Democratic Sentinel, Volume 15, Number 44, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 20 November 1891 — Crime and the Tariff. [ARTICLE]

Crime and the Tariff.

Why does mot the.prison eongressin session at Pittsburgh attack ithe real cause .of ithe Increae&of the crimewhich it (protective tariff? 1 It ,is like am Indian .aiming at the-smoke to stop a railway .train for these so-eal led philanthropists to .weary us .with .platitudes about ‘♦tendencies,” “training,” “home influences,” asocial customs” and soon. No teaching, preaching,.charity or much telse .can avail a (protective tariff which drags the. people down to crime. 'Gravitation is too much for the .efforts as philanthropy or prison science. Reflection will show any one that .a heresy .which takes from the many ito enrich (the few must increase crime. Whether they know it or not criminals are striking back (at the false pressure of society. Tihe rich have been given the .money to tempt, .and the sale .of virtue iis made easy Jbtvcause of the poverty tlhat must follow -.the interfereatoe with natural Indus tries. But to those disinclined to search tor cause and effect, there ie a fact which settles matters beyond .cavil. England, a.t the close of its protective period, had nearly 50,000oanvicts. As ter forty years of free trade, In which the population has almost doubled, it has 8,000 or 9,000. In London alone, eight prisons have been closed since 1864. When the remainder of class laws hare been abolished, England will have no criminals. The reverse of this is true in the United States because thirty years ago we left a practically free-trade policy for one of protection. When the government stops interfering, nature will commence equalizing, and people will find it unprofitableto do other than honestly acquire a living Until the inauguration of this change, the deliberations of prison reformers are not worth a fig.—Charles E. Huckett, in St. Louis Republic.

The Protective Duty and Wages. Sir: In the copy of the circular of “American Tinned-Plate Association,” published on page seven of your paper of the 14th inst, I no ice this statement —“ * * * (non or steel being protected against foreign importations by a duty of about 50 per Oent .ad valorem, and the standard of wages In onr Iron aud steel mills beinj fixed according to such protective duty, the manufacturer, etc.” —ad nauseam. This bare-faced lie cannot be too often exposed and exploded, and none know better the utter fa slty of the statement I have underscored than the protected manufacturers themselves, who are the first to take advantage of a glut, in the labor market to reduce tbe wages of their employes. When the direct protection of labor by a largo landing-tax on Immigrants becomes fee issue, bow many of tbe subsidized C/Memeyer party will pay, work,

and vote for its success’ This same association, had the assurance to send letters asking for assistance (as a gift) in buildiDg their toy tinnery to parties in the East, whose factories and mills were being wrecked or abandoned for want of free raw materials; and now, having obtained all the protection they demanded, are askir.a the Treasury Department for a ruling which will permit them to import the labor-tomake the tin plate! Was there ever a more perfect exhibition of cheek? Even Mr. Cabot Lodge appears to be fighting shy of the McKinley bill, and accepts a challenge only on condition that the arms of his opponent are limited to purposes of defense. —-Correspondence Evening Post.