Indiana State Sentinel, Indianapolis, Marion County, 6 November 1889 — Page 2

THE INDIANA STATE SENTINEL, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER G.-18S9L

M'DOXALD ON THE TARIFF.

SOUND DOCtRINE FORTHE BUCKEYES A Complet Answer to All Objection Had to tb Mills Bill Bow th Pre. Bt System Injure the Farmer Th Democracy and Wool. Xexia. O., Oct. SO. The democracy of this section turned out en masse this afternoon to hear the issues of the hour. A number of speeches were made, among them the following by ex-Senator McDonald of Indiana: Feuow Citizens of Omo I never address mj fellow-citizens upon political sttairs without feeling a heavy weight of responsibility resting upon me. These political meetings are the lecture fields of the people. In them are shaped and molded that publio opinion in which is concentrated the sovereign power of this country, and by which its destinies are controlled. It is no light thin? for any one to undertake to impress upon that publio opinion his individual views, and he who does so owes it to himself, as well as to those who honor him with a nean n er, to make no statement be does not believe to be true, and, if he fails to add to their stock of knowledge, to at least leave them no worse than he found them. 1 hope, therefore, no man will leave this meeting, after I have finished what I may have to say, thinking any less of his country and its institutions than he did when he came here, and that he will be at least as well qualified to discharge the hieb duties which rest upon him as an American citizen as he was before he heard rae. I am a democrat because I believe in the principles of the party, but in the advocacy of them I have no denunciations to hurl at the heads of those who ditferwith me in opinion. I hall not abuse those who differ with me, and, as to those who aeree with me, I prefer to strengthen their faith by arguments, rather than to appeal to their passions and their prejudices. I shall not attempt to discuss all of the political questions that may be regarded as involved in your canvass, but will confine myself mainly to the subject so aptly stated in the first resolutions of the platform adopted by the last democratic convention of this state, in which the democracy of Ohio approved "the declaration of principles made by the national democracy in t. Louis in l.SJtf, and especially that part of it demanding a reduction of tariff taxes," and declared its purpose to "continue the battle for tariff reform until the cause of the people is triumphant." Questions of revenue and expenditure are always of interest to the people. Your governments, state and national, derive their means of existence from taxation. Their treasuries are filled by exactions from the people, and nothing goes into those treasuries that is not, in one form or another, a tax. The power to tax is the power to take from the citizen a portion of his income or property to be applied to the payment of governmental expenses, and the amount each citizen should contribute should, as nearly a possible, be in proportion to his ability and the decree of protection afforded him by the state. These propositions are axiomatic, and from them it follows that no more mcney 6houlJ be collected into the public treasury than is necessary to meet the demands of the government under a rigid system of economy, and that it ought to go there as a sacred trust. It is not in dispute that this just rule has for years past been violated by the revenue laws of the United States, and that these laws are still on the statute book, and the battle you have pledged yourselves to waee "until the cause of the people is triumphant" is againEt thoe laws. As is well known, our national revenues are chiefly drawn from two different systems of taxation "customs duties" and "in'ernal taxes" in the form of excises on whisky.malt liquor and tobacco. The power to lay these taxes is vested in congress by the federal constitution in the following words: Congress shall hare power to lay and collect taxes, duties, im posts and eieie to py debts, and provide for the common defense and gpneral welfare of tbe United Stais; but alt duties, imposts and excises thsll be uniform throughout the United States. This is not an unlimited power to tax, but is wisely restricted to the uses and purposes of the federal government in the discharge of its public duties. It must be exercised for a publio purpose, general in its benefits. It established free trade between all of the states and territories of the United States, and any attempt to nse it for private advantage, or to favor one class of citizens at the expense of another, is a gross perversion of it The present revenue law of the United States has been in force since 1SS3 without chancre. It was framed by the republican conference committees of the senate and house of representatives (the t&rifi branch), substantially the war tariff with some alight chances in the schedules, and some important additions to the free list. A more important change was made in the internal revenue; mot-t of the internal taxes were taken off, except those upon or relating to the manufacture and sale ol whisky, malt liquor and tobacco, and the tax on tobacco was very materially reduced. The first effect of these laws was to reduce the revenue, but it was soon demonstrated that the falling otf iu tariii taxes was but temporary, and from 1S77 to the present time there has been a steady increase of the revenue from customs duties. The federal revenue from the fiscal year of derived from customs, amounted to ?21XX),000 in round numbers. This was more than had been collected by tariff taxes in any one year of the war. But this has been exceeded iu the last fiscal year by over $4.000,000. end from the present outlook there will be a still further increase in the present fiscal year. The internal revenue of IMS was ?I21.MJU,G0O and this last year it was fl.TO.OOO.OfK), bein; an increase of $6,000.000 over the former year. The entire federal revenue for the fiscal year of lS?f amounted to the enormous sum of S3$7,öOO.Or0, and the expenditures of the goveminent during this same period to J299.(sX),000. This includes ? 17,000,000 premiums on bond purchases, but did not include the amount paid in the purchase of bonds. From this statement you will see that for the last fiscal year the excess of revenue overall expenditures was $88,000,000. The receipts for the fiscal year of 18 were $37,OuO,000, and the expenditures for the same period were 11:1,000,. CO, and the excess of receipts over expenditures for that year was $110.000,000, the dinerence being that while the increase of the revenue for the last year was $3,00O,w0, the increase of expediture was $22,Ouu,0O0. This increase of expenditure will be found to be in the additional amount paid in premiums in the purchase of bonds, and in the war and navy expenditures, and in pensions. These figures are taken from the official statements of the treasury, except that I have given them in round numbers. How Shall the Revenue Be Reduced? I think our republican friends will agree that they show very conclusively that our federal revenue ought to be reduced, and the only ?uestion that is at all open for discussion is: low ought that reduction be made? Where ought this reform to begin, and what should be its scope and purpone? Under the systems of taxation now in force it is possible to reduce the revenue and at the same time increase the burdens of the people, or you can reduce the revenue and also reduce the burden of taxation. If you act upon the so-called protective principle and increase the tariff duties to such an extent as to cut off imports, you will reduce the revenue, but you will at the same time increase the prire of the protected article; so that what would before have been paid into the treasury will in part, at least, be paid into the pockets of the protected parties; while, oa the other hand, if you reduce the tariff' so as to produce a smaller revenue, the consumer gets the benefit of the reduction in the reduced price of the article imported. Let me illustrate this by referring to our foreign commerce. For the fiscal year ending on the 50th day of Jane last, our imports of foreign merchandise amounted to $74.5.000,000. Of thia sum , ("1,000 came in duty free, and fm.OQO.OOO paid a duty of $218,000.000. If you add this f uty to the cost of the goods upon which it was paid, you make their cost, when they were entered for consumption, $706.000,000, without counting the freight, insurance, and other charges, so that where the imports of foreign merchandise for the last year went ioto our markets for consumption, they cost not f7-i.,000,)00. the original invoice price, but $S!,(j00,0u0 being the original cost enhanced by the duties paid. No-, you can see, if the duty on these good had been cut down by a reduction of the tariff to eav $118.000.000, they would have cost onr people $100.000,000 less than they did, and the revenue would to the same extent have been reduced, but an increase of the duties would bave had the very reverse effect. It is sometimes said more often insinuated by ' republican speakers that the consumer does not pay the duty. I would not notice this fallacy if it were not for the fact that many wU-meaoing, honest-minded people are misled

by it, and yet the refutation arises almost out of the statement of it. If anything more is needed, a brief reference to the laws governing imports of foreign merchandise will settle it. Goods imported into this country are placed in bonded warehouses without In the first instance paying any duty. The duty is not paid until the owner or consignee enters the goods for consumption, and he may let them remain in the warehouse for three years, and at any time within that period re-export them to any other market in the world. If he has paid the duty he is entitled to have it returned to him. During the last fiscal year over seven million dollars of dutiable goods were reshipped to foreism countries, and over thirtyeight million dollar remained in the warehouses waiting, I have no doubt, a favorable opportunity to place them on the market, and that favorable opportunity would be when the owner could sell at a profit, including the tariff tax that he would have to pay to withdraw them from the ware-house for consumption. There is no necessity which compels the importer to bear the cost of the tariff in order that he may enjoy the privilege of selling his goods in our markets, as he still has the markets of the world open to him for three years after his goods have landed on our shores. There is no question, as I bave said, as to the necessity of reducing the federal revenue. To this all parties are agreed, but as to the manner in which it shall be done there is a direct and well-defined issue between the democratic party and the republican. The democratic party favors a reduction of the revenue mainly by a revision of the tariff, so as to relieve, as far as possible, the necessaries of life from federal taxation, and to place upon the free list such articles, in a crude or partially manufactured state, as are used in our domestic manufacture; and, if a still further rednctian can be safely made, to repeal the tobacco tax. except such parts of it as rest upon cigars ana cigarettes. The position of the republican party may be stated in the language of its Chicago platform, as follows: The republican party would eflett all needful reduction of the national revenue by repealing the taxes on tobacco, which are an annoyance and a burden to agriculture, ami the tax upon spirits used in the art and for mechanical purposes; and br such revision of the tariff laws as will tend to check iru ports of such articles as are produced by onr people, fie production of which gives employment to our labor, and to relieve from import duties those articles of foreign production (except luxuries) the like of which cannot be produced at home. If there shall remain a larger revenue than in requisite fur the wants of tho government, we favor the entire repeal of internal taxes ratber than surrender of any part of our protective system. This is a bold and unequivocal declaration iu favor of protection for the sake of protection. The taxing power is to be used with a view of checking imports, and not with a view of raisin? revenue. The so-called doctrine of protection, as heretofore. claimed by its advocates, extended no farther than the right to adjust a tariff laid for revenue so as to af.ord protection to certain infant American industries, but the Chicago platform demands a tariff for protection per se, and in that sense it loses its character as a revenue measure and becomes a bounty law in favor of the protected industries. I am opposed to the doctrine of protection as announced in the Chicago platform among others upon the following grounds: 1. That it is a perversion of the power of congress "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises" and tends to the establishment of class legislation in its worst form. 2. It compels the laborer to engage his services at the market price fixed on the basis of free trade, and to purchase his supplies at the market price fixed under the operations of a protective tariff", and this in effect reduces his wages and decreases the purchasing power of the money he receives for them. 3. It fosters and cherishes monopolies by keeping out foreign competition, and thus enables capital to organize into trusts and to control production and prices. It is folly to denounce monopolies and at the same time upnold a system of laws that not only make them possible, but encourages their formation. 4. The products of protective industries are necessarily excluded from the free markets of the world, by reason of the increased cost of manufacturing under the protective system. The only market open to them is the home market, from which foreign competition is in a measure excluded. This is especially true hen the tariff is upon machinery or material used in any of our manufacturing industries. To return to the democratic policy of revenue reform. It is as I have stated: 1. To revise the tarifl by placing on the free list such articles of foreign production as are used as material in our domestic manufactures, and, 2. A reduction of the tariff on the necessaries of life, so as to relieve them, as far as possible, from the burthens of taxation. The treasury report of our imports for the last fiscal year show in the list of dutiable goods imported articles crude, or partially manufactured, but for use as raw material in onr domestic manufactures, foreign merchandise of the value of $1000.000. The tables showing the amount of duty paid have not yet been published, but if we take the lowest average of 30 per cent. we have the very large sum of $-10,000,000 duty paid making the cost to our manufacturers exclusive of freights and profits, $17(5,000,000, instead of 13t,000.000, the price at which the foreign manufacturer could supply himself with the same article. A burthen oi $-10,JO,OüO upon American industries is suCicient to shut their prodicts out of any neutral market in the world. But thai is not the only burthen the protective system entails upon the people; in many instances excluding the foreign article, it enhances the price of the domestic articles, and to that extent they pay a bounty, but the government receives no revenue. While the country is seemingly prosperous and the people are able to pay for domestic goods at the high price (which protection enables our manufacturers to charge and which they must charge) in order to make a profit upon them (under the protective system), we do not realize the weight of the burthen we are carrying. It is only when the limit is reached, and the country is sufering from overproduction, and we look abroad for a market for our surplus, that we realize fully this false system of political economy and the cost. This is well illustrated by (Joy. Ames of Massachusetts in his article on the present condition of the iron industries of New England, in which he demonstrates that unless they can be relieved roni the tariff burthens on raw materials, they will be compelled to close up. The same condition exists in regard to other of our industries, particularly iu the manufactures of woolen goods, although at present perhaps not to the same extent. Abstractly speaking, I suppose no person would oppose the reduction of the duties upon the necessaries of life; it is only when we undertake to make a practical application of the proposition that opposition is encountered. Next to food, there is nothing more necessary than clothing, and in this rigorous climate of ours we need good warm clothing, and yet we re paying a duty of over thirty millions a year upon woolens, being at the rate of about 70 per cent, ad valorem, and everv effort to reduce or modify the tariff upon woolen fabrics has so far failed. The 9IUls nilL In the last congress, the honse of representatives being: democratic, passed what is known as the "Mills bill," and while it is by no means a perfect bill, it a step in the right direction. It embodied in general the democratic idea of revenue reform by largely increasing the free list and reducing the tariff on necessaries, particularly on woolen fabrics and clothing. It also repealed that part of the tobacco-tax which more particularly aßects the producer, but left it upon cigars and cigarettes. I will examine thia measure more in detail before I cloe. The republican senate struck out the house bill from the enacting clause. and adopted a substitute embracing the principles of the Chicago platform, except as to sugar, and in respect to this article the doctrine of protection so earnestly insisted upon in that platform was totally abandoned. As no agreement could be arrived at between the enate and house, congress adjourned without eflecting any change in the revenue laws, thus leaving the act of 1853 still in force, under which, as I have shown you, the people are being taxed largely in excess of the want of the government. Iut there are other grave objections to the tariff taxes imposed by it. They are so adjusted that in many cases the heaviest burthens are made to fall upon articles that necessarily enter into commou use, so that poor men and those in moderate circumstances are made to pay an undue proportion of the taxes imposed, and in this respect it violates the fundamental rule that men should pay taxes in proportion to their means and ability and the degree of protection they receive. This result is obtained under the plan of specific dnties adopted by the republican party, but could not be practiced under the ad valorem system. The better to couceal the unjust discriminations practiced under this system, specific are often united with ad valorem duties, so that the same article pays a specific and an ad valorem duty. For instance, in the cotton schedule all cotton cloths are classified by the number of threads to the square inch, and a tax of so much per square yard imposed on each classi

fication. That is, in the first class all unbleached cotton cloths that have not to exceed one hundred threads to the square Inch pay a duty of 2j cents per square yard; all that exceed two hundred threads, and do not exceed three hundred, pay 3 cents per square yard, etc.: so that the coarsest cloth in any one of these classifications pays as much duty as the finest, although it may not be worth half aa much; when the quality goes above threehundred threads to the square inch there is a duty of only 40 per cent, ad valorem laid: while the coarser article, by the peculiar adjustment of the specifio duty, is required to pay much more. The injustice of this system is much more forcibly shown in tbe adjustment of the tarifl on woolen roods. Woolen cloths, woolen shawls and all manufactures of wool, valued at not exceeding 80 cents per pound, pay 35 cents per pound and 35 per cent, ad valorem, and all valued at above b0 cents per pound, 35 cents per pound and 40 per cent, ad valorem. Here you have the specific and ad valorem duties mixed. Under this adjustment you will see that the pound tax bears most heavily on the coarse fabrics worn by persons in moderate circumstances. Let me illustrate this: A yard of common cheviot cloth, all wool, worth say $1.20 per yard, any merchant tailor will tell you, will weigh about thirty-two ounces, or two pounds. This makes it worth less than 80 cents a pound, but at 35 cents a pound the tariff' on it is 70 cent per yard. Now take a yard of fine cloth, worth R50 or $3 a yard, and the same authority will tell you that it will weigh only a pound and a half. This, too, only pays a pound tax of .v cents per pound, which makes pound tax only 52J cents per yard, or 1714 cents less on the yard than the coarse article pays. But when you apply this to still coarser woolens, such as blankets and heavy shawls, the injustice is still more glaring. It may be said that a higher ad valorem duty is placed upon the fine goods to equalize the tariff, but the dilference, as you will see, is. only 5 per cent., and that difference exists only with respect to goods that are worth less than 80 centa per pound, as all goods over 80 cents per pound pay the same ad valorem duty, ( whatever may be their value). The Mills bill struck out the pound tax and placed an ad valorem duty of 40 per cent, on all woolen goods; bo that under the Mill bill each article would be taxed accerding to its value, and not according to it weight. T.' e senate substitute increased the present pou.id tax to 40 cents a pound and applied it to all woolen goods worth 60 cents a pound or over, and this would embrace almost every article of clothing however coarse, manufactured from wool, as noDe of the coarser goods weigh less than two pounds to the yard. All such, under the senate substitute if it had become a law, would have been taxed 80 cents per yard, while the finer and more costly article would have only paid t0 cents per yard, or 20 cent per yard less thad the coarse goods. There has been no measure be-fore congress and the country in the last quarter of a century that has been so unqualifiedly denounced and been subjected to so much misrepresentation as the Mills bill I shall not take up your time by replying to all the grounds of objection that have been made to it, but shall confine myself to those which appear to have the most political significance. The first in importance seems to be the charge that it is a free trade measure and if adopted would embarrass, if not ruin, many branches of American industry, and particularly our wool-growing and woolen manufactures. With regard to the charge that it is a free trade measure, I may say no political party in this country has ever advocated the doctrine of free trade, and no party ever will until some better mode of raising revenue for the federal government can be found than that of tariff taxes, and to call a measure like the Mills bill, which, according to the estimates of the treasury department, would bring an income from custom duties of at least flt3.0ut0tiO a year, a free trade measure, is but a bold assertion against a stubborn fact and ought to have no weight with the people. As to its effect, 1 hare already said its chief features consisted in placing on the free list those articles of foreign, merchandise which are imported in a crude or partially manufactured state, and which are intended for use in our own manufactures as raw material, and in reducing the tariff on the necessaries of life. You have seen that our manufactories are now paying a duty of $40,000,000 on foreign merchandise, which they use as raw material, and which they must collect off of the people to whom they sell these goods with a profit. By the Mills bill they would be relieved of above oue-haif of this cmount. How this could tend to their ruin is beyond my comprehension. It is very clear that they could sell these goods for that much less and make the came profit, and this would tend to increase their sales and to extend their markets. What American manufacturers want more than anything else is a market not the home market, for that they can always command nuder proper circumstances, but the world's market. They have the capital and the enterprise, and all they want is the opportunity, but while they are handicapped by a protective tariff upon the essentials to their successful work, they cannot have the opportunity. Do you think our manufacturers can pay $40,000,000 a year on the materials they use and then meet the foreign manufacturer who is not thus taxed in the neutral markets and sell in competition with him? If you do, a very brief examination into the state of onr exports to foreign countries will dispel the illusion. For you will see that of the 7;0,000,000 of domestic niercbandse exported during the last fiscal year, less than 29 per cent, are domest'C manufactures. Men who are engaged in manufacturing American goods know better than any one else the disadvantages under which they labor in this respect, but they bave been harnessed np to the car of protection so long that they are afraid to break away from iL They have built their plants and purchased their machinery under protection prices, and they fear the depression which would follow, but the time is not far distant when they will rebel against the dogma of protection and lead the way in favor of that kind of free trade which will place the American manufacturer on an equal footing with his foreign competitor, and when that is done we will be able to keep our home market by being able to meet our adversaries in any foreign market, and our people will reap the benefit of it in the reduced prices in that market South American Trade. This is a good time to study this problem. The disadvantages under which our foreign commerce is carried on are not questioned. Even now we are looking anxiously to Mexico and to Central and South America for some means of improving our trade with them. We purchase largely of them and sell to them but little. The reason is obvious. We are compelled to have their productions, and they can buy from Kngland and other countries the articles of manufacture they need (they do not want the products of our soil) cheaper than we can sell to them. So they take our money and buy in other countries. Kven with Mexico there is every year a large balance of trade in her favor. At this time there are in this country representatives from all of those countries who have come here on the invitation of our government to hold a conference with us on these subjects. As a preparation for that conference, and as the guests of the nation, they are making a tour through the country to become acquainted with its resources and the character of its industries. A few days lines they were in the city of Cleveland, the great iron mongering center of your state, enjoying the widrly-known hospitality of her people, and viewingwith astonishmentand wonderher mammoth iron works. It is said they are taking notes of the cost of the productions in the various manufactories they visit. At the banquet which followed tbeir day of observation, your distinguished republican senator, Mr. Sherman, who graced the occasion with his presence, could think of nothing more encouraging to say to these representatives of all the Americas than to suggest very mildly that it might be well to have free trade between the American states. This was a happy thought, but not in very much accord with the republican doctrine of protection. It would have been still better if during their turn of inspection the iron mongers of the city of Cleveland had been able to demonstrate that notwithstanding the tariff of 75 cents a ton on cool and iron ore, aud $ti.ö0 a ton on pig-iron, they were still able to manufacture iron in ail its varied forms for commerce and deliver it to them as cheap as the manufactories of England. For unless we can do this, even free trade will not benefit us in our trade with our southern friends. It might add something to our purchases, but not to our sales. If the American manufacturer is put upon an equality with his foreign competitor in the cost of material and machinery, he can compete with him in the neutral market of the world in all branches of manufacture where the work is performed chiefly by the aid of machinery, without any reduction in wages, relying, as he may, upon the activity and energy of the American operatives to overbalance all other advantages, if any, there be against him. Aside from the increase of the free list, the Mills bill proposes a reduction of duties upon other articles to tbe amount of about $29,000,00. Tbe chief articles reduced were wool and woolens, beina- about $13.000,000, and upon suar $11,000,003. The reduction on the sugar

tariff was from 17 to 20 per eent and on woolens, as I have alreaiy shown, by taking olf the specific duty and laying an ad valorem duty upon all woolens of 40 per cent. This made the reduction upon woolens something over 30 per cent, but a wool, which now bears a duty equal to from 30 to 40 per cent, was to be plaoed on the free list, there could be no just ground of complaint on the part of the woolen manufacturers, as it gave them a better selection of foreign wool at a lower price to mix with the domestic article, while the consumer of the goods was greatly benefited by the reduction of price, which the reduction of the tariff would necessarily cause. But the enemies of the measure insisted that it would destroy the wool culture in this conntry. There wa also another objection which applied to the whole bill, and which I shall notice more at length before I conclude, and that was that the bill was sectional and discriminated aeainst the North and in favor of the South. This charge was intended, of course, to excite sectional prejudice against the bill irrespective of its merit, and many person were, without doubt, influenced by the charge who never looked into the bill to see how far it was sustained by the facts. But ought wool to be placed on the free list; and what would be the effect upon the woolgrowinginterestin general in the United States? Under the tariff laws immediately preceding the present law, there was a duty of 10 per cent, ad valorem on all clothing and combing wool (and we raise no other) in uddition to the present specific duty of 10 and 12 cents per pound. The act of 1883 tbe present law took off the ad valorem duty and left the specific duty remaining at the same time under the pretense of raising the duty on woolens. It changed to some extent the classification and increased the duty on the manufactures of wooL We raise no wool in this country, as I have already suggested.except what is called of the "first and second classes;" that is, clothing and combing wool, and we do not raise either the finest or coarsest of those classes, and if foreign wool are excluded from our markets our manufacturers can not supply themselves with the proper assortments to meet the demands of our domestic market, much less to be able to sell in a foreign market, and therefore you have seen by the complaints made by New England manufacturers, that they are unable to maintain themselves under the present protective tariff of over 70 per cent.; it is plain if the wool markets of the world were thrown open to them duty free, that it would greatly stimulate the production of woolen goods in this country, and as a consequence create a demand for American wools to be mixed with the foreign wooL While it is possible that there might be some reduction in theprice.it is certain that it would furnish a much better and steadier market, and it is also certain that the consumer of, of whom the wool-growers in the northern and northwestern states form a very large class, wouid be greatly benefited by the increase of the quality and the reduction of the price of the manufactured article. The Semite Substitute on Wool. But in this connection I wish to call your attention to the senate substitute as it affects the wool tariff. The present tariii on wool is 10 cents a pound on ad clothing and combing wool worth 30 cents and under, and 12 cents a pound on all worth over 30 cents a pound. The senate substitute proposed a uniform rate of 11 cents a pound upon all clothing and combinzwool. This has the vice which the protective policy seems to cherish of making the coarser article pay more according to its value than the fine. It is at best but an increase on coarse wool of 1 cent a pound, while, as I bave shown you, it adds Scents a pound to coarser woolen fabrics. Under that bill, if it should become a law, you might sell your coarser wool at 1 cent a pound more than you could under the present law, but you would be compelled to buy your woolen clothing at 5 cents a pound or from 10 to 12 cents a yard more. Themost important question for you to solve in this connection is whether in the future you have the greater interest in free wool and cheap clothing, or a protective tariffon wool and dear clothing, for, under all circumstances, you must have wool clothing, and for much of the year plenty of it. If you will look into the history of wool growing in the United States. I do not think: it will take you long to decide, for you will see that the centers of wool growing have been, and still are, undergoing important changes under causes wholly aside from tariff laws. In the early history of our country the center of wool growing was in New Kngiand. Then it was transferred to the middle states, then to the northwestern states, and within the last ten years it has crossed the Mississippi and gone into the southern and western states and ; territories, there to remain. In 1S75 there .were 33,000,0ii head of sheep in the United States, in 18$7, 41,000,000, being an increase of 11,000,000 head, but in that time Ohio did not quite hold her own, while in the other northwestern states, including my own, there was a loss of over to million head. At the same time, there was a gain in the touth and West of over twelve million head; and to-day there are more sheep in New Mexico than in Ohio and Indiana, and yet the same tariff Jaws are over both sections. The reason for this is obvious, when you take into consideration the fact that in New Mexico they bave cheap lands snd a mild climate, and here you have high-priced lands and a climate iu which you have to provide shelter and food for almost half the year. There they raise sheep in herds of tens of thousands, with but little other cost than a shepherd and a shepherd's dog. Here you keep them in comparativelv small flocks, as part of your farm stock, and have to devote special care to them, both winter and summer. And, while I have no doubt you will continue to keep small flocks of sheep, it will not be long before whatever may be the result of the taritl question you will raise them not for the lleece, but for the mutton. You could not grow wool in competition with cheap lands and a mild climate, if the tariff which protects you against foreign wools was 100 per cent bizher than it is. The charge that the Mills bill is sectional and discriminates against northern industries, is the most groundless of all accusations that have been brought against it, and yet the most distinguished men in the republican party Lave not hesitated to make it. I have noticed in the public prints that Senator Sherman, for whom 1 have great respect, and of whose abilities there can be no question, has in the present canvass made this his chief point of attack. To support this charge it is claimed that it undertakes to adjust the tariff on wool and woolens, on sugnr and on rice, in the interest of the South, on the assumption that rice and sugar are southern productions, and that in placing wool on the free list it was the design of the authors of this bill to injuriously affect northern industries for the benefit of the South, wholly ignoring the fact that the South and Southwest are now the chief wool producing sections, while the North and . Northwest are the consumers. Woolen clothing is an absolute necessity to us, while it is not to the South. If placing wool on the free list will tend to reduce the price of wool grown in the United States, then Texas has a greater interest in opposing it than Ohio, because more wool is grown there than in this state. If it tends to reduce the cost of woolen goods, then Ohio is more interested in that reduction than Texas, for vastly more woolens are worn in this state than in Texas. If there is any advantage to either section by the changes which are proposed in wool tariff by the Mills bill, it Is in favor of tbe North, The rice question is not of sufficient importance to take much of your time in considering it. There i but a small margin of land in one or two southern states in which rice can be raised at all. The South, as a section, is as much a consumer of rice as the North. It is an article of food and comes as much, or more, in competition with farm products of the North than of the South; and then it must be remembered that the present tariff, which our republican friends are quite willing shall remain, is their handiwork, and the Mills bill makes a reduction on the present duty. The only comClaiiit is that a greater reduction should have een made. No StctlunalUni In the Mills mil. The charge of sectionalism again.it the Mills bill on account of its adjustment of tbe sugar tariff, come with ill grace from a party that has framed every tariff law that has been passed since lkC2. Under the democratic tariff of 184i, revised in 1857, the duty on foreign sugars was 24 per cent, ad valorem. The republican party changed this into a specific duty of so much per pound and increased the duty. The range of duties under the present tariff is from a little less than Vt cent per pound up to 3)4 cents, making an average rate if duty of about 70 per cent, ad valorem. The Mills bill proposed to reduce this about 20 per cent., and because it did not propose a greater reduction, it is charged with discrimination in favor of the sugar-growers of the Nouth. If such had been the purpose of the bill, then it would have been iu accord with that part of the Chicago platform which declares in favor of such a "revision of the tarifl laws as will tend to check imports of such articles as are produced by our people, the production of which gives employment to our labor." Or rather, the Mills bill, to have been in strict conformity to the Chicago platform, ought to have increased the duty on sugar to a point that would "tend to check imports," but it was an honest bill aud had no other purpose than

to make a reasonable reduction of the burden of taxation and yet not make 6uch a radical change as to seriously affect industries that bad been started or built up under the protection oiTered by existing laws, however wrong these laws might be in the principle. But it isa mistake to suppose that the protection which the tarifl on sugar gives to the home production' is especially for the benefit of the South, for it inures to the benefit of all producers North and Weit, as well as houth. There are only two 6tates In the South where sugar is produced in commercial quantities the states of Louisiana and Texas. Not more than three congressional districts in iouisiana are interested in its production, and not more than one in Texas. Even under the protection which the present law gives, it is not, as a general thing, a profitable industry in either state, and in the nature of things cannot be. ugar cane is a tropical plant and we have no territory in the United States far enough south for it to mature in. In Louisiana and Texas it is grown from the ratoons obtained by planting the stock, and these have to be renewed every three years by using about one-third of the crop for planting, while in Cuba and other tropical countries it is grown from the seed, and when the stand is once properly set the ratoons will continue to spring up from the old stock for years. The area of sugar planting is not increasing in Louisiana and Texas, and it is evident that if we are ever to be self-sustaining in the production of sugar we must look to some other sections of our country for its production, and some other article than the sugar cane from which to produce it. Our government has been making experiments in that direction, and it is said with good promise of success. It is not in Louisiana and Texas that these experiments are being made, but in Kansas and California, and in regions of our country where the sugar-beet and the sorghum grow in the greatest perfection. Senator Sherman, who has not hesitated to attack the Mills bill as a sectional measure, and who cannot be regarded as friendly to the South as a section, in a speech in the senate in answer to Mr. Cleveland's tariS reform message, proposed a reduction of dutie on sugar to one-half the present rate, and the application of the revenue raised on imported sugars at this reduced rate to the payment of bounties to the sugar producers of the United States. As the present tarifl on sugar yields to the federal government a revenue of over $50,000,000 a year, Senator Sherman's proposition of paying bounties would distribute to the sugar producers of this country over $25,000,000 a year, which is grently in excess of the value of all the sugar produced from sugar-cane in the United States. Does anyone believe that Senator Sherman, in proposing this measure, snpposed he was offering a subsidy to the South? And yet those wty charge the Mills bill with being a sectional measure because of the protection it affords the sugar-producers ought, if they are sincere, to charge Senator Sherman with favoritism toward the South because he proposed to open the treasury itself and pay out the money directly in the form of bounties to the sugar producers. I have gone into the questions of revenue reform and the points of difference between the democratic party and the republican party more in detail than I would otherwise have been inclined to from the fact that our adversaries carefully abstained from anything of the kind, but deal in wholesale charges and denunciation, so I have thought it best to meet assertions by facts, and denunciations by arguments drawn from these facts. But in adopting this course I have been compelled to pass by unnoticed many points to which reference might have been made in dealing with these questions in a more general manner. It has been my endeavor to show you the true issue between the parties, arising out of the necessity of reducing the federal revenues. 1 have pointed you to the fact that the democratic policy was based upon the constitution; that in reducing the revenue it also reduced the burden of taxation ; that its reforms were in the interest of the consumer, and therefore for the benefit of the many. On the other hand, the republican policy of protection for the sake of protection has no warrant in the constitution; that so far as that party proposed any change in the tariff, their purpose was to "check imports" by increasing the duty and thus increasing the burden of tariff taxes; that in excluding foreign competition they encouraged monopolies, and in fostering a few protected industries they were legislating for the few at the expense of the many. The Farmer and the Tariff. Before leaving the subject, I ask your indulgence while I call the attention of the farmers to the relations which these questions bear to their interests. They do not manufacture, and therefore, as to all articles of manufacture for which they have any need, they are consumers, and everything which tends to increase the cost of the manufactures which they consume is against their interest and imposes upon them an additional burden. Frotection hasthat tendency. Tbe tariff on timber, on iron and on paints tends to enhance the price of their farming implements. The duty on cotton and woolen goods increases the cost of clothing. Under the pnrective system, the farmers are compelled to purchase supplies at enhanced prices. The surplus farm products, on the other hand, are in the form of breadstuffs and provisions, and their prices are fixed in neutral markets under the operations of. free trade, for you know as the price of wheat or corn or provisions goes up or down in London and Liverpool, it goes up or down in the commercial centers of our own country, and regulates the prices the farmers of Ohio and other states of the Union receive for their productions. They sell fn the lowest market and under the protection system are compelled to buy in the highest market. Political economy teaches that all men should be left free to sell in the highest market and buy where they can buy -cheapest, and the farmers of the United States ought to have the benefit of this rule, except so far only as the necessities of the government in the form of honest taxes may vary it. Senator Sherman, a few nights since, in his speech at the Music hall in the city of Cincinnati, referred to the fact that in his late tour abroad, he had visited many European countries, and that they had, to use his own language, all adopted the American system of protection, except free -trade England France, Germany, liussia, Belgium, Italy all except England but be failed to state the fact that England is shipping annually to foreign couutries more products of manufacture than all the other countries named by him put together, and that she is the only country in Europe that pays a decent price to her laborers; that in Europe wages are lowest in these countries where protection is highest. This may not prove that free trade necessarily increases the price of labor, but it certainly docs prove that protection does not. I shall not attempt to discuss the issues that are local to your people and concern the domestic policy of your state. Although a native of Ohio, I am and have been, from my youth up a citizen of the state of Indiana, and do not claim the same right to speak upon questions local to your state that I do upon those questions in recard to which our interests are in common such as the great battles you are waging for the people in favor of revenue reform. But I may say the stand you have taken in favor of "home rule" and against third-termism, in the executive department of your government, meets the approbation of all men who believe in popular rights and in the sacred character of the traditions of the people, and ought to bring yen success if there were no other question involved in the contest. The man or the party who would ruthlessly trample upon the tradidilions of a people is more to be dreaded than if they should boldly attempt to infract a written constitution. For the last you have a remedy in the courts. For tbe first the people must take that into their own bands, for there is no other remedy. In conclusion, fellow-citizens and fellow-dem-ocrats, permit me to address to you a few earnest words of exhortation. I have watched the course of- your campaign with no common interest, and, but for my earnest desire for your success, I would not be here to-day. You are represented on your state ticket by men of yourown choice. I know j'our standard-bearer and most of his associates on the ticket; they are all men in every way worthy of the trust you reCose in them, and the gallant fight your standard earer has made in this contest has excited the admiration of the democratio party everywhere. In the history of party politics no man has been more bitterly and unjustly assailed and none more triumphantly vindicated, but the vindication would be more complete if the voice of the people should proclaim it at the polls. I believe success is within your reach if you are vigilant, and the national democracy expects every democrat in Ohio to do his duty in this election until every vote is cast and counted. A Fearful Fear. , . 1 1 fuck. . . "The Trince of Wales is a very brave man. He is said to be afraid of but one thing." "What is that?" "That he'll die before his mother." The Nation lie Loved. Puck. "I would abed my last drop of blood for the nation!" cried the candidate for honors. "You bet you would for the nomination," was the sarcastic reply.

THE TARIFF AND FARMERS.

A Crashing; Reply to Recent Deliverances of the "Journal." To tiie Editor Sir: In the Indianapolis Journal of the 25th inft. there was an editorial article headed "Timely Warning," from which I make these extracts: It has come to light that the democratic managers in Illinois and other states bave made arrangements under an alias to put into the hands of the farmers of that state, to be read during tbe winter season, pamphlets assailing protection. The Cobden club is sending no more tracts direct; but may we not ask who is furnishing tbe democratic managers with the funds necessary to meet the expense and distribution of the free trade tracts? Who but the deeply-interested foreign manufacturer and merchant who, if not the members of the Cobden club? They should meet them with the same weapon and at the same time; and the best weapon is a republican newspaper, which, from day to day and from week to week, presents the unassailable arguments drawn from experience, upon which the policy of protection is grounded. Let us see now what a blessing protection has been to the fanners of Illinois. AVe will take the farm-mortgages, and I quote from "the bureau of labor Btatistics" of that state. Ily leaving out town and city lots and the suburban district of Chicago, the purely agricultural part of the debt is seen Farm mortgages: Year. 170 S !.721.K'3 JSO PW..-v.'-,237 1S7 m.Tltl.VjS This tells 1t own htory; for farms are a constant quantity and do not increase. It is only the wave of debt that increases over them. A.s this report separates w ith euch accuracy as it can command, "mortfrnges representing, defered payments of purchase money from loans." the deduction of the commissioners is that "the mortgage indebtedness of farmers for lorroMred money has increased 23 per cent, since 18S0 in Illinois, and that this is more than twice the increase in the value of the farm lands." But you may go further west and find. figures of the same solemn sort. In the western states the farm-mortpages amount to SI, 42,000,000. This is equivalent to a debt of $200 per capita for each person, or $1,000 to each head of a family. The interest which these mortg-ages pay runs from 7 to 9 per cent., while the profit? on the farm capital, to put it large, is only from 4 to 5 per cent. In regard to the cry about the Cobden club, that is an old chestnut We all remember the campaign of last year, how the republicans plastered wails, fences and even out-housos with pictures of the Britkh flag, and pointed to them a. emblems of democracy. And with what hypocrisy their professions have proven, let's eoe: The first oflice our pious president conferred after his election was the appointment of Mr. llalford to be his private secretary, an Englishman. Next he appointed Tortcr, another Englishman, as superintendent of the census, and that is one of the most important oflices in his gift. Only a few months a'o Ilussell Harrison, who calls his father "pa," made a trip to England and the continent of Europe. One of his rirst acts after he arrived in London was to accept an invitation from the queen to dine w ith her, and desiring to ape as nearly as he could nobility he donned a court dress, knee breeches and buckles, and was received as Trince Kussel 1. We respectfully suggest that the more quiet the party leaders now keep about Cobden clubs, British influence, etc., the more consistent and respectable, they will appear to a majority of the people of this countrv. Circulate republican papers. We advise the party by all means to send out the Journal among the fanners of Illinois and Indiana. What the Journal people do not know about farming and farmers' wants can't bo found in any agricultural paper in this rountry. It is no secret out here on the Wabash, among republicans, that the Journal's influence did more to defeat the party in Indianapolis, a few weeks ago, than all the other causes. The prophecy of the leaders here is that it must bo bought out or crushed out of its present management, or the party, inlS'.K), will go to Hades. If there is any combine or trust that is r.gainst the people, that does not have its full and unqualified indorsement, the average reader w ill be pleased to have it pointed out Last fall, after the election of Harrison, the republicans consoled themselves for an hour that this tariff question had leen ellectually relegated to the rear. But it will not down. Like the slavery question, it is here to stay, and will go right on till it is fully 6ettl?d that this people w ill no longer pay tribute to the barons and monopolists, and pay taxes to keep fifty to one hundred millions of dollars of a surplus in the treasury, to be plundered and robbed by as infamous a set of scoundrels as ever disgraced any country. With them it is, as one of the barons said a few years ago of the people, "the surplus be ." John Kedpath. Terre Haute, Oct .00. Lots In toothpicks. I Kansas City Times. 1 "The finder of this will please address Miss , Lewis-ton. Me." So ran a note which fell into the hands of Night Cashier James llilliker of the "creamerie" several months ego. It was written in a delicate feminine hand, and was carefully folded in a box of wooden toothpicks, and one night while Mr. llilliker was filling the silver hat on the cashier's desk that holds the toothpicks the note rolled out before bis eyes. He stuffed it away in his pocket and thought nothing more of it until the next day. Then he concluded to answer it He wrote to the young lady stating that he had found the note. A reply came, and from that quite a correspondence sprang up; photographs were exchanged, and the mutter soon ripened into a courtship. Mr. llilliker has ascertained that bis fair correspondent is a very worthy young lady. To-day he goes East, and if the mutual affection which the exchange of photographs caused to spring up does not die out when they meet face to face, Mrs. llilliker will accompany him back to Kansas City. Mr. llilliker is a son of ex-Mayor llilliker of Kansas City, Kan., and is a very worthy youug mau. A Safe Fines of Residence. Puck. New Yorker (to visitins Chicagoan) "No, air; I don't believe there 're a dozen anarchists in the city. We're pretty safe from dynamite, any way." Chicagoan (as a terrific explosion is heard). "Hello! what's that?" New Yorker (serenely). "Oh, that may be a sewer blowing up in Broadway; or cellar blasting in Fifth-ave.; or an explosion in a steam heatin? subway. One or the other happens every few days; but there are seldom more than two or three persons killed. I tell you, this is a safe town to live in." 1'ictures In the Fire. Puck. Mamma "Well, what have you girls been doing all the afternoon?" Mabel "Watching pictures in the fire, mamma." Mamma "Ah! dream-pictures, I suppose?" Mabel "No, mamma pictures of some of Clara's old flames, which she was burning. She says she is going to turn over a new leaf and-" Mamma "Oct engaged, I suppose?" Mabel "No; get some new feliows." An Underground Mystery. Puck. Uncle Si Low (watching pile-drivers at work on a West-st. foundation) "Waal, I'll swowl I've heerd about your burjin' the wires, but this do beat all." 1,11er "What is this got to do with it?" Uncle Pi "Why, when you git them telegraph poles druv into the ground, how do the men get down to string the wires?" Strange All 'Round. Puck.) Lawyer (savagely, to witness) "It's very strange, sir, that you have no memory!" Witness "Well, ain't. I teetifyiu' before men that have uo opinions ?"

R. R.

R

RADWAY'S READY RELIEF. The Cheapest and Best Medi cine for Family Use in the World. In from one to twenty minutes, never falls to relfsw PAIN with one thorough srp! ct.oa. Koms'ter ho violent or etcracmt töe pui'x, the P.beamalie, Bdri(lJn, Inf.rm, Crip;.lrl. Nervous, X'timlno, or prImieJ wiu dnnw mar nfr. RADWiV'a KKADI fci-LiEP will Uor4 inlnt reüeC THE TRUE RELIEF. RADWAY'S READY RELIEP is the only reraedi' rnt in vorne that will instaatly stop pain. InstanUj rolievea ana soon cam RHEUMATISM! NEURALGIA! fviatica. ITeadache, Toothache, Inflammations, Congestions, Asihnia, InSueuza, hore Throat, .Difficult Breathing. Summer Complaints, DYSENTERY, DIARRHEA, Cholera Xlorbu. It wPl in a fe w minnte. when takc'i, rrnr i n Li. airfetion, rare t'rainpH, Spasms, Soar Stomach, iicuriuum, .use, vom.un. ervoisne. Mejosnes. Cholera Morbus, Sick Headache, SITMMFR COMPLAINT DisrrhT-a, Dyvnlerv, Colic, Wind ia Bowrls, and all internal pains. It is h'Khly importait that evrrY familr keep a sonPlyor IUiJIVAV'S KEAUY RELIEF älmava in tits Lous. Its ose w. 11 prove beneÜCial on all occasions of pain or sirknrss. There is n.Mhinff in the a or. J that m ill top pain or arrest tbe propres of disease aa C ttcicly as K. K. K. Where epiJr raic disease prevail, sich as Fevers, Dysentery, Cholera, Inuenia, Diphtheria. Scarki Kevtr and othfr malignant disease. RAUWAY'4 RliAUYKELIKKw i, if latfn as direct-d, protect the system against attacks, and if seized with sickness quietly cure ;he patient. MALARIA IX ITS VARIOUS FCRMi FEVER AND AGUE. HEADWAY'S READY RELIEF. JTot en!y cores the pat'ent setied with ma'arla, tmt If peopl" exposed to it will, every morning on jifttinr ont of bed, take twenty or thirty drops of tho Keadt Kelikt in a R:'S of water, and drink, and eat a cracker, tiiey will escape attacks. Practicing With R. R. R. Montaoce, Texas. Dr. Rad way & Co.: I haw; her Bine your medicines for the last twenty years, ar.d in a'.lcaaesof Ch:l.a and Fever I hve never fa leiw cure. I never use anything but BKA DY REI.IKF ani FILLS. THUS. J. JOXF.S. Fpxitlaxo, Iowa. Dear Pir: We are nsinc yonr medicines for Typhoid and Malarial Fevers w.th th rreatet benefit. What R. R. . and Radwav's Pill bave done do one can teU. JOHN SCHÜLTZi. VALUABLE TESTIMONY! Cisoto! Landing, N. Y., Jane SS, 1S Mwr. FtadwayA Co. Oentlemen : Last teason I employe t about 153 men, and during the season they boue'it of mesixteendozen bottles of Radwsy's Ready Kelu-f, a larpe number of boxes of Pil's and sotne Reolven.. They U5-e the Ready Relief in their drinking water, 1 1 to 15 drops in a class of water, to prevent cramD and keep oil fever and cgae; they also nse it (externally ( for bru mes, sore han.ls, rheumatic pa.ns, aore throat, etc. If by any chance we run out of your medicines, we have no peace until our stock is replaced. I, miself, take K. IL R. before froi.ig out in the yard early In the riorninr. and am nerer troubled with fever and Rue. This year I was attacked with rheumatism, and your I ill did me more Rood than any other medieir.e I took. Yours trulv, Higied) "S. HAMILTON. JR. Mr. John Morton, of Verplanek Point. X. Y., proprietor of the Hudson Kiver Brick Manofaoturinc Company, says that he prevents ani cures attacks of chills and lever in his lamily and amonr the men la his employ by the use of RadwaT's Ksadt Kelie? Pili. Also the men in Mr. Fmst's bnckvard at the same place rely entirely oa the K. R. K. tor the cure and prevention of maiari. There is not a re medy airrnt in ths world that will cure Fever and Arne and all other Malariona, Bilious and other Fevers fr.iaed by RADWAY'S PILLS) so qn ekly as K1DWAYÜ READY RELIEF. lUJaay's Ready Relief is scare for every pain. Toothache. Headache, Sciatica, Lumbairo, NenraljMa, Rheumoti.-ui. swelling of the Joints, bprains, Bruises, Psins in the Back, Chest or Limbs. The application of tbe Ready Relief to the part or parts where the difficulty exist will afford int.tat ease and comfort. FIFTY CENTS PER BOTTLE Sold by Druggists. P AD WAY'S 11 Sarsaparillian Resolvent. The Great Blood Purifier. Pure blood makes sonnd flesh, strong bone and a clear skin. If you would have your f.esh firm, your bones sound and vour complexion fair, ose RAD WAY'S SA RS A PARI LLA RESOLVENT. It pos.esnes wonder'.ul power in curing all forms of Scrofulous and Eruptive Diseases, !ypailoid, t'lcera, rnraors, Sores, Enlarged Glands, etc ., ranidlvand permanently. Dr. Randolph Mclntyre of frt. Hyacinths, Can., says: "I complctelr snd marvelous!? cured victim of Scrofula in its last stage by follom-ing yo r advice given in your little treaties on that disease. " J. F. T runnel,' South .St. Louis, Mo., "waa cured of bad case of Scrofula alter bavins been given up a incurable." Sold by all Druggists. ONE DOLLAR PER BOTTLE. DR. RADWAY'S REGULATING PILLS. THE GREAT LIVES AND STOY! ACH REMEDY. Terfect Tursatives, Soothmtr Aperient. Act Without 1'ain, Always Reliable and Natural ia their Operation. Perfectly tasteless, elejrantly coated with sweet gum, pure. roirulste, cleanse end strengthen, 1UUWAVS PILLS fi.r the eure of all d.sorcers ot the Stomach, Liver, Bowels, Kidneys, Bladder, Nervous Diseases, Los of Appetite, Ili.-ad.tohe, . na tion, Loslivencss. indigestion, uyspeps a j-H'nisrcs1 Fever, inflammation of the Hosvels, P.l's Vt t rangetnents of the Internal Viscera. PurcN to c. containing no mercury, minerals or deleterious di cga. What a Physician Saji of Radway'i Pills. I am selling your R. R. Relief and yonr Rec-nlatine Tilts, and have recommended them above all pilis and k ii a erf t many of Uit t., and bave them on band alwavs, and cse Ihem in my practice and in my own family, and expect tu. in pre!r rence of all puis. Yours rcspectfullv. DR. A. C. UiUULiBbOUK, Doravül, G. DYSPEPSIA. Pr. Radwsy's Pills are cure for this compla:nt. They restore strensth to the sumach and enable it to perform its functions. The symptoms o Ivreysr oisappear and with them the liability of the tvfrtetn t contract diverse. RADWAY'S PILLS AND DYSPEPSIA. Kkwport, Kt. Meers. Dr. Itadaav A Co GctiU: I have been troubled with Dyspepsia' for about four biojths. I tried two lit!rent tioctora without an permanent brneni. I saw vour d. and two ws aci bought box of your R-rulalor nd fed preat deal better. Your I'il'.s have done me more good than ail the Doctor's Med cine that 1 have taken, etc. I am, jours respect fully, ROEtitr A. PAOU Iyspepata of Im rig Standing; CrI. Pr. RArtVay I have for many years hern fflicted with Dyspepsia and Liver Complaint, an f found but littie reüeC unt.l I got your l'...s aid In solvent, and they made a perrect cure. They ore tbe be-t medic. 1 eser had in mr life. Your ir end forever, Llanchard, MicL. WILLIAM XODXAX. Sold by Druggists. Price U5o 'per Box I Eadway & Co., No. 32 W rrvu-st., ew York. To the, Publio. Psntrs and ak for RIwav'sandscsllit thenaat JU.EWA.Y" Uon bat jen'buj. 1

7 ' 1

L

T 1