Rensselaer Republican, Volume 27, Number 50, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 15 August 1895 — LOOK AT THE LOSS. [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

LOOK AT THE LOSS.

Ten Mon tbs of the Wilson Bill Has . Cost This Country $170,000,000. The advance statement of our'statistics of imports and exports for the twelve months ending June 30, 1894 and 1893, affords opportunity for some very interesting study. Taking first of all our exports of American products we find that they compare as follows: Exports of American products. Year ending June 30. ———■■ Value. 1594 .$869,058,158 1895 793,553,018 Loss to producers .$75,505,110 During ten months of the 1595 year the Gorman tariff has been in operation, the wall of protection has been broken down and the markets of the world have been thrown wide open to us; yet we sold $75,505,140 worth less of American products and manufactures in that time than we did during the preceding twelve months. Turning next to our imports of foreign goods, these have been $84,185,302 greater during the year 1895 than in 1594, as follows: Imports of foreign goods. Year ending June 30: Value. 1895 v.. v .$731,900,319 1894 , 047,775,017 Loss to labor $81,185,302 In this respect the object of the Gorman tariff has been partly attained, although the free-treders have not given away such a large slice of our markets as they had hoped to do. However, they have made a beginning and, if allowed to do so by the American people, they will continue their work of destruction to American industries and their robbery of the many American wage earners for the benefit of the few foreign manufacturers. We next compare the imports of goods admitted free of duty with the following result: — r —— Imports free of dqty. Year ending June 30: Value. 1894 $372,575,931 1895 303,230,927 Decrease $9,345,004 This shows that under the Gorman ' tariff, which was supposed, to give our people an extra abundance of this world’s share of free goods, we have actually received $9,345,000 worth less of free goods than' in 1894. Thus another free trade promise is proven a falsehood. Now let us take the imports of dutiable goods. These compare as follows: Dutiable imports. Year ending June 30: Value. 1895 $308,729,392 1894 275,199,086 Loss to labor $93,5^0,306 dutiable goods reached $93,530,306. It must be remembered that this amount (7 1 gain to foreign producers and manufacturers occurred practically during only ten out of the twelve months that they were enabled to break Into our markets, because our wall of protection had >een torn, down. When we come to figure the increase In dutiable Imports for a full year of the Gormandizing act we shall undoubtedly be able to show the value of that portion of our market which the free-tradersgaveaway to foreigners aggregated fully $100,000,000 for the year. However, dealing with the fiscal year, and showing our total loss through the decline In our export trade, together with the larger amount of foreign goods that have supplanted American goods, we arrive at the following aggregate of loss: TOTAL LOSS, 1805. Throtigh export trade $75,505,140 Through dutiable Imports.... 93,530,306 Total year's loss $160,035,446 The American people have paid. In round numbers, $170,000,000, according to the Treasury Department statistics, for experimenting with the rule and ruin policy of free trade. This Is the result of the first,year and, practically, of but ten months lxf the year. It waa

a costly "change” that the people voted for. Fill Out These Blanks. . ...*» National Headquarters. 135 West 23d street, New York, Aug. 1, 1895. To Defenders and Friends of Protection: Dear Sir—Carefully prepared and reliable information upon the effects of threatened free trade and the effect of the WilsonGorrnan tariff is needed at the present earners, should be thoroughly posted upou the exact conditions prevailing. If you will furnish the information asked we will see that it reaches the people. Yours very truly, THE AMERICAN PROTECTIVE TARIFF LEAGUE. The card referred to reads as follows: b. (Over) The American Protective Tariff League, No. 135 West 23d street, New York. Dear

Sir — Kindly furnish us with the average number of hqnds employed by yout during the first six months from January 1 to June 30, 1890, 1592, 1894, and 1895? Taking 100

to represent the full rate of wages paid in 1890, will you also kindly fill in the proper percentages, more or less, for other half years? c. (over) State P. O Business, ....... .Date,.,..;.. 1895 Name, .' Average Number of Hands Employed, Jan. 1 to June'3o. 1890. 1592. 1894. 1895. Average Percentage of Wages Paid, Jan. 1 to Juue 30, based on 1890 as standard. ~1890~ 1892. 1891 TS9S~ 100 ..- Information furnished by. If the facts here asked for are supplied impartially and honestly by employers of labor throughout the country, lliey will enabled, study of the exact condition of the wage earners of this country during the present year, as compared with the census year of IS9O, as compared with our most prosperous year 1892, and as compared with our worst year, 1894. Fill In the blanks and return them to the above address. Our Corn Trade. Since that breach was made in the wall of protection, at the end of last August, we exported in the eight months from Sept. 1, 1894, to April 30, 1595, Just 18,394,804 bushels of corn. During the first eight months of the McKinley tariff, from Oct. 1, 1890, to May 31, 1891, we exported 14,582,826 bushels. The Increase in our exports was over 3,800,000 bushels during the Gorman tariff period. The amount of money paid us for corn exported during the McKinley tariff eight months was $9,252,180. For tlie larger quantity sfi 1 piied"abroad' - dff-' der the Gorman tariff we received $9,424,484. Supposing that corn was worth Just as much to farmers under the Gorman tariff as under the McKinley tariff, then they sold 3,800,000 bushqj# for $172,300. This was at the rate of about four and a half cents a bushel. This represents the price paid for the extra quantity of our American product that the markets of the world have been willing .to take away since our wall of protection was broken down. Is it worth while to grow corn for the sake of shipping It abroad to sell at four and a half cents per bushel? This Is a problem that confronts the American farmers. That Sugar Deal. Our Imports of sugar for 1894 were some 500,000 tons larger than during the 1895 year. This represents the gift made by the free trade party and the free trade administration to the sughr trust, which, being aware of the intention of the party in power to place a duty upon sugar, was afforded ample tlm* and every opportunity to bring as much as into this country before the tariff tvent Into effect It Is difficult to compute the extent of this gift made by the free trolders to the sugar trust, but on a basis of only 1 cent a pound It would aggregate the

very neat little sum of $10,000,000. The taint of corruption that surrounded this disreputable transaction still sticks to every free trade member of Congress who voted for It, and to every member of the present administration, like files upon a molasses barrel. What the Deficit Means. Said the New York lTerald;“Some high tariff advocates are apparently disappointed that the fiscal year has closed and that the treasury has not a big deficit.” If the Herald means by “high tariff advocates,” protectionists, we reply that we are not at all disappointed. The deficit of “only $44,494,183” is quite enough, especially when it has been accompanied by a heavy increase In the public debt as the result of new loans, something that was unknown under protective tariffs since the close of the civil war. The deficit means simply financial mismanagement and discredit. Every year, since 1862, there had been a surplus in the public revenues, amounting iii the fiscal year 1882 to as much as $145,543,811. This annual series of abundant surpluses meant the steady reduction of the public debt, prompt payment of just claims on the treasury and financial credit, such as free trade England regarded with envy. The deficit means the reverse of all this. It demonstrates strikingly the wild, haphazard way wherein Mr. Wilson and his “revenue reform” associates attempted to revise the tariff at the dictation of the President Had they not been held In check in the Senate by the strong protective sentiment of the country they would have plunged the nation still more into financial discredit and the people still deeper into individual disasters. Protection for Wheat. In the debate on the tariff act of 1824, Mr. Taylor explained why the duty was placed on wheat in 1816 at 15 per cent., equal, ho said, at that time to 22(4 cents a bushel. Since then it had been found that that rate did not prevent 1 importation of wheat from the Black chiefly from Upper Canada. The principle, he said, on which the then proposed Increase of duty of 2(4 cents per bushel w’as to be laid was to secure to the American agriculturist the whole of the American or home market Mr. Tracy stated that foreign wheat was coming into Rochester, N. Y., and selling for 70 and 75 cents, the price of domestic wheat being sl. (Annals of Cong. Ist, 18th, vol. 1, page 1689-1093.) Messrs. Buchanan, Ingham, Vance and Mr. McLane of Delaware favored the Increased duty In favor of our farmers. Mr. McLane wanted to know “If it was wise policy to build up our revenue on the growth of a rival and neighboring State", on the encouragement of foreign In the place of domestic agriculture?” (Annals of Congress, Ist, 18th, vol. 2, page 1698.) The motion to sfrlkerfim the proposed incrcgsed duty of cents on wheat was lost, 113 to 71. Free Wool Benefits? The boon of free wool very nearly doubled our imports of carpets in May, as compared with May, 1894. An increase from 37,908 square yards up to 67,842 square yards imported, and a decrease from 42,487 yards exported In May, 1894, down to 28,151 yards exported In May, 1895, shows such peculiarities of free raw material benefits that we should like the New York Times to explain. An increase in imports and a decrease in exports seems, somehow, contrary to all the freo trade theories that we have read about How Is This? The open markets of the world seem to be checking the sales of American cattle, as we sold 1,870,000 head less last May than in May, 1894. ” They Take the Cake. As representatives of corruption, deception, Intrigue and un-Americanism, the second administration of President Grover Cleveland has never been equaled IS the history of the United States. It Is Nature’s highest reward for a true, simple, great soul that he gets thus to be a part of herself. » . .