The Algona Upper Des Moines from Algona, Iowa on February 14, 1894 · Page 3
Get access to this page with a Free Trial
Click to view larger version

The Algona Upper Des Moines from Algona, Iowa · Page 3

Publication:
Location:
Algona, Iowa
Issue Date:
Wednesday, February 14, 1894
Page:
Page 3
Cancel
Start Free Trial

Page 3 article text (OCR)

said that it was from the New York Herald of to-day. Here Is a workingman's procession described in the New York fierald of .Tannary 11, 1855. Today is the thisAy-ninth anniversary of that great demonstration of unemployed workmen. Its banners will serve to illustrate the situation that now prevails: We want work and must have it. Hunger is a sharp thorn. This is our last resource. Live and let live. , I call the attention of the Democratic man- ngeps to the fact that these starving multitudes were not a'sking for a reduction of the tariff, they were not even asking for cheap clothes and cheap food. They were asking for the privilege of being employed. The county can gain no advantage through cheap goods that can at all compare in its ministration of good to the community which comes from the universal employment of the people. There is no burden levied at the cijstom-house, whether it is 100 per cent or 500 per cent, that can compare at all with the incalculable burden of three millions of willing workers without anything foi- their hands to do. [Applause.] A members Did you say three millions of unemployed persons. Mr. Dolliver: I saw that number stated in a great newspaper. I have no doubt there are mere erf them. This matter long since eeased to be a mere question of politics with me. The saddest sight I ever witnessed in this eapi- tol was that delegation from Philadelphia, intelligent, well-dressed, manly young workingmen, standing before the. ways and means committee pleading, as they said,not for their employers, hut for their employment, for their wiveg and their children. These men stated thnt the working people of Philadelphia are withoirt occupation, and in many cases without food. They said that they represented 200,000 people, one- fi'fth of the population of the greatest industrial city on this continent. Now it is a libel upon our common manhood and a slander against human nature itself, to soy that these men were intimidated except as their actions were influenced by the facts and circumstances that surround thorn. And so when the chairman of the committee on ways and means stood here and undertook to tell us the otber day that the hundreds of thousands of workingmen of the United States who have protested by petition and in great public meetings against this bill have done so under duress from their employers and had been bullied and driveu here by brutal threats, I could not keep out of my heart a sense of indignation at the disparagement art the work- irijrmen of the United States implied by that reproach against their manhood, (Applause.) The chairman went further, and in the BRiiie breath illustrated the attitude of our greatest and most thoughtful trades unions and the mass of our laboring people in looking with a protest of alarm upen this bill by the bogus petitions of John Quincy Adams' time, in which slaves were brought into this house by petition asking that their slavery might be made perpetual, Horace Greeley onea said that the man who pretends to be in favor of high wages and a low tariff is either a knave or a fool. Has it come to this that the doctrine of free trade, the favorite article in the creed of slavery, can not be resisted by the working people of the United States, enlightened as theyare both by experience and by the wisdom of faithful and approved statesmen, without inviting from a leader of the Democratic party an odious and infamous comparison with slaves. [Applause on Republican side. I A great deal has been said in the course of this tariff controversy from time to time about the working people of the United States and about the farmers. If there is anything that stirs up pathetic sentiment in the heart of the Democratic politician more than the distress of the workingman it is the distress of the farmer. As I said, I live in the greatest agricultural community in the world. It is true, as the gentleman from Illinois observed, that we have some mortgage indebtedness, because wherever you find wealth and prosperity accompanied by a business integrity that never repudiated a debt or dodged the fulfillment of a contract, you will find ths credit wnich lies at the basis of investment and enterprise. The states that are freest of individual debts in the United States are shown by the census to be the poorest and by the record te be given over to questionable business methods, and in many cases to the opan repudiation of their obligations. These states are comparatively free from mortgages, not en account of the thrift of their people, but by reason of the well grounded caution of people who have money to loan. I know something personally of mortgages, having contributed at least one to the census of 1800. It represented the amount I paid for nay homestead when I was without a dollar 'in the world and had to convert credit into a mortgage. I do not believe that it increased my poverty: on t'he contrary I have always suspected that it increased my wealth. And it does not take a very high order of intelligence to discern that that simple ease represents the situation oj nine-tenths of those who a're In debt in ihe^tate of Iowa. •That is not a matter of speculation. It was made a matter of investigation and record in the county of Crawford, in my own congressional district, wbere the census shower) that 90 per cen't of the indebtedness of tho people represented the purchase price of land and only an insignificant fraction of the people's debts represented pither their misfortune or their poverty. It is true &at our people have suffered from time to vlme through the depression of business and the decline of market values; but we ha"ve been bombarded for a generation with humbug arguments for free trade; and (he great commonwealth stands to-day first in the column of Republican states with the doctrine of protection made secure by the intelligence of the farmers of Iowa. [Applause ou the Republican side.] My friend [Mr. Wilson], in closing his address to the house, took occasion to set up the standard of free trade; that is to say^, t'he standard of plantation politics be- fcy-e the war of the United States; and as he called the Democratic party to rally around it, in.the name of the working-man and of the farme^ I Bands up my mind at the first opportunity to tell him that the farmers of the state of'Iowa want none of the theories, »nd less of the sympathy, of the Democratic managers ia t'bia house. [Applause on the Republican side.] They talk about their affection for the farmer! Yet even the geutlematt'ifrom Illinois ['Mr. Springer] who has iuvtiafceu his seat hai just stated that if wisdom such ns his could have left ,its impress on the proposed legislation 'he would have framed the bill in respect to the schedule of agricultural products exactly as the McKinley bill was framed. What have these demonstrative friends of the farmers done? I recollect very well tho day when somebody introduced me to our friend from Massachusetts [Mr. Btevcns], I took up the congressional directory and found that he was the largest individual woolen mill proprietor in the United States. When I saw him go over to the Democratic side and sit down my heart came into my mouth and I said, "Those fellows will mur'der that man." [Laughter and applause on the Eepublican side.] I was young in this business then. I had at thnt time a tendency to believe everything I heard in speeches, and used to sit here listening as the precious truths fell from the lips of the orators. I heard these woolen manufacturers denounced as thieves, as burglars, as cutthroats, as pirates, and as pickpockets, fastening their smooth fingers upon the pockets of the American farmer, and I said, "If that woolen manufacturer goes over there, Bryan and Springer or some of those brethren will get around him, draw him into ambush, and murder him in cold blood." [Laughter on the Republican side.] But the next thing I heard of it was that the Democratic managers had placed him on the ways and means committee of the house to help lift the burdens from American agriculture; and how did they lift them? Exactly as this house is about to do. They take the seventh agricultural industry o'f the American people, wool growing, "nnd put it into helpless and hopeless competition with those latitudes of the world where the business can be conducted almost without cost, all in order that the "thieves and burglars" of New England may have cheaper material out of which to manufacture cloth. Now, we do not take the view that the managers of industrial enterprise in New England or elsewhere are thieves and burglars. We have sense enough to know that these great centers of production are managed by men of affairs with economy and integrity, and if the people of New England prosper the people o'f our country have never had any quarrel with them on that account, because wo have things to sell and we wish our customers to have money with which to buy them. So the Eepublican party has never encouraged a quarrel with New England on that account; but when I find this masquerade of reform sacrificing tho seventh agricultural industry of the county in order to increase the advantages of ttre woolen manufacturers of New England, I say to myself that nothing can compare to the thrift of New England, except the stupidity and the hypocrisy of the Democratic party. J.Ap- plause on the Eepublican side]. What else have they done? They have taken every article that the farmers of the United States produce and either put it on the free list or so greatly reduced the duty as to invite an immediate increase of importation; and in order that I may not be suspected of partisan bias in that judgment, I want to read what the greatest Democratic newspaper in the United States has to say this morning of their treatment of the American farmer. I quote from the New York Sun of to-day: "Prof. Wilson's service to the great silent masses, the farmers, is the putting of a lot of agricultural products on the free list for the benfit of their competitors, and the increasing of the farmers' taxes for the benefit of manufacturers. The great silent masses must bear additional burdens in order that the mamv 'cturers, protected and favored by the remission of duties on raw materials and by the continuation of protective duties on the manufactured products, may wax fat while the silent masses ara plodding their way with Wilson taxation weighing them down." I wish also to say a word about the wages of the working people of the United States. This country will find put within the next five years that Mr. Blaine was right In stating that the tariff question is essentially a question of wages. Tho lesson will come through experience; and for one I am not sorry for it, because the Ruler of tho universe has only one way in which to teach men and nations, and that is to send them along the pathway of experience. The trouble with this country to-day is that a whole generation has grown up in the United States since we have had any practical experience on the other side of the tariff question ; and so dreams and visions and mysteries and speculations, drawn mostly from the text-books of foreign political economists, have taken the placa of the knowledge which would have saved the American people from the folly of 1893. And evsn now we are regaled in this debate with long extracts from Adam Smith, brought into this house as novelties, as if the American people had never heard of Mr. Smith. Adam Smith printed his book the same year that our fathers declared their independence; and if the people of tbe United States had desired to govern themselves by the wisdom of the father of English political economy they have had more than a century to read his book and apply his philosophy to their affairs. It is an interesting fact that while our ways and means committee is enlightening this debate by bringing into it the precepts of English political economists, old and new, great English statesmen like Lord Salisbury, speaking to the English silk- weavers and observing the almost total destruction of that great English industry, looked upon the maxims of his own school and mournfully declared that their application might be sound philosophy, but it was poor busin'ess. Nor is it remarkable that the editor of the Cardiff Mail, recently returned from an extended tour with a party of friends through the United State", takes the trouble to print the little book, 'of which I have already quoted freely, in which the sturdy Welsh good sense candidly admits that the situation and experience of the United States have contradicted the economical speculations in which bis judgment had always yielded a ready acquiescence. He says: "I am, as you know, a convinced free trader. Protection is to mean economical heresy, the fraud and folly of which are capable of mathematical demonstration— demonstration as absolutely convincing as that by which the solution of a problem in Euclid is arrived at. And yet throughout the length and breadth of this vast continent one is almost daily brought face to face with solid, indisputable fact* that seem to give the lie to the soundest aud most universally accepted axioms of political economy. Let me give you just one example : Under the shadow of a stringent protective tariff the manufacture of paper was commenced in the United States. Paper is still subject to a heavy Import duty. Ad- cording to our theories that ought to enhance its price to the consumer in this country. As a matter of fact, the New York newspaper proprietors buy their "news" at a less price than that at which it could be supplied to them in London, and some of the paper mills in New Jersey are actually exporting paper to the old country. Unless it can be shown that this paper Industry would have grown up without the aid of a protective tariff, It is futile—nay, It is an impertinence—for an outsider to say that the Americans have acted unwisely "in tax- Ing themselves for a few years In order to establish in their midst a great industry, giving occupation to a great quantity of highly paid labor. And it seems to me that this set of facts and the arguments based on It apply to many other industries which are assuming such colossal proportions throughout the length and breadth of the land.— Yankee Land and tht Yankees, page 53. Now, I like the English, They have never in any emergency failed to take care of themselves. I hope we have not lost our inheritance in that serviceable turn of mind. I can easily see bow the problem of cheap production has driven English statesmanship to ignore every other element that enters into the life of man, resisting even that reduction in the hours of labor which is tha hope of the working people of the world. So that I have never tried to convhice an Englishman that his countrymen have not had sagacity enough to look after their own interests. All I object to is that the leaders of English opinion should feel called upon, bavin? taken care of their own people, to propose a plan for taking core of us. I have an old friend at home, a farmer, who comes in occasionally to see me, a great talker, especially on the tariff. He likes to argue with the Democrats. Every time they make an argument in favor of the fr<e trade theory the old man always begins his reply wifti these words, " I recollect." If the Republican party in 1892 had had to do with men and women able to recollect what had happened in the experience of the United States we would have avoided the folly of that election. Now, what of the labor condition in the United States? I believe that if our civilization is ever destroyed it will be by the degradation of American wages. This government has no facility, for any length of time, to take care of universal popular discontent. In other countries it may be done with armies. In this country it may be done for months with seup-houses a'nd with the bread of charity; but in the long run the idleness will destroy the fabric of our institutions and produce the irresponsible and uncontrollable forces that may shake the •structure of modern society to its foundation. I heard my friend fro'm Illinois (Gen. Black) the other day, and who of us could express the amazement with which we heard him, deliberately advising the degradation of American labor in order to discourage immigration? Why, gentlemen, It is a great thing* for a nation to be able to take care of itself. It is more than any nation in Europe has been able to do; but the glory of the Republican party Is that for thirty years we have not only taken care of our own, but we have opened the doom of hospitality to the struggling people of the world, and they have come, ten millions of them, and instead of bearing down the level of our civilization they have helped us to lift it up, until to-day the American workingman has within his reach a larger share of the comforts of life than could have been secured by a day's work in any nation of the world or in any age in the history of the human race. [Applause.] That statement does not depend upon my testimony alone, for we recall that in the midst of the eloquent remarks of my friend from New York (Mr. Cockran,) last summer in the silver debate, he made that notable admission in the cause of truth and political integrity, that a day's work in the United States goes further to provide a family with the necessaries of life than ever before since society was organized. [Applause.] Where did the idea come from that the American workingman ought to take his place on the level of the civilization of the Old World? My countrymen, it came ftom the plantations of the slave power, where labor received no wages, and where tha leaders of politics openly maintained that proposition in express words. Gen. Mc- Dufflo. chairman of tha ways and means committee in 1832, without quibble or equivocation, admitted on this floor that the wages of American labor under free trade would fall to the level of the wages paid in other countries, and boldly declared that it ought to be so. That idea lies historically at the bottom of the free trade agitation in the United States, and I denounce it here in the name of every American family that buy* the comforts of life with the wages of daily labor. [Applause], The Eepublican party,- whatever may be the discipline of its defeat, will never consent to take away from the firesides of American labor the shield of American law. My friend from West Virginia (Mr. Wilson) speaks of the lordly and almost kingly tone in which the employers of labor describe the unfortunate strikes which prevailed in some of the departments of industry in 1893. He emphasizes what the organ of the iron and steel industry describes as ''the rebellion of labor." I do not undertake to apologize for the phrase; but I stand here to say that if there was a rebellion of labor it was a rebellion against organized capital and not an active hostility against the protective tariff, and if any proof was necessary I need only call tbe attention of this house to the fact that tbe "rebellious" Association of Iron and Stael Workers came before the ways and means committee at this session pleading for tha maintenance of the tariff of 1890 while Andrew Carnegie, departing for the valley of the Nile for a winter's vacation, made a farewell address to his fellow citizens by advising them to support the Wilson tariff bill. There is one case in whieh tha protests of labor were not the result of intimidation for it would almost seem that the arguments which have brought American labor to this capitol with its protests have secured for the Wilson bill from the most repulsive »yn- disate of capital the benediction of approval. I am content if the endorsement'of Andrew Carnegie costs the Democratic party as many votes in times to corn* as it has caused us in times past. We gladly exchange the support of the syndicate of Iron and steel employer* fgr tho good will of the Amalgamated Association of ' on and Steel Worker*. A great many people talk as If the general decline of values of the American farmer had been left behind. I Intend to put Into the body'of my remarks a few observations made by my friend, once a member of this house, Senator Mills, of Texas, a man whose tariff bill in th* light of the present seems like tbe work of a statesman. [Laughter on the Republican side. I It is a profound study of the relations of American agriculture to the decline of values in recent time, a study which enabled the senator to prove upon the floor of the senate that while the products of the American farmer have declined in value in thirty years their fall has come far short in the fall of the value of every article that is essential to the comfort of farm life of the United States:; pnioics OF OHBTAIN pnopnoTa gnoM 1873 y 1891. 5 88 oo 80 80 CD 80 *i M -5 •! *S --5 -4 ) w $. w to »-• <S *3 08 -3 o» ci »**• w potoicsifrio.onei-'ooii b> -3 01 ono v Vs to to «o Vfl M «o *J oo -• i**- o> bo D«OCJt«DpiCO*frOOQ«OO3pOi»»t at *•. bi w l^ "o en o> »o "w a» *» to '•••a w -< -* o -i OoedtDeocococd»a'pt-*U'rfn*»ooocn>—i-* ...... . zo enu -lad •18 A I IB <n & not •» oo "nq jad a oo -HO.!? J98H 0,011 -qoj, ARTICLES THAT FAICMKR9 BUY. ooo5B"opc>— 9*0*3 tffc \-f 'ft>*-a]io ci'u* ts a-i boot o> fc CH CO 4* <O C£ O *» C> *-* UO Oil-* 3- CH13 S ~l Cn 8S88888SS8S8ig"g888S8 X o E> aad •qj 43d •lint 43d 'nO4]41IQ •uoi 4f>d I33JS •pnnod aad 'aa; -joj OJH •punod jad 'va p.IV.C .19(1 OOOOOOOOMtOtOt^l— i— UC pjo.t .tad t-t 1— tv W W W}W W M M * M •-19 14 M M M K K f3 W W M 88 at at •> a> -j a> » -< oo to co <o oo oo oo P.IVA* .iod pju.C Jatl ZO 43(1 •ZOp 43d •43pU0 43d •siuvq •aujo •<U 43d >43ddad 43<I This table shows that from 1873 to 1891 •liver fell 26 per cent, cotton 53, corn 6, wheat 80, bacon and hams 14, lard 25, pork 24, beef 27, butter 82, cheese 81, ftnd tobacco 19. These are the articles which farmers sell. The average decline of the ten articled Is 26.1 per cent between 1873 and 1891. During the same time refined sugar declined 60 per cent, nails 62, bar iron 51, steel rails 75, Rio coffee 11, tea 73, sheeting 48, drilling 55, shirting 46, standard prints 47, print cloth 56, quinine 89, glass goblets 70, 10 by 14 window glass 60, undershirts 64, ginghams 64, carpets 26, pepper 62, molasses 68. These are the articles the farmer buys. Now, if what he buys declines at an equal ratio with what he sells he Is just as well off at one time as another. But if what ho buys falls more in price than what he sells he is benefited. When we average the articles he buys we find that the decline is 65.4 per cent. What is the situation to-day? I do not intend to say even a word about the industrial depression that surrounds us. God knows that it is bad enough, and God knows that it is plain enough, without the necessity of a description and without the need of'an argument. Mr. Elaine very ^ruly says, in his discussion of the tariff in "Twenty Years in Congress," that in all the industrial depressions of the past the American people have never failed to turn from low duties to the standard of protection. He says that never once was a financial or industrial panic in the United States relieved by turning from pro- •tection toward free trade In the disturbance of 1857, while possibly the panic was mixed with financial 1 complications, the remedy proposed by the Democratic president was an adjustment of our affairs along the lines of a protective tariff. I used to think that Mr. Buchanan was a weak and practically useless public man, and that he failed in yielding to the events which surrounded him at the outbreak of the rebellion. I have lived long enough to revise that impression. He was a man of culture, of large faculties, and of approved statesmanship, and if ha fell short in the crisis of the civil war it was because he was dealing with a situation in which the Supreme Governor of the Universe had put his hand upon American society to revolu- tlenize and reform it; and 1 believe th* human race never produced a man strong enough to stand- erect in that storm and come between Providence and the Divine purpose to create a nation strong enough to resist disintegration, and grand enough to cast off the barbarism of slavery. [Applause.] And so I L^'-equite revised my idea of James jiv^'uian. The remedy which is proposed is n» ^ new one. It had already been suggested in his annual -' message of January 2, 1855, by Myorn H. Clarke, governor of the state of New York, before the Republican party was born, in these words: '•Many branches of domestic industry are languishing for lack of that protection which proper tariff regulations would have afforded, which, had they been seasonably adopted, would have averted much of the distress consequent upon the paralysis of business which now pervades the country." The remedy was to return to the protective tariff, and when my friend, the chairman of the committee on ways and means, described the tariff then enacted as a war tariff, I answer him that it was a . tariff enacted for economical and commercial purposes before the war began and signed by the last Democratic president save one." Mr. Chairman, what is the remedy for the evils that now surround us? Our people are without work. Is it possible that the human mind is capable of the folly of seeking to correct that situation by sending the people's work to be done in other countries? The remedy for the evils that surround us is the employment of our people. That makes the general prosperity. Every woolen mill and factory was in motion. Mere than a hundred new industries had been established and the American people, as President Harrison showed in hia last message, had touched the highest level of prosperity. That seems now as if it were a generation away. Yet it was a condition to which we may go back if we do not blindly despise the wisdom of our fathers. The opportunity to work measures the ability to buy. The ability to buy creates the American market place. Destroy that or degrade it and the American farm goes back to the open prairie from which it came. Out west we long ago went through the experience of having nobody in the United States to buy what we had to sell. In 1802 we thought we were beyond that experience. We had found the bread producing power of the world at last overtaken by the bread consuming power of ths world and we believed that the permanent prosperity of American agriculture had at last come. To-day we are confronted with the spectacle of two or three millions of our customers deprived of their ability to buy, whereby the American market place is degraded and the welfare of the American farm threatened. I beg of you, gentlemen, by the counsel of every great statesman this country bus produced, from Washington to Lincoln, to save the American people from re-enacting the folly which has already four times in our history destroyed our industrial and commercial prosperity. [Prolonged applause on the floor and in the galleries.] When Uncle Sana Speaks. From tht Cincinnati Star. The hand wqs the hand of Uncle Sara, but the voice was the voice of Grover, and when it said, "Mr. Dole, came down," he came not. Presently a voice will say, "Grover, coma down," and he will not stand on the order of descent, but descend at once. It will bo the voice of Uncle Sana this time, and no mistake. * relation in t Average r«iuotioa it* uct*, fe »rm products, M.I. neteen othfi prod* practical Prohibition. From Puflt "I see the 'Drys' got on''- three vote* in Simpkinsyille. I thou^ .m told me the prohibition sentuuciii. was very strong there?" "It is under normal conditions; but in this campaign the saloon keepers threatened to close their places if the town, went dry." ^ Transcontinental Bankruptcy. From tkt Portland, Daily Prets. A Portland banker says it is now possible to travel Jrorn th» Atlantic to Uie oo

Get full access with a Free Trial

Start Free Trial

What members have found on this page