an Act imposing duty, or a tariff, on imported goods. From the foundation of the Government till this very moment there has never been a year or a month or an hour when this policy has been abandoned. All Parties, at all times, have insisted on a tariff. The exact point of difference then, today, between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party is this: the Democratic Party insists that in its imposition no regard shall be had to domestic industries, no regard had to domestic labor, no regard had to National prosperity; but duties shall be imposed solely with the view of collecting a sufficient amount to defray the expenses of the Government.

"A tariff for revenue only,-what is it? A fair illustration would be the imposition of a duty on coffee, tea, indigo; things not produced in this country and which cannot be produced in this country. The revenue derived from this source would be purely and strictly a revenue tariff. It could have no element of protection in it, because there is no domestic industry of the kind to be protected.

"The Republican Party takes clear and sharp issue with the Democratic Party on that question, and says, 'No; do not make this imposition of duty on articles not produced in this country. Let tea, coffee, things not produced here, come in free; but impose this duty on articles that we do produce or can produce': and

the Party affirms that by so doing we will accomplish a double purpose. First, we shall raise the necessary revenue to meet the annual expenses of the Government, and we shall do a further and a better thing,— we shall encourage, foster, and build up domestic industries, and give employment to American capital and protection to American labor.

"I suppose that every farmer will concede that he does not till the soil for the pleasure of it. He labors not only to provide for his own family, for his own wants, but to accumulate a competence for his declining years. To accumulate that competence it is necessary for him to have a market for his surplus products. It is of the highest importance to the farmer that his markets shall be as near to his farm as possible, and the nearer his market can be brought to his farm the more valuable will be his products. No one can question that. It follows, therefore, that if had to rely entirely on a foreign market for the sale of your surplus products the value of them would be very largely diminished, for the cost of transportation comes out of the value of the product as you take it from the farm.

you

"Secondly, a protective tariff benefits the farmer in giving him a steady market. What the farmer wants, quite as much as a market, is a steady market, so that when he sows his broad acres in the Fall he may know

in advance that he can reap with profit. Suppose we had no consuming class in the United States, and the farmer had to depend upon the foreign market for the sale of his surplus product. One year there would be a dearth in Europe, and she would take all the surplus products of the farms of the United States. Then the farmer, trusting upon that market, would sow broader fields, and lay the foundation for richer harvests; but the next year comes and the harvests are bountiful in Europe, and Europe at once says to the farmers of the United States, 'We have no use for your surplus products,' and the wheat and the corn rot in the stack or in the crib.

"But a protective tariff benefits the farmer in the third place, by increasing the value of his farm lands. The value of his farm products is not only increased by this home market, but the value of the farm itself is enhanced by building up manufacturing industries. I do not make this statement without knowing whereof I affirm. If I should call the roll of States, you would be amazed to find that in those States where manufacturing is the greatest the value of farm lands is the highest, and in those States where manufacturing is the least the value of farm lands is the least.

"But a protective tariff benefits the farmer in other ways. It gives a market for the farmer for things

that he could not otherwise dispose of, and which on his farm he regards as substantially valueless.

It

"There is another industry affected by the tariff in which the farmer is specially interested. I allude to the wool industry. The sheep growers of this district, and of the whole country, are deeply interested in the wool industry of the United States. It sprang into existence under a protective tariff. The farmers have invested in their flocks the accumulation of long years. They were led to do this by the protection of this industry, and we have reached a point in 1884 when the destruction of this industry is seriously threatened. . . . More than a million men are today flock-masters in the United States. These flocks are increasing not only in number, but in quality. If this industry is not protected it certainly will go to the wall. The wool-growers of the United States cannot compete with the wool-growers of South America and Australia. In the first place, take the Australian wool, it is just as good a wool, if not better, than you can grow. They are increasing their flocks of sheep beyond all calculations. They herd them on lands which they rent by the year for a penny an acre. They have no sheds or barns, for it is perpetual summer. They shear the sheep twice a year. They feed them nothing in the Winter, for there is no Winter;

and they can grow that wool and lay it down in your market, at a profit, for twelve or fifteen cents a pound. Where is there a wool-grower in my hearing this afternoon who is prepared to say that it would pay him to continue in the wool industry if wool was only twelve or fifteen cents a pound? Free trade in wool would simply drive your flocks to the slaughter pens."

By electing Cleveland the country seemed to express its desire to test out more liberal trade conditions as against Protection. Whatever may have been Cleveland's personal attitude in the matter of tariff, he found himself confronted by a serious problem. The excess of receipts over expenditures was placing the Administration in a really dangerous position; tax reduction could not be secured, and the President failed to come to any agreement with his Party on expenditures, the net result being that the Treasury Department had no alternative other than to store up its funds or to buy bonds in the open market. For the Treasury to retain one year's surplus revenue meant that the monetary circulation must be reduced at least one-twelfth, and such a contraction made a financial crisis not only possible but probable. Cleveland became convinced that tax reduction was absolutely imperative, declaring that his position was taken on the ground of excess revenue