82 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. 



to consider for a short time tlie beneficent principles of practical 

 co-operation in some of its varied forms. So, too, we believe that 

 liberty which illumines the wa}' to man's enfranchisement will all the 

 better accomprush the purpose when aided and accompanied by 

 co-operation. Instead of the cold and indifferent selfishness, dead 

 to another's welfare as Arctic climes, it brings the semi-tropic warmth 

 of fraternity and of brotherl}' love and sympath}'. It leads out upon 

 the pleasant hills and valleys into the glad sunlight of prosperity'. 



The noblest words of Daniel Webster, to our mind, are : "Liberty 

 and Union ; one and inseparable." This is the American idea. It 

 is the corner stone of our popular government — individual liberty 

 and complete union, combined with high morality and general public 

 intelligence. Monopolv is an usurpation of public welfare to private 

 ends. One of the greatest issues, in fact the chief issue before this 

 countr}-, is the tariff" with its two sides — protection and free trade. 

 These sides are being argued by the press, the debating societies, 

 the stump speakers, and by our national legislative body in Congress. 



The abstract theory viewed in the light of existing facts presents 

 grave matters demanding the candid, careful thoughts of the best 

 intellects in the nation. But the trouble does not end with consider- 

 ing difficult questions upon their merits. The whole tariff business 

 is so intertwined with selfish and party considerations that other 

 difficulties are presented. Every one wants to buy as cheaply as 

 possible and to sell at the highest possible price, so that pretty much 

 every one is a free trader in what he has to buy and a protectionist 

 in what he has to sell. Hence tariff legislation is too often selfish 

 log rolling rather than a result of an honest study of economics. 

 Motives of part}' or of personal popularity often take the precedence 

 of the public good. This makes a revision of the tai'iff full of knotty 

 perplexities. Three-quarters or more of the people in the nation are 

 doubtless in favor of "tariff reform." But these words in some cases 

 are a cloak for abstract free trade notions, and the words have been 

 picked up as an opprobrious epithet to hurl b}' one part}' against the 

 other. To add to the confusion, therefore, "tariff reform" is coming 

 to have an arbitrary or technical significance. If a person with a 

 free trade or a protective record argues for tariff reform, his record 

 rather than his arguments are attacked. 



"We regard the subject of tariff reform, considered in the light of 

 seeking to adjust the duties necessary for the proper protection of 

 our industries and for payment of expenses of the national govern- 



