MONOPOLY OF TRADE THE TARIFF. 625 



and the farmer is forced to compete with the convict labor 

 of Australia, with her ninety millions of sheep, in the 

 markets of the world in the sale of wool; while at the 

 same time the manufacturer is protected, by the same bill, 

 to the amount of 30 to 50 per cent. , which amount may be 

 added to the price and charged to the fanner when he is 

 compelled to re-purchase this wool again in its manufac- 

 tured state. If there is any argument that can be sustained 

 in favor of free trade, it certainly cannot, with justice, be 

 urged that the farmers and producing classes shall bear all 

 the burdens of the system, while others receive all the pro- 

 tection of our tariff laws. The Republicans rush to the 

 other extreme and desire a sweeping reduction on tobacco, 

 and a partial reduction on distilled spirits. But it is not 

 proposed, in this letter, to discuss the merits of free trade 

 or protection, and we only mention these facts as showing 

 the position of the two political parties upon the tariff 

 question. 



From the discussion in Congress it would seem that 

 the chief difference between the two parties was upon the 

 free list; the Republicans desiring to retain the duty on 

 lumber, wool and the products of the farm. To what 

 extent the Republicans propose to reduce the duties is, in 

 part, a matter of conjecture. In his message of December 

 6th, 1 88 1, President Arthur said: 



"The tariff laws also need revision, but' that a due 

 regard may be paid to the conflicting interests of our citi- 

 zens, important changes should be made with caution. 

 If a careful revision cannot be made at this session, a 

 commission, such as was lately approved by the Senate, 

 and is now recommended by the Secretary of the Treasury, 

 would doubtless lighten the labors of Congress whenever 

 this subject shall be brought to its consideration/* 



The commission above referred to was appointed, and 



