Show THE protectionists projectionists DREAM Prof Sanborn states in his interview with tile ration nation that the mckinley MeKin lev bill carries to its logical 11 extreme the theory of protection this is il an error the lo 10 logical ical extreme of protection esthe is the prohibition of imports china is the only country that carried protection to its logical extreme kt at a time when cilina wis was the richest eliest ri country in the world she adopted the policy of refusing to trade with foreign nations As a result of this tile the great body of her laborers awl and especially the agricultural classes have become serfs who toil for five or ten cents per day thourl they live in ill a country that is naturally naturally one of tile the richest ric liest on oil the globe prof sanborn yan born is too bright a ruin min not to see the facts so lien he consoles his readers with the assurance that friends of tile mckinley McKin loy bill claim to sec evidences of filver linings lilloll lil lill on oil the clouds that at pre the republican party throughout 0 this his t nation these friends of tile the mckinley bill must have a keen vision no one else cle lias has b ben en able to ace anything any tiling of this silver lining bein heing 0 a reader and a reasoner it is not surprising however that all alis professor sor should see this happy though illusory vision lie ile states in another ar lother place that free trade in ill a utopian or ideal world is unanswerable ab considered it is easier to prop propagate apte this doctrine than tho the rovers reverse this is an ail adroit manner of avoiding tile isue there is no free trade theory but there are arc ta inc that provo prove tile theory of protection to lie be a stupid absurdity these facts make nien men tariff reformers and the only theory they I 1 know of is a mere statement of tl alie to I 1 facts as they arc found to dream i that abstractly conil considered ered a certain fact can call be ally anything tiling m more mor e or less than a fact is a favorite and frient frI vision of protectionist who unable to face the feets in ill the rac declare they have lave a theory which will not gralli if abstractly considered but which tile they y claim I 1 to be ai groll as the alic facts presented by their opponents we lve prefer the fact to tho the vision even though that vision bo be called a theory ind and will not stand if abstractly considered |