I hardly know why your committee selected me to speak upon the subject of Reciprocity and Foreign Trade; unless some hint may have been given to them that I have not been entirely in accord with my own political party on this subject. I do not however, agree with my friend Mr. MacVeagh when he states that protection is in trouble. On the contrary, I differ strongly and wholly from his ideas on this subject. Protection is not in trouble; nor has it had any trouble. But protection run mad has received a severe criticism from the American people. Now, that is a proper thing for me to say, although it may not agree with the sentiments of many with whom I have always acted and do to-day act.

The principle of protection simply is this, that it is better for this country to take care of itself and its people than to take care of other countries and other people. In other words the first duty of a man is to his own family. And then if there is any necessity of assisting his neighbors, he can consistently do so after he has taken care of and protected his own. Let the people of this country stand by that doctrine which has so well protected them. The time allowed here to discuss the tariff question is so short that it can not be done properly. My friend, Mr. MacVeagh, gives us quite a severe arraignment of the reciprocity plan. And not content with receiving it from Mr. MacVeagh, we must also have it from our Chairman in a little stronger illustration. If you will take my word for it, when the reciprocity plan is adopted and has become the working system of this country, there will be no mule to kick. If we can induce South America, the West Indies, Mexico, and Canada to take our products and give us in return what we cannot produce, then we have bettered ourselves. But if we are going to open our doors and take in the products of Europe, the manufactured articles of Europe, to the extent that will prevent our manufacturing institutions from giving employment to our labor, then you have not bettered this country, nor have you helped our people, nor have you helped our Government, nor have you helped freedom or free men.

Now then, I believe in the doctrine that was once promulgated in this country, to do the greatest good to the greatest number. And when we reach the time when it becomes necessary to reduce our revenue, then let

us reduce it upon the articles where we will feel it the least and benefit us the most. You can take the article of sugar. Not over twenty-five to fifty thousand people in this country are interested in its production, while sixty-three millions want it free. We cannot produce what we want. We cannot begin to produce it. We have never done it, and we never can. Therefore I say, let it come in free. I believe that to be the true protective doctrine. But when you come to reach the manufacturing interests of this country, the woolen mills, the cotton mills, the iron interests, if by admitting the goods from Europe it will result in reducing the prices of our labor, then their arrival is not desirable. I do not believe it is necessary to have a tariff higher than it ought to be to keep out those goods. I do not believe that it is necessary to make that tariff so high that the manufacturer shall profit unreasonably; but I would have it high enough to permit him to pay a liberal amount of his profits to his laboring men and be well rewarded for the use of his capital. One of the greatest troubles of the tariff question is that there are too many men in this country working for the interest of their pockets. They want the tariff made for their particular benefit. One man wants free raw material to help him manufacture, while he ignores the justice due the manufacturer who produces that raw material. Therefore I say, that the difficulty is, there is too much pocket business in it. A former Senator from the State of Illinois who is now dead made the statement less than ten years ago, that within ten years the manufacturers of New England, although at that time demanding protection, would be against the protective party because they would want free raw material. The late election demonstrates the truth of his assertion. From the manufacturing districts of New England comes the strongest opposition to the present tariff laws. Local self interest supplants principle.

Now then, I believe it to be true and it cannot be denied, that the most prosperous times this coontry has ever seen have been during the high tariffs. When we have had the low tariffs we have not had that prosperity which we needed or that prosperity which came with the high tariff. And when I say the high tariffs, I am free to say that I do not mean a tariff higher than is necessary to protect us, but a tariff that will take care of our labor, take care of our interests, manufacture our goods at home, make our laboring men prosperous, and give to the manufacturer himself that fair remuneration for the use of his money, that he ought to have, and no more. Now if we will stand by that doctrine, look after all material interests, look after our labor, then we are friends of our whole country, for a tariff that is sufficient to protect labor will protect us all.

I do not believe the cheapest goods are the best. I can buy a suit of clothes for ten dollars, but I insist, and every gentleman present will agree, that a suit costing sixty dollars will look better and last longer than the ten dollar suit. Why do you pay the high price-simply because you will have the foreign suit. In buying the foreign suit you support that tariff that enables our manufacturers to sustain themselves and give employment to our people. Some claim Government has no right to tax my goods to benefit others. I insist that one man or his interest shall not stand in the

way of what is best for the whole community. Under the protective system this country has prospered to an extent that the world has never before seen. The growth and prosperity of the last twenty-five years more than equals all our previous history. Free trade might do better, but history is against it, hence, why try a dangerous experiment?

It occurs to me now that I have wandered from our subject, but with my time almost gone, I will leave it for other gentlemen to bring us back to the real duty of the evening. Let me say in conclusion that we neither want a Chinese wall nor foreign trade that leaves us in an impoverished condition, but that reciprocity that takes our productions and returns something we cannot produce, is the plan that will bring to our doors a large measure of prosperity.

THE RED FLAG.*

BY WILLISTON FISH.

For the third time this season I rise to get my grip on this intelligent audience. You may consider it your third attack of the grip.

We are discussing to-night, in our usual able manner, the Red Flag. We have all seen and shuddered at the Red Flag of Anarchy. If there are any here who have not shuddered, I will state that it is now everlastingly too late. The Red Flag of Anarchy is no more. Our investigation to-night is a post-mortem.

I am not a lover of the Red Flag-of the plain Red Flag. It does not suit the complexion of the country. I pretend to no special information or trained taste in flags-I have never been a flagman-but were I called upon to design a flag for the United States, that should be a good flag, I would not make it all red.

I do not know just how I would proceed, but I think that in choosing my colors I would have a fair proportion of blue-of azure blue-which might be taken as signifying hope; and I would have a fair proportion of white-which might be taken as signifying virtue and cleanness; and of red I would have just enough for glory, but not enough for barbarism. And perhaps I might add a few stars. It seems to me that this would make a fairly good flag. No doubt in New York such a flag would seem strange and outlandish, but I would as soon have it as any other flag. And I would call it the Stars and Stripes and fling it to the breeze.

Gentlemen, this is not idle visionary talk. I have been a soldier under the Stars and Stripes, and, gentlemen I never did a blamed thing. I was accounted a splendid officer. O the thrill of the true soldier when he gets his package from the New York tailor, and finds that the stripes on his trousers are the widest and most flaming in the regiment! There, there is the spur to professional ambition. Gentlemen, every throb of the life-blood of the true soldier belongs to his country. When his country calls he goes, no matter what the duty-reveille, tattoo or drill— and so he continues until he marries and leads a rich father-in-law to the altar. Some young officers save their money, invest it, and become rich themselves. But, for the most part, they wait for the rich heiress and let nature take her course.

*It is to be regretted that the two leading papers on this subject were not preserve by their authors and consequently are not available now.

Mr. Catlin has such a shiftless way of announcing the subjects of discussion, that he leaves us a good deal at sea, and I have often noticed that when other gentlemen and myself are doing our best to speak here we rarely know what we are talking about. This is entirely Mr. Catlin's fault. This Red Flag may be the Red Flag of the late Anarchists or the Red Flag of the auctioneer. They are something alike, sometimes they are produced by similar causes. We see the auction flag budding forth where people have not been able to provide for themselves, where they have lived beyond their means; we see it waving above worthless property to which attention can not be attracted by any less violent means. The Red Flag of the auctioneer waves above stocks of miserable, useless, tawdry goods, and the Red Flag of the Anarchists waves above stocks of miserable, useless, tawdry opinions. And there is another likeness between these flags, that they are both put forth sometimes as false signs of distress. Some trading concerns make a business of appearing bankrupt in order to grow richer, and there are many men in comfortable circumstances who put forth the Anarchists' flag in the same way.

This is a large country but there is room for only one flag. I am for the Stars and Stripes. I wish every man here when he lays his head on the curbstone to-night to feel assured that my voice is for the preservation of the Union.

If war of factions should be precipitated, let it come! I repeat it, let it come! And let it bring its friends! I trust that I shall not prove a laggard in the fray. When some Rebecca leans from the castle casement to report to the chief how goes the fight, I trust that I may be named with honor. Ha," will say Front-de-boeuf, "where is the strange knight now? Does the false craven blanch from the helm when the storm is the highest?""No, he blanches not," the maiden will reply, "he blanches not. He has hired a substitute and is looking first-rate."

Gentlemen, I am nearly done. I am runing dry. Act the true part; let thy apparel be rich but not gaudy; look not upon the wine when it gives its color in the cup, nor upon the Red Flag when it gives its color to the bum's nose, nor when it waves over the cheap stock. Do not buy the ice-water set for $13 nor the diamond scarfpin for $10.50. Good things do not come so cheap. Do not believe that by listening half an hour to an agitator under the Red Flag you can imbibe enough ideas to safely begin remodelling the world. Good things do not come so easily.

If we were living in the state of communism that seems to some so desireable; if we were living even in the ideal, Utopian state at which Mr. Bellamy thinks he hints, it would be as easy then as now to argue that things were wrong. It would be easier for the argument would be just. And when some orator rose to ask that nature's broad laws of existence and progress be no longer hampered and turned awry by the narrow rules of man; to ask, then, that we be no longer the puppets of an institution but only the creatures of nature as we were made; to ask that to every man be restored his old right to eat that he gets and wear that he makes, and thank no one and no Government, there would be such a round of applause as never greeted any theorizing orator since the world began.