We Cannot Understand How Any

taan vould 'vote against the accep.'.nse e the road roller and stone oruebac Alter the council had afreed to ?jmrekse. othese machines if they. fulnied oertain requiremente.' So f ar, there kas boen no question as to the naicMrits doing all that they are guarutood to do. Still thrue aldermen w.otrc] ajrinst closing the contract. The maiti eost of raising wool in Beore the shecp graze over the inain is the wages of the berder, ïn the Argentino Republic this 'üiyof labor rt'ceives threeSpanish ats per month. In Montana the ■d of the herder, whieh is also the a cost of growing wool there, is $40 jper month, as against $3 in South -Amec-ica. This is an increase in the of growing American wool, otherwríao under simular conditions, of 1200 oect The freight on the wool from Cioodon to New York by sailing or steam tel thia only one-fourth -cent. per jxjund, while tho cheapest freight from .Mqntana is 2 cents per pound to the ■ame market. Here is an inercase to the Montana grower in the cost of trans.ition of 700 per cent. over the cost to tfee South American grower. With this dilTerencc against the American iwer on the fi-ec range, how much ' must be the cost of raising wool on farms worth $50 to 875 per acre? SlKOE that a bieach was made in the of Protection, at the end of last fuet, we exported in the eight ■hs fnmi September 1, 18i)4, to Ajril30, 1895, just 18,394,804 bush i. During the flrst eight oaonths of McKinley Tarlff, from Oetober 1. toMay31, 1801, we exported 14.336 hushols. The increase in our ... as :;.smo, ikiii tmshels durGorman Tarilï period. Tiicamount of monoy paid us for corn wted during the McKinley Tai-iff bt tnonths was 19,252,180. For the vater quanity shippod abroad under the Gormau ïariff wc roeeived $!l. 424,4. that uorn was worth as much to farmers undcr the ( rOT" TarüT as under the McKinly Tar11 :a Miey sold 3,800,000 bushels for SJ22,aO0. Thlï wás at the rato of about - nda half cents per bushel. Tik represento the price paid for the n quanity of onr American product !i :i', tbc markets of the world have been MC take away since our wall of iPro4xtkn was broken down. Is it M-ihTFhile togrow eorn for the sake klppiBK it abroad to sell at four and ;a. half conts per busbel? This is a jvH3lcm that confronta the American lx the debate on the Tarifï act of 2, Mr. Taylor explaiucd why the i duty was placed on wheat in 1816 at 15 r cent., eqeal, he said. at that time to 22 cents a bushel. Since then it had been found that that rato didnot prevent importation of wheat from the Black Sea. but chiefly from Upper Canada. The principie, he said, on which the then proposed increase of duty of 2 cents per bushel was to be laid was to secure to the American agriculturist the whole of the American or home market. Mr. Tracy stated that foreign wheat was coming into liochester, NY., and selling for 70 and 75 cents, the price of domestic wheat being $1. ( Annals of Cong. lat, 18th, vol. 1, page 1689 -1693.) Messrs. Buehanan, Ingham, Vanee and Mr. McLane of Delaware favored the increased duty in favor of onr farmers. Mr. McLane wanted to know "if it was wise policy to build up our revenue on the growth of a rival and neighboring State, on the agement of forein in the place of domostic agrieulture?" (Annals of Conirren, lst, 18th, toL 2, pago 1698 ) The motion to strike out the proposed inereasfid duty of 2è cents on wheat was lost, 113 to 71.