Editor Argus:- The pamphlet issued by ths republican state central committee exhibits some peculiarities. After laboring to show that protection is a necessity and a republican child, the address on page four says, "two thoudand articles put upon the free list and everything free but liquor and tobáceo is tüe republican record, while quinine and a four cent per pouud reduction on tobáceo is the democratie record." Ifthe republican party put t;vo thousand articles upon the free list, how does this record agree with their professions. This declaration is made in the face of their professed willineiness to accept the tariff issue. They would put sugar on the free list because we caunot produce enough when they well know that beet sugar is fast becoming a national product which may be carned to any exteut desired even in the nothern states. But because Louisana's electoral vote agaiu canuot be stolen, its leading product should be freed from protection. They seem to forget that ouly $76,000,000 worth of sugar was imported in 1886 (the date the last distributed report) while it was uecessary to import $54,000,000 worth of wool the same year. With only $22,000,000 difference in the value of the yearly importation of the two sectional commodities, they are made tbe basis of a political fight;under the tariff svstem . The farmer is supposed tö get ttie beueflts of a 37. IS per cent. tariff on wool, while the manufacturar gets a benefit of 67.29 per cent. on his enhanced mauufactured wool value which is f rorn two to ten times what the farmer gets on raw wool and he must buy it back at this rate in clothiug, etc Does the farmer see any beneüts here Suppose, as is claimed, that the tariff does stimulate production, can it at the same time take commodities and laboi the prices of which are both increased by tarifï and successfully put cheaper articles on the market?Itishardly reas, onable, yet thelaborer bas believed this political heresy in the past. Strikes and labor troubles have been and are the result. Besides, if the protective system is correct, wool is about the only product upon which the northern farmer is claimed to receive any benefit through protection, while he must buy mauy articéis which are taxed. The schedule notes a protection upon grain and meat, but they are of no value as none are ever imported and they were passed to appease the angry farmer, yet to retalíate on such legislation, Englaud the great wheat bearing nation of the world, developed her India wheat fields and thus this republican protection has become a national curse. The circular says (page 9) wool cannot live without protection, yet it is ïower under protection than ever under freo trade and pauper labor dees not grow wool. There are but few articles on which the tariff has been reduced 20 per cent. in some years, yet this repubican circular says a 20 per cent. reduction on sugar Is rery slight, Suppose, as the circular says, uur foreign markets are leaying us. The quantity produced then, controla the price and as a producing nation we must pursue a ourse to cali them back. This cani o". jedoneby shutting themout by law. We believe that it is in retaliation for our protective laws that England has developed her India wheat fields and under that stimulus, the development will )e continued until America üuds herself so shut in as to require no merchant marine, no great industrial jlants, no communication with the out side world, her progressive nature dwarfed, and that intervening line with nations which has been her stimulus, entiiely cut off. To put sugar on he free list and protect wool is not 'air protection, neither is such desired exceptáis for political effect.