The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1873-10-10
From Old and New.
Farmers and Railroads.


great benefit 10 the grain producers Let Us
trace out the successive results. In the first
place, the price OF gram at the seaboard would
probably be reduced by about the amount OF
the decrease ip freights. This would cause an
increase of consumption and larger demand
FOR expectation, but at first i. would only in
sure the farmer at the west that he could sell
larger part of his crop at the old price. If
the enlarged demand should oyertake the sup
ply, 1t would raise prices. But would demand
probably overtake supply? We have gone on
increasing our production in spite of all the
drawbacks at an enormous ratio: the wheat
crop Of 1860 was seventy-three per cent larger
than that OF 1850; that Of 1870 was sixty-six
per cent larger than that OF 1850; and the crop
OF 1870 was lS7 per cent larger than that Of
1850, although during the twenty years our
population increased only sixty-seven per cent.
SO that whereas IN 1850 we raised but four and
three-tentns bushels of wheat to the head OF
population, in 1870. we raised seven ana four
tsnths bushels for every man, woman and
child in the country. Either we went hungry
10 1850 or we had great surplus in 1870. II
prices continued low. then. after reduction in
freights, the farmer would not be benefited at
all. II they rose, the increase would serve as
a still further unhealthy stimulus to over pro-
ductlon which. in turn, would speedily bring
down prices.
But it may be said that the demand Tor ex-
port, stimulated by the diminished cost, would
regulate the price and give great impetus to
the trade. II vii, De conceded that Great
Britain Is and must be practically our only
market for the export OF grain, ior there Is no
other great purchaser Of breadstuifs N the
world. But Great Britain Itself IS great gram
producing country and is only dependent upon
foI Ign countries for the deficiency. And this
deficiency is an exceedingly luctuatlng quantity.
The importations OF wheat and -four into Great
Britain in 1853 were tltty million bushels: in
1855, twenty-slx million bushels IL 1850, fifty
nine million bushels; in 1862. ninety-three
million bushels; IN 1865, .orty-eight million
bushels; in 1869, eighty-three millions; in 1872,
eighty -eght millions. Now, il we ere raising
enough wheat per head IN 1850, We have now
g. bushe per head to spare. aud this, for our
population, amounts to nearly one hundred and
ton million bushels, -more than Great Britain
has needed to buy of all the world in any one
year. It Is clear, in the first place. that we
cannot afford to lay our plans solsly with refer
once to the prospect OF selling III market re-
quiring so uncertain supply; in the second
place, that we cannot compete successfully in
the English market either with the proximity
OF France or the cheapness of production in
the Baltic and Black sea districts and, thirdly,
that beng already able to spare Great Britain
all she needs, constant stream OF emigration
70 the vest, and an almost equal addition to
the gram production, are rapidly CARVING the
supply beyond the demand, and must do so for
many years to come.
Therefore, although it Is no donbt true that
cheaper transportation would cause an increased
demand, IT Is not at all certain that the reform
would not add such further stimulus to pro-
ducton further west than the present gram
growing centre, as practically TO neutrallze
whatever advantage the farmers might al first
derive from 1t 1t Is not to be denied that the
cheapenlng OF food at the east would prove
great blessing to consumers but we take 1t
that what the farmers desire Is not 80 much
philanthropcally to benefit eastern mechanics,
as to obtain for themselves larger share of
the prices now obtained at the sesboard.
The political sdventurers who have been try
ing for the past few months to capture the
farmers movement. have endeavored to direct
ut into an assault the tariff. This is not the
place to discuss the question Of free trade or
protection; the only proper problem for us to
consider Is, whether the tariff on iron Is respon-
-.eibe FOR the high price Of transporta ton, a.
cunning for the moment that the great evil is
excessive freights. Let us take the case OF
freight transported over the New York Central
road, furnished with double track weighing
sixty-fve pounds to the yird. which is consd-
erably above the average Of that road. Let US
also grant that the iron In a,ls represents only
half Of the railroads consumption and finally,
that all non, VIII ether American or imported,
in reality pays the tax OF sixty-three cents a
hundred pounds.
Tue weighr OF iron in one mile Of single
track would be $685. 800 pounds; for the 470
miles between New York and Buffalo, 107, $780,
coo pounds. Doubling this amount for double
track, and doubling 1t again for all the other
iron used by tho road, We get 430, 144, 900
pounds The tariff on this amount al GO cents
per hundred pounds would be 81. 709. 9O7. 90
We Will suppose that tho company exacts
enough GuDuaDy W r..y ten per cent on this
sum, that ia 1910. 800 ~. Now We will further
gu Ipose that the whole OF this extra amount
i assessed on freight and none on passengers
to how much will 1t amount? The New York
Central road carried last year 1,02l million tons
OF eight one mile. Hence, the dividend on
the extra capital required to pay the duty on
iron would increase the ccst OF Transporting a
ton of merchandise one mile by the SUN OF
.0264 OF cent. For the whole 40 miles, this
extra charge on a ton would be 1914 cents. OF
a bushel of wheat weighing sixty pounds, the
extra charge would be thirty seven one hun
dreoths of cent. II, instead OF the distance
between Buffalo and New York, we take. say
fifteen hundred miles, we shall find that the
whole enhancement of the cost OF transporta.
ton OF bushe OF wheat, in consequence OF
the tariff. on the most liberal allowance ia les,
than one and one-fitth cents; to be exact, it il
1.1SS ceuts. We fancy tnat no intelligen
farmer who examines these figures WI! ALLOW