The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1881-05-06

FaTTn2Garden.
THE WESTERN FARMER OF AMERICA.
by AUGUSTUS MoNenEplEN.
[coNrlNrrn rRoM LAsr WASH. |

CoNTfNuEp FROM LAST WEEK.
However, 10 err on the side of eau
ton, we will, instead of 90 per cent.
or 4o3 per cent, take 40 per cent as
the overcharge which the Western
farmers have to pay for the goods
which they require to supply their
wants. Now we have shown in the
table published last week that their
annual expenditure on the supply of
those wants amounts in the aggregate
to 400, 900, ,0oo dollars. Let us see
what portion of this sum is unneces-
essarily squandered. Ii the Ameri-
can farmers were allowed to buy, as
they could buy, for 100 dollars VIII at
they are now compelled to pay 40
dollars for, it is clear that they could
buy for 1000 million dollars what
they now pay 400 million dollars
for, and consequently they would
save 400, ,000,0 600 dollars every'year.
In other words by being left free TO
buy where they could buy cheapest,
they would benefit TO the extent of
400 million dollars, which they now
lose by the operation of the project
I've duties.
Truly p startling sum \ stupen-
dous sum. That such pile of wealth
should year after year be unneeessari-
ly and unwantonly thrown away and
wasted seems utterly incredible, and
yet 1t is literally true. "What," we
can imagine a Western farmer ex-
claiming, 'sdo you mean to say that
We farmers, our class alone, are every
year, out of our hard earnings, seed
leSsly and heedlessly throwing away
400 millions of dollars, and that we
could, If we would, save in our yearly
expenses sum large enough To de-
fray the whole of the national eX-
penditure nearly twice over ?" ssYes,
SIR" We reply, sit is a fact. We
have clearly shown that the same ar
tleles of consumption that you could
get from the BritiSher for 100 dollars
you have now TO pay 40 dollars fer.
Now. If you, one with the other, rich
and poor, spend 300 dollars a year on
such articles, the common rule of
three shows that but for your heavy
customs duties you need spend only
153 dollars for the same things in
stead OF 200, and that while living
just as comfortably, you would on an
average save 81 dollars year. Now
as there are I, ,000,00o of these agri-
culturalists, multiply that number
by the fifty-seven dollars which each
would save, and you will find that il
comes To 400, 900, 900 dollars. The
fact is, that you never realized the
amount of your loss-never put ii
into figures. 1t is so mingled up In
small doses with your daily spendiugs
that, though enormous in the gross,
It does not strike you in the detail.
You go on paying thirty cents for a
knife instead of twenty, or fifty cent,
for a piece OF canvas instead of thirty,
or ten dollars for woolen clothing in
stead of six or your wife buys q
printed calico gown for three dollar.
instead of two, and so on throughout
the wholerange of yourrequirements
but you do not stay TO ask how you
have been overcharged at each step
Now, this has been calculated fol
you. For every seven doIlas which
you now spend you ought only t.
spend five, the other two dollars are
simply thrown away in consequence
Of your import duties"
l. has been said that the American
farmers actually prefer payirg sever
dollars to the Eastern States manu-
facturers to paying FIVE dollars fo
the same thing TO the Britisher, es
pecIally as the extra two dollars dt
not go out of the country. Well, i
the two dollars do not go into an
other country, they ut all events e
into another pocket, and surely th'
farmers can hardly be persuaded tina
il is the same thing TO theI1 whethe
they pay seven dollars to man il
Massachusetts,, or five dollars TO /:
man in Lancashire. We believe or
the contrary that the hardworkin;
Western farmer prefers getting a
much as he can for his money. Bu
if We are wrong and it be really trur
that the farmers are content, know.
fngly and voluntarily to pay out o
their pockets yearly contribution o
40O, 900, 900 dollars as free gift II
the Eastern States manufacturers, e
enable them to carry on losing busi
mess, which without that assistance
wo4:d have to be given up, we ca,
only admire and wonder. And VI
wonder all the more as this immense
sacrifice is made in vain, and is 0
very little or no benefit to any one
This we shall show In the next chap
ter, when we examine what becomes
of the 400, 900, 900 dollars which tht
farmers lose. At all events the farm.
esTz ought surely to have d voice il
the question. whether they really d'
ated they do) prefer losing
hey prefer saving, the
S40e. 900, 900.
ii is said that the Americal
.iinpfs have fourished and pros
tered that they have proftably ex
tended and are still extending, thei
operations, and that therefore they
cannot have suffered the yearly los:
alleged. That does not at all follow
No one contends that an average los,
OF $57 per annum sustained by each
agriculturalist could turn the scale
and make farming losing business
It does not destroy the farmer but il
sweeps away so much Of his profits
By the census Of 1870, the total value
Of (cereal) farm productions amount
ed to s2,448, ,OOO,O Out of thi.
farmers could afford to. throw away
a certain portion, and still thrive and
make money; but that is no reason why