The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1881-07-29

ioF WHICH We must ma market, 10
We have no home market. Look a
the condition cf things to-day ia on
midst. Wheat is only worth about 81
cts per bnsbel in the central Willamett
Valley and Scots or less per bushel il
Southern and Eastern Oregon, an,
every practical farmer knows that tber,
10 no profit for him at thst price. Th'
least that wheat can be raised for II
Oregon and snSrd reasonable prof
to the farmer, considering the bigI
price Of labor, expense OF harvesting
and accidents, incident 10 that busines,
as well as every other, is 7J cents pei
bushel, and We ought 70 be able d
realize that price aud more to-day, u
We had an equal chance 1T the great
grain markets Of The world, and were
not handicapped by lbe blind miserable
policy pursued by our lax matkers.
This idea is well illustrated by the fol
lowing from the Oregoaian. n leading
journal Of this state:
There are phases Of our foieig,
trade which deserve the attention and
consideration Of those who would main.
tain that policy Of prohibition aud ex-
einsion which We Inisname protection.
We want To sel! TO Great Britain for
she is the chief customer for onr
agricultural products. Our prosperity
depends on our selling TO her. But we
Intentionally prohibit her from selling
10 us. Readers have doubtless obsery-
ed that Of late there has been reported
steady movement Of coin from Europe
TO the United States. This simply
means that in order 10 pay her debt.
10 America, Great Britain mast make
two exchanges instead Of one. We will
not take British goods, aud British
goods must be sold in other markets
IN order To realize the money balances
needed 70 settle British debts here. Is
il not apparent thst this makes IL the
interest Of Great Britain TO look az far
as possible To other countries for the
supplies she wants Oar prosperity
Is CO confessedly the result If exporting
the surplus of our crops, chiefly 10
Great Britain. But suppose Great
Britain should encourage more exten-
sion t'llage and cheaper transportation
IN other agricultural countries, and put
herself IA n position To discriminate
against orr products IA. We do against
her. This l. not an imDos IL
bic consequences. lt is an error To
iInmagne that Great Britain Inust al
ways be dependent for food supply
upon the United States. Extension of
the railway system Of Russia, and de.
veloplnent Of the agricultural resources
of Australia and Canada would in
lsw.y yeaFsenslle her % become so inds,
pendent Of y that she might Law a
eeayY Y-asty on onr food products. This
would be a perfectly fair and just way
OF teaching US that our inte-ests require
reciprocal trade. We cannot sell 10
the best advantage To a country unless
We buy Of that country. This, in a
large degree, explains what the matter
is with us here at the present time.
We want 10 sell our wheat to Great
Britain and she is the only customer
who can take il. And we want in
tuin goods which she has to sell. But
the exchange as hamperel, and even
virtually prohibited by system which
oppresses us for the benefit of the east
eTn manufactures This is too lin
for dispute or argument. To state the
case is 70 prove it. Before us il the
London shipping and Mercantile
Gazette Of Nov. which contains an
article reminding American readers
that Great Britain already has statutes
to enable her to meet by reprisals our
prohibition Of British ships and goods.
BY their statutes power is given Her
Majesty, the Queen, in cases where it
shall appear that British ships are
either directly or indirectly subject ia
any foreign country to duties or charges
of any kind from which the national
vessels of such country are excepted or
where British trade is not placed by
such country, upon as advantageous
a footing as that of the most favored
nation, to impose like, or other disa-
bilities, upon the trade of that country
with ports of the United Kingdom.
Owing to the extreme loyalty which
successive governments of Great Brit
ain have borne to the principles of free
trade, these statutes have never been
enforced. but foreign states which are
disposed to place British trade at a dis
advantage are advised to take note that
the power exists and may be exercised
whenever the British government may
see ne TO resort to it. But in fact by
our policy of exclusion we are hurting
ourselves more than we hurt Great
Britain. A people situated as we are
here. whose prosperity depends on
selling their surplus crops, and who
must sell to Great Britain if they sell
at all, ought to be able without any
difficulty to sea that policy which
prohibits or impedes the exchange
they desire is policy that orpresses
them.
The theory that the agricultural and
laboring interests of the country, must
be taxed to build up and support the
manufacturing interests, and that the
farmer, mechanic and laborer, must
pay heavy duty on sll that he wears
or uses in his business, was, in the be-
ginning sustained on foreground that
it was necessary to aid those industries
to compete while in their infancy with
foreign and the skilled labor of the
old country. Whatever force that
argument once had it certainly has
none now, and the idea that the farm
ing interests are to be continued to be
oppressed with unnecessary and unjust