The Brookhaven leader. [volume] (Brookhaven, Miss.) 1883-1891, 1884-10-16
Farmers and the Tariff.

following paragraph, which 1T
namesake in this city, produce
with the remark that - great dea
of truth is cOmpactcd" in it:
"Fhe American farmer pays {
tariff tax on almost every articl
that he buys. receives 20 protection
on anything he has to sell, and thcr
is compelled to ship larga part o
his crop thousands of miles lIy raj
and water in order TO sell it in a
market which is equally free to
farmers anywhere else OF the
globe who have no tariff taxes t.
pay
OF the three statements made in
the foregoing paragraph it may lie
briefly sail that the first is an ex-
aggeration, the second is an un
truth, and the third, if it is meant
as the statement Of n grievance, is
an absurdity. Confning ourselves
for the moment, to the second and
third statements, what is TO be said
Of the sanity OF journal which
gravely asserts that the American
farmer receives no protec ion on
anything he has to sell p What
about the duties on animals, on all
breadstuti5, on cotton, on flax, on
hemp, on jute, on leather, on
potatoes, on all kinds Of provisions
and dairy products, on sugar, on
tobacco, on wood aud wool? Are not
all these things which the American
farmer has to SELL - and on which he
is protected ?
Now let US eXamiae for moment
the third grievance which the
American farmer is supposed t.
have against the protective system
He lis compelled to ship large
part of his crop thousands Of miles
by rail and water in order to sell i
! in foreign market. Do our highly
esteemed free trade contemporaries
wish the American farmer 10 be
ieve that the distance between him
and the foreign market would be in
some way miraculonsl Y abridged by
the introduction of free trade? What
are the facts with reference to the
American farmer and his foreign.
market2 In the first place. it is not,
relatively speaking, "a large part
OF his crop which he ships abroad.
The great bulk of the products Of
his industry is sol and consumed
in the home markets; it is the sur
plus Gully which goes abroad. What
would he the effect of free trate
upon the home market and upon the
surplus? IL would make the home
market poorer, because it woul.i
destroy OR lessen the purchasing
capacity of hundreds OF thousands
of men aud women now engaged
in manufactures, who are the far
mer's best customers. The Troy
Times states the case very convlnc
ingly thus:
Wheat is not the only item to be
considered. Diversified industrie,
occasion demands for many other
kinds of food which come from th'
soil, and some OF these ave not ex
portable. Think Of the almost in
Vulnerable varieties Of vegetable:
and fruits, the butter and poultry
and eggs and other things from
which farmers derive income thrOugi
the proximity OF manufacturing
centres employing nom-agricu tura
labor. What would farm lands ant
the labor expended upon them b
worth within a radius of fifty mile
about Troy and Albany and Coh"e
if the manufacturing industries o
these cities were brought to a stand
still or largely diminished? Sup
pose the purchasing power q
mechanics, operatives and laborer
were reduced by reason OF dcclin
in wages to the European ltve
would the farmers hereabout b
gamers OF losers? 1t seems to L
there can be only one intelligeu
response to that question:
The most valuable agriculturs
lands in the country are those whlc
lie near the manufacturing centres
break down these industries an
whas becomes of the farmers HON
market? The farmers customer
will become his competitors. Th
men who now depend upon mani
factures for their livelihood wi
have to betake themselves to agi
culture. Thus the same cause whic
makes the home market less profit;
bile will increase the agriculture
product and the surplus which wi
have to be sold abroad if at all. Th
is a singular policy to be commende
To American farmers as an imprOvj