The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1884-09-18
Both Sides.

Both Sides.
j In glancing over our exchanges we OBJ
served two communications, one in the
Greenbrier Independent from a Democratic
| free trader, or tariff reformer, and the other
from a Republican protectionist in the
Cincinnati Commercial Gazette. AS each
presents the side of his party on the tariff
question we have thought it would be in
teresting to our readers to examine them.
1t will be seen that the Democratic free
trader favors leyeling everything down
ward. He contends for low priced wheat,
low priced -four and bread, meats, and low
priced wages, as a condition of things,
according to his belief, which would con-
tribute to happiness and prosperity. His
argument is the lest that can be made
from Democratic standpoint, and it
| inevitably directs to destruction of the
manufacturing interests of America, and
the reduction of the wage earner's pay
to the very lowest point. He does not
seem to understand that there is but
Topper cent. of the wheat of this country
which finds market in Europe, and that
the time is coming when India and Aus
tralia. dependencies of Europe, will even
supply that deficit that the only real
market for the farmers Of America is the
home market, built up by manufactures
and diversified industries, whereby con-
sumers-the workmen in these industries,
are enabled to learn wages to pay for
farm products. We suggest this line of
thought in connection with the reading of
the article from the Republican side, SO
that the reader may carry it.on his mind
in his perusal:
THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE.
(Greenbrier independently
Whatever effects might follow reduction of
tariff duties one beneficial result would be that
it would enable farmers to raise their products
at less cost than at present, and would also
portation If the prices of those commodities
which the farmer has to buy and which enter
should be diminished it must be apparent that
the farmer could afford to sell his products at a
lower price still and make as good profit as he
does now The advantages of this would be
tWo.fold 1t would result in cheaper bread
and meat for the labor1ng classes at nome, and
these products. 1t may not be generally known
that the foreign demand for our agricultural
products is falling off, owing to the fact that
other countries which have not heretofore ex-
norted to any considerable extent are now
sending large quantlties 81 Oh "neat al least 70
wheat from India has risen within the last few
years from almost nothing to about 40 600 000 1
ner annum Australia exports about $1,000 900
Ia % OOO 900 bushels and the South American
countries something like 1900, 0O0 The def |
cheney Of the European svP hcn Is bo ~ ~ So
bushels are furnished by other countries than
the United States Now IL II d GGnia De SO that
European markets cheaper than the like pro- |
ducts of other countries, 1t is reasonable to con-
clude that the whole amount of this foreign
demand would be furnished by this country. The |
advantages of cheaper flour and meat to our |
own people would be very great. 1t would re-
f1uce the cost of living by reducing the cost of
at least two of the prime necessities of life. |
This would not diminish tne farmers profits
be diminished as much as the price OF the pro- |
duct would be reduced. reduction of certain |
tariff duties would give the farmer cheaper |
Inducements and utensils cheaper wearing an |
parei. and family supplies. And even suppos- |
ing that there should be no reduction in the |
nrice Of farm labor, the farmer could AFFORD 10
sell his products little cheaper without any |
loss to himself but Win a, materiai benefit to the
reduction of the tariff duties should have the
effect of reducing farm labor to any appreciable
extent would not the decreased cost of living
make IN to the laborer whatever failing on |
there might be in his wages, so that he would |
save as great per cent, OF his income as before
ment? The experience of the past ought to |
show us how much our prosperity and the ac- |
tivity in trade depends upon the shipments |
abroad of our agricultural products. -When- |
ever our wheat and meat are not going to the |
foreign markets freely then we have dull times
to move 1t is the signal for a revival in busi- |
ness. Is it not wise, therefore, to foster this |
our greatest industry, by helping those who are |
engaged in it to produce these commodities as |
cheaply as possible. and would this not be ac
complished at least to a considerable extent by |
q reduction of tariff duties? j. G.. w,
THE REPUBLICAN SIDE.
To the Editor of the Commercial Gazette:
The protectionist's theory of the tariff regu-
ulatiOns of our country is based upon the SIM |
PIE ., 20 ,o IN
a source of revenue for governmental purposes |
The needs of the Government are some $780, |
100000 annually, and of this great sum over !
5000. OOJ are derived from the Republican
system of protection, thus relieving us of the |
odious and dangerous measure of direct tax |
upon the people for the support of the Govern |
ment, measure that has proved dangerous In |
every age and in every country.
i, Our Industrial system must be protected and |
encouraged for two weighty reasons, to leave |
all others out of consideration. One is that
we may have home consumption for home |
productions. The one of these reasons is con-
cent. of our people engaged in agriculture |
will produce enough for themselves and our
cent. engaged in northumberland in pro- I
ducing II per cent. more than is required to
furnish our population The neceSSari0H of life. |
And it is not difficult to that any closing of
our industries would only have the effect to
drive the laborers thus thrown out of employ
ment to agriculture as means of support
This would still further augment the number
of producers, and still further reduce the num-
Der of consumers, which would be unfor- |
tunate to us in several ways. First, it would
reduce the wages of what Watterson calls the |
sfield hands," the Iaborers on the farms. and
second, it would reduce the price of the pro- |
ducts of the farm. The first condition would
result because OF the increased number of
10 hnr a 1fVSy. n,,<l-
ond, because larger per cent. of our annual
crop supply, ninety per cent of which is now
seek foreign markets. And with the vastly IN
creased and still increasing average of Russia |
Australia, India, New Zealand. the Argentine
be of no profit, since 1t would be brought into
direct competition with the countries named, |
with which. owing to the lower scale of wages
paid by these countries, we could in no sense !
compete.
1t is already known that everywhere in the !
wheat producing countries there will be a sur
plus of that cereal this year. In our own coun-
try, as It is. our surplus Will be enormous-far
help matters by still further lessening the
number of consumers, which our free-trade
friends, by letting British yandals destroy our
industrial system, would be sure to do?
The wheat crop of 1884 is estimated to be
900 bushels This exceeds the yield of
1882 by l20OOOO0 bushels, and that of 1883 by
ll8,000.0 900 bushels and the average crop of the
ase v e years py 0voov ;v Dusneis rms IN
the god of harvests has also smiled upon other
countries this year, as well as upon our own. |
In England the under wheat is 1925 900
acres compared with 2,7l3.000 last year. This
will give England SS,OOO,OOO bushels of the 20O-
100000 annually consumed by her, leaving only
l20,000,000 as the import needs of the United
Kingdom. To supply this she has Russia with
a large crop of this years yield, besides heavy
stocks of last years crop, and the countries
named above, with their enormus increase.
Frances crop is also large this year that
small import will be required for her needs.
Now suppose the Democratic policy of free
trade which would despoil our industrial system
and change thousands and tens of thousands
of its workers from consumers to producers Tor
idlers). were put into execution, wouldn't that
lessen just in the ratio that men left the wheel,
the spindle, and hammer, and took to the pillow,
the drill and the reaper, the consumers of our
land? And is it not true that If you lessen the
home requirements you thereby increase the
export trade-the sale of the OverpluS in foreign
marts? And haven't we seen what kind of
chance we would stand and what kind of com
petition we would encounter in our export
sales?
Let us be careful. The hope of the consumer
and the hope of the producer are alike embod-
led In the proposition: Make home market
for home productions. We consume ninety per
cent. of our productions as 1t is. Let US con-
tinue to legislate In this wise and safe man
ner, hoping and aiming, at no distant day. to
find q market In our own country for the re-