The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1884-10-09
Communications.
"a L Il II T ER
FARMERS OF THE SOUTH.
BYsoNE OF THEIR NUMBER.

Act-act in the living Present,
! n Heart within ana God overhead.r'
To or Brethren, the. Southern Fa,.mers:
/ GENTLEMEN.-Th most importan
/ question inthe impending electionfor vol
to consider is.the question Of Protection
versus Free Trade.
And in orderto assist you towards de
cision on this point, the writer himself 1
Southern farmer) respectfully begs to cal
| your attention to the following consider
| tions:
Those who advocate the policy of free
| trade try to show that, protective policy
| Injuries the farmer.
This statement is absolutely false: ant
! for this main reason that protection gives
| the. farmer home market.
And every farmer knows that the home
market is of far more Importance to him
than any foreign market can possibly be-
more particularly in States bordering or
! the Atlantic ocean which cannot compete
in corn and wheat with the virgin soils Of
the Western prairies.
Consequently the Eastern farmer must
raise specialized products for which Z
home market is most necessary.
What is the home market ? 1t is that
market which is nearest or most CONVENE
CHu lOi UlfC llllCl ttlIu WIClC llC Cdll pei
sonally obtain money for his products
without the intervention of agents.
No one will dispute that the contiguity
of a large town is beneficial to the neigh
boring farmers, by affording them a good
sale for their eggs, butter, vegetables, and
other products OF the farm.
The farmer gets his living chiefly by sup
plying those persons who are not engaged
in farming with farm products. There
fore it is to his interest to have as large a
non-farming population near him as posi-
bic. The non-farming population consists
mostly of artiZans and storekeeperS of
various kinds. Hence the advantage of
having local manufactures for the farmer,
because these local manufactures main
tain large number of people who must
be fed.
In the case of cotton: no one we pre-
sumo will maintain that it is not to the in
terest of the cotton producers to have cot
ton mills established within moderate
distance of his farm. 1t may be said that
he can export his cotton to Europe. But
his cotton is there liable to competition
with other cotton from other parts of the
world-and the local farmer loses the feed
ing of the mill hands, who must have milk,
eggs. butter. bacon and all the other nee
essaries Of life.
Again-the home market is of far more
Importance to the farmer than the foreign
market, for two chief reasons g
/. Because his produce has not to pass
through the hands of so many agents be-
fore it reaches the consumer, and
2. Because the nearer the market the
less is the cost to the farmer of transport.
ing his produce thither.
But it may be said that this last item of
nxyv a,,cO &c 1,yf hn Ve,i
Experience does not prove this on the
contrary the farmer is the first man to
feel the expenses of heavy freight charges
and the commissions of agents. The con-
sumner being the cash payer, has more or
less Of the advantage which ready cash
always has over those who are dependent
on sales for living, and the consumer
takes good care that the farmer gets his
full share of the incidental charges by way
of deduction from the cost of the produce.
Moreover, the consumer can generally
afford to wait. while the farmer cannot,
but in most cases must sell.
Adam Smith in his wealth of Ma
tions7' says THE greatest and most impor-
tant branch Of the commerce OF every
nation is that which is carried on between
the inhabitants of the town and those of
the country
diminish in any country the number of
artiicers and manufacturers tends to di-
minish the home market-the most 6Dapor-
taaat of all the markets for the rude produce
of the land, and thereby still further to DIS
courage agricultural"
Those persons who argue that because
England has a free trade policy, therefore
such a policy is proper for the United
States, commit an egregriouS error The
circumstances Of the two countries are so
totally different that there is no parallel
between them. There is an old proverb
that what is one mans meat is another
man S poisonN and this is precisely the
case here. England has far larger popu-
lation engaged in manufacturing pursuits
than America. She pays her laborers
South are far better off than the laborers
in England in every respect.
She has an enormous accumulation of
capital, ready to turn into any profitable
channel at a moments notice. She has a
small area of land compared to America.
And last, but not least, she has the great
est mercantile navy in the world. In other
words she gets most of the great profits
of the carrying trade of the world. Con-
Sequently the freer the exchange, the
freer the trade, the more work for her ship
ping and the more profits.
Now as to America. Her population is
mainly agricultural. She pays her labor
much better than England, consequently
they can afford to buy more Of the COM
forts of life, including farm products.
She has not nearly SO much ready capital
as England and what she has is almost
constantly employed.
She has an enormous area Of undevel-
Oped land, necessitatmg a consuming pop
ulation to pay for it's Development.
She has no mercantile navy worth speak
ing of. Thus the circumstances of the
two countries are entirely opposite in al
most every important particular. And the
natural and reasonable inference is that
the economical policy must be different
also. The protective policy aims to draw
capital and artiicers from Europe to fill
our country with manufactures, whereby
our farmers viii have the feeding of them.
1t is well known fact that in those
sections where manufactures are most
plentiful, there farm lands attain the
highest value. This is proved by statistics
The following statement by one of our
leading men, Senator Warren Miller OF
New Y ork, is to this effect. He says:
I'm States where more than 20 per cent.
of the people are farmers, the average
value of farm land is So per acre; in
States where from SO to 10 per cent. are
farmers it is $l3 an acre; where from 80
to so per cent. are farmers it is $50 per
acre; and where less than thirty per cent.
are farmers it is worth on an average of
$3S an acre. Why is this? Because the
increase of manufactures brings the far
mers' market close to his own doors.
Every increase in the number of labOrers
in manufactures makes so many more con-
sumers of the farmers produce. Would
it be well then to turn the consumers out OF
the factories and make them producers in
stead My memory goes back to 1866,
when my father and his neighborS were
glad to get six cents pound for their
cheese and twelve and a half for their but
ter. That was because there were only
farmers around use and no market. But
the farmer is told that he could buy more
for shilling then than now, and that if
our ports were opened to foreign goods he
could exchange his crops for more than he
now can. Is that true? Iron is worth
only half what it was in $780, We are
manufacturing agricultural implements
for the world manufactured goods were
never SO cheap as they are now, and yet
in the face of all these facts the farmer is
told that it is to his interest to be free
trader
1t is stated by the free traders that pro-
lection tends to raise the price of manu-
featured articles.
The test of the truth of this statement
is comparison of prices and for all neces-
sary articles prices are far cheaper here
II 10 nfif