Morning journal and courier., 1886-02-15
Prosperity of fSouthern Farmers.

Prosperity OfSouthern Farmers
 From the Galveston CTex.) News.l
 The Atlanta Constitution has letter from one of it's country correspondents whom it
 describes as farmer, and praises his pro
 tectionist views. Like many other protec-
 tionists, the Constitution and it's farmer with
 incidental anti-free trade proolivity do not pretend to harmonize all interests in the
 United States, nor yet all farmers interests,
 but, speaking of southern farmers, profess to
 indicate some local benefits through local
 manufactures. The generalization as to Southern farmers is not justified by the all legged fortune of few southern farmers sspe- cially circumstanced. They are to the mass of fsouthern farmers perhaps the spots on
 the sun are to the sun. Thus an argument or an appeal so narrowed down cannot capture southern farmers as a body, if they think.
 The protectionists are still harping upon the destruction by war over twenty years ago,
 and assuming that without protectionism no perceptible recuperation could have been
 experienced This is absurd, for twenty years is period far more than sufficient for recuperation in agricultural country.
 France, with much more perishable wealth
 destroyed, revived wonderfully in far short CT period, and the Southern States needed only more population to have recreated vast
 ly more wealth. The slaves set free repre- sented large nominal loss, but, though the system of labor had to be reorganized on
 wage basis, the workers remained. It is not
 argument at all, but pure assumption, that
 protectionism has been the cause of 6 revival
 of production. Such revival is natural un- der any condition of peace and the necessity
 experienced by millions of people having to
 fl +I,a anil rabr1i1d thair hOuSes and fapces
 and earn a livelihood. With scarcely any
 manufacture. large areas in the South, Eota-
 bly Texas, have exhibited very considerable
 development of industry. This cannot be at
 tributed to protectionism in the light of facts
 patent to every comprehension. The Con
 stitution repeatedly exclains, in a begging
 tone: ''Give the southern farmer the op-
 i1ortnnity of home markets" Who is asked
 to give, to bestow, this faver-this grace!
 So far as the protective legislators, are able
 to give to grant the opportunity, they
 are expected to give it by taxing from the
 farmer and other nen-protected people their
 potential savings, preventing them from ac- cumulating capital out of their sales in fer eign markets by wrestling from them the difference between the natural price of man ufactured goods and the artificial price as produced by the effect of the tariff The sophistieators do not face the question, what extent of factories would be necessary to afford home market for all the products of southern agriculture. They might try to imagine such a case-all the Southern States so studded with manufactures that the grain, beef, cotton, and wool would all be wanted for domestic consumption. The South would need population like that of any old settled country in Europe to consume so much. But if goods are to be nanufac-
 tured for export, they must be sold as cheap
 ly as those of European factories then the
 raw material of every sort must be as cheap,
 hence such home market would be no bet
 ter in price than the foreign market or man
 ufacturing would have to stop by reason of
 dearness of supplies. Nothing is here said
 of the northern manufacturers competing
 amid the over-supply in relation to domes-
 tic purchasing power. They are already able
 to supply American demand on the average,
 and are seeking foreign outlets, the chief
 trouble with them being basis of dearnsss.
 As customers in the home market they want
 cheap supplies. The home market cannot
 rise above the foreign market for the farmer
 without compelling the manufacturer in the
 same proportion to stop. The home market
 is the same as foreign market for the farm
 CT, whose grain is in part exported; but 1t
 the demand in the home market could absoI b
 all his grain and give him a higher price
 an absurd supposition till America has hun
 dreds of millions of consumers-then the
 American manufacturer would be crippled as to selling his products abroad by the cost of living here. Thus the protectionist ideas are barren idealities, vain imaginings and not sober reasoning. It is ridiculous, more over, to suggest that anybody will give the farmer an opportunity or anything else in commerce if he does not take his oppor- tunities and understand his relations he will be made use of as a pack mule. Amid a plenty of seemingly idiotic sentimental va porings the Constitutions farmer indulges in 6 dangerous venture at figuring. The need ! ful revenue is put at s35O, ,000, ,OO0. It is quietly assumed that the internal revenue of | $125 900 900 will of course be repealed and l the inference is drawn that at 20 per cent ! revenue tariff it would be necessary to i'm | port $1, 750, 900, 900 worth of goods to raise 1 the revenue Exports are put at $500, ,000,- l 900 leaving balance of S95O, 900, 900 to be 1 paid in cash, which would sweep all the spe- l cie from the country in one year. Assuming l the case as stated, here the laugh comes in or 1 the protectionist. Would the foreigners con tinue to dump their wares upon us gratis, ol l would they stop! In the latter case, Ameri l can manufacturers would have to supply l American needs, and free trade would have I done what protectionism never has done give the home market to American indus 1 tries by letting Europe have the coin and keep it, but American exports would still sell in Europe for either coin or whatever of value we wanted, and imports would be cut down at least to the amount of exports. The latter would, of conrse, be increased by there l being more money in Europe. Some sort of domestic revenue would supply whatever the government needed and did not obtain from customs. It is gratuitous supposition that the free-traders would abolish the whiskey tax, forced supposition by the protection ist, but he is welcome to tho rope with which to hang his system. The requirement. of S250, GOO, ,000 revenue for the government is purely arbitrary. But if any such monstrous sum is demanded it in whole or in part be raised by excise direct taxes under the Constitution of the United States.