The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1886-09-04
"NO MARKET FOR CORN"
How Farmers Have Been Fooled by the
FalIacious Argument of DistiIlers.

How Farmers Have Been Fooled by the
FalIacious Argument of DistiIlers.
Once upon a time CHANGED to stand
in a meat market soon after six O. clock
Saturday night. Men from the ma
chine shops were there getting supplies
for Sunday dinners. l noticed with
surprise how little some of them
bought. One in particular took only
bit of liver, remarking as he handed
over the few cents asked for it: This
is all that is left of my weeks wages"
Just then in came Charley, the rotund
saloon-keeper whose saloon is on the
street leading from the machine shops
to the market. He is a big, pompous
fellow, and walking up to the counter
with 'I-am-monarch-o f-all-I-survey'
air ordered the incest roast in the shop,
pulled out a big roll of bank bills,
handed one to the clerk to pay for the
meat and went out. | saw that jim,
the liver buyer, stood watching him
moodily, and that peculiar look came
over his face as his eye rested on the
bill Charley paid, then glanced from
the nice, juicy roast which was to be
Charley's dinner to the insignificant
bundle in his own hand.
As Charley passed out, Jim turned to
his shop-mates and said: "See here;
don't you know we're fools! That bill
Charley paid for that roast is the very
one paid him for liquor not half an
hour ago. It's gone to buy his family
a good Sunday dinner, while mine can
have nothing but liver. Next week |
am going to keep away from his infer
nal saloon and see if my folks can have
roast beef for their Sunday dinner"
'Let's all try it," they said, and went
out discussing the question of Sunday
dinners VS.. whisky.
Curiosity led me to the same market
at the same time the following Satur-
day. In came the same people; but |
noticed that every one of those shop
men bought roast of beef. and great
was the chuckling among them when
Charley walked in with a long face,
saying: 81 never did see such luck as
I've had this week; never had such
poor week for trade in my life; believe
/ won't indulge in a roast, but will take
some of that ljUer."
All of which set me to thinking. We
were near neighbors to Peoria with its
mammoth distilleries. My work took
me much among the farmers; every
where among them my Temperance
appeals were met with: 1--WE don't
drink, nor wish to; but if you Tenn
perance folks shut up the distilleres
there'll be no market for our corn" l
knew they were wrong, but could see
no way to prove it to them, till the in
cident in the meat market let in flood
of light upon the question. | begun to
investigate. The first step was, to
write to the Internal Revenue Commits
sioner at Peoria, to see how much
whisky was made out of a bushel of
corn. Waiting his answer 1 asked
Jack, Charley's son, who was pupil of
mine and my good friend, how many
drinks there were in q gallon of whisky.
"Well," he said, ''that depends on
how big the drinks are; but near as can
calculate they run about fifty to gal
lon" The commissioner replied: Il
have the honor to say that fair aver
age production of spirits from bushel
of corn for the period of one year is
| from 10y TO lI5 quarts.
Then l went to figuring. Allowing
each man to take but four drinks
day at five cents each, a low average
you will allow, he would spend each
| day twenty cents for his whisky. In
| the course of the year that mounts up
to over seventy dollars, or just about
as much as whole beef would cost
him, bought at the market along as he
needed it during the year. My house
! keeping experience convinced me that
a medium-sized family would consume
that amount of beef in year--if they
could get it.
The next thing to figure on was the
amount of corn used in making the
whisky. Four drinks q day give 1,460
a year; taking jacks average of fifty
drinks to a gallon this calls for twenty
nine and one-half gallons of whisky,
III quarts. To make this amount will
require, according to the commits
sioner's figures, not quite seven bushels
of corn. This, mind you, on the sup
position that there is no CROOKED
ness in the whisky nor any adultera-
ton in the drinks; we give the distiller
all the benefit of the doubt.
The next step was to discover how
much corn would have been consumed
TO make the beef. This was harder to
ascertain, for farmers do not keep rec
ords as strictly as the internal revenue
does. BY diligent inquiring and COM
parison of results as given by many
farmers, l arrived at the conclusion
that fifty bushels of corn was low es-
innate for the amount eaten from the