West Virginia Democrat. [volume] (Charles Town, W. Va.) 1885-1890, 1888-03-16
THE FARMER AND THE TARIFF.

ne dTlu hClOAA OAuO So'S :"
banquet in New York on the 2lst
inst, and representative men from
different parts of the country made
excellent speeches. Mr.. Melbourne
II. Ford, member of the House of
Representatives from Michigan,
spoke upon a subject upon which he
is thoroughly at home, THE Farmer
and the Tariff" and his statements
explained why recent attempt to
put the agriculturist on record as
''protectionist" proved such a dis
NAL failure. In the course of his
speech he said:
IF the sum which the Govern
ment annually collects through its
customs officials, together with the
present tariff forces the farmer to
paw to a few manufacturers, were
put in one sum and raised from the
people in the form of a direct taxa
ton. then would the farmer realize
it's true effect. If such course
should be pursued, if this money
we're raised in the form ola direct
tax, the people would never submit
to it. Why, there would be revo'
luton in this country within 80
days. Now that an appeal has come
up from all parts of the country for
a reduction of revenue, the war tar
iG advocates see that something
must be done in that direction, and
in order to prevent any reduction OF
the tariff tax, they favor the aboli-
ton of the internal revenue and raj
ly around the cry, of free WHISKY
and tobacco
when taxes are to be reduced
where should we commence Ger
tainly with the ones most burden
some. The reduction of taxation
should be largely made upon arti-
cles of necessity, upon commodities
the people must have-in other
words, a reduction should be made
of the tariff tax. But observe what
means those willy hightariff men
take to make the people believe that
the war thrift must be let alone.
Mark how shrewdly they waylay the
farmer. Of what use in the United
States is tariff on wheat, beet, or
pork ? OF what advantage to the
producer, is an import duty on a
commodity of which we produce our
entire consumption, and which we
export in large quantities ? None
whatever. We fear no foreign com
petition here on wheat, beet, or pork.
No tariff can help the producer of
those commodities in this country.
But then there is wool. This
tariff on wool is the piece of resist
anee of the tariff bounty advocates.
If the wool tariff benefits the farm
er. which / do not believe, how
much is it? Taking the entire val
ne of our agricultural productions
the wool crop comprises but 2 per
cent of it. Suppose bill were in
troduced in Congress to pay the far
mer bounty of 10 cents a bushel
on corn and 20 cents bushel on
wheat How would these men who
have lately blossomed out as the
champions of the wool tariff treat a
bill like that They would ridi-
Guile it todeath. 1t would be laugh
ed out of Congress in a moment.
But still that would be giving the
farmer nothing more than an equiv
alent to what these protected man
ufacturers are now receiving.
Next the farmer is informed that
the high tariff has cheapened the
price of everything-not everything
they do not say that; they tell the
farmer that it has cheapened the
price of everything but wool. The
fact of the matter is, as every OBJ
serving man knows, that the ten
dency Of the prices is to cheaper
constantly, owing to improved
means, of transportation and pro-
duction. Prices have declined ev-
erywhere. They have declined IN
free trade England and in the Cant
bal Islands as well as in the United
States.
Again, they say that the tariff
has given the farmer home mar
ket. Let us see how much of home
market it has given him. Out of
our entire agricultural productions
about % per cent. are annually ex-
ported and sold in foreign lands. SO
we consume here IS per cent. and
sell abroad % per cent. Of the 10
per cent. which we consume at home
it is fair to suppose that the farm
ers, who comprise about one-half the
populations would consume aboul
one-half Of it. or 81 per cent. of the
whole crop. The persons engaged
in manufactures comprise about one
fifth our population. They would
consume then one-fifth of the rs Fer
cent, or Is per cent. of the whole.
Then the 'home-market' scheme
amounts to this: The protected
manufacturer says to the farmer, i
will take u per cent. of your crop,
but if l do that / want the privilege
of charging you 46 per cent. more
than my goods are worth In other
words he says, Out of every $4,000
worth of your products, / will take