Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-08-21

anu dhotHeI Hli1Ou III the W est Indies
lSud for the fifth million is compelled t,
seek a market in England, and that, beins
the renotest point at which she sells, anC
the point most exposed to disadyantageou
competitiorf,, is naturally the poorest mar
ket, the farthest and lowest market t.
which she sends her surplus will govern
to great extent if not absolutely, the
price she receives fox the whole surplus
But on the other hand, let her cloths, her
wares, be manufactured In her midst, OF
on the functions and waterfalls in her vi
cinity, thus affording an immediate market
for her grain, and now the average price
of it rises by an irresistible law, nearly OF
quite to the average Of the world. Assum-
ing that average to be one dollar, the price
in Illinois, making allowance for the fer
tility and cheapness of her soil, could not
fall below an average of seventy-five cents
Indeed, the experience Of the periods
when her consumption of grain has been
equal TO her production, as well as that OF
other sections where the same has been the
case, proves conclusively that the average
price of her wheat would exceed that
sum.
We are now ready to calculate the profit
and loss. Illinois, under free trade, with
her workshops in Europe" will buy her
cloth twenty-five cents per yard cheaper,
and thus make a nominal saving of two
hundred and fifty thousand dollars in her
years supply; but, she thereby compels
herself to pay for il in wheat at thirty five
instead of seventy-fve cents per bushel
or to give over nine and one-third bushels
of wheat for every yard under free trade,
instead of four and a third under a system
of home production. In other words,
while she is making quarter of a million
dollars by buying her cloth ''where she
can buy cheapest" she is losing nearly two
millions Of dollars on the net product of
her grain. The striking of balance be-
tween her profit and her loss is certainly
not difficult but rather an unpromisins,
operation.
Or, let us state the result in another
form: She can buy her cloth a little cheap
er in England being there lower,
machinery more perfect, and capital more
abundant-but, in order to pay for it, she
must not merely sell her own products at
correspondingly low price, but enough
lower to overcome the cost of transporting
them from Illinois to England. She will
give the cloth-maker in England less grain
| for her cloth than she would give to the
man who made it on her own soil 4; but for
every bushel she sends him in payment
for his fabric, she must give two to the
wagner, boatman, shipper, and factor who
transport it thither. On the whole pro-
duct of her industry, two-thirds is tolled
out by carriers and bored out by Inspect
ors, until but beggarly remnant is left to
satisfy the fabricator of her goods.
And here / trust l have made obvious
to you the law which dooms an agricult-
ural country to inevitable and ruinous dis
| advantage in exchanging its staples for
manufactures, and involves it in perpetual
and increasing debt and dependence. The
| fact, / early alluded to is not the reason
now apparent 1t is not that agricultural
communities are more extravagant or less
industrious than those in which manu-
features or commerce preponderate-it is
because there is an inevitable disadvantage
to agriculture in the very nature of all
distant exchanges. Its products are far
more perishable than any other; they
cannot SO well await future demand; but
in their excessive bulk and density is the
great evil. We have seen that, while the
English manufacturer can send his fabrics
to Illinois for less than five per cent. on
|
pay two hundred per cent on his grain for
its transportation to English consumers.
In other words: The English manutact-
urer need only produce his goods five per
cent. below the American to drive the lat
ter out of the Illinois market, the Hill
noisan must produce wheat for one-third
Of its English price in order to compete
with the English and Polish grain grower
| H.. o,,I bnH ELI
And here is the answer to that 5cintilla-
ton of free trade wisdom which flashes
out i'll wonder that manufactures are
eternally and especially in want of protec-
ton, while agriculture and commerce need
none. The assumption is false in any
sense-our commerce and navigation can
not live without protection-never did
live so-but let that pass. 1t is the in
terest of the whole country which demands
that that portion of its industry which is
most exposed to ruinous foreign rivalry
should be cherished and sustained. The
at-grower, the grazier, is protected by
ocean and land by the fact that no for
eign article can be introduced to rival his
except at cost for transportation of some
thirty to one hundred per cent on its
value; while our manufactures can be in
|
of some two to ten per cent. 1t is the
} grain grower, the cattle-raiser, who is pro-
tected by duty on foreign manufactures,
quite as much as the spinner or shoema-
| ker. He who talks of manufactures being
sensibly complain that we fortify Boston
/ and New York and not Pittsburg and Gin
: cinnati.
? 1or +o tHAsn
| philosophers who modestly tell us that
/ their views are liberal and enlightened
: while ours are benighted, selfish and I'M
! Christian. They tell US that the foreign
r factory-laborer is anxious to exchange
5 with us the fruits OF his labor-that be
asks us to give him of our surplus of grain
for the cloth that he is ready TO make
r cheaper than we can now get ii, while we
have a superabundance of bread. Now
putting for the present out of the question
the fact that, though our tariff were abol-
ished, his could remain-that neither
England, not France, nor any great manu-
? featuring country, would receive our grain
I untaxed though we offered so to take their
I, goods-especiall the fact that they never
r did SO take of us while we were freely TAX
: ing of them-we say to them, "Sirs, We
r are willing to take cloth of you for grain
$ but why prefer to trade at a ruinous dis
!. advantage to both? Why should there
e be half the diameter of the earth between
him who makes coats and him who make,
l bread, the one for the other? We are
c willing to give you bread for clothes; bu
= we are not willing to pay two-thirds Of oul
e bread as the cost of transporting the othel
d third to you, because we sincerely believ,
r it needless and greatly to our disadvant
age. We are willing TO work for and bu,
e of you, but not to support the useless anC
. Gripping activity of falsely directed com
: merce; not to contribute by our sweat t.
j the luxury of your mobiles, the power o
e your kings. But come to us, you who ar
]. honest, peaceable and industrious; brin.