Ceredo advance. [volume] (Ceredo, W. Va.) 1885-1939, 1888-06-15
How Farmers are Interested In
Tariff.

"a N"' '''uSiS mo itniSine tue
farmer is not interested in the tariff
question. The editors of the WAYNE
Ne'cs, the Milton Star, the Tyler
Democrat and the New Matamoras
(Ohio) Mail (who do not seem to
understand why farmers should be
Protected) may profit by studying
the article carefully:
Free trade organs and orators
admit that the protective tariff is a
benefit TO manufacturers and their
employees, but contend that it is
maintained at the expense of the
farming classes. This is clearly a
fallacy. Farmers are as directly
and vitality interested in the main
tenance or protection as any other
class. 1t is manifestly to the adj
vantage of the American wheat
grower, wool grower, fruit grower,
or the producer of potatoes, vegeta-
bles, etc, that he have the prefer
ence in American markets. He is
entitled to that preference because he
is citizen of the Nation, bound by
its laws, bound to contribute to the
support of the Government, bound
to risk his life or the lives OF his
sons in defense of that Government
when called upon.
The free trade or revenue tariff
theory is that the man who is sub
ject to all these obligations should
be placed on plane of equality
with citizens and subjects of other
nations. The tariff reformers as
sert that the American agriculturist
has no protection and needs none,
because no foreigner can compete
with him. That is false. Under
the existing tariff the agriculturalist
has protection and moreover he
needs it, and deserves it, unless we
propose to give the foreign agricult.
urist preference over our own in
all the great markets this country
affords. The duty on wheat is
twenty cents bushel, with CORE
spending duties on corn, vegetables,
fruit and numerous other farm pro
ducts. Abolish the wheat duty and
Canada wheat can be delivered at
New York and Boston at from six
to ten per cent. less cost for trans
portation than Kansas, Nebraska
or Dakota wheat. Would that not
be palpablc discrimination against
the Western farmer and in favor Of
men who owe no allegiance to our
Government? If we are to have
free trade in manufactured goods, is
it not plain that manufacturers and
laboring men will insist upon hav-
ing free trade IT. grain, beef, pork,
potatoes and other food products?
Grain from India, the Crimea,
South America and Africa has not
yet been brought into competition
with American grain in the Ameri-
can market, but it would have been
had it not been for the tariff; and
who will undertake to say that it
will not in few years, even with a
duty of twenty cents a bushel?
With labor at six cents per day
wheat can be produced in India at
forty per cent less cost than it can
by our Western farmers; ard the
ocean being great natural high.
way which cost nothing for con-
struction and cost nothing for re-
pairs, and the art of building and
ProPelling ships having attained
high degree of perfection, grain can
be transported from Calcutta 20
New York almost as cheap as from
Kansas City. If the manufacturers
1.-The Eastern States must compete
on equal terms with the manufac
turers of Great Britain they must,
Of necessity, adopt British methods
buy in the cheapest market and
sell in the dearest, the cheapest
market for grain being in India.
Free trade would most likely re-
suit in dePriying American farmers
Of 100000 of their customers
customers who now consume more
Of their products than they sell in all
the world beyond the limits of the
United States. II stands the West
farmer in hand TO demand
that American productions, includ-
ing his own surplus products, be
protected, and w el protected,
against the blighting hand Of for
eign competition. The interests of
American farmers, mechanics and
are 50 interlaced
49,. 4 =. L q