Wichita eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1886-1890, 1888-09-22

from Kansas; that some of the corn and
oats that was fed to the horses they used.
came from Kansas: in fact, soon learned
that these men and their employers were
some of the very best customers that the
Kansas farmer had. If then, l had any
regard for the interests of the Kansas far
mer, how could vote so as to deprive him
of these customerss By taking from the
farmer any of the custom of these loo. 900
people would have lessened
THE DEMAND FOR KANSAS PRODUCTS
just that much and this would have de-
creased the price for which the farmer
could sell. He gets little enough now. and
if | voted and acted so as to decrease that
little, how could face him and claim to
be his friend? But. it is said that the
Kansas consumer of lumber would get it
cheaper than he does if the tariff of 81
per thousand was removed Did you ever
hear free trader try TO figure out how
much, if any, of this - the farmer or Kan
saS consumer would get if this tariff was
done away with? No, and you never will
They always vehemently assert, but they
never attempt to prove how it can be done.
Did it ever occur to you that these
freq trade theorists profess to
be such great friends of
the Kansas farmer and la
boring man on this lumber question are
really working in the interests of the lum-
Der kings and the great transportation
lines. believe l would almost undertake
to prove this TO jury of Kansas Demo
Gratis if they could be induced to lay aside
their party prejudices for a few moments
and listen to me.
What are the indisputable facts in re-
gard to this question, The Kansas con-
sumner would have to contend with the
lumber manufacturer the wholesale deal
er, the railroad company and the local
dealers for this 81 per thousand feet or
any part of it. To make this perfectly
plain, as it seems to me, let US see what
items OF cost enter into the price paid for
lumber by the Kansas farmer
First, the value of the logs, but as there
IS no tariff on these, then certainly the
tariff does not affect the price of them
Second. the cost of saving the logs into
boards, etc, and the profits of the manu-
facturer.
Third, the profits of the wholesale dealer
and what it costs him to handle and sell
TO the retail dealer.
Fourth, the profits of the railroad COM
pany and the cost of transporting it to
Kansas.
Fifth, and last, the profits of the retail
dealer IN Kansas and the costs of handling
and selling it.
MS iuinDcf, bucu, uluSU pass through
the hands of the manufacture the whole
sale dealer, the railroad company, and the
retail dealer before the Consumer would
get chance at it. Here, then, are i've
parties, including the consumer, to con-
tend for their portion of this 81 90 of tariff
If, therefore. the Kansas consumer get his
full share, it would only amount to one
fifth of g 90, or 40 cents.
But would the Kansas consumer get his
Shaypt AnV ICbO will thipG
moment will conclude that as these parties
all have chance at it before it reaches
the consumer, that he would have to take
what was left, and that would be-noth-
ing. Where would this money so? In
stead of going into treasury of the United
States to help pay the national debt and
the pensions of old veterans, it would 60
to the lumber manufacturer, the whole
sale lumber dealer. and the railroads.
The papers and speakers and all others
who find fault with me because | would
not vote for free lumber are growing be-
cause l would not take it from the poor
pensiOner and give it to the lumber kings
and the railroads. These men are growing
because | would not vote to lessen the CON
sumption of Kansas products-yote to
lessen the demand for these products, and
thus lessen the price which the Kansas
farmer could get for them-vote to lessen
the wages of the laboring man in the lum-
Der industry, or compel him to seek other
employment-votet to deprive the Kansas
farmer and the Kansas labcrng man of
customer, and, in all probability, make a
competitor of him. Well, l guess | can
stand ali such growing.
But there is still another view to take of
this subject. If the Mills bill should pass
and become a law then the lumber indus
try, and the flax and hemp and wool in
dustries. and number OF other important
industries which have beer Disseminated
against in that sectional measure, would
have no further interest in protection. 1t
has been limited that this is the scheme of
the free traders. They know they can not
destroy protection at one blow, and hence
they intend to do it by piecemeal This
southern interest would like to have
cheaper wheat and corn and pork, because
they do not produce much of these pro-
ducts and have the most of them to buy.
1t is the same with large number of man
ufacturing interests. Suppose you remove
the tariff on lumber. Then the lumber inter
est would have no further use tor protec
ton to your wheat and corn and the food
which it must buy What more
human nature like, then, than for these
to combine with the southern
free trader and do away with all protection
on food products? Without the protection
of 20 cents on a bushel of wheat that
article can be raised in India, sent to New
y ork and sold for less money than the
actual cost TO you of raising it and ship
ping it to that city. The meat product
could be raised in South America and in
other countries outside of the United
States, packed and sent here and sold at
LESS PRICE THAN THE ACTUAL COST
to you The same is true of almost all
food products The result would be the
destruction of our home market, which
now consumes 81 per cent of the food
product of this country. This would be an
advantage to Great Britain and South
America and the southern planter and the
lumber manufacturer. but it would bring
bankruptcy and ruin to every farmer in
the middle and western states. How has
it worked il England under free trader
An official of that government is reported
as saying in the house of commons:
That the prolonged depression of agri-
culture III England is a matter that sur
passes the Irish question IN interest and
danger The loss in values for the past
year is put at nearly two hundred and fifty
million dollars, an amount equal to a re-
ductlon OF one fourth of the export trade
OF the country. Thousands OF acres of
land have gone out of cultivation, and
there has been concurrent decrease in ali
kinds Of livestock. Furthermore, there is
a steady increase of unemployed persons
who formerly earned living as farmers,
the present number being estimated at
700, 900, while those who are able to find
employment have TO work at greatly re-
fuced wages"
That explains why the great enemy Of
free trade today in England is the farm
ing population OF the kingdom. Hundreds
Of tariff clubs have been formed among the
English farmers, and they are making a
VI gorous fight to have protection restored.
They DID not realize the falseness of the
free trade theories until it's letters were
FIRMLY fastened UPON them. Will YOU not