Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1888-04-26
THE FARMERS AND THE TARIFF.


Ohio State journal.
The United States Senate has become
the theater of tariff discussion, though
no tariff bill is pending-the Senators
apparently wishing to get through with
the debate by the time the Mills bill is
sent up. Several Democratic Senators
who have spoken on the subject have
fallen in with President Cleveland's idea
that farmers who own no sheep have no
interest in the wool question other than
that their neighbors who do own sheep
shall be placed at a disadvantage as
against the Australian or South Ameri-
can fiockmaster; for, be it remembered,
the American sheep owner pays local
taxes for the support Of State and local
governments, while the Australian or
South American pays nothing for the
support of government here, whether
National, State or local. But what are
the facts as to every farmers interest
in the wool question, whether he owns
twenty, fifty or hundred sheep, or none
at all! Say that one-half of the farm
ers of Ohio, or Illinois, or Kansas own
no sheep, how would the abandonment
of sheep husbandry by the other half &f-
feet them? If wool growers abandon
that line of industry must they not en-
ploy their land, capital and labor ia pro-
ducing grain, beef, cattle, hogs or some
thing else to make good the $50, 800
or $500 year which they now receive
for wool? And are farmers in any State
or Territory anxious for greater and
sharper competition in raising and mar
keting staple products, such as wheat,
corn, beef and pork? If so. they should
vote for free trade in wool, and the con-
sequent annihilation Of the wool indus
try. Is it not true that, while in some
of the new States and Territories man
can manage to live and save something
By raising and selling corn at so cents
and wheat at IS cents per bushel, he can
not do SO in any of the States east of
the Mississippi? Is it not true that in
all of tbs olden and more thickly- settled
States diversity of products is essen
tial to success in farming?
Statistics introduced into the tariff
debate show that the production of food
supplies s-but especially of grain in
Asia, Africa and Eastern Europe, has
greatly increased, nearly doubled, in
fact, within the last six or eight years,
thus enabling those countries to under
sell the United States in all the markets
of Western Europe. The free traders
lay hold of this fact and use it as an ar
gument in favor of throwing open our
markets to all the world and admitting
free of duty more than one-half of the |
products of foreign countries and levy |
ing upon the remainder mere recenue
duties, the admitted effect Of which
would be to augment importations four
fold or more. When told that such a |
policy would increase rather than dimin-
ish the surplus, the free traders answer,
''Very we'll: if such be the effect we can
further reduce duties and add to the
free list till the revenue is reduced to
the needs of the government" - they
well knowing that such policy would
greatly embarrass, if not paralyze, every
industry in the United States Gncluding
agriculture) unless our workmen, skilled
and unskilled, consent to reduction of
wages to the European and Asiatic
standards.