Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1889-01-05
WHEAT BOUNTY.

From Springfield, O., congress has re-
ceived petition out of the ordinary. Mr..
j. II. Thomas, who sends the petition, is
manufacturer of agricultural implements,
lawn mowers and iron pumps. The
Thomas company operates a large
plant and employs hundreds OF men. Tt
happens that in this case the manufactur-
&er Is also farmer. That ie, he owns
xh6ot 9alds.-eHd kn8xs the present
fpanciai condition of wheat growers.
The petition recites that from the newt
able failure OF crops that comes sometimes,
from low prices and from the taxation to
which American wheat is subjected in sup
port of other interests, the industry of rails
ing wheat is depressed. He esks two
questions:
IF the manufacturer cannot compete
with foreign cheap labor without gov
eminent assistance, it ought not to be re-
quired of the farmer. On the other
hand, IL the farmer continue to compete
with cheap foreign labor, without any as
sistance from the government, then why
should not the manufacturers do the
same?
"If the farmer must continue to pay in
: creased prices to manufacturers by reason
OF protection extended to them, why
should not the manufacturers contribute
to help the farmer to secure some sort Of
increased price for his wheat, over the
price that is fixed for him by wheat raised
with the cheapest foreign labor?'
A proper equalizaison seems to him nec-
essary in view of the fact that the farmers
are not as prosperous as the manufacturs
ers He suggests to congress that fund
be provided from which growers of wheat
shall receive a bounty of 20 cents bushel
to compensate them for the higher prices
they ere compelled to pay manufacturers
and also to compensate them for the diff
ference between the price of Egyptian and
East Indian farm labor and the price of
American farm lgbor. The fund would
be about $50, 1000 yearly, or less than
one-fourth the bounties the farmers pay
manufacturers. 70 partly or wholly raise
the fund he thinks fair method would be
to lay tax on manufacturers whose goods
are increased In price by protection.
AS Mr.. Thomas says, our farmers and
especially our wheat growers, are not In a
. u r "a oompsrison suith What other
nltnneo .oall pln6noxitH A the-I Tunes
predicted several years ago and repeated
the average farmer under our present sys-
tenn To put this industry, much. more
important than any conceivable branch OF
manufacture, on an equitable footing the
government should be allowed either to
take burdens off or put bounties on TO en-
courage the business,
Mr.. Thomas is engaged In two pursuits
which require him to know the financial
results of wheat growing He speaks
with authority, and his view OF the cbm-
.naratiyely unprosperous condition OF
fhrmers viii find plenty OF corroboration in
every agricultural community. What
reason against granting bounty on
wheat can be urged which is not tenfold
moro valid against bounty on manufac-
tures? He, as we'll as the Times, viii adj
NIT that there are economical objections
to the distribution of such bounties, but
not one which in another form is not be
ing howled at as catering to England"
II tariff reform is catering to England
opposition 10 wheat bounties for American
farmers is catering to Russia and India
The Tunes advises every farmer in the
west TO send to Mr.. Thomas for copy Of
his petition. It will do to think about
this winter over the fire.
The Times is, as the girl fresh
from Vassar would say, just too
funny for anything. A few months
T sfteupted to belittle our
= 3 1lllet = nE -
- - = g IS 4 3 S S.