Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1889-06-20
Which is to the Farmers Interest.
Tariff or Free Trade?

Correspondence Journal of Agriculture.
hesitate to shy my castor into the
ring, when so many people are writ
ing articles column long or more; but
it seems to me that the writers of these
! articles are philosophers and not farm
ers. What we want is the true rela-
tion of the tariff to farmers.
All these long-winded articles seem
to be discussing the tariffin it's relation
to the good of the whole country.
Well, l want to say right here, / am
not in that business. I am working
for John Smith and nobody else. 1 am
not arguing in favor of any measure,
because it benefits the United States.
nor the manufacturers, nor the me-
shanics. l am in favor of any measure
that seems to bring me benefi the
quickest. / guess ali the balance of
us are pretty much the same way too,
or we wouldn't all join the Wheel and
Alliance to try to force prices down.
Now how about the tariff? If made
iron and steel should want tariff; IL
l raised sugar or rice or wool, and
nothing else, should want protection.
Why? because it would be to my in
terest. l do raise wool; have 100 head
of sheep, ,sheared last teason 700 pounds
of wool, but / raise other things be-
sides; SO the question with me is, would
l be most benefited by tariff or free
trade. l can answer very quickly; by
free trade every time.
Do you want to know how that is2
Say that my 700 pounds of wool is
worth 80 cents under tariff, that $2lO,
for the lot; take off the tariff and it Is
worth only 20 cents a pound, or $1f0,
then l have lost SO. But what have
gained? Let's figure out little. I
haye a cousin who was In England last
fall. He had two suits of clothes made
by "a tailor in London, that cost HIM
there four pounds each English mon
ey) $40 u. S. money. He showed them
to a tailor inKansas City,w told him
he would make the same suits for $45
apiece. He saved $50 on the two suits,
by buying where there was no tariff.
/ buy, on an average two suits year,
that cost me $25 a piece, $50 for the
two, say I could save half of IL, $25.
Then on my three boys clothes, say I
save $40 each a year, that Is $50 more.
On my wife's and two daughters
clothes, say save So each a year, that
is $500 more. We used last year 325
pounds of sugar at 8 cents a pound,
500 25, say 40 per cent. is tariff, that is
$11.10 more; bought a binder for $l75,
UWl!S 90, pIuCI tOOlS, ubiAS duu
ments about $50, say tariff was only
SIS on these last and $50 on the binder
and twine, how much does IL all figure?
Answer $146.70. That is,I get protected
$40 worth on my wool and lose by 1t on
clothes and other necessaries $148, 20.
If | had no sheep, the whole amount
would be lost by the tariff. That is
why | am for free trade, or as near to
ii, or as near to 1t. as we can get, to
keep up the revenue of the govern
ment.
That is the way that every farmer
wants to look at this question. In all
other lines of business, 1t is every man
for himself. We must run by the same
rule. No manufacturer or mechanic,
no lawyer, doctor or merchant IS look
ing out for the interests of Mr.. Farmer,
and he has been fool enought not to
look out for them either, and we are In
hole. No more general principles
for me, am not figuring on scheme
now to keep up the mechanics wages
or the merchants profits; they don't
figure to keep up the price of my
wheat or potatoes or hogs, but you bet
your bottom dollar am going to figure
on it in the future. The United States
can take care ofitself and an going to
look out strictly for No. /. Therefore
| have made up my mind that the best
policy is plenty Of money and free trade
for JOHN Smith.
Johnson Co., Mo-. April .8, 'SS.