The times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1882-1897, 1890-06-06
wheat have grown from 1870 to 1886 as

wheat have grown from 1870 to 1886 as
follows:
1870. .,................:....... ss.eos cwt
1856. ...21, Coz go
There is now being exported from In
dia moro than two hundred and fifty
times as much wheat as in 1870.
That American farmers cannot COM
pete with wheat growers in India is
shown by the following extracts. The
consul at Calcutta, b. F. Bonham, in
making his report says:
"With all his simple and primitive
methods, am compelled to admit that
the Indian farmer can in my judgment
successfully compete with those of the
United States in the production of wheat.
Strange as it may seem to many, the
mystery is solved when you take into
consideration the facts that the Indian
farmers entire outfit represents capital
of not more than $40 or $50, and his hired
help Off he should require any can and
does work, feed and clothe himself, &C
cording to the Indian fashion, for an
average throughout the wheat growing
provinces, on about $3.50 per month";"
This being Democratic authority, and,
from the highest source available, is
sufficient to cause an inquiry on the part
of the intelligent farmer, where is he
going to find market for his produce
unless he finds it at home?
From the foregoing statistics, taken
under Democratic authority, we must
find:
First-The foreign market cannot be
relied upon by the farmer for the dis
posal of his surplus produce.
Second-He must have Protective
tariff to enable him to control the home
market, and to secure q living COM
pensation for the results of his labor.
If, then, tariff is needed as direct
protection for the farmer, how much
more is it needed to retain, secure and
build up for him reliable home market,
and which he has absolutely under his
control?
The Free-trader holds up to the farmer
some garment and says to him that were
it not for our Ubiquitous tariff it might
be purchased for less money, and
then says to him, You have been robbed
by just so much as the tariff on that
article; what the farmer needs is Free
trade.
Though the assertions be false in fact,
yet with this he stops.
The inquiring farmer asks him what
he means by Free-trade. He answers
that he wants the privilege of going into
the markets of the world and buying
what he wants where he can get it
cheapest, and of bringing it home with
out having to pay a duty to the govern
ment. thus greatly enhancing its cost.
But this is not all. Were that the end
of Free-trade, were there no evil conse-
quences to follow, we might be led to
welcome it.
But what means Free-trade but to buy
abroad what we now buy at home?
A shipload of foreign made goods is
brought into our markets for sale. 1t
may be of clothing.
The material is wool from sheep grown
in Australia, Syria or Buenos Ayres, in
stead of America. It means also 10000
days of labor taken from the laboring |
people of this country and given to for
eigners. The money paid for the cargo
has gone abroad, instead of being re-
tanned at home in the channels Of trade
The day laborers of this country have
just SO much less purchasing power to |
buy the accessories of life for themselves
and families.
This system continued, and the hun
dreds of thousands of them now en-
gagged in manufacturing Industries, with
their families, are driven to other means
Of support. No vocation is open to them
except to become producers; and hence
those who are now consuming the farm
ers' surplus products become, instead,
producers themselves.
There is no vocation more vulnerable
to the evils of Free-trade today than that
Of agriculture in the United States.
The history of our country shows it.
The condition of the world outside affirms
It, and statistics, though dry and unin-
5eresting, with observation, reading and
common sense, prove it.