Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1890-11-29

bidding the other on freight rates till in
some instances wheat was actually
taken to Europe free. This was made
necessary by reason OF the fact that
ship must have some weight in its hold
to steady it-ballast as it is called.
OF course when our products are taken
to Europe at very low freight rates they
can be offered for sale there at a very
slight advance upon the New York
price. This gives our products the
power to compete advantageously with
the products Of other nations, and thus
widens the market for all we sell
abroad. The cheaper our wheat can bo
carried to Liverpool the more we can
sell there, and the more competing
wheat from Russia and India can we
drive out of tho English market.
Now, ocean freights can be low only
when ships can get cargoes both ways.
II we put up Mckinley tariffs with the
avowed object of shutting out foreign
goods how can we hold our foreign
markets for what we produce? Isit not
clear that II ship has to come empty
to America for a cargo Of grain twill
have to charge double freight on that
cargo? 1t can not afford 10 cross tho
ocean for nothing. When our grain,
then, is put down in Liverpool with a
double freight added 70 its price will it
not be placed at gSsat disadvantage
in the competition with the grains OF
Russia and other lands that are now
gradually getting ahead of us in the
English market?
Besides, why should we wish to harm
the industries OF England? The glee
with which protectionist orat tors point
out the evidences of the satisfaction
in England over the Mckinley bill Is
evidence Of the most stupid ig-
norance. They entirely overlook the
value Of the English market to US,
especially to our farmers On an aver
age we sell every year S2i6 600, 900
worth of commodities in England over
and above what we buy there. About
one-fourth of our wheat crop is sold
abroad most of this in England; and
two-thirds OF our cotton finds foreign
market; nearly all of this in England.
Evidently it is of the utmost impor-
tance to US to hold that market How
supremely foolish to run the risk of
losing a large part of a market in which
So per cent of all our exports are sold,
and from which we buy only "a per
cent. of our imports.
Mr.. Blaine chases after the will-o'-
the-wsp of reciprocity with South
America to which, as he shows we sell
very little, and at the same time the
market in which more than half Of all
our foreign sales are made is recklessly
endangered by our stupid tariff makers.
That the market for our breadstuffs
will continue to grow narrower in Eu-
gland is now practically certain.
The London Economist, the leading
financial and economic authority among
English journals, says in its very tenn
perate discussion OF the Mckinley bill:
Many of the staple commodities we now
import from the United States We can buy
elsewhere, and II the cost of production In
the States is enhanced, as it must be under
the new tariff these other markets will be-
come the cheapest for US 10 buy in.
There are other evidences that En-
gland is looking elsewhere for its grain
supply. A recent dispatch rom London
says of the Mckinley bill:
For one thing 1t has already made it GER
tain that Europe will take no nterost n tho
Chicago exhibition, and will practca ly be
unrepres nted there Even more important
Is the impulse it has given here to nsoli-
date capital In an energetic effort to imm'-
dately push railways throughout the Indian
and Russian wheat belts and thus render
the European market Independent OF Amer.
lean grain suppl es.
We have already lost heavily in COM
peton with those countries. The of-
cial figures Of the Treasury Department
are conclusive proof of the fact The
relative quantity of wheat and flour
bought by England from the three
principal sources of supply in 1850 and
1883 is as follows: