Daily Republican. [volume] ([Wilmington, Del.]) 1874-1890, 1890-04-08

Protection 10 To day quoted by every
fFee.trads paper - the first, chief and
only reason for the losses sustained BY
farmers In this country, the depression
In the prico Of their land, and the dc
crease In the ceiling value Of the pro
ducts Of farming. England has ali the
Advantages Of free trade. IL has had
them for half . century. Az its popula-
tion h steadily increasing, and half Of II
10 In great cities, each aero has more and
more to do In supporting pc aulation and
should increase In value. In this coun.
try, also, in 1880, ~ per cent. 0f those at
work were on the land Raising something
TO sell. In England only Il per cent.
are thus occupied, and the labor of each
inevitably has . closer and larger de-
mand. Yet one Of the beat authors
ties In England. Mr.. Francis
Fulier-one Of the most capable land
agents and auct!0ueers In the United
Kingdom. put the depreciation from
1875 to 1885 In rents, In England and
Wales alone. at el50,000, 600 . gear on
w ,OOO,0OO acres, the tota; agricultural
area OF England and Wales-an area
twice the acreage Of the farms In Penn.
sylyania at the last census. This was q
loss Of one-third the rental value, aud 1t
sess VI S1toVu,VUUsUuU on
the selling value OF this land. In add.
tion, the farmers cultivating this soii had
Lost In ten years e6O0, 900, 900 In working
capital.
The land OF England and Wsles, there.
fore. In area . eth smaller than the
combined farms Of New York aud Penn.
sylvsnia. Loaf In value and capital In ter
years by this expert estimate. made by I
man handling land all his life, $1,000.
100000. All this was under the frees,
Kind Of free trade, which. In 'faiI
Kent" the best land IN England at the
gates Of London. had. as the speech o.
one Of It's berg. Mr.. Brookhsld, said
February Q, 1888, LETT upward Of rs, 0O(
acres OF arabic farm land absolutely
uncultivated."
We wonder II there 10 any fool In o,
out Of any free trade newspaper ofic,
who thinks the iarms Of this State ant
New York have lost 35. 600, o00, 900 In thu
last nfteen years or 500, 000, 900 or eve,
e60, 0OO. 600. Yet this 10 the loss 10 Eng
land and Wales. It y the estimate &C
oepted In all discasslonsi It IL quotet
with approval BY the London Field and Z
has never been ccntroverted. This Dc
crease In rent has Rone on since 1885
1t 10 to-day nearer 5000, 900, 900 thar
$3.50, 000, 900 and the depreciation II
value y nearer %, O00, OO0, 600.
Year by year sees 1t worse. II Affect
product - well Is rent aud value. From
1880 to 1886 the total farm pro luce Of
the United Kingdom fell from 81, 49,.
81, 900 In value 10 e941, 779, 900, . de-
creass Of one-sixth, the figures beinl
published In April, 1850, in the Londoi
Times, by Mr.. A. II. Lee. In the United
Ststss, from 1880 to 1885 the value o
cereal crops, cotton, hay, tobacco and
potatoes Iarm animals rose In their farm
value from $685., 200. 900 to 4,32l, :
00O, 900, an advance Of ons-sixth.
Yet In the face OF facts like these
which show loss In the value of farm
lands In England In ten years under
FREQ trade thirty-fold greater than the
entire revenue collected under . protec.
tive tariff here In the same ten years,
and decrease In the value Of farm pro-
ducts OF Is per cent. there. an increase
here OF Is per cent-there are fools who
are actually writing and printing arti-
cles about the harm done to farmers by
protection, and tho advantage they would
enjoy under free trade.