The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1890-04-17
following result is Obtained:

"a Class 10 | li2B2t ,2S1 3,fBDGlJ,eTI / ID % ~
81 Class ID 237 So. 0i0 3.2I2 .070 10 50 IS
4th Class 9 los ,7es 662 1882 Is II
If every farmer would paste the above
table in his hat, and thereby have it handy
for the Free Traders who are just now try
ing to convince him that the way to procure
increased prices for his grain is to produce
more of 1T, the agents of foreign manufac-
turers in America would make very little
Roadway in the Oranges and Alliances
throughout the country. In the previous
articles / have shown the direct benefits
which the farmers get from the present tariff
and the additional benefits which will accrue
to him should the Mckinley bill be passed.
The above figures show the indirect ad-
vantages TO the farmers which arise from
contiguous manufactures.
Every intelligent farmer should study the
influence of manufactures, of mines. or of
any productive industry on local prices,
whether of farms, farm products or farm
labor. II he does, what will he the result?
lie will find, without any doubt whatever,
that where the farms, workshops, factories
and mills are thickest prices for farm prod
ucts, for farm labor and for farming land are
highest. II does seem that this is n strong
argument enough. II is not, though, in
some quarters. The farmer is persstently
told that the prices he pays for things are
higher in consequence of Che tariff; and yet
if ne viii only stop to consider he will find
that nearly everything he buys costs less
now than it did under a much lower tariff,
when he was getting much lower price for
his products. He must not forget the enor-
nous increase which has taken place in his
production, rs well as in the production of
the American manufacturer
A few weeks ago an Indiana Senator
poured forth tale of woe about the Ameri-
can farmer. II was long speech and an
eloquent one from the standpoint of free
trade At its conclusion quiet man, with
almost white hair, closely cropped and
standing erect over vell-shaped head
arose. He was the junior Senator from Iowa
Had he arisen to respond TO the gentleman
from Indianar Apparently not. lie had no
books, no tabulated statements, no reports
He merely asked permission to read letter
from Des Moines County farmer, Charles
NJ. Garman. "He knows" said Senator
Wilson, by practical experience more about
the condition of farmers than the Senator
from Indiana has learned all his life through
his reading and his theory"
Then the quiet gentlemen proceeded to
read a brief letter, in which the Iowa farmer
showed that, according to his books, in 1916,
he sold pork for $3.50 per hundred net in
stead of $3.50 gross; that he hauled wheat
into town with an OK team and sold it for
37l cents bushel that he got 10 cents for
corn and 8 cents for oats. The prices of the
| commodities which he bought were as high
| as the farm products were low. He had to
| pay So barrel for salt which can now be
| bought for $120. A farm wagon cost $40
instead of $50, and hardware cost nearly
| twice MS much rs ii does now. He chad to
pay $50 to $50 for good overcoat, which
can now be bought for SIS to $50, and no.
body ever imagined that good suit OF
clothes could be bought for So" A har-
vester, which used to cost $3.50 to $500, can
now be had, with binder complete, for 500.
This Iowa farmer also pointed out the fact,
which everyone knows, that farmers now
buy great many things which in those
days were looked upon as luxuTies and ex-
travagances. Carpets, which then were
being imported almost exclusively from
England, were 80 high in price that they
were generally dispensed with, can now be
bought for 60 cents yard.
In short, AS Mr.. Garman said, eve dress
better, we have better houses, they are bet
ter furnished, we have better farm imple-
ments and we have u great many comforts
that were not enjoyed by the pioneer farmer.n
Every sensible farmer will be struck with
the truth contained in the above letter. II
answered completely the long speech of the
Indiana Senator.
In no possible way can it be shown that
the American farmer is worse off to-day than
he was under the low tariff before the war.