Griggs courier. (Cooperstown, Griggs Co., Dak. [N.D.]) 1885-1902, 1891-05-29
sl.5OPER ANNUM

so AoDoSA o'sAHA SeoPS Au anu pioCectS
the American farmer The duty on po>
tatoes is 25c per bu; eggs 5cper doz and
80 per cent on grain and horses. Now
the profit of their business is less thnn
that of the American farmer to the amt
of this duty. Mr.. Editor, l am no freq
trader, but will crack this nut and see
what is in it, as it is a fair sample nut
of protection advocates. 1st. The
Wahpeton man takes it for granted that
all men are as ignorant as himself upoa
this question and that any kind of hash
and rot dealt out will go down with the
farmer, but if !. know anything of the
average intelligence of Guggs county
farmers such hash will not enter skin
deep with them. I'd. Canada being
exporters Of wheat anG Toronto several
hundred miles nearer the Liverpool
market than Chicago, how could the
$. be Canadas natural market for
her surplus wheat? And ii tho Wahpe-
ton man did not know any better than
to make such statements and the editors
to publish them, will guarantee for the
intelligence of Griggs Co. farmers, know
ing that the dumping of all the surplus
wheat of Canada Oil tho Duluth and
Minneapolis markets could make no
difference to the price of the American
surplus, us the final destination Of the
surplus of Canada and tho u. s. is the
European markets, and if the editors
don't know our farmers do. That it
would make no difference whether the
surplus wheat of Canada and the U S.
was all found in The u. S. or I'LL in Can
ada, rs it wonid not add one peck to tho
quantity or effect the price Que mill on
one million bushels us supply and de-
mand regulate prices, and if our smart
Allies that attempt to deceive our farm
ers with II tariff to shut out Canadian
wheat could devise Il scheme to get the
Canadian surplus into our country and
carry it to its final destination with our
ships and men instead OF Canada, our
nation would reap all the profits of the
wheat industry of Canada, us all the
profit accrue after the wheat is out of
the farmers hands. Would this not bo
an Improvement over Canadian and
English bottoms carrying our surplus to
it's final destination? Again, rs we are
exporters of wheat our American buy
crs would only buy Canadian wheat on
basis of profit in carrying to the Euro
penn markets, just as they buy our own
wheat now. therefore would make no
difference in price, and it is high time
fooled out of their hard earnings by the
nj l,f TO u,,1 1,ira1ipCr ,,rocs 1skn 6,,kw
on potatoes is 25c, and notice that our
farmers buy about rs many potatoes as
anybody else when the full price is
greater than 25c, for when potatoes are
dear enough for our farmers to reap
the benefit of this Csc tariff, then it
means that not more than one farmer
in every 10 to 20 have any potatoes to
sell, ard the or 10 arc. taxed for the
benefit of the one, and all other con-
sumers of potatoes. But even under
failure of the potato crop this tax won't
hurt our farmers much, as they are
generally too poor to buy them, and
under favorable seasons for potatoes
our farmers must take 25 or 30 ceLta
per bushel for their potatoes as freights
;.re generally SO high that farmers cam
not send them further than they might
carry them on their back without con-
Stunning the whole price. Eggs sc per
dozen protection. Well eggs arc too
big an industry for me to tackle. We
| will leave that to the secretary OF agri-
\ culture and his staff, as they are paid
for their time. The Mckinley bill levles
u duty of 80 per cent on barley, which
is Just that much discrimination be-
tween the American and Canadian
farmer in favor of the American. The
above may delude and deceive tha
American farmer Notwithstanding the
situation, but It's a delusion and decep-
ton, chaff for the American farmer, for
it is not because we don't raise enough
barley for to supply the home market
that we import barley from Canada,
but on account of climatic differences,
while we raise and sell millions of
bushels of barley on our own markets
at from 80 to 80 cents per bushel whila
that which we import from Canada
would sell on the same markets for 60:
to 80 cents per bushel, therefore the
bulk of American barley does not enter
into competition with that which we
have been importing. The bulk of the
Canadian barley that we import is I'M
nearly as white as milk, and if from
| SOlllC CAtlSC IuC OduttuIttu luC1 AstiiS
produce this white barley he cannot sell
to the American buyer for export. The
writer has grown thousands of bushels
of this white barley for the American
market and knows what he is talking
about, The Mckinley bill will either
shut out this Canadian white barley
and the American consumer forego his
special drinks or pay higher for them.
But rs the bulk of the barley grown in
the United States is too yellow in color
the Mckinley bill will cut no figure in
prices on the most of the barley we
grow no more than if it was on OATS
Again the article says ''this duty rev.
enue goes to the support of the govern
ment and if not raised IN this Way
would be raised by direct taxation. If
my memory serves me right the advo-
Gates of the Mckinley bill would reduce
the revenue and if the Mckinley bill
shuts out barley where does the revenue
come IN! And who pays it If it does
come? And if potatoes are ever e0c
per bushel higher on account of the
Mckinley bill who will payit Perhaps
we could make Italy pay this tariff as