The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1891-02-10
FAILURE IN THE ARGENTINE
REPUBLIC.

There is an article in the Farmers
Alliance department of the Florida
Dispatch, of December 18th, headed,
"A Sub Treasury Bill in South Amer
lea" 1t is intended as q warning to
the farmers of America who nave IN
Sorsed the Sub Treasury bill formu
lated by the F. A. and l. U. AS the
picture drawn of the financial catas
trophe in the Argentine Republic may
brighten many friends OF the farmers
measure, as well as furnish arguments
AGAINST it to it's enemies, our earnest
atten ion should be directed toward ;
ascertaining the causes OF the Argen,
tine failure, and to disco vering how
far their system of finance is Identical
with the farmers proposed system,
and how far the two systems are apart
or dissimllar.
No doubt the failure in Argentina
was due in a great measure to appar-
emily unlimited lending and borrow
ing, and, as the Dispatch says, "this
is an object lesson which cannot be
too carefully studied by our citizens
at the present time" Bui when 1t
proceeds to assert that "the Sub
Treasury scheme does not differ in
essence from the national mortgage
banks of the Argentine Republic, or
from it's national pawn shops" we
must demur to this very evident case
of "begging the question" There IS
no need TO enter into a metaphysical
INQUIRY as to the " essence " of the two
schemes, but we want to see by refer
ence to plain facts how far the posi-
ton of the two peoples and the
schemes of the two peoples are alike
or are different. And the more the
two systems are compared the more |
think we shall see that their system is
not our system and that our ways will
not be their ways.
1t is said in the Dispatch that the
resources of the Argentine Republic
are limitless; that it has an energetic
population; that it was on the high
road to a national prosperity Almost
without precedent. Its internal trade
was increasing, and its exports grow
ing. Immigration was pouring in,
steamship and railway communication
multiplying, and the nation was strid
ing with giant strides along the path
to prosperity. True it does not appear
how far the farmers shared in this
phenomenal" prosperity, or whether,
as in this country, 1t was monopolized
chiefly by the merchant, manufac
turers and fnanciers. But as the
farmers are said to have owned more
sheep than in any other country in
the world, and the wool export to have
been in round numbers 200, 600, 900
pounds, that their cattle trade with
Europe was immense, as well as in
beef and mutton, and that from the
Pampas 5000, 900 bushels of fruit
we're exported, it would seem that the
position of the Argentine farmer was
q different one from that of the Ameri
can farmer. We may conclude there
fore that the cry for a Sub Treasury
bill was no. wrung from an oppressed
class with ruin staring them in the
face; it was not asked for by them,
but was thrust upon them by the
finance mongers, who poured money
into the country obviously for their
own gain and not for the benefit of
the people.
Here then in the be GINNING we have
two opposite conditions In n coun
try the farmers are stretching out
their hands for a measure of financial
relief; in the other an extravaganza
system is thrust upon them by and
for the benefit of a lot of greedy
inanciers.
The second opposite condition is
that the Argentine scheme was
financed with borrowed money, for
which heavy interest had to be paid.
The London Daily News says: cit
was reckoned that in the year 1889
the interest on public and private
Argentine debts, together with per
sonal expenditures abroad amounted
to II millions Sterling" The farmers
of America ask for no borrowed
money. They ask to have issued to
them an amount of the money Of their
own country common surate with the
amount of wealth they have produced.
And that as other indus ries are pro
tected at the expense of the whole
community, the farmers may thus be
enabled justly and equitaol oily to pro
tect their own industry.
The third difference in the two
schemes is that in Argentine there
was granted, besides unlimited chattel
mortgages, an apparently unlimited
land mortgage, and these mortgage
bonds, called ceduLGS, could be put on
the market and sold for what they
would fetch, the government guaran
teeing the interest. The farmers Sub
H.. LII - - 1-