The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1892-10-11
$ they now do at our efforts to make our

make beet-sugar growing success. We
learned all about how Germany and |
france rance inade sugar. The result was the /
Mchlnley bill took offthe S57, 900 duty |
you had paid for sugar and offered a |
bounty as an equivalent protection to the I
grower, which is limited to the year 1905. |
w now have in operation successfully |
Two factories in California; one in Phila- |
ueIphla; one IN Utah; one in Nebraska, |
ana IL Is conceded by all persons who |
nave studied the question, that by the |
llme the bounty expires we shall be max !
ing IN the United States all the sugar we
consume and become large exporter.
This is what the Democratic platform
calls the eliminating atrocity of class
legislation. This is what Republicans call
craftsmanship.
FARMER BENEFITED.
Another charge made is that the pro-
tectlve laws and particularly the Nc
hlnley Act do not benefit the farmer.
1t IS not easy TO trace the benefit or in
jury OF any law directly to the individual.
No farmer in the United states can lay
ms nnger upon an instance where he Is
injured by the protective legislation. He
Is helped or hurt as the whole country
prospers or suffers. We must search for
general effects and from these we con-
clude as to the wisdom or vice OF the
law.
The argument as it touches the farmer
directs itself to the general bearing of our
Laws upon his occupation, as 1t does TO
the wage-earner.
To the wage-earner we say that protect
i've laws are not made always with the
effect of raising his wages, or that such
result follows. What we say is that pro-
tectIve legislation has established
standard far above the standard of
countries competing for our trade. and
we legislate to keep that standard up.
Our laws have done and are doing this
Wa homo
market is his best market, and that every
man who can be found employment in
the factories or III the trades or profess
sions, or any other way than in the field,
becomes a consumer of the fruits of the
taTmer's toll and gives him market
which otherwise he would have to seek
abroad
Take the leading item of corn, that is
grown all over the Union:
In 1891 we grew 1850, l54, 900 bushels, of
the value of 1886, ABS, 22S. We export-less
than five per cent. There is a duty OF 10
cents per bushel of 56 pounds.
Practically all our corn-and the value
is enormous-is consumed at home.
Suppose you drive out 100000 wage
earners from the factories and put them
TO raising corn with their families of four
members each, and increase the produc-
ton of corn proportionately. The result
is increased product without increasing
consumption. The per capita consump-
ZION OF corn in this country is an aver
age of thirty bushels per annum. These
5000 people would consume 15,0O0000
bushels and produce none if left in the
factory; otherwise they consume the
same, but would produce twenty times as
much besides.
Take hay, of which we produced in 1888
1858, 024 tons, of the value of S40S 49S, sos.
a nlaoa q dl1ty IF nc haU Inv
the Mckinley bill. 1t had been - per
ton under the old law.
We imported in 1889 hay of the value of
Sl.1S3, 1872 under the old duty. But under
the II duty only S45l so worth came in.
Hay is grown along the Canada border,
and so also the wheat in large quantities.
Hay could be shipped from Victoria to
San Francisco. Our duty gives our farm
erS the hay market, and as we export
practically no hay we have home mar
ket for it all.
But here, as with corn, if you shut down
the factories and drive the wage-workers
to farming, you have increased produc-
ton with no more consumption.
WHEAT.
Wheat is another farm staple. Our av-
prage product in recent years has been
about 450, 200, 600 bushels, of which we ex-
port in wheat and flour per cent.
varying during the past ten years from
402S per cent. in 1879, to as low as 1911
per cent. in 1888. Our exports depend
upon the amount of the crop and the de-
mand abroad. There seems to be no fixed
relation between exports and production
here. In 1888 we produced All DOC
bushels and exported only 1917 per cent
In 1885 we produced 357, 000, 600 bushels
and exported Z6.29 per cent.
In 1888 we produced 5000, 600 bushels
and exported 2l.35 Ger cent.
The duty on wheat is twenty-five cents
n n1lShnl If < nnrpiU DrOrnpfiUa &C &c
on corn. We don't need any wheat from
abroad, and don't want it. But Canada
is a great wheat-growing country. They
would like to ship wheat to Minneapolis
and Buffalo and other milling centers, il
we would let them, but they can't clint
over that twenty-five cents barrier.
The Democrats say this is unconstitu-
tional. We say it is right.
What we want is home market for al
our wheat.
everything in free. Except as a duty i,
needed for revenue, which we say is baC
policy.
BARLEY.
Barley furnishes another illustration
We put a duty of thirty cents on a bushe
by the Mckinley Act; it was ten cent
before.
In 1889, before the Act, we imported
barley worth S6,25S, 297.
In 1891, after the Act, we imported
only Sl,590,040.
The American farmer sold the barle,
to the brewer instead Of the foreign
farmer selling it.
We kept about five million dollars a
home for the American farmer, instead O
paying it to the Canadian farmer
FLAXSEED.
Flaxseed furnishes a striking exampl
of the operation Of the Mckinley ct am
protective legislation. The old law put
duty of 20 cents a bushel, and in 1889 w
imported S4,136,736 in value The Nc
Kinley Act put a duty OF 80 cents
bushel. The business of raising flax wa
stimulated and we supplied the marke
and importations fell Oft over four and
half million dollars, which went to th
farmers. Linseed oil sold in 1889 for So to 6
cents per gallon. After the Act of 1891 j
sold for 81 cents and in 1892 sold down a
low as 81 cents.
And so we had the usual result-mor
production at home; less importations
and the manufactured article cheaper il
the face of higher tariff, and showing tina
the duty has but little influence on til
price of domestic products.
l have a table on some farm product
on which increased duty was levied t
protect the farmer, showing decrease
imports.
FARM PRODUCTS IMPORTED.
Articles. 1890 1892
Cattle..-................. S244,747 So, 46
Horses................. 4,S4o,4o5 2i55,S
Eggs............... $500. 2.074.912 522,24