Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1892-11-03

|" seS ~1AAAg
while the farmer pays it all out of his
products. A Democratic orator who
has been talking to the ranchmen of
this county, ever goes SO far az to
imply that while all manufactured
articles, and many other manufac-
tured articles, like wool, are pro-
tected, the products of the farm are
not protected. 1t is the purpose of
this article to refute that falsehood.
One of these orators, Mr.. B. C..
White, of Ubet, in a speech delivered
at Beaver creek in this county, on the
night of October 25th, asked his audi
ence why different persons in his audi
ence should not be protected by a
tariff upon his horses, cattle and grain
as we'll AZ the wool men are. The ques-
ton shows Mr.. White to be the rank
est kind of a dem agogue. It requires
no argument to prove this assertion.
for every article that the farmer pro-
duces is protected. There is n duty of
80 cents per bushel on barley, 25
cents on wheat, Is cents Ton corn and
oats, 6 cents per pound o. butter and
cheese, 5 cents per dozen on eggs, 81
per ton on hay. 25 cents per bushel on
potatoes, 5 cents per pound or bacon
and hams, and 2 cents per pound on
beef: horses and mules $50 per head.
provided that horses valued at $15O
or over shall pay a duty of 80 per
cent. ad valorem; cattle more
than one year old SO per
head, less than one year old
So per head; hogs, 81. so per head; and
so on through the list. If there were
any foundation in fact for the insinu
alton contained in Mr.. Whites ques
ton, the question itself would be most
pertinent, but there is no foundation
for it.
But aside from the tariff upon his
products the farmer is benefited in
numerous other ways by the tariff
system, the most important of which
is the home market which the system
has built up for him. According t,
Robert B. Smith, democratic orato,
of Montana, only 81 per cent. of tn.
wealth of the United States was in
vested in enterprises other than agri
cultural in 1850, while now II pc
cent. is thus invested. In other words
in 1860 about $5,OOO,O OO, 900 wer,
invested in enterprises other thar
agricultural, while more than $40
600, GOO, 900 were so invested i'm 1890,
An increase of SAL OO, 900 900, OF
nearly 900 per cent. During thai
period, it should be remembered, tn,
aggregate wealth of the farmers has
wonderfully increased. All of this in
creased investment in non-agricultura!
pursuits has furnished employment to
millions of our fellow citizens, who i,
turn have greatly increased the mar
kets for farm products. A very larg.
per centage of this increase has beer
invested in manufactures, established
and maintained by the Republican
policy of protection.
Take the subject and look at it il
another light. In 1860 we had q
population in the United States OF
81, 500, 600, which had just aboul
doubled in 1890. OF the able bodied
portion of this increase by far tn.
larger part have found employment
in pursuits other than agriculture,
most of them in manufacturing indus
tries. Every farmer knows that agr :
culture is more overdone in the Unite d
States than any other line of produc-
ton. Protection keeps millions of
laborers engaged in manufacturing
pursuits who would otherwise becom-
PEELED to turn their energies towaro
farming to gain a livelihood for them
selves and families. Protection thus
works both ways i'm favor of the
farmer: it not only increases his hom.
market, but it has II very decided
tendency toward keeping down tn,
over production of farm products.
Democrats, as q rule, admit that some
degree of protection is necessary to
build up infant industries, and that
without it many lines of manufactur-
ing could never have been established
in the United States. Republicans 60
farther, and assert that these same
industries which have been established
by the beneficient workings OF the pro-
tective tariff system, still require the
protection afforded them, and will
continue to require that protection so
long as conditions remain so radically
different in the United States from
what they are in the old world, especi-
ally in the price of all kinds OF labor.
The need of protective system in any
country is due mainly to the differing
conditions, and especially in the
wages that have to be paid for the
labor to be hired. The differences in
the profits of capital the world overis
not so marked as the difference in the
wages of honest toll. In a country
where wages are at the lowest, and the
wage n are contented, either be-
cause of their ignorance of a better
condition or because they are COM
PEELED to be satisfied, and where those
employing labor are satisfied to allow
those in their employ to occupy that
position, there is little OF no need of
protection. At any rate there is not
that demand for it that there is in a
free country, where labor is accus-
toned to receive sufficient remunera-
ton to satisfy the wants of the body