The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1893-10-07

70 the farmers ana ASK tnat each onc
who reads after us first disabuse his
mind of ali political prejudice, whether
he be democrat or whether he be
republican. It's n fact that farm prop
erty--,neaning farming land--has fear
fully deprecated in value during the
last twenty years. This fact Is not only
widely known to them who own farms,
hut it IS patent to every intelligent
man in all vocations, east, west, north
and south. There must be n reason for
this depression, and it is the honest
duty of every man to discover, If possi-
bic, that reason. Let each farmer
ask himself the following ques-
tions, and answer them to him
self with manly courage: what could
] have sold my farm for. per acre, in
1902" "What can sell it for, per acre,
to-day?" If in 1870 he could have sold
for Sl00 per acre, to-day he can not sell
at $40 per acre. If in 1870 he could
have sold for SO per acre, to-day he
can not sell for $50 per acre. These are
reasonable truthful propositions. They
show that depreciation of 80 per
cent has taken place Then let him
ask why is this SOP Is my farm less
productive than it was twenty years
ago? Is it more difficult to till?" He
would have to answer negative
ly each of these questions.
"Why, therefore, should my farm
1,e 1, trt1 t1u
was twenty years ago? Is it because 1
have a home market for my products?
A what? A home market. have not
home market. Why have l not home
market? Because we farmers raise
more than home market can consume,
and our immense surplus must go to q
foreign market. What effect has the
sale of this surplus in a foreign market
on the value of my product in the home
market? 1t fixes the valuc-that is, it
fixes the price, per bushel, on every
bushel OF grain which ] sell. If the
foreign market fixes the price of my
products in the home market, how can
it truthfully be said that have home
market? j have no home market so far as
the value of my product is concerned.
why is not the foreign market as
good as it was years ago? Is it be-
cause other countries have largely in
creased their productions? Let us eX-
anime some statistics to see if this is
that in 1890 Russia raised>o of wheat
$50, 900, 600 of bushels, and that in 1892
she raised 342, ,9G5,00O bushels, and of
this there are 81, 1893, 900 bushels of a
surplus. What kind of labor does Rus
sia use in cultivating her fields? Serf
labor. The farmer must compete with
this OF. 5000 bushels of Russian sur
plus, raised by serf labor. Here are
the statistics for India, one of the CO.
lonial possessions of Great Britain.
In 1870 India raised 9O,0OO.0OO
bushels of wheat, and in 1892 she raised
274, 900, 900 bushels, of which 1O2, 600, ,0OO
bushels are surplus. What kind OF
labor was used in the production of the
crop in India? Lower caste" who
live on FOUR CENTS per day per person.
Th farmer must compete with this
paupcr labor in the markets of the
world in the sale of every bushel of his
whether tits consumed at home. Why
are you not protected against the com.
petition of this pauper labor? Because
the farmers raise more wheat than can
be consumed by the people of the
United States. Our surplus must find
sale in foreign markets, and there il
must meetin competition the products OF
serf and 'lower cast labor. Why has
there been such large increase in the
production of wheat in India? Foreign
people, on account of the high protective
duties imposed by the government of the
United States on their manufactured
articles SO as to prohibit almost, thei,
importation into this country, have
for the investment of their capital, ant
consequently they have selected the
vast plains of India for the growing O.
wheat. When we were boys we were
taught that the principal products o
the fields of India were Indigo and rice
To-day the indigo fields have bee,
turned into wheat fields, and the ric'
swaInps have been drained SO that they
wave with golden grain.
Let the farmer take one step furthe
in the inquiry. Let him ask himself
Shave the manufacturing interests de
creased in value" The answer to tina
is-f.No. They have in twenty year
increased two hundred per cent. "Wh.
has this increase in their value oc
curred?" Because they have been tn
recipient of the fostering care Of tn
government BY high protectiv
tariff they have been protected agains
competition. Each year has added t
their immense accumulations, unit
to-day they are plethoric wit
wealth. The farmer has contribut
ed of his scanty store to tn
benefit OF each manufacturing interest
The people of Ohio during the yea
ending on the S0th of June, 1892 pal
for bounty to the manufacturers of tn
United States s135, ,OOO,O 900. The farm
ers paid their full share of this start
ling sum.
There is but one way for the farmer
to get relief and that is by the repea
of the Mckinley bill, and the enac