Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1894-07-23
An APPEAL TO CONGRESS.

III OSAoil vi UuC IdLuSIlCdu ldl
GENTLEMEN: We, the undersigned,
have been appointed a committee of
the National Grange of the Patrons Of
Husbandry to urge before your hon
orable body such legislation as is
deemed by our order essential to the
prosperity Of the agricultural inter-
ests Of our country, and in attempt
ing to discharge this duty we find it
necessary to emphatically object to
some of the changes proposed in the
agricultural schedule by the so-called
Wilson Tariff bill.
When the people at the ballot box
decide any issue raised by the politi-
cal parties on general principles our
order cheerfully accepts the situation
and only insists that the policy thus
Endorsed shall be fairly carried into
effect without any discrimination
against the farmer, or any class Or
interest in our country.
When the people decided for the
Protective policy at the polls we
asked Congress that in the proposed
1CNlSIOA IO-
ceive the same consideration as did
other interests. Our demands were
respectfully and fully considered, and,
with one exception, all that we asked
was incorporated in the Tariff laws
of our country, and the farmers were
largely incidentally protected in the
American, markets and as a result real
lied better prices for hay, barley,
vegetables, potatoes, beans, live stock,
poultry, eggs, tobacco, fruits and
many other products, which were not
oppressive to those engaged in other
vocatiOnS.
In the change of the political situa-
ton of our country our farmers had
reason to believe that in the revision
of the Tariff, placing it on new ba-
sis, it would be so adjusted that du-
ties would be imposed largely on lux
uries and such products as might be
imported that would directly come in
competition with American agri
cultural products and American man
ufactures, which were essential to
give employment to American labor
and capital. In fact this was guaran-
teed in the Chicago platform of the
present party.
Had the committee reported a bill |
in strict conformity with the decision |
Of the people at the polls we should |
have nothing to say against it, but |
because the proposed legislation is
very unjust, in SO far as it pertains to
the farmers, and unfairly discrimi
mates against the interest of agri
culture by virtually abandoning the
New England, New York and coast
trade to Canada and other foreign
countries, by reason of proximity and
cheap water transportation, which in
effect bring the producers in foreign |
countries closer to these markets |
than our American farmers in the in
terror, who must transport by the
more costly methods of rail-
The great bulk of agri cultural prod
ucts imported into the United States |
from Canada and counties hey ond |
the sea are consumed in our seaboard |
tiers of the East, which should be pre-
served as market for the products
of the farmers of the United States.
Your petitioners respectfully main
tain that the difference in the cost of |
agricultural productions in the Unit
tied States and in foreign countries
should be regarded as just measure
of the duties which may be laid upon
the products of foreign agriculture
for the protection of American farm
ers. The cost Of agricultural produc-
tions, including the transportation in
the United States, exceeds the cost of
such productions in Canada, includ-
ing transportation, by A per cent.
owing to the price Of labor This is
at least 10 per cent. in excess of the
duties now imposed by law upon the
products of foreign agricultural pro-
auctions in countries beyond the sea
is even less than in Canada, owing to
the same cause.
The Wilson tariff bill as it now
stands is unjust as between the man
facturers and the farmer, who is a
producers of wool, fax and other
fibrous productions that enter into |
the manufacture of cloth. If the |
manufacturer should have free wool,
then the farmer should have free |
cloth.
We ask only for justice, that you
treat the farmer as others are treated. |
The placing of agricultural imple-
ments on the free list in compensation
for the reduction of the duty on agri
cultural products is ridiculed by ev