The farmers' union. (Memphis, Mo.) 1891-1895, 1894-02-01
COME HOME TO BOOST.
HOLDERS OF BONDS GET THEIR
OWN MEDICINE.
What Has the Old "t;iye-l S-a 4 hance"
Party Done for the Relief Of the PeO-
pIe-U nabie to Muster Quorum in the
House.
Great Defaults In Interest.

NOEcOniOrmlst: Those brilliant econ
omists down in the Eastern States,
who wanted an "honcst" dollar so bad
ly, during the months Of August, Sep
TENDER. and October, got lesson in
the elementary principles of that Sci
ence Oh the LIST of January that will
probably set them to thinking once i'll
their lives, and after they have thought
Il while, they may perhaps come TO the
conclusion that the Populists are not
such a set OF idiots as the great dailies
declare them to lie. On the LIST of Jan
uary interest became due in New York
on bones and stocks to the total face
value OF -, 495. l35, Gi7. There should
have been paid in interest to the hold
ers SI49, 7OS, 1902, but on account of
failures and bankruptcies of railroads
and other industrial enterprises, the
actual payments were only $40. S24, 800.
1t seems that the dollar has grown
to be SO honest" that abou, six
enths OF them did not get any dollar
ut ALL This did not affect the lckel-
heimer ring. They don't invest i'll
that kind Of securities. They leave
them to the Gentl'es. Their invest
ments are in national, state, county,
and municipal bonds. on which the
Government collects the interest and
hands it over to them. They have
nothing which is not made good by
"ti,c power of taxation" The true
state of affairs is beginning to perco-
late through the thick skulls OF some
Of our Congressman and they are not
talking so much about the llnacy of
the Populists us they did six months
ago.
Poor Dis: rcs,ca Banks.
Carlisle recommends that the tax on
national banks be reduced to one
quarter OF per cent. How badly
these distressed banks need this relief
is shown by their january statement
after year OF financial distress. The
Chemical National Bank of New York
declared bi-monthly dividend Of %
per cent. This poor, dis ressed con-
Germ could only make, in these bad
times, 100 per cent. per annum on its
Investment, and it needs relief from
taxation.
The First National of New York de-
clarcd % per cent. 1t is in hard lines,
too. Bankers should have more than
100 per cent. per annum on their in
vcstment. and that is all the First Ma
tional could make. Let the tax be re-
duced right away. These two banks,
ana eiShty-seven others in New York
City, all of them in the Ickelheimer
ring, are the ones that send the lObbies
down here to have their circulation cx-
tended to the par value OF their bonds
and their taxes reduced. Carlisle and
Voorhees, back them up. and the DEM
Ocratic party has n chance
Besides the banks of New York,
which are suffering under the l per
cent. tax and ought to have it reduced
to three fourths. are some Of the banks
in Pittsburg, Boston, and Philadel
phia. There is the Farmers Deposit
National Bank of Pittsburg. for in
stance. TIE stock is only worth 5S221
on TIE dollar, the Bunker Hill Ma
tional of Boston only brings 2O2s. the
Eighth National of Philadelphia 800.
and SO on. Of course these poverty
stricken concerns ought not to be
forced to pay per cent. when pros
perous farmers are only taxed about )
per cent.
"t:ivc Is II Chancc.''
Do any of my readers remember Il
a campaign about two years ago in
which the issue was tariff reform?
Did or did not 10000 Democratic or
atOrs uisclaim to us old farmers for
hours at time on the horrors Of tn,
"robber TARIFF" Did they all say that
ii We would only give them II chance"
they would abolish that horrible tariff
iistanter. and as soon as they got to
Washington? Did they not all say
with one accord that the money aues-
ton was not an issue. but tina, the
tariff war? 1t is my recollection that
they all. without one exception. did
say those things. Notwithstanding
they said the money question was not
an ISSUE, the first thing they did was
to call an extra session for the sole
purI ose of legislating about money.
i.eccn;ly they made feint OF intro
ducing tariff bill. 1t was not a
tariff for revenue" bill such as they
had promised 1t was very high
protective tariff bill. but did not give
quite as much protection to iron and
coal rs some of these tariff reformers
thought they ought to have What
was the result of this terrible on
<slaught on the "robber tariff" Al
though the Democrats have ninety
two majority in the House. they
could not get enough of these old
time tariff reformers to stand up and
be counted to make a quorum. How
do YOU old fellows feel now who voted
to give them n chance?" Didn't the
popul;s,s tell you the truth about
them? Do you feel like giving them
another chance?
For four days the House did nothing
but call the roll in vain effort to get
enough Democratic tariff reformers to
answer TO their names to begin work
on the tariff bill. The wouldn't
answer They were there in the Cap
itol but they wouldn't answer. know
they were there for in conjunction with
some other newspaper men I counted
them. Are not they pretty set of re-