The record-union., 1895-02-16

/
vania Stale Grange and q member of the tx
ecuttve Committee OF the National Grange,
! Here permit me to quote the first few por-
agraphS of his remarks
! "Mr. Chairman and gen tlemen of the COM
mlttee: The resolution before your committee
| calls for a remedy for the depressed condition
! OF agriculture, and for the removal of the in
CAPABILITIES that exist in our country between
I the relative value of agricultural staples and
manufactures as caused by legislation and
| the present policy Of the Government Learn
Ing that such resolution had been intro
duced, and that q hearing would be had be-
! lore your committee, came here under the
direction of the National Grange to listen,
! ana, II called upon, to take part in the dis
! cussion. This question has been fully dis
! cussed by the National Grange, especially at
! Its last convention at Springfield, H., and
! special attention was paid to q proposition
! presented by Mr.. Lubln of California for
! Government bounty on the exports of agri-
! cultural staples u q means of equalizng tax
atlon, and the relative values between staple
agriculture and manufactures. Mr..
LuDin mas TO my mind properly traced many
OF the causes Of agricultural depression to the
efforts Of England, and the remedy which he
/ proposes, namely, bounty on agricultural
eNpoI Is, is not new proposition to me or TO
the National Grange. About four years ago
the National Grange had this matter under
consideration and reported 1ayorably upon
the same
When we come to staple agriculture, 1t is
impossible to build up its price b. reason Of
factories alongside the ranch; the product as
soon as there is a surplus Will sell ut the price
at which it will bring in Liverpool less the
cost OF transportation to liverpool, even
When IL is consumed within q mile OF where
1t was grown.
What will an export bounty do? This
proposition declares the Government has
flghI IN equity 10 assess the people justly for
Government expenses, but, if in addition to
running the Government, il desires TO be q
great father and become paternal, and ii it
desires to lift up wages and commodities by
tariff revenue when it collects this money it
| should use 1t to hit up the wages and COM
moditieS OF all the industries and not of one
ha1 alone, because To increase the price of
wages and commodities for one-attlt and not
Tor the other half of the nation, is to compel
the unprotected half TO pay for the enhance
ment OF the protected half, which is an ill.,
justice. Some OF you gentlemen hear this
probably for the first time tonight. You are
not done with ii until you hear il many times
more. ana the pioneers in this great work
they viii be remembered.
This proposition has been spoken OF To u
great many people. and it fell like water from
Il ducks back-no effect. But the pioneers are
ready for 1T. There is one here, one there and
our great nation is built up rom the lew, and
the rest are simply used TO I'LL in.
\ QUESTION OF EQUITY.
In this proposition the question is one of
equity. The Government has no right in
equity to use u dollar OF this one-sided pro-
tectIon money for Government expenses. If
it desirer TO be paternaI to artiicialiy enhance
something, then ii ~ ust raise the other thing.
How can this be done? 1t raises manufactures
by having this protection wall, and the duty
same enhancement be had for staple agricult-
ure? Why will this not work here, as we'll as
with anuiactures? Because staple agricult-
ure IS an export, and not an import. There
are only two ways by which this protection
wall viii work tor all American interests, and
one is for Us TO annex England to the United
States. Then this protection wall Will work
spleudidly; we could then have the tariff on
the other side for the wheat, corn and cotton,
and tobacco, and also the tariu on this side
1of manufactures
The other way is to take the moneys. col
lected here as tines or duties and pay them
out on the exports of agricultural staples in
the form OF DOuntleS. " hat will the bounty
do? Ten cents bounty on bushel Of wheat
for export-What will lie its effect? Why"
say some, that is easy enough TO tell. The
Spectator Will get the 10 cents and that is
the end Of it." This is not true. The specula-
tor would get it ii it were not for the tariff
But now the tariff is going TO work. Twenty
i've cents bushel TO bring in wheat, 10 cents
a Uushel to take 1t out. 1 am miller, and
our TRENT here is the export buyer who buys
for Liverpool; he wants TO make that 10 cents
very badly, but it Will cost 20 cents to get
that wheat in over the tariff wall. We 90 to
the fight in the wheat pitt is worth as
much to me as 1t is to him, and the result is
that the product comes up to the worlds
price with the full measure of the bounty
added
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN EXPORT AND
PRODUCTION BOUNTY.
There is distinction in bounties which I
would like to make very plain. \ Gu have all
heard Of the bounty on sugar, which has been
repealed recently. Now, the bounty on sugar
IS a bounty on production. That means
every pound raised is given bounty. but this
is not true with the bounty on exports j
bounty on exports works this way: If this
We're TO be a bounty on the production of agri-
cultural staples, neither the United States.
England, Ireland, France and Germany put
together would have money enough to pay
the enhanced prices OF these staples.
But the proposed bounty is not on produc-
ton, but only on the quantity exported
which would enhance not alone the exports,
but the greater quantity consumed at home
also.
THE EFFECT OF THE EXPORT BOUNTY.
Thus. if the Government would nav out a
bounty OF S&O,000,0OO, it would bring the
growers OF all the wheat raised n the United
States $50 100000 provided that we export
OF our wheat product. That is the ratio In
other words, if The entire production of wheat
in this country is 100000 bushels. and
the exports are 2oO,0U0,0U0, u bounty OF ten
cents per bushel would cost the Government
100000, 1000. But the price OF the whole
GOO,OOO,OOO bushels would be raised ten
cents for each bushel, and the wheat-grOwers /
OF the country would receive S6O,OOO,OOO /
more than they would without the bounty !
This IS protection to staple agriculture such |
different method.
The question is, is that true? Until some
five or six weeks ago l really and honestly |
beiIeVed was the dlscOyerer OF this PROPOSE |
ton. short time ago William II. Mills of !
San Francisco wrote me a letter that he q few /
years ago, had sent q letter to the late senator /
Stanford, showing that il would be a splendid /
thing to extend the protective system 10 !
staple agriculture. Consequently l thought !
surely, Mr.. Mills had the priority. Bur, /
upon reading up Adam smith, found that |
the same principle advocated here was in I
operation in England long before Mr. Mills or 1
l was born, and for the very same reason. /
Why? Because there was time in the his /
tory of England when they had a surplus of /
what they call corn" Then they had a high /
protective tariff on manufactures; they al /
lowed no manufactures TO come in except |
as IN our case, over q high tariff wall. What |
did they do? They realized that if thev had /
simply protection TO manufacture, and a sur /
plus of agricultural products, and no protec- (
ton to agriculture that agricultural products /
would pay for the protection to manufacture /
and they did not want that 50 they took /
the money, or portion OF 1t, that came in /
by protection and paid 1t over an export /
bounty on agricultural staples, and protected
agriculture and manufacture precisely the !
same as am advocating now.
Then said Adam Smith. whom YOU all t
know was the nrSt free trader, this bounty /
on exports is bad: II IS Dad tor two reasons. !
In the hrst place. 1t is tax paid out by the /
Government on the export and in the next |
place there IS the proportional enhancement
that takes place on the greater quantity Tor |
home Use, which the people have to pay.
This is what he objected to, and this is ex- |
actly what l am IN favor Of-the very point, /
Why? Because IT viii give staple agriculture /
the same measure of protection that is given
TO manufacture. Therefore, by this export I
bounty, justice Will be done to both great in [
terests. Anything less than that is Injustice
Why should our agriculture bid against the |
world and our manufacture not?
y TYPICAL PROTECTION SPEECH.
The regulation protection speech, as I have
heard it,~runs about this way: "FelloW-citi- 1
zens, our party stands for protection, protec- /
uon to American industries against the com /
petition OF the pauper labor Of the world /
and there is generally applause.
Now, there is not single word Of truth in |
American industry?' "0h, yes. And
shoes?' "Oh, yes" 'And hats ~ ''Oh, yes.'