The record-union., 1895-11-16

The producers of agricultural staples
III our country not alone gain nothing
by indirect protection, but, on the con-
trary. they are very heavy losers by it.
This loss is so grossly unjust, so inequit
able, so oppressive, and of such great
magnitude as to be without parallel
in the economic history among civilized
or unclVlllZed nations. 1t may be sup
posed that as soon as the truth of this
injustice has been made clear, that
| there would be a prompt general effort
| on the part of our political leaders at
rectification; but the contrary is true.
| Among those who understand the
truth are to be found political leaders,
who prefer to cater to the wish of a ma
| jOrity rather than to strive unselfishlY
! for the good of the country. There *,
| there can be but one term for such
! leaders, they are traitors to the repub-
| lie. and yet, under guise of patriot
| ism, these men shout loudly for prOtec-
| ton, for protection of American in
| duStrieS against the competition of the
pauper labor of the world Under
guise of this patriotism they help per-
| petuate the most StupendOuS robbery
in the world. They help the majority
| to sacrifice the minority, to literally eat
the flesh and drink the blood of the pro-
! ducers of agricultural staples. Here
we have a spectacle of a greedy, selfish
| of this republic devouring the other
| half and that the better half, too.
But says editor Grosvenor of the
! New York Tribune, But you forget to
! take into consideration that this very
| system has been in operation in
the United States for the past thirty
years, and that these have been the
| most prosperous in its history" Ad-
mitted what then? This, that for thir-
| fNr Of rria 1t11t. .al
staples have suffered under unjust
| laws, but in spite of this, and by rea-
| sons of certain world advantages, they
| pTospered.
Chief among these advantages was
! the almost exclusive use Of agricult-
| ural machinery, cheap and fertile
| lands and better transportation, all of
| which almost gave the American pro-
| ducer of agricultural staples mOnOp-
| oily price and profit on his investment
| and labor. These advantages are his
no more, nor is it likely that they will
ever be his again. Agricultural ma
| chinery is now in the hands of the
! cheapest labor in the world, on lands
| cheaper, newer and more fertile, with
| transportation facilities and natural
| advantages, in many respects superior
| to ours. This is the new world cOndi-
| ton, it has come to stay, and this con-
| ditiOn we must now meet. The condi-
| tion which permitted prosperity in spite
Of injustice is gone, and the time has
now come when other and better and
more just methods must prevail.
Those who make light of this state
| ment or those who insist in maintain
| ing the present one-sided and unjust
| protective system, because it operated
| to their satisfaction for the past
| thirty years, must prove clearly, first,
! how a tariff on imports can protect an
export. Second, how the home market
OF such products can be indirectly pro-
tected, as long as there is a surplus for
! export, which is sold in the open mar
| ket at free trade prices Third, they
/ must prove that we are still the eXclu-
sive users of agricultural machinery,
and that we do not annually export
| about SJ0G0,OO0 worth of these for
use in the cheapest land and labor
countries Of the world. Fourth, they
must prove that there are no plants for
the manufacture and export of agri-
| cultural machinery. to the cheap land
| and labor countries in England, France,
! Germany. Austria and Belgium. Fifth,
| they must prove that there is no great
| subsidized trunk railway lines in India
| ana in other British possessions, for the
! purpose of cheap carriage of agricult-
ural staples to seaboard. Sixth they
must prove that the Suez Canal has
not shortened distance in carriage of
| agricultural staples to England. Sew
| erth that Argentine did not import
| -four and grain a few years ago; that
she did not send to England in direct
competition agaist us 6,410,045 bushels
| of wheat in 1892. II, 4,645, ,O9o in 1875, and
-. III. $50 in 1894.
That the same country did not send
to Germany in direct competition
against us 66. 1697 metric tons Of
| wheat, to our G30.2130 metric tons in
! 1892: that she did not increase the 66
! 169.7 metric tons to 6,2243, against
our 323. 491 > in 1894. And in periods OF
five years, 1896 to 1910, 1851 to 1870.
1876 to 1880 and 1891 to 1898, that
| India did not increase her cotton crop
, from 81 800 900 to 134 S00,0O0 then to
| 4O1. 400. 900. then to 491 100000. And
| that FgyDt did not in the same period
Increase her cotton crop from 30, lOO, =
! 600 TO 90 OO0.0 .0OO. then TO 26S, 100000,
then TO 449 300, 600. Seventh. they must
| prove that agricultural machinery is
rot being introduced and that rapid
! DEVELOPMENTS are not taking place in
Furopean and Asiatic Russia, or that
Russia or Argentine have reached their
limits in the placing Of available land
under cultivation, or that all these
| things have no material effect on the
/ worlds price; that if the worlds price
! as soon as we produce surplus for eX-
I
! Can these things be refuted? No. rot
one. Finding themselves beaten, inch by
/ inch on their own ground, these would
he conservative leaders take a cross cut
ont of the difficulty by braZenly claim
/ ;pg that protection does not enhance
| The price of manufactures at all, that
/ the fellow on the other side pays the
dutv. and that our manufactures are
/ cheaper than those of other countries.
4 n ha fa
J only export of mining. fisheries. manu-
/ features. forestry and miscellaneous
/ about ~ per cent, and of staple agri-
| culture - per cent, that II our manu-
! factureS were cheaper there would be
no need Of d tarff. that we would ex-
D0rt them in place Of fearing competl-
/ ton by imports, that in spite of our
/ high tariff the foreign manufacture
/ can. and does still undersell us to the
/ extent Of about 10000 600 protective
! duties. annually paid into the treasury,
which with profits Of middlemen added
thereto. is paid by the consumers Of the
country. to be ultimately repaid in total
with additions by the producers of ag-
ricultural staples.
They alone be it remembered. are the
/ only great class in our country who lay
! for protection and are themselves IN
protccted. But the enormity Of this IN
/ just BuIueH, itStlliS Oil IiiS Pi OduNCA'' "
/ AGRICULTURAL staples. is much greater
/ than is seen on the surface. Not alone
| is the duty added on imports, but the
/ usual profits Of merchants. are likewise
! added on the duty as wells as on the
! goods proper This, together, becomes
| the measure Of possible enhancement,
o. protection of home manufactures.
| To Illustrate. if the duty is so on case
! of goods. and If the profits of importer,
/ iobber and retailer be respectively 10
| per cent. % per cent, - per cent.
! (which is a general average, and, eX-
! ending staples. is conservative, the
| -. L.. III s.,-nll ahn1lf ~ fnllnNNs