New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-12-24

, above Misunderstanding that the influence OF such
Endorsement would go far toward securing favor
able action upon IT in Congress. In this they
have signally failed. The four economists present
without the slightest previous conference among
themselves, set their faces like flint against the
whole scheme. This morning The Tribune cores
pendent obtained from Mr.. Nimmo the following
statement In regard to the discussion:
Yes 1t earnest and animated debate
marked throughout by perfect courtesy and per-
sonal goodwill by the debaters both sides. Mr.
Lubins proposition covers two points First, that
tariff protection is nequitaDie toward agriculture
and, second. that bounties on the exports OF the
great staples Of agriculture will correct such in
equity. The jury summoned for the consideration
of these propositions gave to both most emphatic
denial from the point of view OF every economic
and comercial consideration advanced. In the first
place the perfect equity OF the policy of protection
through duties on imports was sieadfastly main
tanned by the several economists in their various
ways of stating the subject. In showing the i'm
policy the inequity and absolute absurdty OF the
Lubin plan. ! will give you my own view Of il.
1T proposes to give bountles only to the prnci-
pal agricultural exports. viz, cotton wheat to-
bacco beef pork and other animal products How
ineuuitable this would be toward American agrcul-
ture is shown as follows: The Western and North
western States have already driven New-York farm
ers from the production Of those eXportab.e prod
ucts to non-exportable products Now. top
Of this the Western farmers would receive
enormous bounties their products while
New-York farmers would receive not cent
their non-exportab.e products and be called
upon to pay a large part of the bounties. Hay is
the chief agricultural product OF New-York 1t
exceeds in value the cotton product OF Texas But
Texas would receive enormous bounty her
cotton and Network not a cent her hay. Cali
fornia farmers would receive very large bounty
on their wheat but New-York farmers not a cent
on their hay potatoes beans or hops the annual
value of which is several times that Of the Cali
fornla wheat crop Then again. stated, the
bounty would come through some form Of taxation,
mainly out Of the pockets of those receiving no
bounty.
Notwithstanding the fact that the Western
States and the vast interior. and the Pacific Coast
have driven New-York agricuturists from the ex
portable products, yet she stands second among
the States of the Union in the value OF her annual
agricultural products. and first among the States
in the value OF products per acre. the result of
the promotion Of her home markets through pro-
tective duties on her manufacturing Industries.
THE Lubin claim to bounties agricultural prod
ucts is inspired mainly by the idea OF relieving the
agrcu.turaliss of California. But during the decade
from 1880 10 1890 California the banner State OF
agricultural progress. The value of her products
OF agriculture Increased % per cent and the value
OF her agricultural lands Increased lG per cent.
Nothing like this was realized In NewYork. Penn
syvania any other OF the Atlantic seaboard States
In grocery and frult store AT the East Califor
MIA fruit fresh and dried, and preserved is exposed
for sale and IT is coming 10y day and by night in
trainoads, but not pound OF Eastern agricul-
tural products finds its way to California, and yet
Eastern agriculturaists are called upon pay enor-
nous bounties on one Of CALIFORNIA; staple prod
ucts-wheat.
I'm various other ways the gross inequity OF the
bounty plan exposed and no answer could be
made 10 the overwhelming weight OF evidence. for
sngularly the proponents OF the l>ubn plan seemed
al. prepared 10 meet this array OF exact
and evidence OF various sorts as 10 the inequiiy
OF their plan. The whole Lubin scheme hinges
upon the inequiy of the present protective tar.n
policy Of the Republican party, although the chief
proponents OF the scheme. Mr.. Luhia himself. and
Mr.. smith Editor OF 'Seaboard pronounced
Republicans and Protec;ionists. But they were com
petely refItcd by the overwhelming fact that Amer
lean agriculture owes its present eno nous fnagni
tude 10 home markets developed by protected manu-
features % cent OF the product being marketed
In our own country
Then falling back upon the distress OF agriculture
during the last three years ana reasoning from