Birmingham state herald., 1896-09-15
WILLFUL PRIESTHOOD OR STUPID
 JGNORANCE

in attempting to defend his robber tariff,
 uses these words:
 | Tn 1892 the .eXportatrade of the United | States attained the highest point in our history. The aggregate of our exports | that year reached the immense sum of | Sl,o5O ,14S; a. sum greater by $1OO,00O,- | 900 than the exports of any previous year. ] In 1893, on account of the threat of un- | friendly tariff legislation, the total | dropped to $847 665194. Our exports of 1 domestic merchandise decreased $189,- | 0O0,000; but reciprocity still secured us a | large trade with Central and South | America, and larger trade with the West ln9ies than we had ever before | enjoyed.
 Reciprocity" is MT. Blaine's name for free trade-nofhing else.
 When Mckinley speaks of the years | 1892 and 1S9S he talks of the years ending | on June 30, 1892. or 1893, as the case may | be; that is from June 30, 1891, to June 30, | 1892, is his .4'1S92, and 1893 is the twelve 1 mouths following June 3O 1892. Let it be l constantly borne in mind that the robber | tariff was in full force as law from Oc- tober G. 1890, up to and after August, 1894, covering and overlapping by more than year after them both the years he mentions and compares The present
 
 September l, 1894, and did not become fully operative until some time later.
 MeKinley's figures as to imports, given above, are only partly correct: yet they contain the only element of truth in his statement.
 Manifestly he intends to claim that the increase in our exports for 1S91-92 was due to the operation of his tariff of 1890; and he asserts that the decrease in our exports in 1892-93 was lon account of the threat of unfriendly tariff legislation" Harrison, in his message, December, 1891, says the agricultural products of the country in 1891-92 exceeded those of 1S90-91 in volume by $70o, 100000. and were the greatest We had ever known--an ex- cess due to Gods bounty and our peo- ples industry, and nothing else,
 The figures we use hereafter as data are to be found in the United States statistical abstract, published by the gov ernment for 1894, on pages 7S 157, 367, 2S4 and 2S5, which any one may verify for himself.
 The total decrease in our exports for the year 1892-93 below those for 1S91-92 was not $1S9, 1000, 900, as MT. Mckinley states. It was..as any one may find for himself, exactly 182,612, ,954, more than sc 100000 less than he says; but such a discrepancy as this is a mere trifie to him. All this decrease and more fell on our exports of agricultural products. These for the year ending June 30, 1892, amounted to $799 1928, ,232; in the year end ing June 30, 1S93 to $6l5, ,3S2, ,9S6 thus showing a decrease in exports of these products of $183, ,945, ,246. This means that in all other items of export there was an aggregate increase in the year ending June 30, 1S93 of $1,332, ,292, for the loss in exports of agricultural products exceeds the whole loss in exports just that much.
 Let us now see if we cannot find causes for this enormous decrease in one class of exports, while there was none in all others, a. little more truthful and substan- tial than the threat of unffiendly tariff legisla tion."
 In round numbers the cotton crop of the year ending June 30, 1892, was $685. 900 bales weighing 45OO, 900, ,OOO pounds, and worth $31s, GOO. For the year end ing June 30, 1893, the crop was 6700, ,O0O bales weighing S,350.000,00O pounds, and worth $26S, 100000. Here is loss in our
 
 GOO 000 pounds and $i5, ,0OO, 900 in value. The wheat crop of 1S91-S2 was 611OOO O0O bushels; in 1S92-93 it was 515000,000 bush els, a decrease in quantity of 96,000000 bushels and in total value $109, ,000 000 The corn crop fell off in 1S92-93 from that in 1S91-92 432, 100000 bushels, and in total value s194, ,000, 900. The oat crop of 1S92-93 decreased from that Of 1S91-92 77000000 bushels. and in money value more than $21 100000. Here we have in these four crops alone a decreased production in quantity of 2,335, 900 bales of cotton 96,- 0000 bushels of wheat 432, 900 900 bush els of corn and 77,000,000 bushels of cats, and in exportable values $S69, 900, 900. The figures published in the abstract do not enable us to compare other crops for those years; if they did the same propor- donate decrease would probably appear in them, This decrease in production | and of course in exportable surplus-is more than double the actual decrease in | exports (of nearly $1S40O00 000) and fully l accounts for it. It was no threat of un-- l friendly legislation" that caused that de- | crease, for there was nothing of the sort 1 but it was the stubborn and conclusive | fact that our people did not make and | have the values to export in 1S92-93 that | they had in 1S91-92. and of course they | could not export them.
 | But there is more than this still to be said. In 1S9192 the food crops of nearly all Europe were cut extremely short Tn Russia espeeially-our great competitor in the grain markets of the east-the fail ure was terrible. Famine and starvation reigned over an area of 475.000 square miles and in the homes of 30.oo00J0 of people. The export of grain from Russia was prohibited, and we had little compe- tition in European markets. We actually l shipped numerous cargoes of breadstuffs | as gifts to the starving subjects of the | czar, and we received full prices for all | We had to sell. In 1S929S this famine and | dea1Fh was mercifully abated; our own l food crops were not so abundant; the | world had to buy less, and we had less to | sell; the values of all things, our food products included, were then going down | under the stifling grip of the gold stand-