The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-07-17
BRYAN and the Farmer.

The Erie Dispatch. published in dis
trict which suffers keenIy from Canad-
ian competition in certain agricultural
products, has been looking into the
facts as to Mr. Bryan's repeatedly pro-
claimed solicitudc for the American
farmer. It does not find in his short
record as a public man any evidence
that he really cares for the welfare
OF the farmer: on the contrary, it cites
formidable proof that he seems to pre-
fer the interests of foreign to domestic
agriculturalists.
AS member of the ways and means
committee which drafted the Wilson
bill, Mr.. Bryan made a special hobby
of free wool. Well. feee wool was
adopted. What was the effect? Half
of our domestic flocks had to be sent to
the butchery. Two-thirds of our wool
supply was imported. The loss to the
American farmer from free wool alone
ran up into the tens of millions.
Under the last year Of the Mckinley
tariff there Were exported from this
country 4,74o,5SS bushels OF barley.
Under Mr.. Bryan's low tariff the ex-
ports fell in one year to 1,556, 715 bushels,
loss of 100000 bushels or $150O, 600.
np hA oil ko l>o, ,1n
exports We're declining under a practi-
cal exemplfcation Of the Bryan idea
of a tariff for revenue only. the imports
of this cereal were steadily growing. In
1894 we imported only 79l O6l bushels OF
barley. In 1895. we imported 2,116, SIG
bushels. The American farmer lost
this difference. The Bryan style.of tar
if mulcted him in the case of barley
nearly s4.OO0,OOO.
Again, as the Dispatch points out,
"the imports of cattle free of duty in
1895 increased to the value Of $94,O
Those in which a reduced duty under
the Wilson bill was paid. increased in
value s653,OOO, nearly S75O.OOO of a d.
rect loss to our farmers caused by OPEN
ing wide the doors to foreign competi-
tion by Mr.. Bryan's able assistance.
The number of American cattle from
1894 to 1896 decreased 100000 head,
owing chiefly to these heavy imports.
Flour exports fell off S25,000,0O0 from
1898 to 1895. Supposing we had that?
Would not that help per capita cir.
culation? For instance in 1899, under
Mckinley prices, January /. the market
price of Nc. barley was 571s cents.
Under the Mckinley law sugar was then
worth cents a pound so that bushel
of barley would buy 14la pounds Of su-
gar. January /, 1896 under the Wilson
law barley was worth 32ls cents and
the same sugar cents a pound. Then
a bushel of barley would buy 6ls pounds
Of sugar, less than hal: what it would
in 1892"
As final illustration of the insincer-
ity of 7Ir. Bryan's solicitude for the
farmer, let us take the case of hay,
hides and hops. The Mckinley tariff
on hay was 81 ton. The Bryan idea
was 50 ton. In 1893 the domestic hay
product at Mckinley prices was worth
s570.SS2,s72. In 1895, under Bryan's
prices. it was worth only little over
S4OO, 100000. the falling Off having been
due very largely to importations from
Canada. In 1895, under the Wilson,
Bryan tariff more hides to the extent
of $4,000. 900 worth were imported than
were imported during the final year Of
the Mckinley tariff. In the matter of
hops, importations grew from S2S,022
pounds under the Mckinley idea to
3,13S, S,664 pounds under the Bryan idea,
and the price of the home product was
cut almost in half.
1t is a conservative judgment to es-
timate the total loss inflicted on Amer
ican agriculture by the recent working
of the Brya,s tariff idea at s650,0OO 900,
or in round numbers $50 per capita to
every farmer. Suppose the farmers
Of this country had this loss restored