The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1896-05-30
As@sz@;;: s3@a.
G p9s!:DSpeDci1
%aaSG !. . 4,
CECIL FARMERS CLUB.
Regular May Meeting at the Residence
of Col. NOyeS, Near Port
Deposit

Cecil Farmers Club was held at "NTount
Ararat'' the picturesque home Of Col. +.
Noyes. The day was not in keeping with
the brilliancy of the festive season. vet
with all the vigor of our worthy host sun
shine within reigned supreme. At II a. m.
the president ordered the calling of the
roll, when the following gentlemen re-
sponded to their names: John Il. Bond
James II. Maxwell A. Kirk, Thos. Bond,
A. j. Michiner, G. w. Clifford, John p
Wilson, Col. +. Moves, Henry Coudon, f.
L. Duyckinck; visitors, T.. Z. Ewing, Dr.
Bromwell.
Unfinished business of the previous meet
ing was taken up, accepting the resigna-
ton of Jos. Coudou. \ resolution offered
by Col. L. Noyes was accepted and read as
follows:
When the California Republican platform
of 1894 demanded an export bounty on
farm products in order to protect agricul-
ture as much as manufacturing is now
protected by import duties, the demand
was regarded as an evidence of the eXtraor-
binary discomfort of Western farmers.
Since that time however. the evidence has
| been rapidly accommodating that this de-
mand is endorsed by farmers in every part
OF the country As essential to the Justice of
protective system. The most remarkable
instance of this is found in the resolutions
recently passed by the State Grange of
Pennsylvania. BY unanimous vote that
body propounded the following questions
to the American Tariff League and the
| Home Market Club:
| First Can tariff on imports directly or
indirectly protect the home market prices
OF agricultural staples as long as the sur
plus stock is sold for export and the export
and home price of these are the same?
Second-1f it cannot, must not this I'M
protected industry pay for the cost of pro-
lection for the unprotected industries?
Thrd-ls not such a system of protection
inJuriously unjust and inequitahle to the
producers of agricultural staples?
Fourth-Will not a bounty on the ex-
ports of agricultural staples for the protec-
ton OF their prices in tie home market be
Just and equitable so long as protection by
tariff on imports is in operation?
With the above conditions in view ctfer
the following preamble and resolutions:
WHEREAS, II being the undivided opn-
ION "t the farmers of the country, when
prices for their products are made in foreign
markets, that il is both unequal and unjust
to continue a system of taxation which
places the farmers who pay - per cent. of
the taxes state ard national, in an UNEQUAL
position with the manufacturer, who re-
ceives the full benefit of protective system
Therefore, be it
Resolved That we the Cecil Farmers
Club, now i'll session, request our Repre-
sentatives in Congress to use their influence
to secure one or both of the following CON
ditions, either a bounty on our crops raised
or protection TO the agrculturists in re-
monetizing silver, thereby compelling for
our farms, instead of buying our silver at
81 cents an ounce, to be used in Eastern
countries worth Alb cents an ounce to
supply cheap labor to raise wheat, cotton.
etc, for such nations as purchase our silver
| for said purposes. Further
Resolved, That no system of protection
beneficial to the laborer, whether on the
| farm or in the shop, can be successfully
continued when it discriminates in favor of
labor employed in manufacturing to enrich
the manufacturers, at the expense of the
farmer who is compelled to labor manufac-
turer's prices.
Mr.. John Bond said it was in the right line
and consistent If it be to the advantage
of the manufacturers to be subsidized it is
equally SO for the agIiculturist. In
country like this the diversity of eli
mate enables us to live wholly within our
borders. As it is the farmers are the prev
of all the industries of the world. England
is adopting the system set forth in the reso-
lutipH iuhN ptiilS Il NltllllUI lldIlDD NC
tates her own terms, and shall so long as
we are debtor nation.
Mr.. A. Kirk had a limited idea as to
how individuals selling in a local market
were to receive Il bounty and if so how is
the basis to be found
Mr.. Thomas Bond said the question was
an impractical one. Russia, India, Argen-
tina can produce grain much cheaper than
we can, and as England is gradually draw
ing to the line OF protection, under the free
trade issue she finds it not financially
healthy
Mr. +. Ewing said the question was an
issue between the manufacturer and the
farmer. Should it be healthy issue for
the manufacturer, it is equally Sc for the
farmer, he being equally as much of a pro.
ducer as the manufacturer. Why is it so
many OF our mills stand idle under the
fostering influence of high protective
duty? How many farmers are there in
Cecil county, one of the richest agricul-
tural sections in this country, that close
their gates without any subsidiary legisla