The Penn's Grove record., 1897-08-06

consequently Oh tneit putShoSAHo
we find the true explanation Of the cur
tailed demand for manufactured goods
and the true cause of industrial stagua-
ton. The gross income Of our farming
classes derived from their crops OF
wheat, corn and oats in 1891, was, as
estimated by the United States Depart
ment of Agriculture, Sl,5S2,00O,UVV, IN
1892 it was Sits, 100000, in 1874,
S905 900, 900, and in 1896 but S9S4,VVV,-
600, Such is the cause Of manutactnr-
ing depression. 1t is the shrinkage ~
the home market for manufactured
goods, not the loss Of that market to
foreign manufacturers. And THIS
shrinkage in the market has been oc-
casioned by the fall in prices for our
agricultural products, prices that are
fixed in the European markets in COM
petition with all the world, and from
such competition no tariff a protect
our farmers.
That the farmers do not suffer from
foreign competition in u " mark
cts will be made apparent by a COM
parison of these figures: Last year we
exported of breadstuffs SlS2, el4,37e
worth; we imported but s2,A36s56o; Of
provisions we exported S134, 599, SOC,
we imported but 81, 11O, 7o2; of animals
we exported S42, 019, 523 worth, we i'm
ported but 81, 7S5,o04
The new tariff protects the wool
grower and the beet sugar grower, but
i it does not extend protection, for 1t
! cannot, to the growers of our great
staple agricultural products. 1t Will
not free our planters and farmers from
the competition that they feel; 1t will
not aid them in raising prices; 1t Will
not serve to put more money in their
pockets, and thus to expand the de-
maud for manufactured goods. That
expansion may come because of crop
failures abroad; it will not come be-
cause of The tariff.
No doubt the new tariff will serve to
diminish certain lines of importations,
and make a certain increased demand
for our own products, but this inereas-
ed demand will be limited, it will not
be of q magnitude to bring, of itself,
any appreciate revival Of manufactur-
ing industry. The true revival OF
manufacturing must spring from the
broadening of the home market for
manufactured goods. That market has
shrunk in the last i've years because OF
the impoyerishment Of our farmers by
at least forty l40) per cent.
In other words, our farmers realized
forty t40) per cent. less for their crops
in 1896 than they did in 1891, and, of
course, had 40 per cent. less to spend.
That is the cause of manufacturing de-
preston. The loss of our manufactnr-
srs from foreign competition is insight
ficant compared to this loss from a
shrinkage in the home market.
That the falling off in demand for
the products Of our mills and factories
cannot rightly be attributed to an in
road of foreign goods is evidenced by
the following facts: During the fiscal
year 1892, the first full year under the
Mckinley act, we imported manufact-
ured goods to the value of S222, 55 ,533,
during the calendar year 1896, we i'm
ported manufactured goods valued at
but 5000, 677, 773. Clearly thi~givssGo
evidence of a flooding Of U markets
with foreign goods. 1t is true that
prices we're much lower in 1896 than in
1892, and that the smaller value OF
goods in 1886 represented a larger vol
ume of importations than was repre-
seated by the greater value in 1892.
But making all due allowance for this,
there is left no basis for the assertions
that manufacturing depression has
been caused BY a food Of foreign i'm.
portations.
To be more specific, for the fiscal year
1892, We imported cotton goods to the
value of SIS, 323, Sal, for the calendar
year 1896, we imported s30,s47, 95s
worth. Here is an increase in impor-
tations Of two and a half millions, but
such increase in foreign importationa
cannot be held accountable for a fall
ing off in the demand for the products
of our cotton mills by from one-third to
one.half. Two millions represent but
a fraction Of one per cent. as compared
to the value of the product of our cot
ton mills, and it is absurd to lay a fall.
ing off in the production of cotton goods
of one-third or more to such a slight in
crease of im~portations.
The same story is to be told 9f oul
wooden manufactures. We Imported
S35, 565 $40 worth during the fiscal yeal
1892, and S37, los, 1868 for the calendar
year 1896. And to such increase il
importations cannot be attributed
falling off in the demand for the pro
ducts of our wooden mills Of many folt
such amount.
OF iron and steel manufactures w
imported SIS, OPS, 103 worth in 1892
and SIS, SOC, 576 in 1896, a falling off
not an increase in importations. An(
it is further Of note that in 1896, TIL
same year in which we imported SO,
SOC, $40 of iron and steel manufactures
we exported S4s,670,21s. So ii is cleai
that it is not an increase of foreign
competition, not a flooding Of ou'
markets, but a falling off in demand
that is responsible for depression in tn
iron trade.
The same is also in large measure
true OF the silk industry, though it is
fact that the increased competition will
sl1- - +. =.