The herald., 1897-06-09
g''g'.E
+ SENATOR ClNNOU'S EXPORT I
& BOUNTY FOR farmers !
.ttFtJ'.5s.ss.a''g'.t.et .ss't'5@5

senator cannon OF Otdn oueEeu tNo Aos-
lowing as an amendment to the tarin bill:
From and after sixty days from the pas
sage OF this act there shall be paid out OF
any moneys in the treasury not otherwise
appropriated to any exporter OF wheat or
wheat flour. rye or rye flour, corn (ground
or unground) cotton, hops or tobacco pro-
duced wholly in the United States and ex-
ported by sea from any port In the United
States to any port of any other country,
equalization to agriculture Of the benefits
Of this act and to encourage the industries
Of the United States. to wit: Ten cents
per bushel on wheat: so cents per barrel on
wheat flour; 10 cents per bushel on rye; 50
cents per barrel on rye -four; cents per
bushel on corn; 10 cents per GENITAL on corn.
ground; cent per pound on cotton; cents
per pound on hops: 2 cents per pound on
tobacco.
This is the first time that legislative
effort has been made in Congress to re-
lieve farmers from the unjust taxation
imposed on them by the policy of a high
protective tariff. All Intelligent pro-
ducers from the soil recognize their duty
to pay taxes for the support of the gov
ernment, but all of our tariff legislation
in the past, except the Wilson bill. - s
made revenue only a secondary consid
Grafton. while the animus pervading
the Mckinley bill, as we'll as the House
bin and the Senate bill. is to enrich
manufacturing corporations and trusts
at the expense of the tillers of the SOIL
This is not a new idea with the protec-
tionists, as 1t was boldly charged against
them as far back as 1928, when the Hon.
Mr.. Drayton moved an amendment to
the bill then before Congress as follows:
IAN act to increase the duties upon GER
tain imports for the purpose of increas-
ing the profits of certain manufacture
ers" This amendment was voted down.
as the high protectionists were then, as
now, in the saddle, yet it expressed
clearly the intent of the Republicans
now in Congress
Until the introduction of Senator Can
mons amendment it had been thought
that the farmers could not be protected
by any kind of legislation. The producte
of the soil furnish three-fourths of our
export trade and consequently pay for
three-fourths of our imports. While the
statistics are not entirely accurate as tc
the number of person, directly or indi-
rectly engaged in tilling the soil, yet it is
safe to say that they represent three
fourths of our population. Mr. Can
mons amendment is simply revival o
the question of bounties. If it was con-
stitutional to give to growers of sugar
two cents pound on their product
would it not be just as constitutional tc
give a bounty to the farmers of the Yves,
on their wheat and corn and a bounty
to the cotton growers of the South on
their cotton?
While am opposed to the bounty sys-
tenn because 1 believe it contrary to the
genius of our government, yet am will
ing to accept it as means by which all
the surplus, coming into the treasury
by virtue of high protection. can be die
tributed among the farmers of the
country. The government does not need
a dollar above her legitimate expenses
and surplus would only whet the ap-
petite of the political cormonants who
live on the treasury.
Senator Aldrich in his opening
speech on the tariff, admits that the
House bill will in normal years bring in
a revenue of 1859, 1O5, 900, an increase OF
$113,479,973 over 1896. The would give
a surplus of fifty to seventy-five millions
annually. after paying the expenses of
the government.
Whence comes this surplus and to
whom does it belong? 1t is the booty
obtained by legal robbery under a
high tariff, and is held in trust by the
government for thoee who are forced to
pay it, by operation of an unjust and
tyrannical law.
Under the operation of Senator Can
mons amendment. should it ever become
law, the bounty proposed, based on our
exports for 1884, an average year, would
he a G fOlOwS.