The Cambria freeman. [volume] (Ebensburg, Pa.) 1867-1938, 1897-06-25


manning ut the present time Ill the
school of protection very many men
who Will contend and none who will
prove that the indirect protection afford
ed 10 the farmer by the tariff on man
ufactured goods is sufficient compensa-
ton TO him for the vast cost entailed
upon him III carrying the protective
tariff system upon manufactured goods
1t has become apparent to all thought
full observers, and certainly 1t Is known
10 all who have any direct connection
with the agricultural industry of the
United States, that the farmer cannot,
and the man who reads him well knows
that the farmer will not, much longer
bear this burden.
There are three remedies possible
The second remedy, and one which l,
as a believer in protection, would be
ready TO accept rather than to hold to
and vote for an inequitable bill, would
be absolute free trade, by which the
farmer might buy as cheaply as he is
compelled to sell, and that remedy this
congress will not seek TO enforce. There
remains, then, but the third-the appE-
cation of an export bounty which shall
in measure give restitution to the
farmer for the higher prices which he Is
compelled 10 pay Ill protected markets.
No proposition based upon the decla-
ration of equal protection to all the in
dustries Of the United States is com
plete, nor can there be successfully
made a contention that it Is just, unless
1t gives TO the exporter of agricultural
staples from the United States an equiv
alent benefit to that given to the manu-
facturer by the imposition of an import
duty.
a duty of % cents bushel upon
wheat is a delusiOn and snare. The
farmer of the United States gets no ben
eft from it. The imposition of duty upon
cotton, if that We're attempted, would
be of no value to the cotton producer.
The imposition of a duty ON rye Is of no
value to the farmer of the United States.
Every other protected industry has a
direct benefit from this tariff, because
where we do not produce in the United
States sufficient for our own COnsump-
tiOn and quantity considerable in ex
tent for export the import duty serves
as a means whereby the local producer
can enhance the price to the LOCAL con-
sumner.
The immediate benefit 10 the farmer
derived from the treasury of the United
States would not be all. For this com
paratively small expenditure to him he
would receive for these staples more
than 1925, coo, 900 in higher prices than
he now receives 1t is true that this
would increase the price of breadstuffs
TO the consumers i'll the cities, but un-
dor tho declaration made today
that with higher prices the people will
be more able 10 buy we will have
larger consumption of wheat and wheat
flour and other agricultural staples in
the cities of the country than we have
now at the low prices.
Mr.. Butler-Mr. President, the sena-
tor from Utah said he was III favor of
about SI3, 900, 900 export duty on wheat
at 10 cents bushel If we pay an ex-
port bounty of 10 cents a bushel, that
viii raise the price Of every bushel of
wheat, whether exported or consumed
at home, that much, will it not?
Mr.. Cannon-Certainly it will.
Mr. Butler-Then, for an investment
of 5000, 900, which the government
would pay out i'll the shape of an export
bounty, the wheat farmers of the coun-
try would get their protection of $780,
600. 600 OF SO, 600, 600, would they
not
Mr.. Cannon-They would, if there
be any truth in the protective principle.
Mr. Butler-That would be a very
good investment.
Mr. CannOn-It would be very good
investment If it were TO be made in be
l,u1 ,T. iyl,,C-yy- nv
any trust III the United States, but any
thing in behalf of the farmer Is looked
upon with scOrn and is considered a
doubtful Investment by the Legislature
of the United States
In addition, Mr. President, it is a
very poor argument, when you have
been rObbing some man for years and
he asks you for justice, to say that you
propose TO continue to rob him of more
and say that you do not know where
you are going 10 get the money with
which TO restore that which you have
unrighteously taken. 1t is the very first
duty of the congress Of the United
States to provide a bill which shall not
only be honest in its present applica-
tion, but which shall pay back some
portion of that which has been taken
from the pockets of the toilers of this
land.
L have talked with the farmers in 20
states Of the Union since last fall, and l
firmly believe that this tariff will no
longer endure than until the farmers of
the United States can have a chance to
revise 1t at the polls, if you do not give
10 them some portion of its benefits.
The farmer Is bending beneath bur
den which he cannot carry longer. He
has been the backbone of the integrity
OF the United States, but there comes in
the place of the free and independent
farmer of this country race of tenant
~ to reap servilely where he sowed
nobly, men who receive their opinions
from others instead of giving their own
independent voice at the polls and in
all their declarations to their fellow
men.
The senate of the United States can
afford to be absolutely just l believe
the amendment should be adopted
Mr.. Chandler-May L ask the senator
from Utah question?
Mr.. CannOn-Certainly.
Mr.. Chandler-I heard the senator
speak of robbery "a little while ago with
reference to the tariff Does the senator
mean that the farmer has been robbed
all these years by the tariff? Is that the
senator's argument?
Mr.. CannOn-Yes, sir, decidedly.
Mr.. Chandler-When did the senator
first think that the American tariff sys-
tenn was a robbery of the farmer?
Mr.. Cannon-Just so soon as the SEN
atOr gave sufficient attention to the sub
Ject TO understand the truth of it. / ad-
Vocated Republican tariffs as earnestly
and as faithfully in my humble way as