Clinch Valley news. [volume] (Jeffersonville, Va.) 18??-2019, 1897-06-25

Senator Cannon, OF Utah, introduced
on May rs an amendment TO the thrift
bill which In likely to make trouble for
the republican leaders. and which may
break down the whole protective sys-
tenn. The amendment favors the I.ubin
achemc OF pnying export bounties on
farm products. This scheme n now be-
ing pushed vigorously. not only by It's
author. David Lubin. but nlSo by the
grnng~rs of many states and by trades
unions and ministers. II mRIrs Its fight
inside the ranks OF protection. and has
already opened more farmers eyes to
the folly OF the system than all OF the
tariff reform work that has been done
Senator Cannon told some plain
truths when introducing this amend
ment. lie spoke In part as follows:
II was with great surprise. upon nm
examination of the measure, that
found TINT the great class OF our populn-
ton who have from the beginning not
only supported the protective tariff
purity by their votes. but have supported
the protective tariff principle by their
industry from the beginning OF It's OPP
Grafton, were in n large degree exc; uded
from any OF it's benefits. II is, saw,
to supply n very pntent omission from
tho measure as II now stands that the
amendment is proposed. and II will Toe
advocated here until "A vote shull be had
thereon.
The bill, rs it is offered to-day, affords
no protection TO agricultural staples
There Is remaining. l presume. no ad-
vocnte of the protective tariff system
who Will contend that In this bill. with
these import duties. there Is afforded
any protection or benefit of Increased
prices arising from import duties upon
any OF those commodities OF which VIC
export our surplus. nor are there re-
lmnining Mt the present time In the
school OF protection very many men
who will contend and none who will
prove that the indirect protection nf-
forded 10 the farmer by the tariff on
manufactured goods IL sufficient COM
pensation TO him for the cost entailed
upon him I'm carrying the protective
tarin system upon manufactured goods.
IL has become apparent to nll thought
ful observers. and certainly IL Is known
TO all who have any direct connection
with the agricultural Industry OF tho
United States. that the farmer cannot.
and the man who reads him we'll knows
that the farmer will not. much longer
bear this burden.
There are three remedies possible
The second remedy. and one which /.
rs believer I'm protection, would be
ready TO accept rather than TO hold TO
and vote for an inequItablc bill, would
he absolute free trade. by which the
farmer might Iouy as chcnply ns he IL
compelled To sell. and that remedy this
congress will not seek 10 enforce. There
remains, then. but the third-the ap-
pication of an export bounty which
shall In u measure give restitution to the
farmer for the higher prices which he
Is compelled 20 pay In protected mar
kets.
No proposition based upon the decla-
ration OF equal protection to all the In
dustries of the United States Is COM
plete. nor cnn there be successfully
mnde contention that il is Just, unless
u gives TO the exporter Of agricultural
staples from the United States an equiv
Alent benefit to that given 20 the mOn-
ufacturer by the imposition OF an I'M
port duty.
A duty OF IS cents - bushel upon
wheat Is q delusion and n snare. Tho
farmer OF the United States gets no ben
eft from II. The imposition Of duty
upon cotton. II that were attempted,
would be OF 40 value TO the cotton pro-
Queer. The imposition OF n duty on
rye Is OF no value 20 the farmer OF the
United States. Every other protected
Industry has direct benefit from this
tariff. because where we do not prod uce
In the United States sufficient for our
own consumption and n quantity con-
siderable In extent for export the i'm
port duty serves as a means whereby
the local producer emu enhance the price
to the local consumer.
The immediate benefit to 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 SEES. O00, 900 In higher prices than
he now receives. II Is true that this
would increase the price of breadstuff s
To the consumers In the cities, but un.
der the declaration made here to-day
that with higher prices the people will
be more able TO buy we will have q
larger consumption of " heat and wheat
-four and other agricultural staples In
the cities of the country than we have
, now at the low prices.
Mr.. Butler-Mr. President. the sen
ator from Utah said he was In favor OF
about SIS. 100000 export duty on wheat
1t ten cents bushel. II we pay ON ex.
port bounty OF ten cents bushel. that
Will raise the price of every bushel o;
wheat, whether exported or consumed
at home, that much. will IL not?
MIR. Cannon-Certainly Il win.
Mr.. Butler-Then. for an Investment
Of $l3,0OO.O00, which the government
would pay out In the shape of an export
bounty. the wheat farmers of the coun
try would get their protection Of SEQ.
100000 OF $7O.OOO. 900. would they not
| Mr.. CRnnOn-They would, II Their,
be any truth in the protective principle
! Mr.. Butler-That would be q YER,
good investment.
Mr.. Cannon-lt would be a very 0oo(
| investment If IL were 20 he made in 10