Warren sheaf., 1900-10-11

How How IT IT HAS BEEN nROUGHT ABOUT
BY TIE URLICAN POLICY
or I'ROTEcIYON.s s#
STATISTICS m EVIDENCE
Every Article Produced by the
/ Farmer Is sFavornbly Affected
by Protective Legislation.

l$ FArmer As FAvOrlbly5 Affected
by Protective eLegislation.
The farmer has shared with the busi-z
ness man, the manufacturer and his
lWorkmen, the railways and their em-
ployes, and the various classes Of our
lowing the return TO the tariff policy OF
| protection. His markets have Increased
both at home and abroad, and with this
increase have come advanced prices for
what he sells and advanced value OF
that which he retains. Not only do the
figures Of exports show a marked in
crease in the receipts from abroad, but
in the home market, by far the most
important to the farmer, prices have
advanced, consumption and demand in
creased, and with these has come pros
perity to this greatest class Of produc-
ers. % = E. l&fts s@i 4 5gt s4:ai
On all farm products the rate Of duty
was reduced by the Wilson tariff, and
in most cases that Of the Mckinley tar
If was restored by the Dingley tariff.
This Increase has had its effect in
checking the importation of manufac-
tured articles Of farm production, and
thus has saved to the farmers a share
|of the home market.
! Decreased Importation of. Farm
/ # Products. ss: s w
| y There was marked decrease In the
importation Of farm products immedi-
lately following the re peal Of the Wilson
law, which occurred In July, 1897. the
imports of the year ending June 80,
1897, having thus come entirely under
the Wilson act. The total imports Of
agricultural products, as classified by
the Department of Agriculture, were, in
the fiscal year 1897, $40O, ,S71 1853; in 1898,
under the Dingley law, they dropped to
1914. .291. .796. and in 1889 were $685., ,514, $751;
/ This gives an average reduction Of over
$50, 100000 q year in agricultural i'm
ports in 1898 and 1899, as compared with
1897. 'ss .s. Il
i A Lesson From Eggs.
Many single incidents might be cited
l to show the reduction in individual
classes of articles; but as single ex-
ample will be all that is required for
this purpose, the comparatively unim-
portant item of eggs is selected. Fig
ures Of the Bureau. of Statistics show
that prior to the enactment Of the Nc
i Kinley law, which placed duty upon
eggs entering into the United States
from abroad, the value Of the importa-
tipns ranged from two million to two
and a half million dollars per annum,
being, In the year 1899, $2,41S,926, and IN
the year 1890, $2,O74,912. Immediately
year 1894, the last year of the Mckinley
law, amounted to only $199, ,536, or about
10 per cent of the average in the years
preceding its enactment 4sv&
The Wilson law however, reduced the
duty on eggs from cents to 3 cents per
dozen. and in 1895. the first year Of its
IOperation. the importations increased to
$324,133 in value, following the general
! depression In 1896-1897 The Dingley
law restored the rate Of duty to cents
per dozen. and in 1898 the value of i'm
portations again dropped to $S,O7S, and
in the fiscal year Of 1900 averaged
4 about $1,700 per month, or a trif1e over
4 $4,000 per year, as against an average
of over $2,0O0,OO0 per annum before a
duty was placed against this article OF
\ foreign production. This clearly shows
that protection keeps the home market
& for the American farmer.
The Home Market Under Protection
Prior to the election of 1892, and the
4 depression which Immediately followed
1t, the amount of wheat retained for
consumption in the United States was
{fabout six bushels per capita On some
occasions it exceeded that figure being
in 1888 and 1885, more than six and one.
half bushels per capita, and seldom fall
ing below five and one half bushels In
the year 1898, however, during the de-
I preston which Immediately followed
the election Of a Democratic presiden,
land a freertrade congress, the per CAPT
Y ta wheat consumption fell to 4S5 bush.
8 els, in 1894, to BAL bushels, and in 1897
was 1888 bushels. Immediately follow
ing the repeal Of the Wilson tariff there
was q marked increase in the per capi.
4 ia consumption, and in 1899 it had again
about reached its nomal figure, being
for that year, sos bushels per capita.
Il Another example may be found In the
1amount Of cotton retained for consump
4 tion under protective and low tariffs,
respectively. In the years 1891 and 1892
the amount Of domestic cotton retained
q for consumption was, respectively, %
4 and "a pounds per capita. while in 1893
j lit fell to ~ pounds per capita IN 1894
4 1t was 16 pounds, and In 1896 and 1897,
4 1S2 21-2 pounds, increasing, however, in
\ 1895, under protection. to 25.2 pounds,
and in 1899 to 21.7 pounds or so per cent
more than the average during the en-
tire Democratic free trade term from
1893 to 1885,.
sheep and Wool Values Reduced.
Take the, single n item Of wool The
j Wilson law gave the country in the
item Of wool an example Of the effect
OF genuine, Simon pure Democratic free
trade. It was, to the free trade mind,
the one redeeming feature Of that act,
II whose feeblA affempf AT rot ininr q