The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1910-12-07
WANTS DRAWBACK
LAW REPEALED
FARMER WRITES OPEN LETTER
TO M'cUMRER ASKING HIM TO
WORK TO GET LAW CHANGED
SAYS 1T WRONGS NORTHWEST
FARMERS.

c. M. Taylor of Lynchberg, N. d.
asks The Forum TO publish the fol-
lowing open letter which he has sent
to Sen. P. J. McCumber at Washing
ton:
Lynohburg, n. D., Dec. S, 1s10.--Hon
p. j. McCumber, Washington, d. c.
Dear Sir: AS this is Dec. 5, | am re-
minded that it is the opening day OF
| congress and have something to say
that wish you would repeat to every
republican in the upper and lower
houses.
You have said in one of your
speeches, The public may Just as well
begin to understand that the day of
equal justice 10 the farmers of the
country. though long delayed, is near
at hand" Now IL that is true, the
farmers of the northwest want the
drawback" law defeated as soon as
It can be done The greatest insult
ever offered the republican farmers of
the northwest was handed to them
when that law was passed. The farm
ers of the country have gone to the
polls for fifty years and voted for a
protective tariff on everything they
buy, and while we were an exporting
country of wheat, they gave them a
duty on that cereal of 25
cents per bushel. How would duty
avail the farmer so long as we had a
surplus to export? That import duty
on wheat up to four years ago was all
rot. and at that time when our crop
was rusted so badly and the big mill
ers wanted Canadian wheat, It vas
practically taken off when congress
passed the drawback" bill allowing
them to ship in Canadian wheat by
simply putting UP bond to insure the
government that at some time 90
they would ship the equivalent in -four
back. The law as / understand 1t
doesn't even provide when they shall
ship It back
Now suppose the big Minneapolis
mills had good export trade on -four,
don't you suppose they would supply
that entire trade with flour made
from Canadian wheat so long as they
could buy 1t for Is or 20 cents
less than American wheat by just
simply agreeing to ship it back. when
they intended to ship II back any
way: Every bushel of the wheat that
is shipped in under the drawback"
Law comes in direct competition with
the spring wheat that is raised in the
three northwestern solid republican
states, the states that have been for
protection or everything they buy.
Now let me tell you, the farmers OF
the northwest are going to begin to
raise h IL that law isn't repealed
and the republicans will lose everyone
Of these states two years hence to the
democrats if it isn't done at this ses-
sion, as, If it is done after the demo-
Gratis are in control they will get the
credit of rectifying a republican mis-
take And the farmers don't want
that law amended by making them put
up the cash duty with the provision
that they shall get il all back when
they ship the flour out AS, can't you
see. that they could do the same thing
by simply increasing their working
capital?" They want it repealed. The
drawback" law is plainly and surely
giving the northwestern farmers free
trade on what they have to sell, and
the rest OF the republican laws are
giving them high protection on what
they have to buy, which is entirely
out of line with the quotation from
your speech. Now anyone outside OF
an insane asylum can clearly see that
the farmers will want either one or
the other-protection on what they sell
with what they buy or free trade on
all Very respectfully,
C. Nj. Taylor.