The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1911-06-08
THE FARMERS FREE LIST BILL
BY Frank Is Lord N The National
Monthly

A~a legislative companion piece"
lr the Canadian r"riprurl! lu"a--
are. thr House Of Representatives
las pissed III" Farmers Ere" List
hiIi carrying rcIloi To millions OF
American consumers and bringing
sorrow only To- muuopuli~lIc inter
"St~ and those who either directly
rr indirectly represent th"m.
With the exception ui ia" OIL iu
larry into effect the Canadian pact,
"u partisan measure which has Zee
r"iN,d th" sanction either Of the
senate or House M recent years,
has been accorded greater degree"
uf popularity than this one, having
for il purpose the hcstUwal OF sim
pi" Justice upon 80 large body Of
Nh" American people. Not only ana
u command tn" support of III" solid
Democratic majority, hut II also
lad the cudoI ~"mcnt Of lw"ntE-iuur
pth"rs who call Themselves R"puh-
Loans. That the mrasuI" VIII CON
'Iuuo To- grow IN public favor a~ It's
provisions h"cum" NOR" widely
known aud appreciated, r. III" best
judgement Of thus" WIN w"r' lus;ru-
mental In shaping It and giving II
safe conduct through ~" lower
branch uf Congress.
Two fold are ,hc rhrrf purposes
of the 'udrTwuud Farmers Free"
List bill Tn" one I> tn" removal
of the tariff duties from thuSg i'm
plrIucuts of trade necessary To- tn"
lgriculturist in the production of
his crops, which 20 To nuke up 81"
large part of our foreign com
rn"rrc, the other ~ Tia" reduction IN
the cost Of living to III" masses ct
the consuming population by put
ling upon the fire." list their prinri-
pal articles OF food.
Strange A~ II may ~""W, "a meas
ARE having such lHudahI" aims met
with opposition, hut It was opposI-
'iuu from SQUIRE" which could be-
easily anticipated. II cam" alone
from tn" Republican sid" Of the
chamber. But since II was lu"ilrr-
tN, and consisted mainly iu lrrhul-
cal objections rUUChcd IN thread
bare Ulalltudr~ aud supported hE
'rIi" arguments ana theories long
sine" exploded, II ~ 81 NOR" Impur-
taur,' Ia consider the merits of th"
measure than 10 dwell upon th"
lam" excuse. offered by tho>" who
uuttguuizrd &c.
When the Democratic members of
en-" Ways and Means Committee
drafted and reported the free" list
bill they were fully rugnIlHut that
IT'S enactment meant e loss annual
~ of $40, O0O, 900 IN r"vrnu" to ia"
Federal treasury, bat they also liz
urrd upon tn" infinitely greater cor
responding benefits which would ac-
rruc to the public As II matter Of
fact upon the bash uf importation
of those articles affected 10y the
measure, during recent years under
the Diuglcy bill and under tn"
PAYNE Aldrich bill, aud considering |
m" remission ui some million and IA
half dollars in revenue by reason Ut
the Canadian reciprocity agreement, .
wherein like articles are included In
jh- two measures, the loss in Gus
toms will not exceed ~, 800 900. The
omission of one Drcadnaught in the
naval building program Of ON" year,
which by tn" way the Democrats /
purpos" doing, will more than offset |
this apparent loss in rcvenu" by tn" |
passage Of the free list bill.
Would the American people pre-
ter To- have another hattlcship added |
to our already tup.heavy navy or |
The elimination of the taxes upon |
the necessities of life and the impl"- T.
mcut- Of their labor?
Consider the enormous value of |
the product in one year of the ar |
ticlos enumerated by III" ire" list |
bill
Agricultural implc nrnts U..-U, uUU /
BngginE tor cotton. suck, ana
hurlup- 2u,u'l .rh I
cotton ties. hoops aud baud
non l!,r." mo
Leather. boot, ana SHOES, har
ness ANA suhuluIN ..--.- itF. tuu. uuH +
Barnrd wire ana other fence
wire IJ, 0g5 .oU1 |
FRESH and preserved meats nj ~ Uu /
Flour, cereals ana 80 forth ~ ,U8t $40 !
Lumber Iath~ ana shingles hsu ,U2! ,uOn /
SEWING machines 20 Nh",uu /
t!,,-l ,gtb, 90 /
II the consumers of the country |
save only ton per cent upon this /
gross expenditure for these articles /
each year, they will benefit to the |
extent of nearly 500, 900 900, an
amount which liz mt present going |
aulo the COItIt Ol lne tTHhIS, -hlnct ,
almost every article enumerated is
to greater or less degree con
trolled by amonopOly,-as surplus
profit over and above what would |
he enjoyed under fair and honest
competition
The tariff duties under the Payne
Aldrich law have all but made the
importation Of these articles prOhib.
tive. Those duties are:
On salt, eleven cents per one hun
drcd pounds
ON agricultural implements, av-
"rag" tifteen per cent nd valorcm.
On bagging, sacks, burlap, 0.G
cents per square yard.
On cotton ties, hoops and band
iron, O.3 cents per pound.
On leather, boots and shoes, har-
ness and saddlery, ten per cent nd
yalOrem and up.
On harbed wire and fencing wire,
,hree-fourths of cent II pound.
ON fresh and preserved meats,
one and one-half cents per pound.
On bacon and ham, four cents per
pound.
On flour, cereals aud 80 forth,
twenty-five per cent ad valorem and
up.
on lumber, $I.2j per thousand
'eet.
On iotha twanfv cpnta upr thuu-