The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1911-06-05
WANTS TO KNOW WHY FARMERS
SHOULD BE MADE THE GOAT"
N J. Noble Of Hettnge, N D. Makes Reply to an Editorial
Which Appeared in The Outlook May 20, Concern
ing the Farmers and Reciprocity

ana hasten the glad day when all ma
tions shau be truly free. But he never
proposed TO enhance the power of the
arm oy striking q deadly blow at the
neart- Nobody knew better than Nc
hinley that a nation must be great at
nome and within itself il Ii would for
moment aspire to be great abroad.
90 rar from his proposing to leave q
single one of our essential industries
without protection his plan was to raise
the tariff on even these nonessentials
from abroad until the foreign nation
producing them would adequately
compensate us for the benefits of our
markets by giving us certain rights In
theirs. Mckinley knew that a nations
power and influence 60 with her ex
ports and do not follow back on the
track of her imports, His reciprocity
was craftsmanship; this so-caIled Cam
adam reciprocity emo dispersion intend
eu) IS but a lazy mans device.
But even granting that free imports
from Canada may in some instances
be an economic gain, what reason is
that for the adoption of the agreement
III free lumber is needed, let us take
the tariff off and have It. But what
has that to do with wheat? Surely
conservation has not gone to the ex-
tent Of including buffalo grass as an
object of its carel
! fail, then, to find single national
reason why anyone of our great ma
tional industries, especially the wheat
growing industry, should be sacrificed
On the ronfrarv saa a. @h4s ,,,o.-.c...,5
agreement a very great national dan
ger. Wheat has done far more for us
as a nation than simply to feed our
people and help out our foreign trade
balance. It has in all new states fur
nished one of the earlier and easier
steps to greater agricultural prosper
ity. 1t has been, and still is, the home
steader's first aid. With limited capital
the homesteader cannot stock I'D his
free land; but he can break it UP and
SOW it to wheat and so begin his climb
up the hill of prosperity and manly
independence. To ruthlessly let the
value out of this cereal in the United
States simply because it can be pro-
duced cheaper in neighboring coun-
try to the north of us is to take from
ZIG pOOI man III IIS united states one
or his heretofore greatest opportunities
and to drive him to that foreign land.
Nor will that be the only nor, in Some
respects saddest, result. Many cannot
or will not go to the foreign land. out
Will remain in the crowded cities there
to enhance the value of eastern I'M
proved lands and at the same time to
depreciate the value of labor and thus
help to widen an already apparent gulf
between the rich and poor, the capital
list and laborer
Reform did you say? What reform
do you mean? What has been the cry
ing need for tariff changes in this coun-
try for the last half century? What
word expresses that need if not the
word monopoly? But you have not
used the word monopoly or the word
trust anywhere in your editorial. Nor
can you use such a term in any plea
to farmers asking them to renounce
their benefits under protective tariff
For the farmers never have and never
can form monopoly. So long as
agricultural lands in this country are
free to those who will work them
tariffs on agricultural imports can h ave
no other effect than to furnish honest
encouragement to a most worthy N