The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1913-02-18
AS TO GREE FOOD.

The New York Press notes a countrywide de-
mand for the abolition of duties on meats, vege-
tables, dairy products and all other foodstufs,
saying that there will be no popular objection
from any part of the country, but adding that
It is doubtful II such action win lower the cost
Of living.
To this extent the Press is right There is an
apparent demand for free" foodstuffs. and there
will be no popular objection from any part of
the country should congress meet that demand.
The two statements are synonymous. It Is also
justified In its doubt as to the practical value
of the action. Free" vegetables will not lower
the price OF vegetables for the aiisuficent rea,
son that there are no imports of vegetables and
can be none, except from Canada A reduc-
ton or abolition of the duties, therefore. will
not change the present status one fota, because
there viii be no resulting imports or threat of
imports to force reduction in the price in this
country. The same holds true OF breadstuffs
dairy products and OF many other foodstufYs. The
theory that tariff reduction will reduce prices is
based on the assumption that lower rates or abo
lition OF all duties will force the domestic pro-
Queer to lower his prices TO meet foreign COM
petition. Where there Is and under no conditions
can be any foreign competition, no results can
follow from the abolition of the duties. The
tariff wall in such conditions is a protection to
the producers against assaults that are not be-
ing made. In most cases the tariff was laid by
Republican politicians to bunco the farmer into
voting the Republican ticket
You protect the manufacturer at our ex-
pense." cried the farmer "AIl right; we will
protect you. too" comes the answer, and slap
goes a tariff on vegetables. The abolition OF
this tariff means merely putting an end to q
farce
II is when the Press gets deeper into the
question that II goes astray. Speaking of the
tariff on meats which article be imported
and will be subjected to foreign competition
should the duty be eliminated, 1t says that the
cattle industry is in precarious condition now
because profits cannot be made even at present
prices. and that should foreign products be al
lowed to come into this country at lower prices
for the time being, the cattle raising industry
would shrink still further, perhaps virtually
vanish" 1t then draws this woeful picture OF
conditions under these supposed condition:
| Nobody can suppose that in all the rest of the
world there is enough surplus beef raised to
| supply the normal demand of the American
people. If there liz to be meat enough to sup
ply the demand, the largest part of the supply
/ to meet 1t must come, it has always come.
| from this country. But cattle raising in this
country still further languishes. as 1t could not
products were rushed into this market to under
sell domestic products, then the last estate OF
/ the American people with the great cattle rails
| ing industry of the United States abandoned.
would be worse than their first.
| The fallacy here Is obvious. Even In the I'm
probable event of a decline of the domestic pro-
duction the moment foreign production became
| inadequate to meet the demand of the consumers
the former would enter upon revival. The
supply would always equal the demand at some
price. and should the tariff be lowered and for.
eign competitors force domestic cattle from the
market, the revival would begin when there was
left not enough foreign cattle to supply the mar
ket OF course, prices would rise toward their
former level. but would not reach 1t until the
foreign production failed entirely, In which case
there would be no need for protection. There
would be nothing against which the domestic
cattle industry could be protected, There would
be no foreign cattle to enter ports In com.
petition with cattle raised In this country
1t is by no means certain. however, that the
reduction of the tariff on cattle would benefit the
consumer. II II be true that cattle raisers of
this country cannot make profit, 1t Is due to
the fact that the packers force down the prices
paid for the product and not because the market
price for dressed and cured meat is not high
enough to furnish a profit, did the raisers get
their Legitimate share 1t will be seen, therefore
that the reduction of the tariff live stock will
have little effect on the price of fresh meats I'M
less at the same time steps are taken to prevent
those combinations of packers which enable them
70 force down the price they pay for stock on the
hoof The best way to deal with the high cost
o: meats is TO deal with the packers.
AS matter of fact the theory of free raw
materials is unsound, because the resulting re-
ducton In price benefits the manufacturers and
the packers, Injuries the producer and benefits
the consumer very little If any.
THE EASIEST WAY.