, 1922-08-18
absurd Democratic Argument

IN
iohDELL HULL, in his capacity as chairman o
the Democratic national ommittee, is making
campaign against the emergency or farmers tariff
In doing this he represents the Democratic part
organization. BE is in line with the attitude of III
democratic leaders in both senate and house.
The emergency or farmers -arif became a Law
May q, 1921. It was enacted by the Republica,
congress In its special session which began Apri
H. I92l- The farmers tariff bill thus enacted an,
approved by President HARDISG was the Duplication
OF u similar bill which had been passed by the Re
publican congress during the last few months O
the Wilson administration but which was yetoe,
by President WnsoS March Q, 1921. In the discus
sion or this farmers thrift bill, Mr.. HULL, then
member of the house from Tennessee, was one o
tue leaders in opposition to it. The Democrati
leadership Of the house lined up against IL. whe1
u was up for discussion in the senate practicall-
every Democratic leader opposed its passage. Man,
OF these Democratic senator's who opposed the pas
age OF the farmers tariff are from western agricuI
tural states and are now asking the farmers o
those states to support them in the coming cam
paign.
The American farmer today is able TO m asur,
he wisdom and safety of Democratic leadership b,
referring to the arguments made against the pass
age of the farmers tariff bill by CoRDELL Hull ant
other Democratic members of the house and tn,
democratic senators. They opposed the passage o.
L farmers tariff mainly upon two grounds:
a. The enactment of such a tariff would no
benefit the American farmer inasmuch as prices il
ms country for farm products and live stock mus
so they insisted) drop to the same level as tn,
prices paid elsewhere in the world.
~ The only salvation for the American farmer
was TO increase his foreign sales. BY so doing h,
would find the prices for his products returning IL
4 profitable level.
No one is better posted upon the market condi
tons than the American farmer. It Is therefor,
needless to tell him that since the enactment of tn,
farmers tariff the price of his products has not dc
Scpnded TO the level for 1iEa nroducts =, n 49,.
tries. Since the enactment of the farmers tariff
minneapolis and Kansas City have consistently pait
moro for wheat than Winnipeg; Duluth and Mime
tpolis have consistently paid more for tiaxseed thar
BuoA'os Ayres and Hull (England) Bos
ton has consistently paid more for potatoes thar
Montreal; Chicago has consistently paid more 70,
all classes of cattle than Winnipeg and Toronto;
Chicago has consistently paid more for sheep an6
lambs than Toronto and Winnipeg. So the lst
might be continued, but these illustrations are suf
dcient to prove the Democratic leaders did not know
what they were talking about when they said a pro
tective tariff for the farmer would not benefit his
farm prices.
1t needs but a citation of the record to show
that the Democratic leaders were equally wrong IL
advancing the absurd argument that the farmers
prosperity depends upon the foreign market. Thu
period of greatest exports of American farm prod
nets ever known was that of the year 1921. TIT
foreign trade bureau of the department of com
1nerce shows the American farmer in 1921 exported
i've times as much wheat as the average annual ex
port of any previous ~ive;year period in the history
Of the United States. He exported twice as mucl
wheat in1921 as he did in 1919. In 1921 he exported
three times as much corn as the annual average Of
any previous ~five-year period in the history Of
America; he exported six times as much corn as hi
did in 1918. He exported eight times as much rye
as in any previous year; IL times as much dair,
products and so per cent more meat products. II
other words, Europe in 1921 bought many time.
more farm products of America than in any pre-
vious year or any previous period of years in hel
history. This is a fact.
According, then, to the arguments of Mr.. Hull
Senator's HITCHCOCK, MCCLELLAN, REED, PoNERENl
and others, the American farmer in 1921 SHOULD
have been experiencing greater prosperity out of thu
1921 exports of his 1920 crops than he had ever
known. Instead of this, as the American farmer
and live stock grower well knows, he was getting
lower prices for the products than he had for q gen
Grafton. He was facing bankruptcy and in hundred,
of thousands of cases went "dead broke"
These cold facts completely annihilate the argu
ments advanced by Democratic leaders against thu
enactment of the farmers tariff. Furthermore
they should effectually warn American farming ant
livestock interests against believing the arguments
now being advanced by Chairman Hull and his as
sociates as to why they should be elected to con
gress in order that they may repeal the farmers
tariff.