Democratic Sentinel, Volume 11, Number 17, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 27 May 1887 — TARIFF AND THE FARMER. [ARTICLE]

TARIFF AND THE FARMER.

How It Affects the Agricultural Interests. Hon. Frank H. H uni Tells New Jersey Husbandmen of the Discriminations Against Them anti Their Urethren. I remember the time when this country shipped millions of bushels of grain annually to Canada. Firms in the city where I live grew rich out of the traffic. Now that trade is stopped, and little or nothing of our farm products goes to Canada. This because of a duty of 25 cents per bnsbel on American wheat and a high rate on other grains, imposed and defended upon the doctrine of retailiation alone. Treaties have been pending in the Senate between this country and Mexico and Spain, by the prov isions of which an approximation of reciprocity was proposed, showing that those two countries are ready to relax their high duties against our products if we will consent to the relaxa’ion of ours. The prohibition of the importation of American pork by Germany and France into those countries, while ostensibly based upon sanitary reasons, had its real origin in a desire to retaliate on account of our tariff. The recent increase of duty in France on American wheat to 16 cents a bushel is retaliatory. Recent advices from that conntry indicate that the Government has accepted the proposition to increase the rate to 25 cents a bushel. I have been told that the people of the provinces have leen excited to a high degree against us by the mere reading to them of our tariff rates against French goods. I believe that the duties of Mexico, Canada, South America, Spain, Portugal, Germany, and France against our agricultural products, would bo willingly reduced if we would only enter into treaties of reciprocity with them. Wbat a joyful event if the American farmers could add to their purchasers the 100,000,000 of people of those countries. It would restore the price of grain, increase our commerce and give relief to a great industry burdened now everywhere to a condition of the deepest depression. The only obstacle in the way of the extension of such a system of reciprocity is the unreasonable and extortionate demands of the advocates of protection. How long shall agriculture bear this burden without complaining? When shall this giant realize the bonds which bind it? In the hour of its awakened strength may it deal justly with those who have so long dealt out injustice to it. But, again, the chief nation with which wo trade which has not retaliated has sought markets for her grain among people who are willing to trade with her people. The most remarkable fact in recent history is the growth of wheat production in India.

A few years ago India had a protective tariff, placing nigh duties upon the products of Great Britain as well as other countries. The Marquis of Ripon was appointed Governor General with a view of bringing about an abrogation of these tariff rates. It was not long until this was done, and the markets of India were opened to the products of the world. Then began the development of the production of wheat. Systems of irrigation were adopted to make vast areas tillable. Thousands of acres were put into wheat which before had grown nothing. Railroads were built, so as to make communication and transportation between the interior and the seaboard easy. The production of wheat increased enormously, and its exportation increased from a few thousand bushels to 40,000,000, the greater part of which was purchased by Great Britain, who paid for it with the products which the tariff laws forbade our farmers to receive. The difference between paying in products and in cash was enough to justify the great expenditure to make this development in India. Every bushel of this grain has interfered with the sale of a bushel of American grain. All the exportations of wheat, both from India and Australia, have come into competition with our American exportations. Is it any wonder that the price of American wheat has gone down? Seven years ago I foresaw the condition which would naturally result in this regard if our tariff laws should continue, and lifted up my voice in warning to the farmers against them, but in vaiu. When wheat was over $1 a bushel I predicted that it would fall through foreign competition to 75 cents, wLich has been fulfilled, and I believe now that this decline must keep on, as Indian and Australian wheat production increases until our wheat will not rea ize enough to pay for the cost of raising it. It is too late now to undo much of misch es which has been done. A prominent and intelligent Englishman said to me the other day that Great Britain was no longer dependent upon the American farmer. This is, however, not true to the fullest extent; but it is becoiniug truer every day. Much more delay in reducing our tariff, and the golden opportunities of the foreign market will have passed away for a generation. I would appeal to the farmer with all my earnestness to awaken to the necessity of tariff reform at once. You must act promptly and thoroughly, not to do injury to ethers, but to secure justice to yourselves; not to injure the business of others, but to save your own, and to save the channels of outflow to the world, without which your harvests will be as ashes aud your plenty will laugh y> u to scorn. But it is said that protection has developed a home market for tho farmer with which he ought to be satisfied. This home market, I may remark, never has been, is not now, and probably never will be large enough to consume the whole product of our agriculture, so that the vital question always to him will be the condition of the l'oieitn market in which he must sell bis surplus. Again I say that tbe original object of prott ction was not to give a home market to the f.umer, but to tbe manufacturer. It was not to compel the manufacturer to pay higher prices to the farmer, but the latter to pay higher prices to tbe former. If the farmer gets )nv advantages from the home market through protection they are purely incidental, aud you may be assured that they would not be permittad to stand in the,way, for an of the y-olicv which was principally do-uu d .or the benefit of other clu ses. But 1 deny ihnt.it is in the power of the mauu!in Hirers under pio.ection to nfo'-d an adequate market to the farmer. This presents the question of the effect of tbe tariff u> on the manufacturers theuiselus. Of course, 1 l ave not time to-

j night to discuss this question in all its ! phases. I will coll attention to a few to 1 show that the tariff is not of the benefit to the manufacturers which they generally imagine. In my judgment there are few instances of permanently successful manufacturing which would not have occurred as well without the tariff as with it. Indeed, in many cases it has been of positive injury, Consider those who have peculiar advantages for manufacturing, either natural or local. They would have grown rich without the tariff, for the tariff did not give to them their advantages. It may be tine that the tariff has enabled them to make more than they otherwise would have done; but it is a bounty to them unfairly and unjustly forced from their fellow citizens. Consider also those who manufacture under the protection of the patent laws. These give to the inventor the exclnsive privilege of manufacturing for seventeen years. During the existence of the patent he can practically control the market without the aid of customs duties. He can charge substantially as much for his patented article without as with the tariff, and the principal effect it can have upon him is to diminish his profit by increasing the cost of his plant and material. Again, there are cases where manufacturers pay out in the increased prices for wbat they are obliged to have in order to manufacture all that they receive in the increased price of their product. I have often asked manufacturers who have complained that they would be ruined if my policies were carried out how the present tariff affected them. I have been surprised often at tho want of information among them. Many have been unable to tell me exactly the duty upon the foreign product similar to that of their manufacture. Few have been able to-toil me how the tariff affected the price of their product at a given time, and I have never found one who has been able to tell me how it affected the cost of their buildings, machinery and raw material. 1 have the word of some manufacturers who, at my suggestion, have carefully examined into the effect of the tariff upon them, that the increasing of price all around was “like digging post-1 oles to fill them up again.” A paper manufacturer in Ohio told me that if the duty were tnkeu off his plant and chemicals and material he co’uld afford to have the duty taken off his paper, which, he claimed, he could then sell at a profit in the foreign market. A woolen manufacturer said that ho was willing to take free trade for his woolen goods if he could have free trade in blinks, and lumber, and stone, and machinery, and wool. What was there but to say that what protection gave with one hand it takes away with another. I believe that if the manufacturers would carefully study the effect of the protective laws upon them they would find that they derive much less benefit from them thun they suppose. I have made the proposition in the House of Representatives, and I believe it would be accepted by the tariff reformers, that if each class of manufacturers would show the net profit to it of the tariff no reduction should he made which would lessen that profit. In this way justice could be done the manufacturer, aud large reductions in prices would result to the advantage of the consumers. My friends, the only demand which can consume your harvests, set in motion the Bilent wheels, and keep your toilers busy, is the demand of the world. Invite it, persuade it, win it; do not refuse, reject, repel. Yon cannot long dolay the solution of the problem. If the teachings of political economy will not convince you, if the experience of the world will not teach, if the condition of the laboring population will not excite your sympathies, then let the strikes of starving and underpaid workmen warn you. Tbe question which confronts you is, shall the laborers of America be satisfactorily employed? It must be answered. You have invited nil the labor of the world here, and have closed the channels for the disposal of their products. You build mills to keep them busy and then shut them down because you have refused to take buyers for your products. You fill the hopper in the granary and set tho stones to grinding, but give no chance to the flour to flow out. You suffocate yourselves in your own accumulation. You are still in the midst of machinery which you have power to keep busy, and the laborers are without work and their families without food. Ob, protection, let tho people go! You have fastened them all in the meshes of a home market, and they can neither fly nor soar. You have made this land of beauty .and liberty a land of bondage for them. Let them go before discontent and turmoil find expression in revolution. Let them go before the plagues come and the blood of the first bom is shed to stain the lintels of our door 3. Let them go, to meet all nations of the earth in the peaceful ways of friendly trade, that America may in our day and generation enter upon the career of wealth and prosperity which has been so long denied her by unequal and unjust laws.

He wha keeps his nails irregularly cut is has y and determined. Men who have uot the patience to cut their nails properly generally come to grief; most of them commit' suicide or get married.; *