Rensselaer Union, Volume 8, Number 43, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 13 July 1876 — Importation and Poverty. [ARTICLE]

Importation and Poverty.

Statistics show that last year we imported from other countries, $400,000,000 worth of their productions of various kinds, such as wool and woolen goods, cotton goods, linen and hemp, sugar, silk, salt and saltpeter, leather, lead, glass and glassware, porcelain ware, iron, steel, etc. Of the whole line ot heavy inportations, we have an abuudanoe of raw material out of which to manufacture these goods at home. That we do not do so, and thus give employment to our own people, and in turn ereate a large home market for our productions, thus saving transportation tariffs on a large part, of our surplus grain and provision, shows great fault somewhere in our system*. duat think of k: we import four hundred million dollars worth of goods which we have facilities for producing at home. We en-. force idleness and starve our own people, while buying from those of other countries the articles our own Cld manufacture lor us, more ply than we pay abroad, when considering the transportation tax upon the surplus gram and provisions wo pay when feeding European labor. Not only so, but here is four hundred millione of goid to pay forthese goods, which we send out of the country annually, which we might keep at home to strengthen our own credit and bring prosperity to our people. No country but America could stud such a foolish strain upon its resources. Wo cannot always do if, and there is no good reason why wc should do so any longer. No one can give a reason why we should j>*y rail j|ud ocean freights thousands of miles on our own to, feed skilled labor while producing goods for ns, which must in turd be freighted back thousands of miles. No one oan give any reason why we should keep up ten tdousand importing firms with th6ir ’ retinue of book-keepers and clerks, add their large profits; to which mpy bo added hundreds of customhouses and their thousands of attendants, all to be paid, while handling the goods of manufacture which we can aha ought to make at home. The importers’ profits and expenses, and all 'this other expense is taxed upon our own people, it all comes ont of tfie home producers aud consumers. If we were to tax ourselves half at muth to encourage home manufacturing, and the development of our own resources, thus producing most ot these goods at home, we should have labor for all, arid prosperity vfould soon return, for with manufacturing comes a home market. The tens of thousands of men now employed, in importing, handling aud selling foreign goods, at large salaries, which the peoplepoy i would have to find other employment, and the tax for their support would cease. We should adjust our system »6 as to give employment to our ioup*BhiM|M& labor, especially when it ia clearly Seen that it would be great economy, both public and private to do so.— lndiana Farmer. *■ One-horn of the Indies dilemma —Big Horn. ——i-s A New Hampshire legislator wears a SIB,OOO diamond. \ —: —_ —•——' —— , Kentucky grasshoppers continue to sit around chewing other folks’ tobacco. ' Itr Boston more lawyers get | arrfesteu aud punished forcrimes tuaa in any other-city in {he Union, j