1902.] THE FARMER AS A CITIZEN. IO5 



ings as much as you choose, it will not alter the situation; 

 the fact is the caucus rules. In America it has got to do it. 

 Go to your caucuses; it is your duty. In our country districts 

 about ten good farmers will control the caucus every time. 

 That is the fact of the business. The boys that go to the 

 caucuses are not bad, but they get misled, and they need the 

 older heads there. Of course, I am talking about the ideal 

 citizen in all these relations. 



Now, the relation of the citizen to the State, and in that 

 connection I w^ant to call your attention to some of the things 

 the farmers of this country have done. Do you know that the 

 farmers of this country have controlled the policy of this 

 government in some of the greatest crises we have had in our 

 business history? Let me illustrate it: One of the great 

 questions that has been agitated during our lifetime has been 

 the question of protection — the question of protection to 

 American industries. Now, what does this amount to when 

 you come to simmer it down? It amounts to this: The 

 manufacturers, as a rule, got the benefit of protection; that is, 

 the immediate and direct benefit went to him who manu- 

 factured the goods; duties are laid upon foreign goods; 

 duties are laid upon those goods that we hope to manu- 

 facture in this country. We want to stimulate the manu- 

 facture of those articles here. Now, who would you naturally 

 expect to vote for protection, and who would you naturally 

 expect to vote against it? If they were controlled simply and 

 solely by their selfish interests in the matter, who would you 

 naturally expect to vote for and against it? Why, you would 

 say that you would expect the manufacturing towns, and the 

 cities where these manufacturers are carrying on their busi- 

 ness, and where the people get the benefit of good business 

 would vote for it, and that the farmer who wants to buy 

 manufactured goods at the least cost possible would vote for 

 free trade. That is w'hat you would naturally say, and there 

 does not seem to be any room for disputing that; that the 

 natural voters for protection would be the voters in the cities, 

 and the towns where there are manufacturing industries, and 

 the natural voters for free trade would be those who live in 

 the rural districts, who sell their goods in the markets of the 

 world anyhow, and want to buy manufactured goods just as 

 cheaply as possible. What is the fact about it? Here it is: 



