Protection 



however highly food were taxed, we should not be 

 able to feed ourselves, and ios. per quarter on 

 wheat would only benefit our farmers to a small 

 extent, compared with the amount of foreign 

 wheat that would pay tax. A tariff on food bears 

 hardly on the poorer classes, for food represents 

 the bulk of their expenditure. 



If, when Protection comes, farmers are not 

 powerful enough to impress their terms upon the 

 various governments, they will be in a worse con- 

 dition than to-day, falling into the plight of 

 American farmers. The steel, iron, and allied 

 trades, which are so powerful, would demand a 

 crushing tax on Yankee farm implements, say .£10 

 for every self-binder, when instantly they would 

 raise their own prices from £6 to £8 more, and we 

 should have to pay it, because they would still be 

 cheaper than the Yankee. This is what happened 

 in America on the appearance of the McKinley 

 Tariff, and the farmer, as a consumer, would find 

 everything costing him much more. There can be 

 no doubt about this, I think. If we are to have 

 Protection, but at the same time food is to be no 

 dearer, as some of the leading papers reiterate — 

 if, in short, the farmer is to be the " under dog " — 

 then I for one should abandon agriculture in 

 favour of boot-making or some well organized 

 industry. 



29 



