124 The Tariff and the Farmer. 



the Mines, Quarries, Pits, etc."; seventeen products are 

 named. To show what close scraping was done to give 

 as large a total value as possible, we note one dollar's 

 worth of gravel from Belchertown, Norfolk and Milford. 

 Sudbury and Grafton are each credited with muck to the 

 value of $1. Four towns have a return of $1 of sand; 

 three towns the same value of fish. The total value of 

 this class of products is $226,549. It is evident, then, 

 that if the same thoroughness had been exercised in the 

 State report of 1885 as in 1895, the increase in gain in 

 value of agricultural products of 11% would have been 

 largely reduced. Of course, it is possible that a state 

 whose gains from 1885-95 were less than 11% might have 

 gains from 1890-1900 of 51%, as indicated by the national 

 census. But the fact of many omitted products at one 

 census-taking makes valueless any comparison in the 

 latter case ; and failure here, there is no other alternative 

 than to fall back on the State censuses that were more 

 carefully made. 



(2) In still another respect, as regards the total value 

 of agricultural products, the census figures are rhost 

 deceptive; they imjDly far larger returns than the facts 

 warrant. In proving this we shall confine remarks 

 chiefly to the State of Massachusetts, though the charge is 

 applicable to a more or less extent to most parts of the 

 United States. We refer to the great duplication of 

 values. Massachusetts officials carrv the matter one 

 step further than the national officials. This is the value 

 of manure made on the farms. This product is treated 

 just as if it were sold for cash and the money deposited in 

 the farmer's pocket. There is no reason why its value 

 should appear as a part of the farmer's income. While 

 it is a product of the farms, it is only when changed into 



