198 AMERICAN FARMS. 



that the placing of about three quarters of a million 

 dollars' worth of fruit, seed, and tree imports upon the 

 free list reduces the farmer's protection down to about 

 6 per cent. Small as these figures representing the 

 farmer's protection seem, it must also be borne in mind, 

 that a large portion of even these small figures is made up 

 of protective imposts on canned goods (really protection 

 to manufacturers). 



While the tendency in the past has been so much in the 

 direction of putting farm products on the free list, it has 

 been also in the direction of rapidly increasing the pro- 

 tective duties upon the farmer's articles of consumption. 

 In 1867, the Canadian tariff gave the manufacturer 15 per 

 cent, protection, and in 1877, 17I per cent. In 1881, the 

 tariff had grown in the interest of the manufacturers to 

 about 27 per cent., calculating on the dutiable list only, 

 and about 23! per cent, if the free list of manufactures 

 be also taken into account. In 1887, the average protec- 

 tion to manufacturers was about 30 per cent, on goods 

 classed dutiable, and 27I per cent, on dutiable and free 

 manufactured goods combined. For 1888, it will not be 

 less than 2)Z per cent, on dutiable manufactures, as the 

 tariff for this year has been vastly increased.' 



Canadian protection has worked about as the following 



table shows : 



Against 

 1879. Assumed fair play all round. the 



farmer as 

 1881. To the farmer 8 ^, to the manufacturer 27 ^ . . 3f to 1 



1887. To the farmer 7 %, to the manufacturer 30 ^ . . 4I to I 



1888. To the farmer 6 %, to the manufacturer about 33 %,^ <j\ to i 



The average Canadian protectionist seems to be per- 

 fectly satisfied with this one-sided protection. We had a 



' This prediction has been fully confirmed. 



* Over 500,000 families in Canada are depending directly upon 

 agriculture for a living, and less than one fifth of this number upon 



