896 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
DEC. 27 
Farm Politics. 
Here it is proposed to discuss with freedom and fairness, ques¬ 
tions of National or State policy that particularly concern farm¬ 
ers. The editors disclaim responsibility for the opinions of cor¬ 
respondents. The object is to develop a true and fair basis for 
organization among farmers. Let us think out just what we want 
and then strive for it. 
A FEW POLITICAL NOTES. 
On page 827 of The Rural I notice a strange tale of a 
Nebraska farmer. His three loads of produce, together 
with his fat steer and fat cow, brought him only $28.40 
worth of clothing. Now, if the poor fellow had only lived 
in Illinois the same articles would have brought him $115. 
With a sum like that a man in this glorious State could 
clothe and decorate himself in a style that would lay Ward 
McAllister on the shelf. Possibly Nebraska is a grand 
State to stay away from. The tale aforesaid so indicates. 
A certain party is yelling: “ Reduce taxation to the 
necessary expenses of an economical operation of the gov¬ 
ernment. The same party controls New York City, and 
who ever heard of economy in the operation of its govern¬ 
ment ? The same party sent millionaire Rrice to represent 
the great agricultural State of Ohio in the United States 
Senate. It will leave no stone unturned to send a political 
demagogue from Illinois. Will farmers be fooled by its 
favorite yell ? 
A certain other party has arranged a tariff on imports 
for the especial protection of the dear laborers, artisans, 
et al., and, incidentally, of certain wealthy manufacturers. 
These latter will at once proceed to put on the twisters and 
squeeze a few more millions out of the consumers’ pockets. 
Said party was heard to strike a stump recently, and the 
result was a high tumble. It was a needed lesson. 
The recent election developed the existence in Illinois 
and Wisconsin of a large and well-organized party opposed 
to our public school system. The vote was simply on these 
two questions: (l) Shall parents be compelled by law to 
educate their children ? (2) Shall foreigners who come to 
this country to live be compelled by law to teach their 
children our language ? The majority vote was in the 
negative. Accordingly thousands of children will be kept 
out of our free schools to help their parents make money. 
Thousands of foreign-born people will teach their children 
the language and customs of their native land only. These 
children will grow up as utterly ignorant of the language 
of America, of its laws and customs as they would be if 
born and reared in some dark corner of Europe. Germany 
compels parents to educate their children, and as a result 
there are but very few adult Germans who cannot read 
and write. The United States should do the same thing, 
and a similar result will naturally follow. [What author¬ 
ity is there in the Constitution for any interference on the 
part of the General Government in the education of the 
people? This is a matter of State jurisdiction ; and it is 
hardly likely that two-thirds of the States will ever con¬ 
sent to delegate it to the General Government by a con¬ 
stitutional amendment.— Eds.] From the ignorant, un¬ 
educated foreign class come nearly all our anarchists, 
thugs and cut-throats and the secret societies of assassins 
which are now beginning to trouble the authorities in our 
large cities. The farmers who voted to crush out one of 
our grandest American institutions, who supported anar¬ 
chists and assassins in their assault upon intelligence, will 
in due time reap a reward they now little dream of. 
Will the farmers hang together long enough to secure 
the reforms they seek ? Since the election quite a number 
of Republican Alliance men have emphatically informed 
me that they will never be caught in another “ Democratic 
trap.” The facts are that while a large number of Re¬ 
publican farmers voted the straight Alliance ticket, but 
very few Democrats voted it. In this precinct the Alliance 
caught 58 Republicans out of 144, while it caught only four 
Democrats out of 183. “ You fellers didn’t stick !” snapped 
an irate Republican Alliance man to a Democratic brother, 
a few days after the election. “ Didn’t intend to ! Had 
too soft a thing 1” smilingly retorted the other. 
Christian County, Illinois. FRED. GRUNDY. 
SOME LIQUOR QUESTIONS. 
I would like to know what readers of The Rural think 
of the internal revenue tax on whisky, beer and tobacco. 
Does it, with our license system, tend to create monopo¬ 
lies, rings and trusts of the worst kind ? Are the political 
parties to-day controlled to a great extent by those rings, 
aud will not any new political party that doesn’t bolt the 
rings be gobbled up by them ? Is there a better way to 
bolt the rings than by taking the money out of their busi¬ 
ness, and is there a surer way to take the money out of 
business than by removing the tax ? Would it not be 
easier to restrict and govern the sale of intoxicants with 
the tax removed, that is, by taking the money out 
of the business, than under the present circumstance ? 
Why is it that whisky sellers are so afraid of free whisky 
and its bad influence? Is it because they cannot get 10 
cents for one cent’s worth of liquor. Why is it that the 
Federal Government requires that whisky at the distillery 
shall stand the test of 90 proof, and that State laws allow 
wholesale dealers, jobbers, rectifiers, etc., to rack that 
same whisky off and make five or six or even ten barrels of 
“whisky” from one barrel of proof f Now would it not be 
better to have free pure whisky than poisoned taxed 
whisky? Why would it not be a good plan to have every 
whisky seller placed under bonds to sell pure liquor ? 
Then the tax law and license system might be a benefit to 
the people; now they benefit only the dealer. Why is it 
that the press never take up the discussion of this ques¬ 
tion ? I am sure that it is of as much or more importance 
than either the McKinley or the Mill’s Bill. N. T. R. 
Lewis County, N. Y. 
R. N.-Y.—Many Prohibitionists are conscientiously op¬ 
posed to the taxation of intoxicants by either the National 
or State governments, not because they believe that the 
use of “ free whisky” would be less than that of “taxed 
whisky;” but because they are strongly of opinion that it 
is morally and economically wrong for any form of popular 
government to license the traffic in intoxicants, and this 
is done when any government taxes the business. Does 
our correspondent imagine for a moment that if liquor 
can be obtained for half or a quarter its present price, less 
of it will be drunk even if the quality should be the same? 
And if the price of the stuff should be greatly lowered and 
its quality greatly improved, nobody but a crank could 
believe that less of it would be swallowed. “ Before the 
war ” the national tax on liquor was a mere trifle; was less 
of it used then than now per capita of the population ? 
Until two years ago Ohio had not taxed the liquor traffic 
for years; was the reputation of the Buckeyes for temper¬ 
ance exemplary ? Is it a fact that whisky makers, or 
sellers or drinkers are “ afraid of free whisky ?” If so, 
they show their fear in a strange way—by earnestly advocat¬ 
ing the decrease or abolition of National and State taxation 
on intoxicants and earnestly opposing any increase of tax¬ 
ation or the imposition of a tax where none existed, as was 
the case in Ohio until recently. From the point of view 
of an outsider, N. T. R.’s argument would suit these gentry 
exactly. Many good people who strongly deprecate and 
heartily deplore the evils of intemperance and still cannot 
believe altogether in the “ saving grace ” of Prohibition, 
would be glad to see the taxes on all intoxicants limited 
only by fear of the smuggling and illicit distillation that 
would be certain to follow excessive taxation. They would 
also rejoice to see the evils of the traffic thoroughly con¬ 
trolled, checked and minimized by State legislation. 
Again, there are many clear-headed scientists and others 
who, in spite of the humanitarian spirit of the age, believe 
that the immemorial natural law of the “ survival of the 
fittest” still operates even among the human race, and 
some hard-hearted members of the class are not properly 
sorry for this misfortune. These believe that only the 
moral weaklings of the nation are greatly injured by the 
indiscriminate U8e of intoxicants, and they would be reluc¬ 
tant to approve of any State supervision over liquor 
adulteration, that would prevent the speedy execution of 
the law in their case. According to very able statisticians, 
at the present rate of increase in the human race and with 
only a moderate improvement in sanitary science, and in 
the absence of any enormously devastating plague or war, 
the population of the world will be as great as it can sup¬ 
port just 182 years hence. Then must come pinching, 
starvation and a compulsory check on the increase of man¬ 
kind. Why not delay the evil day, these people say, by 
allowing our moral weaklings, whose failings are a curse to 
themselves and to others, to be knocked out of the race by 
the Rum Demon with a half emptied whisky bottle ? 
AGRICULTURAL POLITICS AT A FARMERS’ 
INSTITUTE. 
At the Gallia County, O., Farmers’ Institute, held on 
December 10 and 11, Mr. W. N. Cowden, Secretary of the 
Wool Growers’Association, read a paper on “Causes of 
the Present Agricultural Depression.” Such a depression 
exists and is serious. Other occupations resting on agri¬ 
culture are threatened. Congress is attempting to give 
relief but has not recognized the true cause. Farmers 
should give attention to them. They are general and can¬ 
not be found in extravagant living. The causes are: 
1. Demonetization of silver, which was brought about 
clandestinely. Millionaires were made by it, and these 
now control legislation. Had not the public conscience 
been blunted at the time, the men who conceived this plot 
would have been classed with the Arnolds and the Burrs. 
[During the debate on the Silver Bill towards the close of 
the last session of Congress, the charge of trickery in 
clandestinely passing a clause authorizing the demonetiza¬ 
tion of silver, in 1873, was openly made in the Senate. It 
was reiterated over and over again in half the political 
newspapers of the country, and the deceit was boldly 
attributed to Senator Sherman. In a powerful speech in 
the Senate, however, Sherman demonstrated that not only 
was he not the author or instigator of such deceit, but 
that no deceit of the kind had been practiced. He cited 
numerous authorities, among them the Congressional 
Record containing the speeches of the members and the 
proceedings of the Senate at the date referred to, and 
showed that the alleged clandestine clause had been openly 
debated. Since then the charge has never been repeated in 
the Senate or in any of the large, respectable newspapers, 
however hostile. It is better to be fair, even in politics— 
perhaps.—E ds.] At that time farmers were prosperous, 
were buying more land and going into debt, and were 
caught by the contraction of the currency. 2. Resumption 
of specie payment. This measure increased the amount of 
all indebtedness. Our available circulating medium is 
less than that of almost any other country. Our financial 
operations require two or three times as much as we now 
have. The time Is at hand when we will have free coinage 
of silver. The present law was intended to prevent any 
inflation, and its paternity may be easily guessed. 3. An¬ 
other cause is the tariff on imported goods. These ques¬ 
tions affect farmers and must be discussed without regard 
to partisan politics. The present tariff compels the farmer 
to pay the maximum price on all he buys, and to take the 
minimum on all he sells. Do I advocate free trade ? No. 
Let men who know what agriculture needs revise the 
tariff in its interest. Other causes are found in the com¬ 
bines, trusts, adulterated food products, and high salaries 
and taxes. There is no overproduction. The ill-fed and 
ill clothed point to under-consumption. As bad laws are 
the cause of this depression, good laws are the remedy. 
Ten times more farmers are organized than ever before, 
and they will make themselves felt as never before. 
In a paper on The Claim of the Alliance upon the Far¬ 
mer, E. A. Bing said : “ The Alliance has business, social 
and political features. It is not a partisan organization, 
but an educator. It took its rise in the depression of agri¬ 
culture. Our public debt has been doubled by the schemes 
of the Wail Street bankers whom the lamented Garfield 
said the American people would remember as the Germans 
remember the barons who came out of their castles only to 
plunder. [There is little doubt that originally, while the 
debt was being contracted, the operations of financial 
speculators made it more difficult for the government to 
obtain loans, and therefore they had to pay higher interest 
and premiums for them, so that in this way the public 
debt was made a good deal larger than it otherwise would 
have been. At present, however, it is not much over one- 
third of what it was at the close of the war.—E ds ] Our 
country has the proud distinction of having made three 
hundred millionaires and three million tramps.” 
Hon. J. W. McCormick in a paper on The Farmer and 
the State, said: “The tillers of the soil are the conserva¬ 
tive force and safeguard of the State. The farmers are 
entitled to representation in proportion to their numbers. 
The conviction is in the mind of the farmer that he is the 
victim of class legislation. Unequal burdens are placed 
upon him. Farmers are organized as never before, and 
they must be conservative, but insist upon their rights. 
They should demand equal taxation, reduction of salaries, 
pure food laws and restricted ownership of land.” 
One speaker said: “When all the non-producers are 
abolished, and every worthless novel changed to a seed 
catalogue, and every loafer into a producer, the earth will 
bloom as the Rose of Sharon and be fragrant as the Lily of 
the Valley.” alva agee. 
[Did he give any date when we might expect this Flow¬ 
ery Age ?—Eds ]_ 
NOTES. 
McKinley’s Cigar —A good story is told of the great 
leader of the “ protection ” forces. One day last week he 
invited two friends to “ have a cigar.” He went to a store 
where he had frequently bought “ three for a quarter ” be¬ 
fore his bill became law. But the price was 35 instead of 
25 cents “ owing to the McKinley Bill,” said the store¬ 
keeper, adding: “That fellow McKinley has just about 
ruined our business.” One of the party quietly examined 
the government stamp on the box from which the cigars 
were taken and found that the duty on it had been paid a 
year and a half before the McKinley Bill passed Congress ! 
The Advantages of a Home Market, Page 827.— 
From 1856 to 1860 I resided in Washington County, Illinois. 
At that time there was no surplus in the United States 
Treasury, no national banks, and the government was 
ineffectually trying to float its debt with eight per cent 
Treasury notes at a discount of 20 per cent. In the month 
of February 1858, a resident of my township loaded his 
three ox teams with corn, drove to the railroad station 
and sold it to foreign speculators. The proceeds he In¬ 
vested in a pair of Boston made boots. He went home 
whooping for “old Buck” (Buchanan) and “freer” trade. 
Gallupville, N. Y. F. H. 
" Drop a Dollar in the Slot.”—I give below a list 
of a farmer’s produce, showing what the producer receives 
and the consumer pays. These figures will apply to the 
greater portion of this State : 
FARMER RECEIVES. 
Wheat, per bushel_$0 SO to 80 93 
Potatoes, *■ _ 6u to to 
Oats, * .... 4S to 50 
Hay, per ton. S 00 to 9 00 
Rutter, per pound_ 18 to 19 
Beef, “ .... 04 to 05 
Pork, " .... Otto 04 
Chickens, “ — Oi to 09 
CONSUMER IVAYS. 
Flour, per barrel.$4 50 to 85 50 
Potatoes, per bushel.. 70 to 80 
Oats, “ .. 50 to 55 
Hay, per ton. 9 00 to 10 00 
Butter, per pound .... 19 to 20 
Beef, - .... 06 to 08 
Pork. “ _ Ofi to 08 
Chickens, “ .... 10 to 12 
The list could be extended. I only want to reveal the 
truth, and trust that The Rural in its efforts to “ keep 
up with the procession ” will maintain its time-honored 
reputation for truthfulness. E. P. p. 
Midland County, Mich. 
R. N.-Y.—Very likely these prices are realized where 
the “ middlemen” are mostly dropped, but let our friend 
figure what Eastern people pay for Western produce. We 
should be happy, indeed, if we could buy flour for $5 ; 
potatoes for 75 cents; butter for 20 cents; hay for $9 or 
beef for 8 cents. What proportion of Western farm prod¬ 
ucts are sold at home ? How about the surplus ? 
Coal AND Reciprocity.— Dispatches from Canada state 
that the question of reciprocity in coal between that coun 
try and the United States is being actively discussed. 
Here is a brief review of the figures given: In 1854 Nova 
Scotia coal was admitted free. Out of a total output of 
234,812 tons we took 139,125. During the 12 years of “re¬ 
ciprocity ” the sale of Nova Scotia coal in this country in¬ 
creased steadily until, in 1866, we took 404,252 tons out of a 
total output of 511,795. Since the tariff has been changed 
the quantity of coal sent us has steadily declined—in 1889 
it was but 29,986 tons. Notwithstanding the enormous 
production of coal in the United States, the importations 
have steadily increased—from 471,818 tons in 1880 to 1,130,- 
491 tons in 1889, while the standard price of coal is greater 
to day than in 1880. The heaviest importations were from 
British Columbia and Australia to the Pacific coast re¬ 
gion. It is claimed that it costs $2.60 per ton to haul coal 
from the Pennsylvania mines to Boston. Coal can be 
freighted from Nova Scotia to Boston for $1.10, and the 
Canadian advocates of reciprocity say that free coal would 
cheapen the price to New England consumers by at least 
$1 per ton. But what would Canada do in exchange for 
this increased trade ? 
“Direct” Tariff Benefit.— An editorial (on page 836) 
of The Rural says: “ We have no hesitation in saying 
that under existing tariff laws the farmer receives only an 
indirect benefit, while the direct beuefit goes to the manu¬ 
facturer.” By “a direct benefit” I suppose the writer 
means “protection” on what he has to sell. The McKinley 
Bill largely increases the tariff on nearly every product of 
the farm, making it so high on many things as to be almost/ 
