Newspaper Page Text
ALLIANCE AND GRANGE.
FARMERS AND LABORERS.
■•••lutiona of Victory Union, Ohio Coun
ty. Ky.
At a recent meeting Victory I nion
80. 784 adopted the following resolu
tions:
Wiirrkas, We believe that the Govern
ment should be a Government for the peo
ple and by the people, and that the people
•hon'd run the Government instead of the
Government running the people, as it is, by
monopolies, trusts, combine.*, class legisla
tion and every other corrupt means that
ever existed in any nation. We believe
that the time has now come when class
legislation, monopolies, trusts and coni
ktnes should cease running the Govern
ment and let honesty be reinstated and
legislate for the many instead of the few.
Knowing that the farmers and laborers of
this country are sorely oppressed by high
taxation, trusts and combines on one side
and by rings and monopolies on the other,
and that relief will never come unless we
demand it, we have therefore adopted the
following resolutions:
Krtolred. That we ask Congress to enact
stringent laws , with heavy penalties, pro
hibiting trusts and combines of all kinds
whose operations tend to reduce the price
received by the producer and raise the price
she customer is forced to pay.
Hetolred, That we believe that the National
banking system is detrimental to the best
interests of this country, therefore, we de
mand the abolition of the National banks.
Ile»olrtd, That we ask unlimited coinage of
silver and that paper money be issued by i
the Government direct, in sufficient amount
for all commercial and industrial purposes
which shall be a legal-tender for all States
of this Nation. We also ask that Congress
issue a sufficiency of fractional currency to
facilitate exchange through the medium of
Uie United States postal system.
That we ask for laws prohibiting
the alien ownership of land, and that Con
gress devise some means to obtain all land
now owned by aliens and foreign syndicates,
and that all lands donated to railroads
which have not fulfilled their obligations
xpecilled in their grants bo reclaimed by
our Government and held tor actual settlers
•nly.
Heiolvtd, That we believe that the capi
talization of the labor of the country in the
form of National and State Interest-bearing
bonds constitute a heavy burden upon the
wealth producers of our Nation, therefore,
we ask our law-makers and all others in
authority that they shall use all and every
means in their power to pay off and liquidate
all such bonds at the earliest day possible,
consistent with the welfare of our country.
Resolved, That taxation. National and State,
• hall not be used to build up one Interest or
class at the expense of another, believing in
the doctrine of “equal rights to all and spe
cial favors to none.”
Resolved, That we demand such a revision
of the tariff as will lay the heaviest burdens
on the luxuries and the lightest on the neces
saries of life; and in no case shall the duty
• u imported goods exceed the difference in
the cost of producing the same article.
Resolved, That we demand a graduated In
come tax upon all persons whose income
•hall exceed one thousand dollars per an
■um.
Resofrerf, That wedemand a well-regulated
system of education for the masses, know
ing well that our form of government de
pends on the intelligence of the people; and
that all trusts and combines on school
books shall be prohibited by law as far as
possible.
Resolved, That we ask that all means of
public communication and transportation
•hull be owned and controled by the people
and that equitable rates be everywhere es
kibllshed, on the same basis as the United
States postal system.
R'osolved, That a copy of these resolutions
be sent to our country Union, and a copy to
The Ohio County Farmer, Hartford Herald,
f! i rtf ord Republican, and the Farmer’s
Uome Journal for publication.
F. W. PIRTLE, 1
C. Allen. > Com.
H. C. Felix, )
0. B. Brown, Sec’y.
EQUAL REPRESENTATION.
The Farmers Should Have a Voice tn
Making the Laws.
The most essential idea of our repub
lican institutions is the proper repre
sentation of all classes. In tboir strug
gle with England the colonies declared:
“No taxation without represetation.”
In other words they demanded a voice
in the laws that govern them.
Now all that farmers and laborers
•sk is, that that theory be put into
practice. No class of men was ever
■known to work for the interest of an
other class as against their own inter
est. If any thing is done for the farm
ers’ benefit, the farmers themselves
must do it. This is a self-evident
ikct. The farmer does not want any
thing unfair in legislation, but is will
ing to :.€cord to others the same rights
be demands for himself. Let every
•lass bo represented in proportion to its
mini bets; let the f inner be represented;
kbt the day laborer bo represented, and
iso the lawyer, the manufacturer and
capitalist. This will not be class legis
lation, hut will be just representation.
Each will have an interest to look after
and guard. It is said by some smart
alecks that the farmer and laborer are
■ot capable of making and administer
ing laws. This is slander; the farmer
«say not be quite as expert as a lawyer
in getting up bills, nor as fluent in
defending a measure before a legisla
tive body, but he knows better than the
lawyer the farmers’ needs, and he is a
jreatdeal more apt to work for their in
terests. for the lawyer will, nine times
«ut of ten, work for the concern which
pays him, and which is generally somo
lug corporation. The lawyer may sell
•ut and snap his fingers in the face of
Ins constituents, he has nothing to lose
and every thing to gain; but if the farm
er proves a traitor he will find his
■eighborhood a hot place to return to.
We want fewer lawyers in the Legis
lature, and as to politicians we have
ao use in the world for them.
And the laborer, too, should have
bis voice in the making of the
saws that govern him. Take, for
example a factory employing a thou
sand or more hands. Are they repre
sented by one of their number in the
law making institutions of the county?
time. If any one from the estab-
lishment is sent to the Legislature or
Congress it is one of the firm, or its
minion who will work for its interest.
Is it any wonder the operatives have
such a hard time?
They stand “no show" if they take
their grievances into court, and if they
resist the oppression of their masters
they are shot down by police who are
upheld by the courts and legislation.
Their condition is worse than that of
the black slave of the South before the
war. —Cor. Indiana Farmer.
PROTECT FARM PRODUCTS.
From Report* of the Legislative Com
mittee of the National Granite.
There are imported into this country
many agricultural products which crowd
and depress the markets in which we
sell our produce, because there are no
duties or lieeause the duties are too low
to protect. In view of the fact that it is
proposed to protect fully other interests,
we insist on duties upon such imported
products as will afford full protection to
the American producer of like commodi
ties.
We therefore indorse the increased
duty on barley, live-stock, hay, pota
toes. beans, wool, etc., as set forth in
the schedule recently reported by the
committee on ways and means.
We found, upon examination of the
lists of agricultural importations, that
about 824,000,000 worth of foreign hides
were brought into this country every
year free of duty, whilst upon leather
and its manufactures there is a pro
tective duty. We believed this to be an
unfair discrimination against the grower
of hides, and on the principle of equal
protection to all. we asked that a reason
able duty be placed on hides. The com
mittee on ways and means recognized the
justice of the demand and granted our re
quest; whereupon the manufacturers of
leather (themselves protected and very
prosperous), went before the committee
and insisted that no share of the pro
tection which they enjoyed should be
extended to those who have for years,
since the duty was removed from hides,
grown them at a positive loss. Their
demands were backed by a few of the
Representatives from their districts,
and hides were returned to the free list.
Again the plea was made for justice,
not favor, by the representatives of the
farmers, and so convincing were their
arguments that the duty was again
restored, only to be removed at the
last hour in order to secure support
from certain quarters.
We see no reason why these manufact
uring industries should be afforded
ample protection, when the producer of
the raw material (so-called) is forced to
abandon an important industry because
he is not protected. We say to you, as
we said to the committee on ways and
means: "If you will make leather and
manufactures of leathe free, we will ask
no duty upon hides. If leather and its
manufactures are protected, we want
equal protection upon hides.”
THE NATIONAL GRANGE.
The Patron* of HuHbandry Diepofied to
Extend Their Sphere.
The Patrons of Husbandry, as the
members of the Grange style themselves,
are disposed to extend their sphere of
action in the interest of the farmer as
they increase in strength and become
lietter organized as State and National
bodies.
At the last National Grange a com
mittee of throe members was appointed
to watch Congressional legislation to
secure the enactment of various meas
ures devised by the Grange, and to pre
vent such action as might prove in
jurious to the farmer.
The result of the labors of this com
mittee, backed by the National Grange,
maybe seen in the Tariff bill just pre
sented in Congress. It is a great ad
vance on any thing ever embodied in a
tariff to protect the farmer from unjust
and injurious competition. It covers
the entire field where the agriculturist
has been hither assailed. Still the leg
islation thus likely to be secured is but
reasonable. It simply proposes to treat
the farmer and his interest as the man
ufacturer and his needs are treated. It
is that the American toiler shall enjoy
finder the proposed Tariff bill the same
favor with o'her classes.
Would this have been done had not
the farmers been organized in a mighty
body? No, indeed. And when the
draft of the Tariff bill was published,
two weeks ago, what a furore it created.
First one well-protected business fran
tically demanded that the duty should
be taken off wool, another lumber, dairy
products, farm and field products of
various kinds, and eggs and poultry.
Those who thus insisted on this repeal
desired to secure all the benefits that
the tariff gave their products, but the
farmer must continue to suffer in the
old way.
The sub-committee having such mat
ters in charge were overwhelmed by the
| powerful appeals made to modify their
work as far as the fanner alone was
; considered; they wavered, and then sur
rendered several important points. The
duty on hides, for one thing, was re
moved, and they were placed on the
free list, and on some other articles the
duties were reduced.—Putnam County
(Ind.) Patriot.
—There will be a harvest home din
ner gathering of the Alliance and labor
organizations on July 3, at Columbus.
Hon. L. L. Polk, president of the Na
tional Alliance; Ralf Beaumont, lectur
er of the Knights of Labor; B. H.
Clover, president of the Kansas State
Alliance; W. P. Brush. National or
ganizer of the Alliance; Van B. Prather,
lecturer Kansas State Alliance, and
others will address the people
SINGLE TAX DEPARTMENT.
SINGLE TAX THE INSTRUMENT.
Addrenn of William Lloyd Garrison Be
fore the Unitarian .Ministerial Union at
Channing Hall, Boston, April 28, 1890.
[continued from last issue.]
The cause he saw was the ownership
and monopoly of land. The remedy he
discovered was the single fax. to the
practical examination of which I shall
now address myself. The question of
taxation is a broad one. Granted the
necessity of government, and the where
withal to sustain it must be granted
also. The methods of levying tributes
in the form of taxes are innumerable,
yet human ingenuity or avarice or tyr
anny or wisdom has never yet formu
lated a plan for a just and equal distri
bution of the burden of taxation. In
every civilized community of the world
the question is a burning one, and a
sense of wrong underlies the popular
complaint. The reason is that a tax on
property diminishes wealth and de
creases its production, subtracts from
the earnings of labor, and, with a very
few exceptions, taxes decline to stay
where they are put.
One of the objections most frequently
urged against single tax is that capital
will thereby escape taxation. But cap
ital laughs at the idea of being taxed.
It gladly pays the tax because it can be
easily shifted to the consumer. A more
unequal arrangement than obtains to
day in the collection of revenues, direct
or indirect, would be hard to devise. I
sat beside a distinguished woolen manu
facturer of Providence the other day
while Judge Lawrence, of Ohio, in advo
cating the protection of the wool grow
er, intimated that the manufacturers of
Rhode Island were amply able to pay
the tariff tax on raw material. ‘‘Does
the dunce suppose that I stand the tax
of ten cents a pound on my Australian
wool?” whispered my neighbor. ‘‘l add
it to the price of my cloth with interest
and profit, and sell my goods to the Chi
cago Jews. They make it into clothing
and add the tax and profit and interest
and sell their goods to Judge Lawrence’s
constituents —the farmers, wool growers
and mechanics —who boar the entire
burden. What does he take us for?”
This is merely an example. As a rule
a rich man sheds taxes as a duck’s back
does water, and they fall upon the weak
est shoulders.
All wealth comes primarily from the
earth by the application of labor. A
denial of access to land prevents the
production of wealth and diminishes
the opportunity of the worker. Yet we
see land owners grow rich, in utter idle
ness, by simply taking from the land
they hold the value given to it by oth
ers. Long John Wentworth, of Chica
go, understood and practiced the scheme.
His advice to a young man was to buy a
farm on the outskirts of a city. “Grow
cabbage upon it,” he said, “and the as
sessor will tax it lightly.” By and by
the city will envelop your acres and you
can sell house lots by the front foot and
at a great price.” This is the secret of
the Astors’ fortune. All the time land
is held for a rise in value those who
would use it to advantage are denied
the chance. The owner declines to sell
and refuses to improve it, knowing that
the growing community is increasing
the value of his possession without
causing him expense or effort. And the
present custom of assessing land favors
this kind of speculation. If two men
own adjoining city lots of equal value
and one improves his by a useful build
ing, the tax on his lot is immediately
raised. He is fined for adding to the
wealth of the city, and his neighbor is
rewarded for preventing the addition of
wealth by holding his lot idle for specu
lation. Under the single tax the vacant
lot would pay as high a tax as the im
proved lot. and the holder would find
it to his advantage to build
upon it or allow some one
else to do so. It would, therefore, make
building lots plenty, and multiply stores
and dwellings. For then buildings would
not be taxed. Personal property would
not have to hide itself away in dark
corners and tax payors would have no
temptation to perjure themselves or
move to Nahant or Lancaster. There
would be bo tax dodging. The land can
not bo hidden.
“This might answer in the city,” you
say, “but how abou 1 the poor farmer
whose chief possession is land? You
would exterminate him.” This was the
assertion of the chairman of the commit
tee on taxation this year from the town
of Barnstable, anxiously concerned for
the fate of his farmer constituents.
Look around to-day under the present
vaunted system. Is the farmer’s lot a
desirable one? On the contrary, of all
the great industries of the countries,
what is there which compares in depres
sion with agriculture? The farmer is
taxed on every thing he has, for the as
sessor can usually enumerate his prop
erty to a sheep or a hog. For the staple
product of the farm he has to accept a
price based on the world’s value of his
surplus in London or Liverpool. It is to
him, of all men, that the single tax
would come as an angel of relief.
No improvements would be levied
upon; only the bareland would be taxed,
just as if no spade or plow had ever
turned up the surface. The house and
tools and machines and stock would be
freed. The indirect tax on his lumber
and hardware, and glass, and blankets,
and carpets, and stoves, and crockery,
and clothing would vanish. Unless his
farm was more valuable for other pur
poses, like the one on the outskirts of
the city, the relief would be immense.
You tell me this is unlikely, as there
is a surplus of larm products uqw. To
this I answer, that gluts most exist as
long as governments make it a punish
able offense for people to exchange their
grain and fruits and cattle where it
shall profit them most. As long as hu
man beings anywhere on the globe hun
ger and starve there is congestion and
bad distribution, but no real surplus of
food. By value a farmer is much less a
land owner than he is a capitalist and
laborer. But the owner of the small lot
on the corner of Washington and Court
streets, upon which Sears’ building
stands, is a land owner indeed. Just
try and estimate the number of farms he
could get in exchange for that dimin
utive piece of land. I know no better
illustration of land values. Boundless
acres weighed in the balance of one
city lot, and the acres kick the beam.
The twenty-five cities of Massachu
setts, while they cover less than 5 per
cent, of the area, contain 77 per cent, of
the land values of the State. Boston
alone contains 45 per cent, of the land
values of Massachusetts, and only 20-
47ths of 1 percent, of the area. Under
the single tax Boston would pay at the
present valuation 46 per cent, of all ths
taxes raised in the State. At present it
pays 35 per cent. Three-quarters of an
average acre along Washington street
is worth as much as all the land in
Southboro. The owner of the 819,500
building at the corner of Washington
and Winter streets, standing on a 8122,-
500 lot, w’ould have his tax increased
heavily and find it profitable to erect a
better building, but Fred L. Ames would
probably pay a loss tax on the corner of
Court and Washington streets than will
be levied under the present system.
(For these facts I am indebted to Mr. S.
11. Howes, of Southboro, Mass.)
I grant that under the system we ad
vocate speculation in land would cease,
as no one would desire to possess it ex
cept to use it, nor would it profit any
ono to do so. It would cease to be an
investment. No capital would be locked
up in it, and a vast sum now imprisoned
would be set free for productive pur
poses.
Imagine that land ownership had
never existed in Boston. That all land
was accessible to him who wished to uso
it by simply paying its yearly rental
value. That no landlord, as now, stood
ready to gobble up in rent the profits of
labor. That each tenant were secured
legally in his possession as he possibly
can be now in ownership, had no fear of
taxes, direct or indirect, and that no
barbarous custom houses interposed an
unnatural barrier to free trade. That
the wage earner, allowed free access to
the opportunity of land at present lock
ed up from him. Instead of begging for
work as now. were free to employ him
self. Would not Boston be better than
Bellamy’s dream of it, and that without
the sacrifice of individual independ
ence? Then there could be no excuse
for idleness or poverty, except through
personal fault or misfortune, and not as
now enforced by cruel laws which
breed evil conditions. To able bodied
people seeking work or charity, we
would say, “Go and employ yourselves.”
Human wants are illimitable. Oppor
tunity is opened for all who will use it.
The profits of labor can not then be
filched from the laborer. No armies of
officials will interfere with our exchang
ing freely what we raise or make for
something else that we want. Univer
sal interchange means increased human
satisfaction and an unending demand
for workers. Therefore, the more work
ers the more wealth.
No wonder that Mr. George, seeing
what may be wrought with no miracle,
simply by striking off the fetters of law
and custom, gained new reverence for
the Creator of the earth, and looked
upon the “unearned increment” of land
as the divinely appointed source of rev
enue from which a perfect society could
support itself in peace and prosperity.
Supposing we compare the three part
ners which produce all wealth -Land,
Capital and Labor —and see what sort of
equality exists in the partnership. La
bor struggles and is in chains; Capital
grumbles at the small returns it gets
for investments, but the landlord, who
neither works nor risks, gathers in tho
profits and is cheerful, like
The smiling young lady of Niger
Who rode on the back of a tiger;
The return from the ride
Found the lady Inside,
And the smile on the face of the tiger.
But before you reach this terrible ver
dict look further. True, if you ask the
idle villagers who is responsible for
their misery they will say “the Lord,”
but they mean the lord of the manor,
like the Earl of Kenmare and Herbert
of Muckross, who are the owners of tho
enchanting landscape and delightful
waters. They own also the wretched
hovels and neglected farms. Not one
of these people can raise a potato or
ply a trade unless tje gets permission
and pays a tribute in the way of rent to
these two favored mortals of Killarney.
What service have these landlords ren
dered to mankind? They produce noth
ing. They live luxuriously and with
profligacy on money wrung from their
tenants. In fact, both had been spend
thrifts to the verge of bankruptcy, and
when I was there last summer, were
away seeking fresh means to bolster up
their failing fortunes and redeem their
mortgaged estates. Their tenants were
discouraged because the rent took all.
The more they earned and saved the
more the landlord raised the rent, con
tent only when he left a bare livelihood.
No wonder despair came to them and
beggary or exile was accepted.
[to be continued.]
—Circumstances alter cases. They
also frequently modify verdict^.—Van
Dorn’s Magazine.
PERSONAL AND IMPERSONAL.
’ —Ed Van Metere, an educated Sioux
Indian, was lately admitted to practice
law before the Dakota circuit courts.
—Chauncey M. Depew was born in
Peekskill, N. Y., April 23, 1834. He is
of Huguenot descent He is a graduate
of Yale. He was elected to tho presi
dency of the New York Central railroad
in 1885.
—Mrs. Martha Lumpkin, of Upson
County, Ga., is in her ninety-eighth year
and enjoys good health. When ninety
five years of age she knit sixty-five
pairs of socks during the year. She
has 400 children, grandchildren and
great-grandchildren.
—Major Robert Stiles, formerly of
the Richmond Howitzers, marched in
the Lee monument procession arrayed
in his own veritable gray jacket and
General Robert E. Lee’s hat, having
sewed upon its front one of the stars
from the General’s coat-collar.
—The Pittsburgh Commercial-Gazette
publishes a list of sixty-five residents
of that city whose wealth ranges from
81,000,000 to 83,000,000. Away above
above these figures are Mrs. Mary
Schenley, 836,000,000; Andrew Carnegie,
825,000,000: J. N. McCullough, 815,000,-
000; George Westinghouse, Jr., 810,000,-
000, and C. G. Hussey, 85,000,000.
—Stumm is the iron king of Germany.
He owns enormous foundries at Neun
kirchen, where over 9,000 men are em
ployed. None of his workmen may get
married, change their place of residence
or join a society without his permission.
He gives them good advice in regard to
investments, and aide them in many
ways. He is a member of the Reich
stag, and was ennobled by’ Kaiser
Friedrich. |
—Mr. Stanley relates that one day
while conversing with a friendly tribe,
during his recent travels, one of the
chiefs present inquired how many wives
he possessed. Upon Mr. Stanley inno
cently replying that he had none all
those present stood up like one man and
unanimously exclaimed: “What a
splendid liar! 1 ’ They intensely admired
the apparent calmness with which he
had, as they thought, tried to pass off
on them a wondrous traveler’s tale.
—Joseph Clark Thom is a young
Chinaman who is now’ entitled to be
called Dr. Thom. He took his degree
of M. D. at the Long Island Medical
Hospital, and held his own with some
exceptionally able young men in a class
of fifty. He will settle in New York
City. He says that he does not expect
that he will have much practice among
people of his own race; they will seek
relief at the hands of Mott street
quacks, just as they have always done.
—Prince Bismarck after passing his
state examination in law at the Univer
sity of Berlin was made official law re
porter at one of the courts of that city.
But Bismarck, the young law reporter,
lacked the discretion and diplomacy of
Bismarck the Chancellor. He one day
engaged in a wordy war with a certain
pig-headed witness and at last threat
ened the object of his wrath that he
would have him kicked out. The judge,
however, reproved the young reporter
by saying that he attended to the kicking
out. “Well,” said Bismarck to the ob
jectionable witness, “be careful what
you say or I will get the judge to kick
you out”
“A LITTLE NONSENSE.’’
—Teacher —“Go on. What is the next
event recorded?” Boy—“Um tired out,
sir. Won’t you please let the rest of the
history repeat itself?”
—“Johnny, do you love your teach
er?” Johnny (with a saintly expres
sion) —“Yes’m! I love all my enemies.”
—Van Dorn’s Magazine.
—Mrs. Bullion —“Is that coachman of
yourn a mulatter?” Mrs. Mushroom—
“No; he ain’t a mulatter. He’s the
next grade whiter; he’s a squadron.”—
America.
—Cumso (reading)—“Prof. Blank
sley is an agnostic.” Mrs. Cumso—
“What a lot of diseases that man has!
I read the other day that he was a dys
peptic.”—Harper’s Bazar.
- Clara— “How deliciously fresh and
pure and clear the landscape looks this
evening!” Flora—“ Ya-as. I just read
that some Pinkerton detectives are
scouring this part of tbo country.”—
Pittsburgh Bulletin.
Nephew “Why, uncle, I thought
aunt was coming with you.” Uncle—
“ Yes, she was; but we could only scrape
up money enough to get one ticket.
She said she could not come without!
me, and that’s why she didn’t come.”—
West Shore.
—First servant —“How do you like
your new place?” Second servant—“l
don’t like it at all.” “What is the mat
ter? Do they treat you rudely?” “Oh,
no; but they talk so loud that I can
hear every word they say without hav
ing to listen, and I ain’t used to that.”
—Texas Siftings.
—“What are your charges, doctor?”
“My terms are three dollars a visit,
madam.” “Is that for both the rheum
atism and malaria?” “Yes.” “Well,
times are hard and money does not
fetch the interest it used to. Suppose
you let the rheumatism stand and euro
only the malaria?"—Jury.
—McMullen—“Begor, I’ll never growl
at a two-dollar poll-tax again. Here's
ivery Frenchman in France has to pay
twinty-five dollars a year. How’s that
for a tax?” Rounder—“ Ain’t you mis
taken, Mack? It's only foreigners that
axe to be taxed that way.” McMullen
(scornfully)—“Well, if a Frinchman
isn’t a furriner, wliatis he?” —Lawrence
American, 7