Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

13 articles on this Page

FACTS TO PONDER.

News
Cite
Share

FACTS TO PONDER. We must again protest against the very auggestive utterances of Mr Richards, Llynclys, who, while assisting in the organ- isation of local agricultural associations, con- trives to insinuate Protectionist opinions that are calculated to create regrettable differences if persisted with. Recently we had occasion to remonstrate with this gen- tleman for his very pointed references to tariff reform at these gatherings of farmers, but he is evidently determined to propagate a thoroughly party question as the oppor- tunity serves. At Meifod, the other even- ing, he urged farmers (assembled for the formation of a local branch of the Associa- tion) to consider Protection from the stand- point of their own interests, and "only to support or oppose the tariff reform propa- ganda as they considered it would be fa- vourable or detrimental to them." The phrasing of this exhortation is very astute, and we can imagine Mr Richards indig- nantly repudiating a perfectly natural in- terpretation of it. He would avoid any troublesome misconception of this studied ambiguity by an explicit statement of his own views of Protection as an agricultur- ist, and if he is not wishful to adopt that clear and courageous course, he should limit his political purview" to sugges- tions less pregnant with partisan mischief, Let us once again discuss with farmers generally the question as to whether Pro- tection would profitably or adversely affect them. The very latest contribution to this important consideration is made by Mr 'Austen Chamberlain, who, in the course of an address to his own constituents the other evening, treated tariff reform chiefly as it concerns agriculture. After lamenting a great shrinkage in the acreage of various crops caused by the importation of cheap food stuffs, he went on to deny emphatically that the changes which fiscal reform pro- posed would mean dearer bread." Well, then, let us ask the intelligent farmers in Montgomeryshire how they can expect to receive any possible benefit from tariffs which do not raise the price of the products of, their soil ? That tariffs will increase prices every sensible person, of course, knows. The whole history of tariffs proves this. But this fact, notwithstanding, he is a peculiarly credulous farmer who believes that Colonial Preference, which is the basis of Mr Chamberlain's proposals, can profit him to the merest extent. Under this sys- tem of preference, all grain from our colonies would be admitted free, as at present, while foreign corn would bear a tax, the purpose being to give the Colonial farmer a monopoly of the British market. Now what will it profit the Montgomeryshire wheat-grower to turn aside foreign grain in favour of the Colonial article ? So long as Colonial and foreign corn is imported—as it must be of necessity—how can our home' farmers be profited by tariffs ? Those of them who are foolish enough to grasp at the shadow of two shillings more for the quarter of wheat, lose sight of the substance. Taking four quarters as the average produce per acre, the Montgomeryshire farmer would gain to the extent of eight shillings per acre. Would this increased value encourage him to enlarge his grain acreage, while, on the other hand, he was required to pay more for feeding stuffs, manures, tools and imple- ments, rent and taxes and wages ? For be it remembered that Mr Chamberlain has given the farm labourer to expect an in- crease of wages as the result of higher prices. In the old days of Protection, the idea was to keep up the price of corn, on which the landlords based their rents. Upon what calculation do you fix the i rent ? a land agent was asked at the Par- liamentary inquiry in 1822, and gave as*his answer: On the average of wheat at 10s a bushel." Let the Montgomeryshire farm- er ask himself whether present rebatements of rent would be continued if his corn crops yielded but even eight shillings more per acre. Moreover, there are farmers other than grain-growers whom taxes on grain could not possibly benefit. Would the dairy farmer and the stock farmer, for in- stance, welcome a rise in the price of feed- ing stuffs ? Cannot farmers realise the in- evitable fact that owing to a reign of dear- ness the demand for their produce would be substantially lessened, and, consequently, their profits ? Why is it, do they ever ask themselves, that in Protectionist Germany agriculture has long been suffering a de- pression quite as acute as in this country ? Mr Rider Haggard, who has carried out many important investigations into the con- dition of British agriculture, recently told the Central Chamber of Commerce that the effect of a retaliative policy upon agricul- ture must be, in his opinion, something very nearly approaching ruin." Nor have times changed so materially since Mr Cham- berlain himself solemnly warned farmers against the folly of following after a Pro- tectionist will-o'-the-wisp. "If," he de- clared, "they study history at all, they will find that the condition of the farmer was never so hopeless, and that the state of the labourer was never so abject, as when the corn was kept up at high value by a pro- hibitive or protective duty." These are a few facts which the farmers of Montgomery- shire may ponder, since Mr Richards has intimated that tariff reform is one of the ,questions that come within the "purview" of their associations.

NEWTOWN AFFAIRS.

IN CALM WATERS.

FOR " BROTHERHOOD AND EQUALITY."

IS IT TRUE?

MONTGOMERYSHIRE ODDFELLOWS.

A LIVELY SITUATION.

________ JNEWTOWN URBAN DISTRICT…

A DRAPER'S CUSTOMER.

Insanitary Montgomeryshire.

NEWTOWN'S SEWAGE FARM.I

R

---------_._--._----------SEEN…