The Middlebury people's press. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1841-1843, 1843-09-06
From the Bennington Banner.
The Tarif-Wool.
LETTER FROM MIR. HALL.

Enoch Davis Esq.-Sr:
learn from your paper that the following
statement in relation 10 the tariff act now il
force has been made in the Vermont Palri
OF published at Montpelier.
"Was it not well understood bv our dele
"gaiion in Congress. pending the tariff b'I
''of the late session, that il afforded no pro
Tection to the wool growers of Vermont
During this time did not NJ. Hall on the
first District, say 10 Mr.. Fillmore of New
York substantially, that the clause pretend
ing 10 project WOOL was humbuy, or thai
at afforded little or no protection 10 the
wool grow
To these questions so far rs they apply
10 The tariff bill as ii finally passed ana be.
came law, say unequivocally, that so far
as know and believe, it was NOT under.
stood by The Vermont delegation in Congess
that II afforded no adeqdale protection 10 the
wool growers of This state. 1T WAS
NOT so UNDERSTOOD BY ME-.
further say that Mr.. Hall of the first district
nerer said 10 Mr.. Fillmore of New York
or any other person, that the clause pretend.
aug TO project wool was humbug, or tina,
1t afforded little or no protection TO III. wool
grower. Nor did Mr. Hall ever say any
thing like it in reference to that tariff
bill.
With the bill as reported by the committee
Of Ways and Means, of which Mr.. Fillmore
WIS chairman, vas dissatisfied, and 10 that
bill | expressed strong opposition both to
Mr.. Fillmore and on the floor of The House.
In this opposition | understood the whole
delegation TO concur.
That bill proposed 10 impose a nominal
duly of per cent, upon all wool costing
under 8 cents per ID. and duty of 80 per
cent upon all wool costing over cents per
ID. was dissatisfied with this provision
because believe that the cost of wool 10
The foreign countries, as shown at the Gus
tom Houses by The importers, was not true
test Of its quality. and that under its proyis-
ions large quantities of fine wool coming in
direct competition with the wool of Yer.
mont woulI be imported under the nominal
duty Of per cent, and because also thought
that more protection than would be given
by duty Of 80 per cent ought TO be afford.
ed 10 the higher priced wool.-In this dis
satisfaction understood the whole delega-
lion 10 concur. Mr. Slade and myself were
dcputed by the delegation 10 go before the
committee of Ways and Means. and endeav.
or 10 procure tbeir aid in improving the bill.
A majority of the committee including the
chairman expressed their willingness 10 put
wool upon mn equal footing with other ar
Ilcios IN the bill, and especially TO furnish
us much protection TO wool, rs was afforded
20 the wool manufacturer. II was suggest
ed by the committee that If duty of the
same per cent was imposed upon wool that
was imposed upon WOODEN goods, the wool
grower would have the whole benefit Of the
protection, and the manufacturer would have
none and former tariffs were cited TO show
that higher duties had always been imposed
upon wooden goods than on the raw mate.
Tlals. 1t was found that by the tariff act of
1882 the duty on woolens was 80 per cent,
wnIle that on wool was ouly equivalen, 10
about 40 per cent. The tariff bill as pro-
posed, ii was said, kept the articles in nearly
abe same ratio. The duty on wooden goods
wos reduced 10 ferry per cent, and that on
wool TO 81 per cent. In this reasoning we
did not concur, and partly by the exer,ions
Of the dergalion in the House. and partly
by the all Of the committee the bill was al
Tered 10 Inc shape in which il became q
law.
by the bill as ii was passed, the cos, of
wool which was to come in under the duty
Of per cen, was reduced from to cents
and il mus, he coarse wool. Fine wool,
though il might cost less than cents, was
subject TO the higher duly. This was Deem
cd most important provision. BIZ the old
law, all wool under cents whether fine or
coarse had been free-not subject 10 any d.
ty.
BY the bill as il passed duty of 80 per
cent, an also 3 cents per h.. equiqnlent
10 40 per cent was imposed. ! was salts
fed that this placed wool upon equal fnuiing
with the other articles in the bill. and espe.
ciallv upon an equality with WOODEN goods
the duty upon such goods. being 40 per
ceni,-ihs same rs upon wool. | would
,,avc gone for higher duty upon woolens.
and upon wool, and also upon many o'her
articles, but it was the best bill that could
be obtained. and vo,ed for il cheerfny and
hearlliy. believe if it is suffered 10 con-
Time. and is fairly carried into operation
IL will furnish fair and adequate protection
10 the wool growing and other important
Of the country. Whether it is 10
he Suffered 10 remain and rcsusiiate the
4 rooping business of the Country. or is des-
tined 10 fall under the blnws of party
whIrh. every where but hero-and here. nj /,
ways. except just before an election hold !
forth tie eulopiau system of Free Trade as
the remedy for all the evils Of the body polls !
iic-lime will determine.
an, sir, very respectfully voa~s,
HiLAND HALL.
Remington. Aug. &c, ls4s. !