Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1843-09-29
THE TARIrr-WOoL.


Hiland Hall to the editor of the State Ban
era Waterman.
LETTER FROM MR.. HALL
ENocn DAVIS, Esq.-Sir:
learn from your paper that the fol-
lowing statement in relation to the tariff act
now ia force has been made in the Vermont
Patriot published at Montpelier.
"Was it not we'll understood by our del
egation in Congress, pending the tariff bill
of the late session, that it afforded 10 pro-
=, lection to the wool-growers of Vermont >
During this time did not Mr.. Hall, of the
first District, say to Mr.. Fillmore of New
York, substantially, that the clause pretend
ing to protect wool was humbug, or that it
afforded little or no protection to the wool
grower p
To these questions so far as they apply TO
the tariff bill as it finally passed and became
"A law, say unequvocally, that so far as
know and believe, it was NOT understood
by the Vermont delegation in Congress that
it afforded no adequate protection of the
wool growers of this State. II WAS NOT
SO UNDERSTOOD BY Me. / further
say that Mr. Hall of the first district neUcr
said to Mr. Fillmore of New York, or to
any other person, that the clause pretending
to protect wool was humbug or that it ai-
forded little or no protection to the 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 commit
tee of Ways aud Means, of which Mr.. Fill
more was chairman, | was dissatisfied, and
to 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 to impose a nominal
duty Of 5 per cent upon all wool costing
under cents per pound | was dissatisfied
with this provision because belived that the
cost of wool in the foreign countries, as
shown at the Custom Houses by the impor-
tiers, was not true test of its quality, and
that under its provisions large quantities of
fine wool coming i'll direct competition with
the wool of Vermont would be imported un-
der the nominal duty of per cent, and
= because also thought that more protection
than would be given by a duty of thirty per
cent ought to be afforded to the higher
priced wool. In this dissatisfaction | I'M
derstood the whole delegation TO concur
Mr.. Slade and myself were deputed by the
delegation 10 go before the committee of
Ways and Means, and endeavor to procure
their aid in improving the bill. A majority
of the committee including the chairman
Expressed their willingness to put wool, upon
an equal footing with other articles in the
bill, and to furnish as much protection 10
wool as was afforded to the wool manufac-
turer 1t was suggested by the committee
1hat Il duty of the same per cent. was im-
posed 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 materials 1t was found
that by the tariff act of 1882 the duty on
wooleRs was 80 per cent, while that on wool
was only equivalent to about forty per cent.
The tariff bill as proposed, it was said, kept
the articles in nearly the same ratio. The
duty on WOODEN goods was reduced to forty
per cent, and that on wool to thirty per
4. cent. In this reasoning we did not concur,
and partly by the exertions Of the delegation
in the House, and partly by the aid of the
. .committee the bill was altered to the shape
9 in which it became law
BY the bill as ii passed, the cost of wool /
which was TO come in under the duty of 5
per cent. was reduced from s to cents,
and it must be coarse wool. Fine wool,
though it might cost less than cents, was
subject to the higher duty This was DEEM
ed most important provision. BY the old
law, all wool under eight cents, whether fine
or coarse, had been free-not subject to any
duty.
BY the bill as it passed duty of 30 per
cent and also 3 cents per pound, equivalent
to 40 per cent was imposed. | was salts
fed that this provision placed wool upon an
equal footing with the other articles in the
bill, and especially upon an equality with
WOODEN goods-the duty upon such goods
being forty per cent.-the same as upon
wool. | would have gone for higher duty
upon woolens, and upon wool, and also up
on many other articles, but it was the best
bill that could be obtained, aud voted for
at cheerfnly and heartily believe if it was
suffered to continue, and is fairly carried in
TO operation it will furnish fair and ade-
quate protection to the wool growing and
other important interests of the country
Whether it is suffered to remain and resus-
cltate the dropping business Of the country ;
or is destined to fall under the blows of a ,
party which, every where but here, and |
here, always, except just before an election {
hold forth the Utopian system of free {
trade as the remedy for all the evils of the S
body politic-time will determine.
l am, sir, very respectfully yours, i
Inland HALL. /
bennington, Aug. 26, ie43.
Too Gown contemporary remarks, that peo- ]