The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1843-08-29

provisions on this subject, will not Pro'eot "e'h'
But there is something more serious involved IN 'hS
case than false logic. II is either specimen OF gross
ignorance, or an attempt TO impose upon the pubic
He may embrace either horn Of the dilemma.
But this boosted friend Of the farmers attempts 10
make them believe that. by the present tariff msr'n0
selected feeces Gun be imported under the per cent
clause. Now say, withou, any qualification that
this statement is uniounded In the first place such
Aeeces canno, be purchased for cents per pound,
and he admits it, the very article IN question is
words are "Even nerino selected feeces half blood,
and native wool from Buenos Ayres, have been sold
at public auction in New York, at prices averaging
from 10 cents per pound" Here II will be seen
that the wool from Buenos Ayres, taking his state
ment 10 be true, varied from to l3 cents. This
wool he divides into three classes -mcrino selected
eeces half blood and native and he tells us that the
acreage is from to 3 cents per pound. All this
may be true and still the "seected merino feeces"
may have been worth 30 or % cents per pound; and
the only reason why they sold AS low as cents,wa
owing their being averaged with the conrs naive
wool, which is of very inferior quality. But take
his statement just il is, and what does 1t prove?
Why that selected merino wool fiom Buenos Ayres
has been sold for 10 cents per pound. And what
follows? Not that paid but a mills per pound, as
he asserts but that il under the other clause o:
the law and so was subjected n very high rate Of
duty. We will follow out his statement, and see TO
what results it will bring lie tells that merino
selected eeces sold in 1871 for IL cents per pound
and tina, the prices have since fallen rs per cent?
this would bring the price down 10 81 cents in our
market allow Is cents for and charges of mpor
Ii, ia 70 sho
ket down to cents per pound. Now, by the provis-
ions of the law, what would be the duty upon such
wool! Not per cent, as he would have the farm
ers believe, bu, GA per cent This would be the
duty in such case; the 80 per cent, nd valorem
would stand 80 per cent and the 3 cents specific
would be 374 per cent,-nakng 674 per cent, us
before stated; from 674-thereby showing that his
statement, ie 621 per cert. distant from the truth.
But W i'll not examine his statements in detail.
Admit that his selected merno 1leeces be bought
for or for cents per pound in foreign market
even this would not entitle them to the privilege Of
coming in under the five per cent. For the law not
only requires that the wool cost cents less, but
it expressly provides that it must DO "coarse," in
contradiction from fine merino feeces. MIR NJ. seems
disposed TO substitute his assertion for the express
provision of the law. While The per cent clause
of the law applies exclusively 10 coarse wool, he is
eful TO substtu e mertno fine in its place.; and,
satisfied with this, he must have something lit
tie more at variance with the law, and consequently
he adds selected aeeces. Now suppose n cargo of
coarse or inferior wool should be imported and there
should be found only Of his fine merino selected
Heeces, what would be the effect? 1t would subject
the whole cargo though it might be worth
than per pound, to the highest rate of duty.
The law provides. "That when wool of different quail
tiles, and different kinds or sorts, is imported in the
bag PACKAGE al lshal be appraised the value
ofthe finest most valuable kind sort, and duty
charged thereon accordingly. Provided further tina,
if bales Of different qualities embraced in the
same invoice at the same price the value ofthe whole
shall be appraised according TO the value Of the bale Of
the best quany.''
These and several other provisions were incorpo-
rated into the last tariff for the express purpose Of
curing the evils and abuses which existed under the
former law; and yet, whene the editor Of the Ad
vocaie speaks upon the subject he has not the candor
to notice these new provisions, but speaks Of the
law as though it were an exact copy of the law Of
1888 or 1892 far the subject Of wool is concerned
In the very article before us, us have already
seen, he refers 10 the importation in lS4l under the
old law, to show what must be the effect Oft pres
emf tariff, as though both laws were precisely u
like. But the old law differed from the present in
three important particulars; LIST, the maximum price
of the favored wool under the old law, cents,
under the present law it is z; I'd, the WOOL by
the old law, admitted free Of duty-the cent
wool, by the present law, pays per cent; 3D., the
present law contains several distinct provisions intro
dnced for the very purpose Of preventing the evils
which were found TO exist under the old law. And
we may add another difference the old law allowed
credit, and the present law requires cash duties
We have already noticed the injustice of referring
TO the importaons under the former law. 10 show
the operations Of the present law. will give spec
linen ofthe mportatons of wool into Boston, both
before and after the passage ofhe present tariff law
by which it will be seen that the searching provs
ions of our present law have checked the evils of
which the farmers had just to complain under
the old law. There was imported into the District
of Boston and Charlestown:
From Sept. /, 1871, to March 81, 1912, of wool
not exceeding cents per pound, 2,s52 500 lbs
value $I97,l1O.
From Sept l, 1912, to Mach 81, 1913, Of wool