Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1844-06-14
wooI-THE PRESENT TARIFF.

= The Albany Argus complains that the existing tariff
isunus towards the wool grower because II does not
impose duty enough the cheaper kinds ofwool AS
have before stated the wool ostng less than cents
per pound so much Of which is imported Is ofa coarse
qnality-such is not and cannot be raised in this
country dnd therefore does not enter into competition
with domestic wool II is used in the manufacture
of coarse cloths, blankets carpeting and the like
whereas wool is consumed for broadcloths cassi-
meres, home made" hannes, hosiery, &c Now if a
larger duty imposed upon this wool, it
necessarily from the consumer Of the frst-named
articles, for the manufacturer will be obliged to charge
higher prices than heretofore for them. So the in
reality would press in far greater proportion upon the
poorer classes-for whom the Argus and its kindred
prints profess such hearty love and deep regard
hhas been a rule in the construction of tariffs not
articles of necessity which be obtained only Of
foreign countries and by attempting unsuccessfully
thank fortune y to increase the duty coarse wool
the Locofocos only display their petty spite against
home industry.
But the party mot even consistent with itself in this
matter Under the compromise act of 1888, wool cost
ing less than cents per pound was admitted DUTY
FREE and the Locofocos in Congress bitterly resisted
the attempt to impose trAing duty of per cent
il, for the sake of revenue. Where then was their
boosted regard for the interests of the grower p
Where their warm friendship for the farmer and his
focks Where their keen of injustice at per-
hitting manufacturers to receive a necessary article
not the product of the United States nearly duty free
Where their false imputation upon the Wings, of pro-
tectng manufactures the expense of agriculture ?"
These feelings did not exist. And all this fiery zeal is
the mushroom growth Of few months, intended to gull
the tariff men of the North by professions of stronger
protcctonism than the Wings themselves. The veil
however is too Aimsy conceal in the least this shall
lovy int oc
for the insidous article in the Argus is evidently aimed
at Vermont, and therefore notice twill never be
deceived by the hollow-hearted cries of demagogues
who have just made desperate effort to lower the du
ties such wool raised here.
Bnt the Argus says this imported wool DOES compete
produced in this country, and quotes the Bos
ton Cultvator to prove that, AFTER BEING cLEANsED
much of is equal the American product. Now it
happens that the tariff of 1919 provides for this very
contingency enacting that all wool which is filled
with tags dirt &c. to be worth less than cents per
pound, shall pay duties upon the price which ii would
have been worth if perfectly clean. So that argument
goes for nothing. Again-if the imported wool is of
SO fine description to compete with ours, why is it
returned COARSE" wool in the last Treasury doc
uments-the highest of all authority
In conclusion we wish to ask few plain questions
on this subject If the Locofocos perfectly con-
tent when there duty at all on wool, why
are they FESTIVE when there is duty Of per
cent Again-if5 per cent. is al uerely nominal du
ty acrding protection at all to the wool-grower"
how much good will Mr.. MKay's BILL which imposes
duty of 10 per cent three times nothing at Aldo
him Thirdly, and last-if fine wool has greatly in
creased in price under the tariff Of si2, thus benefit
ting the farmer for whose interest you solicit
GUS why do you wish to cut down the duty one-thrd
that article "Oh," suppose the answer will be-
these new-angled notions of only mark the pro-
gressive course Of the democratic principle"