The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1866-10-24
THE TARIFF.
LETTER EaoM lioN. I. p. pot.N,
MoNrpELIER. Oct. Is. ls66.

MONTPELIER, Oct 10, 1866.
Dear IS6" Your letter Of the 5th
INST, enclosing a copy of resolutions adopt
ed by the addison County Wool Growers
Association, was received the evening be-
lore left home, and | have n,t been
able TO rerly sooner. You ask me to
give my views upon the tariff question 70
tar as 1t regards the interests OF wool and
ITS manufacture. My general views upon
the SUBJECT Of protection for the products
and manufactures of our own country.
and especially of the entire inadeauacy of
the existing tariff for the PROPER protecs
tion Of the wool interest of Vermont
were briefly, but | believe plainly ex-
pressed in letter to lion. James M.
Slade, which | believe was generally
published by the newspapers of the State
lhe ordinary necessity for protection is
now greatly enhanced by the vastly in
creased cost of production, occasioned by
the great events of the last few years,
whereby the currency of the country has
been largely inflated, and the expenses OF
the government so increased, as to re-
qnirc vast burden of taxation upon
every form of productive industry I'M
derstanding that the whole subject of
tarlil duties would come before Congress
for revision during the last session, gave
AS much attention and study rs could to
those interests particularly affecting my
own constituents, with TIE desire to do
them what service could when the sub
Ject should come before the Senate.
/ understood that the rate of duties
upon wool ard manufacturing of wool,
fixed by the Bill which passed the House
at the lust session was one agreed upon
and adjusted by a meeting of leading pro-
duceis and manufacturers Of wool, and
that their agreemen; was adopted by the
Comntte who reported the bill / think
it was SO stated by Mr. Morrill,, the
Chairman in the House. | should there
fore have voted for the bill with such
provisions as it contained on those sub
lcctS a the same time | must say that
the result of my own examination of the
subject, led me to believe that the rates
OF duty fixed, were much more beneficial
to the manufacturer than to the producer
of wool, and that they still would retain
their usual preponderance of advantage.
1t will be remembered that the Bill
was not passed in the House until very
near the close OF the session, and when it
came to the Senate it was at time when
there was great pressure Of unfinished
business and when any cause was more
likely TO be damaged than aided by
lengthy debate. The m 10 to postpone
the till TO the next session was urged
mainly upon the ground that there was
not sufficient time to consider bill of 80
much importance and of such extensive
details. The Importance of speedy
consideration and passage of tn bill was
forcibly urged by Mr.. Fessenden tho
Chairman of the Finance Committee,
and by Mr.. Wade OF Ohio, and upon
consultation of the friends of the measure
IT WAS Thought not advisable to spend
any further time in debate upon it. My
colleague in the S,nite and myself would
have very gladly taken a share in the
debate. hal there been the slightest pros
pect of changing the result by our doing
20. The Bill was opposed by nearly all
the Senators from the Western states, hut
| did not und' r,tanl their opposition
arose from any objection to the protection
afforded TO wool, but 10 the high protec-
ton afforded to nearly every species of
maru Il tur =. do not apprehend that
any considerable opposition is to be cx-
pected to the bill 50 far as wool is con-
cerncd.
feel quite able to assure you and the
members Ol the Association you represent,
that thay can safely rely upon my active
CO operation in any and al! measures
tending TO give to the people of my own
State, adequate and ample protection for
their products and manufactures, against
foreign competition,
am very respectfully yours,
LUkE L. POLAND.
NlcroR WRIGHT, Esq, Chairman of Com.