Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1867-09-27

wanted to manufacture the cloth needed Tor
use in the country,
Edwin Hammond Of Middlebury made some
remarks in regard to the agreement made be-
tween the manufacturers and wool growers.
A great many Of the manufacturers we're al
ways opposed to any union with the growers,
and great many Of the manufacturers in
Massachusetts, and elsewhere never became
parties to that agreement He believed that
those Of them who made an agreement to act
in concert with tho wool growers upon the
tariff question remained faithful to their agree.
ment, and il was TO be remembered that the
present tariff on wool, which was 4 cents per
pound mure than under the preceding duty,
was obtained thr0' the assistance Of the man
uacturers. He believed that the prices OF
wool would improve when the country became
cleared of the present accumulations of wool
and cloth. And even at present prices he
could see no reason for any encouragement
for the business of wool growing in Vermont
was more profitable now than it was thirty
years ago. Then the product was not more
than three pounds per head.
Victor Wright Of Middlebury rose to pro-
test against provoking fight with the manu-
hcturers. The present tariff could not have
been cbtoined without the aid Of the manufac-
turers, and he did not believe it could be re-
tanned without their aid. lie thought the
wool growers would gain more by being friend
ly to the manufacturers than they would by
fighting against them.
Henry CLARK of Rutland defended the man
ufacturers from the accusations that had been
made against them OF acting in bad faith with
the wool growers. The present tariff could
never have been obtained without the aid OF
the manufacturers.
Mr.. Hammona,pf Middlebnry said that
when the question of fixing the rate Of duty
was before the wool growers and manuhctur-
ers' committee. at New York. the wool grow
efs did not dare suggest "a hig her rate of duty
than the one now IN force. The rates Of 2
and Il cents per pound were suggested and
discussed at this meeting, but il was finally
concluded that if they made an fort to get
more than 10 cents per 10. and 0 per cen, ad
vaiorem, they would get nothing az ali.
Judge Colburn Of Springfield believed that
the wool growers might have COTTON more
favorable tariff without the manufacturers than
with them. II ey certainly could il they had
gone TO work in the right way.
George Campbell Of Yves minister said thai
he had lately been told by Buenos Ayres WOO
merchants in New York and Buenos Ayres
wool growers, that our present tariff was
a benefit to the wool growers that il was
obtained through the assistance Of the manu-
tacturers, and that the wool growers should
cultivate a congeniai feeling with the manu-.
iac'urers. In answer to questions by Mr.
Clark Of Rutland, Mr.. Merriam Of Boston said
thai he had no doubt that If the wool gro wers
had made direct issue with the manuiactur-
ers upon The tariff question the wool growers
would have triumphed He also said thai
he bad never known d Massachusetts United
States Senator to vote IN favor OF an agricul-
tuiai measure. They always ad favored The
manu- -oturers and he supposed they always
would
d. Smith Of Dandy said that the wool
growers were better IF than the cheese ma
kers. ast year he sold his cheese for 81
cents per pound and few days ago be was
offered only 10 cents per pound for the same
dairy Of cheese. He was in favor Of supper
ting the wool growers, and urged all farmers
to join with the wool growers in keeping up
the present rate Of duty on wool and cloth
People could better afford to pay high prices
for The cloth they use than to have the wool
growing business abandoned by those farmers
who are now engaged in it.
The discussion was quite spirited, and was
well attended and listened to. 1t was by far
the most spirited meeting of the week, and
it was not until 100 clock hat any movement
was made for adi9iTnment.