The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1871-07-18
agricultural department.
BY ALBERT CHAPMAN.
Wool and the Tariff.

culated to mislead the very men whom
they desire to assist. The New York
Economist occasionally undertakes to
teach the Western farmers how unwise
they are in regarding the tariff on wool as
identical with their interests, and in its
latest issue we find the following para
graph, which is designed to instruct the
farmer in regard to business which they
certainly understand much better than
the New York editor. This journal says
"For the past year or two Northern
and Western farmers-after our legisla-
tors mad passed a special prohibitory tar
iff law on wool, if not woolens, to suit
their in;erests--have discovered that leg
islation, after all, does not regulate the
value of any commodity; and instead Of
obtaining higher prices for wool, they
have been compelled to sell for compare
lively lower rates. This we predicted at
the passage of the high tariff; and when the
prediction turned out to DO a positive re-
atty, the farmers became disguised with
the prohibitory act, and through spite,
commenced to kill their sheep in thous-
ands, because the home manufacturer
would not bid higher for their wool.
But the manufacturing interests had to
contend with the difficulties which put
many in sorry pligt, which brought
the bailiffs and tax-gatherers to their door
and as their demands could not be salts
fed at once, the motion of the wheel and
loom ceased with the click of the shuttle,
and the auctioneer's flag, in many instan-
ces, gave the people to understand that a
prohibitory tariff is not sufficient guar.
antee to foster manufacturing inthis coun-
try"
Here we are informed that the farmers
are disguised with the tariff on wool that
they killed their sheep out of spite of the
tariff, and that they were discouraged at
the low prices offered by the manufactur.
ers:
Now, the plain truth is, that there is
not an intelligent wool grower or farmer
who keeps sheep in the West or East,who
does not know very well that at the pre-
sent time prices of wool are solely main
tanned because the manufactures cannot
procure woods grown cheaply at the Cape
or Brazil, and in Australia by half
savage population, at prices that would
preclude the growing Of wool altogether
in this country, except on land that had
DO marketable value.
Then, again, it is untrue that the wool
growers and farmers for the past two
years killed their sheep by thousands out
of spite at the tariff; on the contrary.
they killed them because under the ex-
element occasioned by the war prices
and the stimulus of short supply of wool
their farms had become overstocked with
sheep, and they could not DO fed and
kept, at the same time returning profit
even at high prices. 1t was found that
in our mixed husbandry there were other
stock that must be raised, and it would
not do to turn the whole surface of med
ium sized farms into sheep pastures
There are more sheep in Michigan this
year than there were in 1864, but not so
many as there were in 1866 and 1867 !;
but there are more cattle and hogs now
than there were in either of those years.
The farmer found that his land would not
only support a certain number of sheep
per acre, in proportion to his other stock,
and being overstocked he was obliged to
get rid OF them land the tariff had no more
to do with this necessity than the Econo.
mia.-On the contrary, when the tariff
on woods and wooden goods was settled
upon and continued permanent, large
number Of flock masters continued to
maintain their focks which would other.
wise have been disposed of, and it is the
tariff that to-day encourages them to
grow wool, when if it were abolished
there would not be sheep upon their
premises
If it is the policy Of the Economist to
deliver the whole wool growing interest
over to foreign importers, and cause it to
shrink to the smallest possible dimen.
slons in the country, then let the tariff
be abolished, and we shall see wool grow
ing reduced to the same level as the
foreign article; while our Western wooden
mills will become as picturesque ruins as
the traveller on the great German river
would wish to see.
The Economist also says :-"By all
means then, let us have free trade in wool
as the farmers in this country cannot il
they would, raise it in sufficient qualities
at any reasonable price to supply the
necessities of our manufacturing interests,
and the result is, production cannot be
diversified until our wooden producers are
enabled to obtain the raw material on an
equal footing with those of other counter.
les. The Western farmers have clearly
put themselves out of count when they
commenced to kill their sheep, as giving
up the whole question Of wool growing
for they found it too unproftable-oul
winters are too long, and they cannot af
ford to fodder their sheep. Away, then
to the plains of California, Texas, Soutl
America, Australia and the Cape
must we henceforth look for supplies o
the staple, if our wooden interests are t,
thrive on this Continent, and they can
not thrive or prosper without Free Wool
and Free Dyes"
What keeps up the price of wool at tn
present time to the prices which rule, i
simply the tariff on wooden goods, and tn
tariff on foreign woods. Abolish them
and our whole agricultural and and me
chanical industry becomes tributary t
the fereign importer, and these interest
seem to be of far more consequence to tn
Economist and the Eastern writers o
the wool markets, than the home indus
tries and the industries of Michigan fal
mers.
We say to the wool growers that tn
editor who proposes to thus place them o
level with the bush-rangers of Austrs
liza, or the Doors of South Africa, or tn
half-breed Indians of the South Amer
Pampas, is the enemy of American agr
culture, and he ought to be watched an
rx lo o&a1 III