Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1883-09-20

eign woods, was about hye cents pe
pound. (ThiS Democrats, as we have
shown. wanted repealed because too
protective BY the law Of 1867 it wa:
pat at 10 cents per pound on wool val
uRd at last port of export at 32 cents ol
less per pound and IL per centum ad
valorem; and on wools exceeding 81
cents valuation per pound, II cents pei
| pound and 10 per centum ad valOrem
The act of last winter fixed the duties al
10 cents per pound on woods valued al
80 cents per pound or less, and u cents
pound. These rates are for unwasheu
woods. The duty on washed and sconr-
ed woods is fixed at double and triple, re.
spectively. the above rates, following the
law of 1867. 1t will be noted that the
j.. specific duty. through tue classification,
was increased, and the ad valorem duty
was dropped.
! The greatest reduction of duty per
pound valued at so cents and below, per
| p"und, is 3.5 cents, above so cents and
not above 32 cents 1.3 cents, and the av-
erage reduction on that valued above 32
cents is about 3.4 cents. This does not
account for the depression in the price
of wool. That comes from the same
general causes which have brought
down the price of iron, steel, leather,
etc.
Neither in the Senate or House or in
committee, did any Democrat propose
to maintain the duty on wool. The wool
schedule was not reached for cOrSidera-
tion 10y paragraphs in the House, SO we
must, to.learn the position of Demo-
era S, turn to the action in the Senate,
in committee. in general debate and on
general propositions. In the Senate,
August 5, 1892, MIR. Beck of Kentucky
proposed by resolution 25 pei centum
ad valorem duty on all weo!, Il more
than so per cent. reduction, and then he
and Mr.. Bayard. in debate, gave their
views in favor of free trade in wool.
Mr.. Bayard, speaking to the resolu
tion, said:
Whatever may be- the revenue, or
whatever protection may come from it,
let it stand until we deeide- and l hope
we ultimately will--te place it (woeD
on the free list
Twenty-three Democrats, including
Senator Pendleton (no Republican,
voted for the Beck resolution; thirty
Republicans against it and defeated it.
Mr.. Bayard, on February 6, 1888, in
the Senate, moved to fix the duty on
wool at 25 per centum ad valorem. and
advocated his amendment by saying:
i believe that It is all essential for
the success of the manufacturers in this
country that there SHOULD be cheapen-
ing of raw material etc.
Mr.. Beck, on the same day, proposed
to change the classification, as fixed in
the act, because the changing of classi-
fication from 80 to so cents might make
very large increase in duty
And he then further said,
4 do not propose to make wool free. /
wish it could be done
On these propositions Mr.. Pendleton
voted for the decrease.
When Senator Sherman, February 20,
1888, moved to fix the duties on wool st
II and IA cents per pound, instead of 10
and II cents, II Republicans and three
Democrats voted for it and 26 Demo
Gratis against it.
Senator Bayard and other Democrats
in the Senate denounced the wool duties
as fixed in the present law as IAN OBJ
struction to the manufacture of wooden
goods in the country The Senate was
composed of 81 Democrats. 81 Republi
cans and Senators Davis of Illinois and
Malone Of Virginia.
But how stands the case in the House,
with only bare Republican majority ?
Besides the speeches made by Democrats
In favor of free trade and great reduc-
tion of tariff duties, we have much to
guide us to the conclusion that they did |
not favor the rates fixed on wool. but |
wanted them abolished in accordance !
with their state and National platform |
declarations.
Pending the discussion of the tariff |
commission bill, Or March 80, 1882, Mr.. |
Hewett, one of the more moderate of the |
+ 'se trade Democracy, proposed set of
to govern the ways and |
means committee in framing tariff |
bill, the first resolution reading:
THAT all law materials, meaning there
by all materials which have not been
subjected to any process of manufacture,
shall DO placed upon the free list"
He and the other Democrats support
ed and advocated this resolution, which
would put wool ON the free list, but fav-
ored retention of the duties on wool
ems.
During Mr. Hswett's speech in advc-
cacy of his resolutions, question was
asked him:
Mr. Russell-"Is the gentleman in fav-
of the abolition Of the duty on woOl?',
Mr. Hewett, of New York; am ab
in favor of the abolition of the
duty on wool. and | am confirmed in
this view by the opinion of the largest
wool manufacturer in the U. 5. If the
wool growers have removed from them
the burdens of the extra price they pay
on everything they consume they will
receive ample indemnity for any sacri-
flee they may make in the reduction of
the duty on wool"
This emphatic declaration of Mr..
Hewett in favor of the abolition Of the
whole duty On wool met with d hearty
response on the Democratic side of the
House, and above two hundred thouS-
and copies of his speech were ordered
for distribution by Democrats. In the
same speech he said:
Il would blythe removal of duties on
raw material, not woOlensl cheaper
Thus may we in measure
prepare for the great alterations which
of tue world, from causes more power
full than mere human devices, bringing
about the time when atF trade shall be
free"
The utterancs was in accord with
Democratic views in the House.
May I, 1882, just prior to the passage
of the tariff commission bill in the
House, Mr. Mills of Texas offered to re-
commit the bill with instructions to the
to report a free trade tariff
bill similar'to that of 1916, and in ac
cordanee with the old Robert J. Walker
resolutions.
No Republican, but 75 Democrats OF
the House, voted for the Mills resolu-
tions. Leedom and LeFevre voted for
them, the other Ohio Democrats dodg-
ed the vote or were absent. So OF 9th
erS.