Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1883-09-20
THE WOOL TARIFF.
THE DEMOCRATIC CIRCULAR ON
THE WOOL TARIFF EN-
PL0DED.
Extract from The Speech Of General
J. Warren Keller. at Carey, Wy
andOt County. September 10.

: \ pamphlet is before me-. issued anC
: circulate ed by the Ohio Democratic exc
! cutive committee, on the subject of th(
wool tar # recently ad opted by Congress
from cIuSing paragraph of which
quote:
Farmers of Ohio, can you trust the
party that has. in our National Legisla
ture, outraged End robbed you, at the
bidding of the capitalists of New Eng
land =
Tie party that created tn S great
wrong cannot be lrusted'tO give you re
lief. The Democrats N Congress were
your friends. They sought by every
means III Their power to prevent this
WTOng from Ueiug done
The writer of the pamphlet. if his OBJ
ject was To crowd into it as much pure
fa,sehoOd as possible, was fortunate. He
comedies that no effective tariff for the
D. otectOn Of The wool interest was pass
ell un.. 1867. This was a Republican
measure passed through Congress after
a long fight W tn free-trade Democrats.
Democrats voted solidiy against t. No
protective tar, 4 law was ever passed by
The Democratic party. and every one
was eDacIed in sp;le of It's opposition.
IN the yeas Immediately preceding
the passage OF the act OF 1867, which
gave protection TO wool, Democrats in
and out of Congress v.oienty opposed
the enactment OF such a law, and they
have denounced it ever since.
First, let as see how the Ohio Demo-
Gratis stand on the question of wool pro
lection.
The tariff on wool prior to the act Of
1867 was about > cents on the pound
and not sufficiently protective, yet at a
January s convention in 1867 (befOre
the passage of the protective act.) Ohio
| Democrats declared that the high pro
tecUiVe tariffs - plainly violate
the equity and spirit of the Constitu
tion:'
And further,
THAT the people, and especially those
of the agricultural states, have suffered
too long the eSacIions of high pTotec-
tive taiIGI-s,' etc.
In the Ohio Democratic platform of
| 1868 see nothing on the tariff. That
year the party in Ohio exhausted its
platform ability in declaring there never
! had been rebellion, and that Ohio
Democrats had neither the purpose nor
desire to re-estab ish slaverylir Slavery
! mad long before been abolished.
The Ohio Democratic platform of
1869 denounced the high protective tariff
and concludes its resolution with these
words:
We demand its repeal and the sub
stitution Of another based upon revenue
principles alone, approXmatirg free
trade as closely as possible
This was after the protective wool
tar & of 1867 had largely extended the
wool Iterests in the United States, but
Democra S then wanted free trade in
wool.
June I, 1870, Ohio Democrats again re-
solved:
That we denounce the present tariff
including that on wool as gi-
gantic robbery Of the labor and industry
of our country = and that they
should no longer be submitted to, and
that no candidate for Congress nor any
other office, is worthy of support, who
is not in favor Of low revenue tariff,
which closely approXimates to free
trade
|. And in 1877 they resolved in conven-
tion tlat they were
opposed to the protection theory, So
called
Again, in 1872, Ohio Democracy in
platform say:
'We insist that our tariff laws should
be formed with view to revenue, and
not to tax the people for the benefit of
industries
In 1874 Ohio Democrats have grown a
little bolder when in convention they de-
clared:
That we are friends of all the indus
tries of the country, whether agricultu-
raj, mechanical or commercial, and be-
lieve that these industries thrive best
when no unequal privilege is conferred
by law upon one over the other. We are
therefore opposed to the unjust and
oppressive features of the existing tariff
laws, and insist upon their repeal
The wool duties in 1874, among other
tariff duties, was to Democrats oppres-
sive and unjust. and nothing but repeal
would satisfy them.
"A tariff for the sole purpose Of reve-
nue., was the declaration of Ohio De
mOcracy in 1879, and in 1876 its plat
form read:
That we are in favor of a tariff for
revenue only
No prot ctive duties, was, and is the
policy OF tn national as well as state
Democrac, hence it opposes all duties
on anything we may grow or manufac
ture in this country and favors duties
alone on articles of necessity which we
cannot produce.
In 1913 Ohio Democrats, in conven
tion, charged to our vicious laws =
tariff laws:
The destruction of the industry of
the country and the pauperism of labor
And TO the same effect is the Ohio
Democratic platform of 1879, and of
succeeding years.
The Republican party, in its platform
in Ohio this year, declares In favor of |
restoring the wool tariff of 1867; the |
Ohio Democracy, two weeks later, con-
Spicuously fail to make any declaration
in favor of its restoration, or of any in
crease of present duties.
Having conclusively shown that Ohio
Democrats. as well as others, opposed
protective tariff system, and persistentIy
favored its repeal without exception, it |
is hardly necessary to say much more to
convince you that the Democratic oppe-
sition to the tariff act of 1883 was not
because it reduced tariff duties, but be-
cause it did not repeal or reduce them
more.
1t is easy to prove by the Record that
the great majority of the Democrats in
the last Congress, especially in the
House, were in favor of absolutely re
pealing all tariff duties on wool. 1t
was classed as raw material, and as
such they favored putting it on the free
list. Before proceeding to that proof
let us retrospect little further.
In 1876 MIR. Morrison of Illinois.
chairman of the committee of ways and
means of Democratic House. as direct
ed by the committee, reported tariff
bill, said to have been prepared by the
agents of the English Golden club. in
Mhich il WIS nrnnnsnh 70 ..nd.... IL