New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-04-08
CONVERSE DISAPPOINTED
THE DUTY ON WOOL NOT TO BE RESTORE D.
v.tS APPEAL TO DEMOCRATIC CoNGR1ssN'-N ~
REDEEM THEIR PARTYs PLEpGES'
TELEGRAPH TO THE TIBUNE'I

provided by the act OF 1907. Eleh'S 90
and IS Democrats voted in the ailrmau'e' anu l.
Repubicans and Ia Democrats in the hegauNo'
The Democrats who voted to redeem the pieuseS
made bv their party in Ohio last year, to the woo
,,y.,,vers of that State were Hewitt and She'eS'
Alabama: Henley Glascock, Tully and RosecranS'
California; Nichols Georgia; Weller, iowa; num-
Louisiana: Finlay Maryland; Eldredge' Nhenig@n' ,I
Fielder New-Jersey; Spriggs, Stevens ana Won-
pie. New-York; Converse, Hill. JORDAN 1t r0N,0'
Murrav Paige Warner and Wilkins ONO; Doyio'
Connolly, Duncan, Ermentrout, Hopkins Mutch-er'
Patton. Randall and Storm, Pennsylvania liN-
man. south Carolina; Dibrell, tennessee; ouSuei
and Wilson West Virginia; and Sumner ana
Winaus Wisconsin. The Republicans who voted
against the bill were Adams Illinois; henderson
and Struble Iowa; Davis, Long Lyman, ROCK" cl
and Whiting, Massachusetts,; Nelson otralV anu anu
White Minnesota and James, New-forN. MoS' VI
them did so on the ground that, being opposou
TO any agitation OF the taIln t"'0'oDH
ot this session, they could not CON
sistentlv vote to increase the duty
ON the single article of wool, especially when
the measure proposed would strike blow at WOOL
len manufacturers. Some Democrats who VOteu
against the bill also say they did SO because they
are opposed to ali tariff legislation or attempted
legislation at this session.
EFFECT on THE MORRISON BILL
Itis claimed bv the friends of the Morrison bill
Winans. of Wisconsin, and Weller, of Iowa, voted
as they did to-day in deeronce to local interests IN
their districts and that when the test comes on the
ouestion "Sbau the Morrison bill be considered I
they will be found voting i'll the aihrlatFe'
The Democratic opponents of the Dill deny tuls
assertion and pertinently ask whether any man
who votes to increase the duty on wool can OF VIII
vote for bill which reduces that duty ten per cent
Chairman Morrison tonight declined to express
~. IF
prospects of his bill He thought some OF the Dem
ocrats who voted for the bill to-day would vote Tor
the consideration of his bill, in the hope that IL
might be amended 50 to be satisfactory TO them
He said: have not asked mon TO vote Tor tne
consideration of my bill aOr have asked men now
they will vote on that question. OF course nave
general idea as to how Democrats Will vote but
do not care TO discuss the analysis you nave SHOWN
mp. We will know all about it week from to-
morrow
OHIO LOST TO DEMOCRACY.
The result of the vote grievous disappomt-
nent to Mr. Converse and other Ohio Democrats
who frankly declare that the dominant faction OF
their party the House has destroyed the iast nope
of Democratic success in OHIO next fall. While the
vote was not perfect test of the strength OF the OPP
poson TO the consideration Of the Morrison bill, 1t
made one fact sufficiently plain. If that bill does
receive the consideration of the House. the Republl-
cans will be largely if not wholly, responsible; Tor
it is evident that if they unitedly opposed con-
sideraton they will be reinforced by enough Demo
Gratis TO give its opponents decisive majority Not
less than forty Democrats will unite with them If
the plainest indications are TO be trusted
AN APPEAL TO DEMOCRATIC HONOR.
The debate to-day was opened by Major Mckinney
in a four minutes speech. He explained the enectS
OF the last reduction of the duties on wool and de
scribed the magnitude and Importance of the indus
trv. and mentioned the great food of petitions
which had rolled in upon the House from every
State from Vermont to California, praying Tor
restoration of the duties. Major Mckinley appealed
10 Democrats to vote for the bill. venture 10 90
II tbe more boldly" he said, because your brcth-
ren last fall in Ohio assured the people in the most
authoritative manner that the wool duty OF 1867
should be restored at the beginning OF tins Con-
frcss II was not the campaign clatter Of rrespon-
sble politicians 1t was the voice and utteT3nce OF
the leaders in the State supported by the leaders OF
the party in other States. The people heard ana be-
Icved these utterances, and thousands OF WOOL
growers who had heretofore voted the Republican
ticket transferred the entire political power OF the
State from the control of the Republicans to that OF
the Democrats, captured the Executive and both
branches of the Legislature, elected United states
Senator and now that you have reaped the fruits
of their faith and your promises, the farmers and
wool growers of the State demand that you make
good your titles and keep faith with those who
acted upon your assurances"
Mr.. Mckinley then read from campaign docn-
ments ISSUED by the Democratic State Committee OF
Ohio in the last campaign, denOunclng tie kepuO-
lican party for the reduction of the wool tariff and
declaring that if the wool growers Woulu lIl,sU llIS
Democratic party 1t would restore the duties OF
1867 at the coming session OF Co1iimless: Io ar,
Wilkins, of Ono, and Henley, OF CailIoIH'"' "4So
made short speeches III favor OF the DILL
MORRISON AND HURD IN OPPOSITION.
Then Mr. Morrison opened against it. lie said
the present duty wool is that recommended by
the Tariff Commission, after an investigation last
ing eight months The report of that Commission
has been approved by the small number OF pro-
fectionists in the Democratic party, as well as by
the Republican party lie declared tldl lil' uuItS
on wool cannot justly be considered apart from the
duty on woolleu manufactures bill for that pur-
nose is now before the House. lie would ask tine
House to consider that bill week from to-hoIIOW
lie then yielded the floor to Mr., Hurd, who made
IN eaTpest speech against the measure NE qucs-
1ion he said, was whether the House by Us ac!ion
would do anything TO increase the pnce OF WooLch
goods Three classes of persons are interested IL
this matter-first. all the people who wear woollen
third the producers of wool There was no doubt
that TO increase the duty on wool would increase
cost ,yoollen goods Ii would also interfere with
The M; uufacuTers, who would be unable to buy the
law materials. manufacture goods and sell IN COM
petition with foreign manufacturers OF Woolens
lie furl acrnOrc continued that 10 increase the price
II foIei wool in the American market WoHl1 q 4
iAnish the price of domestic woods, and thereby
work an injury to the wool growers MI !uld was
sIeouent!y applauded.
CoNvEEsE's INEFFECTCAL Effort
. SIr Converse closed the debate He declared that
this is not question whether higher or lower prices
shall be pald for clothing The question is whether
OF the most important Of American Industries
shall be destroyed and the profit 90 into the pockets
of foreigners He declared that the doctrine OF free
material is a taacy and that le only hope of
continued prosperity lies IN equal protection TO
American manufacturers and American labor.