The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1884-04-24
The Wool Question

The following extract from the speech
of Hon. William Mckinley, Jr., in support
of the wool bill of Mr.. Converse, explains
how it has happened that necessity exists
for an increase of the wool duties.
The general revision of the tariff made
by the last Congress reduced the duties on
wool to 10 cents and IL cents per pound on
first and second-class woods. That is, it
abolished the 10 and II per cent. adj valo-
rem which. under the act of 1867, were as
sessed on these two classes of wool in adj
dition to the specific duty of 10 and IL
cents per pound.
The bill now before us proposes to re-
store the ad vdlorene rates, so that hereafter
the duties to be levied and collected upon
these two grades of wool shall be 10 cents
per pound and / i per cent. dd galorens upon
one class, and IL cents per pound and 10
per cent. ad UaIorem upon the other. In a
word, it restores the duties upon wool as
fixed by the act of 1867. tits only proper
that should state that the last House
never had an opportunity to vote upon the
wool duty as a separate proposition, but
was compelled to vote upon the Senate bill
as was agreed to in the Conference Com
mittee as a whole. The alternative was
then presented to the House of passing
the bill as an entirety, which involved re-
auctions in custom rates and large re-
auctions of internal-revenue taxes, amount
ing to $40,000,000 annually, or defeat it
and thus lose everything of good which
the bill contained. Had the question of
disturbing the wool duty been presented
distinct and separate, the reduction would
never have taken place. This was shown
when the Ways and Means Committee au-
thOrized one of it's members to offer as
committee amendment the wool duties of
| 1867, which would have been presented
and passed had the consideration of this
schedule ever been reached in the House.
The reduction was made under the Cir
cumStances have named, and the injus-
tice of it has come to be recognized by the
Republican party and by many Democrats
in Ohio and other States. We now have
an opportunity to do justice to this impor-
tant article of American production, and
the proposition Of my colleague, plain and
simple, is to correct the injustice and place
the wool industry of the country where
the Legislature of last winter found it.
1t will be remembered that when Mr..
Converse sought to introduce his bill to
restore the tariff on wool the motion was
defeated by vote of 11s yeas to 126 ayes.
The affirmative vote was made up Of S4
Republicans and "a Democrats, and the
negative of ia Democrats and IL Repub-
licans. The Republicans voting nay were
Davis, Long, Lyman, Rockwell and Whit
ing, Of Massachusetts,, James, of New
York, Adams, of Illinois, Henderson and
Struble. of Iowa, and Nelson, Strait, and
White, of Minnesota.
Of the twenty-six members from the
New England States five voted for and ten
against the bill, and eleven failed to vote,
among the latter being the entire member
ship from Maine. No member from Penn
sylvania, California Nebraska, OF West
| Virginia, and only one from Ohio, Frank
Hurd, voted against the bill Of the thirty
four Democrats voting in the affirmative
eight are from Ohio and six from Pennsyl-
vania; from California and New York
there are four each from Alabama and
Wisconsin. two each and from Georgia,
Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland. Michigan,
South Carolina, Tennessee and West Vir-
ginia, one each.
The farmers will be able to gather from
this vote which of the two political par
ties has shown its friendship for them,
and in which they can put reliance for
protection of their interests.