The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-03-15

| grower and flock master of PENNSYLVANIA. was
| the first speaker. After giving q history Of the
growth of the wool industry in his section Of the
country, he reviewed the condition of that id.
dustry under the various tariff acts. Tnder the
| act of 1867 the grower had fair living profits.
The act of 1868 had injured the
| industry, and in 1884 and 1885,
| sheep worth So or So each were sold ak
| any prices--lO, 20 or so cents-and many farmers
had abandoned wool growing. Thedomestic grow!
| er could not grow wool in competition with the
| English grower. in Australia. If the industry
was broken down at home, speculators would
control the market, and consumers would have
| to pay more for their clothes. The growers did
not ask for prohlbitory tariff, but Recognizing
that the act of 1883 was step backwards, they
asked restoration of the rates Of 1867
Representative 0. r. Jackson, Of Pennsyl.
vania. expressed his belief that large majority
OF the wool-growers were IN favor of a protective
| tariff. Unless the tariff OF 1867 were restored,
the industry of woolgrowing must practically
cease in the United States.
Mr.. Morrison--What you want is the duty
taken off by the protectionsts themselves in
1883?
Mr.. Jackson-Yes; we want restoration Of
the tariff of 1867.
Mr.. Morrison expressed the opinion that when
the protectionists went around protesting and
saying that they intended to raise the duty on
wool. they deceivine the wool growers.
Mr. Jackson-You would make yourself popu-
lar with million wool-growers il youwould help
to raise it.
Mr.. Morrison--I don't intend to help; and
don't think the others do. think that they be-
lieve the duty wool is as high it ought to be-
Mr.. Kelley-f you give us increased duty
on WOODEN and worsteds we will gladly vote
higher duty than that of 1867 on wool.
Mr. Morrison-We did not put either Of them
down; you did
Mr. Kelley-(Sarcastica didn'tl
Mr. Morrison-No, sir.
Mr. Keley-There was not Democrat In
h0 atod IN aipf ha< ld sfy.<ia
Mr.. Morrson-There was not Democrat OF
my way of thinking-an6 that was q majority
who voted for the bill that made the reduction.
Mr.. McKinley-When the bill was under con.
sideration the Democrats, as q rule voted to re-
duce the duty WOOL
Mr.. Reed Ito Mr.. Morrison)-T only reason
you did not vote was because; in your Judgment,
the duties were not reduced enough.
Mr.. Morrison-That is true
Mr.. Reed-So you cannot regard yourself as
virtuous on the protective side.
Mr.. Morrison-We do not. meant to convey
this impression that these gentlemen who pro.
fess that they want to increase the duty are de-
ceiving tho wool-growers, for they are the men
who reduce it.
MIR. Reed suggested that, In 1883, the Republic.
ans had but small majority in either house,
and that there were certain internal revenue
taxes amounting to SAG 1000, which the peo-
pie wanted repealed. I'VE got away from you
the best we could" he said Hereafter We
will get away better"
Mr.. Morrison-You are so anxious 10 relieve
the banks and certain other interests FROM taxa
ton that you also reduce the tax on wool
Mr.. kelley will have to play the part Of
usurper, and call the members to order.
M. Mckinley ito Mr.. Morrison)-If yon give
us enough votes, we will restore the duties
Mr.. Mo-rison-And when we get through, half
of you will vote against it. / don't want those
gentlemen to masquerade as men who want to
put up the duty on wool after reducing it.
Mr.. Reed-No, not masquerading
John l.. Hayes, secretary of the National AS
ISOLATION of Wool Manufacturers, demonstrated
against the changes in the wool tariff proposed
by the Morrison bill. He protested against
tariff agitation by a revision of the tariff as
disturbance of business and postponement Of
the repose needed for recovery from great indus
trial depression. The passage of the bill would,
he said, infict blow upon manufacturers which
would inevitably recoil upon the interests of the
domestic wool production in the destruction of
its home market