New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-06-17
THE TARIFF ON WOOL.
REFUSING TO RESTORE THE 1867 RATES.
MAJORITY AND MINORITY REPORTS OF The WAYS
AND MEANS.
rnY TELEGRAPH To rHH rRIDUsE.1


suspicion that the adverse report male TO the
House to-day by Chairman Morrison on General eros
vcncs resolution restore the wool tariff OF 1857 WAS
written Connecticut Ii bears oar marks whch seem 10
be plainly tho work OF Ncw-Engand Tree trader
whether this suspicion be just or not 1t Ia seievient
that tho report simply attempt to defend the FREQ
wool paragraph OF the Tarn bill II Will he likely to
attract some attention IA Of the most illogical and
Inaccurate documents that omanated from Ways
aud Means Committee OF the House. Tho statement
prepared and submitted by Major Mckinley In reply to
tho report Is mastery argument which completely re-
flutes the statements and demoshes What the majority
of the committee styles an argument
The majority report in part: "Proection to wool
growers IS perhaps the solitary benefit which can be
offered to farmers under the protective system as the
protection given 10 wheat corn. vegetables ana pro
visions OF every kind. including cattle, Is obviously
more pleence and sham Wool Is the only article when
farmers recognize coming from abroad IN competition
with item any material extent. IT, therefore. II could
be shown th duty on foreign wool would oeneht the
farmer the committee would not hesitate to recommend
the continuance OF such duty"
A long statement OF figures from the statistical
abstract Of 1882 and other authorities, is introduced al
this point TO support the statement that the result OF
imposition OF the tar.n OF 1857 enacted In obedience
to the canore OF the growers OF the states OF OHIO
NevYork. Pennsvivania Indiana u in"is, IOWA WIS
eonsin and N chigan was iailhs on 81 30 n o. .e
product in those eight states FROM ihs showing te
committee argued that the wool growers we're not bcne
was nom,na ally protcc Ell the the condition
grower: that American wool had always risen IN
price when the home manufacturer had pceh peImttru
io Obtain foreign wool duty free nearly, that no
amount of protection Of the wool manufacturer suiices
to compensate Tor the difficulties under which he abos
by reason OF the tax materials, or that both the
wool and the manufacturer have prosperci more
all wool than they have under the opposite system
The assertion ia made that mot one-htth OF inc wooI
growers really concerned in the pro-
cecdngs OF their assumed representatives, ana the com
nitec is confident that many OF the most lnellgeht
snnf y ID
largest quantity Of WOOL are no, In sympathy WIN me
cssenci tho production ana lowered the price the
time II caused acc rding 10 one statement OF an
slaughtered without being replaced. according to
another OF his statements the slaughter OF sheep pro
dnced by this beneficial tariff intended to Increase their
number, have been nearer eight millions than four
millions" - .
In conclusion the committee submits "That tho
duty upon the imported wool Is proved by testimony
derived from both argument and experience to he
injurious to all classes and beneficial 10 none drives
from markets many kinds OF wool not raised mere
nut indispensable TO the SUCCESSFUL manufacture OF
woollen goods gives the European manufacture me
exclusive Use OF these woods and therefore, monopoly
goods OF them consequently of the markets
or the world 1t confines American manu- 10
restricted choice or materials ana so to the proGucton
limited class OF goods with which the home marAes
is periodically glutted.
It makes imposs BILE for our manufacturers to ex
port WOODEN gOOis aud by coniinng them to the nome
market leads fluctuations In prices resulting
frequent closing OF mills and their sales al disastrous
1t crippes the only customers Of wool-growers
so seriously that The mirAeI Tor Wool Is periodicy III
lit prevents home MANUFACTURED from buying the
foreign woods which conll be used IN mixture with
American thus the demand for Aner
woods instead OF increasing II "a intended .
" 1t gives European Manufacturer control OF all
foreign woo tbds the importation OF foreign
wool in manufactured form ana the more the
duty has been raised the more disastrous has been the
result To the American wool grower
at has furnished good excuse for heaping heavy
taxes upon the clehng OF the people and 1t has taken
from the wool-grower amount far exceeding any
benefit which he might have imagined he would derive
from he tarn. without giving him that imagined bens-
tit -,
woolen manufacture II mas ruined investors who Gu
tered this manufacture by the deuslye promise OF
high tariff 1t has greatly hind-rei our trade with our
natural customers in south America; 1t has made cloth
ing dearer IN America and cheaper In Europe IL has
" III. committee. Therefore recommend that the reso
lie table. but that the OF the textile
DUTY wool should DO repealed and the duties on
woolen manufactures reduced to at least an equai
extent"
Representative Mckinley. Of ohio. on behalf OF the
minority OF tho Committee on waTs ,na Means sup
which the minority says among other things'
res as ii s II
obtained from the protective system. comes
remembered that the same committee has already
ported BIZ taxing away from this class Q; our fellow
CITIZENS large part OF the now afforded Them
The assertion viii hardly satisfy the farmers In view OF
'.' The reports then proceed, to demonstrate to
the tsfscOn OF the majority no doubt, that protec-
TO farming 1t struggles to show that pro-
teetIvc tariff Is great burden upon the people, tax
facturers yet forco to admit that since the tariff
Of 1867 the price Of wool has diminished that while
Ia quality, the manufacturer has increased
his sP1G a%d pr 9s seeks s'OysS
any tariff Dol Is injurious to the interests
wool and diminished profits TO the industry and In the
sane connection turning away from the farmers and
addressing the great body OF consumers 1t bewa with
them burdens which the duly on imported
wool compels them to bear Turning again TO the
1865 when we had. practically free trade IN WOOL bis
prices were higher for b.; product ana the demand
yies h ,ha ss 1Jn the increase ganE the prcss
OF his clip and derive greater profits on hi. Investment
Turning aside from the farmer again, aud addressing
his fortunes with and nelp the
enormous tarih upon wool which - maintained ny the
protective system. because 1t will cheaper wo0llen man
ufactnres and enable him to buy cheaper clothing and
cheaper blanketA 49,
illustration the Inconsistency Of the modern free
trader 1t does not undertake TO explain how free trade
wool can increase the price Of that product and
ut the same time enable the manufacturer TO make
cheaper goods Tor the consumer. We had always sup
posed that the OF the material used in the manu-
facture OF cloths had much 10 do with n1ng the price
OF the finished product They say. further. that wool
runous fluctuations which have characterized the last
twenty years. The steady market which they would
would be- Ia true, free from fluctuations, for 1t
would he no market at all once admit wool duty free,
the United States. and tho foreign wool would control
the American marset and would fix the price. for 1t
wOnld be without home competition
d" In our judgment II Was rfgnt and proper for the
farmers and manufacturers OF hiring
the of Congress the condition aud OF
their respective industries and that Congress framing
the Tariff law OF 1867 formed their vie mother
dscredtshle reprehensibe. and that the Results Of
the law the best indication Of tho wisdom OF the
course The manufacturer and the wool grower
and the labor which they employed and benefited by
this tariff and the great of the people shared
IN the benefits in the enlargement of u national
industry and In the resultant increase OF general
prosperity II Is fact that after the passage OF
the law OF 1867 great stimulus was given TO wool
growing and wooIen manufactures. thus enarging tho
field OF employment. and increasing the demand for
skilled and unsklled labor while all kinds OF wollen
fabrics reduced In prize and mprov ed In quality.
Every favorable prediction IA to that law has been
more than reaiZel."
The minority into exhaustive argument
brstling with figures to demonstrate that the growth
and velopmrnt rcuture have been obstruct
ed by protective tariffs
PREPARING FOR THE TARIFF VOTE.