San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1888-11-03
ghe daily Eight.
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER, 3, 1888.
REPLY TO CHAS. MONTAGUE.
The Free Trade Advocate of Ban
dera County.


dera County.
From the criticism upon the address of the
republican congressional executive commit
tee of Mr.. Chas. Montague, of Bandera, APP
pearing in the Times of last evening, with all
due respect 10 the author, whom we under
stand 10 be a gentleman of Intelligence, can
dor aud great earnestness, we must believe
that his free trade readings have caused him
to arrive at some very erroneous, and we
might say absurd conclusions.
Without comparing statist ca hgures TO as
certain whether or not the committee has
committed any errors to the amount of wool
exported from and produced in the United
Staie ca. regarding that OF minor Importance,
we will simply Lot;ce at this time the gist OF
the criticism, which seems to be comprised in
the following questions, statements and an
"Now will my good republican friends who
compose the executive committee tell me II
free trade or low duties will not force the
manufacturers to discontinue the use of shod-
dy hair, and to great extent cotton, thereby
crea. ing demand for say lCDGCJ,C pounds
more of wool than is now used by them, and
send the price up? / think so, and submit
the following in support of the sta ement that
wool is now selling az ireS tra9e prices nnI
Journals correspondent from London, last
summer, quoted AUS ralian wool as selling in
the grease from % cents to 81 cents per pound
OF course the light woods sell as they do here
for higher price than the greasy, but monld
like to see the Texan who sold any WOO this
summer at even p cents. Have we not been
What good did the tariff do us then! AT
the recent fall sales in London cape woo!S
sold as high az IS cents per secured poUI.n.
These WOODS | am told shrink about e. per
cent; this would be 4.40 cents per poun" in
the grease-all free trade. Here under
high protective tariff we sold woods shriuki1g
not more than 50 per cent for IL TO 10 cents
Did the tariff do us any good then. AID d1r~ II
do us any good at any time! tn" hnl ra
effect of high tariff is to force maEufa tuners
TO substitute cheap and interior male II Tor
l. hon.. hnxr
the price of the good material GOWN to less
than il would be were il sold in an open and
free market, a fact think fully sHn"E ~ ;:c
statistics above quoted in regard 10 t,c COT
sumption of shOddy, cotton and mar
CHAS. &ONTAGUE.
Banders, Tex, Oct. p.
Mr. Montague seems to con- nd taat WIKI
high projection American wool is now selling
It free trade prices, viz: from 10 TO Is cents
per pound. IN the grt ase, quite as h gh a., ne
says wele the recent safes Of WOO! in London
which he puts at l4.4O cents per pound.
Yet he saws the natural effect of high tar. Il
is to force the price of wool down to less than
it would be were it sold in an open and free
market. We are unable to reconcile the two
stat ments. Their incons!gtency is pNIpabIe
-"inducional absurdsm." He also contends
that the tariff by keeping iOreign WOO! from
our market CautCs our manufacturers 10 use
shCddy, hair and c tt"n in place OF wool to
the extent Of 1OJ,00J0G .pOunds annuaily. II as
he insists, putting wool on the tree list VIII
tncrr ase its price, which mUSl"the tefOrc make
the wooden fabric more costly to the manu-
facturer and the consumers, hy what faclS,
course of reasoning or logic, can Mr.. NJ, c lr-
clude that manufacturers viii cease to usethe
cheaper material hair and cotton by means Of
which they can pIa 20 upon the market {! Q
JstlV article We produce more tndu three
fJurths OF IL the wool manufactured in this
country. How its increased pC.ce with the N
creased price of imported wool VIII force our
manufacturers to use tEe dCa"er i place of
the cheaper al ucic now probably used by
them we are unable TO see. Tn s tallacy OF
Mr. MOntawue is in keeping with the many alb
surd theories cOmudOnIy INDUCED in by the
advocates of free trade
Grant, if you please, that we use OF foreign
WOODS 100 600 600 pounds and might use ".J,Ou J.
o. pounds or more per annun than we Pre-
duce, we ask, in all candO", would not the pro-
,IrctiOn OF SO large Il deficit by our own hOcE-
men contribute vastly more to the general
welfare and prosperity OF our peoD.e and
common country than to have such deuclt sup
pli by foreigners, who would thereby drain
rom our country many millions of dollars,
which might be kept at home aud give em
plOyment, support and comfort to hundreds
of thousands of our own people!
The rapid increa in the wool product or
this country under protective duties shOuld
convince the most iucreduOuS that the en-
adequate protection would, in a few years,
enable our foes men to supply the entire
amount of wool required for home CO1sumP-
ton.
The following authentic statistics showing
the great increase annually in our product OF
the amount we prOduc prior anH subsequent
TO that tariff, proves this proposition.
Amount of wool produced in the United
States;
FROM TIE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, OCT. 5,
1888: