Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1888-08-09

Here is an estimate of losses which no
Ohio Democrat dare deny, as it is based
on a calculation which seemed to have
the approval of every Ohio Democrat in
the State in 1888. A loss in single
Congressional district on wool and sheep
alone of over $3,000,000. And yet in
the face of their own figures, in the face
of these enormous losses, and in the face
of their own record, the Ohio Democra-
cy Immediately change front at the
bidding of the President and indOrSe
the Mills bill, free wool and ALL And
some of the gentlemen who voted for
the Converse bill to restore the duty are
still members Of this House, and how
they will explain to their constituents
their sudden conversion is more than |
can conjecture. They propose in this
bill to remove the present duty of 10
and II cents per pound when they know
that the reduction of the duty of %
per poundin 1888 reduced the number of
sheep in the United States from l,000,-
900 to 44,000,000, and the wool product
from 300,000,000 pounds to 260,000,000,
and that if no reduction of duty had
been made in 1888, and the increase had
gone on as before, would now have 64,
100000 sheep instead of 44,000,000.
In this last table 1 have only estima-
ted the loss on the value of wool and on
the value of sheep. The loss on the val
ue of land and other losses could be as
certained in the same manner. These
are the losses which were estimated by
the Ohio Democracy in 1888.
While l do not estimate the destruc-
tion of the wool industry in any unreas-
enable manner, fully concur in the es-
innate of certain eminent gentlemen
who put the actual loss to the wool in
dustry of the United States which will
follow the passage of this bill at $780,
100000. The possibility of its passage
has already entailed an immense loss.
A few years ago the Congressional dis
trict / have the honor to represent had
in it 10000 sheep. The law of 1888
has so crippled the industry that the
number now is not nearly so great Es-
innate the diminution at Is per cent.
and that would leave the present num-
Der about 650,000000. Count the loss
on the wool and sheep at the present
prices compared with last years prices,
and the loss on wool will be about 50
cents per head, and the loss on sheep
will be about 81 per head, and the ag-
gregate loss will be S1,000,000 in this
district, an average of over 100000 to
each county. If the possibility of the
passage of this bill entails on the peo-
pie such loss as this, what will be the
loss if the bill shall actually pass? This
is the loss that will be borne by those
who sell under the present depressed
condition of the market, and If this bill
shall succeed it will be borne by all, with
all the other losses which it will carry to
million homes and to at least five mil
lions of people.
WHY is WOOL MADE FREE?
AS wool has had tariff on it continu-
ously for IS years, ever since 1924, is it
not very strange that there should come
a proposition just now to put it on the
free list? Has President Cleveland more
wisdom than all the statesmen of the
last two generations? The reduction of
the duty in 1888 was made to reduce the
revenue, and yet imports of wool sprang
from 64,000,000 pounds to Ia, 100000,
and the revenue increased accordingly.
The increase of the revenue on worsted
cloths, yarns, knit goods, ladies' and