St. Paul daily globe., 1888-02-10
The TARIFF ON WOOL.
a Minneapolis Manufacturer
Gives His Views on the
Subject.
Free Wool Would Open to
America the Markets
of the World.
Wool Growing Would Suffer
Until Reaction, When 1t
Would Improve.
A Tax That the Poor Must Pay
Interesting Compare
son of Wages.

More men have talked tariff in Mime
apOliS in the past three months then in
all the previous history of the city. No
politics is politics unless it rings in the
tariff. Men who scarcely knew what
tariff was last summer, are now deeply
VerSed in the lore of duties and import
taxes and talk of it at all times. Gordon
L. Coles free trade speech and Marshal
CampbeliS tariff reform talk have been
supplemented by argument at political
meetings and discussions at free trade
ana political science clubs. One form
of the discussion, probably Superin-
duced by the hyperborean weather.
runs to the tariff on wool and WoOlen
goods. The recent action of the wool
growers has stimulated matters some
what and now the politicians, who
think they know. and the economists,
who ought to know. are endeavoring to
find out how far reduction of the tax
on WOODEN goods and the abolition of
the duty on raw wool would cheaper
the clothes we wear and the blankets
which keep us warm these frigid nights.
Manager Northup, of the North Star
WoOlen mills, ought TO be thoroughly
cOnverSant with the relations of the
tariff to his business. which is one of
the protected industries" and to him
aGLOBE reporter went for information.
Mr.. Northup is a Republican, in kind,
with slight mugwump tendencies,
just ROW. and will probably
vote without much regard to party
tickets. so his views are cOlOred by no
partisan bias. One of the first things
he said was in relation to the difference
b b,tween wages in AEerica and Europe,
though he did not attribute this to any
idea OF protection" His mill pays
higher wages than similar mills in the
East. and that, of course, was not the
result of protection. AS to the differ
ence in price between here and En-
gland. for instance, Mr.. NOrthup ad-
mitted that his information was second
hand and therefore not reliable, as will
be shown hereafter. As a theory, he be-
lieveS in free trade between all nations,
and while he believes violent tariff
changes might diSorganize business,
trade and manufacture would adjust
themselves to the new state Of affairs.
MANAGER NORTHUP'S VIEWS.
Il am very positive of one thing"
said he. This constant agitation is
very demOraliZing to business gener-
ally. and the manufacturing interests
particularly. The tariff should be set
tied finally and for all, so that we can
know just exactly on which basis we
are working"
What would be the result of placing
raw wool on the free liSt?o
There would be several results. To
the trade in general and to the people
at large it would be good. To US, indi-
vidually, it would be bad. Take our
selves. We use 100000 pounds annu-
ally, which is more than Minnesota pro-
duceS, so we draw on all of the sur
rounding states. If the duty should be
hn
local wool growers would GO out of
business. We would then be compelled
to buy at the SeabOard at seabOard rates,
and freightS and commissions would
make our wool cost more than it does
now. We might have to go out of busi-
ness ourselves. That would be the ef-
feet upon us
Take broader view and tell me
how 1t would affect the trade generally
and the wool wearerS?"
The trade would be benefited. The
tariff on wool builds wall around the
United States and completely shuts us
Off from the markets of the world. The
increased price of our wool prevents our
competing with the nations which pay
no duty on wool. Strike off the duty
and America completes with the world
and finds market everywhere. Our
present market is limited to the United
States, and when we have supplied that
we must shut down. There is no other
course. Sometimes we run Oh at loss
in preference to shutting down and
scattering our help"
Then the opening of the markets of
the world would have tendency to
keep the WOOlen mills running more
steadily, and would thus benefit the
workingmen. How would WOolen goods
be affected?"
That would depend upon the price
of wool. The competition in America
for wool might keep the price up so
that there would be no change in fab
TlcS. If the price went down, the price
of fabrics might naturally follow. Yes
that would benefit the general wool
wearer. don't believe, however, that
a reduction of the tariff would reduce
the revenue, as, under lower duty,
the imports would so increase that the
revenue would be the same, or greater.
Were raw material admitted free there
certainly should be a duty on manu-
factured goods sufficient to protect the
labor. My experience has been that ex-
tremely low prices for wool means de-
mOlitiOn OF the tlOckS, and this would
entirely be the result if wool were adj
mitted free. That the country would
adapt itself to the new order of things |
have little doubt, but for period the
raising of sheep would be greatly en-
barrassed. The duty OH carpet WOODS
is S215 cents per pound; on other grades
i'll the gross, as follows: Under 80
cents, 10 cents perpound; overs 80 cents,
II cents per pound. Notwithstanding
this duty the importation is very large
Mr.. Northup agrees entirely with
the revenue refOrmerS, in the matter of
throwing open the doors and giving to
American manufacturers the markets of
the world. And therein lies the whole
matter. He still clings to the idea that
labor is cheaper in Europe than in
America and thinks labor ii. e., the
manufacturer, not the workman should
be protected. He believes the reGuc-
tiOn of the tariff on wOOlen- fabrics
would cheaper them to the people who
pay for and wear them, but thinks it
would be at the expense Of the manu-
facturer, who could not compete with
foreign-made goods. The fact is, how
ever, that the tariff on wool has brought
American manufacturers down to the
point of using so much shoddy, poor cot
ton and wOOlen waste that the domestic
goods are inferior to the foreign. Those
who can afford it will not buy domestic
goods, and the cheap, coarse and COM
mon stuff is forced upon the poorer
classes, who cannot afford to buy any
other, with its great price laid on by an
average tariff of II per cent. The state
ment is made that not over 20 per cent
of the goods made in this country are
pure wool. The question is asked
IF 1T WOULD NOT BE BETTER
for the 50,O00,000 pounds of wool used
annually to come into the countay in its
raw state, untaxed, to be worked up by
our own labor, which would soon enable
our own workingmen to clothe them
selves in woolens, and thus increase
tn demand for wool? With wool free
not pound more would be imported
than there is now in the various stages
of manufacture, but that which would
be imported would absorb large guam
tity of domestic wool for mixture. As