The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-10-30
DEMOCRATS AND WOOL IN 1888.

In the tariff revision of 1883. made by q Re-
publican Congress on a protective basis. a re-
duction was made in the duty on wool. It
was not a large reduction, yet it had an in.
furious effect on the wool industry and wool
en manufacturing. In Ohio, where the
wool interest is large, the Democratic party
sought to make political capital out of the
reduction of duty. The Democratic State
central committee issued a pamphlet. a copy
of which is before us, severely a~rraigning the
Republicans in Congress. This pamphlet
was widely circulated and the Democratic
managers laid great stress on it. After set
ting forth the Importance and extent Of the
sheep industry in Ohio it said:
"What will be the result Of the recent re-
duction of the tariff duty on woolf Plainly,
IL cannot fail to be most disastrous. The
wool-growers Of Ohio see this already in the
reduced prices of clips But they may not
foresee the whole result; and it 10 highly i'm
por:ant that they should do so.
'The average reduction OF duty by the new
law is Is Ter cent. During 1881 and 1882
the prices received by Ohio farmers for their
wool ranged between 50 and 40 cents. Sup
posing the latter to be the commonest market
price, the farmer who has been accustomed
TO get 40 cents for his wool will this year re-
ceive 80 cents. Taking the minimum amount
as the average market price he will receive so
cents. To state the consequences in a practi-
cal manner: The farmer whose flock pro-
duces 500 pounds of wool per year will get $50
less this year. estimating upon the maximum
Drsro loot and natfunoffnD rnon the min
imum price Of last year. be will get $31. so
less than he would had the duty not been re-
duced. Our farmers will. indeed. do we'll, il
the a merican sheep industry escapes total
ruin"
This was said in 1883 of a moderate reduc-
ton Of the duty on wool. In 1883 the Mills
bill repeats the duty entirely. and every DEM
ocrat in the land is bowling for its passage.
The pamphlet went on to prove that manu-
facturers would suffer as, we'll as farmers.
"The operations OF the laws of political econ.
omy." it eaid, do not cease with q single
effect. They work out their long train of
consequences for good or evil" Then It was
shown how WOODEN manufactures would LAM
guish and finally die. like the sheep industry.
But this was NOT all. The pamphlet showed
than the value of farm lands would be iLa-
paired. 1t said:
at is by no means q s~pecious argument to
assert that the influence Of the reduction
upon the value OF the sheen and their product
will be felt upon the value of the land. Ev-
| ery farmer knows that q flock Of sheep is one
" -
that sheep can subsist upon very poor land.
| This is seen in oil mountainous countries. as
Scotland and Switzerland. where the focks
range the highest and most barren peaks.
leaving the richer low ground free for Guilt
walton. OF this nature Of the sheep every
farmer takes advantage. He turns his flock
into his poor ground. upon which they live as
we'll as they can do elsewhere. and which they
end in enriching with their manure.
THE abandonment. 10 q great extent, of
sheep raising mus. inevitably follow, If the
| pernicious course designed by the Republican
rarty il allowed to De carried out. The farm.
ers Of this State will then be losers. not only
| directly by the decline ia the value OF the
focks and their fleece. but indirectly by the
loss Of the decreased prodnctiveness Of the
coil. This 10 not an unitnportant point, and
we notice il M one OF the MANY raised by the
probability of the early Abandonment OF sheer
hu.handry by a large portion Of those now en-.
gagged in it in Ohio"
All This is as true to-day a. 1t was in 1883,
and IS applicable to Indiana as to Ohio. Thi.
able document then proceeds to show thai
..under no circumstances can the consumer
be a gamer by a reduction Of the duty OF
wool; that it would injure the wool-growel
and the manufactures without beneftihS
anybody. 1t concludes with an earnest sp