Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-05-10
RAW MATERIALS.
Which Shall It BET Cheaper whisky
and Tobacco or Cbsspened Nec-
essaYiss Of Life.
WOOL Prices and Importa;iors Under
Bigh and Low Tariffs.
Kansas City Tines.

bscco, as advised by the Republicans in
the tariff debate, or will It be chespened
necesssries of lie and free raw material
as indicated By the Mills bill AMI the
Presidents message? TIE Mills bill is q
very conservative MEASURE, one ia which
every Industry Is dealt fairly with. Not
one of them would be injared in the
least should've bill become law. They
would be greatly benefited by being
relieved OF high taxes on raw ma
terials which their foreign rivals are no.
burdened with. II is evident 10 all think
ing persons who have tsken the trouble 20
investigate this question that our iDsbil-
ity to compete with foreign rivals in the
markets of the world is not due TO supe-
rior wsges psid our operatives IS claimed
by protectionists, for statistics demcn-
| strate that there is little il any addition
to the cost Of producing an article on &C
count Of wsges.
| The fact that the American operative
| works more hours End sccomplishes
much more In given time than his for
eign rival, magnifcently illustrates the
fsllscY of the protsctionist assumption
| that our inability to compete with
Great Britain is due to g higher scale
| Of wages paid to American labor.
The real cause is to be found in the
| fact that owing to "protection" the
| Americans machinery costs nearly double
/ that Of Great Britain, and in fact nearly
every article which he uses is made enor-
| mouslY high through the operation OF our
iniQuitous tariff laws. Caespened ma
chluery and free raw materials are all
| that is needed, and This alone can render
| it possible for Us to compete with coun
| try like England.
Tariff reform is not promulgated
| through the influence of British gold and
| the Golden Club. Such nonsense Is in
tended TO mislead those who are yet in
darkness. 1t is not British movement
in any sense. It is an American principle.
With the settlement of America W.s born
freedom and independence. Tariff for
revenue Is only natural outgroWth of
the principles as set forth by JET
ferson In the Declaration of Iu-
dependence and the federal constitution
which followed. Then let US silence the
irreleyeut and utterly false assumption
that revenue reform is British move
ment, sgitcted in the interest of Eng
land, promoted by British gold, at the
hands Of the Golden club and their
American allies. Nothing could be
more absurd or farther from the
truth. With cheap raw materials
and the abolition OF our infamous navigs-
ton laws, g revolution OF our msnufec-
turing Industries would follow, which
would haue the effect Of Wrestling from
Great Britain goodly amount of the
trade OF South America, Australia, Gen.
trcl America and Mexico, which she row
practically controls. 1t will be seen that
nothing could be more fatal to Epglnnd's
commercial interests than radical re-
duction of our tariff laws.
But the slightest lntimation Of reducing
the duty, as, for instance. on wool, is the
signal for q howl from the proteciionist
camp loud and fierce, tainted with vitu-
peration and falsehood. There can be
given no intelligent reason why wool
should not be placed upon the free list,
for if past experience and history
has taught anything 1t has taught
the lesson that tariff laws
have but little influence upon the price of
domestic wool. This conclusion is based
upon q careful examination of statistics
covering q period Of sixty-one years-1S24
to 1885. Under the very high tariff from
1924 to 1882, the average price OF fine
washed clothing fleece wool per pound was
sos cents. Importations were z, $50, 478
pounds. From 1888 to 1912, with duties
high and increasing, the aversge price per
pound wss 81 cents. Importations for
the decade were 1o,300,S69 pounds
From 1S4S to 1916, with duties stesdy
and high, the average price was
SO cents, while importstions in
creased to 1854, 1913 pounds. From
1s47 TO 1857, with low duties, the
average price wss AZ 9 cents. Imporsa-
tions were 18. 1865 1926 pounds. From
1858 to 1861 the average price wss 81
cents, with high duties. Importations
still increased 70 $1,000 1852 pounds.
From 1861 to 1864, duties still high, the
average price was A cents, while |
importations reached the enor-
nous amount of 70.134,3l1 pounds. |
From 1875 to 1883, with the very high |
duties of 1867 restored, the average price |
for nina years WAS but 40 8 cents, with !
importstions still enormous, being 6l,- |
112 ,450 pounds. In order that protec-
tive tariff may be OF any benefit to Ameri- |
can wool growers it must at least produce |
two CREST effects-ret6rs Importation and |
give higher prices for domestic wool. II
1t falls short Of this we must ali agree |
that it is OF no value to the producer, but
s burden, and should be abolished. Let |
us first observe the above figures in
reference to importations. The tariff hiss
no stable effect upon the volume
of importations, whether to in
crease them II low Or diminish |
them il high. The smallest Importation |
OF apy one year for the period WAS in 1880
under very high duty, and the largest
of any one year WAS under
The very high tariff of 1880. Il Is note
worthy fact the tariff of 1867, to which
the protectionists point with SO
much pride, utterly failed from
its inception to its expiration to
check importation. There is another fact
that governs importations Of wool. Our
Industries cannot flourish nor even exist
without foreign wool. II will be remem
bered that there are many grades, from
very coarse to that with the hossiness Of
silk. II has also been ordained BY nature
that no one country shall produce all OF
these grades. 1t therefore follows as a
matter of necessity that we should i'm
;x Nv. 6ao x,hi ma do mt and