The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1888-07-20
Should Wool be Taxed.

The question of imposing higher
tariff taxes upon wool or Of repeating
all duties on that raw material, is now
before the House.
One party, with few exceptions, de
mands, by amendment offered to the
pending tariff bill, that the duties of
1867 shall be restored, which would
impose a tax of about 165 per cent. or
the cheaper grades of wooden goods.
The other party, with few excep.
tions, favors the repeal of all tax upon
wool and its free admission ia the
interest of our wooden manufacturers
and labor.
Which is right Which is wropg7
We now tax our home consumers OF
woolen products SO per cent. ostensi.
bly, to protect our woolen industries
and give them our home market. II
we thereby obtained our home market
it might be wise to tax the working
man SO cents of every dollar of the
wages he expends for wooden goods,
but does this excessive taxation give
us our home market?
On the contrary, our highly protect
ed wooden manufactures and our over
taxed woolen consumers, give our
home woolen manufacturers and
labor only so per cent. of our home
market, while Europe comes in and
supplies 4S per cent. of it.
Why is this soY
The reason Is PLAIN as the unclouded
sun at MONDAY. The European manu-
facturer gets his wool and other raw
materials free; the American manufac
turer is so exorbitantly taxed for his
raw materials that even with a SO per
cent, tax imposed upon consumers of
woolen goods, 70 project our capital
and labor, Europe can pay the high
tax and compete with us in our home
markets.
With free wool and reduced taxes
on the necessaries of life, our woolen
manufacturers could reduce the cost
of woolens to consumers not less than
20 per cent; they could double our
product of woolens and supply our
whole home market; they could double
the employment of labor in the wool
en- industry, and both capital and
labor could get better compensation
with reduced taxes upon consumers.
And what would the people gain by
it?
We consume annually $40 per head
of woolen goods-that is S6OO,OOO,-
600. We now furnish from home
mills and labof about $500, 900, 900
and pay European mills and labor for
nearly S3OO,OOO,OOO. A reduction of
20 per cent. in woolens would relieve
the consumers of woolens annually of
the enormous sum of $4,000, 900,
and of that sum $l5,O0O,O0O would be
saved by the consumers of woolens in
Pennsylvania alone, while the entire
crop of the State does not exceed $780,
900.
Everybody consumes wooden goods,
and especially our workingmen.
Many of them wear only woolens the
whole wear, and they are now taxed
SO per cent.--snd much more on some
of the cheaper articles-to protect our
woolen mills and labor. when the pro-
posed protection defeats itself by taxes
upon the raw materials we must have.
Was ever such folly committed by
an honest government?
"But we must protect the labor of
the sheep industry" answers the mon
opolist champion. Pray, what labor
is there in wool-growing! The labor
involved in the care of q flock of 500
sheep is about one boy and dog, and
there the protection of labor ends.
Was ever such mockery of the pro-
lection of labor offered to an intelli-
gent peoplef
Should wool be taxed? Let the
House answer the question by its vote
on the tariff. The people will answ-
er it in thunder tones in favor of free
wool; reduced prices to consumers: en-
larged labor for our workingmen; the
entire supply of our home market and
increased prosperity for both labor and
capita'.-Phila. Times.