Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1888-08-15
THE DAILY ARGUS
JOIN W. POTTER.
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST Is, 1888.



value of wool. The proposition is so
ridiculous that it is hardly worthy of
consideration, but still there are some
who will probably follow the same line
of reasoning. The Union also insinuates
that decrease in the number of sheep is
also due 10 the measure formulated and
passed by the democratic branch of the
national congress. Whatever sheep are
raised in this section are used principally
to supply the mutton market rather than
wool, and statistics show that as the land
increased in value and fertility, the sheep
raising industry has gradually dimin
ished For the benefit of the Union and
other deluded high protectionists, the
views of Mr. Rowland Hazard a wooden
manufacturer of Rhode Island, are given
herewith Mr.. Hazard is an authority,
and consequently is entitled to be heard
with great respect. He says:
elusive we had practical free trade in
wool. In one of these years, 1859, wool
was as high as it was in any year of the
previous ten (lS41 to 1857 and the aver
age price of the four years of free wool
is higher than for any consecutive four
years of the previous ten. After these
four years of free wool, lower prices
prevailed under ali stages OF the tariff
until 1871 and 1872. which two years av>
eragcd the same as 1859. Since 1872
with only slight changes in the tariff and
with very high duties, continuously
maintained We have had lower prices
than We had under no tariff tax in 1867
and 1860 1t is plain that farmers can
not rely on the tariff to ensure them high
prices for wool
The story which the statistics tell of
the sheep is perhaps the most instructive
and the most remarkable. Ii TO 1867
when the tariff was passed to encourage
wool growing. the number of sheep re-
ported by the agricultural department
was increasing year by year. In the
eight principal wool growing states
Ohio Michigan. Pennsylvania, New
York. lndana. Illinois, Wisconsin and
IOwa-there were in 1865, % 500, Oe
sheep. In 1867 there were nearly 30.
600 900 in THESE same states. 1t 1877
after ten wears of protection, there wert
less than 10000 0N. In the states east
Of the Mississippi river there were les.
than one half as many sheep in 1878 II:
there were IN 1867
During the same time Texas and Cali.
fornia largely increased their flocks
From less than million in So they
rose to 4 500 900 in 1879. but this enOr
nous increase left the total number %
sheep in the United States less in 1S1!
than it was in 1867 In 1861 there
were about so, 500 Oa0, and in 1877!
there were 3. 100, 900 Since lS1!
the number has gradually incre lsed. Ii
the census year. 1850. - 600 600 are re-
ported and in January 1883, there wtrt
40 9OD. Oou" I'm 1887 there were re-
ported by The commissioner of sgnCul
turr, II. 759 3t4) But the fact re
malns, that for twelve years after the
high protection tariff of 1857 was passed
there WAS Nc general increase in sheer
hus bandry. During those twelve year,
the new and cheap lands of Texas anC
California were opened up. lands who's,
most profitable use was sheep farming
and but for this addition. which canno
I've ascrihed to the tariff. the number OF
.Jt-sheep would have decreased IN the mos
serlons manner.
Besides, the estimates Of the WOO
clips for the several wears under consid
Grafton, made by James Lynch, Esq, o
New York. the first authority on thi
subject. confirm the fact that there wa
An actual falling oil in the product o
wool lie reports the total wool clip o
1865 ut - Onu. 600 pounds There Wa
All immediate decrease, and this tigur
WAS not again reached till 1874 Tn
falling off in fleece and tob wool, most o
which was produced east Of the MIssis
sippi was more marked, as in this sectio
there WAS the largest decrease in sheer
In 1868, this wool was 15U, 900 90
pounds 1t went down to 100 600. 600 il
1874, 25.O0O GOO in 1873, IL 500 600 il
1876, and did not reach the figures o
lsUs until 1881, when it was 1914 900.
OGO.
But bearing in mind the caution as t.
economic phenomena, | do not say tina
this decrease was because Of the tariff
Probably there were many causes. Blu
what do say, and say it without fes
of contradiction, Is that the tariff Of 1876
failed 10 prevent the decrease Of sheer
and it failed to foster and increase tn
growth of wool II was expressly de
signed to encourage the wool grower, an
it rad no such effect
"WOol growers are dependent upo
wool manufacturers for their marke
Hence wool growing cannot thrive un
less manufacturing is prosperous Tn
question, then, is, why has not manu-
featuring been more prosperous?
Nothing. not even the tariff can max
goods sell which the consumers have M
the ability to buy. Further, rs the pric
of Al article is forced up. the number {
consumers who are able to buy it is IL
creased IT, therefore the tariff raise
prices, it decreases consumption, an
the manufacturers ri goods at hIg
cost fail 10 find consumers at a prof
The tariff cannot increase the ability
consumers to purchase, but it can M
does increase the cost of goods by pr
venting the American manufacturer frol
buying his wool in the markets of tt
world where he can buy cheapest.
There are but three great wool-prC
duclng countries-South Africa, TIL
Australian Colonies, and the SOut
American states about the River Platt
10 Canada in the United States. in Fl
rope, III Great Britain, in Russia. the
have from seventy to one hundred shee
to the one hundred inhabitants
South Africa they have 800 sheep, j
Australia, :. 4O2 sheep, and in the Rive
Platt countries, $50 sheep to the OF
hundred inhabitants These three Coun
tries grow wool to sell Their natur
advantages make it very cheap. but OF
tariff SAYS to the American manufacture
You shall not buy it without paying
tax of from 80 to 100 per cent Tt
consequence is that the foreign manufaC
turer can buy these cheap woods at fro
one half to two thirds what the America
manufacturer would have to pay.
'NOO UrOWprs cannot sell at hiO