Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1888-03-17
Mr. JACOBS REPLY.
MOI satisfied with tho Registers Answer
The Wool Question.

Not satisfied With tho Registers
The Wool Question.
To "s Editor cf he R,gJScr.
SIR:-In your issue Of the 18th inst yen
publish q communication from mt making
certain inquiries, which in your comments
You Lose sight OF altogether and
fail to answer, but branch Oft with
a dissertation on the BEAUTIES of fee
trade and how the wool growers of Amer
ca will he benefited by placing wool on
the free list. We DO not agree wieh yOu
in your argument, Eor various reasons.
understand pert, city well how a certain
corporation controlled the salt industry,
and the cause OF its decline, but do Lot
understand, that If properly and honestly
managed, Shy it will cost more 10 manu-
f,ctur- salt ia West Virginia than IL will
in Michigan. If the lumber dealers ere
satisfied with lumber on the tree list
which | douh'I we viii not complain. In
nv communication | did nos speak of my
self, aud 1t does not matter whether KEEP
one hundred or one thousand sheep, lshan
defend the indurtry the anne and talk in
the int rest o. the million tlDCS masters 0f.
America.
Iquote from Your comments, We hops.
Mr.. Jacob will take all these matters into
consideration and after a thorough analy-
So Of the situation ask himself il Id or
T. per cent protection, %c' Let us eX-
anime aud see IL the proposed reduction by
placing wool on the tree list only amounts
TO ~ or II per cent. ! will quote from
President Cleycland's message, II think
il NAV be fairly assumed that q large pre-
portion OF the sheep owned by the farmers
throughout the country are found in small
hncks numbering rom twenty-five tn fifty.
The duty on the grade of imported wool
which these sheep yield Ia 10 cents each
pound if OF the value OF 30 cents or leSs,
aud IL cents il OF the value OF more than
81 cents" Ii the liberal estimate of SIX
pounds be allowed for each lse,e, the duty
thereon would he CD or - cents and this
NAV be taken as Tho utmost enhancement
of its price 10 the farmer by reason o. this
duty. Eighteen dUllaSs would thus repIe-
sent the increased price OF the o from
twenty-five sheep, AID thirty six dollars
that from the wool of fifty sheep, Il ut
present values this addition wouid amount
to about one third of its price Take 30
centsas the Az rage price OF the wool spoken
of Tor lS-T and reduce it One-third, or to
twenty cents per pound. / think instead
Of q reduction of 10 or II per cen.. 1t would
he 334 per cent. on | have taken the Pres
dents own figures and arglm,n', and II 1t
il not correct place the blame where 1t be-
longs. Think OF it one moment, and see
that il is y reduction ct ten cents per pound
not 10 per cent which makes = vast diff
ference to the wool growers. by the tariff
act Of March 2, ISL, all wool costing less
than - cent? Per pound WaS admitted isee,
over 20 cents a duty of - yer cent. I'd va
lorsm was allowed. Unher the effect Of the
tariff tine NN woods in Washington county,
Pa, sold a. low rs % cents per pound in
1889. and sheep were bought by the thous
and At one dollar per heal and killed for
The pelt and oil aud the carcass fsd - the
hogs" So says MIC. J. G. McNary, Of
I~IouStonsyille, Pa History. repeats i'Sfli
Is why we are now fighting
against free wool Let's see what effect
the tariff act OF lsSa had on the sheep in
dustry OF the eOu1try according to Stats
tics:
The number Of sheep in the country in ,
lSSi was 50, GIG. 90. in lS~T 80, 80. 3l5, a
decrease OF nearly & .OOO. ODO sheep aud a
d~iminution Of the annual wool product OF
over 3 ,OO0. GOO pounds. When the slight
change in abe tarG Of lSSS resulted in re-
ducins the number Of sheep nearly 5000,
600 head, what effect will the total aholi-
ton Of the protective duties have? You
<ay 10 your issue OF the 9Th inst "TTuS,
il takes away his $50 protection in every
500 pounds OF wool, but the getferlliy far
greater reduction on all that the farmer
uses, his pectssaries Of life, make up thrice
over the loss OF his 10 cent protection,
which did not really protect Why did
il not protect? WIS il not because Of the
rulings OF the Treasury Department and
the naturalization and classification in
the New Yosk Custom House that neutral
lied SIl tie protection received? Observe
how others look at this question.
quite recently there has sprung mp 3
lively interest 10 butter making on the
cream gathering system What has
most stimulated the farmers to make q
move Is the determined effort of the sd
minissration party to destroy the tarif On
wool. Large docks OF sheep in The West
will 20 ont Of existence and now the
farmers loresee their destiny and are max.
ing Timely moves to counteracs 30 greatf
calamity" ''Rhe SoSl Industry GU.
for the dairy business will oyes>NSN
10 that extent, there will l<.aihnE nro'
"Ts sn~zwissrpssz
: cp@
~ M,rsIn IN
Country GeRfienaR, March sthN !
Thus you see how Others view It. :
might 90 Of almost i~ndeiniily. II the =
working man, n a consumer, nil take !
the REGIsrER's arguments ard be table I!
furnished by a Brooke county geatlsman ,
and from which the REGISTER 50 Often {
he Ill! see that the yeas ~ !
which wool was on the has lat, il 81 iof
more money than in the years It MSS !
protsstsd. d. the same arsumen5 9
II the raw saterial cost MOE
money for their goods. II tfst
49, correct it Is not 10 his in-terst a
ohens S"J on the ire hss5 - NJ 80
20 sns Son On nave 10 pay more nlO~~y \
aoans you w.ii Mr.. Editor, when yos
S9s sonsisssias shs interests OF the con
sOmsr and advocating tue %sb ss nooa
manufacturer The VOL gro"es
bear In mind that uAs hOck W~si Sos
not 90 To HE Wool orcAard sno P.eN me !
aeeees OF wool from the tssss like apples, :
a. some sem 10 think, has- hose hseees
OF Voc. rsptsssn much hard llor aud