Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1888-10-16

, bTS Salu 10 tOnSIdS nuuucA VI yo~AAoaS
! In 1866 they addressed q communication
to the United States Revenue Commission
e ar to be submitted to Congress, in whicl
, they said:
1.-THE committee do not hesitate to affirm
that, Independently of considerations o
general public policy demanding a duty
wool, the wooden manufacturers OF TIL
country would prefer the total abolition Q
!, the specific duties, provided they could hav
all their raw maleiil duty free and OIL
actual net protection Of 25 per cent
!, Applause on the Democratic SIDE.
This is signed by the executive Commit
tea of the National Association OF Woo
Manufacturers, and By John L. Hayes
their Secretary.
After the internal revenue tax was place.
upon the domestic production the manu-
tsctpre,s came and said to Congress: Nov
We want compensation fer this, too" Iney
had compensation for the AK OF WOOL, anC
now they wanted compensation for the tai
Of 10 per ceat. imposed by tie Internal rev
enue laws. Tie duty YVES raised to 80 pei
cent; but they ale fire ~diplomasists, and
short time after that they came betoie Con
gIess and got the internal revenue TAX On
woolea goods repealed. Bat the 80 pei
cent. still remains, although they had said
that 25 per cent. protection was all Trey
wanted. Now We give them fee wool and
40 Ger cent. protection, and still they say
to us: Your bill is afree trade measure.
Laughter on the Democratic nde.I
On the scheinls embracing books. pa
rers, ETC., the duty under existing law IL
ST.. Is, and we left it at $22.O6, areducilon
of less than 10 cents on the bundled dollars,
Now, Mr.. Speaker, l have gone through
with the schedules of the hill and come
to the free list. We have placed upon the
free list articles amounting In round num-
bers to $40, 900, COO. The largest item Is
wool, S. 39O, 1000. Why have we put WOOL
on the free hs,2 They soy that this Is full
free trade. They say to US, when yon
strike wool out OF the taxable list You have
shot out the middle link in the chain, and
the chain Is parted" Is that trutP Why,
sir, somebody put cottoo on the free list a
few years ago. They shot the middle link
out and parted the chain then. There
were millions of our fellow citizens who
were affected by that missing link IN the
chain of protection, but the chain was
parted, and parted by the gentlemen on
the ether side of the House, who have been
30 loudly crying free trade st Us. 10 Is
our greatest exporting product; 1t gives
employment to millions Of laborers. 1t
had q duty of 3 cents q pound, but they
removed it and put cotton on the free list,
and they did right. There could be no
justification for its tax, as there Can be
none for q tax on wool.
In 1872 hides were put on the free
list and by the same party that boasts
itself the special champion and friend OF
protection. Did the chains part them?
This is a great cattle growing country. 1t
is a great sheep growing country. We pro-
duce ali eorts of hides.
But when we propose to touch wool,
which affords in Winter the clothing OF
so, 600, 900 people, we strike ut the oombi-
nation that has made this protective tariff,
and they say, you shall net tluch it; toat
is free trade" Let us see whether it is OF
net. The first tariff law that ever was en-
acted by this Government after the Con-
stitution was ydopted-the joint product
Of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison,
Thomas Jefferson and George Washington
embraced in it's title the declaration
of the principle that it was made to en-
courage home industries; and the method
adopted by them to carry out that policy
was to put wool on the free list. There it
remained until 1924, the fathers and
founders of this government never propos.
ing to disturb it during all that time.
And in all that grand array of talent there
was only one, perhaps, who could have
BEEN accused of leaning toward free trade;
and that was he who wrote the great
Declaration, and in one line Of it indicted
the King of Great Britain and arraigued
him before the bar of mankind for eating
off our trade with all parts of the world.
TApplause on the Democratic side.
We are proposing to reduce the price Of
wooden goods by taking the tax off wool.
1t is not raised by skilled labor. II
scarcely employs any labor at all. There
has been a great deal Of sympathy mani
tested On the other side for the sheep. They
tell rs by heavily taxing the wool more
wool will grow on the back OF the sheep
1t is the back of the man we are caring for
on this side Of the House, and we propose
to bring down the price of wooden clothing
80 that poor people can get enough to wear
In winter. But we are met at the Threshold
with q proposition from the other side to
increase the duties on wool and wooden
manufactures SIS, 600, 900. This would
practically prohibit the importation d
either wool or wooden goods.
demand is one Of the most remarkable
propositions that has ever been submitted
to q legislative body, and that is that the
cheap wool that now comes in as carpet
wool shall not be Manufactured into
clothing, as it is being done to-day, be-
cause the better wool is kept out Of the
country now by high duties. How is this
law, il enacted. to be carried out9 Are
we to have Pinkerton detectives exsmin-
ing peoples clothing, and if some garments
are made of carpet wool instead Of clothing
wool grown on American ranches by alien
flock masters, are the garments to be taken
of the back Of the people and confiscsted3
Our people are to-day wearing carptt wool
in their clothing because the duty on the
clothing wool keeps it out. Dat Of 114,-
0O0, OOQ pounds Of wool imported in 1887,
over 80, 0O0, 900 pounds was carpet wool.
And now the wool manufacturers and
wool growers associations, and their allies,
are determined that we shall not even
wear carpet wool. On the 18th day of last
January they met in this city, in "a dark
lantern ROOM" and agreed on a schedule
that raises the duties on wool and wooden
goods so high that neither q be import
ed. Now, what are our people to do
for wooden clothing? Mr.. Dodge, the sta
tistician of the Agricultural Department.,
and 3 protectionist, says in his official re-
port that we only grow 265, 600. 900 pounds
Of wool. Others sly more, but we put il
safely when we say our product does moi
exceed 800, 600. 900 pounds. Our annual
consumption ia about 800, 0O0, 900 pounds.
Now if We refuse the importation of the
foreign wool to sstiafy the wool growers,
and rsfnse the imp,rtation of wooden goods
to satisfy the wool manufacturers, what
are we to do for clothingP ! suppost
they expect the people to 60 naked and
vote the Republican ticket. lApplsuse
But we say to you we shall have plenty Of
good wooden clothes. Serve the Lord and
vote the Democratic ticket. Renewed
applause on the Democratic aide
Mr.. Speaker, we have put wool On th'
free list rot only to chespsn the clothinS