Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1888-01-05

ti.t HA'iH : q. 'titf!f. ''.. H"..t. ''f'.
p.r-i.,s- ri tfe Natiea ar,. Gr...
ct Asso.i..'o. ve'.. STD publish.
will NOT n'". ,.. approval %. .I. a.-
wool grocer. hs eny m-an- -iTrr.
is II -irougp disability fl. 49, u.'a-.
is influenced by p1m . consider.
tions in urging concerted opi,o-I-Ipn
to the President. Being Repub-
lican OF long standing and welded to
the high tariff idea he cannot hc ex-
pected to he in sympathy with the
President = recommendations, or with
any reduction of the wool tariff what
ever. But republicans and demo
cra.s outside of the strongly protected
states oil Ohio and Pennsylvania are
not dashed to the high protection
horse. though the majority of both
may believe in the principle. Mr.. Della
nos address sounds too much like n
patisan document. lie would have
the wool growers believe that Mr..
Cleveland was an enemy Of the indus
try. That he would wipe it out of
existence through a reduction of the
tariff on wool. The President recon-
mends "the removal or reduction of
the duty" as the wisdom of congress
may determine. There should he a
reduction on many articles; ON what
articles, and to what extent n reduc-
ton shall he made, may be evolved
an issue that will divide the two
great parties on this question. but at
present all are at sea. The Republi-
can party cannot win on "a high tariff
platform nor the Democrats on free
trade.
The Chicago Tribune and st. Paul
Pioneer Press, the two leading Repub-
lican papers in the west endorse the
Presidents message, and are in favor
OF u reduction of the wool tariff. Blu,
Mr.. DelanO has not read them out OF
his party. Aside from Mr.. DeIano's
political bias, there are arguments to
prove that no great calamity would
be visited upon the industry should
the tariff be reduced. 1t isclaimed by
friends OF the protective system that
wooden mills are closed down through.
out the East because the present
tariff makes raw material 40 expen.
sive that many grades OF wooden
goods cannot be made in this country
at all, and that there is u heavy duty
on certain varieties of wool not pro-
duced in this country, hence no COM
petition on the part of the american
wool grower. In reply to the showing
made by Mr.. Delano to prove that
tn: reluct ion 81 s.ssl
the number of sheep was owing to the
"unfriendly legislation Of 1885," the
journal. "A protection
paper, says: "'rsking Mr.. Delano on
his own ground, that high tariff
means abun'ian' WOO! production
and "a reduction o. ju. as means the
AZ the industry, We find
that, in 1867. tus duty on wool was
rai>el as tue r..'iaG Ds growers.
from 81 to $50 pep Gems. Before thar
iar;i went into r.l..0. ,he total 500,
clip 5ftho country ..a~ lf5.t"1.1nt
poanas, ..vo years M,.c F., ha3 ti'.an
to I62,251.0uu pcolis has ,u4t
decrease due to til, advance IA axes?
By the treasury reports it appears
that the decline was not owing to
unfavorable seasons, but resulted
from decrease in the number OF
sheep kept. "In the ten years sue
ceeding 1867" adds the journal,
despite the continued maintenance
of the highest sort OF a protective
tariff, the number OF sheep in he eight
most important wool-prOducing states
fell from 10000, 900 to 1900, 900.
In Michigan alone there was a decrease
from 4.O2S, 900 to I, 1900 Look
ing farther it is found, "during the
forty years preceding 1864, when
tariffs were low, the average price of
American wool was 53 cents; in the
twenty years ending 1886, when duties
were uniformly high, the average price
was AZ cents. Neither the number
OF sheep kept nor the price OF wool
has been advanced by high tariffs.
No decrease i'm either is attribut able
to tariff reduction"
1t will he seen that doctors of the
same school may disagree, and Mr..
Delano's attempt to array the wool
growers against the President because
he has taken position held by the
best writer's and thinkers in the land,
will meet with signal failure.