New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-01-29
FOR THE TARIFF ON WOOL
VIEWS OF TREASURER BEARD. OF BOSTON.
TIE rx-ooaLzcroR Of THAT foHi "AN'
yaGokaEs REPLY TO An AD'o'N
or FggE TkABE-


- u~,,-crop oy THAT PORT MAKING A
ytGokays REPLY TO An Ap'o'AS
or FgEE TkAes-
p.,e.x Ian % ssxeclan.-stste Treasurer A. W.
paara = ,,,, IN a esvstc reply 90 soeef biskH en-
the tar,g v,.s~sian Mr.. Bi2kse criticised previous
,rtlcia M NJ Eearsi tfe wead snrsSl *H MI
heard tsaar responded IN tofrit'se ossheing man
ner. M. beard s4Es, sp1aans oi ''se S""iieh "1"s
try:
Van sxv The industry established under .
low arA aaJ Lad lis sle.aesi pEo psiiiy thsI 4hee
IN The w~oe~ nanrfs.5 wing industry I'm the last
fwcraT rrrs hiGh fr-r that thrse was IN the ten
years q eS i7E Ss5 ee soG Se rena that in 1sso
and 80 years preceding ,iTe great buk OF purchases
weelru sOsas 81. eiSt bang purposes were fc'e,gn
goods thsG bsd American sal4Issts o't'eo- Airp
eOtns aIal cass.QoIes bu even OF lBese MOI IAlse
had few low g-sco. sl.-k dcesktus and black cas-
meles, and small nsinbcr of nalls were mslns
low AID l.ediHu g AIDES OF fancy eassimeres; ESsd
Harris was making a limited quantity OF fairly good
.sn>r~s. but their mostly confined 10 ne.
chant tsaors- Ar coating, other than snoSo
mentioned, we're Imported Brosdcl0 hs were iaft'rH
aud imported Nothwi hst andlas tse low "a. a
poorer In quality than to-day cs ter or cheaper
than doubt If there is any country Wn s me
masses cloihe themselves so well Tor tse i SUE
money know there country where thcp i. .SVs
win bring hs much food ard clohng a, seq 80 , nns
tar ridden ons" l also SAID tnai IN ioo lS az
could count bis fingers the number OF in' ns~ a
r. eetsoc wooSn goods !. s~ xc 1e a nn and
with a flourish enuIncrste from your memory qute
a q
pny You mentIon eight mills IN Amesnury'
daed and rsore anlaed IN ISIS or 1855 under
poration. The sslisbury cnlpshy. which had IN l1eo
and FIVE sets on satnsts Is this a specimen of your
countingl Many Of the mills YOU mention we're smsn
Your own for instance, would II take to-
day to make goods than all In
tie United states made IN 1850! You
do not attempt to conrovst the statement that we had
TO depend mostly foreign goods for our clothing
trade You mention the Merchants " ooen MIL, Ded
ham Inc Nashingon Mills and Others. The Mrrchanfs
Washington we're both reorganizaions a. the loss o.
and inst prior to 1850 Their period Of pros perty
with the tariff Of 1851 and their subsequent decline
came from well known 10 manufacturers ana
~ ed 10 mo s,l,hrv and scvrra others Some of
these mills did later DAYS. because they
did not keep up with the times in mach merry IN good
tase Lacked geo mssnasememt ana eet1s' FsG
have been IN all branohss Of business when there is
brisk competition. II is The survva of the httest"
You say You will not seek the aid OF statistics 10
refuie NY statements You had beit"r let sttistcs
alone In this In 1850 the entire consumption OF
wool in the United States only s6O0o00O pounds
In 1856 over 100000 900 pounds. THIS shows tet'er
the w6oen Industry Of this country So much for do
veopment OF tho wooIen industry prior TO
the masses sse are clothed better and cheaper
than ever before. bur you say Il Is because
clothing. ilke other manufactures, is made UP from
materials entering into the garment and the labor Of
coats unaercoats vests and trousers are higher than
the prices paid In 1eGO IS the development of the
wooen industry in the Tn led 81 aes than has so re-
duced the % clothing You have done your share
I'm this development, Why make statements that all
manufacturers and dealers know to be disingennous
and unwarrsnted, II not rediculous9
You make the Wild '@tement that every 10 cents
Is p cents because Of the tariff Most people sup
pos eoin to BE- an Ae0o s aVT az 70 tram
port the raw corn across the Atlantic ana re1nPart
II I'm the form 81 starch Then again, Mr. Blade
when was Collector farina or staIcn, as an Ilcio
OF food Was free Whether II Is so now or nor mahes
no Inference A tariff corn starch. high or Tow,
agree with you that the $40 900 600 or $4,000
600 OF imported woollen goods ought 10 be made IN
this conntry. the largest part a. least Inc tarln
on wooden goods reduced In l5oj The erroneous
Classification OF worSted goods which al parties srfui
NOW ready 10 rectfv increased This reduction IN two
Instances I an givo the results OF this reduction
% duty. The inportations 81 wooiien yarns during
the year ending June 80 1s53 before me re9o9 quo
ton took effect, amounted In value to S433,963
After the change IN 1eo4. imporaiions were SlO48'-
IA. IN 1.sG I'm mort afions OF woolen yarns
soe-3 176 IuiTort ations Of wo'sted goods IN LIS
Amounted 10 sQ63.G0S In 1884. ~. 42Oo33' 10 loSo'
s. 2O7 sS6 in 1-S6 - 295 436 In thess two items,
wooden warns amt worsted goods the increase OF duties
paid IA the three years subsequent to the reduction
OF the tariff over the duties paid IN the three years
preceding the change IS Sc GS.427 II can be seen
from these examples how reduction OF the tsrlr on
woollen goods reduces the surplus.
Now Il depends upon the standpoint you loco occupy
no" s9. loom t' o" @ ple Of protection 10 American
Industries in the adjustment OF the tariff tnfn III ee
and the wool growers At the present low price OF
Wool The dny o on Wo 9oods Ia seo V se
OF wool in this country about 60OOO.OOn pounds
in S67. $50 900 OO0 pounds IT rose to 10000 600
pounds in 1859, and then fell of to l5oOOo.onO IN
iR7a After 1872 the production Of wool Increased
each wear reaching 100000 900 pounds In 1884 For
ten wears previous 1854. inclusive, this country
produced 0ur-ffh of IFS entire consumption OF wool
Certainly wool growing IS American Industry In as
Isrg, proportion as wool msnufac turing, aud much
entitled 10 discriminating protection Setting aside
the equity OF the wool growers claim am willing 10
lenve the discussion OF the eNpedency TO the
Manufacturers themselves. You Instance three
OF your old schoolmaes in Scotland Who have
been equally succesSf ul IN hee-trade Rriton
making goods for the markets OF the world"
Nobody surprised that British manufacturers have
prO,Dered WHY shouldn't they with labor paid less
than half Won have paid and making goods for the
markets OF the word7i Had you received no pro
lection the goods made by your schoolmates would
have had chance to have driven your own goods
ont OF the homo market seeking 10 supply.
doubt ~ woud have developed IN the
country adoption. had not been for the pro-
lection received against the manufactures OF the
schoOmatcs and others you LEFT when you emgrafed.
But how is II about operatives bore and I'm Great
Britain. the operatives of old schOomstes and the
operatives You have employed7 Do those in Great
Britain have the comfortable homes. the good living.
the savings laid UP for old age the opportunities
offered for Improvement thar your operatives enjoy
Have they the consuming power 10 make market
for productions Of OF her Industries besides your
own These questions you may answer at your
leisure. The American protective system covers the
whole people and must be judged By its effect the
general prosperity