New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-10-12
WOOL AND THE REPUBLICAN POLICY.


The TRIBUNE has refrained from wasting
time upon those who have characterized OPP
position TO the free wool scheme as an attempt
to "force through Mr.. Delanos PLAN" or the
increase Of duties proposed in the Senate Tariff
bill. 1t is a fact that THE TRIBUNE has plainly
informed those who clamOr for free wool that
they must expect free goods Also if they ever
get what they ask But it is not true that
THE TRIBUNE has at any time urged the in
crease of duties proposed in the Senate bill as
the precise thing necessary. 1t may save
trouble to state once for all, how the matter
does stand so that those who make it their
chief business to miSrepresent THE TRIBUNE
may be moro readily exposed.
Since the reduction of duties on wool and
woollenS by the revision Of 1888 it has appeared
clear that the manufacture and the growing of
wool were both seriously injured. As the
manufacture cannot thrive without an increas-
ing supply Of American wool, it has appeared
to be a necessity to restore substantially the
measure of protection to both interests which
was given by the tariff of 1867, under which
both growers and manufacturers in every
branch proSpered more than at any other period
The Senate bill went beyond that point, as to
third class wool, placing the duties little
higher than they were from 1867 to 1888
when both growers and carpet manufacturers
made their greatest gains. Adequate reason
for higher duties than those Of the tariff of
1867 has not yet been perceived by THE
TRIBUNE. But it would without hesitation
advocate such an advance if it should appear
necessary to restore the prosperity of the man
ufacture and of the growing of wool. As at
present advised, THE TRIBUNE without hest
tation OPPOSES reduction or removal Of duties
on any class of wool, because that opens the
door to immeasurable fraud and to defeat Of
all protection for wOolgrOwcrS, and THE TRIB-
rNE advocates restoration of substantially the
measure Of protection afforded by the tariff of
1867. but does not sec that still higher duties
on either class Of wool are required. The lat
ter question is one Of detail, and not Of prin-
ciple. however, and if Senators are satisfied
that higher duties are necessary to afford the
measure of protection required, they are en-
tilely justified in advocating such duties. The
principle involved Is that American wool grow
ers ought to be effectively defended in their
industry, against the destroying and degrading
/ influence Ol cOHpthtOh Win NOOl grown by
seifs, savages or convictS.
II anybody chooses to dissent from this po-
sition Of THE TRIBUNE he is welcome. But he
is not at liberty to miSrepreSent it. The adj
vocates of free wool submitted their case to the
PEOPLE last year and were soundly beaten. They
were not fortunate in their leadership, but can
never expect TO get particularly wise or we'll
informed leaders to champion a cause which is
that Of foreign capital against American labor
II they see tit to renew the contest on the old
issue the Republican party is ready to meet
them. But that party is in no way committed
| to the details of measure which Republican
in the House had no part in flaming and nc
opportunity to vote upon. AS Senators did
their duty according to their best information
and judgment, SO Republican Representatives