New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-09-21
The WOOL MANCFACTURERS RESOLU-
TLONN


The Executive Committee of the National
Association of Wool Manufacturers. whose re-
cent call for meeting was foolishly supposed
by Free Traders to be the beginning of a move
ment against the present tariff. has met in con-
ference with large number Of invited repre-
sentativeS of different branches of the man
ufactup. The result was the adoption of reso-
utiOnS which are to be submitted to the full
meeting of the association, with recommended
ton of the committee and those comforting with
them. The resolutions, which are printed on
our second page to-day will be a sore diSap-
pOintment to the so-caIed tariff reformers,
who have imagined that the manufacturers
were about to ask for free wool. With the ut
most possible distinctneSs the resolutions de-
clare: eve do not demand lower rates of
duty on our chief raw material, wool, or other
materials used in the fabrication of our goods.
nor upon the machinery we employ" In tho
preceding sentence, 1.-The National Association
Of Wool Manufacturers leaves wholly to the
wisdom of Congress the determination of the
rates Of duty which should be applied to the
raw material, wool, for the purpose of enabling
the American growers to continue to produce
a sufficient quantity Of such woods as can be
grown to advantage for the consumption of the
American manufacture"
This is as direct and distinct a rebuke as Ian
guage could express to the pretence that wool
manufacturers were clamoTing for free wool
and could not get along without it, and at
tributed their recent ill-fortne to the want of
free raw materials. The pretended reform Or
CANS, here and in Boston, which have kept up
for months this Misrepresentation of the man.
ufacturerS, have occasion to feel about as one
might when publicly branded as liar.
The manufacturers proceed to ask from Con-
greSS ga revision of the tariff in which there
shall in every instance be placed upon the man
ufactured product the full amount of the specific
duty necessary to compensate whatever rates
of duty. public policy may require to be i'm
posed on the raw material" and that, in addi-
ton to the compensatory specific duty, " the
wooen industry is entitled to the highest de-
gree of protection" Certainly no other re-
ouires a larger measure of defence in order to
resist and overcome, not merely the lawful
competition of foreign producers, but the
frauds and perjuries which have become in
that branch of importing trade more numerous
and more difficult to meet than III any other.
These resolutions are not, it will be per
ceiyed Of the free-trade variety. They put
strongly the argument for protection of Ameri-
can manufactures, and assent heartily to the
imposition Of whatever rates of duty on raw
wool the wisdom of Congress may determine
10 be desirable But in direct contradiction Of
tbo nreyious declaration, the resolutions make
an exceptional statement about carpet WOOL.
and declare that the rate of duty proposed In
the Senate Tariff bill "cannot stimulate t9G
American grower, and must seriously cripple
one branch Of the woOllen manufacture" Inc
Fvocutive Committee would have been shrewd-
or if it had left this point also to the wisdom Of
! Congress. since facts do not make manifest the
wisdom of the committee in this exceptional
| recommendation.
The Senate bill as reported from the com
mittee July 21, 1888, fixed the duties on CO.
pet wool at . 1-2 cents for wool worth less than
| - cents and 6 cents for wool worth over II
cents per pound These rates were lower than
those asked more than twenty years ago by
! the wool manufacturers conference Of 1867
adopted in the tariff Of that year, in
/ force from that time until 1888,
and under which the carpet manufacture
/ achieved its wonderful triumph. The duties
on the two kinds Of carpet wool in that meas
ure were and cents. and it is exceedingly
/ clear that they did not PROSTATE the carpet in
| dustry. Having first demanded a specific duty
on all goods carpets included, precisely com
pensatory for any duty on wool which Congress
| NAV in it's wisdom determine to impose, the
committee would have been more logical if it
had not claimed that a particular branch Of
I
Of cents and 8 cents thus compensated, just
one-third higher than the duties under which
all the progress of the manufacture in this
country was attained. If compensatory duties
do not compensate, why the anxiety Of the
committee to have specific duties precisely com.
pensating? If they do, how can higher duties
harm the manufactured THE TRIBUNE has