New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1889-06-15
HOW 4 MIG WUMP DODGES.

"The Boston lIcraldp classfcs itself az TO
morals with the John l.. Sullivan end Of Boston
in its attempt TO discuss the wOrsted duties.
The assertion that the worSted manufacturers
Of the United States appeared before the Tariff
COmmis sion and made precisely the same argu
ment in defence OF higher rate on worstcds
that THE NEw-YoRK TRIBUNE is making ut
the present time,n is incorrect. So too, the
assertion that the late DR.. Hayes, aided by
the association with which he was connected"
did enforce upon the minds OF Congressman tho
fact that methods of manufacture had greatly
changed, and that worsted goods were largely
used for clothing as only woollen goods had
been previously used, is also a complete mis-
representation-to put It mildly. 1t happens
that the report Of the Tariff Commission, in
which DR.. Hayes and his associates set forth
the information and recommendations they had
10 submit TO Congress, is not rare document.
Most persons can get access 10 copies in public
Libraries. On pages 1881 Of that report is
found whatever the commission had to say
about woOllen and worsted duties, and the very
breyity Of the remarks on that topc-occupying
ess than two pages-SufflceS TO indicate that no
change deemed of consequence was proposed
or discussed.
Persons who suppose that "The Boston Her
aIdr is entitled to confidence will discover, upon
examining these pages of the report, that not
one word Il said therein about the substitution
Of worsted for wOOllen goods in mems wear, or
in any other use for which woollen cloths had
been employed. Not trace is to be found Of
the reasoning by which change Of claSsifca-
ton is now supported, as 4" The Boston Herald"
asserts But the commission did say on page
20, {" the commission has deemed it eXpedient
to mako no material change in the general
structure, Of the woollen schedule. The class
ifcatiOn and the very phraseolOgy of the act
Of 1867 is retained by the commission, and was
also retained by Congress. This shows how
little Of integrity there is in the assertion that
after fair examination of the arguments and
facts now sub ntted, and notwithstanding in
formation from the commission, Congress re-
fused to change the classification of woellen
goods.
The truth is that the goods which have re-
Gently been 10 largely imported and have taken
the place Of woollen cloths were not imported
at all prior TO the change of duty IN 8S3. But
Congress lowered the duties on worsteds, sup
posing that the term applied in practice, as it
did in legal meaning and use up TO that time,
exclusively to goods manufactured from long
combing wool, and in texture untitled to be
used in place Of woolen cloths. In that sup
position the reduction Of duties was intended
to affect only the coarse worsted stuffs for dress
goods were separately dutiablo under paragraph
386, and paragraph 1913 was never intended by
Congress to affect any kinds Of goods essentially
different from those specified as follows
" Flannels, blankets, hats Of WOOL knit goods
and all goods made on knitting frames, bal
morals, woollen and worsted yarns"
When the reduction Of duty took effect, from
90 to 1 o cents per pound on the cheaper goods
Of this class, foreign manufacturers immediate