Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1889-07-16
THE TARIFF ON WOOL.
System Which Places the Burden Of Taxa
ton on the Farmer.

ton on the Farmer.
Detroit (Mieh.) News.
Those farmers in Michigan who own
sheep are now supposed to be getting the
benefit of the duty on wool in the in
creased price they are receiving They
are willing to be taxed on their tools,
their clothing, their food, their house
furnishings, their fence boards, and
even the nails that hold them to the
posts, for the sake of the profit that the
tariff enables them to pocket on their
wool.
And yet the record kept by +. A.
Dewey of Cambridge, Mich, of the
prices for which he has sold mis- wool
during the past fifty years, and pub
lished in the Peoples Cause, a tax
reform journal, shows that between 1916
| and l860-low tariff years-his wool av-
eraged IS cents a pound, as against an
average of SO cents a pound between 1857
| and lS77-high tariff years. Just nov
prices vary from hfteen to twentF cents
for unwashed and from twenty-five to
thirty-two cents for washed--an average
below any of the above figures.
George W. Bond, a wool expert agrees
with MIR. Dewey. He says: ''Our fine
woods have always been higher, other
things being equal, whom we are able to
freely import woods of other countries at
low duty or no duty at ALL This is
| the secret of good prices for American
wool under q low tariff. ''The Ameri-
can manufacturer must have the power, .
wrote the National association of
wool manufacturers to Secretary
Manning In 1885, 'fof Sc
leoting a portion of his raw ma
terial from all the world 5 source of SUD
ply > in order to compete with foreign
manufacturers ''for the possession of the
markets of this country Not for the
possession of foreign markets; that was
out Of the question. But for the possess
sion of the home markets.
The best results in wool manufacture
are attained by mixing different grades.
No two countries produce the same kind
of wool. SOIL and climate create differ
ences that cannot be overcome.
The foreign manufacturers haze
the whole world from which n to
choose their raw material. The manu-
| faeturers of the United States are not
granted this privilege, and in eonse-
| quence they depress the home market by
every aPtiflee in their power in order TO
| compensate them for the duty they are
compelled to pay on their imports. Be-
sides, an overabundance of one kind OF
wool makes that kind cheap. There is
more of it than can be proftably used.
| So the price of American wool is de-
| pressed by the very instrument Intended
| to make it more valuable.
In 1867 there were 20 ,S29 ,Sl5 sheep in
| Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania. New
York, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin and
| Iowa. In 1887 the number had decreased
| 20 IL $40, 1858. What wonderful stimu-
| Ius the tariff must have been TO the wool
industry in those states! Ii has had the
same effect, also, on the country at
| large. In 1867 there were 80, 3s5 1886
sheep in the United States; in 1870 the
number had decreased to 35 1904 200.
| In 1884 it was 80 ,626 1924, inlsss, - ga =
| 755-an increase of only ,l59 1873 under
| twenty years of protection The wool
elip has increased from 100 900, 000
| 1867 to 2G5 600 ZOO in 1887, the aYerSse
| weight of fleeees being pound or more
| heavier. But this is due 20 improved
! methods of breeding. and il as marked IN
| free trade as protected countries
The persistence of an economic error is
| shown In no case more plainly than in the
| tenacity with which the American farmer
clings to a system Of taxation that COM
pels him to bear greater part of the
| burden of government, saddles him with
| nonepolies, and is rapidly driving him
| INTO the class of tenant farmers.