Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-01-04
WOOL AND ITS DUTY.
continuad from Ffrst Paas.


Continued from First Page
duty on any foreign commodity that we cam
not produce sufficiently to supply the wants
of the United States.
Mr.. CarIisle-Then you would put duty
on tea and coffee because we do not produce
either of them?
The Witness-As to what would be wise
revenue system, submit that that is sub
ject which has not been assigned to me to
discuss. If were driven to the necessity OF
putting duty on tea and coffee, would OF
course resort to it.
Mr.. Carlisle-Would not that be ineYitas
bly, the result of your policy.
The Witness-If necessary to save the
protective system would tax whisky not
merely 80 cents gallon, but 81 80 gallon
to the full extent to which the law could
be enforced.
The Chairman-Is it not one of the CONS
plants against the protective system that
we are raising too much revenue?
The Witness-Yes, and all the efforts Of
the last administration and of the present
one have not yet been able to get rid of the
surplus.
NOT AT ALL PRoHIBIToRY.
The committee here took recess for half
an hour. After the recess Mr.. Lawrence re-
sumed his statement. The duties which he
had been instructed BY the National Wool
Growers Association to ask to have inserted
in the bill were, he said, not at all prohibi-
tory, and only, to Limited extent, protective.
Mr.. Bayne suggested, in order to save
time and TO give other gentlemen an oppOr-
tpnity to address the committee, that Mr..
Lawrenee's manuscript be printed without
being read. To this suggestion Mr.. Law
renee assented, with the condition that he
would make condensed statement orally Of
what it contained, and then hand over the
manuscript to the official reporter.
That clause was adopted, and Mr..
Lawrence went on with his re-
marks. He would purposely, he said,
omit the tariff speech which he would like to
make in Congress to the effect that an ade-
quate duty on wool and manufactured wooden
goods would not increase the cost at all, be-
cause home competition would prevent un-
reasonable charges, while, if the protective
policy were abandoned and all such producfs
were imported from abroad, the result would
be that the American people would be at the
mercy of foreign trusts and corporations.
RESTS ON ABANDONMENT.
Mr.. Carlisle-That argument rests on the as@
sumption that the home industry would be
abandoned.
The Witness-Yes, the effect of the tariff Of
1888 has been to cut down vastly the number Of
try would be practically abandoned in the
United States. The Boston Wool Reporter, he
said had recently spoken Of little coterie OF
Ohio politicians who were pressing demands Tor
high duty on wool. He (the witness) was not
a politician, but a member Of the Ohio Wool
Growers Association. That association had q
large membership, but there was not poll
Gcian among itS'members.
The next witness was Mr.. John 7. Rich, OF
Michigan who said that he was the representa-
tive Of the Michigan Merino Sheep Assoeia-
tion, and that the needs and situation OF that
average wool grower of Michigan. They de-
sired that there be no reduction on wool; that
there shall be substantial protection, and that
frauds in importations Of wool shall be pre-
vented.
Mr.. James Dobson, of Philadelphia carpet
manufacturer, next addressed the Commission,
critIcising what he called the violent TRADE
which Mr.. Lawrence had INDUCED in against
carpet manufacturers, and denying the cor
rectness of many of his statements.
would 90 further in the protection cause
than the carpet manufacturers, but they
did not want to be bounded, as they had been
for years. by the wool growers and WOOL
dealers. II there was to be free trade, let it be
free trade, pure and simple, and the carpet
manufacturers would take their chances. They
asked nothing more than to be Put on the same
level as wooden cloth manufacturers.
DoBsoN's ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Dobson argued that the wool growers OF
duce the quantity of carpet wool used in tha1
industry. because where they received 81 50
for the fleece of fne wool sheep they would
not receive % cents for that OF q coarse wool
sheep. -
National Association of Wool Manufacturers,
next addressed the committee. presenting q
memorial and resolutions adopted by that asso-
citation. The association took the position, he
said, not to attempt TO fix the duty on wool but
to leave that to the committee without remark
or comment. He would say, however,
t6s tSs' tns manufacturers EsTlS Connected Connected WITH
the organization was q preference tor
the maintenance of the existing duties, and
that the present rates should not De increased.
They would certainly oppose any attempt to
restrict the importation Of foreign wool, and
he did not believe that the committee would
attempt such thing. because 1t would De 1ms
possible for wool manufacturers to produce all
the goods necessary for home consumption,
unless they could have foreign wool The wool
manufacturers, he said, were willing to have 4
protective duty on wool, but not prohibitory
or restrictive duty.
Mr.. Bayne-Have you figured out what that
duty should be?
SATISFIED WITH THE DUTY.
The witness-No.we have not gone into that.
We de not come here to make an argument for
lower duty on wool or for higher duty on wool.
We are satisfied with the duty as it now is.
After a long examination, the witness was
wool manufacturers of the United States had
free wool, they could enlarge their market by
sales to foreign countries, and he replied that
under no circumstances would free wool en-
able wool manufacturers to make an 1mpres"
sion on the foreign markets.
Mr.. Breckinridge-Or free anything else.
The Witness-I would like to contine my ana
swer to what know about.
Mr. Breckinridge-Would free wool give you
an increased market in the country?
The Witness-l think there can be hardly any
TzrrNNF Fr0F a nr1n0 & m
production, and would give US an opportunity
to display the foreign products now used here.
But think that the effect of free wool would
be to diminish the price OF wool, and, conses
ouently to discourage the sheep raiser; and
the moment we begin to take from the worlds
product any given amount OF wool the pr1ce
wool would become considerably dearer than
it now is.
COMPARATIVE TARIFF.
Mr.. TIC. Search. of Philadelphia. represent-
inp the Manufacturers Club of that city was
the next witness. He declared himself in har-
mony with the views expressed by the last wit.
ness and argued to prove that the duty on
warns and wooden cloth should be Just four
times as great as the duty on unwashed wools,
which was now 10 cents per pound-wtth 40 and.
so per cent additional ad Valorem.
Mr.. McMillan-Do you favor an increased
duty on wool?
The Witness-I do not object to anything that
the wool men ask to-day.
A statement on tQe same BuDleCLs duu W
like effect, was made by Mr.. W. II. Folwell. OF
cloth manufacturer. He an
nounced himself in favor Of putting high du-
ties on Southern products-sugar. rice, turpen-
tine and peanuts-and of having free'Whisky
and free tobocco
Mr, McMillan-You would have free whisky
and tax sugar.
The Witness-I would only tax the sugar that
comes from abroad, until we could supply the
whole demand ourselves.
THE next statement was by Mr.. Alexander e.
Kursheedt of Philadelphia, braid manufac-
rurer He argued in favor of specific duty OF
Is cents a pound on braids and so per cent ad
valorem.
MI. John F. Plummer, of New York. made
some remarks on the subject Of wooden fabrics
worn by men. He said that he did so, not as a
nor as a wool grower. but as an
enthusiast in favor of American wool products.
The country was suffering under a popular
prejudice that better clothes could be got
abroad than here at the same price. He de-
clared that there was no country where man
could get as good suit OF clothes Tor az little
money as in the United States.
The committee, at $50 o'clock, adjourned till
10 A. NJ. tomorrow.