The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1890-01-04

/
a Democrat In all but free trade, unt
that II the Mills bill had gene into eiIec,
Texas sheep raisers would have had tc
90 out OF the business. Hon. SWm. Law.
renee, OF Ohio, read carefully prepared
paper upon the necessity OF further pro.
lection for carpet wools. llsss.;3
DETAILS OF. TILE HEARING.
a Texas Wool Grower Mai on II Warm for
the Democratic Members OF tho Wa, \
ind Means Committee. n. n i,'
WAsItSaroS, Jan. s. Tho House
COMMITTEES on Ways and Means opened
its session this morning BY listening to
the.remarks.of Representative Carter, oil
Montana, " lio spoke In relation to sheen
husbapdry, particularly on the eastern
slope oil the Rocky Mountain country.
be thought thRte30 per cont. was nd
duty on wool:; that the wool industry Of
Montana would be'destroyed. 'i.ig1l5E /
Mr.. Sheppard, n wool grower, OF Texas,
was the next witness. He said that the
subject assigned to him by the President
Of the. National Wool Growing Associa.
ton, was the ability OF the United States
to raise all the carpet wool CONSUMED ia
the country; and he proceeded to read a
paper TO prove that with sufficient pro-
lection it could bo doue.5 He gave figures
10 show that in Texas it costs iron, is to
IS cents pound to produce fine wool,
and'that it canuot be laid down in Bos.
ton at less than 10 cents u pound, while
the Australian wool could be laid down
there, il there was no duty on it, at 9
cents a pound. Z! II sEgG'i
Mr.. Car lisle-You say that you cannot
produce wool without adequate pro,ec.
lion. What rate. Of dntys ,io YOU con-
slider adequate protection 5sll
The witness-1 would have the same
duty OH. all wool, say 10 cents pound.
MIR. Gear-What would have been
the effect on the wool growing business
In Texas il the Mills bill hnd gone into
effect = r !! -.;7:si
The witness-We would NIL have gone
out OF the business, l reckon. -.
Mr.. Mills put series of questions
designed to make Bthe witness admit
thstthe ten cents a pound duty on wool
was the protection Of capital not OF labor,
which 6 was being robbed, he said, to
that extent. q 5g7zEis li
The@ witness %replied R( with much
warlntl) that he would like TO rob no,
the poor man, but the rich man, such as
Congressman; and Senators, who were
robbing the sheep laisers by not giving
them their dues. He declared that lie
was q Democratfall but free trade:s He
could not stand that, PIE hadEvotei for
President Cleveland the tirsS tiu,e and
would have voted for him the second
time if he had not sought to slaughter
sheep raisers ior the sake of free trade,
Mr.. Bayne--Are the farmers and wool
growers Of Texas generally in favor Of
protection : JisE-E - - =; !. Z. :
< The witness-I cannot speak for the
farmers. | know that the wool growers
are. - Z, = Il :, q 4 r, :. y Z
Observation-Disclosures Mr. TO party I?
The Witness-We are going to drop
tue Question of party. .s:.ii J.,
Mr.. Aliils-Did not you tryJa little OF
that pl.ilosophytlnst campaign? 9iE
FiThe Witnrss-Not as much as I wish
We had done. z There was another feat.
ure in that campaign-prohibition--
which elected some gentlemen.
Mr.. Dfcckcnridge-Is the SDemocracy
gf tTexs.4s Is strongly in favor Of prohibi:
tiUh? ~ - - = = 5:'-) - n
e The Wilness-No, sir;sI am sorry to
say liIat the Democracy OF. Texas is In
fayurOi free. whisky Laughter m,
aProhibitlonist Id yseiI. We did not try
TO crntralizG the wool interest in the
last calhpaigu, but The next time we viii
try. $fi z II Ell ~. ;s5:cf fl45E &
Alter some remarks by Mr. Walsh, Of
Missouri, uou. Wm. Lawrence, OF Ohio
read statement. iHe said that he wai
one Ola committed appointed tby the
National Wool Growers Association al
the recent convention in Washington
to make sorib re;nprks ias 10 itllc llegisla
ton which wool growers generally be
iieved was required by sound publit
policy, and Justice. 1t was his duty, he
said to'ad'lress the Committee on two
subjccts-the first being the proper duty
on carpet wool, ,and the second being
the, provisions OF Inv necessary 10 secure
an honest administration of the 5tariil
lay! IT was sale.tofsly,tliat wool'crow
ers GENERALLY, believed that q sound pol,
icy required the imposing OF such Il dutI
on so;ealled carpet wool us would in duo
time enable American wool growers t
produce oil the carpet wool required fol
consumption ins Tue United. States, thu;
shutting outinportalions and giving the
a niericau wool growers the privilege D
supplying ull tie carpet wooiliere.s 'i
Al Mr.. Cnrlisle-Are ~ yoI{ lin favor Q
taking the axoGto6acco 2SS s. s. ] Z,
~ The witness-Yts. Il :}SffE
Mr.. Carlisle-And or alcohol, used il
the arts RI ds S.st . q 8 HS: sss "a
Tho wltness- Yes. HI ls q
Mr. Carlisle-Then you would put
duty on ten and coffee ssi5aE,s., 4.
sttThe iwitness-No, sir;t am in favor o
admitting, without duty such articles a.
calnot be produced in the United States
II Mr.. Carllsle-.Are you in favor Of TAX
ing the duty of sugar VA S7j n + (. (;
1.-The 1witness--Sugar gGdoes wnot :al
| WitEiu tHe pOilCyto protective Etarlu
for. the reason that for more than twent,
years witliproteotion the sugar industry
has not developed toisupply more thar
10 per- cent Of the. consumption OF tht
country.9W We can develop the wool In
duatry SO as q supply all the wool VT
want! 3; i ~ Y - - Z n
III Mr.. Carlisle-We, have not done SO il
twenty:ycaraS7.Would you take the dut,
oil L sugar, because we cannot produce
enough to supply Tie wants Of the coun
try in.l "a fSni li,ss
SArhe witness-Itwould .takeathe tarif
OF sugar as far: as it,isiniposed for mere
| ly protective purposes.S: i would leave,
!. revenue. duty on the foreign commodity
that we cannot produce, sufficiently L
supply the wants Of tue United States. +
II Mr.s Carlisle-Thens you would put
duty on tea and coffee because we. do no
produce either Of them. M 7 r ssi'. 4,
The WitnessaS-As to What would be ;,
wise revenue system i submit that is
snbject!which has not been, assigned i
me to discuss p ss;lS ~
,lA%Ifs I were driven to the! necessity Q
putting a duty on ten and coffee, I'wouI,