Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1890-01-09
RooL saoHrgs.


WASHINGTON, Jan. 2.-Tbe ways and
means committee to-day heard arguments
by representatives of the wool grower9.
George Ii. Wallace of Missouri, read y
prepared paper Astounding with statistics
to demonstrate the necessity for main-
tanning the duties on imported wool and
suggested an adjustable tariff, which
would diminish when wool was scarce
and high in price and increase when 1t
was plentiful and low in price. He dwelt
ct length upon what he described as i'm
psrfections of the present olassifcations,
saying that in WanamRker's store could be
seen pantaloons made of third class or
carpet wool and sold at $3.50 per pair.
The importers Of carpet woods said that
this grade Of wool was used everywhere
and for all kinds of wool manufacturing
rs we'll as carpets. This demonstrated
the fact that the importation Of third
class wool under the present law is
diminishing the production of wool in
America.
Representative Flower questioned Mr..
Wallace closely as to actual coat of wool
production in Missouri, eliciting the fect
| that the land was worth from 1856 to $40
per acre, and that it would maintain one
sheep per acre.
Representative Carlisle joined in the
| inquiry and ascertsined from the witness
that the fleece averaged $l.50. The
actual cost of production of the wool
was about 20 cents pound. There wss
no money 10 be made at that figure, but
there were other considerations to be
Needed, such as the manuring of the land,
the fact that sheep cleared of bramb!es
and weeds and otherwise benefited the
farm.
Mr.. Carlisle remarked that that was as
he supposed; the sheep we're not valuable
alone for wool and mutton.
MIR. Breckenridge sought to ascertain
the production OF third class wool in the
United States, but the witness ssid that
owing to the fact that the GLASS Of wool
used by carpets varied according to the
quality of the manufacture he could not
give any exact figures. The wool grower
had found the carpet manufacturers very
retioent in giving information.
MIR. Breckenridge having put q long
hypothetical question respecting the
amount of profit in wool growing in the
United States the witness replied dryly
that he would find that subject discussed
with great ability in the Presidents mes
sage OF two years ago.
|
american Wool Reporter, was the next
witness and said that the petitions would
be presented to Congress-on signed by
$40 persons, In favor of free woodland
the other signed by 1856 persons in favor
of an ad valorem duty on wool in place
of the present specific form OF duty.
The witness having mentioned the
name of Joseph Kitchenn'an, signer of
the free wool petition as large manu-
faoturer and leading Republican OF Phil
adelphia and one who helped raise the
celebrated Philadelphia campaign fund
in the last campaign, Mr.. Doak OF Phila'
dslphia rose in the rear of the room and
fatty contradioted the statement, saying
that Mr.. Kitchenman WAS q life-long DEM
ocrat and never had contributed to a
Republican campaign fund.
The witness was adverse to radical
chsnges, and believed that an ad valorem
duty of 40 per cent on combing and 30
! per cent on carpet wool, would afford
,, sufficient protection.
Replying to Mr.. Carlisle witness said
that 1t was undoubtedly true that as land
increased in price the number Of sheep
8 decreased. Where the sheep decreased
the prosperity OF the inhabitants in
5 CREASED vastly. He did not think that
the tariff on wool had increased the prices
realized by the wool grower.
n At the conclusion of Mr.. Benefits ties.
/ timony recess was taken.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 3.--The House CON-
:, mittee on ways and means opened It'll
! session this morning by listening to the
! remarks Of Representative Garter of Mon
!. tana, who spoke in relation to sheep hus
Z bandry, particularly on the eastern SLOPE
] of the Rocky Mountain country. III
a thought that il there was no tariff oil
a wool the wool industry of Montana woult
. be destroyed,
4 Mr.. Shepherd a wool grower OF Texas
was the next witness. He said that thl
= subject assigned TO him by the presiden
!, of the National Wool Growing Asaocia
i tion was the ability OF the UaiteC
States 10 raise all the carpet woo
consumed in the country; aud h
. proceeded to read paper 10 prov
~ that, with sufficient protection, it coult
bs done. He gave figures TO show tina
in Texas il cost from Is to is cents
Is pound to produce fine wool, and that
% cannot be laid down in Boston at les
n than 10 cents pound while the Aus
d traiian wool could be laid down there q
there was no duty on iD at Six cents
pound.
~ WASHINGTON, Jan. 4.-The hearing betor
!" the committee on ways and means We
. opened this morning with an argument b
10 Mr.. Edmund A. Whitman OF Boston In fayo
IS OF tue removal OF the duty on fax.
;, The present rates, q said, had now bee
d In force 10 years and yet the product OF fla
It In this country had steadily decreased
! was practically. n nom oxIstAnt lndugtr,
!. Its culture required too much Hrduou
10 manual labor and technical ekill. The pre-
=, duct had fallen of from $1,000 zoe pound
In 1850 to 5,0D0,000 pounds In 1870, and to
day 1t was so insignificant hat no one coul
tell what 1t was. The duty was, therefore
a burden TO the linen manufacturer with
- out being compromising to the farmer. TIL
importation OF linen goods had increase
d four fold since the duty WIS placed on fla,
10 the amount in value In 1883 beIns 2 65g, 01
a Much OF this linen might be made In TIL
= country but for the duty on FAX. Ii
- argued, therefore, that the duties should
10 removed from all grades Of fax dresse
" and undtessed.
IS The next statement was made by Nj
~ Anderson of Maine. a manufacturer {
4. fancy cassimeres, broad cloth, &c. q
4 argued iii favor of q restoration OF th
il duslgs on such goods 10 about whore the
=" STOOD prior to the change made In the tgsi
" Law OF 1883. aud In opposition to the n
m0val OF the duties on wool, In reply /
questions by Mr.. Carlisle, the witpess raj
r, tn4t he did not want the rates which wei
, Increased ny the tariff of 1853 reduced I
s., what they had been, butt that re wanted ii
III rstes which had been reduced put up
what they had been.
MIR. Combs of Kentucky, u hemp grove
made eu argument In favor OF the duty q
OF hemp and sgG.nst tho proposition to p,
| int, afl al MI ma ia On ~ a f. lar