Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-03-29
R0UND.UPS
The Duty on Herds Discussed by North
ern Parties, in Full.
The EnGlish Embargo on American Cattle
Accounted For-Cattle Lcsses in the
Acknowledgement Notes.

The New York Tribune is the acknowl
edged organ OF the Republican high
tariff advocates. It has also claimed to
be favorlte paper among the Republic
can farmers and always to have been
vatchful OF their interests. It will
therefore, interest our Chagrin Falls
correspondent to read what 1t says on
the subject. In It's issue of March "a 1t
says editorially:
The duty on hide s was taken off BY a Republican
congress ihJs72. The imports have SCARCELY in
creased a all since that time. At this port where
most OF the hides arrive. the imports last year
were hardly teI per cent. larger than they were
In 1871. before the duty was removed. This seems
conclusive evidence that the home Drodncer
does NOT suffer from foreign competition, and
the supply of American hides actually marketed
has increased during the same period ia per
other cattle reported. II can hardly be be-
GeYed that the home producer will be benefited
under such circumstances BY the imposition of a
DUTY when would apparently help nobody SO
much as the rich combinat on of beef-packers at
the West, while it would seriously affect the
cost OF the materials for leather and boot and
shoe establishments the seaboard, which
use foreign hides largely and export consider
able part Of their products
That domestic hides are lower now than
they were few years ago is a fact, but
perhaps the big Strengthening establish
ments could explain that fact in the same
way that they might eXplain-if they
would-why the price of meat on the
hoof is so much lower than il was without
q corresponding decrease in the price OF
meat 20 the consumer. That boots and
shoes are no cheaper now than they were
eighteen years ago is q statement that
does not seem to accord with the COM
peTative prices of footwear in Cleveland
now and then. Certainly much cheaper
shoes can DO had here now than eighteen
years age.
But it seems the question as to the
effect of the restoration of duty on hides
is not to become practical one after all.
Reports from Washington are TO the
effect that the Republican cutlery against
the duty has been so loud that the Re-
publican majority in the ways and means
committee have backed down, and the
hide duty has been struck from the new
tariff Cleveland Plaindealer.
We have received the following letter
from Chagrin Falls concerning the pro-
posed duty on hides;
Editor Plaindealer:
In an editorial in the issue of March 20, speak
ing of the tariff bill, you among duties
imposed Is the restoration of the duties on hides,
which have been imported free since 1872, from
which time Is dated the enormous development of
the leather industries, which is true, but how
about the farmers and stock raisers that produce
hides in this country? We used to get 5is and
~ cents for green hides, now cents down
ward; deacon skins used to bring from IS cents
to Sl.25, now from 10 to 30 cents. A good veal
was worth from Sl.25 to 81, now from Is to 80
cents in Chagrin Falls. Shoes and harness are
no cheaper here than they were ten or fifteen
years ago, and the dealers here say they cannot
buy them any less, though they admit they
ought TO. Now, who has profited by free trade
in hides, few manufacturers or the millions of
producers and consumers? Why would it not be
the same with wool under the conditions
which you advocate and are endeavoring to make
farmers believe would be for their benefit? I ask
these questions in party sense
Chagrin Falls, Ohio. g. a. KENT,