Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1890-06-05
CARPET WOOL AND sHopoY.

CARPET WOOL AND SHoDDY.
A Case of Protection That win Protect Mo-
body and InJure All.
Secretary Rusk insists in a recent let
ter that we can and must grow our own
carpet woods It is to bring about this
result that the tariff bill now before
Congress contains clause which raises
enormously the duty on carpet wool
At present carpet wool worth less than
twelve cents pound pays duty of two
and one-haf cents pound; carpet wool
above the twelve cent limit pays five
cents only.
The law now proposed raises the duty
on wool worth twelve cents Or less to
three and one-half cents; and on that
above twelve cents, the duty is to be
eight cents pound. This is an attempt
to compel farmers to raise carpet wool.
But why do we not raise carpet wool?
Because we have developed our wool
growing industry beyond that stage.
Our farmers used to produce carpet wool
but they soon found that they could i'm
prove the breed of their sheep and pro-
duce a finer grade of wool. Accordingly
we produce no carpet wool now. The
grower finds it much more profitable to
produce Merino clothing wool worth
thirty cents pound, or more, rather
than to waste his time and energies in
producing carpet wool worth only ten or
twelve cents. A sheep with coarse car
pet wool on it's back will eat just as
much as one with fine clothing wool and
will cost just as much in every way.
Where is the sense then in trying to
compel our people to grow carpet wool
when they can do better for themselves?
Is it not like foolish attempt to make
water flow uphill, while it will serve
our purposes better by flowing down-hill?
Besides this the carpet manufacturers
of our country need the carpet wool of
certain foreign countries. The manu-
facturers are seriously embarrassed in
many places. In Philadelphia, which is
the greatest carpet manufacturing CEN
ter in the United States, several large
mills are reported to be idle. and several
thousand laborers in the mills are out
of employment. Under the proposed
tariff the manufacturers would be seri-
ously hindered, the wool-growers would
still refuse to raise carpet wool, and the
people who use carpets would foot the
bills for all this folly. The Mckinley
woods absolutely out of reach of our
manufacturers. They will have to i'm
port practically every pound of wool
they use, for even tariff of 100 per
cent. would not be sufficient to induce
our people to go back to raising carpet
wool.
1t is estimated by high authority
that the increased cost of carpet woods
under the proposed law would raise the
price of carpets anywhere from nine to
thirty-three cents yard. Increased
cost means fewer sales, fewer carpeted
parlors, fewer carpet mills, and fewer
workers in them. And who is to be pro-
tected by this law?
Nobody; absolutely nobody.
1t is simply part of the scheme to
humbug the farmer by making hum be-
lieve that he, too. is getting some of
the benefits of protection. It will be 3
nice thing to tell the farmer in cam
paign speeches, Here is protection for
you, too; we have not forgotten you;
you also shall grow rich"
Men who expect the farmer to believe
this stuff, so far as it relates to carpet
wool, give him credit for a very shallow
brain. Instead of helping him. this
duty on carpet wool is direct injury to
him; for the farmer is to some extent a
buyer of carpets. The price of carpets
will be higher by reason of the b CHER
duty. But this is not the whole effect.
The quality of the carpets themselves
will be made much poorer. Everybody
knows that the use of shoddy in carpet
making has been very largely extended
during the past ten years. According to
the census of 1880 we used fifty-two mil
lion pounds of domestic shoddy, besides
what we imported. How much is used
now nobody knows exactly; but calcu-
lation has been made by the New York
Commercial Bulletin TO show that at
least one-third of the material used by
our carpet and wooden mills is shoddy.
This paper is a high authority in trade
circles, and it's estimate deserves
careful consideration from the
grower of wool as well as from
the consumer of cloth and carpets. The
Bulletin estimates that the shoddy used
last year was some two hundred million
pounds. Every pound of shoddy used
of course draws out an equivalent of
pure wool. s'But the wool-grower," as
this paper says, 'never stops to con-
slider that this use of old wool, collected
in the form of old clothes and rags and
worked up after cleaning in the mills,
is powerfully stimulated by the very
steps he insists upon taking to shut out
cheaper supplies of wool. Neither does
the consumer consider that the dete-
rioration in quality of goods produced,
of which he often complains, is due in
considerable measure to the same in
fuence. The manufacturers of wool,
when forced to choose between high
priced wool and shoddy, inevitably use
! more shoddy and less wool, and the
growers and consumers both get the
worst of it all the time. Nor is this
tendency one which can in any way be
arrested by legislative interference.
There is no remedy for it possible, ex-
cept to secure the amplest and cheapest
possible supplies of wool for the manu-
facturer. Any attempt to enhance the
price can only result in more rapid in
crease in the consumption of shoddy."
The Tobacco Duty.
The tobacco men of New York are
taking steps to fight the tobacco schedule
of the Mckinley bill. The feature they
object to is that which places tax OF
sara a pound on Sumatra leaf tobacco.