The pioneer express. [volume] (Pembina, Dakota [N.D.]) 1883-1928, 1890-09-12

u"etoH ptOuuclns country. III Tile eS.
scntial prerequisites for sheep are a
dry billy country. and plenty of good
pastnrage, do not see why all of
North Dakota, except the Red River
Valley, should not be one of the best
wool and mutton countries in the
whole wide world. Sheep raising had
many points of commentator in its
favor. 1t dusen't take much money
to start with, sheep increase rapidly,
mature early. eat everything that
other stock will cat and many things
other stock will not, and carcass,
fleece and pelt are valuable.
You have something better than a
gold mine III your sheep industry, for
a gold mine will exhaust, while the
source of profit from your sheep will
prove inexllaustible while grass grows
and water runs. and the democratic
party, dominated by the cotton grow.
ers of the south, fail to get wool OH
the free list. The democratic party
is OH record as in favor of free wool.
The Morton county wool growers who
vote the democratic ticket this fall,
will he voting for free wool. Grover
Cleveland. in his celebrated screed
against protection and in favor Of free
trade. took wool as his text and in his
pompolls diction proved conclusively
that the price of wool in the 1imeri.
can market is increased to the extent
of the duty levied. The present tariff
on the kind of wool you grow in North
Dakota. is ten cents per pound. see
by tue Ellentale Commercial, quoted
by the Pioneer, that wool in North
Dako nets eighteen cents per pound,
after dcducting freight. The same
paper puts the average weight per
fleece at from ten to twelve pounds.
at present price, each sheep will pro.
duce from $3.50 to $2.16 worth of
wool. The democrats claim you are
getting too much; that instead of eigh.
teen cents per pound, you ought to re.
ceive only eight cents per pound; that
instead of the sheep of North Dakota
wool growers producing from $3.50 to
$2.16 worth of wool per aunum, such
production should he but from eighty
to ninety cents per head. The Grand
Forks plaindealer, as quoted by the
Pioneer, says the Mckinley bill will
increase the duty on wool forty per
cent. This. If am not mistaken,
would increase the present duty to
fourteen cents per pound, so that in.
stead of getting eighteen cents net for
your wool, you would get twenty-five
cents net, ami sheep instead of produc.
ing from $l.SO to $2.l6 per head,
would produce from s.. 20 to 2,6O. IL
must he borne in mind that just in
proportion as to the value of the sheep
for wool production increases, he in.
creases in value for mutton. The rea.
son is obvious. You would not sell a
sheep for mutton that was producing
$3.50 worth of wool annually, for the
same price that you would if he were
producing but eighty cents worth.
Cleveland overlooked this point
when lie was examining for his cele.
brated free wool message. Accord.
ing to Cleveland's logic then, the eff.
feet of the present tariff OH wool is
sufficient to make sheep raising profit.
able in North Dakota, and the effect
Of the Mckinley hill will he to make
sheep raising there much more profit.
able. Bear in mind. that whenever
the price raises above the cost OF pro.
duction Of any article, every cent add.
ell to the price, is absolutely clear
profit. All increase in the price of
your wool which results from the Nc.
Kinley bill as a law, will be "velvet."
1t will cost the North Dakota farmer
no more to raise twenty-five cent
wool under the Mckinley bill, than
eight cent wool under Cleveland's free
wool regime. 1t will cost the North
Dakota farmer no more to raise a
sheep whose carcass will bring SIS for
mutton under the Mckinley bill, than
it would to raise u sheep under C.eve.
lands democratic free wool regime,
which would sell for only $3.50.
l see by the Grand Forks Plaindeal.
er, rs quoted by the Pioneer, that
there has been. during the past year,
Il falling off of wool production Of
eight per cent, and that the import of
WOODEN goods last year, amounted to
$l03,00O,000. Is there anybody fool
enough to suppose that with such {.
large amount of foreign wool coming
in, and such large amount of Ameri.
can money going out, that the price of
our wool has not been deprecated, and
that we have been made poorer!
Does it require anything like remark.
able ability to see that with the duty
OH wool four cents higher, as the Nc.
Kinley bill provides, a large amount
of this foreign wool would have been
kept out, and that for every pound of
foreign wool kept out, a pound of our
wool would have been used! That a
steadier wool market and better pric.
es must have resulted! That there
would have been more money in ON
country with which to do business!
The democrats call the tariff a tax
but they do not, because they cannot
prove that it is better for the WOO
growers of North Dakota when OIL
manufacturers of WOODEN goods send =
u million dollars to Australia OF Soutl
America for raw wool than it would
be If that million of dollars was sem
into their own state in exchange fol-
their own wool. The democrats cal
the tariff a tax. but they will never
prove, because they cannot, that i,
would not he a thousand fold bettel
.