The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1890-01-04
DON'T WANT FREE WOOL.
MANUFACTURERS AND GROWERS
BEFORE THE COMMITTEE.

and Raise Foreign Prices.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 3.-The House com
mittee on ways and means opened its session
this morning by listening to the remarks of
Representative Carter of Montana, who
smoke in relation to sheep husbandry, par
tcularly on the eastern slope Of the Rocky
mountain country.
Mr.. Shepherd, wool grower of Texas,
was the next witness. He said that the
subject assigned to him by the president of
the National Wool Growers Association
was the ability of the United States to raise
all the carpet wool consumed in the coun-
try. and he read paper to prove that with
sufficient protection it could be done.
He gave figures to show that in
Texas it costs from Is to IS cents per pound
10 produce fine wool, and that 1t cannot be
laid down in Boston at less than IL cents
Der pound, while Australian wool could be
laid down there Gf there was no duty on it)
for cents per pound.
Mr.. Carlisle-How many sheep have you?
The Witness-About Is, 900.
THE LAND HE USES.
MIR. Carlisle-How much land do you
use?
The Witness-Eighty thousand acres.
Mr. Carlisle-What is that land worth
per acrel
The Witness-Governmen land is worth
50 per acre.
Mr.. CarlisIe-How many acres are re-
duired for the support of one sheep!
The Witness-About five acres.
Mr.. Carlisle-You have set out quite
number of advantages which your part of
the country possesses for the production of
carpet wool, and yet you say that, notwith-
standing these advantages, you cannot pro-
duce it without adequate protection.
What rate of duty do you consider
adequate projections
The WItness-Enough to raise the price
of carpet wool to the price of fine wool.
Mr.. Carlisle-Is it your idea that the
government should impose a duty that
would enable you to have as much profit on
carpet wool as on fine wool!
WANTS THE SAME DUTY ON ALL.
The Witness-I would like the same duty
on every pound of wool.
Mr.. Carlisle-What do you mean by the
same duty!
The Witness-I mean that one class of
wool should pay the same duty as another
class.
MIR. Carlisle-You have not told us the
rate of duty you require.
The Witness-I leave that to the better
Judgment of the committee.
Mr.. Carlsle-What is your own opinion2
The WItness-I would have the same
duty on all WOOL at, say, 10 cents pound.
Mr.. Gear-What would have been the
effect on the wool growing business in
Texasif the Mills bill had gone into effect?
The Witness-We would all have gone
out OF the business, reckon.
Mr.. Mills asked series Of questions de-
signed to make the witness admit that 10
cents pound duty on wool was for the
protection of capital and not for labor,
which was being robbed, he said, to that
extent.
MADE THE TEXAN HOT.
The witness replied with much WARMTH
that he would like to rob not the poor man,
but rich men SUI h as congressman and sena-
tors who were robbing sheep raisers
by not giving them their dues.
He declared that he was democrat up to
that date He could not stand that. He
had voted for President Cleveland the first
time, and would have voted for him the
second timeif be had not sought to slaughter
the sheep-raisers for the sake of free trade.
Mr.. Breckinridge-You are revenue
democratic
The Witness-I do not know what you
may call me.
Mr.. Bayne-Are the farmers and wool
growers of Texas generally in favor of pro-
lection?
The Witness-I cannot speak of the
farmers. | know that the wool-growers
are.
PARTY LINES TO BE IGNORED.
Mr.. Bayne-Wi hout regard to party?
The Wltness-We are going to drop the
question of party.
The Chairman-You must be very dis
eliminating in regard to members. There
are some members from Texas whom we
want left with us. [Laughter.]
MIR. Mills-Did not you try little of that
philosophy in the last campaigns
The Witness-Not as much as we could.
There was another feature in that can-
paign- prohibition - which elected and
knocked ut some gentlemen.
MIR. Breckinridge-Is the Democratic
party Of Texas strongly in favor of pro-
hibition7
The Witness-No, sir. 1 am sorry to
say that the democrats of Texas are in
prohibltionist myself. We did not try to
centralize the working interest in the last
campaign, but the next time we will try.
WILLIAM LAWRENCE HEARD.
Hon. William Lawrence of Ohio said
that he was one of the committee appointed
by the National Wool Growers Association
at its recent convention in Washington to
make some remarks as to the legislation
which the wool-growers generally believed
was required by sound republican policy
and justice. 1t was lis duty, he said, to
address the committee on two subjects, the
first being the proper duty on carpet wool /;
and the second being the provisions of the
law necessary to secure an honest ad-
ministration of the tariff. 1t was
safe TO say that the woolgrowers generally
believed sound policy required the imposl-
ton of such duty ON so-called carpet wool
as would In due time enable American WOOL
growers to produce carpet wool for con-
sumption in the United States, shutting out
foreign importations and giving the Ameri-
can wool-groWer the privilege of supplying
all the carpet wool required for consump-
tion here.
ONE EXTREME OR THE OTHER.
Either the protective policy should be
abandoned and the policy of free trade be
adopted or else the protective policy should
be made effectual SO as to give the whole
american market TO the home producers.
Mr. McMillan-What would we then do
Tor revenue! Would you levy additional
taxes?
The Witness-I would give to American
producers the privilege of supplying every
thlng that can be supplied in sufficient
Quantities to meet all demands at reason
able prices. If we cannot derive sufficient
revenue from customs we have the whisky
TAX, tobacco tax, and other internal revenue
taxes to the amount Of $3.50, 100000 a year.