The sun., 1890-01-04
rHr TARrFF oN Koor.
Weol Growers Ask fsr suhieisnt Preteo-
tion 60 shat Out FereigA Carpet Weols.

WASHINGTON, Jan. 8.-The House Commit.
tee on Ways and Means opened its session this
morning By listening to Representative Garter
Of Montana who spoke In relation to sheen
husbandry, particularly on the eastern slope Of
the Rocky Mountain country. He thought II
there was no tariff on wool the wool industry
| Of Montana would bo destroyed.
Mr.. Shepherd, wool grower Of Texas, read
paper 10 prove that, with sufflcient protoc-
ton, the United States could raise all the car
pet wool consumed in tho country. He gave
figures to show that in Texas 1t costs from Is
to 18 cents pound to produce fine wool. and
that It cannot be laid down In Boston at less
than 10 cents a pound, while the Australian
wool could be laid down there. II there was no
duty on 1t, at cents pound.
BY M oarliSle-HOw many sheep have yOu' A.
About lAoOo
o-How much land do you usei A.-Elghty thousand
aoreG
Q.-whAt il that land worth per acrot A-The Gov.
ernment land II worth 81 per
Q-How many are required for the care Of one
sheepi A-About ave acreG
Q.-You have set out quite n number Of ADVANTAGES
which your part OF the country for tho produc
hon Of carpet WOOL and yet you that nowithStand
Ing these advantages You cennot produce 1t without
adequate protection What rate Of duty do you con.
slider adequate proteotionf A--Bnough to raise the
price Of carpet wool to the price OF hne wool
o-Is your Idea that the Government should impose
duty that would enable to have as much prOnt on
carpet wool nno wooi Al would like the same
duty on every pound of wool
o-what do you by the same dutyi Al mean
that one rlass of wool should pay tho duty as
another casa would have the same duty all WOOL
say ~ ten cents popnd =,
wool growing business in Texas Il tho Mills bli had
business reckon
r,pt 81 anf
to make the witness admit that the ten cents a
pound duty on wool was the protection Of
he' said. to that % eItemt % The % witness repiied. %
with much warmth. that he would like to rob.
not the poor man. but the rich man. such as
congressman ana Senators, who were robbing
dues. He declared that he was a DemocraiHN
had voted for President Cleveland the first
time. and would have voted for him the second
time II he had not sought to slaughter sheep
raieors Tor the sake OF free trade.
Texas generally in favor Of protsctiopi Al cannot
speak for the farmers know that the wool growers
a,Sn W. 5sEsEd to pArty' Ave are going to
IT SI;6,d try li,sl: that Phc.G
prehibltion-which eiocted some GsntIemen
strongly In fsyo! q aSron,OiIon %@SS .is 'a a%
sorry % say that hs Democracy of Texas in favor Of
;S 6S 9S
The Hon. William Lawrence Of Ohio said that
policy required tho imposition of such duty
on so-called carpet wool as would in due time
the wool PoSaired woG Tor tSM consumptlon In the
United States. shutting out foreign importa-
tions, and giving to the American wool grow
erS the privilege OF supplying all the carpet
wool required for consumption here. Either
the protective policy should be abandoned and
tho policy OF free trade adopted. or else the
protective policy should be made effecIual. so
as to give the whole American market TO home
producers.
had been instructed by the National Wool
Growers Association to ask TO have inserted
to limited eStent protectlSe. He made H the the
point that II the carpet manufacturer had an
adequate concentrating duty on carpets as the
tive duty on the wool could not injure him.
An ADEQUATE duty on wool and manufactured
the cost at ali. because home competition
would prevent unreasonable charges. while, II
tho protective policy were abandoned. and all
such products were imported from abroad the
result would be that the American people
would be at the mercy Of foreign trusts and
corporations.
" &, q s st o. 1888 h..
Gu. down vastly The sunber our sheep, and
ss noN o h M pss would DO
Mr.. John T. Rich Of Michigan said that he
was the representative Of the Michigan Merino
Sheep Association. and that that Association
duty on wool; that there shall be substantial
protection. and that frauds In importations Of
"SH S ena % BoSSon Of PHILADELPHIA carpet
manufacturer. next addressed the committee,
critieisinG what he called the violent TRADE
carpet manufacturers, and denying the cor
EeSiness OF many H ya q bis his fd statenentS % There
than the
turers but they did not want to be bounded.
as they had been for years, by the wool growers
let 1t be free trade. pure and simple, and the
carpet manufacturers would take their
Ks Rs Maen be-
growers Of the United States would not and
ceived 81. so for the .deeee Of fine wool sheep
they would not receive Is cents for that OF a
Mr: William Whitman of Boston. President of
the National Association Of Wool Mauufactur-
ado sdcpted % BY that sssoeIation. % % The H assocation
took the position, he said. not to attempt to fix
the duty On wool but to leave that to me COM
say. however, that the prevailing sentiment
among the manufacturers connected with the
tenance Of the existing duties. and that the
present rate should not be increased. They
oud eesny OPPOSE any nd to to rHsrict
believe that tho committee would attempt such
thing. because II would bo impossible for wool
manufacturers to produce all the goods neces-
sary for homo consumption unless they could
have foreign wool. Tho wool manufacturers
were willing to have protective duty on wool,
but not prohibtory or restrictive duty
After O long examination the witness was
asked by Mr. Breckenridge whether. II the wool
manufacturers OF the United States had free
wool. they could enlarge their market by sa es
to foreign countries. and he replied that, under
no circumstances S would iree wool sia enable wool
foreign markets.
Mr T. c. Search OF Philadelphia. represent
ing the Manufacturers Club Of that city, de-
clared himself In harmony with the views
expressed by the last Witness and argued to
prove that he duty on yarns and woolIen
cloths should be Just four times rs great as the
duty on unwashed wool, which was now ten
cents pc! pound-wllh ~ and 90 per cent. addi-
tiOnal ad valorem.
Mr.. John +. Plummer OF New York made
some remarks on the subject OF ,woollen fabrics
worn by men. and said that he did so not as q
mRnufaetu er. nor as wool grower. but as an
enthusiast in favor OF American wool products.
The country was suffering under O. popular
prejudice that better olothes could be got
abroad than here at the same price. He de-
OlRF0Q that there country where q man