The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-09-25
DYsUM AND FREE WOOL.

OF the Dernocratlc MISSIONARIES tnat are
| now irving to "evangelize" the Republican
| Northwest, in the course of his denuncia-
ton of the Mckinley tariff at Spokane
last evening, declared in favor of free wool.
Mr. Bynum probably never heard of John
| p. Irish, of San Francisco, who stumped
| Oregon for Cleveland and free wool in 1888,
and the result was over 5000 majority for
| Harrison and protection, the greatest Re
| publican majority in the history of that
state. The history of wool under protec-
| ton is worth reciting on the heels of Mr..
Bynum's cry for free wool.
There are two kinds of Democratic
demagogues who never can talk about
the Mckinley tariff without getting wool
on their teeth" and thus impairing their
utterance. There is the Democratic editor
who denounced the Mckinley tariff on its
passage, declaring that higher duties on
wool would necessarily increase the prices
OF all WOODEN manufactures. The duties
were increased, but prices have not gone
up, but are lower today in many if not all
lines OF wooden goods than they were a
year ago. The raw material Is cheaper
instead of dearer, SO that the Democratic
duty must increase the cost of the raw
material" are now notable examples OF
the folly of 'prophesying unless you
know"
But there Is another kind of free trade
demagogue, with wool on his teeth, and
~. 10 TOD huyG
who, finding that wool is lower instead of
higher, try to make the farmer believe that
the Mckinley tariff is failure because it
did not increase the price of wool. Here
Congressman Bynum seems to part COM
pany with Senator Eshelman. and wholly
lose sight of the absurd Cleveland dogma.
''the tariff is a tax" Let US look at the
facts. In the nine months the Mckinley
act was in effect up to July 1, according
TO the official report of the bureau of sta
tistics, there were imported 104, 1886. S5S
pounds of wool of the value of S14. 32S, 1H.
or at the average rate of 1877 cents per
pound. The importations in the CORE
spending period of the previous year
were S2,09I, 432 pounds, of the value of
Sll,605,7l7, or at the average rate of Ii.
cents per pound. These figures make it
clear that the Mckinley tariff has not in
creased the price of imported foreign wool.
In the same period there were imported
4,542,3i7 pounds of carpet wool, valued at
1892, Glib, or at the average rate of 1915
cents q pound. In the corresponding
period of the previous fiscal year there
were imported s.. 9O2 $50 pounds, valued at
$7,6S2, 10, or at the average rate of lis
cents a pound.
1t is clear that the price of carpet woods
has not been increased by the tariff. The
ordinary tariff demagogue who talks to
the Democracy seems to be under the inn
preston that carpet woods are now used
extensively for clothing purposes. Two
years ago the carpet manufacturers testi-
fed that over 100000 pounds year of
wool were consumed in the manufacture
of carpets. The new tariff practically ex-
cludes shoddy and substitutes, of which
100000 of pounds were imported in 1890,
and but 4 pounds in June, 1891, and in
creases the consumption of carpet wools
1t is evident that practically all the inn
ported carpet woods go into carpets. 1t is es-
timated that over zoe, 900, 900 pounds of wool
will be consumed in the United States this
year. A New York free trade wool dealer
estimates the amount at 100000, 900
pounds. and the importation of carpet
woods viii not exceed 10 per cent. of that
amount. The United States consul at
Melbourne reports the sale of 81, 800 bales
of Australian wool at an average of ELL SIS
"a per bale in the five months succeeding
the enactment of the Mckinley law. In
the twelve months preceding the enact
ment 265, 0l9 bales were sold at an average
of GA los I'D per bale. In the five months
after the law passed Australian wool sold
from % to 80 per cent. less than under the
old tariff. According to Bradstreet's, Ohio
and Pennsylvania wool sold on August 81
last for 29G30c, and on August %, 1890 it
sold for 3i@32c, decline of about 6 per
cent, or less than one-fonrth the decline
in foreign woods. These figures, for which
we are indebted to the Philadelphia Press.
show clearly that the Mckinley tariff has
not increased but reduced prices. but it
gives American producers of wool an ad-
vantage of about is per cent over their
foreign rivals. This is further evident in
difference of from to - cents a pound
in Canadian and American wool of the
same grade.
Mr.. Bynum will speak in vain 10 the
farmers in denunciation of the Mckinley
tariff in face of the fact that under il the
domestic production OF wool has been
greatly increased. The report of the per-
sonal property assessors of Ohio for 1901
has recently been made public. A COM
parison with the assessors reports for
other years shows the number of sheen in
the state and the loss and the gain:
Yadr Nau7bsr No Loss. M c,f,
lS>4...... ...... 5,llSN>4 .......
SSH. ...... 4>1&q21 2Sq.e62