The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1892-09-02

L way AAN& - e~NaWNT"WF~
This being tho case, what advantage 70 us
10 a Nigh duty on woods needed 70 mix WIN
ouraY II seems plain that Is the ciosh
maker 10 compelled to pay ao much iof
foreign wool by reason Of high tnriH ~
will buy onr wnols Al I correspondingty rs-
duced price In order 70 make cloth ~ :
price which will not bs too high and beyond
thu reach sof The average purchases. Inc
pric~ of wool, like thNt Of all other com
modities. 10 governed BY supply ant de-
maud. We md that a high tariff has cur
tailed ths demand for domestic woods.
First, By putting foreign woods out Of Ahe
reach Of many manufacturers, thusly caus-
ing many OF their apindles 10 stoPi
secondly, BY stimulating the manufacture
and sale Of shoddy goods which do not re-
quire any Of our wool in their makeup.
shoddy cloths, a poor substitute for
WOODEN goods, are flooding tho country, and
these goods in many oases take the place
with the masses Of all wool goods. People
buy them because they seem cheap IN COM
parison with better goods. This substitute
poor AZ it 10, lsssens the demand for wool,
Al the demand il limited for honest goods
made of wool.
The healthy competition which We once
had has passed away. and 'high tariff on
our wools'' il undoubtedly the cause. After
ton years experience in wool growing in
Montana va find wool reduced in price at
least IS per cent, having fallen 20 per cont
since the passage OF that wonderful Mo
Kinley bill which was to benefit No SO very
much.
We do not produce as much wool as we
did six or eight years ago. Our population
has greatly Increased. and naturally the de-
mand for our woods should increase also;
but by reason of too high tariff our manu-
facturers have been compelled to reduce
their output Of woolsns. Our importation
of wooden goods in 1890 represented l40,-
O00, 900 pounds of scoured wool.
4a With free raw wool va could ourselves
manufacture these goods, which would re-
quire almost 1000, 900 pounds Of domestic
wool in addition to what il already used.
True, we might import raw wool. but for
every additional pound Of foreign wool our
manufacturers would need a pound Of do
mestio wool to mix with it. Free wool
would enable our manufacturer to make
cloth cheaper, people would buy moro
freely, shoddy would be driven from the
competition in the manufacture
of good honest wooden goods be stimulated
and We would not only have an improved
market, but We would be enabled to
sell some of our surplus goods in foreign
also."
We may add with their contemporary
that a study of values for Montana wool
in the last few years is interesting. 1t
appears to give its case practically away
when it comedies that the price Of wool
has dropped in the past two years de-
spite the glories Of a high protective
tariff that was to raise and maintain
prices for the Montana clip. 1t might
discover even more glowing beauties of
protective system by going back a
years farther when in 1856 Montana
woods sold from % to 25 cents per pound
Or in 1887 when as high as 2l1s cents
was paid. In 1890 the average price was
about II cents. This interesting change
in values occurred under a high tariff
presumably designed to protect wool
growers; and it appears that the lowest
prices occurred under the workings OF
the Mckinley bill. MI. Woodson in the
above communication tells very aptly
how thus occurred and points to the
The River Press will find that the
free wool chestnut" will burn a good
many republican fingers before this
m mpairn ia finished |