New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-12-09
ONE or THE PROBLEMS FOR DEMOCRAIS'

r. every Republican will do one thing this
wear and get bis ncghbor to do the same, 1t
NAV help t. make Republican votes four Yeas
hence. Let him put down on Il slip of paper
tbe cost of the woollcn goods he buys with a,
accurate description as he can OF tho KIND ana
quality. and get records OF the same sort KEPT
or given to him by his nciGhborS. When the
record is opened in 1896, he will have means
of determining for himself how far Democratic
victory has made his woollcn clothing cheaper,
as everybody has been promised.
So great a blessing surely ought not to be
wantonly delayed Yet there is ground Tor
believing that the Democrats themselves do
not dare 10 test their theories by putting them
int, practical operation. Already they begin
{, hesitate and in private t. ask themselves
low this wonderful chcapcning CT woollenS Is
10 be brought about. The very cornerstone
of reform; is that wool shall be free so that
the manufacturer hall have cheap material.
As the plains Of Australia and South America
are capable of unlimited production, it may
be supposed that the wool this country requires
can he supplied without any advance in cost.
But the fact is that prices are already stliicn-
ing abroad in anticipation OF increased AmcrI-
can demand when the Democrats get in. How
far the price will rise when, instead of mere
anticipation. foreign dealers have an actual
demand for wool 10 supply the wants OF tins
country. n orc can say with confidence.
1t is the Democratic theory that the Amcri-
can wool grower will find 50 largely increased
a demand for wool that tho price paid 10 him
will advance II so. how is the manufacturer
10 ct cheaper materials? 4 distinguished
citizen was asked recently what he supposed
would be the difference in tho cost of his suit
of clothes if the wool were free Of duty, and he
answered. about So Then he was shown
that there was less than nino pounds OF wool
in the whole suit, and if the entire duty should
be taken oT the cost of the wool il would make
a difference Of only 90 10 90 cents in the cost
of the suit. But in some mysterious way the
tariff rcfcrmcr must cOntrlyc 10 give the farmer
moro money for his wool. and yet save several
times the entire cost of the wool by giving the
manufacturer cheaper raw materials.
Lower duties on goods would undoubtedly
invite heavy imports of many kinds of foreign
woollcnS In place Of these Americans now uSc
in the main goods Of domestic production,
which are sold mere as cheaply a they can be
anywhere. quality considered. But the same
spirit which wants cheaper goods from abroad,
and the same ignorance which imlgincS that
much cheaper and better goods can be i'm
ported. viii prompt enormous purchases, at
least at first of the cheap stuff which will be
admitted by lower duties. I'm year ar two
Americans will find ont that they have been
dclud, but meanwhile what j. 10 become Of
the home manufacturers After half of the
mill, have stopped, how long will the foreign
price remain as low rs il is. even for the goods
that ave made 10 sell but rot to wear? If in
stead Of working up 0O,000,00O pounds OF
wool into goods our mills work up only
2OO. 600 900 pounds, and the people send
abroad far the goods made ont OF 200. 000, 600
pounds, that enlarged demand alone would lift
foreign markets not little.
When our Democratic friends muster courage
to test their theories by taking off all duties
from wool, and cutting down the duties on
goods to a revenue basis, Americans will soon
begin to learn whether they get goods OF the
.amc quality any cheaper than before. If they
do. they will next inquire how much they have
- pay in other ways 10 support the employees
Of woollcn mills that arc closed by foreign