Gloucester County Democrat., 1892-11-03
DEMOCRATIC WOOL DUTIES.


Free Wool Bill
We passed a bill known as the Springer
wool bill. We put raw wool on the free
Hst-made it absolutely free. We did
not intend to hurt the farmer when we
did it, because, in q proper sense. the
Australian and other foreign wool
brought into this country is not in COM
petition with American wool. 1t is an
auxiliary-an aid-necessary to mix and
mingle with it to make the various kinds
of goods that we want.
And then, again. the Democrats gener-
ally are in favor of free raw materials
to enable our manufacturing establish
ments to obtain their materials more
cheaply. We put wool on the free list,
but we did not stop there. We reduced
the tariff on woolen goods from an av-
erage specific and ad valorem rate equiv
alent to so per cent, which is where the
Mckinley law puts it, to an average of
less than IS per cent. That is the reduc-
tion proposed in the bill which passed
the house. Now last year there were
brought into this country $35, 900, ,000
worth of wooden goods, and upon those
goods there was paid into the federal
treasury tax Of 49,, ,000, 600. That is a
great deal more than this average of so
per cent. that l told you about. Tho
tariff on some articles is much higher,
and on some articles it is lower The
woolen schedule is among the highest.
Last year $35, 900, 900 worth of woolen
goods came here from abroad to be sold
in competition with the American
woolen products, and those goods paid
$32, ,000, 900 tax. The American consum-
ers Of those foreign goods paid $67 ,000,-
600 for $35, 900 900 worth of goods. They
got $35, 600, 900 worth Of goods and
$32, 900, 600 worth of tariff when they
bought them. Now, if the American
people consume five times as many goods
of domestic manufacture rs they do of
imported goods. then the American peo-
pie paid FIVE times $32, 100000 in the way
of increased price on goods Of American
manufacture, and therefore they paid
$3.50, 900, 900 in round numbers for goods,
and at the same time they paid about
$145:000,000 in round numbers for pro-
lection on woolen goods.
Now the Democrats believe that for
the same amount of money you ought
to be able to buy more goods and less
protection. So if the Springer wool bill
becomes q law, instead of that $35 ,000,-
600 worth Of imported goods paying S32 {.
600, 900 tax, it would have paid $11 900,
900 tax, and you would have saved
$21 100000 on that and five times $gI I
100000 on the home made article, which
would have been 500, 600, 900 more.
We are not in favor of free trade. We
favor free trade in the raw materials.
but not free trade in the goods into
which skilled American labor enters.
There is plenty Of protection left TO
more than compensate for any real or
supposed differences in the price of la
Dor, and at the same time there are
more cheap goods for the American
workingmen.
Now let the American workingman
take it TO himself when he goes to the
store and buys a suit Of woolen clothes
for $40. He pays about Sc for the clothes
and about s. for protection. Now, if
you cut down that protection. as we
have proposed inthe Springer bill, when
the worllingman buys 80 worth Of
clothes lie will get about S. so worth of
clothes and $3.50 worth of protection,
and that is plenty That is as much as
the workingman needs in cold weather,
when money is scarce and he has clothes
to buy
Now what else did that same bill do:
1t reduced the tax on wool hats from So
per cent. to % per cent. and the same
on blankets and WOODEN underwear, so
that if the bill had become law the
wooien underwear for which yon now
pay So you could buy for S3.25. The
Democratic idea is to benefit the work
ingman in this way..by imposing a Gus
toms duty for reyenue purposes ana dis
tributing the incidental protection Judi
ciously, becaEse it has got to operate
somewhere. and by reducing 10 the
workingman the price Of what he has to
hug sSIssas.'=al l,''-isl,,s Speech in Detroit