New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-01-16
THE LATEST TRICK OF FREE TRADERS

THE LATEST TRICK or FREE TRADERS
No, Messrs. Free Traders, you cannot dodge
your own theories Men who pretend to believe
the Protective policy iniQuitous and hurtiul to
the country must either abide by that belief or
surrender il. Yet "The New-York Tines shows
a strong disposition to thimble-rig in the mat
ter Governor Mckinley had said: There is
one thing they might as well make up their
minds to down in the Eas.-that they can't have
wool free when it comes from the Sleeps backs
and put a tariff on it when it comes on our
backs" 1.-THE Times" comments thus: AS
no one likely to have the slightest influence on
legislation wishes any such condition imposed on
free wool. the friends of that measure Of justice
may fairly ask the Governor if he is ready to
support free wool with just reduction on WOOL
lens.n The words Just reduction cover fraud.
The intewCis TO suggest that Free Traders would
be satisfied to allow all the protective duties on
woollen goods to remain, cutting off only the
compensatory duties-those intended to put the
manufacturers in tho same position as ii there
were no duties on wool. But that Is by no means
the purpose Of those who oppose Protection. They
frauduenty begin by Offering free wool and
protective duties on woollens 20 tho manufact-
urers But they know with certainty that II the
removal of duties on wool can DO effected. max
ing tho woO-growers angry, they can then take
off the duties on woollen goods also, with the
help of The wool-growers.
That is exactly the meaning of Governor Nc
Kinleys warning. 1t may as well be needed by
all who are interested in this Industry. Mr..
Springcrs BILL it is true, is outngeously unfair
A. -. tl,o,,
exposed to the enormous frauds which exclusive
ly ad valorem duties always invite But if it
were in that respect fair bill, II it left the wool
manufacturers in exactly the Same situation,
without duties on raw wool, that they now have
with those duties the bill would still mean death
to the manufacture. II would take of tho duties
on raw wool In order to drive the woOl-grOwcls
into hostility TO the duties on manufactured wool
len goods, and Mr.. Springer knows perfectly
well that the repeal Of the duties on wool would
be followed almost instantly by the repeal OF
all duties on goods manufactured Of wool. The
representatives Of wool growing districts would
be the first to propose such measure, and the
Free.Trade Democrats without an exception
would vote FOR 1t.
Free trade in wool and woollens Is the real
intent OF ODe Oil OH"Tcu bN M springer III lH'
House, and no tricky statement that only J." just
reduction" of the woollen duties is designed will
deceive tho manufacturers. Their meeting al
Boston this week showed clearly by the rcsolu
tons there adopted that they understood tho
danger 10 which Free-Wool bill would expose
their industry. Neither would this measure de-
ccire the voters who have seen that woollcn
goods actually become cheaper under the opera
ton Of higher duties on wool and woollens, and
who know by this time that tho so-called tariff
reformers'' have been lying to them about the
effect Of protective duties. The removal of the
duties on wool would in no way cheaper the
manufactures OF wool to consumers in this coun-
try, b,,, It would PROSTATE the manufacture and
at the same limo injure the wool-growcrs
throughout the country. Hence it Is that the
growers and the manufacturers together will re-
slst the change which Mr. Springer proposes,
being too well informed to sacrifice their mutual
interest for the benefit of the Free Traders.