The weekly tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1891-1894, 1892-07-16
SATURDAY. JULY Ii. 1882.
TARIFF AND WOOL.

The history of the wool tariff and it
effect upon the industry in the United
States is an interesting study to every
man who raises, manufactures or con
sumes the staple. There is no question
that each studies it, but each is prone tc
draw his conclusions from the standpoint
of his own interest as he sees it. A few
properly view the matter from the lamb
upon the range to the coat a man wears;
while the greater number sees only that
feature of this question which appeals to
seltishness. 1t is impossible to 90 over
the whole history of wool tariffs and
their bearings upon sheep raising, in a
newspaper article of ordinary length but
a few facts and figures may be given
which may serve to give the reader a
clearer understanding of the question.
The democratic party favors free wool
free raw material. The republican
party favors tariff taxed wool-tarif
taxed raw material. The democratic
party believes that free wool will enable
our home manufacturers to compete
successfully in the markets of the world
with the free WOO nations of the globe.
thus multiplying our wooden factories,
giving employment to larger numbers OF
men and atfording a ready and remuner-
alive market for every pound of wool
which may be grown in the country.
The republican party believes that a
high tariff tax should be levied upon for
eign-grown wool in order to keep it out
OF the country, thus giving our home
wool-growers the command of the home
wool market and a better price for their
products, the effect of which, the party
contends, will be to foster and build up
the sheep industry Ct the country. We
believe the two propositions are fairly
Now, which is right and which is
That is the question that con
Germs the wool.grower and the wool
consumer. In finding the true answer
all party pride and party prejudice
should be cast aside. The fact that one
political party takes one view of the
matter and the other takes another
should cut no figure in determining
what is best for all parties concerned.
In this determination worcestershire
nen-will turn to statistics touching the
question and be governed in their decis-
by them.
The first question to consider is: Does
protection stimulate or foster or build
up the wool industry OF the country? II
I be shown it does not, but, on the con-
.rary, depresses it, discussion must cease
md action begin. In arriving at the
proper answer to this question it is nee
,ssary to review briefly the history OF
WOOL tariffs and their effects upon the
WOOL industry. Wool was first tart fled
lnder the Clay tariff of 1924. In July
Il that year wool was sold at 30 cents
or fine, 40 cents for medium. and 30
ents for coarse. Two years afterward,
the tariff was fully felt, fine wool
vas at 81 cents, medium at 30. and coarse
It 2G cents. These were the ruling
for washed fieeces in the city of
Few York.
In 1898 the tax on high grade wool
vas enormously increased and for eight
ears it remained at four cents per
'ound and 40 per cent ad valorem.
There we're comparatively but few sheep
n the country, the population was
apidly increasing, shoddy was not then
manufactured; men wore purely wooden
and woods advanced in price
n 1882 low grade woods were again
lade free. The rich wore the broad
loths made from the highly tariff taxed
ne woods and the poor consumed the
rec coarse woods. There was sense in
kind OF taxation. The burden fell
pom shoulders best able to bear il.
rom 1882 to 1867 the prices OF wool
uctuated from %, 30 and 2G for fine,
and coarse respectively to 100, !
Do and 90 in: 1864, when the war
nocked the industry almost out OF ex- G