Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1892-03-31

there would he some grounds for the
claim put forward, but even this would
be a fiimsy pretext for advocating
free wool. These woods are not so
superior to the Ohio washed woods
and the best grades of western fleeces
that the manufacturers must have
them. If they are, then with the duty
removed they would be used altogether,
to the exclusion of the best Ameri-
can grades. We would hear nothing
more OF mixture" Cheapness is the
chief consideration with the handful
of manufacturers who want free wool.
For il we grant that these woods are
needed for mixture the American wool
grower could not expect to get more
Tor his wool nor AS much as would be
paid for what these writer's term the
elmer grades OF Australian woods"
II wool can be raised in Australia at
so little expense Us to enable Ameri
can manufacturers to purchase it and
pay the specific duty what would be
the result with the duty removed al
together?
Australia has los, OOO, 900 sheep,
producing 500 200, 900 pounds OF
wool, which must find a market else
where as but very little is consumed
at home. Must American woolgrow-
ers go out OF business in order to give
a few wealthy nabobs a market for
their wool? With this immense
amount of Australian wool, with the
entire wool product of the world,
amounting in round numbers to
1000. 900, ooOpounds at present, does
the Montana woolgrower think for a
moment that free wool would help him
any? He must remember, too, that
the great bulk OF this wool is raised in
countries that do not manufacture
but seek this market because protec-
ton has built up our wooden mills.
With our ports made free to all this
wool how long would it pay t o raise
sheep in Montana, say nothing of the
older states?
There are millions of acres of unocu-
pied lands in Australia and South
America and if it pays now to raise
wool for export would not these cheap
lands be quickly utilized for sheep
ranges and the number of sheep
greatly increased with free access to
the American market? What would
become of the "mixture" idea then?
The man who advances this argument
is badly "mixed" himself.
Under protection to the woolgrower
and with careful breeding the time is
not far distant when the very finest
grades Of wool will be raised in this
country and wooden goods manufac-
tured that willequal the foreign make.
Great progress has already been made
in this direction. If a few wealthy
manufacturers on the Atlantic coast
want imported wool to make goods
for the aristocracy because sit is Eng
lish, you know" let them pay the
duty and let their customers stand
the expense. These few manufacture
ers, England and the Bourbon free
trade party, are the only ones crying
for free wool. The National Associa-
ton OF Wooden Manufacturers want
the duty on wool left as it is.
The statement frequently made that
sheep raising has declined under pro
t~ective duties will not stand the test
OF investigation. By the figures given
in the American Economist we find
that in 1910 there were only TO-
100000 sheep in the United States,
and 22,47I,2T5 in 1860, n small in
crease for a period OF fifty years. In
1867, however, a strong protective
duty was levied on foreign woods and
so stimulated the raising oil sheep that
in 1854 the number OF sheep was
5O,626,626, an increase of 40 per
cent. more than from 1910 to 1850.
But under the reduced duty of 1883
sheep gradually declined until 1890,
when the prospects OF increased pro-
lection by the Mckinley bill gave new
impetus to woolgrowing, as is evil
denced by the increase OF nearly
100000 sheep in 1891.
There is nothing in the free wool
theory for American growers to build
a hope on. The sophistry OF the free
wool advocate is apparent. Our wool
growers must compete with the for
eign product on unequal terms or
quit the business. II free wool would
advance the price of the domestic
product Mr.. Springer and his freetrade
crew would drop the question at once,
for it is their aim to get wool as cheap
as possible it matters not where it
comes from, under the pretence that
the masses would get cheaperclothing.
But even this would not follow, for
when we surrender our manufacturing
to England that country will not for
get to pile on the price.