Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1892-03-18
THE FREE WOOL BILL.
Discussion iu the House on this I'm.
portant Measure.

AA"oH"eHuS0Ite, spOhe from the stand
point OF the manufacturers-redu
taxes and lower prices and better
goods. The one was the equivalent
OF the other and the American people
would have reason to complain if the
conditions did not ensue. While the
American manufacturers maintained
a high standard of enterprise and
workmanship there was nothing to be
feared from foreign competition.
Quoting from leading manufacturers
OF the country, he showed that the
free wool bill was satisfactory to them.
The bill proposed was an immense
boon to manufacturers and one of
universal benefit. He represented
that 1T was as wise a distribution of
duties as could be made. If the bill
passed it would result in good to the
people. (Applause)
Montgomery (Democrat of Ken
lucky followed with long argument
in support of the bill, which he read.
Montgomery said he was an ardent
tariff reformer. The measure reported
endeavored to make a sharp, distinct
and disincumbered issue with the Re-
publican party as to whether 65,00O,-
OOO people shall continue to pay 9l5
per cent. increase on all cloth and
woolen goods they consume under the
Mckinley act, or whether they thall
pay only the 25 per cent. fixed in the
measure. Whether the 364 per cent.
OF unnecessary taxation now imposed
on $37O,0OO,OO0 worth OF goods con-
sumed yearly by the people shall be
released was the question that every
member would be called upon to an
swer; whether it was just to pay this
on the cheap lands and great ranches
OF the West, the only portion of the
country where wool was largely grown
and where but little element, either
OF labor or property, except that
interested in fiocks, entered into the
interests of wool growing.
There was no reason why wool
growers should be favored beyond the
millions engaged in other pursuits
who get no benefit from protection
from this country, and could not raise
either the quantity or quality of wool
necessary to clothe the people ccm-
fortably and successfully. Under the
increased rates of the Mckinley bill
importations of wool increased from
l24 ,OOO, 600 pounds in 1889 to 136, ,OOO,-
in 1891, on which the manufacturers
must pay the duty. On this large
importation the price OF raw material
must be added to the price of the
goods and be finally paid for by the
consumer.
If the duty on foreign wool were
added to the manufactured goods and
thereby increased the cost of wooden
goods to the consumer it would bring
no benefit to the wool grower; then
why shall not this duty he renewed?
Under the Mckinley bill wages had
not been increased in a single industry.
The cost of labor in the manufacture
of textile fabrics here differed very
little from that paid by European
competitors, while the prices paid for
labor was far greater, yet our machin-
cry and methods of manufacture were
so superior that the amount expended
in labor yielded as great an output OF
production in shorter time as the
labor of Europe yielded in q longer
time.
The old countries were conservative
and slow to change their method.
Labor there was moro abundant and
there was less incentive to invent and
use labor-saving machinery. We were
progressive and alert to invent and
adopt new, cheaper and superior
methods. Were the American woolen
manufacturer given free wool, free
dye stuffs, free machinery, and placed
on an equal footing otherwise with
European countries, he could pay
American wages and not only hold the
home-market for his products, but
compete with the wooden markets of
the world. He was protected in the
home market by the cost of transpor-
tation and other disadvantages which
burdened his foreign competitors.
The policy OF the Democratic party
was to maintain wages, broaden the
fields of all labor and increase their
comforts. This bill repaid the home
manufacturers 10 per cent. more than
the entire wages they paid for the pro-
duction.
There was nothing in the Republi-
can argument that higher rates than
were carried in this bill were needed
to maintain American wages. The
zeal with which American labor was
put forward to justify the burdens of
tariff was shame and fraud, and
more protection was afforded in this
bill than was necessary. The people
wanted tariff reduction. This bill was
not theoretical; its benefits were uni
versal. 1t removed two-thirds of the
tax paid by 65,OOO,OOO people on all
woolclothes they wore, but which
falls heaviest upon the poor, who
wear cheaper goods, on which Nc
Kinley imposed the highest duties.
He believed the bill would meet
with the approval of four-fiiths of the
woolgrowers and manufacturers.
There was behind it public sentiment,
irrespective of politics, which neither
the Senate or the President could ig.
more. The people would contrast the
Legislation OF this Congress with that