Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1892-03-12
In the House.

In the house this morning Mr.. O'Neill Of
Pennsylvania presented for reference pc
tition of citizens Of the Second congress-
ional district Of Pennsylvania, urging con-
gresS 10 pass law to prevent the landing
of criminal pauper immigrants; to revise
the naturalization laws and submit con-
stitutional amendment providing that no
person not citizen of the United States.
On suggestion Of Mr.. McAiilin of Ten
nessee two hours tomorrow were set apart
for consideration of private bills.
The house went into committee of the
whole (Mr. Blount Of Georgia in the chair
on the free wool bill and was addressed BY
Stevens of Massachusetts,.
The tariff discussion in the house to-day
was more than usually interesting. The
somewhat unique spectacle of the laEgest
individual wooden manufacturer in the
United States arguing in favor Of
the free wool bill was presented when
MIR. Stephens of Massachusetts,, member
OF the ways and means committee took the
floor in support of the Springer bill and the
Democrats paid close attention to his re-
marks and greeted his arguments with ap-
plause. STEPHENS as manufacturer was
not afraid 10 Seek relief of the people by
reduced duties on his product and believed
the majority Of American wooden manu-
facturers who carefully studied this
4uoSllOu NOUIu EGpluAg COIuS 10 his
opinion. The abolition Of the duty on
wool did not mean necessarily smaller de-
mand or lower prices for American wool
It meant that both American and
foreign wool would be used to the
best advantage for the purposes
to which each was adopted and they could
be mixed in proper proportions in all sorts
of fabrics. It meant more wool would be
used than is used today because for
eign wool with less duty would take the
place of shoddy and other limitations, and
more genuine wooden goods would be sod
to American buyers, and it might mean in
the future, perhaps, also opening new mar
kets to American manufacturers. Reduced
taxes and lower prices meant reduced con-
su mption-
Mr.. Montgomery of Kentucky then took
the floor and made a strong argument
largely made up of statistical analysis in
support of the bill of the committee Mr.
Montgomery devoted his chief Stten i0a
to thu conten ion that it deprived lie Ia,
borer of protection, and by statistics
went on to show the bin gave
cost of producing the goods in
the United States. He discussed the propo-
sition laid down by the protectionists that
duty Of II or II cents per pound
on wool was necessary to protect the
American wool grower against foreign COM
peUlIl0n and even with Tree Wool the Amer
lean manufacturers have to have their
present protection to make up the
difference between the cost of la
Dor In this country and abroad.
Touching the first proposition, he
asserted a comparison of the price current
in the markets of London and this country
for the last twenty-five years showed
prices of the unprotected wool
in the London market had
varied less than half cent
from the price of protected woods sold in
New York, Philadelphia and Boston. He
then took up the proposition that the advalo-
rem duties fixed by the bill were insufficient
to compensate manufacturers for the differ
ence of wages in this country and
Europe. He said the labor cost Of the
manufactured products Of this country diff
fered little from that in Europe. The price
per hour and week might be greater, but
this was fully made up by the use
Of better machinery and methods, so one
dollar spent in high-prlced labor here
produced as much as 81 spent for low
priced labor in Europe.
Montgomery was followed by Brook
shire of Indiana, in an attack upon re-
clprocity.
Ray of New York, devoted his time to
political talk which at times seemed likely
to overstep the proprieties.
Coombs of New York, spoke for free wool
The committee then rose and the house
took recess until O'Clock.
The evening session was for consideration
Of private pension bills.