Waterbury evening Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1887-1895, 1892-11-02
pEMocRATIc Wool DUTIES.
Speaker Crisp ON the Effect of the Springer
Free Wool Bill.

DEMOCRATIC WOOL DUTIES.
Speaker Crisp ON the Effect of the Springer
Free Wool Bill.
We passed bill known as the Springer
wool bill. We put raw wool on the free
it absolutely free. We did
not intend to hurt the farmer when we
did it, because, in proper sense, the
Australian and other foreign wool
brought into this country is not in COM
petition with American wool. It is an
auxiliary-an aid-necessary to mix and
mingle with it to make the various kinds
of goods that we want.
And then, again, the Democrats gener-
ally are in favor of free raw materials
to enable our manufacturing establish
ments to obtain their materials more
cheaply. We put wool on the free list,
but we did not stop there. We reduced
the tariff on wooden goods from an av-
erage specific and ad valorem rate equiv
alent to SO per cent, which is where the
Mckinley law puts it, to an average of
less than 80 per cent. That is the reduc-
ton proposed in the bill which passed
the house. Now last year there were
brought into this country $35, O0O, 900
worth of wooden goods, and upon those
goods there was paid into the federal
treasury tax of $32 100000. That is a
great deal more than this average of SO
per cent. that told you about. The
tariff on some articles is much higher,
and on some articles it is lower. The
wooden schedule is among the highest.
Last year $35, 0O0, 900 worth of wooden
goods came here from abroad to be sold
in competition with the American
wooden products, and those goods paid
$32 100000 tax. The American consum-
ers of those foreign goods paid $67 ,000,-
900 for $35 ZOO, 900 worth of goods. They
got $35, 100000 worth of goods and
$50, 100000 worth of tariff when they
bought them. Now, if the American
people consume five times as many goods
of domestic manufacture asthey do of
imported goods, then the American peo-
pie paid five times $32, 900, 900 in the way
of increased price on goods of American
manufacture, and therefore they paid
$3.50 ZOO, 900 in round numbers for goods,
and at the same time they paid about
$145, 100000 in round numbers for pro-
lection on wooden goods.
Now the Democrats believe that for
the same amount of money you ought
to be able to buy more goods and less
protection. So if the Springer wool bill
becomes law, instead of that $35, OOO,.
900 worth of imported goods paying $32.
900, 900 tax, it would have paid 81 900,
900 tax, and you would have saved
$21 100000 on that and five times $21 ),
600, 900 on the home made article, which
would have been 800, 900 more.
We are not in favor of free trade. We
favor free trade in the raw materials
but not free trade in the goods into
| which skilled American labor enters
| There is plenty of protection left tt
more than compensate for any real o.
supposed differences in the price of la
Dor, and at the same time there ar
more cheap goods for the American
| workingmen.
| Now let the American workingmal
take it to himself when he goes to tn
store and buys suit of wooden clothe
for $40. He pays about SO for the clothe
and about 81 for protection. Now, i
have proposed in the Springer bill, whel
the workingman buys $40 worth o
clothes he will get about $3.50 worth o
| CLONES ana Sl.oU worm OF pfOIecClon
and that is plenty. That is as much a
the workingman needs in cold weather
when money is scarce and he has clothe
to buy.
Now what else did that same bill dc
1t reduced the tax on wool hats from s
per cent. to 25 per cent, and the sam
on blankets and wooden underwear, s.
that if the bill had become law tn
wooden underwear for which you nov
pay SIS you could buy for 1926. TIL
Democratic idea is to benefit the work
ingman in this way-by imposing Gus
toms duty for revenue purposes and dis
tributing the incidental protection judi
ciously, because it has got to operat
somewhere, and by reducing to tn
workingman the price of what he has t
| h1v --SDeaker CrisD's SDeech in Detroit