Virginia free press. (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1832-1916, 1892-10-26
TARIFF ON GOAT HAIR
THE ABSURDlTY AND INJUSTICE OF
1T EXPOSED.
A Duty of Twelve Cents Pound I'm
posed Upon an Article the Commercial
Value of Which Is but Two Cents-A
Shrewd Scheme.

Value OF Which Is but Two Cents-A
Shrewd Scheme.
Judge Gray, of the United States su-
preme court, has Just sustained the action
ofCollector Beard, of Boston, in classify
ing common goat hair with second class
wool, and making it dutiable therefore
at twelve cents per pound.
In commenting on this decision The
American Wool and Cotton Reporter,
edited by moderate protec.ionist. says
in its issue of Sept. %;
"Of course the court did not consider
/. whether this duty a. 500 to 500 per cent.
upon the pauper goat hair of Bombay or
Russia is absurd or the reverse. The
court simply decided that under the
phraseology of the Mckinley bill all
goat hair comes within the provisions OF
class 2 of the wool schedule, and is
therefore dutiable at twelve cents per
pound. Under the tariff law which was
in force previous to the passage OF the
Mckinley act this goat hair wasfree OF
e"As the law reads, the hair of primi-
tive Russian or Bombay goat, worth two
cents per pound, is dutiable at twelve
cents per pound, while the wool Of a
primitive sheep at s2 per cent. al valorem
might get m at three cents per pound or
less.
"The supreme court has decidedupon
the exact reading of the law, and it has
reached o decision that must be con-
ceded as Correct by every person who in
terprets the law as it stands, and not as
it should be from. a commercial or eco
nomical standpoint.
"The fact that the law imposes duty
of twelve cents per pound upon an arti-
Gle the commercial value of which Is
from two to three cents per pound, and
which has heretofore come in free OF
duty, has no bearing upon the question.
The Mckinley schedule is replete with
these inconsistencies, and q close study
of the measure and the methods en-
ployed in constructing it will show that
these seeming absurdities and ridiculous
features did not get in by chance, but
were cleverly devised schemes Of men
who knew what they wanted and were
not scrupulous in reaching for ii. And
it is this feature of the Mckinley bill
that has cast odium upon it and has cost
the Republican party large number OF
voters"
1t seems absurd to talk about twelve
cents per pound duty on common goat
hair, and yet this is the law and there Is
no escape from it.
"The Ohio wool growers have gained
their point, but we fail to see where 1t
can benefit them in the slightest. IL is
hardly probable that they contemplate
establishing common goat industry,
nor is it at all probable that the
exclusion of foreign goat hair will
appreciably increase the demand for
wUol-certainly not domestic wool.
1t is a hardship which falls heavily
upon carpet manufacturers, and also
upon consumers of low grade carpet
ings. and is of no material benefit TO any
one. A duty Of twelve cents per pound
on goat hair is nonsensical; it means abb
solute prohibition, and that is what the
trainers of that portion Of the tariff law
aimed at"
1t is not surprising that, understand
ing as it does how the wool schedule
was concocted, The American Wool and
Cotton Reporter, protectionist though 1t
is, has come out in favor Of free wool
and dares to say that the Mckinley bill
is not perfect.