Fergus County argus., 1892-05-12
THE TARIFF AND WOOL PRICES.

THE TARIFF AND WOOL PRICES.
The editor of the Great Falls Tribune
Is again trying to make figures lie in
order to prove that free wool would be
good thing for Montana sheepmen,
and like every Democratic editor who
wants to find anything good to say about
his party or its policy, he goes back
into the misty past for evidence. Th 5
is done to hoodwink and deceive the ig-
norant and unsuspecting. Mr.. Searles
goes back to 1924, when a wool tariff
was first imposed, to prove that ''the
best prices were obtained when the
wool tariff was the lowest" At this
time the worlds product of wool was
insignificant and did not come largely
into competition with domestic woods.
Besides everything bought or sold
brought twice the figures 1t does at the
present time. A srit of wooden clothes
that was worth thirty dollars then can
be bought now for fifteen dollars. If
low duties enhance the price why is it
that wool growing was practically at a
standstill from 1910 to 1850, the increase
in sheep being only 100000 in fifty
years? Land was cheaper than it is
in Montana today. If you say there
was only a limited market for wool,
very well. 1t is an argument in favor
of protection, which has built up our
wooden manufactures and other in
dustries and made the best market
in the world-a market that England
covets for its own goods.
But let us come down to a later pc
riod and examine the results of protec-
ton. An eminent authority says:
"The whole number of sheep in the
United States under protective tariff
laws from 1867 to 1892 increased nearly
20 per cent. During most of this time
the secured value of foreign wool in
free trade countries was less than one
half the secured cost of American wool
under protection, and that difference
exists today. The decline in the value
of secured wool in eleven months from
May, 1891, to March, 1892, in free trade
Europe was 26 per cent. The decline
of similar American wool under pro-
lection for the same eleven months
was only 6S per cent. and this decline
in America was wholly caused by the
much greater fall in values all over the
world where merino woods are lower
than ever before. The object of the
Springer bill is TO reduce the American
wool industry to the wretched condi-
ton now existing abr pad. The effects
of the Mckinley law now i'll force en-
able American workmen in worsted
factories to receive "a against 81 for
his European competitor, and causes
the American Wool grower to receive
double the price for his secured wool
which is received by his Australian
aud South American competitor"
The last circular from the house of
Justice, Bateman d Co. contains a
table of American prices for Ohio me-
dunn and London prices for such Aus
tralasian medium woods as in blood and
in shrinkage are the same as Ohio me
dunn. The price is given both in the
fleece and also secured cost, and is from
the year 1865 to 1891. The difference
in the prices shows the advantage that
American wool growers have over their
foreign competitors by reason of the
duties which have existed since the
passage of the tariff of 1867. The table
also shows what would have been the
price for Ohio medium wool if sold in
the London market. Without produc-
ing the table IN this article it is only
necessary to state that the Ohio grower
received nearly as much again for the
same grade of wool in the American
market as the Australian wool brought
il the London market for the entire
period.
1t is frequently claimed that the
London market rules the world. This
is false, as the figures show. 1t inhu-
ences the American market to Il GER
tain extent, as does the enormous prod
uct of wool throughout the balance Of
the world. But with the duty entirely
removed prices would seek a common
level, and American wool growers
would have to compete with the semi
civilized countries in grade for grade of
wool. There is no question but our
wool growers will continue to receive
prices in excess of the foreign price to
nearly the amount of the duty inn
posed.
There is no necessity for acting the
part of hypocrite in this matter.
Wool growers are an intelligent, read
ing class, and they know that the east
ern manufacturer cannot get his wool
any cheaper unless it is at their cost.
Come out square-footed, Colonel, and
admit that the Springer bill is blow
at the "noisiest If all beneficiaries of
the tariff" as the Chicago Herald as
serts.
WITNESSES CAUGHT.