The record-union., 1892-10-19

ficiency in wool, and how easily, too.
other countries can step in and supply ali
We need.
The increase is rapid and accounts for
the lower prices, but it is fact that while
the London market has decreased q per
cent. the American market has decreased
only 1s per cent.
We consume about 600, ,0OO, 900 pounds
and produce about half that.
A glance at these figures will show
that the supply of wool is rapidly in
creasing in other wool-growing countries,
ana al the present ratio will soon supply
the worlds demand.
If we have no duty these woods must
necessarily displace ours unless we can
produce and sell as cheaply as they can
and will. Can we do this?
Our home prices are from 20 to 30 per
cent. higher than in free trade England.
IN 1889 wool in London that brought %
cents in New York brought 36 cents; in
1880 wool that brought in London D cents
In New York brought 81 cents; in 1891
wool that sold in Canada at 49, cents was
worth in New York 33 cents. You will
see that the duty of II and Y cents on un-
washed expresses about the difference in
selling value here.
Ii we take the London and New York
prices upon washed or secured wool we
ma ABOUT the same result. The duty on
washed woods of first class is double and
on second and third classes three times
the 0uty on the unwashed.
L have here table of prices of Ohio fine
neeces, secured, and Australian secured
nne 1leeces in New York and London. In
1851 the price of Ohio wool in New York
Afs q nd.
nan wool, 53c. The prices fall gradually
until we find:
IN NEW YORK.
In 1890, Ohio wool 3I3c
In 1891, Ohio O3c
In 1892, Ohio wool 6214c
IN LONDON.
In 1890, Australian wool dc
In 1891, Australian wool 4Oc
In 1892, Australian wool....................;3 g. 20
The complete table shows an average
difference for twelve years of thirty-two
cents, which again is about the amount of
duty on secured woods. Now, it must
follow that ii the duty is removed the
New York price and the London price
would be the same.
The Democrats promise the manufact-
urer OF woolen goods this very differ
ence. But when they speak to the farmer
they say, Y our price on wool will re-
main unchanged and you will get cheaper
clOthes.'
At the same time the Democrats leave
very high protective tariff on imported
Woolen goods, which will enable the
manufacturer to charge as much as he
doos now and pocket this very difference
which we claim will come out of the
Wool-grower. Can anything be palmer?
But let us apply the law practically to the
California wool-grower. We grow
very dirty wool tbs 60 per cent. dirt.
We get for fall about 13 cents and for
spring about 10 cents per pound. Now
we all know that the sheep industry
could not prosper at much lower than
present prices for wool. Indeed without
high price for mutton sheep the present
prices OF wool would not make the bus
mess remunerative.
We know as matter of fact that Aus
trallan and other woods come now to this
country and are presumably sold at satis-
factory prices, and yet pay the duty of IL
cents to Il cents per pound.
Does 1t not follow inevitably that if this
duty were removed the FOREIGN wool
grower would lower his price nearly or
quite the amount Of duty, and if he did
so could we grow wool in this country?
But we are offered two advantages for
this sacrifice. First, cheaper Woolen
goods; second, chance to compete
abroad in the markets of the world. AS
to the hrst proposition, a complete an
sWer is found in the fact that we are now
selling most Of our domestic wooden man
utactures at price below the price for
which the like articles sell abroad. Ger
tain high grades of goods still come to us,
and the rich people buy them, but the
long list of wcolen articles that enter into
general consumption-our clothes, our
blankets, all kinds of dress goods, our
carpets-are cheaper than ever before.
and so cheap that no sane mau would see
them made cheaper by reducing wages to
the foreign standard.
AS to the second proposition, is it likely
we could make woolen goods and ship
them to England, the only place where
we would not have to pay duty on
them? We have free cotton. But with
all our skill we have not been able to
capture the worlds market.
In 1891 we imported cotton manufac-
lures worth S29, ,7l2, ,624; In 1891 we ex-
ported cotton manufactures worth Sl3.-
6O4,o57, In 1881 we exported S14, 105, ,348
worth. So you see that in cotton manu-
factures We have not only not gained in
export trade, but have lost $500, 600, and
all this time we have had free cotton We
have had the same experience in trying
to capture the markets Of the world with
our silk goods and our leather, and yet
raw silk and hides are on the free list
woOLEN FACTORIES.
The importance of maintaining our
wooden factories no one can question.
There are in the United States 2,S67
factories valued at 1924, ,535. .24l; value of
product annually, $345, "a, ,824; wages paid
i'll wool and woOlen industries, 81, 100000.
American wool in our factories has in
creased 315 per cent.
Since the Mckinley bill became a law
we have decreased our purchases Of
wooden goods from abroad. In 1890. be-
fore the Act, we imported S53, S,9l4; in
1891, after the Act, we imported S34, ,000 543:
making a gain of SIS, ,S98,37l. Our own
factories supplied this gain. Instead of
importing 62 per cent. of our consump-
ton, we now import II per cent, and
make the other 86 per cent.
In 1860 the value per capita of domestic
product was S2 o.; in 1890 it was s. 10.
The production and consumption is In
creasing enormously. 1t is worth our
while to stand by so important an in
dustry.
The per capita consumption has in
creased from 81 40 in 1910 to 50 OF i'll 1890.
The Democrats propose free wool now,
and next free products of wool. We say
that means that the 600 600 600 pounds Of
wool now used here will be produced
elsewhere as the result of free wool, and
as the result Of free wooden products we
will have TO abandon the manufacture or
cut down wages to the European stand
ard.
EFFECT OF TARIFF ON PRICES OF WooLEN
GOODS.
We have had high tariff on wooden
goods for thirty years, but prices have
been growing cheaper and cheaper as
everybody knows.
L will not go through the catalogue of
fannels, cloths and all the forms OF dress
goods and the garments made from them,
CARPETS.
The single article of carpets will Illus
f1-at n fha 80