The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1892-07-29
M,KINLEY TARIFF AND WOOL.
Farmer" Gives the Facts Regarding
the Wool Tariffs.

IiItl NNdto dSO AhiNi ivan NOVi
had little to fear from foreign COM
petition.
At that time we had an alum
dance of cheap unoccupied land on
which an unlimited number of
sheep might have been kept at a
comparative trifiing expense.
Then Australia, which leads the
world in its wool product, had
just begun its development as a
wool growing country,
Today Australia has over one
hundred million sheep, or more
than twice as many as the United
states.
The wool growers of that country
would be glad to supply the Amer
lean manufacturers with all the wool
they want, for if American compe-
ttion were out of the way, they
could control the market, and, to a
large extent, regulate the prices to
suit.
During the great rebellion the
Government required such i'm
Rense quantities of woolens to fur
aisfi clothing and blankets for the
soldiers, and the demand for wool
was so great that the price went no
to over one dollar per pound for
wool.
In order to encourage a larger
home production, and to prevent
the outflow of so much gold to pay
for the wool we required, a duty of
eleven and twelve cents was LAID on
the first and second grades of for
elgn wool by the tariff of 1867,
known as the Morreil tariff. I'm
der the operations of that law the
number of sheep multiplied in this
country until 1882 we had in this
country fifty-two million head.
By the tariff of 1888 the duty
on wool was reduced about one
cent.
AS result of this apparently un-
friendly legislation the price drop
ped from about 80 cents to Is and
20 cents per pound.
The farmers became discouraged
and killed off their focks to such
an extent that within three years
time the number of sheep had been
reduced to forty-five millions or IA
per cent.
The Democrats promptly took
up the cudgel and charged the Re-
publicans with having BETRAYED the
the interest of the farmers by this
reduction on wool and in their
platforms especially in the state of
Ohio, they demanded the restora-
ton of the old duty.
The Republicans also pledged
themselves to the restoration of the
old duty should they be given the
opportunity, but before they had a
chance to do anything, the situa-
ton was changed by the double
back action somersault of Grover
Cleveland, which landed him and
his party squarely in the free trade
camp, so far as wool is concerned.
Cleveland's entire message was
devoted to an argument in favor of
free wool and a reduction, or a re-
peal of the duties on all foreign
imports. They went before the
people on the issue they had made
and the result of the election was a
Republican Congress and Repub-
lican President.
The duty of '67 was practically
restored in the Mckinley bill, and
under the operations of this friend
ly legislation, the number of sheep
has again increased to the old-time
figure of over fifty two millions, and
but for the threatening attitude OF
the Democratic party the number
might be easily increased to one
hundred millions, so that there need
be no money sent out of our coun-
try for wool.
Wool is classified in the grades as
classes one, two and three. Glass
one embraces the clothing woods,
or the Merinos and their grades,
which, under the Act Of 1888, was
ten cents per pound for all woods of
a value of thirty cents or under
per pound, and II cents for all
woods of this class of a value Of over
thirty cents per pound.
The Mckinley law provides that
"the duty upon all woods and hair
of the first class shall be eleven
cents per pound, and upon woods
or hail of the second class twelve
cents per pound"
On third class woods used chiefly
for coarse blankets and carpets,
the old duty was two and one-half
cents per pound for wool of a value
of 10 cents per pound and under
and on woods OF the same class ex-
ceeding twelve cents per pound in
value the duty was FIVE cents per
pound.
nho MoKinlav 1au ,,rov16as that