The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1893-10-05

secured or thirty cents in the fleece,
because the wooden mills that are
now idle because they have no orders
for cloth, would soon have more
orders than they could fill; the
wooden mills would be in operation,
and there would not then be enough
wool to 90 around.
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN.
The Australian wool, which is
now being reshipped in such large
quantities to London, would have
to be brought back because there
would not be enough American
woods to supply the demand. You
are aware that by placing wool on
the free list, that act alone, without
any further legislation, at once re-
moves A cents per pound off of
cloth, making a difference in the
cost of imported cloth of 55 cents
per pound on 20-ounce goods. Mer-
chants are afraid of the shrinkage
in values which must thus take
place in cloth if wool is put on the
free list, and they are not ordering
cloth, and manufacturers for the
same reason refuse to make goods,
the value of which may be reduced
over half dollar Il yard by tariff
revision before they can sell them.
This is why the mills are idle, and
this is why the hundreds of thou
sands of working people, out of en-
ployment through fear of tariff re-
vision, are complaining that their
families are suffering from hunger.
These are the good times that were
pre- missed to the worklngmen if they
would vote for an administration
standing upon the Chicago plat
form. Many workingmen believed
the statement, and helped to elect
this administration, and their acts
are the cause OF the present suffer-
lngs.
You seem to object to the fact
that the duties were taken off of
sugar and were Increased upon wool,
although the increase was a beg
carly one cent per pound. You
seem to favor the Chicago platform
which favors removing duties from
wool IN order to cheaper clothing;
whereby, you lessen the taxation of
the millionaire, who owns many
suits of clothing and who consumes
many times as much wool as the
lahorer, and you would put the
duty upon sugar, more of which is
consumed by the workingman than
by the millionaire (probably because
he has better digestion). In other
words, the Democratic policy, which
you favor, is to relieve taxation
from the back of the millionaire
who is well able to bear it, and put
it upon the stomach of the work
ingman who is least able to bear it,
and you thus tax him more heavily
than you tax the millionaire, be-
cause you tax an article of which
he consumes more than is consumed
by the millionaire.
SOME SOLEMN FACTS.
The placing of wool on the free
list makes it impossible for the
American wool grower to compete
on even terms in his own markets
with the wool grower of Australia
and the Argentine republic, for the
reason that the freight on wool from
the sections of the United States,
where the bulk of the wool is from
four to six times as great as the
freight on wool half way round the
world from Australia to our own
markets. The freight on wool from
Australia by sailing vessel is only
one half cent per pound; the freight
on wool from any of your Ohio
farms to our eastern market is
greater than this, but the competi-
ton from London is even greater.
The wool grower from Ohio cannot
ship his wool by rail to Boston,
New York or Philadelphia as
cheaply as wool can be brought by
sea from London. The freight on
wool from London to New York is
only ! cent per pound, which is
about half of what it costs the Ohio
farmer to freight his wool to eastern
cities.
In many sections of the Rocky
Mountain regions the freight is 3
cents per pound on wool to the sea-
board. This twelve times as much
or 200 per cent. greater than the
freight on the same kind of wool
from London to our own market
six times as much or 600 per cent.
greater than the freight on wool
from Melbourne. Australia, to our
own market. How, then, can the
American wool growers exist if there
is no longer any protection in way
of tariff duties? Many Democrats
believe that the wool growing in
dustry on the open range of our
territories where sheep are herded
I