The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1893-11-01

wool would cost 90 cents here, as again
20 cents in londonl In suit oil cloth
ing such as would be used by working
men, the difference would be less than
in dress suit and less than 20 cents,
probably not over 10 cents on each suit
Of clothing made OF coarse wool.
Coarse or medium secured woods cost
over - cents per pound in London, and
in the United Slater under the MCkin-
ley law tile secured cost OF the same
secured coarse wool is under 30 cents, so
that the greatest difference between the
free raw material aud the protected raw
material in suit OF workingman'
clothing would not exceed 70 cents, as
against difference OF 80 cents between
free raw material and protected raw
material in fine broadCiOth suit, such
as the well.to.do would wear Tor even
ing dress. To give the consumer the
benefit oil from 10 to 10 cents on each
suit OF clothes it is proposed to take
from wool the protection that it has
had for ageneration, and subject IT to
the competition Of imported cheap Tree
wool
COMPARATIVE COSTS OF GROWING.
Ignoring the differences in freight
against the American wool grower, al
luded to above, the Australian wool
grower has the advantage OF pasture all
the year round, the pasture in Australia
being better in winter than in summer,
The wool grower in Australia rents ms
land from the government Tor smaller
charge than the OHIO wool grower IN
many cases pays in taxes alone, cnd the
latter, owing to our rigorous winter cit
mate five months in the year, feeds his
sheep hay and grain. nearly the whole
of which is labor 1t costs nothing to
grow hay or grain; nature does that:.
The main cost to the farmer OF hay and
grain is in the preparing OF the land, III
Cnl,ivating in harvesting, and the Iced
ing, which are all laber, and which rep
resent 30 per cent OF the whole cost OF
production, the remaining 10 per cent
representing interest and taxes. Now,
under these conditions, the cost OF rais-
ing wool in the United States is at least
II cents per pound in actual outlay
greater than the cost OF raising the same
class OF wool in Australia or the ArEen-
tine Republic, and the Mckinley tariff
law places the duty OF II cents per
pound on imported unwashed wool to
put the American wool grower on even
terms with his foreign competitor. The
latter has advantages of cheap land, and
in climatic condition and cheaper
freight, which to him is fully equivalent
to II cents per pound.
MANUFACTURERS NOT HAMPERED.
American manufacturers are now in
no way hampered in the matter OF raw
material. This is proved by the fact
that under the Mckinley law our i'm
ports of foreign wool were much greater
than ever before We imported foreign
raw wool during the year ending June
80. 1898, in round figures over l6S,OOO.
900 pounds, an increase OF - per cent
over the heaviest imports oil any one
year under any previous tariff law. The
cost OF this wool to the American manu-
facturer was less, including duties, than
it had ever been before. Now, with the
larger quantities OF wool imported, and
with its cost iessened, wherein is there
any ground, for your statement that
the American wooden manufacturer is
handicapped in the matter OF raw ma.
terial? Besides, the Mckinley law pro-
vides that exported goods made OF I'm.
ported wool shall entitle the exporter to
return OF all such duties paid on such
raw material save one per cent.
II there has been any change, the cost
OF suit OF clothing to-day under the
Mckinley law is lower than ever before
in the history OF the country.
FREE WOOL MEANS LESS REVENUE.
Ii the duty be soon removed or even
reduced, at time when the govern
ment needs more rather than less reve-
ME, the only way to procure even the
same revenue that is now collected is 10
double our imports. Ii we double our
imports we obtain our supplies from
abroad instead OF at home. We cripple
our manufacturers and lessen our mar
ket for our wool. We give great in
dustrial impulse to foreign mills, and
to this extent take employment from
our American mills, and for what? Sim
ply in order to raise as much revenue
under reduced duties for revenue only
as we now collect under duties that are
protective.
The London value OF wool during tie
two years previous to Mr.. Cieveland's
inauguration fell over 80 per cent, and
during the same period American wool
declined less than per cent, Ii it was
not the protection oil Mckinley tariff
that stood between Ohio wool growers
and the cheaper wool markets OF the
world. what was it?
THE FEAR OF FREE TRADE.
Since President Cleveland's Inaugural.
ton, and the assault by his administra-
ton upon the American wool industry,
American prices have declined from %
to 80 per cent. when the outside mar
kets OF the world are unchanged, and
why? Why did American woods hold
up before this administration came in
and fall Immediately aIterward? 1t was
because it was well known by every.
body in the business that the London
or Tree trade price could not be reached
without decline IN American prices oil
at least 80 per cent, and the movement
toward the London market is in pro-
gress.
When you state that workman will
produce more cloth in this country
than in foreign countries under condi-
tons otherwise similar Won make
otntamnDt ,viIhnut foundation 80 f,ot