The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-01-13
NEWS OF TACOMA
TACOMA Brxxxr o. the PosT-IxrxILs-
eHscxx, iif5 PAcTTfc AyKsrE
THomAs EsMxoss. MAyAsEA
THE rAxarv on LrMsKR-
FERN Of . Pssitisn Nov Being eigns
IN This State.

In This stafe~
TAcox4. Jan. i2--fspeciai. l-Frank b.
Cole, secretary Of the Lumber Manufaet-
urcrs' Association Of the Northwest, il
mailing petitions opposing the placing OF
lumber OF the tree list, which he heads -
follows:
Attached you viii find . petition.
which. II is meets with your approval,
please sign aud mail 20 me ss once. IL -
necessary that promp. action saouid b
taken In this. - m early vote 10 antsei-
patel IN congress on the Wlsoa bill
The petition follows:
ITO tie S<wate and House Of R<presenfa-
fises 81 the United 6at<s: The undersigned
manufacturers Of lumber. residing ~ i5di-
Gated below. respectfully submit to your
honorable body brief statement Of the
reasons for enr opposition 20 the proposed
lumber schedules contained in the bill pre-
pared by the ways and means COMMITTEES
Of the house OF representatives. and re-
Gently made public.
"Eirss-Ths lumber manufacturing In
dus,ry il ons OF the largest IL not the
largest industry in the United States. Civ
tng employment and support TO nearly
900. 600 people. Daring tho recent f.nan-
ciai strinssnoy the business has been very
much depressed, and the failures have
been large and numerous. The present
condition OF the lumber business 10 such
that i. cannot endure any further attacks
upon its prosperity without serious conss-
Qusnces.
'.sscond-Ths bulk Of the products Of
our mills IL essentially finished manufzc-
tures and not raw material tho log from
which the lumber II manufactured IL the
raw material. We are therefore not seek
ing TO retain or to have imposed . tax
upon raw material 20 be used IN nanufac-
furs In the United States. Logs have been
for years admitted free Of duty, a. well as
hsmiock and OAK bark. 4 very large per-
centage Of the lumber manufactured at
the sawmilis In the country Is prepared
ready for the buildings In which IL is TO be
finally used. without any other or further
manufacturing process being applied to il.
Our lumber IL therefore, as we have stated
above, essentially q manufactured article,
into the cost of which the element of labor
enters to very great extent, and IL liz,
therefore, entitled TO its fair share Of Incl
dental protection which necessarily comes
from tariff for revenue only.
Without having exsct figures at
hand and from q hasty examination of the
proposed bill We judge the average duty
imposed upon articles taxed to be not less
than % per cent. ad valorem. We beg
leave 20 submit tina: an industry so ex-
tsnsive as ours 10 entitled at least to the
average rate Of protection which comes
from tariff for revenue only. We find
In the proposed bill that while iron ore is
admitted free. tai OF 22,S per cent. sd
vaiorem 10 imposed on pig iron. We beg
leave to suggest that there Is no substan-
tsnl reason why our industry should not
receive nc least the Same protection that
the iron industry receives IN consideration
OF the fact that its crudest products are
carried TO more advanced stage of manu-
facture than pig iron.
''Feurth--Prior 10 the enactment OF
what 10 COMMONLY known ~ the Mckinley
bill the tax upon lumber was 81 per LOCO
feet Statistics OF the treasury department
show that for the year ending June 80
1891. there waA imported into the United
States lumber and forest products TO the
value OF $i9. $50. 35S; for the year ending
June 80. is92. SIS, sa4, 700; for the year end
ing June 80. 1898, SO. f52, To The MeKin-
ley bill reduced tho tax on lumber from So
TO 81 per LOCO feet. The result 10 indicated
In the figures above. showing that by rea-
son of this reduction there was imported
into this country lumber to the value of
S.. Dos. 0l3 in excess of the previous year
and that the American producers were de-
prived OF market for their product to this
extent. There are many other reasons
which can be assigned pertinent TO the
question, such as decreased cost of pro-
duetion in British territory, lower price
of labor, means Of transportation con-
structed at public expense and many
others which we wish to urge. We beg
leave, therefore, to respectfully protest
against the adoption Of the lumber sched-
uies ~ proposed in the bill now before the
house OF representatives, and to pray yonr
honorable bodies to place the numerous
business interests which we represent
upon an equal footing with those OF other
manufacturers in the country and to pro-
vide Tor us fair and reasonable protection
to the products of our mills by tax upon
foreign lumber In any tariff bill which
may finally DO adopted as tho law of the
land ~ "