The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-07

would to many wool growers carry the inn
preston that they are not engaged in rails
ing carpet woods. and so are not Injured
by imports or such wools-
Now. as to what you call carpet woods i
have 10 say: BY the census OF 1880 there
are in the United States 1.020.72S flock
masters, exclusive of owners OF ranch
sheep. There were then in Indiana 54.09
wool growers. Senate Mis-. Doc. 124, ?. 44(
In January, 1894. the sheep in the United
States were 45.04s.017. a reduction from the
number in 1898 caused by the threat OF free
wool. The sheep in Indiana are chiefly the
long-wool sheep, Southdowns,
Shropshires, etc. the mutton breeds. With
adequate protection this country would
soon have what IL needs. e0.oolGO Merino
shcep, 100000 OF the long-wool mutton
breeds and 25.OO0,O coo Of common, coarse and
mixed grades Of sheep. If we had this num-
Der Of sheep our wool growers could not
avoid producing all the carpet wool needed
for the manufacture Of carpets. About one
eighth Of every fleece OF the mutton breeds
Is coarse. hairy WOOL; the belly hip
lock- and .breech" wool is suitable only
for and used for coarse carpets. When the
Mckinley tariff bill was being considered
by the House committee on ways and
means / submitted for their inspection
Samples OF secured Russian dcnskoi carpet
wool and of American secured 'breech'
and hip lock" Cotswold wool. and no per-
son but a thorough EXPERT could distinguish
one from the other: both available only for
Gus that in Texas and the Ter
%ritories the native Mexican carpet-wool
sinme and tbrivs ON io .ari1 n l1Tness ,xh.,e
other sheen will not endure: that they are
there prolific. and that vast areas of and
can be used for no other purpose.
T Secretary Of Agriculture. in a letter,
Feb %. 1890. said: "As to carpet woods:
The principal reason why they have not
because they have been Disseminated
against In tariff rates" The evidence is
abundant that with fair protection our
wool growers would soon produce all needed
carpet woods Senate Mis-. Doc. No. %,
It is an error to suppose that the woods
imported as third class woods are all car
pet woods Most of them are used in the
ladies cloaks. etc, and come in competi-
ton with or supplant the use OF merino
and the long woods. of the 10. 1885, OH pounds
OF third class woods imported in 1898 there
were %, 744,eS9 pounds OF China wool, direct
IMPORTS, besides indirect to an amount not
ascertained. substantially all used in the
manufacture Of clothing goods. The free
wool journal the Boston American Wool
Reporter. OF June Is. 1893. referring to the
rapid increase and vast amounts of third
class woods imported. said:
The increase for a series of years has
averaged about 100000 pounds annually.
the increase the present year being nearly
three times the annual average: - This
large increase Is not attributable to an In
creased consumption by carpet manufac-
turers; an analysis of the imports OF the
descriptions Of woods brought In would make
this evident. . The woods are being
used for clothing purposes, going into mems
wear, dress goods, ~cloakings, overcoatings,
blankets, knit goods: etc Tia Tnis Is patent ,,dn N IN
Glass 3 woods has become large enough TO
affect prices Of domestic woods. these woods
being a greater factor In determining prices
OF domestic woods than Is generally be-
lieved. When the Mckinley bill was under
small fraction of carpet woods was used for
clothing purposes, mainly for blankets, and
this evidence was undoubtedly correct.
ton in the goods market have made it
possible to utilize these woods In the man.
hendS nrOtrctiOn If domestic wool should
take cognizance of these facts"
Evidence on this subject IL abundant
i. Fffty-third Congress. first session. exec
utive, March q, 1893; Senate Mis-. Doc. No.
session. pp. 3. a. dOs s.; Mis-. Doc. No. pf IA. p.
6.)
THE HOLE IN THE FENCE.
The low duty on third-class woods is the
hole in the fence, illustrated thus:
"a rich field of grain is inclosed By a
strong fence. Cattle look upon it IN hun
ger and impatience. The fence may be a
mile long and a mile wide. but if there is
an opening in 1t the cattle will walk
through The fence must not only be
strong. but IT must be whole. 1t might as
we'll be all down as part down. Thus the
policy OF protection TO American labor and
enterprise must stand or fall. If it is made
weak at one place IL is made weak all over.
In IL And the cattle. mark you, are al
ways very hungry, and the odor Of the
grain Is forever in their noses"
In view Of all this, you are mistaken in
saying there can be mo disadvantage" TO
American wool growers by importing third
You say that these imports must be a
certain advantage TO carpet manufacture
for the advantage of a few carpet manu-
facturers than for the thirty million peo-
pie engaged In agricultural industries?
BY the Mckinley law the duty on most
of the third-clasS woods is only 81 per cent.
ad valorem. And yet the Wilson bill pro-
poses to take this off and give wool manu-
facturers an average duty of about from
80 to 40 per cent. or more. Why are not
the wool growers entitled To as much pro-
are In a sense luxuries- The manufacturers
OF luxuries should not have more protec-
ton than wool growers, or, what Is better;
as carpet manufacturers. l repeat, give
wool growers adequate protection, and In
port any foreign wool We will need none.
Our wool growers will have the gold now
sent TO foreign countries to buy wool
countries which take substantially nothing
from US but gold. Let US keep the gold
and we will have no perennial panic.
The Wilson bill processes In part to inn
pose duties for revenue only" Then, why
not impose also revenue duties on wool? 1t
has been shown that In view OF changed
conditions since the Mckinley act was
passed. the present wool duties are now
no more than low duties for revenue only
but even revenue duties may give some
protection. (Senate MIS- DOC. IA, pp. 4. ii,
10. as; Mis-. Doc. No. II, pn. 80. 49, The pres
emit duties are not sufficiently high and
should be designated as revenue duties.
not protection duties, as Mckinley intend
ed. The Aldrich Senate substitute for the
Mills bill Of 1883 proposed a duty of 4 cents
per pound on third-class wool valued at IL
cents or less, and 5 cents on wool valued at
over ~ cents. The Mckinley ill, as intro
duced. proposed 81 and 8 cents on third
class woods, with II cents on frst-class and
Il cents on second-class. With these duties
and increased duties as against Australian
woods. and with the ''sktrting clause OF
the law omitted, sheep husbandry woult
prosper under such conditions as existed
when the Mckinley law was passed.
tn State of Indiana would have 100000
sheep. This would make an additional mar
ket for 100000 bushels of corn for stock
sheep and for 100000 mutton sheep nearly.
II not quite, 3.00.0O0 more, or a total of
100000, worth TO the producer of corn
2,aO,O0 annually Sheep ~husbandry will
wheat and so increase the price. 1t will in
crease the demand for pasturage. hay and
oats, and thus benefit persons who keep no
sheep. The value of lands depends largely
upon the number and Kinds Of uses to which
they can be applied. Diversified industries
are as essential In agriculture as in manu-
features, and no nation ever was or ever
can be great without all these. II il were
possible 10 restrict Indiana farmers to the
sole production OF wheat the value and
selling price of all the lands would depre-
ciate to an insignificant sum. Multiply
the uses to which they can be APP
piled. their productive capacity will in
crease. rotation In crops and grass will i'm
DrnV0 ni1a fnGEaaZ 80 AIN and add 70 fhA