The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1894-01-22
WHEELING, JANUARY @2, 1904.
Chairman Wilson'S Fatal Admission.

Ma Chairman Wilson's Fatal ADMISSION
In tho press reports OF the debate IN
tho house on Wednesday OF last week
Chairman Wilson, of the ways and
means committee, was quoted as max
ing a statement that seemed Impossible
to have come from one who believes IN
free trade and is the author OF the VIII
son bill. The remarks of Prof. Wilson
as given in the Congressional Record show
that he was not misquoted.
I On behalf of the ways and means
committee Chairman Wilson offered an
amendment fixing August l, 1894, as
the timo when wool shall go on the tree
list. Tho bill as reported from the
committee fixes the time as June l.
Republicans wished to postpone the
evil day as long as possible Mr.. Tom
L. Johnson, the uncompromising Tree
trader from Cleveland, wished to have
wool admitted free Immediately on the
ssp passage OF the bill. In support OF the
committees amendment making the
& time Augusta Prof. Wilson, as reported
3 in the Congressional Record, said:
IS We were just as reluctant to present this when
!
uous members on this side to whom It's hrSt
presentation seems to be an unwclcome propo-
& a few words. The great jobbors OF the country.
Marshall Field, Arnold Constable, and other
5 Row. this very day whether to give their orders
for the fall trade to foreign manufacturers or 10
those dates definitely they win probably give
s1hc great bulk to foreign manufacturers, taking
tnrii rates With the dates liked at tho days
I'VE propose they will put their orders to a very
own mills can do the usual work through5the
winter months and our own farmers can find a
OF heir snring clip OF wool. 1t is for that rca-
son, Mr.. hartman, that we have presented these
1.-TWO dates and ask the committee now 10 Voto
+ upon them.
The other date referred to by Prof.
Wilson was December l, at which time
# the.committee intended to propose that
the lower duties on manufactures OF
wool shall take effect. Tho intention
s was abandoned when the house voted
with Mr.. Johnson to give effect to the
FREQ wool provision Immediately on
E the passage of this act"
The johnson idoa is consistent with
Democratic free trade theory and
pledges. The revised Wilson idea is
not. In campaign time twas shouted
from every Democratic stump and
Numbered from every Democratic press
that free wool will be great boon TO
the American manufacturer and the
American wool grower; to the manu-
facturer, because he is to have his raw
material FREQ; to tho grower, because it
removes the duty from foreign wool
which the manufacturer must have to
mix with the domestic, thus enabling
the homo manufacturer to increase
greatly his produce and enlarging the
market for American wool.
If this is to be so good thing, why
delay it by,so much as q day after the
passage OF the bill? Are not the manu-
l:iacturer and tho grower entitled to all
there is for them in free wool and lower
duties on manufactures of wool? and
Is should they not have this great benefit
rs soon rs the bill can be put through?
Then there is the consumer, for
HON the Democratic party has special
regard. lie is to have his wooden
fabrics very much cheaper as soon as
the free wool and lower woolen duties
scheme goes into effect. Why delay
his day OF ''glad tidings OF great joy
II the Democratic theory be right,
Mr.. Johnson and those who voted with
him nre public benefactors, and Prof.
Wilson aud his supporters were work
B ing against the public welfare, besides
going back on Democratic pledges.
This is not the worst feature of Prof.
Wilson's attitude on the wool question.
::s3H 90 says in substance that by keeping
S*S the wool duties on little longer the
American manufacturers will get the
81 fall trade; otherwise the great dealers
twill probably give the great bulk to
foreign manufacturers, taking the
b chances OF bringing them in under the
reduced tariff rates. !"
this be good thing for little.
while, why not for longer? II the trade
# Of next fall be worth saving to our
Il home manufacturers why not the trade
sssof next spring and of the falls and
= springs to come? Ii the home market,
saving to our own farmers Tor. this sca-
son, why not for the next and for the
u following seasons? In short, why not
let alone the wool and WOODEN duties ]?
"a Thy give at any time to foreign manu-
facturers under the reduced tariff
rates the great bulk" OF the trade in.
manufactures of wool
Prof.s " ilson makes an $unanswerable
areument for protective /. tariff aud
{ against.the tariff theorySof his party. OF
which he IS recognized as ono Of the
:sS foremost cham pions. II he vii carry
KS tosits logical conclusion his latest dea