The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-06-14

Ransbr0ugh Talks Il Hand.
Mr.. Hansbrough, of North Dakota,
followed and spoke at some length:
While favorable to the principle OF
protection, he was opposed to the pro-
tective tariff bill now before the Senate.
He opposed it on account of its dis
ordinations, its sectional inequalities
and its false pretenses. 1t did criminal
acts against the people of the west IN
placing wool on the free list, and IL
favors the people of other sections IN
giving rice duty Of 80 per cent. II
levies a duty of more than so per cent.
upon sugars and places wheat, flour
and many other produces of the farm
on the free list. While claiming to be
in the interest Of the extension of our
markets for agricultural products, it
strikes down tie reciprocity clause OF
the Mckinley act, thereby narrowing
the American farmers foreign market
by means of dollars.
He declared that the wool raiser west
of the Mississippi river would be OBJ
liged to go out of the business for the
simple reason that while the cost of
producing wool here was from
8 to 10c. per pound, the cost in
Australia was from 5 to &c.
per pound, and that, in addition
to this, while the freights from Rocky
mountain points 10 Boston and Phila-
dplphia were from 212 to Sc. per pound,
the carrying charges from Australia
were less than 1c. per pound. He was
confident that hereafter, if this bill
passed, sheep would be raised in the
west only for mutton.
Referring to the grain schedule, he
said that the duty which Canada had
been paying in order to sell barley in
our market was a tax upon the Cana
dian farmer, and that the money went
into our treasury as a contribution from
him, and that it was not a tax upon the
consumer Of barley in this country.
The inequality Of this measure lies
in the fact that it places a high pro-
tective duty upon all that we buy and
puts upon the free list those things
that the farmers OF this country have
to sell. With wheat on the free list.
the farmers of the northwest country,
from Manitoba to the further confines
of the Saskewatchan would dump their
wheat into the markets of Duluth. Min
neapolis and Chicago, thus creating a
larger surplus for which the American
farmer must find Z foreign market.
Our facilities for handling our own
grain are already overtaXed. If we must
on top of this handle the grain of the
Canadian farmer. the result can well
be imagined. This is the kind of reel
Drocity proposed by this bill.
Mr.. Hansbrough was succeeded by
free wool as disastrous to one of the
chief industries Of his state.
Mr.. Shoup cortended that the fall in
the price Of wool had been world wide
! for twenty years, and that in the Unit
ed States it ruled higher than elsewhere
by the amount Of the duty levied. The
| emonetiZation Of silver had much to
do with the fall Of the prices of wool,
! in the worlds market He cited mar
ket quotations to show the difference
between foreign and domestic prices
had been nearer together since the cleo
ton Of q. Democratic president He fin
| ally quoted the cost added to the price
| Of a suit Of clothes by the duty on wool
TO show how small a proportion of the
finished the duty is. Comparisons were
! also made to show the greater labor
cost in the United States as compared
with Australia. He contended that free
wool would ruin the industry in the
United States.
VIII Affect the Coast.
Mr. Mitchell, of Oregon, also Oh.
posed free wool. He argued the Pa
cific coast would be more iniuriousl1
affected by free wool than any other
part of the country. Free wool meant
absolute destruction of the wool-grow.
ling industry of Oregon, an industry
which had grown to be of vast impor.
-
Oregon was more useful for sheep graz.
ing than for any other purpose.
AustraIia's Production.
Mr.. Frye declared Australia coulG
produce enough wool to supply the en-.
tire consumption of the United States
Australian wool, he said. could be laiG
down in New York for cents pei
pound. Yet it was the deliberate in.
ltention of the Democratic majority t.
subject every farmer in the United
States. whether he fed his sheep SIX
months of the year in Maine or al
lowed dihem to run wild all the veal
round in Texas, to such annihilatorN
competition from Australia.
When this discussion ended at $50
Mr.. Quay took his manuscript from
his desk, and began the eighth install
lment of his famous speech begun JUS
two months ago today.
Much More to Come.
After Mr.. Quay had spoken ffteer
minutes. Mr. Harris, in charge of tht
tariff bill asked him to yield to hin
iNIarris) He called attention to TIL
slow progress of the bill two days al
READY having been consumed in gen
eral debate on the wool schedule HI
made a request for unanimous consen
THAT the wool schedule be proceeded
with under five minute rule tomor
row. after Mr.. Aldrich. who desired t
Ispea, had finished.
The request developed the fact TIA
iMessrs. Lodge, Chandler, Plat anC
lothers desired to address the Senat,
ION the general subject of the schedule
land Mr. Harris. with reluctance, saiC
me was compelled to respect the re
iqUests of these senators md would
therefore, postpone his motion 10 pro
Iced under the five minute rule Unit
tomorrow.
/ The Senate, at $50, went into execu
tive session and shortly afterward ad
ljourned.
sI-pREME InnGE a. o. II. w