Reporter and farmer. [volume] (Webster, Day County, Dakota [S.D.]) 188?-1946, 1894-05-24
THE FREE WOOL CRY.
nooMes FROM THE COTTON GROW
ING STATES.
Although Representing but One-hfth oil
che Wool Producing Industry, the south
srn Senators Have = Controlling Vote In
the Senate-wool Versus Cotton.

the Wool Producing Industry, the South
ern Senators Have = Controlling Vote In
h senate-woo Versus Cotton.
It is estimated that on Jan. !, 1898,
there were Al, 500. SOL sheep in h
United States. The 13 southern states
own but 81 per cent of these focks, be-
ing a little less than 10, 600, 600, Texas
alone reporting 4, 1874, 600 Of this num-
Der, leaving Virginia, North Carolina.
South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Ala
bama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas,
Tennessee, Kentucky and Missouri with
q little over 8, 500, 900, or an average of
about $50, 900 for each state. The
Pacific states, California, Oregon, Ne
vada, Colorado, Montana, Washington
and Wyoming own 81 per cent of the
entire flock of the United States, or, i'll
round numbers, ID, 600, 600, being an
average of nearly 2 1000, 900 per head to
the state, being more than four times
the number owned in the IL southern
states, exclusive Of Texas. The number
of sheep owned by all the other states,
exclusive of the southern and Pacific,
aggregates IL iljiIc ONCI 81, WV WV, VI
OF per cent of the entire flock of the
country, being an average of about 90O,-
900, or double the number per state for
all the states in excess of the southern
states and about one-half below the aver-
age Of the Pacific states.
The sheep industry, as represented in
the United States senate, may therefore
u, r,,,,,,rignl n- afo,+inr tIn ,YN-
posed tariff bill which has consigned
wool to the free list, as having but little
hope for restoration to the dutiable list.
The vote Of the Is southern states
above named gives 26 votes for free
wool OF the Pacific states, there are
two votes for free wool, with 7
votes for dutiable wool; 3 vacancies
existing-namely, Montana, Washing
ton and Wyoming. OF all the other
states, there are 10 votes favorable to
free wool and 20 in favor of dutiable
wool, giving a total of 81 votes for pro-
tected wool and 90 votes for free wool
in the United States senate. \ further
analysis of the northern states would
show that the wool producing states are
not fairly represented in the senate by
reason of the solid southern vote against
dutiable wool, they being among the
smallest producers of sheep and wool i'll
all the territory of the United States.
The estimated wool product of 1898
was 30l, 500, 900 pounds. The southern
states produced of unwashed wool 20
per cent; of the washed wool, 21 per
cent. The Pacific states produced of
unwashed wool 81 per cent, and of
washed wool 26 per cent. All the 9TH
er states produced of the washed wool
90 per cent and of the unwashed 40 per
cent. 1t will be seen that the southern
states, in their representation in the
United States senate, with the control
ling vote Of the senate's majority, only
represent about one-fifth of the entire
wool interest of the whole United
States. Thus it will be seen that four
tifths of the interest in this great agri-
cultural business Of the United States
are made to suffer by the action of this
small producing minority.
The Pacific states-California, Ore
gon, Nevada, Colorado, Montana, Wash
ington and neutrality-suspicious.:
Per
Pounds cert.
Sneep. l2,Sl1 .bS ~
Wool, washed and unwashed. =. 9,1S5,9l9 81
Secured wool. S,S69,g6l %
The southern states-Virginia, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Flor
ida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana,
Texas, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky
and Missouri-produce:
Per
Pounds. cent.
oueep. S,SSo,u1S Il
Wool, washed and unwashed. -. $685. 20
Secured 1921 sos q
All the other states-Maine, New
Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York,
New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware,
Maryland, West Virginia, Ohio, Michi-
gan, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Min
nesota, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, Ari-
IONA North Dakota Soutb DAKOTA Ida