The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-02-17
THE DECLINE IN WOOL.

the production by reducing the pro-
! its derived from woods and diminish
! ing the temptation to extend produc-
ton We're this depression local, local
remedies would apply, but it is general
and affects those countries Where the
advantages for sheep-raising excel, as
well as those where wool-growing is a
/ secondary matter, and even a by-pro-
duct rather than an industry
The demagogues who have been pull
ing low priced wool over the bucolic
vision, have been playing a snide
game for partisan profit. Aside from
the fact that the high duties on for
eign wool imposed by the Mckinley
law were in force for the alleged pro-
lection of the wool-grower when the
price went down, and that they are still
in operation, the official report shows
that the depression in the American
market is felt everywhere else, and it
follows that the everlasting,y repeated
story that the fall was due to the
Democratic administration is utterly
fallacious, and is indeed a palpable alb
surdity.
Now, as to the wonderful alleged
benefits of protection to the sneap in
dustry. The same report shows that
the increase in production in foreign
countries, especially in Australia, South
America and Africa, has been far
greater than in the United States.
While the American clip has trebled
since 1860. the Australian clip has in
creased ten-fold, that of South Amer
lea nine-fold. and that of South Africa
hve-fold.
The truth is that in many of the
eastern sheep-raising regions the num-
Der has positively declined. The in
crease in the number of sheep and in
the clip oft he wool has been almost
entirely in the west, wher a free
range, exceptional climate andother
advantages make sheep raising very
profitable with ordinary care and bust
ness methods.
The only fair way to Judge of that
is by taking the average for, say ten
years. Even with the exceptionally
low prices of 1898. the average of the
ten years from 1883 win show a greater
per centage of profit from the increase
and the wool. in this part of the coun-
try, than was had from almost any
other regular occupation in the same
period.
The wool report also shows that mo
commercial and industrial nation can
adequately supply itself with wool; no
other nation Of commercial or indus
trial Importance imposes as high du-
ties on wool and woolens as the United
States; no legislation short of prohibi-
ton can maintain prices in the face of
the increase in the worlds supply of
wool; the free entry of foreign woods
has not destroyed the sheep industry
in other countries; wool-raising is con-
trolled by the same economic condi-
tions as other interests
These conclusions should be well CON
sidered in connection with the tariff
question. The United States has never
produced sufficient wool for its own
use. 1t has never produced all the
kinds of wool that are necessary
to successful competition with other
countries in the manufacture of wool
ems. A system which shuts out from
this country the classes of wool needed
for mixture with the home product.
must Of necessity be detrimental if
not suicidal to American interests, and
be disastrous both to wool manufac
lures and to wool producers.
The fact that free WOOL has not
caused any disaster where it has been
tried. is an argument in favor of Civ
ing it trial in this country. The
assertion that it will bring the sheep
raisers Of Utah into competition with
the sheepherders of Australia is an
absurdity. Because. in the first place,
Utah wool is unlike Australian wool.
and therefore the two kinds, instead
of competing. help each other, creating
| a demand for both to mix together.
And in the second place, Australian
wool commands a higher price abroad
than Utah wool will fetch at home.
and with the cost of transportation
added must bring a bigger figure in
this country than wool will from the
territories.
A Republican contemporary affects
to think the report from the Treasury
will give "a black eye" to the claims
of Democratic papers. because 50 it
asserts, zone of their strong arguments
has been that the Mckinley law has
broken down the price of wool in the
United States" That is entirely un-
true, but quite characteristic of the
paper that utters it. 1t is the Repub-
licans who have claimed that the fear
of free WOOL broke down the price of
wool in the United States, and the
Democratic reply has been that this
could not be. because the great de-
cline came under the operations of the
Mckinley law. 1t has not been claimed
directly that the high tariff law low
cred the price.
The report. however, does knock on
the head the humbug pretense that the
fear OF free wool reduced its price in
the United States, for the report made
its principal point in the fact that the
decline in price was not local but gen.
eral throughout the world.