The Mason County journal. [volume] (Shelton, W.T.) 1886-1927, 1894-01-26
The Tariff on Lumber.

| 1Mc Ou AuutUC1s
Frank B. Cole, secretary of the
Lumber Manufacturers Association
of the Northwest, is mailing petitions
opposing the placing of lumber on
the free list, which he heads as fol-
lows:
ATTACHED you will find petition,
which, if it meets with your approal,
please sign and mail to me at once.
1t is necessary that prompt action
should be taken in this, as an early
vote is anticipated in congress on the
Wilson BILL"
The petition follows:
"To the Senate and House of Re-
representatives. of the United States
The undersigned manufacturers of
lumber, residing as indicated below,
respectfully submit to your honorable
body brief statement of the reasons
for our opposition to the proposed
lumber schedules contained in the
bill prepared by the ways and means
committee of the house of representa-
tives and recently made public.
"First-The lumber manufacturing
industry is one of the largest if not
the largest industry in the United
States, giving employment and sup
port to nearly 100000 people.
During the recent financial stringency
the business has been very much de-
pressed, and the failures have been
large and numerous. The present
condition of the lumber business is
such that it cannot endure any
further attacks upon it's prosperity
without serious consequences.
"Second-The bulk of the products
of our mills is essentially finished
manufactures and not. raw material
the log from which the lumber is
manufactured is the raw material
We are therefore not seeking to re-
tain or to have imposed tax upon
!, raw material to be used in manufac-
ture in the United States. Logs have
been for years admitted free of duty,
| as we'll as hemlock and oak bark. A
very large percentage of the lumber
manufactured at the sawmills in the
J country is prepared ready for the
buildings in which it is to be finally
/ used, without any other or further
! manufactured process being applied
= to it. Our lumber is therefore, as We
5 have stated above, essentially manu-
l featuring article, into the cost o
, which the element of labor enters tt
very great extent, and it is. there
2 fore. entitled to its fair share of Incl
: dental protection which necessaril.
7 comes from tariff for revenue only
/ "Third-Without having exac
3 figures at hand and from hasty ex
animation of the proposed bill w
f judge the average duty imposed upol
s articles taxed to be not less than q
percent. ad valorem. We beg leav'
, to submit that an industry so exten
: sive as ours is entitled at least to the
f average rate of protection which
: comes from a tariff for revenue only
D We find in the proposed bill tina
: while iron ore is admitted free, a ta1
2 of 221 per cent. ad valorem is i'm
J, posed on pig iron. We beg leave tC
: suggest that there-is no substantial
S reason why our industry should no
3 receive at least the same protection
t that the iron industry receives in con
e sideration of the fact that its crudes
products are carried to more ad
Y vanced stage of manufacture thai
: pig iron.
: "Fourth-Prior to the enactment O
what is commonly known at the Nc
: Kinley bill the tax upon lumber wa
l 50 per 1000 feet. Statistics of tn
: treasury department show that for tin
. year ending June 80, 1891, there wa
, imported into the United States lum
2 Der and forest products to the value o
= $40, 1856, 1853; for the year ending Jun
: 80, 1892, $685. O9; for the yea
Y ending June 30, 1898. 23,152,722
The Mckinley bill reduced the tax OF
S lumber from So to 81 per 1000 feet
r The result is indicated in the figure
3 above, showing that by reason of thi
, reduction there was imported int
this county lumber to the value o
So, 3O8, O13 in excess OF the previou.
year and that the American produc
ers were deprived of a market TO
their product to this extent. Their
e are many other reasons which can b
assigned pertinent to the question
such as decreased cost of production
r in British territory, lower price o
S labor, means of transportation con.
structed at public expense and man,
e others which we wish to urge. W.
4 beg leave, therefore, to respectful.
l protest against the adoption of the
f lumber schedules as proposed in thu
. bill now before the house of represen
/ tatives, and to- pray your honorable
!. bodies to place The numerous business
, interests which We represent upon al
equal footing with those of othel
manufacturers in the country and t.
, provide for us fair and reasonable pro
!, lection to the products of our mills
, by tax upon foreign lumber in any
: tariff bill which may finally be adopt
/ ed as the law of the land"
In another column will be found TIT