The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1895-10-17
wooL IMPORTS.
A Very Large Increase Said to Have
Taken Place.


The very large increase in the imports
Of raw wool and manufacturer of wool
since the reaction from the panic period
commenced has been seized upon eagerly
b. the pEOtectiOLists as an evidence of
the damage that is being done to Ameri-
can interests By the present tariff law.
1t is worthy Of note, however, that those
who undertake to use the figures of wool
imports TO bolster up protectionist
theories 90 back no further in the history
Of our foreign trade than the panic year
of 1884, when all industries were
stagnant, and when the consuming power
of the great mass of purchasers was at
its lowest point in many years. The
transaction from this year of depression
to the following period of great activity
is about all the protectionists care to in
clude in their TRADES against the free
wool features Of the present tariff.
Mr.. Theodore Justice, who is one Of
the most prolific producers of these pro-
tcctionist arguments, has recently pre-
pared an extended statement showing
the increase in the imports of wool and
manufacturers of wool during the twelve
months ending August 81, as compared
with the previous year. This period was
chosen, in order to show the course Of
which the high wool duties of the Nc
Kinlcy traiff were in force and during
the first year Of the present free wool
schedule. This comparison shows that
the imports Of raw wool i'll the twelve
months ending August 81, 1895,
amounted to 249, 4gG05S pounds, against
jS61S,G77 pounds in the previous year,
and the imports of manufacturers Of
wool increased in the same time from
S1J,SS4, 2GO to $4J,SJS, 42S. These fig
urcS, separated from statistics for pre-
yiOus years, make an apparently striking
argument with which to PERSUADE Ameri-
can wool growers and WOODEN manufact-
urcrs that their interests are being dis
astrOusy affected by free wool and re-
duccd duties on wooden goods. But the
showing which these isolated figures
make, and which Mr.. Justice and his fell
-protcctionists point out with such en-
thusiaSm, is entirely misleading, as may
readily be seen by considering the i'm
ports Of the past two years in their sell
cctcd cOntcX.
As Mr.. Justice has selected an old
period upon which to base his argument,
it is feasible to present earlier statutes
for corresponding months; but the fig
urcs for the government fiscal years
ended June 30 answers equally well both
for Mr.. Justice theories ana Tor the
argument by which to refutc them.
The imports Of raw wool in the fiscal
year ended June 80 1893, amounted to
BOG 1879, 9OG pounds, against 55,152,5 S5
pounds in the preceding year. While
this shows an increase Of 2JO,0S1,321
pounds from the panic period, it was an
increase Of only 33,70O.OGS pounds from
the fiscal year 1929, when the high
tariff duties were in force and
when American woOl-growcrs were pre-
enjoying all the advantages of
protection. Omitting entirely the abnor-
mally restricted imports of wool in 1888
"a, the increase from 1928 to 1S94-93
was but little more than the increase in
imports from 1912 to 1929. This
is made more clear by the following
table of imports of raw wool during the
past eight fiscal years ended June 30:
IL,