The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1896-01-01
WOOL GROWERS.
judge Lawrence Writes u Letter
on the Wool Tariff.
VERY INTERESTING STATEMENT.
Tho Proposed Tariff and the Amount OF
Protection II Gives-Not an Adequate
Mcasure-wooI Growers Asked TO APP
peal to the Senate for am Increase or
the Duty Over the House Figures.
ro the wool arowets Of the Unlted

States:
The National Wool Growers Associa-
tion held session of FIVE days In WASH
ington.. d, c.. commencing December
4th, and agreed on u memorial to Con-
Gress, printed MS senate document
numbered seventeen. which can be pro-
cured from the members OF Congress.
II did not reach the committee on ways
and means Of the house OF representa-
tives in time to enable them to fully
consider II, and the committee. deeming
II necessary to speedily report tariff
bill declined to give the wool growers an
oral rearing. The bill reported by the
committee and passed by the house
this day prescribcs as duties on merino
woods sixty per cent OF the rates OF the
Mckinley act OF 1890 or &C cents per
pound unwAshed and on class three
woods the advalorem rate of that act 81
per cent on the only woods that will be
imported under the bill II II becomes
law. To those who do not understand
the operation OF the act OF 1880. the new
bill apparently gives the specific rate
mentioned. The Mckinley act gave
duty OF eleven cents per pound on UNI
washed mcrino, % cents per pound on
washed and 81 cents are secured. Most
people supposed this gave protective
benefit to the wool growers OF these
rates and certainly Congress Intended.
and wool growers so ey Tected. But II Is
shown In the Memorial. page 49, that the
protective benefit" was In practice on
merino similar to that grown in Ohio
only cents on washed and 1874 on
secured, In competition with the Aus
Inc .ta. kNn NJ
two causes. first, the fatal "skirting
clause" which added all OF 2 cents TO
the value OF each skirted pound, and
saved most OF the expense OF sorting"
shown TO be nearly one-tenth OF the pay
roll in some factories. Memorial page
Al. The second cause. was the light
shrlnkage In securing of Australian
meriuo,
Thus the nominal duty OF II cents, on
unwashed was In practice only equal to
8 cents in favor OF Ohio washed, and not
more than I or 8 cents on much OF the
woods of Texas and the western states.
The nominal duty OF cents In the new
bill will only give protective benefit Of
36 cents on Ohio washed merino and
from to 25 cents on much OF the Texas
and far west state woods. This is no
protection to all. Inadequate protec-
ton is no better than free wool. Evil
IDENTIFY the committee OF ways and
means for want OF time and mature
consideration did not understand this or
their bill would have been framed as to
give some measure Of protection.
The report OF the committee on ways
and means says their bill will give go Of
a cent per pound on unwashed wool"
This proves they did not understand Its
effect.
But this Is not the worst feature of the
bill. When Mr.. Mckinley reported the
tariff bill OF 1890 It proposed specific du-
ties Of 2.5 cents and s cents according to
value on third class woods. The bill re-
ported by Senator Allison In 1855 Us n
substitute for the Mills free wool bill
proposed specific duties OF 2,5 cents and
cents according to value. But GER
tain carpet manufacturers succeeded In
getting an advalorem duty OF only y
per cent in the act OF 1890 on such woods
as are now chiefly imported us third
class. These woods produce more ruin
TO our wool growers than any Others
They supplant our American merino
and the long woois Of the mutton
breeds. Their imports In the fiscal year
1895 were lii.isS.265 pounds, while the
imports OF all other woods for consump-
are OF such light shrinkage that they
would equal nearly 100000. 900 pounds OF
our unwashed mcrino. OF these i'm
ports In 1895 there were OF China woods
260S9.ilS pounds at an import price OF
only 5,i5 cents per pound. This IL new
and the cheapest source of supply al
most unknown prior to the act OF 1890
Tho import prices OF all third class from
August rs, 1894. to June 20. 1885, was only
9.I3 cents The duty OF 20 per cent on
China woods would be less than l.65
cents per pound and. on an average of
all, would be only 2.92 cents. And this
Is on woods shrinking In securing not
over 40 per cent so that the protective
benefit OF the new bill on our unwashed
merino In less than cents per pound.
The China woods by reason OF light
shrinkage would supplant the use OF
10000. 900 pounds unwashed mertno. The
memorial page IS produces evidence
facture OF clothing goods, and that
fashion" has made It popular to use
the very coarse wool goods.
American wool growers cannot COM
pete with these woods, imported at these
low prices. and with these low duties
Tho report OF the committee says: THE
duty on carpet woods Is left Mt ~ per
cent, ndValorem. rs we raise very few
carpet woods" The law does not de-
scribe any carpet woods" because all
woods are now used TO make clothing
goods. We do raise carpet woods and
can raise an needed. rs shown in our
memorial page 76 The report says the
bill Is framed mainly on revenue
ground" Why then did not the com
mittee adopt us Il temporary expedi-
cnt the less thaD low revenue rates OF
the bill In our memorial, page .lS? The
committee bill does give protective
rates 10 Iron and other Industries. but
not to wool The report says that the
hill gives manufactures "a compensate
ry duty equal to the duty on wool" The
fnct In, II Ia largely more than an equiv
alent, wool growers are Disseminated
against. Since the Mckinley act was
passed the prices OF woods In all foreign
countries have declined materially. See
memorial, page 90, etc. This OF course,
was not foreseen when the Mckinley
bill was passed. A new law should
meet these new conditions. BY reason
OF the combined operations OF these
Causes-O) the sklrtins clause, (2) the
light shFInkRge Of American merino,
(Sj the new md enlarged use OF third
class woods for clothing Roods-former-
~ used only for cnrpetS-nnd % the de-
cline in the worlds wool prices. the Nc
kInlcy act CcnsCd to accomplish the
purpose intended by Il. Under II the
prices OF woods constantly declined. and
the Inevitable result would soon have
been n failure to secure prosperity to
American sheep husbnndry. Even In
TexnE, where the cost OF growing wool
Ia MS low, II not less. than In any other
state, sheep declined In numbers from
4,2IS,SI2 in 1890 to 2,S59.2G9 in 1894,
These now md unexpected results
md conditions call for Increased pro-
lection. not for reduction. The duties
OF the act OF 1890 are now even less
than low revenue duties. No other In
$500. 4. =, AZ, ffnrn1 from aiiCh n rOmhi-