Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1896-12-05

A cents per square yard on Brussels car
pet, to Offset the duty of 21a cents to s
cents per pound on the wool entering
into its composition, We wonder if it re-
quired twelve to fifteen pounds of WOO
to make yard of Brussels carpet.
The Wilson bill-the act of 1894-placed
wool on the free list, and therefor re-
jected the specific or compensatory du-
ties in the wooden schedule, but, LEFT TIKI
PROTECTIVE Oh AID vALoREA DUTIES PRAo.
TICALLY WHERE THEY WERE IN THE
M'KINLEY BILL.
Section of the Dingley bill imposes
"a duty equivalent to go per centum of
thd duty imposed on all imported wools
of classes one and two" etc., etc "by the
act of $780," or
THE M'KrNLRY BILL.
Section,2 imposes $50 per centum of
the square yard or pound duty imposed
on" "all imported articles made wholly
or In part of wool, worsted or other
material" ETC., "by the act of 1890"
or the Mckinley bill, "and in addi-
tion the ad valorem duty imposed on
such articles by the act of 1894" or III,
Wilson bill. The language of the Dinss
ley bill when divested of ibs entangling
terms, gives the wool grower go per
centum and the manufacturer 100 per
centum of the protection affor 1ed by the
Mckinley bill. The per centum, when
exactly calculated of advantage given the
manufacturer over the wool grower
owing to different values is 38, 42 and Is.
We ask why there should be this differ
ence, this Discrimination Did the Nc
Kinley bill unduly favor the wool grower!
Not SO; for the statistics published by the
Woolen Manufacturers National associa-
tion show that under the operations of
the Mckinley bill, tho growth OF the wool
en- industry was by leaps and bounds; not
i wheel stood still, not man was idle;
old mills were torn down and larger,
BETTER MILLS TOOK THEIR PLACES,
enormous amounts of capital sought the
business as profitable investment, and
here never was more prosperous two
years in all of its history. On the other
land, the number of sheep in the United
States in 1891, when the Mckinley law
vent into effect, increased from 43, ,431, 1855
20 47,273,553 in 1898 when thA law was
'epealed, an increass of less than 10 per
'ent, and this was only in tho opening of
lew territory here in the west. (See an.
,ual reports of department. of agricul-
,ure.)
"All legislation ia the result of com
PROMISE" has been, is now, and always
will be so, and it is too much to expect of
human nature, especially such as is to be
'ound among wooden manufacturers, that
hey will, after having secured all the
possibilities of legislation in their own
'ehalf, aid us in revision
TO RIGHT THIS WRONG.
No! We will be told: "Tariff is not
he issue this year." business will be dis
urbed by the discussion of that ques-
Ton" "the country demands a rest from
ariff tinkering," etc. We have been met
o that way before this.
Our legislators should think twice be-
ore committing the absurdity of making
t necessary to consult three laws of diff
erent dates to determine the duty on a
,ound Of yarn or yard of woolen cloth.
Our representatives in congress, both
rouse and senate, should throw out the
Oingley bill, and let it be understood, if
he agricultural and pastoral states can
lot receive fair and practically bene-
icial share in protective legislation, es-
'ec;fhr ser vn3l, the psoplc Vi shsse
tatts will tail with delight the passage
+ horizontal BILL" making 90 per
ent reduction of the duties on woolens.
GEO. H. WALLACE.
Santa Fe, Dec. 2, 1896,