The San Francisco call., 1896-07-31
English Shoddies Flood the Mar.
ket and Destroy Home
Industries.
WILSON'S BILL AIDS ENGLAND.
How Democratic Laws Have Hurt
Labor and Destroyed Commerce
in Two Years.

has been so widespread as 10 seriously af-
feet almost every other industry by sym
pathy.
1t has been shown IN two previous srti-
cles on the subject lin THE CALL of
Wednesday and Thursday that the Ameri-
can wool market has succum bed 10 the in
furious effects Of the Wilson bill. Lest the
casual reader imagine that the business
Is limited one l. is well TO take general
survey of its extent, so that some idea
may be obtained of the area OF industry
paralyzed by the policy formulated by
Wilson and championed by William Jen-
nings Bryan. IN Congress when he was
proud OF the name, boy Orator OF the
Platte"
The report of the Commissioner of
Agriculture for January, 1894. shows that
the wool business was hurt as early as
1898 by the threat Of the Democrats, who
were anxious 70 put wool on the free list.
In 1898, fearing that the Wilson DILL would
be passed, number Of growers had sew
eral millions of sheep slaughtered, and
that year the value of American sheep fell
from $125, ,OO0, 600 to $50, ,OO0. 600, dead loss
OF over $35. .OOO, 600. Add TO this the decline
in wool and OF farms and ranches hereto
which is not less than the loss OF the
sheep, and the loss TO farmers that year
was S70, ,OOO, COO.
Under protection the sheep-raising and
wool growing industries OF the United
States were established; under that sys-
TEN, the system OF Clay and Blaine, g mil
lion American flockmasters have invested
500, ,OOO, 600, and they pay out S24, O00, 600
the manufacturers of woolens have in
vested over $500 O00, 600 in 5000 factories,
and paid their employees $76, 100, coo each
year.
Under two years ofthe Wilson bill nearly
every form OF the wool industry has gone
TO the wall, hockmasters are ruined, fac
tories are idle, and employees alone are
losing third of million dollars day.
But what was the claim of Bryan when
ne made his famous speech in Congress in
defense of the bill that has since laid low
the industries of the country2 During the
first session of the Fifty-third Congress
Bryan said: al believe in putting raw
material on the free list, and l believe we
have left far more tariff ION manufactures)
than can be shown to be necessary to pro-
vide for any difference, if there be any
difference, between the cost of manufac-
lures here and abroad" Again this most
unreliable prophet said: IF we cheaper
the price OF WOODEN goods we shall not
only be able to export woolens, as we now
export manufactures of cotton, ETC., but
We shall increase the consumption of such
goods among the people; and every in
crease in consum ption increases the de-
mand for labor, which results in more
constant employment and better wages" +"
Thus it will be seen that the boy Ora
tor of the Platte was at once prom iser
and a prophet. He promised most of all,
and his lips were as roses. What are the
facts? The statistics issued by Demo-
cratic officials show that 90 per cent of
American woolen-mills are idle, that more
than half the laborers are hungry, and
that cheap foreign shoddies are flooding
the American market. West of the Mis-
soun River to-day there are $1,000 900
pounds of wool that cannot be moved, be-
cause the market is so dead that dealers
will neither take the staple on consign-
ment nor advance money to growers.
Under the Mckinley bill, as any market
report will show. the prices of American
wool were A per cent higher than the
London markets, while now they are SO
per cent below them.
For the nine months ending March.
1895. we imported $27, ,0OO, 900 of foreign
wooIen goods, but for the nine months
ending March, 1896, we imported $47, ,O0O,-
COO The difference is loss of $50, 900, 900
TO American laborers and manufacturers.
Why? Because every pound of goods i'm
ported represents just SO much less wool
bought in America and just so much less
paid to American wa e-earners.
In the speech quoted from, the Dem o.
cratic candidate for the Presidency said /:
There is no probability that the sheen
industry will be more injuriousIy affected
by free wool than it has been By protec-
tion."
How do Mr. Bryan's forecasts tally with
the facts from Democratic officials. above
quoted? How does his pic ture of pros
porous labor agree with the facts? No one
can deny that 60 per cent of the American
WOODEN mills-milIs that were busy in 1893
are now silent. Take Lawrence, Mass.
as fair illustration. There the three
large mills are closed. What is the resuit2
Thirty thousand men, women and chill
dren, whose bread was sure under the Nc.
Kinley bill, are absolutely idle, pleading
for employment and eager to hear again
the sound of spindles and looms.
Where now IS Bryan's prophecy that
under free wool the American would
manufacture for wider market? Under
the Mckinley bill the importations oi
cheap shoddy were 81, ,250, 600 year, but
under tie Wilson bill cheap shoddies are
coming in to the enormous extent of s20.-
10000 year. This has cheapened the
quality of goods used, ruined American
manufactures and done harm to the
masses.
Mr.. Holden of the Napa Woolen Mills
owns part of mill in New Hampshire.
He says that his mill, under the Nc.
Kinley bill, used Ohio fleece and Califor-
MIA and Oregon woods mixed for making
clotn for buggy-tops. Now, however, in
order to meet the foreign competition, his
firm has 10 use rs per cent shoddy, mixed
with 25 per cent of long Australian wool.
Charles Hall, of Hall Bros. heavy
manufacturers at Norwich, Conn.,, was