The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-05-28
THE DUTY on WOOL.

A correspondent who has been "A wooden
manufacturer many years writes the Jour-
nal in opposition to the wool schedule of
the Senate committee. He says that and
8 cents, the duty on the clothing wool pro-
duced in Indiana, Ohio and other Central
and Eastern States, is not the difference
between the cost of raising those grades
here and in Australia. In the same con-
nection, he sends an article based upon the
report of Consul General Wallace in Aus
tralia in which the great advantage the
Australian wool grower has over those en-
gagged in the same industry in
this country is shown. The sheep
ranges in Australia are leased to
the sheep raisers for a long period of years
at price which makes the annual average
cost of keeping a sheep less than 10 cents
The smallest area that can be leased by one
person is 1850 acres, or four square miles,
and the largest 1O, 24O acres. or sixteen square
miles AS matter of fact lessees COM
bine and hold immense tracts, which
enables one "squatter" to own from 1000
to $4,000 sheep. In addition to these adj
vantages, the government of Australia has
bored artesian wells and secured low
freights for aid to the coast.
Following these facts the writer makes
the computation of the cost of feeding sheep
in Indiana on land worth, on the average in
the State, $35 an acre. The interest and
taxes are at the rate of $254 an acre. AS
an acre is counted to sustain three sheep,
the cost of keeping each animal is S41a cents
in Indiana to 20 cents in Australia
difference of 6414 cents or. at ssix pounds
of wool to a sheep, 1914 cents.
BY this demonstration it appears that the
duty imposed by the House bill of II and u
cents is essential to sustain the sheep-grow-
ing industry in Indiana and neighboring
States. This is due to The advaNia3e the
Australian competitor has through the aid
of a government which has no other use
for it's lands. If we are going to do any
thing in wool growing, we must impose
such duty as will enable the American
grower to compete with the one abroad who
is given greater advantage. 1t may be that if
the value of the sheep for food were con-
sidered in the two countries that the duty
need not be quite so high the Indiana
manufacturer has estimated.
In an article in the New York Mail Robert
P. Porter, tariff expert, recalls a con-
versation which he had in 1892 with Mr..
Bryan, the Popocratic candidate for Presi-
dent, when he was as rampant a free
trader as he is now a silver monometallst.
Mr.. Bryan was then, as now, prophetic.
with free WOOL" Mr.. Bryan said, 1.-TWO
wooden and worsted mills will spring up
where one exists to-day, and what the agri-
culturist loses the mill hand VIII gain"
The reverse has been the result Half the
mills running in 1892 were closed in 1S93-94,
and it is not until recently that the other
half have been running anything like full
machinery and full time. Free wool has
not helped the home industry, but has in
jured it. Ready-made clothing is somewhat
cheaper because, as a dealer recently re-
marked, we have been forced to sell it at
any price we could get for it d large part
of the season. Even with the prices which
obtained in 1892, it would be vastly better
for producer and consumer to have the con-
ditions of the trade during that year
Sumed.