The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-03-15
PROTECTION FOR WOOL
CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH SHEEP
GROWERS WILL PROSPER.
Effects of the Present Tariff Law Full
~ Explained and IN Restoration of
Mckinley Duties Urged.

of ways and means of the National House
of Representatives:
II hope il may not be regarded as an
act of impertinence on my part in address
ing YOU and, presumng you will hold the
same relation TO the House in the Fifty fifth
Congress that you did In the Fifty-fourth.
through you the Republican members of
your committee relative TO the rate of Gus
toms duties to be embraced in a schedule
on wool. / shall take il for granted that
you agree with me that some measure or
protection is absolutely essential to the
maintenance OF that great industry. hence,
shall contine myself In AS brief manner
as possible TO pointing out the only means
OF escape, in my Judgment from such dis
aster as now threatens sheep husbandry.
The only preventive lies in the levying of
such customs duties on the importation or
foreign grown wool as will enable the
American wool-grower 20 hold the Ameri-
can markets against his foreign competitor
With the experience we have had under the
operation of the tariff OF 1894 IL would GER
tainly be difficult to find any well informed
man who would have the hardihood to con-
tend that wool-growing in this country can
long survive without tariff protection. The
statistics of the Department of Agriculture
show that i'm 1892 the fiocks of the United
States had reached 47223,00O in the number
of sheep they contained. and were increas-
ing more than a million a year Under
the present law they have decreased more
than 3. O00 900 annually, amounting in April.
1896. to only 36.464. 4o5 showing a loss In
numbers Of nearly ,i0 0d S ana nii nf
wool produced has diminished in the same
ratio and the amount realized for it per
pound was little more than haif ,1 fnat which
These facts, | think, are conclusive OF
the proposition assert. And when speak
equaiize all the INEQUALITIES existing be,
tween the domestic and foreign WOOL
grower that enter into the cost or produc-
ton. A duty that falls short of this is not
protection at all. 1t may somewhat pro-
long the struggle for existence. but death
to the industry is inevitable. This is SO
clo rlx nd
| Markham Esq. secretary of the National
Woolgrowers Association, In an address
e ee %eilyer Sesoeiaten Jan IS 1851 copy
| of which / enclose. that to add TO IL, In
my judgment, would simply be a work of
1.-THE sweeping destruction Of the Ameri-
can flocks since 1894 under free trade shows
with what rapid strides they are bee9ming
! since 1860 shows that inadequate protection
is only less rapid in its work of destruc-
| ton
Under the act of 1867 which gave ade-
| quate protection our flocks increased from
30. 1856 to 60,626. 626 in 1854 an increase of
more than 10000 900. and had received such
care and attention from the owners during
that time that the average weight of fleece
was doubled.
RESULTS OF Low DUTIES.
I'm 1888 the duty was reduced below the
protective point, and in 1885 decrease in
numbers commenced. and from that date
|
diminished that they contained only 49,
9.697. a decrease in five years of S.027,541
sheep. (See North's Wool Book Of 1892,
Page 15) An idea prevails largely in this
country. and TO considerable extent
amongst wool growers themselves (who for
| lack OF correct information are making the
mistake) that just to the extent or abe duty
levied on the foreign product would be the
| protection to the domestic product 1t is q
4 lripVOnS nrtnciDal
| reason for troubling you with this commu-
ncation. Our principal competition for our
| own markets comes from Australia, the
! River Platte country and the Cape of Good
| Hope. Those three countries. so extensive
| in territory with their emild climates, per-
i rennial pastures andseheap lands and labor,
| can produce wool in almost unlimited guam
| titles. and, i'm 1894, did produce LIPS, so 600
pounds of wool (see North's Wool Book for
produced on the globe. Those countries
have little use for wool other than TO sell
| wherever they find market. Our
! markets being the best i'm the world, our
people use one-third more wool per capita
than any other nation, they are now flood
and will continue TO do so TO the exclusion
! of the American farmer: hence, / repeat
that a duty afrording less than full protec-
ton will be absolutely worthless.
! 1T should be remembered also that these
| great wool-prOducing countries that have
their wool to New York. Boston or Pha-
| delphia, the great wool markets of this
! country, at less cost than the farmer living
| west of the Allegheny mountains that will
| be compelled to ship by rail. On this point
respectfully refer you TO the letter of Mr..
heod S Sus1fe PRINTED IN Senate Nils
session which please carefully examine.
Having been one OF the COMMITTEES Sc
! lected by the National Woolgrowers' AS
ISOLATION to confer with committee of the
! National Association of Wool Manufac tur-
ers for the purpose OF trying TO agree upon
| schedule of duties on both wool and
| manufactures of wool that would be sa It's
| factory to both associations and those that
they represented and said committees hav-
improper to speak of that failure that you
may be fully appraised of the grounds of
difference that existed between the two
committees. The committee of. woolgrow-
| ers proposed to allow the manufacturers to
fix any rate OF duty that they deemed
! necessary to protect their interest, stating
to them that they would assent TO il. and
| proposed the following rates that they be-
lieved necessary to protect the wooigrow-
| ers. viz: On woods of the first and second
| classes u cents per pound, double duty on
| washed and treble duty on secured wool
be Is cents per pound; on third-class wool
| the duty should be s cents per pound
double on washed and treble on secured.
TOO LOW A DUTY.
1.-The manufacturers committee made nc
statement as TO what rate of duty on the
manufactures of wool would be satisfactory
to them: but did propose to agree TO a dut,
| OF > cents per on All WOODS mol
exceeding 16 cents per pound in value
and on all woods valued above 16 cent:
per pound the duty should be 10 cents pei
pound, treble duty IL secured; but no diff
ference to be made between washed and un
washed woods. This proposition contained
all Of the Objectionable features of an aC
valcrem duty. inasmuch the duty woulC
be governed by the valuation placed upor
the wool and that should be the foreign
valuation. 1t is not hard to see that undo
such law no duty would ever be higher
than cents per pound This was tn,
best and only proposition the manufa ctur
ers would make or assent to. 1t was muci
less than the duty Of 1883, under which
fiocks decreased in numbers over 5000 Oo0 IL
| five years. Such duties they propos
would rapidly destroy the American flock
and il is difficult TO come TO any other con
| clusion than that is what they desired
OF course they can supply their mills witt
cheap foreign wool for time. and secur
the home markets for their fabrics a
against domestic competition except thos
on or near the SeabOard, for such a polio
would prove fatal TO the Western man
ufacturers as the woolgrower. having to oh
| tain his wool in the same market with N.
Eastern competitor and increased dstanc
and excessive freightS 10 his mills wou
soon drive him out of business.
Let us now briefly consider what tn
effect OF inadequate protection would be II
a political point of view. Mckinley wa
nominated for President because he wa
so identified with the policy of protection
that the people believed as chief magistrat
his influence would be exerted TO return I
that policy. His election was secure
! through the suffrage of the Woolgrower
of those Western States where politica
parties are nearly equally divided becaus
a H.. sT,ss