The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1897-01-07

congress be subject to the rates Of duty
of any law passed by that congress
when the new rates are announced:
bonds to be given by importers for such
payments before goods can the with
drawn.
'.The senator from Montana Carter
on my right says that the senate might
pass such a bill by October" interrupt
ed Mr.. Dingley.
AS Mr.. Lawrence was explaining that
| under the schedule proposed by his as
ISOLATION, American wool-growers would
control the home markets in four years.
Mr.. Dalzell inquired how much revenue
would be secured.
"A little more than by the Mckinley
law. Eight or ten millions during the
four years" he replied
And get none?" interposed Mr..
Wheeler.
why should we want any?" retorted
Mr.. Wheeler amid laughter.
II mean from WOOL he amended.
''The country will be prosperous and We
can get revenue from other sources"
Mr.. Tanner of Georgia inquired if the
schedule had not really been drawn u
shut out the higher rates Of wool, which
Mr.. Lawrence denied.
In reply to & question from Mr.. Tur
ner, Mr.. Lawrence said the average
citizen would receive s25 worth of bene-
woods. The point was then ELECTED that
the wool growers plan proposed an an
nual increase OF one-half cent pound.
And where would we finally land?'
inquired Mr.. Dingley.
1.-THE increase would end at Is cents a
pound was the answer.
THE CONSUMERS SIDE.
The consumer MGs represented at the
afternoon session by Theodore Justice, a
wool dealer of Philadelphia. He stated
that while tho trial of free wool under
the Wilson bill had slightly benefited
the consumer by reduction in prices, the
saving had been greatly outweighted by
the loss in purchasing power. The gain
by the lower price had averaged 90 cents
per capita, while the loss amounted to
more than 81. The average loss TO the
wool grower had been s422.s3, while the
mill hands and laborers Of the United
States had lost SIS, 900 during the
past year. The Mckinley law had CIV
en- the cheapest priced clothing ever
known up TO its time. He gave figures
showing the effects of the tariff of 1867,
under which flockS had increased % per
cent in four years: that OF 1883, the
worst ever known" the Mckinley law,
under which fiocks increased Is per cent;
and the last period, under the Wilson
law He said: when ii was known
that Grover Cleveland meant to continue
his assaults on this industry with the
assistance Of both branches of congress, |
farmers began to dispose Of their f1ocks. |
From 1893 to 1896 the number of sheep |
had decreased % per cent, and there
were now fewer i'll the United States |
than In 1865. Had the Mckinley iaw
been continued, the United States would |
be able to produce it's full consumption |
Of 650,O00,0 900 pounds of wool"
Mr.. Justice stated no harm could be
done the American business if woods |
costing under 10 cents were admitted |
free. for these never would be raised |
profitably in the United States.
REFERRING TO SHODDY.
Referring to shoddy, he said that |
while the annual importations of it I'M
der the Mckinney law had been 100000
pounds, between August and September |
of the year the Wilson law was enact |
ed, there had been 100000 pounds i'm |
ported. and in the first full calendar |
year under the law, 2O,71S,OOO pounds.
The theory of the trainers of the Will |
son law had been that free wool would |
stop Importation Of shoddy. No nation |
had ever used as little shoddy as the |
United States Under the Mckinley law. |
The explanation OF the increased use of /
shoddy was that the increased importa-
tons Of cheap clothes under the Wilson
law compelled the American manufac-
turers to make such cheap clothes to
compete that he was obliged to use |
shnddy. Moreover, there had been less
money earned by all classes under the
Wilson law to eXpend for clothes. The
decrease iE price TO the purchasers OF
wooden goods under the Wilson law had
been about equal to the decrease OF the
tariff on the goods.
The next speaker, B. c Moses, an i'm
porter of australian and South Ameri-
can woods contended that the duties
asked by the Wool Growers association
were prohibitive and would mean death
TO the manufacture. He did not believe
public opinion nor the good sense OF the
committee would sustain such a sche-
duie but he did believe present condi-
tons demanded an adequate tariff on
Wool"
FOR WESTERN MEN.
Delegate Catron of New Mexico stat
ed that the value Of the wool produced
by the 10000 sheep in that territory
had decreased on an average OF IL cents
a pound since the enactment of the Will
son law. He suggested specific duties on
third. class woods.
Senator Carter and w. C. Conrad of
Montana appeared on behalf of the wool
growers of their state, and filed state
ments with the committee.
Jesse VI. Smith of Utah, president of
the state wool growers association. as
serted that as sheep raising east of the
Mississippi was greater than west the
western men would be satisfied with
any tariff which the fasteners would
accept. Their greatest necessity was a
stable tariff, which would remove uncer-
tainties.
Wilson n. Blown OF Philadelphia pro-
tested against discriminating against the
manufacturer by any scheme involving
duties on noles and waste.
John Ridgeway of Philadelphia spoke
for protection to the workingmen by a
schedule which would exclude skirted
woods from Australia and give employ
ment TO the wool sorters, who are now
walking the streets. During thirty-one
years experience as a wool sorter in the
United States, he had never seen as
much suffering and loss of time among
the craft as in the past three years.