The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1897-01-08

become indispensable. The supply Of fine
woods grown here was decreasing be-
cause the farmer found greater profit IN
| mutton sheep Notwithstanding the high
duties on wool from 1861 TO 1894. there
| never was a time when the home supply
was so insufficient.
No American manufacturer bought for
eign wool for any purpose for which do
| nes!ic would serve, because he had TO
advance money on imported woods to pay
duties eight or ten months before he
could realize by sales.
There had been no year before 1893
when the requirements OF the domestic
| manufacturers had not exceeded the do
| nestle wool supply and the manufacture
er under a proper tariff would promise
the wool growers quick market for ali
his raw material
PLEA FOR SMALL MILLS.
A plea for the small mills was made by
Thomas Sampson of Rhode Island. who
protested against high duties on rags and
shoddy.
The same subject was handled by Sig
mund Mulhauser of Cleveland, O.. the
head Of the largest establishment of It's
kind in the country, employing 700 hands.
Mr.. Muihauser deprecated the prevalent
impression that shoddy was a fraud. 1t
was made from remnants Of pure WOO.
and manufacturers bought il TO mix with
new woods.
When the witness declared that all the
leading nianufa cturerS OF the country
were bis customers there was an outcry
from the assembled manufacturers. The
witness said that the shoddy business had
Bou-ished better under the Mckinley law
than the Wilson law. Unlike Mr.. Samp-
son. the witness wanted higher duties.
NJ. McMiIlin asked him: Would you
have any objection 10 filing with the COM
nit;ee list of the manufacturers who
buy your goods?"
The witness replied that he would be
glad to do 50. He explained that he made
2i0 grades of wool. In the best grades
he mixed II per cent OF pure wool: the
poorer grades were all Of rags. All Of
his customers bought of him with full
knowledge of the character OF his goods.
Emil Rinke, an importer representing
several hat manufacturers to whom he
supplied materials, asked that wool hats
be taken from the blanket clause of the
wool schedule and clause covering hats
of wool, wholly or partly manufactured.
including wool hat bodies" be inserted
in the paragraph with othtr articles of
wool not otherwise provided for. They
desired the Mckinley rates.
Wilson H Brown of Philadelphia spoke
for several eastern manufacturers who
asked to have clauses 1 and of the Nc
Kinley act, clothing and worsted woods,
combined in one class.
Chairman Dingley obtained the state
meEt from other manufacturers that with
their improved machinery worsted manu-
facturerS were using much wool of class
one.
Mr.. Turner inquired of Mr.. Brown IL
the manufacturers would not prefer free
wool, which gave them, among other adj
vantages, a wider range of selections.
The manufacturer answered in the neg
alive, because, he explained, free wool
decreased the f1ocks of the farmers and
decreased their purchasing power. and
the same condition ran through all the
industries.
EXPERIENCE VS.. THEORY.
B. c. Moses of Maine, who had spoken
yesterday, appeared again.
II am an original free wool man among
the manufacturers" he began. 81 am
still in favor of free wool, theoretically,
but we have been through the experience
and ii cost our corporation 100000 20
get down to a free Woo basis. Now. we
have got TO go through the process of
getting back. What the manufacturers.
the wool growers and importers want is
a tariff so moderate that it will be per-
manent and will not be overthrown.''
Robert Stuntz of New York, a manu-
facturer of wooden rugs and carpets OF
the Smyrna style, who stated that he rep
the only factory making the
goods in this country, asked for higher
protection.
The committee then adjourned.