Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1900-12-31
The Tariff On Wool.

Louisville 1OurIeT-JOuTNdl.
The statistics embodied in the annual
report of the wool trade made by the
American Wool and Cotton Reporter
convey an impressive tariff lesson.
Here are the salient facts:
The stocks of wool held in this coun-
try, exclusive of manufacturers holu-
ings, amount to 352, 247, 1889 pounds, as
compared to 157, 1898 ,879 pounds a year
ago. The stocks held in Boston, New
York and Philadelphia, the principal
wool markets, amount to 1876, 800, 359
pounds against 113, 295, $40 a year ago.
sales of wool in the chief market,
Boston, have been LAG, 975, 100 pounds
for the year, as compared with 347,-
1856, 776 a yea ago-a falling off of
more than so per cent.
Well may the Reporter feelingly re-
mark: "The year 1900 will pass into
history as n of the quietest and most
unsatisfactory periods ever experience
ed in the wool trade" 1t adds still
more feellngly that "a feature of the
business of the year has been the in
creased substitution of cotton for wool
and a preference for the medium or
lower grades of wool as distinguished
from the fine grades"
1t is a well-known fact in business
circles that the wool and the wooden
goods trade have presented the one
dark feature in the most splendid and
promising business season known for
a decade. Failures of wool firms,
hitherto regarded as financial bull
warks, have weighted down the melan-
choly list of the commercial agencies.
nn1r- loci r,AAI~ ALa-1
pension of an old and tried Philadel-
phia firm which, it is hoped, will be
the last of the long line.
The reason is plain to all. 1t is the
excessive tariff imposed in the Ding
ley law upon wool and wooden goods.
The tariff on wool has been called the
cornerstone of the protective system.
1t is a heavy tax placed upon a neces-
sary of life for the benefit Of a small
favored class. The United States have
never produced and may never produce
as much wool as is required to clothe
our teefning millions, and they never
can produce it as cheaply as the vast
plains of South America and of Aus
tralia. Then since the poorest man
must wear warm clothing in the vari-
able climate of a great part of this
country any tax laid on this necessary
OF life falls hardest upon the poor. 1t
is no answer that there are flocks in
Texas and Montana as well as in Ohio
and New England, for the tax was laid
not for the benefit of the cheap wool
producing sections, but for those where
wool is grown at the greatest cost.
What has been the result? Before
the Dingley law was enacted millions
of pounds were imported and stored
and speculative purchasers cleared i'm
mense paper" profits on their stocks.
Those who sold the next year made
large sums. for manufacturers bought
freely. Prices rose like magic on both
the raw material and the finished pro-
duct, until at last the natural result
had to come.
The people quit buying. Stocks were
left on the jobber's hands. Mills were
closed down, throwing thousands of
laborers out of employment. Goods
lay heaped up uselessly on the retailers
shelves. The whole trade sickened.
Then began the extensive ad%ulteration
of the cloth products with cotton and
shoddy. The workingman and work
ing oma were forced to buy worth
less goods at nigh prices because those
OF genuine worth were out OF their
reach. Even yet with abundance of
work in all other lines, with big crops
and high prices for farm products, the
wool trade is crippled and the poor
man and the rich man, too, wear shod-
dy coats.
With such a record before the con-
temptation of Congress and with the
added incentive of an OVERLOOKING
Treasury, the first act the House of
Representatives should have taken up
was one to reduce the tariff on wool
and on wooden goods. Such a step,
however. is not contemplated and will
not be until the wooden manufacturers
themselves organize to overthrow the
reign of shoddy in clothes and shoddy
in craftsmanship.