The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1900-05-01
Protection an Issue in the west.

The Democratic politicians are look
ing with hope towards the bounding
west for success In the approaching
presidential election. 1t is vain hope
"barren ideality." Those Republican
states which went aatray in 1896 have
returned to the Republican fold, and a.
the silver question is virtually settled
they will not in a year of boundless
prosperity turn to party with such
free trade convictions as the present
Democracy is known to hold. The taFiR
has done much for the farmers OF the
west with regard to wool and sheep.
This wool issue has had more imme-
diate effect than anything else in con-
vert!ng free trade farmers to protec-
tionlsts. And indeed, the historical ar
gument for protected wool is very strik-
ing and impressive. The American
Protective Tariff League has published
in Its Defender" series leahet, which
viii be distributed broadcast through
the west this year, showing, in a very
clear simple and entirely convincing
way, the actual results of protective
and of non-protective legislation on
American Gocks in the past two de-
cadeg.
The Boston Journal, In noting the I'M
portant part that the tariff question
will bear in the west this year, refers
to the record OF protection with refer
ence to the sheep industry as follows:
For many years before 1882 the Nor
rill tariff, protectlonist measure, was
in force, and the number of sheep
throughout this country increased be-
tween 1875 and 1882 by fully eleven mil.
lions. In 1883 we tried ''tarin reform
experiment. The duties imposed by this
tariff on raw wool amounted to no
more than a revenue tariff on yarns
and some other goods produced from
wool. In this point the general nature
Of the law was non-protectiVe. Enaer
It's influence, between 1883 and 1880, the
number OF American sheep decreased
about six millions.
But Ehe Mckinley tariff OF 1890 was a
"sclentItc tariff applied TO wool-grow-
Ing" The result was an increase OF
about four millions In the number OF
American sheep before the disastrous
presidential election OF 1892. Immediate
iy, without waiting for the actual pas
sage of the "free wool" tariff, which
was known to be inevitable, a slgnifi-
cant decline began, which, from 1893 to
1895, reduced American flocks by about
nine millions.
In 1896 came sweeping protectlonist
victory, and in 1897 the Dingley taritf,
with scientific protection for the wool
In 1909 Tho
Der Of American sheep had once more
Increased by thirteen hundred thou
sand.
The price of sheep under protection
and non-protection is quite as eloquent
as this tluctuntlon in numbers. This
Defender" statement thus summar-
tees the shifting values:
'Under the Morrill, tariff the lowest
price per head was 50 90, and the high
est Sc SIS. Under the tariff of 1888 the
lowest price per head was 81 81. and the
highest price was 81 "a. Under the Nc
Ilinley tariff the lowest price was So 40
and the highest price So &c. Under free
trade the lowest price was 81 SIS and the
highest price 81 o. Under the DIngley
tariff the highest price In the history OF
the nation is recordad-namely 81 20.
There are tens of thousands OF west
ern farmers who know these focis well
by personal observation. And thousands
Of others who do not will be appraised
Of them long before the momentous
election Of next November. The tariff
may be overshadowed In the campaign
by the silver issue nnd the question
whether we shall stay in the Philippines
and fulfill our duty like men or "scut-
tie" out like towards. But tariff con-
siderations will count powerfully with n
great multitude Of our citizens.
Professionalism will once more prove
bulwark OF Repuhllcanism.