, 1907-10-03
Terms Of subscription.
WOOL AND THE TARIFF.

Tree trade), n q characteristic ara.
Gle on the wool tariff, In which il is
asserted that sheep in his country
are not raised for their WOOL and that
this particular industry is not helped
by the tariff Also, that iii now the
duty were removed and kept off LONG
enough, there is scarcely n doubt that
the wool manufacturing industry would
develop rapidly" There is absolutely
no basis of fact for any II of these
statements. That journal would treat
by-product, but it cannot be ignorant
of the act hat in Utah, Montana, WY,
oming, Idaho. New Mexico, Colorado
and in many other sections OF the
country millions of sheep are raised
n kept chiefly for their wool pro,
duct. That Journal also ignores the
fact that the breeds of sheep produc.
ing the finer grades of wool are deem
ed undesirable for food; and sc those
farmers who raise sheep for their nut
ton find 1t more profitable to keep the
breeds that are more suitable for thia
purpose.
No more sheep are raised on &C,
count of the tariff duty adds the
journal of Commerce. Let us see
about this. The advent Of the Cleve'
land administration in 1885, which
was pledged to free wool, checked the
rapid growth OF the industry. In the
succeeding four years the flock of the
country declined from 50,360,000 10
2,599, 900. The protection to wool 4,
the Mckinley tariff fostered the expan.
sion of the domestic flock, and on Jan
uary l, 1898. the number of sheep hal
increased to AZ ,273 ,553. From the sec.
ond election of Cleveland (Noverber,
1892 until the passage of the Dingley
tariff, the flock steadily declined. In
1898 the wool production in the United
States reached n total of 303, 1853 900
pounds; in the last year of the VIII
son free wooD tariff 1t had declined
to 259, 1853, 251 pounds. On January /,
1898, the total value of the flock had
risen to the unprecedented level of
$125,909, 264; on January !, 1896, u
had fallen to the lowest point on rec
ord, $65, l67 1856. On January /, 1900
Uearly three years under the Dinglev
tariff), il was up to Sl22, SOS ,913. On
January l, 1907, the value according
to the bureau of statistics), had risen
TO Ss04 ,210,129. The value of the wool
clip which is 1896 vas estimated at
$S2, 500 900 Ia decline OF owe SAT ,000,'
600 from its value in 1922, was esti-
mated at S60,679,127 in 1902, and had
risen to ~s79,721,3S3 in 1906. In the
free wool period it is estimated that
the losses to wool growers reached
more than SITS, O00, 900. In one year
1892 and 1S93-the total value of sheep
fell from SI25, 900, 900 to 800, 900, 900
The average value of sheep per head
declined from So and 81 to 81, and wool
from % cents Il pound to ten.
In the face of these figures, con
n wool industry under three tariffs.
ii is going to be very difficult for the
advocates of Tree wool to demonstrate
that either the American wool grower
or wooden manufacturer would benefit
by the greater competition of foreign
wool growers if their product were
admitted free of duty. For a time
foreign woods might be cheaper for the
manufacturer, but with he inevitable
decline in the domestic product there
would soon be another story to tell.
1t is true that within the last five
Nnn - thnra hos hAnn M ~nSiinrn hla
gain in the number of sheep and the
wool clip. One cause for this condition
(Which had its origin in the free wool
eXperiment), has been a growing tend
ency to raise sheep that will be avail
able for both wool and mutton, and
this has led to a scarcity of fine woods;
but if continued tariff protection could
be absolutely assured, there is little
doubt that thousands of breeders
would work back to the merino breeds
to meet fully the demand ior
such woods. other reasons for the re,
tarded growth of this industry are
some unfavorable climatic conditions
in two or more years since 1900, anu
that changes in grazing conditions
have occurred in some of the wool
growing states and territories which
have somewhat contracted the limits
in which sheep raising can be profit
ably conducted, at least for large
fiocks. But not the least of the rea'
sons is the continued menace of tariff
revision downward" threatened by the
free traders, which deters many peo
pie from making Investments in the
business. Nevertheless, the industry
has held its own very well during the
past five years, both in numbers OF
sheep and in the size of the wool clip;
and the prospect for the future is not
much clouded.
In the light of the unfortunate ex,
perience with free wool under the Viii
son tariff, who can doubt that with
free wool as a settled fact the wool
industry in this country would become
practically extinct within a dozen or
fifteen years, and that only sheep OF
the mutton breeds would be raised,
and then in more limited numbers:
Then, indeed, would WOO become a
.t'by-product' in this country. 1t may
well be imagined that it would be a
sorry day for both our wool
turers and consumers when we should
fail to produce wool in this country m
-,o,k{t,, onl hapnna