The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1909-12-24
GEORGE H. VOIGT
If Elected to Congress will Vote
FOB FREE HIDES
CONGRESSMAN w. E. Cox Voted
For a Tariff on Hides.
Read What William J. Bryan and
w. l. Douglas Say.

be reasonable. There -, however
no certainty Of fair and reason
able prices for leather unless boil
hides and leather are put on thu
free list. The beef packers
monopoly has already gone so fan
that il is only a question of d
very short time when free hides
without free leather, would be OF
little or no avail TO shoe manu-
faeturers and other users of leath
er.
BY ownership and control
through community Of interest
and by tanning contracts, the beef
packers trust has already become
so dominant in the sole leather
tanning business that it is difficult
TO locate independent tanneries.
More than thirty tanneries are
now said TO be under Armour,
Swift, Morris control. To a less
extent, the beef packers trust is
also connected with the tanning
Of upper leather.
Under these conditions We see
that the fight for free hides is a
fight for existence on the part of
the independent taners. | predict
that, il the duties on hides and
leather are continued ten years
longer, not onl.y will the monopoly
Of the tanning industry by the
beef trust be complete but the
boot and shoe industry will then
be a part Of the tariff-fostered and
tariff-nourished beef trust. hide
pendent shoe manufacturers can
not pay 20 per cent more sor
leather than will its trust com
petitors and live. The handicap is
too great. Then there will be
monopoly in production Of shoes
and, as soon as the independents
are killed, the % per cent duty on
shoes will become effective and the
prices of shoes in this country
will be advanced TO 90 or % per
cent above foreign prices and,
probably, above export prices.
Why Congress hesitates to give
us free hides | can not under
stand, unless our Senator's and
Representatives have ceased to
think of the welfare OF our ST.
100000 Of consumers and are con.
cerned only about the few pro.
ducers who constitute our great
trusts. The facts and arguments
are all against taxed hides. There
is no sound reason. under any
theory Of protection, for continu.
ing the buriensome and monopoly
producing duty on hides. Not only
does the duty not protect the cat.
tie raiser, but, il it did, there are
so few OF them. comparatively.
that they should not be permitted
to dictate the prices Of hides,
leather and shoes TO all of our
citizens.
The cattle raisers get nothing,
or next TO nothing, from the duties
on hides and leather. They are,
however, by these duties, com
PEELED TO pay materially higher
prices for shoes, harness, saddles
and other leather goods.
In view Of all the facts, there is
no sound reason for retaining the
duty on hides in order to protect
cattle raisers or farmers. Therel
is sound reason in favor of free
hides in order to provide as cheap
raw materials as possible to the
tanning and shoe manufacturing
industries, both OF which are Of
great Importance TO all OF our
people. II the duty on hides is re
tanned, il will be retained at the
behest of the beef trust and for the
purpose OF enabling it to hold and
extend its already great and harm.
ful monopoly. Congress will not
DO its duty to our $1,000, 900 OF
shoe wearing people unless il re.
peals the duty on hides. In NV
opinion, II should also put leather
on the free list.
l am not afraid of free shoes IL q
can have free hides and freeI,
leather. ! would gladly swap any
doubtful benefit from the duty on
shoes for certain benefits OF free
hides and leather.
w. L. DOUGLAS.