Manchester Democrat. [volume] (Manchester, Iowa) 1875-1930, 1909-06-16
FREQ Hide. and Leather.

sets declares that the boot and snoe
manufacturers Of this country are
facing crisis even greater than many
Of them realize. Under present condi-
lions. that Is. with present duties on
hides and leather, 1t does not take a
prophet to foretell in general way
what will happen. The logic of tariff
events has already proceeded far
enough to indicate clearly the goal
toward which we are rapidly travelling.
This Is no less than gigantic trust
controlling the beef packing, leather
tanning and shoe manufacturing In
dustries of this country. This trust
will, of course. be built around the
present beef trust. Such trust Is
Inevitable, providing the present duty
of Is per cent remains on hides. The
advantage given by this duty to the
beef trust, as the original owner OF
hides, is so great that competition
with 1t will be hopeless. as soon as 1t
can establish itself in the leather tan
ming and shoe manufacturing indus
tries.
Under the monopolistic influence OF
the tariff on hides. the packers trust
has already made great Roadway. 1t
now controls directly about So per cent
of the hides of this country. Indirectly
1t is reasonably certain that 1t con-
trolls large part of the As per cent
of hides which 1t does not take off OF
cattle. To make Its monopoly Of the
raw material of leather still more COM
plete, 1t has recently gone into the
hide buying business. Thus the inde-
pendent tanner is left with only
very restricted supply of raw material.
II he could buy foreign hides without
the payment of the Is per cent duty,
he would have some chance to compete
with the packer tanners and the price
of leather would be more likely to be
reasonable. There is, however. no
certainty of fair and reasonable prices
for leather unless both hides and
leather are put on the free list. The
packers monopoly has already gone
so far that 1t is only question OF
very short time when free hides. with
out free leather, would be of little
or no avail to shoe manufacturers and
other users of leather.
Under the conditions. the fight for
free hides is fight for existence on
the part of the Independent tanners.
predict that, II the duties on hides
and leather are continued ten years
longer, not only will the monopoly of
the tanning industry by the beef trust
be complete. but the boot and shoe in
dustry will then be part of the tar
iff-fostered and tariff-nourished beef
trust. Independent shoe manufaStur-
ers cannot pay 20 per cent more for
leather than will its trust competitors
and live. The handicap Is too great.
Then there will be monopoly in the
production of shoes and. as soon as
the independents are killed, the rs
per cent duty on shoes will become eff
fective and the prices of shoes in
this country will be advanced to 20
or % per cent above foreign prices
and, probably, above export prices. If
the American people want to continue
to wear the best and cheapest shoes
on earth, they must see that their
senators and representatives vote for
free hides and free leather. There is
no other road to cheap footwear
About oil that we can hope to get
from the present congress is free hides
and reduced duties on leather. Why
congress hesitates to give us free hides
| y ak nd
tors and representatives have ceased
to think of the welfare of our $1,000
900 of consumers and are concerned
only about few producers who con-
stitute our great trusts. The facts
and arguments are all against taxed
hides. There is no sound reason. un-
der any theory of protection. for con
tinuing the burdensome and monopoly
producing duty on hides.
| 1t Is mistake to assume that the
cattle raisers benefit appreciably by
the duty on hides. Both the facts and
the logic of conditions are against
such an assumption. comparison
Of the prices of cattle, hides and
leather for the last twelve years indi-
Gates that there Is practically no re-
lation or connection between the prices
of cattle and hides and not a close
connection between the prices of hides
and leather.
The prices of hides are often high.
when the prices of cattle are low, and
often low when the prices of cattle
are high. In 1905 and 1906 hides were
selling above 10 cents when cattle were
below cents. while In 1902 hides
were selling at 10 cents when cattle
were selling at S1a cents. In 1906
hides were selling at 1917 cents when
cattle were selling at 6.S5 cents. while
in 1908 hides were selling at 91a cents
when cattle were selling at 71a cents.
From April. 1908. to April. 1909. the
price of cattle declined 2 per cent.
while the price Of hides advanced AZ
per cent. From February, 1906, to
April. 1909, the price of cattle ad-
vansed 26 per cent. while the price OF
hides. declined per cent Figures
dfsprove the claim of the beef packers
4 that the cattle raisers are protected
by the duty on hides. -
The cattle raisers get nothing, or
next to nothing, from the duties on
hides and leather. They are, however
by these duties, compelled to pay ma
terially higher prices for shoes, har
ness. saddles and other leather goods
In view of these facts there is nc
sound reason for retaining the duty
on hides in order to protect cattle
raisers or farmers. If the duty or
hides is retained. 1t will be retained
at the behest of the Beef trust and for
the purpose of enabling 1t to hold and
extend its already great and harmful
monopoly.
A Point Well Taken.
The argument by Senator Shively
of Indiana, against the legality of the
maximum and minimum clause In the
1 M n