The silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1909-1925, 1910-06-21
FIX RESPONSIBILITY FOR
ARTIFICIAL DECLINE IN WOOL
Justice Bdtemdn & Co.. Pioneer Wool Merchants, AddrrSS
Open Letter to Wool Growers Of America

world over is decreasing (See senate
document No. 440).
| We know from our experience dur
ing the free wool period that the Unit
ed States, like Germany with free wool,
would soon see her sheep disappear, in
strong contrast with the period since
the passage of the Dingley tariff act,
when the number of sheep in the Unit
ed States has increased more than half,
while those of Germany with free wool
have decreased more than half
| Wool growers may well ask "who is
TO blame for the loss of $40, 100000 to
the wool industry in six months9 and
who is to blame for the drop in the
lprice of wool to the free wool level,
while the Payne-Aldrich act is still
in forceY''
Congressman known as "Progres-
I lsives' or tInsurgents who have
fought the policies of Aldrich and Can
non are wholly to blame. These de-
lstructtives, by their action, are favor
ling special interests that are sordid
Interests, and not American.
| The harm already resulting from the
agitation has thrown business into
confusion and disorder. The congress
men who are responsible for all this
damage to the farmers who grow wool,
were not elected from agricultural see
tions. They were pledged to protect
the farmers interests The wool
growers will demand an accounting;
they will ask these congressman why
they have been faithless to their trust,
land why they are not advocating the
I .,NIo Il IL e.,
! to wool, ON which they were elected,
and why, on the contrary, they are
i forcing into practice the principles of
William J. Bryan that have thrice
been repudiated by the American peo-
ple at presidential elections.
The farmers who grow wool will not
forget that these senators and repre-
sentatives, while marching under the
banner of protection, have suddenly
tnrned and fred into their own COM
rades, doing more damage than open
enemies.
Senator Beveridge, of Indiana, La
Follete, of Wisconsin, Cummins and
lDolliver, of Iowa, and Bristow, of Kan
sas, and many representatives from
these and other states, not manufactur-
ing but agricultural states, are pro-
testing that they are protectionists." "
Will the wool growers of the United
States accept their protestations of in
nocence as sufficient evidence for ac-
quittal of the crime of having prostrat-
ed this great wool industry, or will
they measure them by their acts, which
have caused all this harm, costing the
farmers who grow wool $20,000,000 on
the 1910 clips
Some stand-pat congressman who
were valiant in their defense of the
wool industry, are having difficulty to
obtain denomination, although these
men stood out against any cut in the
protection on wool.
Are the wool growers loyal to their
friends, and are they giving them
Iearnest support9 Do the wool grow
lers realize that failure to give them
support will end in sending representa-
ltives to congress who are enemies of
THE wool schedule, and who are not
likely to stand up for the wool industry
when they see their predecessors left
at home, because of loyalty to rhe wool
growers.
When wool was put on the free list,
the trade had ample warning, and had
time to prepare for the destruction in
values, for as soon as it was known
that Cleveland was elected, with a
congress in sympathy with his ideas
lof free wool, the industry began to
get ready for the cyclone that follow
ed, but now, without warning, like a
clap of thunder out of clear sky, this
attack upon the Payne Aldrich act. be
ing led by Republicans elected as Pro
ltectionists, has caused Generalization
Nobody now knows what to expect
! and as a consequence, an unreasonine
, fright has taken hold of the communi
, lty, who will buy no goods, and mills
close, and the price of wool falls to
the free trade level. The price lifting
influence of the tariff under this dis
! turbed condition, has entirely vanished
and imported Australian wool is bond
is now being re-exported because il
will bring more money in London than
in the United States.
We ask again, who has caused the
! wool grower who got $S8,000,000 fol
! his 1909 clip to take $67 100000 fol
! the 1910 clipa And we again ask, what
is the remedy9 President Taft has al
ready said publicly that his admins
Itration was not elected to destroy any
industry, therefore it is up to him tt
make good, and the remedy is in his
hands. He has only to say that he vii
veto any legislation that reduces tn,
duty upon wool, and so soon as he has
said this, values will cease to shrink
9 and the protective benefits of the
5 Payne-Aldrich act, which is President
( McKinley's Dingley act revised and
| improved, will Immediately be again
{ operative, and the tariff schedule, the
: protective benefits of which increased
/ the number of sheep from 31,00000t
$ in 1897 to 57,000,000 in 1910 will bt
acknowledged in the future, as in th'
/ past, as carrying the least amount Of
I protection that will conserve the woo
, growing industry of the United States
I For further particulars see senate docu