Evening star., 1911-05-31

the g1ise Of . tariff for revenue only II
voting for the Underwood revision oS sthe
wool schedule, nor would he dfscusH thu
reply to Mr. Bryan made last night \by
the majority leader. The Speakers close
friends recognise that his present posidoA3
is difficult. and have advised him against
becoming embroiled In the party feud-
Chairman Underwood. smarting unde!
the Bryan attack. Is exerting every enort
now to insure two-thirds vote OF the
democratic members Tor the commItee ts,1
bill at tomorrow's caucus The new bill
closely resembles the Wilson bill. except
as to raw wool. the duty on which IL cut
from the present rate of IL cents pound
TO about cents a pound.
Test Of Strength.
Mr. Underwood's committee room pre-
sented a busy roundup scene, democratic
members Of the various state delegations
being summoned in to test the poll OF
strength in support of the schedules. AS
a result of the inquiry Mr.. Underwood re-
NAMED firm in his conviction that the
bill would be ratified by a big majority
and that Mr.. Bryan's attitude would be
demonstrated as at variance with tne
views of the democratic House.
Speaker CLARK attitude on the wool
question from the beginning has been
a conservative one. He has apparently
stood firmly with Mr. Underwood and
other members of the ways and means
committee who insisted upon the neceS-
sity of small duty for revenue pur-
poses on raw wool
Harrison Defends Bryan.
Representative Francis Burton Har-
rison this afternoon gave out an inter-
view on the wool question, in connec-
tion with Mr. Bryan's statement OF yes
terday.
He said:
Mr.. Bryan is not trying to dictate to
the ways and means committee nor to
the Democratic caucus on the wool ques-
ton. He is merely fighting for one OF
the best established of democratic prin-
ciples. The only way for US to redeem
our campaign pledges and give the people
cheaper and better clothing is to make
raw wool free. This has been a prin-
ciple of our party for the last fifty years
and raw wool has been free in. all demo-
cratic tariff bills during that time. In
cluding the tariff of 1857. the Morrison
bill in 1886, the Mills bill in 1SSS the
Springer bill in 1892 and the Wilson bill
In 1891. Why, then, should we abandon
this fixed democratic principle? 1t is an
swered because of the necessity Of rails
ing revenue.
ut is true that the democrats are
committed to a revision of the tariff
schedule by schedule. They are not
committed to the necessity of raising
as much revenue on every schedule as
the republicans do. They are not COM
mitted to the necessity of taxing the
people on their wooden clothing as
much as does the Payne tariff law.
approximately s15.000,0O0 would be
sacrificed by putting raw wool on the
free list.
Why Not Other Raw Materialsp
If ii is necessary that raw materials
and raw rubber. which now are free?
Last year SCI. 200. 900 worth of raw silk
was imported without a cent Of tax
Ten per cent ad valorem duty would
Bring in 5000. .Ooo:last year one hundred
and six million dollars worth of raw
rubber came in without a cent Of tax:
IL per cent ad valorem tax would pro-
luce S1a.000.00o revenue. In those two
TENS the loss of revenue from putting
-aw wool on the free list Is made up.
and it is surely better to tax materials
.or making silk dresses and automobile
tires than it is to tax the materials for
woolen clothing Of the poor.
Reduced to Competing Basis.
But free raw wool Is fundamental
part of a woolen schedule written for
revenue only because. IL the rates on
manufactured wooden goods are to be re-
auced to truly competing basis. our
manufacturers should be given their raw
wool free in order to compete with the
manufacturers Of Germany. France, Eng
land. Austria and Italy, all Of whom
have free raw wool. If they are made
to compete with the foreign manufac-
turers, the increase in revenues from the
manufactured woolen goods will go far to
offset the loss Of revenue from raw wool.
"A revision Of the cotton schedule is
20 follow our revision of the woolen, sched-
ule. A reduction in the duties on cotton
manufactures will bring in an increase of
revenue of possibly $4,000 .OO0 Why.
then. from a revenue standpoint, lis 1t
necessary to levy cent of tax on raw
wool?'