The Logan Republican. [volume] (Logan, Utah) 1902-1924, 1912-04-30

families an honest living, statesmen
have argued pro and con the RICH
and necessity OF its protection.
shall not be my purpose at this tim'
to take up the matter OF a tariff Of
manufactured wool or woolens, at tn,
same time our people realize that un
less the home manufacturer of wool
ems is protected against the foreign
manufacturer they have no market
and no matter how high the duty or
raw wool may be, they receive no ben
eft from 1t. | leave this, however
for men who have made 1t a study
What little ! shall say will be in be
half of the men who raise the sheep
to produce the wool; the men OF
southwestern Pennsylvania, West Vir.
ginia and eastern Ohio, who have, by
| years of toll and study, brought this
industry to its present high standard;
who have succeeded in producing the
finest wool of its kind grown any
where in the entire world, and who
today are willing to meet you in any
reasonable reduction of duty and ad
just themselves to the new rates, pro.
/ vided they can continue in the bust
ness and make reasonable profit
| have talked with many of these men.
and they believe that If the findings
of the tariff board on schedule X are
accepted and enacted into law they
can continue at small profit, but If
you reduce the duty below that line
you have simply made n present Of
that much to the woolgrowers of Aus
tralia, and ut the same time our PEG
pie viii pay the same prices for cloth
ing made of wool grown in foreign
countries. the product of foreign la
Dor and foreign capital, while the do
nestle industry will be gradually de-
stroyed. This is no theory, but a
demonstrated fact.
Prior to the passage of the so-called
Wilson bill the rich lands and fertile
valleys of that section, so well adapt
ed to this industry, were dotted ev-
erywhere with sheep. The sheep
raisers were prosperous, and as re
suit the communities were also pros.
porous. And then came the change.
and in 1896 the flocks had disao-
peared from our hills. The sheep
were sold for 80 cents and one dollar
per head, for mutton only" was an
fact
With the return OF the Republican
party to power and the passage of
the Dingley law these same men. anx.
!ous to again engage in this business.
sent to other parts of the country for
sheep, but it was ten years at least
before the insustry was again firmly
established, and millions of dollars
had been lost to that section of the
country. DO you wonder. then. that
our people look with disfavor on this
attempt to repeat the conditions of
1859?
In 1909, for my own couuty ia
Greene, the census bureau gives the
following data:
Farms on which sheep are
raised ................. l,6l5
tlocces of wool marketed. -. 135,79l
Number of woolbearing sheep l41,37S
GumDer Of pounds OF wool
produced ................ Si2,4?5
Value practically 80 cents
per pound) 1921 ,iiI
This county has population of put
$1,000 people. Assuming that on each
farm there will be an average Of six
persons. and you have almost one.
third of the entire population ell.
gagged partly in the raising of sheep.
The reduction of the duties, as pro.
posed by the Underwood bill, viii
mean a loss, as | figure 1t, of more
than $4,000 annually to the people
of this county alone-will take away
all the profit from the industry ana
in few years destroy II entirely.
Mr.. Chairman, in considering this
bill we are face to face with the ques
ton Of whether the tariff on wool shall
be such as will protect our citizens
who raise sheep on land worth from
$50 to 800 per acre. where they mus,
feed the sheep grain many month.
OF the year,where they employ mer
who receive living wages and who
enjoy the benefits OF our high stan
dard of living; who pay taxes to keel
up the best of schools, build good roads
and make for themselves and fam
lilies community life of culture anC
refinement, or whether that tariff
shall be one fer revenue only, too
small to give any adequate protection
to our own people, who have thei