The daily banner. (Cambridge, Md.) 1897-2008, 1913-01-28
FREE WOOL URGED
ATTARIFF HEARING
Committee Hears Pleas Of
Business Men
VETOED GILL AS A BASE
Boston Witness Wants Return to the
Wilson Law. With All Duties of
Raw Product.

Raw Proouct.
Washington, Jan. %. - Democratic
plans for downward revision of the
wool tariff, one of the most compltcat-
ed features to come before the ap-
preaching session of congress-. were
under fire before the committee on
ways and means.
General expectation among house
Democrats is that the committee will
report practically the same schedule as
was passed in the house at the first
and second sessions of this congress.
was amended in the senate last sum.
mer, compromised in conference and
vetoed by President Taft.
The average ad valorem wool duty
In the present law Is almost go per
cent. The vetoed bill, which serves as
the tentative basis Of action. would
tax raw wool 20 per cent ad valorem.
instead of the higher varying rates on
three classifications in the present
law. It would put an ad valorem duty
of 20 per cent also on wool wastes
and rags, Is per cent on combed wool
or tops, 80 per cent on yarns as well
as blankets and the cheaper hannels
for underwear. rates ranging from 80
to so per cent on cloths. ready-made
clothing. knit fabrics, fanne!s not for
underwear, women's dress goods. web
bings. gorings and articles not other.
wise provided for.
AS compromised In conference be-
tween the two houses last August the
duty on raw wool was shifted to 20
per cent, which President Taft de-
clared was insufficient.
Frank P Bennett, of Boston, argued
for the re-enactment of the Wilson law
of 1894 This was a plea for entire
removal of duties upon wool and q re-
duction of the tariff upon wooden goods
to so per cent. He said that would be
in the interest of both manufacturer
and sheep husbandry, and declared the
wool tariff distorted sheep husbandry
by encouraging growers to keep un-
profitable animals.
The duty of 33 cents pound, now
assessed upon secured wool, had i'm
posed tax of nearly 100000, 900 upon
the American people, besides hamper
ing manufacturers, the witness said.
Joseph ID. Holmes, of New York.
wool expert, recommended ad valorem
and specific duties on clothing. and an
ad valorem duty On wool, with an ad-
ditional duty on clothing to compen-
safe for labor and mill cost, contended
that clothing would be no cheaper If
the duty on cloth were removed. He
said that suit or overcoat containing
So worth of cloth was sold at whole
sale for So to SO and at retail for $12
to $18.
Eben 8. Stephens, OF Worcester,
Mass. a wool manufacturer, advocated
free listing wool wastes.
John p. Wood, of Philadelphia. pres
ideqt Of the National Association OF
Huh ), ted TIA ea5anaits
tee.h he had accepted in good faith the
assurance that the contemplated revis-
ion would injure no legitimate bust.
ness. He said that while rates on some
articles exceed protection require
ments, the tariff board had showed
that the manufacturers realized no ad-
vantage of it, as domestic competition
regulated prices within narrow limits
of profit. The association stood gener-
ally for the present tariff.
Wood criticised the Democratic and
compromise bills of the previous ses-
sion of this congress as destructive.
Who'd refused to make anv sDecif1c
recommendation as to raw wool, al
though proposing the maintenance of
the present tariff protection on wooden
goods. He pictured "big problems"
confronting the Democrats in attempt
ing to carry out tariff reduction plan
and questioned the ability Of the COM
mittee so to classify the different COM
modities as to apply a rate that would
exactly fit each kind of wool.