The Washington herald., 1913-08-19
The Folly of Consistency.

Free sugar and Tree WOOL are al
but accomplished facts. The Democrat:
to whom the Republicans looked fol
assistance in defeating these change:
in our tariff policy have declared their
regularity and thereby assured tie en-
actment OF these administration meas
ure5 into law. 1t will not be amiss
therefore, to analyze the effect OF these
two features of the tariff bill.
The fierce political storm that has
ragged over schedule X will never be
still until wool is placed permanently
upon the free list. Among the ad-
vanced manufacturing nations the
United States is the only nation that
continues to tax this raw material, and
it goes without saying that free wool
will be a boon TO wool manufacturers.
1t will lower this industry from its
present artificial level and place ii
upon basis such as exists in England,
France, and Germany. But, strange as
it may sound, free wool also will be
an ultimate benefit to the wool-grow-
ing industry OF the United States.
Wool is essentially a by-produc.
Only under exceptional conditions,
such as exist in Argentina and Aus
tralia. can sheep be raised for their
wool alone and the receipts from NUT
ton disregarded. There may have
been a time in this country when con-
ditions would have allowed profitable
sheep husbandry for wool alone, but
it is certain that that time is past. 1t
is the part OF our wool-growing in
du>try that refuses to recognize this
fact that needs and pleads for pro-
lection.
Where the fockmasters and farmers
have adopted the mutton type Of sheep
and thereby supplemented their re-
ceipts from wool with receipts from
mutton, they need no tariff. They can
prosper without tariff in the same
way that the owners OF the 100000
sheep and lambs in free-trade United
Kingdom prosper now.
1t is wrong. however, TO say that
free wool will not cause loss. There
are millions OF sheep. chiefly the
Merino, in this country unadapted to
free trade conditions. In Ohio there
are many farmers who cling to their
Merino flocks like people to a bad
tradition. in spite of the fact that even
with tariff of eleven cents a grease
pound, they cannot make money. In
the far West also there are flocks that
lose money every year for their
owners and no tariff, however high,
could make them profitable.
The more quickly these economic
abnormalities are severed from our
body polite the healthier we will be.
That a few men will have TO change
their methods of culture and perhaps
lose some money in the transition is
not to be considered, since in the end
wool-growing would be more firmly
established as an industry and in the
end those in it would profit more than
they ever can under the blighting in
fiuence of a tariff. Free wool, then,
although questionable political move,
is the honest, statesmanlike thing TO
DO.
The sugar industry presents a fun
damentally different question. While
free wool will establish, rather than
destroy, wool-growing in the United
States, free sugar is the initial step
in the destruction of the cane and beet
sugar industries III the United States
and TO the weakening of the sugar in
dustry in Hawaii and Porto Rico
There is no readjustment that the do
mestIc sugar industry can make that
will assure its existence against trop-
ical competition. Sugar can be pro-
duced at least one cent a pound
cheaper in Cuba than in the United
States. At present Cuba does not pro-
duce enough to capture the entire
American market; but free sugar will
stimulate Cuba's production, and as
fast as it increases the domestic in
dustry will decline. 1t is in agricul-
tural cost that the American is at a
disadvantage. He cannot compete
against the natural productiveness of
the tropics.
If it be the intention of the Demo-
Gratis to eliminate ultimately the sugar
industry from our agricultural econ
only. they have taken the first step
in that direction. 1t is feared, how
ever, that consistency in this case has
ceased to be a virtue. Consistency has
not been the rule in every case. Before
election the Democrats advocated a 20
per cent duty on wool, which. after
election, was entirely removed. Be-
fore election they advocated free sugar