Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1913-01-27
WOOL SCHEDULE
BEFORE TARIFF BID.
Witness Asks for Reenactment
of Wilson Law of
r 1894.
THIS WOULD REMOVE
ALL DUTIES ON PRODUCT
Exnect Committee to Report
FavorabIy Bill That Passed
Last House.

WASHINGTON. Jan. 27-Demo-
crasic plans for downward revision
of the wool schedule of the tariff, one
of the most complicated features to
come before the extra session of Con-
gress, were under fire today before
the House committee on ways and
means.
General expectation among House
Democrats is that the committee will
renort at the outset of the extra SEES
sion virtually the same wooden scheo-
ule as was incorporated in the wool
bill that passed the House at the hrst
and second sessions of this congress-
was amended in the Senate last sum
mer. compromised in conference ana
vetoed by President Taft.
The average ad valorem duty of the
schedule in the present law is almost
so per. cent. The Democratic bill that
served as the tentative basis OF the
present consideration provides very
much lower duties. 1t would tax raw
wool 20 per cent. ad valorem, instead
of the higher varying rates on three
. ClaSS1ucdllOns III llAO PA N9~iAN
Twentv Per Cent. Duty on Rags.
II would put an ad valorem duty
Of % per cent on wool wastes ana
rags. % per cent. on combed WOOL or
tons. so per cent. on yarns as Wen
ss h'anl5ets and the cheaper fianneis
for underwear. rates ranging from 30
10 20 per cent. on clothes, ready-made
clothing. knit fabrics, fannels not
for underwear, women's dress gooos'
weddings, gorings and articles not
otherwise provided for.
The witnesses today represented the
national associations of wool manu-
factnrers, growers, importers, cloth
jers and independent manufacturers
Frank p. Bennett. of Boston, editor
of the American Wool and Cotton
Reporter. argued for the reenactment
of the Wilson law of 1894 at the out
set of todays hearing.
This was a plea for entire removal
of duties upon wool and a reduction
of the tariff upon wooden goods to 90
ner cent. He said that would be in
the interest of both the manufactur-
ers and of the sheep husbandry In the
United States, and declared that the
wool tariff distorted sheep husbandry
bv encouraging growers to keep IN
profitable animals. The duty of 80
cents a pound now assessed upon
secured wool, had imposed a tax OF
nearly siOO. 900 Upon the American
people, beside hampering manufac-
furers, the witness said.
Joseph d. Holmes of New York,
WOODEN expert, recommending ad va
lorenn and specific duties on clothing,
and ad valorem duty on wool, with
an additional duty on clothing to
compensate for labor and mill cost,
commended that clothing would be no
cheaper if the duty on cloth were re-
moved. He said that a suit or over
coat containing SO worth of cloth
wholesaled at from IS and SO and re-
tailed at So and SIS.
Fben S. stephens, of Worcester,
Mass, wool manufacturer, advo-
Gated putting wool wastes on the free
list.
John 2. Wood, of Philadelphia.
president of the National Association
of Wool Manufacturers, told the
committee he had accepted in good
faith the assurance that the contem-
plated tariff revision would injure no
legitimate business.
Mr. Wood criticised the Democratic
and compromise bills of the previous
session of this Congress as destruc-