Democratic Sentinel, Volume 15, Number 17, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 8 May 1891 — PROVING THE PUDDING. [ARTICLE]

PROVING THE PUDDING.

CLOTH EXAMINED UNDER THE MICROSCOPE. A Tariff lesson—Cloth Made by High Tariff Manufacturers and by Free Wool Advocates High Tariff Makers of Shoddy Goods. The New York Dry Goods Economist, a protectionist trade paper which wants free wool, has hit upon a novel method of carrying on its agitation against the wool tax. There is in Philadelphia an organization called the Manufacturers’ Club, which is devoted to the high McKinley tariff with its high duties on wool. In New England is another organization called the Wool Consumers’ Association, a body of wool manufacturers who want the wool duty removed. The Economist ha 3 undertaken to analyze the cloth manufactured by prominent members of these two organizations to see if it can discover any reasons why they should differ so radically on the subject of the wool tax. The result of this examination is very interesting from a tariff standpoint. It shows that the men who want a high tax on wool use a large quantity of shoddy and cotton in making what they call woolen cloth, and that the free wool men make good, honest woolen cloth with only a slight mixture of shoddy. The first examination made was on the goods manufactured by Thomas Dolan, the President of the Manufacturers’ Club. The Economist said that one fabric of this manufacturer, which was sold at $1.50 to $1.75 per yard, was found to be “composed of a worsted warp made from delaine wool, which entirely composes the face of the.cloth and constitutes 28 per cent of its weight. The filling makes the balance of 72 per cent., and is entirely cotton and shoddy, in the proportion of 92% per cent of cotton and 7% per cent, of shoddy. “We have also before us,” the Econo a mist goes on to say, “a finer fabric of the same order in a fancy trousering selling at $2.42%, to all appearances a solid worsted fabric, both face and back. An examination, however, proves these appearances are deceptive. The fabric is Of a class known as a filling cord stripe, having a slight mixture of silk twist between the cords. The worsted is of three-eighths and delaine stock, yet every alternate pick of filling is cotton, as is also the warp between the filling cord and the back warp. Thus we have a cloth which every one but an expert Would call an all-wool worsted cloth, yet contains 21 per cent of cotton and 79 per cent, of worsted. Tlio production of this mill is much superior to most of the cotton-filled worsteds that are c-n the market. ” Over against this is the report on the goods manufactured by Jesse Metcalf, one of the most prominent manufacturers of the Wool-Consumers’ Association. Two fabrics of this manufacturer were examined. The Economist says: “The low-priced fabric, at $2.25 less 5 per cent., contains 73 percent of delaine worsted, while 27 per cent, of carded wool yarn containing a small percentage of shoddy is used for barking. “The high-priced fabric sells at $2.75 less 5 per cent., and is a similarly built cloth to the lower one, but made of a somewhat finer grade of wool. The delaine wool is mixed with Australian, and of a worsted made from this blend the fabric contains 78 per cent, of its total weight. The backing composes the balance of the 22 per cent, and is made of a somewhat finer stock than the $2.25 grade.* Another examinatiou was made of the goods of the Camden woolen mills and the Weybosset mills. The treasurer of the former, mill is John T. Bottomly, who was appointed by the Manufacturers’ Club to assist in arranging the wool schedule of the McKinley law. Mr. Bottomly was so successful in getting high duties put on wool that he was banqueted by Kis club. After examining the goods of High Tariff Bottomly the Economist says: “An analysis of these goods brings us to the conclusion that wool is oniy used in a limited quantity. It is a safe assertion to make that the production of heavy-weight woolen goods of this mill contain at least 70 per cent, of cotton and shoddy." Another specimen of fancy cassimere twill was found to contain 71 per cent, of cotton. William B. Weedom, of the Weybosset Mills, is prominent in the Wool Consumers’ Association. The goods of this manufacturer are reported to be “as well and honestly made as goods can be. * “We have not come across a fabric in which a particle of cotton is to be found." “Such an analysis,” says the Economist, “is one of which any mill may be justly proud, and is an analysis that should entitle the mill making such goods to a voice and a very loud voice in the framing of any legislation pertaining to woolens. ” This Is a striking tariff lesson. The manufacturers who clamor for a wool duty are clothing the people with cotton and shoddy; those*who want free wool are making solid woolen cloth. Choose ye whom ye will serve.

To Quit Growing Hay. *

In his attempt to bamboozle the farmers last year McKinley doubled the duty on hay. The old duty was $2 a ton, and McKinley changed it to $4. The benefit thus far derived from this item in McKinley’s farmer’s tariff

amounts to absolutely nothing. Indeed} the farmers of Genesse County, New 'York, are reported as plowing np many of their meadows and planting them, the reason given being the unusually low price of hay. And this in the first year j of McKinley’s protection to farmers! But how can any duty, however high, ! affect the price of hay, either to raise It |or lower it. We produce annually about | 45,000,000 tons, and last year we imported just 124,000 tons. In other words, we raise 362 tons to 1 ton imported. Shut out that one ton, and does any sane farmer believe that the 362 tons will vary appreciably? Moreover, we are exporting a larger and larger quantity of hay every year. Last year our exports rose to 36,000 tons. Whero we are able to export a commodity, competing successfully in .foreign markets, a duty canthavo no effect whatever in raising prices. Do the McKinleyites suppose that our farmers are so benighted as not to understand so selfevident a truth? Clearly, the farmers of Genesee County, N. Y., who are plowing up their meadows, rate McKinley’s hay duty at its true value. They consider it among the things which are stale, flat, and unprofitable. Query—ls this is true of the hay duty, is it not still moro true of the duties on all our great agricultural products, like com and wheat, which are exported in such vast quantities?