Rensselaer Republican, Volume 27, Number 10, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 1 November 1894 — CALLED OFF. [ARTICLE]

CALLED OFF.

Frantic Democrats Appeal, to Congressman Wilson. They Want Him to Stop His Fool Speeches at Swell English Dinners. V A Washington special, Sept. 29, says: The dreadful faux pas of Chairman Wilson in accepting the invitation to the dinner of the London Chamber of Commerce worries the Democratic Congressional committee -tnoru-than- its officers are willing to confess. The shrewd politicians at the head of the com mitten fm3 it difficult to comprehend how a man of any political experience in Mr. Wilson’s position could have been induced to go to such a place, and, having once been drawn into the compromising situation, they do not comprehend how he could have made such an utterly imbecile speech, filled as it was with abuse of the institutions of his own country, throwing himself open to the jibes and jeers of his British hosts when he endeavored to persuade them that the success of the free-trade propaganda in the United States would not ultimately work for the advantage of British producers. The Republican committee is filled with delight. Nothing has yet been done with regard to circulating the speech, although the press dispatches are sufficient in themselves to form the basis of a formidable campaign document, but before the close of the campaign millions of copies of the speech will be sent through the country, together with graphic accounts of the dinner at which it was spoken. Chairman Babcock has sent over to London for copies of all the British papers containing reports of the dinner, and as soon as these arrive the committee will set about the preparation of a campaign document, which it is believed will have tremendous effect in showing 1 the true animus of the British interest in the free-trade movement in this country, and in exhibiting to the American people how completely the chairman <sf the Ways and Means committee |yas been made the dupe of the shretfd English businessmen, whose divine favor he has attempted to curry.

A delegation from Mr. Wilson’s district happens to be in Washington. Among them are Alexander Cohen, the chairman of the Republican committee of Berkeley county, and other prominent Republicans. They have had a long talk with Chairman Babcock, and the report they gave him of the situation in the Charleston district was in the highest degree encouraging. They believe that Wilson will be defeated. Mr. Cohen said this afternoon that not only was he confident of Wilson’s defeat, but he should not be surprised if a great many votes were cast against-him by-members of his own party. When asked whether he had seen the London speech Mr. Cohen replied: “Yes, I saw it in the papers this morning, and we shall make the most of it; but, he added, “we will trot have to do much about it. The speech talks for itself.” The Democratic leaders have sent word to Wilson begging him to make no more speeches while abroad. One dispatch to this effect was signed by Senator Faulkner, it is -said. The West Virginia chairman of the Congressional committee believes that Wilson will have to make a great many speeches on this side before he can counteract the effect of the London demonstration.

AN ADDRESS By Judge Win. Lawrence, President Ohio Wool Growers, at Semi-An-nual Convention Held in Columbus, Sept. 5, 1804. Gentlemen of the Ohio Wool Growers’ Association: The wool growers of the United States are now threatened with new and alarming conditions which threaten the substantial destruction of American sheep husbandry and vast injury to all agricultura'- and other pursuits. - , WOOL PROTECTION FOR SEVENTY-EIGHT YEARS. Prior to 1816 the conditions were such that sheep husbandry did not require the aid of a protective tariff. The act of Congress in 1816 laid a protective duty on wool, and for

more than seventy-eight years in continuous succession duties on the importation of foreign wool, more or less protective, were continued until the GorroanAariff act took effect on the 28th of August and placed wool on the free list. This ruinous blow at the wool industry was struck without any petition from any American citizen asking for it. THE SILENT CONSPIRATORS. It is a remarkable fact, too, that in the Senate, supposed to be conservative, no member ventured to give any reasbn for this monstrous scheme to annihilate capital invested i in sheep husbandry on the faith of , the continuance of a policy which jdiadAurvived. all political changes-for I more than tiiree-quarters of a century. And this outrage upon the agricultural classes could have been averted by two so-called Populist members of the Senate, who voted for it, although representing woolgrowing (States. In all our political history, certainly up to President Cleveland’s free-wool message of December 6, 1887, the Democratic party, the old Whig party and the Republican party all adhered to the policy of protection for wool. TARIFF OF 1890— WHY SUFFICIENT^.Congress passed the McKinley protective tariff act of October 1, 1890. It gave generally and wisely ample protection for all American industries and especially for all agricultural interests except wool and mutton. The bill first reported proposed for the wool industry a degree of protection much better than that of the protective tariff act of 1883. The author of the bill —our own illustrious McKinley —intended that it should give what the Republican national platform of 1888 promised, “full and adequate protection for the wool industry.” But a small yet active minority of the wool manufacturers of the New England States and of the Eastern cities, aided by a portion of the press under the false pretense of friendship for the general policy of protection, succeeded in effecting such reduction in wool duties and changes in the wool schedule of the bill as to strip it of the “adequate protection” needed by the wool industry and demanded "By' the wool growers. The law, while nominally giving a duty of 11 cents per pound on merino unwashed wool, is iD practical effect only equal to 6 cents on Ohio washed merino, as against foreign competing Australian wool. This is admitted by the eminent wool importers and free wool advocates, Mauger & Avery, of New York. This is by no means “adequate protection.” On thirdclass coarse wool the more effective specific duties of the bill, as proposed by Mr. McKinley, were cut out by the power and influence of an active small minority of the manufacturers, and the duty adopted of 32 per cent, ad valorem was utterly insufficient. Then came ~(l) th&.-vast increase ofsheep in Australia, and (2) the purpose of the foreign wool growers to ruin the American wool industry, and the result was that the raw wool imports entered for consumption increased from 109,902,105 pounds in the fiscal year 1890 to 175,636,041 pounds in 1893. The raw wool imports entered for consumption in 1893 were as follows:

<l> O ” • 3 -j O g A'h » '5 © n, S p, »a 5 » o 1 § i£ § S| 5 O 3-* Cl O 58 O fc o n > First... 35.403.011 *6,555,1140 *3,911.349 18.51 c Second. 7 036,439 1,535.812 846.284 21:82c Third.. 133,197,581 10,312,237 3,389,646 7.75 c Totals . 175.636.011 *18,403,689 *8.147,219 *16.02 ♦Average The result was that the price of domestic wool declined below’ that prevailing before the tariff of 1890. not because of the tariff, but in spite of it. But it is equally true that the price of Ohio merino was 6 cents per pound more than it would have been with free wool. Much of the third-class wool, which came in at an average price of 7.7 c per pound, was made into clothing, thus supplanting our American wool to the extent of the imports and reducing the price on all that we had for sale. WOOL GROWERS AND OTHER FARMERS INDIGNANT—THE RESULT IN ELECTIONS. A million of wool growers and other farmers were justly indignant at the course pursued by the little

but powerful lobby of manufacturers and their allies, including the amiable and able Frank P. Bennett, one of the most effective of the lobby against wool growers, wielding his personal influence with members of Congress and the power of his Boston American Wool and Cotton Reporter. The manufacturers, as the report of their national association in 1891 shows, secured ample protection for themselves, but an equal measure of protection for wool was defeated by the agencies stated. Then came the election/ $f 1892, and unfortunately too many of the aggrieved wool growers and other farmers either supported or by their non-action indirectly aided the election of Cleveland, and his Congress united in only one common object—free wool. This ruinous result was not because of wool protection or of protection according to any industry, but because of the inadequate protection given to wool growers and possibly some other industries. These remarks are made necessary by the continued attacks by the Boston Wool Reporter and other like organs of the pianufacturers against the policy of adequate wool protection. (See Reporter of August 30). — And now we have free wool-made possible by the “party perfidy and dishonor” of the little but powerful faction of wool manufacturers and their allies. These manufacturers can now re - pent.at their leisure, and such of the wool growers and other farmers as contributed to the election of a free wool Congress now see and feel the ruinous effects of their folly.

WHAT THE WOOL GROWERS DEMAND. Henceforth woolgrowers will demand such sufficient and gradually annually increasing duties on wool and sheep as will speedily increase our flocks until they shall reach 110,000,000 or more sheep, sufficient, if now in existence, to supply all needed wool and mutton required for consumption in the United States. And when the supply shall thus be made sufficient, the duties should be such as to exclude all foreign wools and all foreign woolen goods. To this end we invoke the cordial, fraternal, united action alike of woolgrowers, wool manufacturers and all the American people. I commend to the free wool manufacturers a question similar, to that of President Cleveland in his Wilson letter: “How can you face the people after indulging in the outrageous discrimination and violation of principle of securing ample protection for wool manufacturers!) but inadequate protection for wool growers?”

WHY FREE WOOL? And now why is free wool thrust upon us? The dignified Senators whose fiat made the Gorman law failed to tell us why. Their silence is a confession that-free wool cannot be justified, or that its objects are such that if made known they will meet with detestation. We may properly judge of the purpose by the probable effects. There are several purposes: First —It is a conspiracy, not only to give cheaper wool, but to still further reduce the already ruinous low prices of cereals and other farm products of the Northern and Western agricultural States. Second— Free wool is a deep-laid scheme with the ultimate purpose of destroying all protective duties, and of securing absolute free trade. The Gorman tariff bill of August 28 reduces nearly all protective duties of the McKinley law and starts the free trade ball in motion with free wool. Mr. Wilson, who imported the tariff bill in the House, which, as modified in the Senate, became a law, declared in the House, August 14, “there will be no let up in the fight” for a tariff for revenue only. On the 16th of August, Mr. Mills referring to the Gorman monstrosity, said: “We do not at all accept this as a final settlement of the question of tariff .reform. We intend to . sweep the streets of the enemy, and take everything from them. . . . The bill does not reflect the sentiment of 1,000 people of the United States.” The ultra free-traders hope that when wool is made free the woolgrowers will be humbugged with the idea that they have no further interest in protection, and that they will thus be alienated from the protective policy and join the free-trade, crusade against wool manufacturing and all other American industries.

Third —A third purpose of the Gorman law is by adequate protection for wool manufacturers, and with free wool to permanently secure the wool manufacturing industry to the Atlantic coast and New England States. It is a monstrous sectional conspiracy against the infant, but growing manufacturing industry of the Western and interior States. FALSE PRETENSES. Fourth President Cleveland’s Secretary of the Treasury, in his annual report of December, 1886, urged free wool to give our citizens the “boon of untaxed clothing.” To this there are at least three sufficient answers: * 1. The Gorman bill repudiates the false pretense. It imposes a duty of 48.82 per cent, on woolen manufactures, estimated on the basis of imports for 1893 (Boston Wool Reporter, Aug, 23.). If untaxed cloth J ing be a boon, woolen goods should be five as well as wool. • 2. If it were true, as it is not, that free wool would give cheaper clothing, this would be no boon under the Gorman law. The McKinley law gave free sugar. The Gor-

man law removes the so-called tariff tax from wool, but transfers five tinalsnits alleged burden to sugar. The tariff on wool in 1893 was 18,147,219. The tariff on sugar williim pose a burden of more than 140,000000 annually on American consumers. Free wool as a permanent policy would substantially destroy the American wool industry. With the supply of wool thus reduced, and the sheep of Australia, South Africa and Argentine, in immense flocks in a few hands, they and importers having thus a monopoly, will not just now, but soon, put up the price. Foreigners will reap the benefit. 3. The.delusivejcryJ&uaised -in,.fag r vor of free wool and free trade — that the tariff is a tax. Suppose this were true. Does any sane man expect the National government can: • be administered without revenues? The largest part of our revenues has always been collected by tariff duties. These are paid by importers for the privilege of selling in this country. When the duties are laid upon articles that can be produced both here and in foreign countries, the foreigner, in order to secure a of our market, reduces the price of his commodities and thus either pays all or a part of the tax. WHAT SHALL WOOL GROWERS Dp? This is now the important question. With free wool the price of wool will be so low —until our flocks shall be vastly reduced in numbers —that wool growing can not be made to pay the fair cost of capital invested and labor required in this industry. FREE WOOL PRICES WILL RUIN OUR WOOL INDUSTRY. This must be evident from the custom house value of the wools imported in the fiscal year 1893. Merino wools 18.51 cents per pound,the long combing coarse wools 21.82 cents, and the coarse third-class wools 7.75 cent. —The freight and other charges from the place of export to Boston did not exceed 1 cent per pound. Thus the Boston cost for merino was 19 cents, coarse combing 23 cents, and the third class 1 less than 9 cents. But the merino was chiefly Australasian unwashed but “skirted,” shrinking less than 50 per cent, in scouring, while Ohio washed will shrink all of 50 per cent.; and the Australian skirted, though not equal in fiber with the Ohio merino, yet will sell for more than Ohio washed by from 2 to 3 cents per pound. The coarse combing wool was of the best class, chiefly washed. The third class wool was chiefly unwashed, but shrinking in scouring probably less than 50 per cent. The farm value of wool in Ohio is about 3 cents per pound less than the Boston price, the difference consisting oT6O cents per 100 pounds car load lots freight, and 2.40 cents for profit of the local wool buyers, overestimates of shrinkage an<FEaster wool dealers’ commission and expenses. American wool growers cannot compete with these prices.

WILL WOOL ADVANCE IN PRICE. But will not wool advance? The wool consumption of the fiscal year 1893 in the United States was 619,000,000; that for the year ended June 30, 1894, only 474,000,000. This was a result of the financial panic of 1893, followed by the prostration of all industries and reduced incomes. The merchants and people are short of woolen goods and woolen clothings These conditions will makenn increased demand, and with our flocks already reduced foreign wool growers will probably take advantage of the situation to advance the prices a little, but not to any considerable extent until free wool has completed its work of destruction of American flocks.