Hides And Leather

Those who really think that the retooval of the duties on wool will destroy er greatly depress the domestic wool growing industry may find 6omething to enlighten them in the effect npon the hide and leather industries of the remov1 of the duty on hides. When it was proposed in 1872 that hides should be admitted free. there was a loud protest. The domestio hide industry would be ruined, it was eaid. But hides were put on the free list, and everybody knows what a great development of the hide and leather industries has followed that change. No one will say that the domestic industry of producing hides bas been destroyed or that the growth of the cattle industry has been retarded. We continue to produce and to tan the green hides of the United States, and at the same time we receive enormous quantities of dry hides from South America, tbe tanningof which has become a great industry. The value of our free imports of hides has risen to $27,000,000 per annum, and Bince the duty on hides was removed the quantity of sole leather exported has so increased that the annual average f or the last four years was about 37,000,000 pounds, 75 per cent of which was sold in England. A well known inanufacturer of ehoes in Massachusetts published not long ago the results af his inquines as to the growth and condition of the leather industries. "Statistics show," 6aid he, "that since hides were placed on the free list there has been an increase of 70 per cent in the shoe business and of 125 per cent in the tanning industry." Two of the leading tanners in the country had informed him that there had been an increase of 15 per cent in wages in their industry since 1873. A consideration of the growth and condition of the tanning industry naturally directs attention to the tariff upon that industry's producís. Under the law of 1883 the duty on sole leather, bend er and belting leather waa 15 per cent. This was reduced to 10 per cent by the McKinley act. The Wilson bill as passet! by the house does not disturb the present duty on bend and belting leather, but cuts down the rate on sole leather to 5 per cent. The official reports show that the value of the exporta and imports of such leather for the last four years has been as follows: Imports. Exports. 1850 $16,189 $,420,134 1891 20.054 6,168,362 1888 24,96'J 6,783.555 1883.... 35.824 5,192,063 A duty of 5 per cent is very small, it is true, but we do not see why there should be any duty whatever on sole leather. The present duty of 10 per cent is of course virtually prohibitory, for the tanners are exporting sole leather to the value of $5,000,000 or $6,000,000 per annum, selling it in foreign lands in open competition with the sole leather of other countries. If they can do this, why should they require a tariff duty to protect them at home against sales of foreign sole leatner here? If they can undersell the foreigners in foreign markets, after paying ocean freight charges, surely they ought, with the same prices, to undersell them here after the foreigners have been liandicapped by the same charges for transporta tion. As we have said, however, the proposed duty is very low, and the retention of it will not be a matter of much importance. But it should not be