Press enter after choosing selection

The Wool Growers

The Wool Growers image
Parent Issue
Public Domain
OCR Text

John T. Kich, rliiiii.nn of the Michigan Wool Qrowera A9soclation, In a report on the condttloD of the wool interest nfld the effect ot plaring wool on th free list, as reeotnniendt-d by President Cleveland, says: The total qunntity of wool imporU-d in 1882 was 63,li:i4,389 poiinds and" iu 1887, 119,306,584. Theduty collected ia 1884 wR $3,934,760, in 18S7, $0,390,053. The number of sheep in the United States in 1882 was 45,016 224; in 18S4 thev had inorenaMt to 50,620.626, bnt in jainiHry, 1N87, Ihpy had decreased to 44,759,318, the number is now much smaller. While our country hiis been Increased in population and wealtli at rapid rate during the last live years, the sheep of the country, which more tlian any olher animal helps to maintHin the fertility of our soil and ut the same time furnishes ns material for both tood and clothing, have derieased. The iimonnt of wool piodnoed in 1882 was 190.000,000 penad, in 1884 it was 308,000,000 pounds; while in 18SG it was only 280,000,000, and the Agricultura I Kureau estimates the clip tor 1887 at nly :20f, 000,000 poumls. 1 endose tahle showinif present price of wool in Phlladelphia, the price which would be paid for the sime based on the pnce of oometing wool In London ; also the decline n prloet In Phlladetphla neceary to be mude in order to reaih the level of priora in London. The table iscoinplicd by the Phlladelphla Textile Associatiou and is so -! mui; au argument in Itwlf tliat hut little conimeiu is necessary. It shows that It would cause a reductiou in the price of American tleece wool of OU to 17 cents uccording to quality. This would not prove quite true iu actual practice, even If the tand' on wool was abolished, because the abolition of the duty here would have the effect of raising the price of wool in fjondon. But even with this modilication it is plain that the etfect of the removal of the duty on wool in this country would be to destroy that industry here. The reduction of duty made by the act of March 3J, 1883, together wlth the nu-aiis found for evading the pnyrnent ot duty, reduced the number ot sheep in the United States withiu two years fully 6,000,000, and the amount of wool produced in this country during the same period 22,000,000 poundg, notwithstanding the universal demand for woolen goods by our people caused by the ncrease of populution and the more general wearing of woolen goods by the people. The letters received from farmers indícate that uniess tliere is u change for the better soon there will le a still further reduction in the number of sheep kept in this country. The Prebident In hia message assumes that as the number of wool-growera in tliia country compared with the whole people is sniall, and the number of sheep kept by enen one is only from 25 to 50, if Ihelr business is injured or destroyed it 011 make but linie dilference. While this is not saiü in exact word.-, the language muy be fairly construed to ni'.an just that. But the wool-growers are not the only ones that will be eftected by the destruction of this industry. There are In round numuers 1,000,000 flock masters wliose business Is In whole or in part the raislng of wool. Ifthey are compelled to sacritlce their Hoeks they mu-t turn their atteution to something else, and as they are usually owners of land, it must be some other branch of agriculture, and there is no room in all the other branches of agriculture for tliose now eugaged in raislng wool, without very sserious depression. Oraina, espociaKy wheat, and 11 kinds of meat ure now as low as they oan be ruised with auy prolit to the producers, aud f tliosc nowengaged in woolgrowing have to turn their nttention to the raising of wheat, beef and pork, that will ruin, so far as prolit is concerned, these branches of agriculture as well. What the farmers of this country need is to further dlversify fanning rather than to contract it. Knoiigh has been chown to prove, flrst, that wool-growing will be rulned in tliis country if the duty on wool is removed or materially reduced, and that incldentally all agricultural interests will be seriously injured. Second, that if the duty on raw wool is removed or materially reduced and the duty on manufactures of wool redneed the result will be very greatly to injure, if not destroy, the wool inanufacturiug industry, and injure those firms whlch have for years employed their time and means in handling douiestic wool, greatly to the benefit of both wool-growers and wool manufacturera, and again to incidentally injure the general farmer by divertlng the labor employed In manufacturing to agricultural, by changinff consumers to producers of agriculturul producís, compclling the farmer to seek a foreign market for a largcr portion of bis surplus producís, where lie must inevltably compete wlth the low-priced labor of foreign lands Third, that the claim that it is necessary to reduce the tariffduties, iu order to reduce the surplus in the United States Treasury, is ill-founded and iintrne when applied to wool, because the amount of revenue derived from wool, when compared with the total amount derived from tariffduties, is insignlticant; that the reduction of the duties on wool in 188Ü ncreftsed the reven ues derived from wool; that there are two ways of reducing the revenues derivd from wool, one the plan proposed by the President, to remove all duties, which will ruin the wool-growing induetry in this country. The other is lo increase the duties and eflectually prevent the evasion of the law now constantly practiced, which would preserve aud maintain t.his valuable industry to our people. Tlien, in the direct interest of the wool-grower and incidentally in the interest of all our people, it ie desiiable to have the duties on manufacturad woolens and worsted so modilied that our manufacturera can atl'ord to manufacture any article comiosed wholly or partly of wool for which the American farmer eau i ui -mísIi the material. The classilication of wools Hhould be so changed nnd the dutles so modlfied as to aftbrd aubstantial protection to American wool-growing. The followlng changes are submitted, not with the belief that they include all the elmnges that inay be found dealrable. but tliat they are sometliliig near what ie necded. First. That wools now descnbed as wools of tlie second class be iucluded in tllOSe Of tllO li I-! CÍU88. Second. That tlie dividinj: line betwesn wools wliich pays tlie lower, and tho9e payiiijr a higher duty, be reduced from 30 l 20 cents. Third. That what are known as carpet wools stiall be subjected to the iame condltiou in regard to wool imported, wasiied or scoured, as wools of the first class. VVashed wool shall be deenied tobe wool washed in cold water on the sheep. Scoured wool shall be deemed to be the fleeee washed after shearinjt in warm water or any cleaiming solntion. All wool tops, waste, oil, etc., to be classed as scoured wool, to be churged three times the rate charged In tuelr several classes. All mixed wool to be charged in tlieir several classes. All mixed wool to be c-har-red the hifjiie-it rale to which any portion of the mixturo would be subject. Wool l'urther advanced in manufacture to be charged proportionate rates. Other known or possible evasions of the law to be proviiled against. When such a bilí has been perfected, it should be presented to Consrre8S as the wool-growers' replv to the President's tuossajre, and should be aupplcmeotod by petitions, letter?, resolutions oí wool-growing and agricultunil associations, with vlgorous and earnest editorial comineut of the agricultural press, and others who believe ín the American aid of protection. The attention of Congress should be called to the important matter in every possible manner until it either heeds our wishes or adjouni&. Influence should then be brought to beur upon those who are candidates for Conrt-ss, and the wool-growers and farmers should vote for uo one for Couress who will not iinequlvooally promise to look after and vote lor such bilis as are calculated to advance wool-growing interests without doing Injustiee to others. With all due respect to President Cleveland, whoin ihe people have t'levaled to the uighett pusition of tlieir gift, and who was elevaieil to that position very largely by the agricultunsts of this country, w':eu In1 in his message to Conjjress sinjlH out wool growers and belittles our nuiuber and our industrv, and adds injury attempting to make believe that ufter all it won't hurt the business much to utterly ruin it, it is time for the farmers and wool-growers to strike back. If we liesitate now, we are not worthy of the proud name of American eitizens. A wool-grower who would not resent such language as the President used toward liim and hls business, would not resent the invasión of a foreign foe into this country, for the Piesident's plan literally surrenders to the foreigner what belongs to the tax payinjr, law-ablding American citizens. The American producer is entitli.d to the American inarket. The wool-yrower who would not resent such reccomendiitions as those made by the President would not delend his own premist against tlio robburs who would tako hiu llock without hij consent, and without compensation, for the recom mendalions of the President if carried out, wlll rob liim just iih The woolijrower who will not resent, and by every means In his power, prevent the recommendationsof the President beinjf carried out, would not light the miscreant who would take the food from the mouths and clothes from the backs of his wife and children, for the result of carrying out the President's reoommendution?, while acting n little slower, will just as surely do it. The farmer, whether wool-grower or not, who will not resent this attack upon thia ifieat agricultural interest, would not asslst his neighbor when attacked by robbers, or threatened by destruction by flre, which mlght envelope himself if not checked in time; for the policy of the President cardei! out, will just as surely atleet your inii-rcsts injuriously as would tlie unconquered robbers or the unchecked lire. Do not be deceived by the statement of the free tntaar that you are not worth as much as Vanderbllt or Gould, that there is a mortgage on your farm, thut the average American farmer h:is not yet all he needs, for he is only trylng to make you discontented with your lot, and whatevcr of truth he may utter as to the inany things you would like which you are stil t unable to purchase, you may rest assured he has nothing better to offer you. For there are no agriculturists on the earth who are sowell ofTto-day a the American farmers. While the Free Trader will make you fair promisea which liave never been fuliilled, that if you adopt his theories you can buy the poor mini's bianket cheaper, and will talk long and loinlly of the ih-tr.ict beauties of free traiie, yet It is not the price which the American farmer has to pay that is troubUng hlm, but the low price for which he is compelled to sell everything which he has to sell. With our matchless energy and power of productlon, the competition of our people with eaeh other may and probably will bring everything which can be proclueed in this country to the lowest price at which it eau be produced witb proflt, but we will have a diversified industry, which wlll make a homemarket foreverythinK wliich we raise or produce, and we shall continue to be the most prosperous In peace, the strongest in war, the best educated and happiest people on earth. ._______


Ann Arbor Courier
Old News