0
6
VOLUME llNUMBER 29
&
a.
ir
vv
KK
i
r j
'!'
t
t
V r
V
If
f
.V
-
il
WJ
On
m
W
"fjff
i y
E
bE
WW.
Practical Tariff Talks
When a business man not only voluntarily
agrees, but Insists, upon a tariff tax being lovlod
upon the raw material which ho uses in manu
facturing, It is a safe proposition that therein
ho has found a way to make money for himself.
The strongest advocates of tho tariff on raw wool
are tho woolen manufacturers of America. They
stand for a tax of 11 cents a pound on wool,
more than half of the value of each pound they
buy. Inasmuch as less than GO per cent of tho
wool used In manufacturing in America is raised
In this country, it Is reasonable to assume that
a tariff of 11 cents a pound would raise tho
price of the local product 11 cents a pound, as
the home producer could refuse to sell for less
than tho manufacturer would have to pay for
tho wool grown abroad. That was why 11 cents
was tho figuro agreed on. This, however, is one
of thoso beautiful theories that do not work out
in 'practice.
, Statistics submitted to congress in several
recent speeches show that the average prico
paid the American wool grower in recont months
has been but 4 to 5 cents above the foreign price.
Tho reason Is not far to seek. Tho prico of
cloth In the American market is made by the
woolen trust; nobody else dares make a price
until the trust has issued its ukase. The amount
paid for the wool to tho producer is subject to
the same influence. No independent manufac
turer dares to bid up the prico against tho trust,
and thero is not that free competition between
wool buyers that is necessary to insure that the
home producer gets tho maximum price. In
effect, there is but one buyer of wool and one
price, varying, of course, with market demands
and quality of fleeces, and, therefore, the tariff
of 11 cents a pound does not add that amount
to the homo price, which is fixed, not by supply
and demand, but by the manufacturer.
The tariff on cloth imported into America' and
sold In competition with the home production is
burdened, in addition to the ad valorem rate,
with a specific duty of 44 cents a yard, which
Is presumed to be the amount the home manu
facturer must pay for the raw material enter
ing into that yard of cloth in excess of what his
foreign rival pays. This is figured on the basis
that It requires four pounds of unwashed wool
to make one yard of cloth. Aside from tho fact
that this 1b a false assumption, therein lies an
other bit of robbery. This compensatory duty
of 44 cents a yard is based on the assumption
that the tariff has raised the price to the manu
facturer 11 cents a pound, whereas, as the figures
show he has been paying but four or five cents
more than he would if wool were free. He gets
compensated 44 cents for an expenditure, at tho
most, of 16 or 20 cents.
A great many speeches have been made by
republicans, in congress and out of it, warning
the democrats that if they reduced the wool
tariff below 11 cents a pound, disaster would
follow. Probably tho last word on this topic
came from Congressman -Willis of Ohio in a
speech made in June, in which he declared: "I
maintain that experience has shown that as soon
as you get below the rate of 11 cents a pound
duty on first-class wool you paralyze and practi
cally destroy the wool growing industry of this
country. If you put it down as you are propos
ing now, to a duty of 20 per cent you might just
as well put it to 5 per cent, because you will
kill tho industry anyhow." Mr. Willis attempted
to prove this statemont by citing these instances
in the past where a reduction in duty was fol
lowed by a decline in tho industry.
In truth, statements of this character are the
purest buncombe, and any argument based
thereon Is entitled to no consideration. The
primary purpose of a tariff on wool or upon any
thing else is to increase the price of the do
mestic product and thus induce capital to enter
the industry. In fixing the amount of duty that
shall be levied the governing consideration is
how much is it necessary to increase the do
mestic price over the foreign price in order to
bring about the conditions desired in the par
ticular industry. The tariff on raw wool was
placed at 11 cents a pound because it was de
sired to give the American wool grower that
much of-ran .advantage , over the .foreign wool
grower. -If, as is -shown -to be true, the taxing
"of raw'wool ll'icenta a pound .increases the do-
The Commoner.
mestic prico but 4 or G cents, what justification
remains for continuing it at tho old figure, and
if a tariff of 11 cents yields a price increase of
only 4 or 5 cents, how would a reduction, as
proposed by tho democrats, below 11 cents, kill
the Industry? C. Q. D.
WATCH IT GROW
Mr. Bryan has given instructions that every
new subscriber shall receive The Commoner for
a period of two years (which will carry it be
yond tho presidential election of 1912) for the
sum of one dollar. Every Commoner reader is
asked to secure at least one new subscriber..
Many will be able to secure more than one.
Everyone, however, may render some aid in this
work.
5
Justis, Kan.;
N. D.; Wm.
B. C. Berry,
P. P. Bingham, Pa. Enclosed find money
order for one dollar for the renewal of my sub
scription for The Commoner. I want to indorse
Mr. Bryan's stand upon the wool tariff, also'all
of his anti-trust views. ..
J. S. Hamilton; N. J. You may renew my
subscription to The Commoner, also send it to
my brother, Dr. A. R. Hamilton, Pa. I wish to
register my protest against Mr. Underwood's
position on the wool schedule and to say that I
as well as any number of my democratic friends
stand squarely with Mr. Bryan on the free wool
proposition. My choice for president at the
democratic convention will be that democrat who
receives the indorsement of Mr. Bryan. He will
bo a progressive and will be bitterly opposed by
the trusts. Bailey doctrine must be destroyed.
W. D. Olmey, Iowa I heartily approve of the
work you are doing, as outlined, and will give it
attention and do all I can to help to push the
good work of your splendid magazine.
Whitfield Tuck, Winchester, Mass. Enclosed
is the fifteenth subscription card I have sent
you within a short time. The people want to
hear what Mr. Bryan says for they believe in
him.. Yours for victory in 19f2.
The following named readers have sent in
new subscribers:
Andrew N. VanHorne, N. J. ; A. J. Liriebarger,
111.; G. C. Nailor, Dela.; Jno. M. Doty, 111.; F. N.
Grube, N. Y.; E. J. Mentzer, Ind.; Jno. E. Down
ing, O.; W. O. Bledsoe, Cal.;-J. K. Murphy,
Tex.; Miss G. E. Keyes, W. Va.; C. H. Ayres,
Mo.; G. E. Stechert, N. Y.; M. S.
Geo. Setzler, Kan.; H. L. Berry.
Spray, O.; R. F. Collins, Wash.;
Ky.; Solon Rece, W. Va.; U. L. Mann, O.; S. R.
Chappell, Ind.; W. H. Dickson, Tex.; C. B. Wet
more, O.; Mrs. Ira D. Ruddell, Mo.; Wm. M.
Beebler, Neb.; C. A. Lonsinger, O.; W. B. Brad
field, Cal.; Thos. K. Davis, O.; R. E. Requarth,
O.; W. A. McAllister, Mo.; J. M. McCoy, la.;
L. B. Grace, N. Y.; J. H. Trout, Idaho; P. J.
Miller, Cal.; Woods Bros., Neb.; W. R. Bowles,
Mo.; J. D. Hammond, Cal.; L. C. Streator, la.;
A. G. Sloan, Okla.; P. A. O'Connor, N. J.; Mrs.
R. McCaull, la,; P. Stolp, Mich.; I. J1. Poling,
W. Va.; L. K. Paine, Mass.; J. D. Hunt, Okla.;
J. R. Churchill, O.; J. W. Parris, Mo.; E. L.
Durham, Ind.; Mrs. O. P. Kellog, 0.; A. J.
Anders, la.; Dr. B. T. Radcliff, Ind.; Whitfield
Tuck, Mass.; Thos. C. Kelly, O.; Wm. Burke,
Mo.; M. C. Free, O.; J". W. Howe, Kan.; P. M.
Miller, O.; D. H. Hammons, 0.; Jno. Wigand,
O.; H. E. Button, la.; J. A. Sellwood, Ore.; J. H.
Schluoter, Mo.; Chas. Perry, la.; H. E. Moore,
Mo.; H. L. Berry, N. D.; Fred W. Schultz, 111.;
Jno. Stedrousky, S. D.; W. H. Dunphy, Wash.;
Hugh'Mooney, Mo.; W. M. Hunter, O.f J, b.
Kendall, 111.; Daisy Hollingsworth, Tex.; Norman
Yadon, Mo.; Oliver Kearns, Cal.; T. B. Pielus,
111.; Jas. Pox, Ariz.; T. D. Stewart, W. Va.;
D. C. Walker, Ore.; J. L. Weeks, Conn.; J. J.
Rogers, 0.; S. P. Bandy, Pa.; L. P. Bergman,
O.; Wm. Surman, 111.; T. E. Hughes, Okla.;
Clinton Bybee, Tex.; W. J. Gray, Tex.; H. B.
Hopkins, Cal.; Jas. Rogers, Va.; Oscar Howell,
La.; Geo. Putt, Ind.; J. S. Patton, W. Va.; E.
H. P. Schneider, Kan.; Henry Balloon, Tex.; J.
R. Holt, Ark.; T. P. North, Kan.; H. S. Grover,
Colo.; W. H. Pace, Md.; C. W. Leesher, Mo.;
Perry Clark, Neb.; W. J. Semmons, la.; R. S.
Scott, Mo.; S. T. Duncan, Mo.; J. C. Roe, 111.;
S. P. Munson, Vancouver, B. C.; Jno. Lovejoy
Tex.; G. W. Deahl, Tex.; J. W. Paterson, N. Y.;
H. D. Ferrell, Kan.; J. E. Akron, la.; E. L.
Yost, Neb.; Henry Oakes, la.; J. J. CUbertson,
Wash.; D. L. Rogers, Mo.; A. L. Overton, Tex.;
G. H. Mann, N. H.; G. A. Guyman. Mo.; Fred A.
Howe, Neb.; A. S. Merrin, Mo.; T. H. Potteri
Va.; Wilbur Patty, O.; W. A. Clopton, Tex.;
Wm. Ladd, N. Y.; J. C. Wiley. Colo.; Alfred
Jaques,. Minn.; Jno. J Keatin,Hl.; Wm. Jtunyan,;
.Kan,rJne E. Taylor. JTla.J.'P. Weisman, .0, ; ;
C. 'Klbler, N. D.; Thos. -Brown, Kan.;. H. -S.'
BARGAINS IN WOOL
Representative Finly H. Gray, In house
of representatives: "The woolen manu
facturers can well afford to make the
bargain, for they do not live up to their
"promise to divide the tribute collected
from the people with the wool growers.
And if they did they would only have to
add the increased price of wool to their
cloth and collept It back off the consum
ers and would make the wool growers
pay their own tribute.
"During the last thirteen years the
tariff upon Indiana wool has been 11
cents per pound and yet the average
Boston price has been only 4 cents above
the London market for the same wool
and the average price for 1910 is only 1
cent a pound above the foreign market.
The reason for this is plain. The farm
ers and wool growers have never been
able to organize and co-operate to hold
the wool, while the woolen manufactur
ers have long been combined as a trust
and thus as one buyer they offer the wool
grower whatever price they see fit to pay
and the wool grower has to take it.
"But that is not all. While the wool
growers have been induced to support a
tariff on woolens on the promise of being
allowed to share in the tribute collected
from the consumers of woolen clothing,
the woolen manufacturers have been col
lecting an average tariff tax of 90 per
cent off of the American people, includ
ing the wool growers themselves,
amounting as variously estimated from
$175,000,000 to $200,000,000 annually.
"While under this promise to divide
profits with the wool growers and while
the American people have been paying
$175,000,000 to ,$200,000,000 annually
to stimulate the sheep industry, the
number of sheep in Indiana has declined
from 832,856 in 1900 to 710,238 in 1909
and the wool clip from 4,537,975 pounds
in 1900 to 1,644,638 pounds in 1909."
'
Schall, Pa.; P. E. Linn, Ore.; P. W. Ball, Mich.;
E. Estill, Cal.; T. L. Turner, Me.; W. L. Ragan,
Mo.; J", E. Norris, Ark.; J. G. Conine, Wash.;
Jas. M. Robenett, 111.; A.-La Due, Fla.; P. J.
Obeirne, N. Y.; W. R. Love, Kan,; Geo. W.
Cook, Mo.; Prank Powers, Ariz.; Mrs. M. M.
Peake, 111.; Mrs. Alice Garwood, O.; B. A.
Kirchner, la.; Jno; Caulfield. Mich.; Jos. P.
Hartman, N. D.; Wm. J". R. Raum, Neb.; Annie
Laurie Price, Tenn.; J. P. Biggs, 111.; J. P.
Gereke, Neb.; J. Hamilton, la.; G. B. Hart, Ore.;
E. W. Newman, Cal.; C. A. Overlander, Ore.;
Russell & Wait, N. Y.; G. W. Sies, la.; S. H.
Aldrich, 111.; W. W. J. Pye, Tex.; Claude
Coffey, Mo.; Hartwell D. Powell, 111.; Thos.
Douglass, Ark.; A. W. Tinney, O.; J. M.
Davis, Ore.; A. J. May, Ky.; R. E. Bruner,
Mo.; Wm. M. Dent, W. Va.; J". W. Van
Mater, Neb.; H. L. Berry, N. D.; Chas. Lund
quist, Mich.; E. B. Andrews, Ark.; Jno. N. G.
Smith, Okla.; G. P. Wilson, Colo.; J. Bentley,
O.; Jno. Haas, O.; P. D. Cutshall, Pa.; B. B.
Overmyer, O.; Albert D. Weeks, Ind.; Jno P.
Brown, Mo.; A. L. Paler, Wash.; J. D. Evan,
Wis.; W. P. Wycoff, O.; O. B. Pettit, 111.; J. P.
Hobbs, la.; J. B. McClain, la.; H. A. Gower,
Wis.; Lloyd Stull, W. Va.; A. J'. Johnson, la.;
W. A. Haile, Ark.; W. P. Yessler, Pa.; R. Derby,
jr., O.; O. O. Pettit, 111.; C. M. Fonder, S. D.;
Jno. Shamon, Ore.; M. E. Herrlck, N. Y.; W. J.
Lerch, Pa.; J. DTWinsted, N. C; J. J". Hallums,
Tenn.; J. W. Boeing, N. D.; J. J. Braselton, 111.;
N. Nish, la.; F. J. Steldl, Minn.; S. W. Ander
son, Va.; J. J. Smith, 111.; J. C. Custer, Mo.;
J. S. Darrah, la.; T. C. Andrews, Tex.; Thos.
McCarty, Ia; Wm. Miller, Wash.; Geo. W.
Myers, Ore.
WHY THEY PROTEST
Chicago Tribune: Mr. Bryan, who serves
notice on his party enemies that he will not
submit to be cudgeled or scoffed into silence,
may take this comforting knowledge to himself:
There would be no objection to his counsels or
his advice if men influential in the democratic
party, but opposed to him, did not recognize
him as still powerful. If what Mr. Bryan said
went to careless ears hia party, opponents might
grin, .but -they, would, not, protest. ;They -do
protest,,and the grin-iswMr. .Bryan's.
S?i
I-
r.T"i '.' i V" -
' " ml Willy
L2liiili!aK1i