VII.—AMPLE PROTECTION WILL ENLARGE SHEEP HUSBANDRY. 1. How much? The value of sheep husbandry to (1) those who are or may be engaged in it, and (2) to the whole country, depends in a measure on (1) what it will become under proper conditions, and not (2) merely what it is now. The following table presents the condition of sheep husbandry for the year 1896: Number of sheep.. Value... Farm value 36, 464, 405 $61, 989, 488 .pounds.. *232, 474, 708 $18, 000, 000 There is, of course, a material difference in the Boston value and the farm price. The wool is estimated on the unwashed basis. This is far short of what sheep husbandry should be, in order to supply the needs of the American people. We can determine what we need, by what has been consumed for a series of years, as follows: North's Wool Book for 1894, p. 36, gives the per capita consumption at 9136 pounds. The consumption of domestic wool for each fiscal year is, of course, the clip of the prior calendar year. The amount of wool in imported manufactures is estimated on the usual basis of 3 pounds for each dollar of import value. Each pound of the imports of shoddy, woolen rags, wastes, noils, etc., is estimated as equal to 3 pounds of unwashed wool. Official statistics show the following for 1896: Wool imports. Value Imports shoddy, rags, waste, etc Value of imports of wool manufactures. .pounds.. 230, 811, 473 $32, 451, 242 -pounds.. 18, 874, 670 $53, 494, 193 On the basis stated the shoddy, rags, etc., were the equivalent of 56,623,010 pounds of American wool, and the wool in imported wool manufactures was the equivalent of 160,482,579 pounds of American wool. The United States Statistical Abstract for 1895 states the wool clip and pulled wool for that calendar year, 294,296,726 pounds washed and unwashed, with an average shrinkage in scouring of 60 per cent in wool clip and 40 per cent in pulled wool, yielding scoured pounds, 125,718,690. Only a small part of the wool was washed on the sheep's back. Allowing that some of the wool imports of 1895 and 1896 were stored in warehouses, it is safe to estimate that the people of this country now need for annual consumption, under normal conditions, all of 660,000,000 * Besides this the pulled wool is estimated at 40,000,000 pounds. S. Doc. 17-8 pounds raw material, which would require 110,000,000 sheep for its production. The Statistical Abstract of the United States for 1895 frontispiece gives the population, June 1, 1895, at 69,753,000, with a per capita consumption of 6.32 pounds, of which 46.1 per cent was foreign wool. But this does not include the wool in imported woolen manufactures. North's Wool Book for 1894, page 36, gives the per capita consumption at 9.07 pounds. This, then, is the enlargement of sheep husbandry, which ample protection will soon bring. And we may assume that with our annual increase of population the amount of wool needed for use would equally be enlarged in amount. VIII. AMERICAN WOOLGROWERS CAN UNDER PROPER CONDITIONS SUPPLY ALL NEEDED WOOLS. Our country has all the soils, climates, material requisites, and classes of people to produce all needed wools of every variety, if aided by proper conditions of legislation. This has been fully demonstrated by official documents: United States Senate Mis. Doc. of the Fifty-third Congress, second session, numbered 35, 77, and 124; Senate Doc. No. 17, Fifty-fourth Congress, first session, 1895-96. At a meeting of the National Association of Manufacturers-its first annual convention-held at Chicago, January 21 to 23, 1896, Thomas Dolan, an eminent wool manufacturer, president of the association, said: "We are certain of our ability to feed ourselves and to procure at home all the primary substances from which fabrics are made." WHAT THE FULL DEVELOPMENT OF SHEEP HUSBANDRY WOULD DO FOR THIS COUNTRY. Ample protection for our wool industry would soon increase our flocks from less than 40,000,000 to 110,000,000, or 175 per cent. The increase would not be in an equal ratio in each State on the present number. But it is safe to estimate that, under ample protection and normal conditions, the States would soon have sheep with annual value of wool and mutton about as follows: In other States the amount would be less, but still great. IX.-ADVANTAGES OF THE INCREASE. The advantages of this increase are so numerous that it is not practicable now to enumerate them, but among them may be mentioned some: 1. It would make an annual income to American woolgrowers of $160,000,000. 2. It would make a market for millions of acres of pasturage, and the hay, corn, and oats produced from millions of acres of land. It would thus benefit farmers who have no sheep. 3. By transferring to sheep husbandry a part of our lands now yielding an overproduction of wheat the home market would consume all and give fair prices. 4. It would give increased employment to men in all branches of industry-carpenters to build sheep barns, dealers to supply materials, and labor in the various departments. 5. It would keep in this country annually millions in gold which would otherwise be sent to other countries. X. SHEEP AND SILVER. Compared with the value of sheep and wool as sources of national and individual wealth, our silver mines are small. The following table shows the product in states named of our silver mines in 1893: Other states produced less amounts. The total of all was about 60,000,000 ounces. This shows how vastly greater is sheep husbandry than silver mining. The first annual convention of the National Association of Manufacturers was held at Chicago, Ill., January 21 to 23, 1896. Thomas Dolan, the president of the association, an eminent manufacturer of woolen and worsted goods, in the opening address, said: Surely it is well that a nation like ours should be self-contained and selfdependent, and to reach that condition, seeing that we are certain of our ability to feed ourselves, and to procure at home all the primary substances of which fabrics are made, it is alone necessary that we should do here all the work of fabrication which is required for the supply of the needs of our people. This was properly greeted with applause by that great association of manufacturers. XI. FREE SILVER REPUBLICANS. There are some free-silver Republican woolgrowers. But the interest of all such is to vote for McKinley and a protective tariff. Protection is more important than free silver. Free wool will substantially destroy sheep husbandry. How will free silver benefit the woolgrower with foreign wool supplying nearly all consumed by our people? The election of Bryan would bring with it a free-wool Congress. To a free silver Republican, Bryan free silver is an apparent very thin sugar coating for the ruinous, deadly, free-wool pill. The following is appropriate in this connection: 1. SHEEP AND WOOL OF COLORADO HAVE BEEN DEMONETIZED. A woolgrower in Colorado writes as follows: We of Colorado have much to complain of. Not only has silver been demonetized, but last and worst the sheep and wool of Colorado have been demonetized. We have got along with the demonetization of silver for more than twenty-three years, and we still produce $15,000,000 worth of silver annually. This is more than three times as much as produced at the time of the demonetization. The highest value of our silver product in any one year was in 1892. We then produced a little more than $17,000,000 worth. This year we will have produced about $14,000,000 worth. By the repeal of the Sherman silver-purchase law our annual silver product has declined about $2,500,000. But the demonetization of sheep and wool has hurt us worse than that. In 1892 our wool clip sold for nearly $6,000,000; this year it will scarcely sell for $1,500,000. The sheep and wool industry of Colorado in 1892 was worth to the State about $8,000,000; in 1896 it will hurry it to amount to $2,000,000. In other words, our loss by the demonetization of sheep and wool is about $3,500,000, more than our loss by the demonetization of silver. While the Sherman silver law was in existence silver averaged 92.445 cents per ounce; but since the repeal it has averaged 64.133 cents per ounce. This is a decline of 31 per cent. In 1892 wool in Colorado was worth 15 cents per pound, but this year our woolgrowers are offered 2 cents per pound. This is a decline of 863 per cent. In 1892 mutton sheep in Colorado were worth an average of $3 per head; now they are worth about $1. This is a decline of 663 per cent. So you see the demonetization of sheep and wool has hurt us in Colorado worse than the demonetization of silver." See Edgemont, South Dakota, Express. Look on this picture. If there is one industry which appeals with more force than another for defensive duties, it is this (wool industry), and to no class of our citizens should this House more cheerfully render legislative assistance, where it can be properly done, than to the million farmers who own sheep in the United States. We can not afford, as a nation, to permit this industry to be longer crippled. (Speech of McKinley on the tariff, May 7, 1890, House of Representatives.) XII Then on this. Speaking for myself, it is immaterial, in my opinion, whether the sheepgrower receives any benefit from the tariff or not. I am for free wool, in order that our woolen manufacturers, unburdened by a tax upon foreign wool, and unburdened by a like tax upon home-grown wool, may manufacture for a wider market. (William J. Bryan's speech, second session Fiftythird Congress, Congressional Record, vol. 26, p. 226, Appendix.) CHAPTER VII. THE WOOLGROWERS' PROPOSED WOOL TARIFF BILL. ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF ITS PROVISIONS. By WILLIAM LAWRENCE, President of the National Wool-Growers' Association. [As published in The Quarterly Bulletin of the Association for July, 1896, with additional comments.] At the session of the National Wool Growers' Association in Washington, D. C., December 4 to 9, 1895, a memorial to Congress was adopted, which gave, in substance, the wool tariff provisions deemed essential to give prosperity to American sheep husbandry. It differs in some respects from the wool tariff provisions of the acts of March 2, 1867, March 3, 1883, and October 1, 1890, to meet (1) changed conditions, and (2) remedy defects, ascertained by experience, especially those in the last-named act. As the purposes of all our protective legislation are to (1) "equalize conditions," and (2) give our citizens "some advantage" over foreign producers, it is manifest that when conditions change the measure of protection should be changed to meet them. The bill proposed by the National Wool Growers' Association as understood from a consideration of Senate Document No. 17, Fiftyfourth Congress, first session, is remarkable for the moderation of its demands. It will be seen, by reference to facts and arguments, presented in that document, that its measure of protection is much less than that given by the act of 1867, under conditions then existing. The bill which the Wool Growers' Association asked Congress to pass is here reproduced, with some explanatory notes, as follows: A BILL to levy and collect duties on wool, hair, sheep, cotton, and other fibers. Be it enacted, etc., That from and after the passage of this act there shall be levied, collected, and paid upon all wools, cotton, hairs, and other fibers, and sheep imported from foreign countries and mentioned in Schedule K, herein contained, the rates of duties which are, by said schedule and paragraphs, respectively prescribed, namely: Schedule K-WOOL. All wools, hair of the camel, goat, alpaca, llama, and other like animals, shall be divided for the purpose of fixing the duties to be charged thereon into the following classes: First, class 1-that is to say, merino, mestiza, metz, or metis wools, and including all other wools having any admixture of Merino blood, |