I. TYE DINGLEY BILL AS IT PASSED THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
DECEMBER 26, 1895
II. THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS ON THE DINGLEY
TARIFF BILL-HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, No. 3, FIFTY-FOURTH
CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION..
III. THE NEW YORK TRIBUNE ON THE DINGLEY BILL..
1. The people do not want an expurgated edition of the McKinley
2. An extra session of Congress..
3. The Dingley bill as a revenue measure
4. Its offensive discriminations..
5. Why prolong them?..
IV. An “Open letter” by William Lawrence, March 13, 1896, to Hon.
Thomas H. Carter, V. S. Senator, on the Dingley bill.
1. Conditions then and now.
2. Why continue the Dingloy bill “until August 1, 1898 ?”
3. Sherman on the wool manufacturers
V. PROHIBITORY DUTIES AGAINST SHODDY, Rags, ETC..
VI. THE “SKIRTING CLAUSE" AD VALOREM DUTIES
1. Proposed amendments
2. Reasons in support thereof
VII. PROTECT THE WOOL MANUFACTURER
1. Footnote 20 on the degree of protection afforded to manufacturer.
2. Ample machinery now in the United States to manufacture all
needed woolen goods ...
VIII. THE DINGLEY BILL GIVES THE MANUFACTURERS BETTER PROTECTION
THAN THAT FOR WOOLGROWERS.....
1. The compensatory duties for manufacturers more than they seem
2. How the Dingley bill favors manufacturers more than wool-
3. As to yarns
4. As to flannels and blankets
5. The duty on tops, rovings, etc.
6. How carpet manufacturers are provided for.
IX. McKINLEY FAVORED BETTER PROTECTION THAN THE ACT OF 1890.
X. How the imports of third-class wools injure woolgrowers.