Show AN N h tl AIS A Z ara ION fu bu ene V air 23 ot fl J lak lah fa F athes n ahe 1 ta i ift quest question i od ai I 1 reply to J T LT edoor 0 the f iorii yva i is tp in 1 i ur isac uc of ir Io glicr loher laii 1 th i tha nadina of if leeche leec hc d 1 sov ui mt 11 iii position on oil the wool question by one aho who vho signs himself J T M r tat tali that I 1 R nd sheep bad tei det ceased froin forty to seventeen under protection As my fiatt tat nn ail cains to be somewhat misunderstood by uie the gentle I 1 will ill endeavor to wake make my position on oil tills this all I 1 in ii ray my statistics on the number of sheep ant anil I 1 decrease under unde r protection I 1 mado made reference only to the sheep 81 beep in tile states stales c fist east of the I 1 missouri I 1 and mississippi rivers as sit at tile alic time lime when the wool tariff was put on there were few sheep wes of eliose rivers exception except in california I 1 thought 0 it would be I ardly fair to take an a it estimate tit of the sheep that have come into tile western states state since they were ivere settled so I 1 simply took the states east cast of these rivers to show the real effect of the tariff f in ili these eastern states in 1860 there were 19 ru millions illions of sheep beep the period from 1860 to 1867 was one of coin comparative para tive free trade in wool there being but a slight revenue duty imposed on oil account of tile the war Fro roCO to 67 the number of sheep sliced in these eastern states stales increased front from 19 1 millions to 37 4 million in 1867 tho 47 per cent tariff was wag put on oil wool the effect aseen cheni is shown that tile lie sheep in e bait ncik ern cra state states that had asked for the wool tariff decreased from 11 sa 7 J millions to toa tt 2334 rn millions alliona jn in but three years vears of high protection from 67 t to 70 but the decre decrease fise lid did not stop in ili 70 by 80 the number of sheep in these eastern states lad had decreased to 21 J millions and ami in 1891 there 1 were but 18 1 millions of sheep in in th the states estates that had asked for protection less than one half tile the num lier there here were when the tariff wn imposed j I 1 admit the number of sheep ha have e increased in the united states sine the tariff on oil wool was put on but bill I 1 contend that there would have been bee much more of an i increase nerease if the pro had let the industry alone here are my reasons rile number of sliced slice in the whole U S in was hy fly comparative free traded trade illis his number had ad increased to 14 sheep in an increase in seven years of free wool of lead or about 01 91 per cent in 1867 the much wan wanted ted wool tariff was put 0 on I 1 i in 1801 1861 twenty four years after I 1 tile number of sheep in tile the whole of the lie U S is only an all increase i n 23 years of hirch 0 protection of only head bad or about one fifth fi fill ol 01 of one per cent I 1 these statistics alatis bics come from the republican bureau bf statistics in it washington and are arc off official leial now as to increase in clip your vo u r correspondent says the lie clip wat was 60 pounds in 1862 and was p iti i r in 1 sat according to tile same republican bureau of statistics the llie clip in 1862 ws was bog pounds aud and in it 1881 way was pounds so our correspondent lias has overreached himself and slightly M colored figures now let rile me show up tip some statis ties in ili regard to tile alie wool clip in ili 1850 tile the entire wool clip in tile lie US IT S was br by 1867 after seventeen years of free wool thew clip had increased to pounds in an increase of 20 sol I 1 per cen cent t our ool viii clip pounds an all increase of POLI pounds 1119 or 78 per cent does this show anything to the hoctor honorable able gentleman if tile ibe of iud tin wool ell clip in pounds luid ilmi net in llie lite tame same ratio ralio 3 icy sicy s did di darin trint lite free trade period quoted we ave would bow havelind hav have eliad llad IOU millions of iliac p in file united states slates aila wool clip of about pou tili the grill li mw r tor in in i ri n ibi fall fal aier ang off of sliu j lite ile ta tariff riff of jsse the iu in tile the oil ivoti tit 11 llie or of ais lisl i yai hirai about 10 pir per ci c tit nt a banit of about 37 per cent un lin raw wool be will arn the year 1983 1 and ancl i 1 1810 10 ia P grall falling 0 oft off mentioned by n it dinall rould could not have haire t j lv hv this r reduction tariff of ima was more than at a ij jj protective Ys ks nr fir f ir the of the mckina mckin bill tile the says that SLL sl L h have increased inure ased 1 boc 50 since tte IN P I 1 call an only ity that tp then er has not been a sufficient time tic its passage to judge of its effect lu ou u industry where lie he 1 1 1 i lh 11 man inan get geli i his statistics of hian 1 I 1 do not know as the latest 1 statistics lali sUca on it wool talat I 1 alae 1 I i able to find bring brina M us only to I 1 it i pile gentleman flue lilan asks two question oo j that it would take too loo much s sfa lit 11 to at al presen tand I 1 will MII nn nii i that I 1 will give him tile the answer il raj yourn exi issue if you will w il I 1 allow allo nu enough ellough space I 1 now I 1 goine eoma to tile tho english engish i i grower As we tic correspondent d there were about laws on i statute books of england evaland at time artl r ga aiding iding tile the wool indus indu indusi sj all kinds 0 of law were anade for f c i liene lafit of tit tho wool grower andl and lie 10 did dice not so receive te ceide im benefit lafo oi of the same k kind ind were passed in n franco eranee and Gerin germany arly and yet the 1 french and german wool growers gro weri lid did not llo seem to receive any benefit I 1 lid did not say that tile the number 0 ol 01 I 1 sheep in ili england Eng lallI had bail increased in it england nor lid did I 1 say that tile wool flip ill i had been becu larger under free wool as I 1 have been as 19 yet unable to obtain an any 1 information on oil that point but I 1 id did say that tile wool growers grower of england and every other foriero n country as well ivell as of tile the U S had been more prosperous when there lias his been free wool than when there lias has been sc called protection on wool there has been one question agitating a my mind for some time thatis if England 0 with 33 30 0 population with but acres of cultivate able land cac i acre of i is 3 worth f from born aoto i to sloop with no public lands can support ort 23 25 sheep whose product comes almost directly into competition with australian and fleeces why cannot LUC united states stales with a W ble area oo 00 acres with a vast public domain with only 65 1 population support a paltry 14 sheep whose product ling has few competitors and let its producers make money without tile aid of a protective tariff this question ling has never dever been answered yet eugene n J young |