The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1888-07-26

Itrlll lie remembered that Congress
man Mills 10 bis opening q the great tar
IN debate said that In this country the
lsboring man vorks ten days Tor money
enough 10 purchase ten dollar suit 81
clothes and then has 70 work ten days 10
pay for the dniy 90 the wool and manu-
isciurc OF the suit. making Il cost double
what II would II there was no duty. Ac
coraing TO his argument . ten dollar suit
OF clothes In England would cost twenty
dollars here, owing 10 the protective
tariff.
A gentleman in Boston who read this
speech went 10 Congressman Morse's store
10 Boston and purchased an all wool suit
Tor ten dollars soa seut il &c Congressman
Mckinley Who afterwards replied to Mills
speech, and sho made the assertion that
a good al WOOL suit could be purchased
anywhere 10 this country for ten dollars,
aud as cheaply as the same quality OF
goods eau be purchased in Esgland.
Morse made the remark that II could not
be done al bis store. and thea Mckinley
took The suit from bis desk With the re-
ceiptsd bill aud convinced lha, Congress :
mao 90 the spo, than 1t bad been doue
Mills, 10 closing the debate last Salur
day. said he bad looked up 10 regard to
Mekiules's suit Of clothes and found that
tnis suit was protected to the amount Of
81 so, icaying the inference that but for
the duty the same suit could be purchas
Cd for s. so This il not true for parties
have taken the pains to purchase similar
suits 10 England aud ind that the price
for like goods Is almost exactly the same.
The whole argument OF Mills, Cleveland
and the Golden club is founded on the
assertion that the cost OF protected articles
is generally increased by the amount Of
the tariff. and though this has been proved
false over and over again they still stick to
it, for If they give up this point their
whole argument falls to the ground.
The fact has been demon strated times
without number that home competition
will always reduce tue price Of anything
that can be raised or manufactured in this
country to reasonable limit, no matter
how high the tariff may be. and in many
cases the price will be very nearly or quite
as low as the same things sell for in free
trade counties. Iu such cases the only
benefit tariff can have is that it enables
Americans TO keep control Of their own
market, and prevents America from being
dumping ground for the products Of the
cheaper labor Of other countries.
Ia relation to wool which his bill puts
on the free list, Mills inquired what Amer
lea is TO do for wool as only 300 ,000.0 900
pounds are raised here and 100000, 900
pounds are required. The report for
1885, the latest issued shows that in that
year 308, 000O0 90 pounds OF wool were
raised here and only 70,596,170 pounds
imported. OF the latter Sc. DOC, 900 pounds
were carpet wool which is not produced
in this country The reply TO Mr.. B ills
question is that the farmers OF the United
States can raise all the wool that is requir
ed here at reasonable price. though they
can hardly afford to raise it at the present
price, 26 cents, Mr.. Mills expects it will
go still lower il it is placed on the free
list, at least he says that manufacturers
will be enabled to get it at a cheaper rate,
though he also claims to the farmers that
wool will be higher if made Free How he
can reconcile these two "claims" we will
not attempt to say. He does not attempt
to explain the matter any more than be
attempts to show why wool which is pro
duced oil over the country should be
placed on the free list while suger, which
is made in quantity in only one state, is
made to pay a duty OF GS per cent. The
latter fact can be explained, however. II
is 10 the line OF tariff for revenue instead
Of protection. which is practically free
trade.