St. Paul daily globe., 1890-10-15
THE DAIEY COST

THE DAILY COST.
Senator DAVIS has started out in
company with Gov. MERRIAM to eX-
plain the beauties of the MCKINLEY
bill. The senator is a glib talker, who
has the faculty of 0bscuring stern facts
by the glitter of his polished rhetoric;
but as this is year when the voters are
looking more at the substance than the
shadow of things, the senator will find
it an uphill business to convince them
that there is any righteousness in the
MCKINLEY law. There are too many
home arguments to oppose his theories.
All this fine-Spun talk about the beauty
of home market or the necessity for
fostering home industries melts like
mist before the morning sun when the
farmer and the workingman have to pay
out in hard cash from % to 10 per cent
more for goods than they ever had to pay
before.
Facts rebut theories every time.
Senator DAVIS led Off in his Crookston
| speech with a lot of glittering general
tiles relative to the advantages of the
| protective system, but it was noticeable
that, while he praised the MCKINLEY
bill, he Studiously avoided going into
the details of that measure and show
| ing the people the actual increase in the
| cost OF the neceSSaries of life that will
be neceSSitated by that Infamous law.
We propose to supplement the sen
| ator'S Crookston speech with a schedule
| of articles named in the MCKINLEY
bill on which the tax has Geen raised,
and than aSt. fhn t0 taip
| how the measure is to be benefit to
the wage-earners. There are three
weeks OF the canvass yet ahead Of him,
and he will have ample time to make
| all the explanations he cares to go into.
The great body of the wage and sal
ary-earners in this country-and they
constitute the bulk of the population
get from S400 to 81 200 year, the aver
! age, according to reliable statistics,
being about $500. This average of 5000
| has to support from three to five per-
sons in family. They have to live
closely to live within their means.
Every item of expenditure has to be
| closely watched, and an Increase of a
few cents in the cost OF any article
| counts heavily by the end Of the year.
| Now, as to the articles that are neces-
| sity to every family which is affected
in prices by the MCKINLEY law:
| Canned goods, an increase of from Is
| to 20 per cent on account of the tax Oh
tin plate.
Kerosene oil, increased from to 10
| per cent on account of tax on tin plate.
| From 25 to so per cent Increase OH all
| tin utensils Tor house or kitchen. A
corresponding increase on tin used in
building and pr0portionate increase
of rents.
All kinds of clothing, from IS to 50
per cent increase.
Buttons, % per cent increase.
Blankets aud carpets, from Is to so
per cent.
On apples the tax is 25 cents bushel,
or 63 cents barrel
Potatoes. % cents a buShel
Eggs. 20 per cent tax.
PruneS, from 20 to 25 per cent in
crease.
ALI articles of household hardware
from 25 to so per cent increase. .,
AT a conservative estimate the in
creased cost of living will be one-ffth
more i'll 1891 that it is this year. That
is to say, it will take 20 cents on the
dollar more to pay family expenses for
next year than before the passage of
the MCKINLEY law. A man who gets
$500 year will be no better off than he
would have been last year with
$500. 1t will be equivalent to reducing
the salary of the clerk or bookkeeper
from $1,000 to $500, or the wages of the
| laboring man from 81 to 80 cents.
| And yet Senator DAVIS says this
virtual reduction in wages and salaries
was justified because of the necessity
| for building up home industries. Will
| he please tell us where are the home in
| duStrieS in Mi nneSota that are to be
| built up by this new tax law? Will
| he point them out? There are cotton
! and woolen mills in New England,
| iron mills in Pennsylvania, glass works
in Pittsburg and Wheeling, and an
| English tin plate syndicate in London.
all of whom will profit by the MCKIN-
LEY bill. But where is the Minnesota
| industry that will be benefited? We
challenge the senator to name one.
And yet he and his colleague and the
| five representatives from this state
voted for the protection of New Eng
land and Pennsylvania and London in
| terestS, in face of the fact that they
were virtually reducing the wages of
the bread-winners in their own state all
of 20 per cent by increasing the daily
cost of living that amount.
These are facts as true as holy writ,
and no amount of sophistry or gilded
| rhetoric can rub them out.