St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-10-14
Why Pro-MeKinIey Bill Sen
timents in the Public
Press Need Sailing.
Words and Expressions May
Be Twisted, Figures Speak
for Themselves.
Opportunities Offered the
Merchant by a "Wise and
Beneflcent Law"
Prices Will Not Go Up Be-
cause They Have Already
Been Advanced.

That series of interviews with lead
ing merchants on the effect of the Nc
klnlev bill and its effects published in
Sundays Tribune is becoming famous
ia nous for its inaccuracies, inconsist-
encies and generally misleading tone.
Commenting on the bill, the Tribune
said:
AS soon as the bill became a law they the
Importers arbitrarily advanced their prices;
Jobbers anO retailers have likewise marked
up thelr prices on goods. The thing cannot
last ana II the public will meet the bluff with
thirty or sixty days poStpouement of pur-
chases the gentlemen who are so eager 10
make something out of the tariff will be glad
To sell their goods at q reasonable price. The
men Who have been marking up the things
they have III stock do not know, in many
cases, what the new tariff is. They are SIM
ply trying 10 take advantage of the furry that
must inevitably follow change in the reve-
nae laws.
In the first place, the above editorial
expression does not agree with the in
terviews as published. The impression
intended to be conveyed by those inter-
views was that the Mckinley bill would
not result i'll any general advance of
prices. The editorial admits that prices
will go up, but insists that it is all a
"bluff'' on the part of importers. In
the second place, the interviews, many
OF them at least. were garbed. The
publication of those interviews empha-
sized the fact that publications OF senti-
ment favorable TO the Mckinley bill are
not to be relied upon, especially when
the exact language of the speaker is not
quoted. Those interviews published
Sunday were WOfully misleading. In
several cases the sentiments of the man
interviewed were referred to Indirectly,
merely, and his meaning was SO dis
torted that he would never recognize it.
In some cases, of course, the merchant
was reported correctly, but there are
good reasons why the retailer should
seek 10 make the public believe that
prices are going to remain just where
they are.
Merchants do not publish a card in
the newspapers announcing "On
and after the til inst. prices on
all - goods will be advanced by us %
| per cent, unless they have surplus
stocks Of inferior goods or articles likely
to become unreasonable, which they de-
sire TO work off. The merchant is not
going to take his customers into his con-
hdence, and tell them just what profit
he nsakeS and warn them every time he
intends to raise the price of staple
| goods. 1t is obvious that such proceed
lngs would ruin his business. At this
time the retailer Gislikes letting his Gus
TONERS know that prices are bound to
go up. He wants 10 delude them into
| thinking that they will not be called
upon to pay more than the same old
price, because they might be more care
full OF the dollars and thereby decrease
his sales.
As cited yesterday in the GLOBE, the
firm of K. ;. Goodfellow d Co. was rep
resented as announcing that the Me
kinley bill would make but little differ
| ence with prices. MIR. Goodfellow was
quoted. but his partner was the man in
terviewed, and his partner, Mr.. Way,
states plainly and unequivOcally. out
side OF the Tribune, where his meaning
was mlSconstrued, that the Mckinley
bill Is unjust and outrageous. Leading
jobbers in the East have ordered their
customers to put up prices on certain
lines OF goods because of the Mckinley
bill. Then there is W. II. Donaldson.
as ardent Republican and as firm be-
never Ill protection as there is in the
whole Northwest. What does he saw?
Outside of the TEibune's columns Mr..
Donaldson says that the Mckinley tariff
law is most unjust measure, in that it
causes a raise Ill prices OH just those ar
ticleS which everybody must have, not
upon the luXurieS.
Here comes George 81. Partridge, of
Wiman, Partridge d Co., jobbers in dry
goods. with some evidence on the effect
or this bill. and he should know some
thing about it. His own language is
| used here. Mr. Partridge quotes the
editorial OF the Tribune printed above.
and SAYS:
Il see from the Tribune that our
merchants quite generally have not adj
Yanced the prices On their stock in hand.
Granting this, let US see if they are not
warranted in advancing their prices. 1t
ought not to be difficult to solve the
problem. The bill Is fact, its provis-
IONS IN the main are plain. and there is
| no reason Why we cannot figure what it
Will cost to repleniSh stock.
what are importers who have stocked
up in anticipation of the passage of this
measure doing? | have before me let
Ter from pearl button importer in New
YORK. who is reported to have on hand
Sl.0O0,00O worth of pearl buttons. See
how magnanimouS he is. He saws:
please find prices of pearl buttons for
| goods on hand; prices for imports would
| be much higher The button he sold
for 1879 cents before the Mckinley bill
went into effect he offers for so cents:
to import now will cost 6S cents. The
| one ne sold for 25 cents he will sell for
20; to import will cost ". The one he
| sold for 49, he will sell for Sc: to I'M
port now would cost s1.Ol. The one he
| sold for 79 he will sell at SO; to import
now would cost S1.09, and SO on through
the list.
Cotton goods, as stockings, shirts
and drawers, are subject to marked in
crease. and here we notice that same at
tention to the interests of those using
the cheaper grades. The only duty on
stockings, costing less than 60 cents per
dozen. was 10 per cent ad valorem; now
the duty is 20 cents per dozen specific
and 20 per cent ad valorem. The stock
ing costing in Europe 20 cents per dozen
| paid duty of cents, and cost landed
here % cents: now the stocking cost
ing 20 cents in Europe, pays 20 cents
specific duty and 20 per cent ad valorem
and costs A cents landed here, an in
crease of over 81 per cent.
''How is it with the higher-priced
| hosiery? Take hosiery costing in Eu.
rope So per dozen; the old duty was 40
| per cent, making it cost $3.50. The
rate under the Mckinley bill is 81 per
dozen and 40 per cent, or S17.SO, an in
crease of between 5 and per cent.
''Shlrts and drawers costing s1.5O per
OOZtil III Europe pdiQ unQer The old
law 40 per cent ad yalorem, thus costing
s2.10: now they pay 81 specific duty and
So per cent ad yalorem or $500, an in
crease of A per pent. Those costing
s12 in Europe paid under the Old law
40 per cent. and cost landed in this
country $3.50; under the Mckinley law
the duty is 81 specific, and 40 per cent
ad valorem. Or $3.50. an increase of IL
per cent.
"Woolens, worsteds, cloths, dress
| goods, Especially the cheaper varieties),
pushes, velveteens, npholstering goods,