The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1891-07-04
Expressing Women.
st. Louis Republic.

Expressing Women.
st. Louis Republic.
Prof. Thomas G.. Sherman esti-
mates that tariff taxes take about
one-siXth of the earnings of the
people, and points out that these
taxes fall most heavily on women.
Sufficient attention has not been
directed to this significant fact, but
as soon as attention is directed to
it, at once becomes apparent a sa
fact. For, considering the case of
the single women supporting her
self, every article Of her clothing is
subjected to heavy taxes, which, on
her ribbons, insertions, gloves and
other similar articles, average
even higher than the high taxes on
mems apparel, the theory being
that the bit of ribbon at the throat,
the "inserting" in the yoke of Il
chemise, the lace on dress skirt,
the plume and flowers in a hat, are
IuXuries" which can be highly
taXed-three and four times as
highly, in the case of some articles
ten times as highly, under thepres-
ent tariff law as diamonds and
rubies. Mr.. Sherman protests with
justice that, though man can do
without ribbon, lace, artificial flow
ers, gloves and similar articles of
adornment, they are, by immemor-
ial custom, necessary for women,
and are to a greater or less extent
worn by all women, however poor.
Hard as these taxes are on the
single woman supporting herself,
they become harder still when she
marries and her husband has no
fortune but his own energy; for
then with each child there is an in
crease in the amount of tariff taxes
to be paid out of the family income
"The married man." says Prof
Sherman, "pays in the course of
his life from threeto five times as
much in taxes to the Government
and tribute to taX-eaters (in higher
prices for family supplies) as the
unmarried man ofequal prudence"
Notwithstanding all this" he
continues, "most men marry. But
who suffers most from the ever in
creasing burden of taxation and
tribute which follows marriage? :?
Is it not, almost invariably, the
wife and mother? Who, when
clothing is taxed up to double its
natural price, goes without new
clothes? Who suffers by the tax
of half.a dollar on every dollars
worth of ribbon, of seventy cents
on each dollars worth of stockings
or dress materials? who, in short,
bears the brunt of all the pinching
which our benevolent tariff laws
force upon the poor? Everybody
knows that it is the woman"
1t is always the woman. When
the family is pinched for means;
when it is a question of self-denial
for someone that the children may.
have decent clothing for school and
Sunday school, it is always the
mother who denies herself; who in
| thousands of cases denies herself
to such an extent that she hardly
has change of clothing. One-third
of the taxes paid az higher prices
under the tariff by the average
family of FIVE would clothe the
mother respectfully. The taxes on
her children's winter flannels
would buy her gloves; the tax on
their dresses would buy her lace,
ribbon and insertions if these ar
ticles were untaXed. But when
the price of everything she wears
is taxed up to half more than it
is worth the economy, the family is
forced to practice, falls heaviest on
the woman. 1t is on her that the
Mckinley bill imposes the greatest
burden of the enforced self-denial
of the masses out of which it piles
higher still the piled up millions of
the Carnegies, the Ammidowns
and the Niedringhauses.
The Surplus.