The St. Johns herald., 1892-08-18
Tariff Debate fin the Senate.

tling of prices, the effect of the Me Kinley tariff has been to deprive the American people of their just share of the benefits of this tenden- cy. In opposition to Senator Al drich's array of statistics to show that the American people save year ly $325, 100000 in housekeeping expenses, Senator Carlisle pro- duces the statistical proofs that the annual cost of living in the United States has swollen to the amount of $2S5, 100000 as the effect of in- creased taxation. On the side of Mir. Carlisle is the invincible argu- ment, independently of figures, that the necessary tendency of an in- crease of taxes upon commodities is to increase their cost to cOnsum- CTS. On the side of Senator AL drich is the violent assumption that the effect of high taxation is to les sen the cost of the commodities upon which taxes have been levied. Between these two positions the American people can have no diff culty in making their decision at the ballot box.
 In regard to the increase of wages Mir. Carlisle shows that, like the de- cline in the prices of commodities, this has been due to world ten- dencies with which the tariff in this country has no concern. Solidarity of interest among workingmen has done more to advance and maintain the rate of wages than have all the tariffs and other legislative enact ments ever adopted. If wages in the United States have actually ad- vanced tbree-quarters of one per cent on an average, this has not been due in any degree 10 the tariff, but has been attained in spite of the tariff. MT. Carlisle produces the statistical proofs of what has long been observed, namely, that the rates of wages have advanced in those industries that owe nothing to the tariff, and that in the highly protected industries 1t has declined. If the tariff could give an upward movement to wages the reverse of this would be the case, At least, the wages in the protected indus tries would not be lower than the earnings in industries that know of the tariff only by it's extortion.- Philadelphia Record.
 In his recent apology for the Nc Kinley failure Senator Aldrich said that "there is no permanent place inAmerican politics for party that bases it's claims for popular sup port on the failures and disappoint- ments of the people" Why not? When the failures and disappoint- ments of the people" are the direct result of the policy of the party in power, how will you correct the blundcrs of that party except by bringing the matter into politics If it be true that political claims cannot be properly based on "the failures and disappointments of the people," then it must be equally true that they cannot be properly based on the successes and achieve ments of the people, and all the Republican talk about the prosper fly of the country-which exists in spite of the tariff laws, and not be, cause of them-should be dropped by Republican speakers and by the Republican press.
 At the time of the passage of the Mckinley law the Republican par. ty promised all sorts of prosperity on account of il. Trade was to bC enlivened. Wages were to be in creased. The prices of manufac tured goods were to be reduced The prices of agricultural product: were to be increased. Have these things occurred? Not at all. There have been failures and disappoint ments of the people" in all of them And now this apostle of protection coolly informs us that political ac