The Superior times. [volume] (Superior, Wis.) 1870-1912, 1892-09-10

coat and wastcoat at the same price as
before. We thus sell titty-fve styles of
clothing made up of foreign worsted
goods at precisely the same prices as
before the Mckinley act was passed.
'Some Democratic partlsans are de-
claring that a large amount of shoddy
has been put in the Worsteds; is that
true? ," at ls not true, replied Mr..
Brickner, "for these foreign manutact-
urers understand that we would detect
the trick, If they were thus attempting
TO swindle us. No, | think they have
maintained the quality of their goods
bv cutting down the wages of their
workingmen. 4 weaver IN England can
only make about SIS month, while IN
this country a weaver earns from $40 to
So a month"
.sWhat was the total amount of wages
YOU paid to your hands in 1891 ?'' I'VE
paid Sll0. 700 in wages to our hands; and
do not put IN that amount what we
paid to our men in this counting-room,
nor TO our statesmen. We sold goods
in the course of the year which brought
us in S520,0OO. 1t is thus obvious that
33l per cent. of the cost of clothing is
the cost of lator used in making 1t.
Cutters make on the average $50
week, and our other hands are equally
we'll paid. fyou will go about Roches-
ter YOU will find that the hands are we'll
housed. There are but few tenement
houses here. A large proportion of our
hands own their own houses, and they
have large savings bank deposits
"What about The price OF the Ameri-
can goods which you use in making
cIothing?" I'VE are not paying any
more for American worsteds, casslmeres
and unlon cassimeres than we did IN
1890"
.Have you reduced the wages of your
hands since the Mckinley act was
nassed?" "We have not, but on the
con,rarv have increased wages of our
hands in individual cases. Moreover,
our hands have constant employment,
six davs in the week, at remuneratlve
wages. Every clothing mandatory IN
Rochester, / believe, at the present
time Is IN prosperous condltlon.
Committed to Free Trade by Their Own
Mouth.
That wing of the Democratic party
which cannot believe that the party Is
ranidly drifting TO free trade, will prob
ably be surprised to read the following
dialogue which took place IN Congress
last spr;nC, when the free wool bill was
,,ndar discussion. Mr. Walker, of
Massachusetts,, is Republican, and Mr..
Wilson. of West Virginia, Is Demo
crat: ,,, III, . o.,-
and will give time 70 any gentleman on
/ tba Democratlc side To answer this queS-
ron II there is a Democrat IN this House
wbn X IN favor of the principle of pro
,antion whether any one OF them would
/ yotn for its application as general prlncl-
nla or ia any single article. or as II IS un-
garstood in It's application IN the Mckinney
hi ar not. Is there Democrat here IN IA
ror rrLr Of Of the protection principle in any form
\ in other words :?
4 Mr.. Wilson: No.
/ Mr. Walker: Very well. The gentle
r,an from vest Virginia says not. on
nii aIi!, iaree 10 that: you all agree that there
a., Hna7 ." Democrat In this House IN favor OF
- ,ba nrinciple OF protection. do you ;
Waiting for an answer. men you are are
IN favor of the principle OF free trade, are
YOU not ~, o.,,, crat n II
with snfficient revenue for the needs OF the
III Walker: Then you tavoT tree trade
tne principle OF free trade.
/ Vr Wilson: As far as we can
Nnta single one of all the Democratic
.,,ar3bers ot 4 Congress Democratic bE
Ia majority favored even the principle
af nIotect;on. Ali beheyei IN free trad