Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1892-04-29
Our NEIeHBoR IN PETFIOOArs.

zeal In endeayoring to prove the insane
theory that the tariff is not a tax. Elk
perience teaches our neighbor nothing.
Though obviously the laughing-stocK
OF the community in its $3.50 'ail WOOL
suit, our neighbor instead OF prohtlng
by its trials punges itself deeper into
the mire Of asininity aud makes per-
feet rcdurtio ad absltrdum OF itself oy
actually appearing in public in a S5.9S
''wool-homespun" wOrking-girPs dress
The Inteuigcncer prints a picture OF
its S3.9s "woolen" dress, with the FOL
lowing inscription:
The duty on this suit If imported, would
he R4l3 The Free Trader SAYS the person
buving it pays that amount OF tarln tax.
But IL was bought on Grand street, New
York. all made up and ready oput on lot
50 .9S. sust 10 cents less than the alleged
tax. =.
This, in our neighbours estimation Is
an unanswerabls argument, and II
struts about in its cheap new DRESS
that came out OF a store on Grand
street, New York, all ready to put on,
with its very hustle inflated with the
sense Of its tarific loveliness-its curves
Of beauty supported amply by tariff
tracts, no doubt
The Iaielligeleer in these s3.9s
"woolen" petticoats, taxed s4.1S, is
even more utterly ridiculous than 1t
was when gnawing its 65 cent file with
its 75 cent tax. 1t is hardly possible to
adulterate a file, while it is the easiest
thing in the world to make a ''woolen"
dress out Of shoddy and pass it on the
willing custom house officers as a man
ufacture Of wool sin whole or in part "
This dress might be made Of stuff that
would make it cost but Sl.9s, yet If
there were a trace Of wool in it the tax
would still be about Sab. On the
other hand, il might be all wool and
very costly, and the only increase in
the tax would be in the Gd UGlorem
duty.
Now, we shall demonstrate to our
purblind neighbor where the tariff is
heavy tax even on this S3.9s working
girls dress. As it stands there is hard
IL a trace OF actual wool in it, II there
is even a trace. As have repeatedly
shown by the statistics Of the census OF
1890 gathered from the wooden mills,
showing a heavy preponderance Of
shoddy and other adulterants over
actual wool used in the manufacture OF
"woolen" goods, it could not at the
price (3.9Sl be aught else than shoddy,
the poorest grade Of cloth manufac-
tured, probably not having one strand Of
actual wool in it. For this worthless
stuff the poor working-girl pays S3.9s.
Now, were it not for the enormous tax
on wool. which forces the domestic
manufacturer to use shoddy to make a
profit, the worklng-girl might for her
sos buy a really serviceable dress with
considerable wool in it-a dress that she
could wear long after the Inteuigcncers
shoddy dress had fallen in rags
Does our neighbor catch the point?
Does il see how this drag-net tax OF
s4.13 conceals as devilish a piece Of
tariff robbery Of the poor working girl,
as is to be found in the whole infamous
record?
The census shows that the value Of
domestic wooden goods during the cen
sus year ended June 1, 1890, reached the
great sum Of S33s, Poi, 100. What part
Of this is the real value? Whas part is
the artificial value enabled to be arbi-
trarily added in consequence Of the ex-
orbitant duties imposed by the McKin-
ley tariff? What would be the real
value if raw wool were free and duties
we're reduced one-half or more, as pro-
posed by the Springer bill?
Taking foreign and domestic goods
together, it is a safe estimate that the
American people will this year pay fully
$500, 600, OOOO FOR manufactured wOOlenS.
and Of this sum probably not less than
two-ffths, or $500, 100000, represents
not real value but value artifcislly and
unnecessarily enhanced by the tariff on
wool and woolens. 1t is impossible to
ascertain what part of the cost of do
nestle wOolens is real cost and what
part tariff cost, but on foreign woolens,
which are a comparatively small part
Of the whole, duties TO the amount Of
over $40, 900, OOO a year are collected,
The taxes on the people as a penalty
for the crime Of wearing wooden clothes
are enormous in amount and still more
enormous in character, The poor work
ing girl, whose pitiiUl shoddy garments
the IRtcuigeHccr jubilantly airs in its
columns, cannot afford to pay the tax
on woolens and so must put up with
shoddy, cotton and cows hair, which to
her are costly at S3.9S.
The Democratic party says: Instead
of forcing this poor working girl to
wear a worthless shoddy dress, giro her
q cheap WOODEN dress.
The Cincinnati Commercial Gazette
takes a long breath and says: