The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-04-04


him to talk about it. We re-
peat, we are not saying o that all of
the Improvement in business is due to
the Mckinley law, but we do assert
that business has greatly improved
since the law was passed, and as to the
truth of this we appeal to business men
everywhere. To this extent, therefore.
the of this country, meaning
thereby the great mass and body Of
people, find life less hard now than it
was two years ago.
Again, Mr.. Cleveland says eff there
is a w%orkingman anywhere who has
had his wages increased by virtue of its
operation, he has not yet made himself
known" The Mckinley law was not
passed to increase wages, and it was new
er claimed that it would have that effect
universally, but. as a matter of fact,
there are a great many persons in this
country who are getting better wages
now than before the law was passed.
There have been hundreds of new man
ufactories established during the last
year, and hundreds of old mes have en-
larged their facilities and extended
their operations. Here is an item that
falls under our notice just now:
The Royal Weaving Company. of Paw
tucket, X. l.. manufactures sleeve Innings
and dress goods. Before the Mckinley act
passed its business was languishing: it had
only twenty looms, and was employing but
a handful of operatives. While the act was
under discussion foreign manufacturers
ordered q cut OF 20 per cent. ana these
twenty looms were stopped. as they could
not compete against such reduction. AS
soon as the Mckinley act became q law the
looms were again set in motion. the capital
was enlarged from $4,000 to $4,000 and
the number of looms increased from twenty
to $50. Finer grades of goods were manu-
featured, and q superior quality of work
was required. There was on increase of
wages averaging p cents a day for women
and so cents for men. Those who before
the act were earning from IS to 50 per week
are now getting from 80 to 81. The wages
of men have increased To Sl4, and in some
cases to SIS. The manufacturer and the
operator have both protted. and the CON-
sumner has shared the advantage. The con-
sumner, who formerly paid 81, now gets the
same goods for Is cents.
The American Economist has COM
menced publishing a list of new in
dustries established or old ones en-
larged since the passage of the McKin-
ley law. The first installment contains
the names and location of $50 such in
dustries, and this is only q partial list.
Many of the establishments report an
increase of wages. One says: From
Nottingham, England, compelled by
tariff to come to United States" An
other, "Will increase if tariff remains,
otherwise not" Another says. First of
this kind in United States" Another,
New industry. result of tariff" An
other, idle sever years; just possible
to begin again." Another. Increase due
to tariff" And 40 on.
Finally, the ex-presidential purveyor
of false information says, plenty of
mills and factories have been closed,
thousands of men have thus lost en-
ployment, and we daily hear of reduced
wages" There never is a year when
some mills and factories are not closed,
but the implication in the foregoing
statement that there has been n gen.
eral closing or general throwing of men
out of employment since the passage of
the Mckinley bill, is Intentionally and
mischievOusly false. We venture the
assertion that for every factory closed
there has been a score of new ones
established. and for every person thrown
out of employment there have been a
hundred given work at good wages.
Mr.. Cleveland presents to the world
the sorry spectacle of an ex-President
trying to secure his reelection by de-
crying his OWL country and m%isrepre-
senting the condition of his countrymen.
His gross misstatements can only be ex-
planned on one of two grounds: Either
he is utterly and absolutely ignorant of
the true condition of the country or he
is utterly and absolutely reckless as to
what he says about it.