The observer., 1900-01-13
THAT POOR MANS SUIT,
Its Increased Cost More Than Made Up by
Improvement in Quality.

Improvement In Quality!
Under all kinds of tariff laws
wealthy people can obtain good cloth.
ing. It is the poor and semi-poor
who are most vitality interested in
such laws: Realizing this fact In
way; the advocates of low tariffs and
40 tariffs most strentously insisted
hat the duty on wool should be re.
moved and that on woolens cut down
IN order that the poor mans clothing
,ould be reduced In price. The Will
son act made wool duty free and took
off both the pound rate or compensat.
ing duty and about one-third of the
Id valorem duty from wooden cloths.
What was the result?
The first result was a great increase
IN the importation of foreign cloths
II low grade, every additional yard OF
which took the place of a yard OF
American CLOTH and helped to throw
American workers out of employment.
These foreign cloths, chiefly English,
we're in general not sound, all wool
'tuffs, but largely made of cotton and
'hoddy mixtures. England's use of
wool substitute is far in excess of ours
per capita, while her proportionate
consumption of wool is only two
thirds as great as ours. English
S0elen manufacturers are adopts in the
fabrication of cloths of good appear
lnce from the trashjest materials, and
tho A m orioop N, a y p al xyo. oooD Aoodn6
with spurious woolens. The foreign
manufacturer had his chance and he
:eveled in it. If the price of clothing
vas slightly decreased the standard of
quality was decidedly lowered.
The American woolen manufacturer
,oon saw what lie was "up against"
He was compelled to compete with the
Kind Of stuff that was making the mar
ket. He accordingly began to import
wool substitutes. This is clearly
proven by the statistics of imports.
The Mckinley act, which preceded
The Wilson act, discouraged the i'm
2ortation of shoddy by duty of thirty
,ents q pound. The Wilson act took
ihe opposite course by putting mere
y nominal duty of fifteen per cent. on
such materials. During the seven
months ending March 81, 1898, the
imports of shoddy and waste were
1913 ,487 pounds, and for like period
snding March 81, 1894, only 40,288
pounds. In the seven months ending
March 81, 1895 succeeding the pas
,age of the Wilson act), the imports of
,hoddy and waste amounted to 1885,
$50 pounds or 225 times the quantity
brought in during the same section of
;he preceding year.
Will any person now assert that the
of the American WOODEN
market thus brought about was an ad-
vantage to the poor man, even with a
reduction in price? And
;he reduction In price could not be
and was not. A suit of
,lothes takes on an average about
;hree yards of cloth, the cost of which
e, say, about half the first cost of the
suit. Reducing the duty on the
woolen cloth does not lessen the cost
,f labor, trimmings or other expenses,
ind the amount so decreased was
'eund by many expert Investigations
md calculations to cut but a small
igure in the retail price Of suit. But
ihe injury to quality, the lessened
durability was practical and tangible
svil, as many a wearer of medium and
ow priced clothing discovered.
The Dingley act restored the duty
IN shoddy as we'll as on wool and
voolens, and the American mills are
turning out honest and durable cloths
n all grades. The ''poor mans suit"
'osts little if any more than when it
vas made of q spurious worsted from
he shoddy mills of England.