Democratic Sentinel, Volume 8, Number 11, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 11 April 1884 — Why Clothes Are So Dear. [ARTICLE]

Why Clothes Are So Dear.

The New York Times (Rep.) publishes a comparison of the difference in the prices in New York and London of men’s clothing, which no fair minded reader can consider without acknowledging the injustice of the outrageous system that makes such a difference possible. For instance, a broadcloth dress suit which costs SSO in New York, costa only $22 in London. A heavy business suit which costa. S3O in New York costa but sl3 in London. A spring serge overcoat which costa S2O in New York costa but $8.50 in pondon. A winter beaver overcoat which costa $35 in New York costs but $14.50 in London. A silk hat which costs $5 in New York costs but $3 in London. These articles altogether cost in New York $l4O. In London they cost but s6l. The man who buys these clothes, therefore, in New York pays $79 more for them than he could buy them for in London. What causes this difference in the prices of the two cities ? *Our tariff. No one will dispute that, with the tariff removed, the same goods eould be purchased as cheaply in New York as in London, at least as cheaply plus the freight rates between the two cities. The man who pays, therefore, $l4O for clothes in New York really buys s6l worth of clothes, on which he pays $79 taxes. And where do these taxes go ? ' If the goods ate manufactured in this country not one cent reaches the Treasury. It is simply $79 taken by law from the man that buys s6l worth of clothes and given to the man who grows wool and the man who makes doth.

If the goods are manufactured abroad, $79 goes to a Treasury which does ndt need it, and can raise all the revenue it requires on whisky, tobacco, and articles of luxury. In either case the purchaser of the clothes gets absolutely nothing for the $79 of the $l4O which he spends. If on buying the clothes he had to pay s6l to the clothier and $79 directly to a tax collector, how long would he stand such extortion? In result there is not a particle of difference between that system and the present tariff system, according to which he is thus unnecessarily and exorbitantly taxed, not only on his dothing, but on nearly every other necessity of life. How long will the people of a country which claims to be free submit to this legalized robbery, which those who uphold it, and grow fat upon it, are pleased to call a “protective” tariff?