Democratic Sentinel, Volume 15, Number 42, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 6 November 1891 — WHAT FLANNEL SHIRTS COST. [ARTICLE]

WHAT FLANNEL SHIRTS COST.

How the Tariff Puts All-Wool Clothe* Oat of the Reach of the Poor, Under the McKinley bill a plain ordinary flannel shirt sells at the cheapest retail storos in St. Louis for $2.50. This shirt is all wool, well made and warm, such a garment as every working man exposed to the weather in this climate ought to wear. The full suit of this flannel, shirt and drawers costs $5. A shirt; shoddy and cotton mixed, with the wool predominating, and having the appearance of an all-wool garment, can be had for $2, or $4 the suit. For $1.25 for the shirt or $2.50 for the suit, wool and shoddy mixturo or cotton warp is offered, and this, no doubt, will be taken by most people of limited income. It is not so bad but that It might be a great deal worse as maybe seen,by comparing it with cheaper imitations of flannel. It takes the, place of the wool and camel’s-hair mixtures sold in 1888 and 18a9 at S 2 and $2.50 the suit, the suit lasting two years, with wear from .September to June lof each year. The imitation flannel, which must now be taken as a substitute, loses most of its wool by washing, only enough remaining with tho, cotton to make it hard and stiff. After a.few washings there is little warmth left in such goods But, leaving tho imitations of all grades from very bad to very good out of consideration, take the real flannel, the plain, substantial, all-wool shirt at $2.50, or suit at $5. The lowest possible cost here for flannels for the winter for one man is $lO for two suits, or sls for an extra suit, such as every workingman should have against emergencies when dry flannels are needed and his change suit is “in the wash. ” It is clear that under McKinley prices real flannel is out of tho reach of people who have small incomes. The average wage-earner cannot afford it at all. He must put up with the imitations, for at the average wages of $1 a day he would have to work five days to get a single suit of flannels. When tt comes to buying for himself, his wife, for the avorage family of five persons, two or three changes apiece, including underskirts for the females, he can no more afford real flannels than he can diamonds and ruble-. Under the McKinley bill real flannel is a luxury for those only whose incomes are much above the average. It wiil often happen that men of family with an income of SSO or over a week will be compelled to lay aside reluctantly the real flannels when buying for themselves and tako tho cotton and shoddy mixtures, vhich, however skillfully made as imitations, are very far from being flannels. Any head of the family who goes to lay in the winter supply of clothing wiil see at once how greatly the total expense for all-wool and imitation woolen goods has been increased by this vicious and demoralizing taxation. The best grade of all wool flannel shirts, readymade, would not s -II for more than $1.25 were there no tax on tho ma'orial or tho finished gpods. Tho real value of the imitation woolen shirts is much less, and without the tax they would sell by thoir grade or their merit. As it is, the buyer is compelled to tako what ho can get. The retail seller doos tho best he can for him, but with double and triple taxation on every article of woolen goods in his trade, the dealer's power to please his customers Is minimized, and his trade is minimized with It For it is not every one who, after paying a real flannel price for an imitation flannel shirt, understands the political economy of It. He finds that ho has been swindled, and he thinks he has been swindled by a dealer who has done his best under a law which does its worst —St. Louis Republic.