Democratic Sentinel, Volume 15, Number 47, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 11 December 1891 — THE CARPET INDUSTRY. [ARTICLE]

THE CARPET INDUSTRY.

DISASTROUS EFFECTS OF THE M’KINLEY TARIFF. Brilliant Promises End in Failure—Wage Reductions—BiU McKinley and His BUI —Wages and Profits—Tariff Shot, Etc. What Carpet Men Think. According to their own admissions the carpet manufacturers raised a fund of $300,000 to assist in the election of Benjamin Harrison to the Presidency. In return for this benevolence thoy wore promised additional protection. Some of them wanted free wool, others lower duties on carpet wools which are not raised in this country, and all wene In favor of higher duties on carpets. A fact which in part explains their desire for higher duties was this, that at that time they wero making arrangements to form a cast-iron agreement to limit production and raise prices, and in this way get back from consumers the money they had raised for campaign purposes. Those who asked for lower duties on carpet wools were disappointed, for the duties on larpet wools wore raised so high and such onerous restrictions were imposed on their importation that many kinds could no longer be imported In this way the cost of the materials used in carpet manufacture was largely increased. McKinley, however, granted the carpet men a liberal advance In duties on their products, the purpose of which was to give them lull control of the home market

Now, what lias been tho result? The carpet manufacturers have been forced to pay higher prices for their wool, all of which has to be Imported. As a result, they had to raise the prices of their carpets. The people refused to pay these advanced prices, preferring to follow the advice of Jay Gould to the farmers and workmon in regard to their clothing, “to get a ong with one suit where they would otherwise have two." The old carpets wero left on tho floors. The result of this is that one of the largest carpet firm* in the country, that of Alexander Smith <ft Sons, has been forced to sell its sto.'k of over $2,000,000 at auction at what it will bring. At the opening of the sale Walter W. Law, the sellers’ representative, said to the gentlemen of. the carpet trade: “The Alexander Smith <ft Sons’ Carpet Company offer you to day an unparalleled opportunity for supplying yourselves with their fabrics at your , own price. Wo have no hesitation whatever in inviting you to put your own value upon every piece wo have in sto k, ex- ( epting only the few patterns which wo have prepared for tho spring of 1892. With the removal of these accumulations, the only serous problem with which carpet manufacturers will have to (ontend is the high -price of wool caused by the McKinley bill and tho still more severe interpretation of its moaning by the Treasury Department. Remember, nigh prices for wool, mean high cost to manufacture carpets. Gentlemen, this is your day, ours wi 1 come later.” Nor are Alexander Smith & Sons alone in showing the blighting effects of the McKinley tariff on tho carpet industry. The actual situation could not bo shown bettor or clearer than does the following from Mr. Arthur T. Lyman, tho Treasurer of the Lowell Carpet Company, the largest establishment in Now England. Mr. Lyman said: “That the McKfn ey bill increased tho cost of carpets; that the prices of carpets wero increased in consequence of the McKinley bill; that they would not have advanced if the McKinley bill had not been passed.: and that if wool had been made free tho cost and prices of carpets would have gone down are facts that cannot bo disputed by anyone who understands the carpet manufacture and trade and its conditions in 1890 and 1891. * In every industry there aro four classes of persons interested: (1.) The producers of raw material. (2.) The manufacturers (3.) The consumers of the manufactured articles. (4.) The workmen emplojed in turning the materials into finished product- 1 . The McKinley tariff on carpets has certainly not been of any benefit to the first class in this country, for no carpet wool is grown, or would be grown, here under any tariff. Instead of benefitingths manufacturers, it has positively injured them as their own testimony shows. The third class, composed of the consumers of carpets, did notask for increased duties, but resented the enforced increase in the price of carpets by refusing to pay it No one would claim in View of this that thoy have been benefited by the tariff. And, finally, have the workmen employed in spinning the yarn and weaving the carpets been benefited by the McKinley tariff? Have more workmen secured employ me t? Have wages been raised? The answer to both questions is the same. There is no evidence of a >y increase in wages or opportunities for work. On the contrary, wages have been cut down. When Alexander Smith & Sons had finished their auct’on sale, they went back to tneir factories and told their workmen that the mo i myst accept a cut 1 1 their wages or the Works would bo shut down. The me.i preferred the former, and were reduced, No interest therefore, has been benefited by the McKinley tariff on carpet wools and carpets. Why, then, should it stand, sin e it works nothing but Injury to all concer ed?