Democratic Sentinel, Volume 16, Number 25, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 8 July 1892 — Page 4

SjjelUtmotrattcSenttnel RENSSELAER, INDIANA. J. W. McEWEN, POBUSHEB.

r Farms in the Mississippi bottoms (we liable to have a hop crop, judging Ifrom the frog croaking. I One Michael Flanagan has entered [the fiftieth year of his service as City |Clerk of Kingston, Ont., and he (knows what he is there for. The skin of a boiled egg is an excellent remedy for a boil. Carefully peel it, wet and apply to the boil; it draws out the matter and will relieve soreness. 1 A leading actress says that “a Ikiss to be artistic must be impersonal.” There is entirely too much inartistic realism in shadowy halls and cozy back parlors. The summer girl has taken to wearing suspenders, but the acme of feminine imagination will not be reached until she is able to scold her husband for not sewing on the buttons for them. A New York preacher proposes that the churches should open some strictly moral saloons in which nothing but mildly alcoholic drinks shall be sold. This seems to be a movement for a union between church and state—namely, the state of intoxication. “Western farmers who expect to raise a crop of corn this year,” observes the Bangor News, “will have to use diving-bells in planting it.” This has been done already, dear friend, and arrangements have been made to procure oyster-longs later in the season for gathering the crop. Another murderer was electrocuted in New York the other day, and one of the attendant physicians declared “there was nothing horrible about it.” Judging from the expert testimony in these cases, science will some time make these entertainments quite amusing to all but a single interested person. And they now say that even he no longer kicks.

If the road-making experiences of modern Europe teach us in America one lesson more than another, it is that our common roads should be taken as much as possible out of the hands of the merely local authorities, and administered by either the national or the State governments after some plan in accordance with scientific knowledge and the needs of the people who use the roads.

Bob Ford wore an opal pin in his neck-scarf at .the time he was shot. . Friends had frequently reminded hip of the unlucky qualities of the opal, 3?ut he failed to heed their warnings. By his violent death the baleful influences of this ill-omened stone are again illustrated. It is especially dangerous when worn on the persons -of people who have committed murders or who have otherwise incurred deadly enmities.

TnE new Boston Public Library seems to be suffering under a variety of afflictions. There was placed recently upon its facade an array of names of eminent lights in the book world, ancient and modern, which an acute observer noted one day was an acrostic, spelling the names of the firm of architects engaged in-its construction. When taxed with this presumptuous offense the architects charged the responsibility upon the boys in the office. Perhaps it was the boys in the office who drew the plans of the whole building. But whether done by the office boys or the office employers the trustees have ordered the names to be removed, and a new set will be made whichwill not be acrostical in its ment. Dr. Bacon, of Chicago, has introduced a word to public notice which bids fair to be a godsend to the medical fraternity. Mrs. Ford died from the effects of chloroform administered to facilitate a surgical operation, and her husband claims that she was given too much of the drug. The Doctor explains that her death can only be attributed to the fact that her constitution bore an idiosyncrasy to the drug administered. Idiosyncrasy, as Polonious would say, is good, feiere have been mapy instances in the past of patients dying while under the influence of chloroform. We now know that the accusations of carelessness and ignorance usually preferred against the doctors were Unjust. The unfortunate patients Were victims of idiosync^y. There are 10,123 teachers instructing the public school children of Massachusetts, and just 901 are men. What is the inference? That Massachusetts is overpopulated on the female side; that she should be bled, so to speak, and that this congestion of one sex in' one vocation should be to be avoided in our other commonwealths. But there is a point not to be overlooked and that is that In the intellectual State that Massachusetts certainly is, woman, seeking an independent vocation, first took to teaching; whereas in our newer States, where distribution of brain work among the sexes is becoming more equalized, both impulse and demand are multiplying the pursuits in which woman is inevitably to become a masterful competitor with father, husband, and brother. It’s English, you know, for women in “high society” to accuse each other of theft. A suit for slander arising from accusation of this nature has been begun in the Chicago courts, •ad » lfte one is compromised at Mil-

waukei by the payment of $3,000 t< the accused person. At a receptior given by fashionable people in th« latter city a set of silver teaspoons was missed, and one of the ladies invited to assist the host was chargee by the latter with stealing them. Mrs. Chandler caused the arrest el Miss Laurence for the theft, but sub sequently lacked courage to continue the prosecution. The spoons were found to have bee*i accidentally taken to a caterer’s, and Mrs. Chandler, 'bo* ing sued by Miss Laurence for $5,000, has compromised for three-fifths of it. There is comfort in the reflection that if fashionable American women must imitate fashionable English women in some respects there is no evidence yet that the imitation can be carried to the pitch of stealing.

Since it is becoming more and more the fashion that the account between husband and wife in cases of marital infidelity shall be settled with the pistol, it would, perhaps, be well to insist upon an accurate knowledge of the use of fire-arms as an essential condition of marriage. It is certainly needlessly cruel to do the thing up bunglingly when called upon to shoot the betrayer of one’s honor. Take, for instance, the case in Paris, where a lady of the first social rank disposed of the woman with whom the husband had been guilty. The outraged wife fired five shots from a revolver into the victim, and even then did not succeed in killing her on the spot. The wretched creature lingered in agony for some hours. Since society seems inclined to regard the shooting as perfectly proper under the circumstances, and indeed as in “very good form,” it certainly should encourage the instruction necessary to the better aim in the first place, may be right to kill, but it is not contended, so far as we have heard, that it is right to torture.

An accident occurred to a cabman in Chicago which seems so reasonable and logical in its nature one wonders that he does not read of such mishaps every day. Some portion of the harness gave way and the shafts shot into a perpendicular position. The jehu, as a natural consequence, found himself precipitated upon the hard pavement with painful emphasis. This accident calls fresh attention to a well-known fact—namely, that the hansom cab is the most uncouth, uncomfortable, unreliable and ridiculous nightmare of a vehicle ever devised by a depraved inventive genius. It is a sort of balancing machine with the horse at one end and the driver at the other. When the driver is a heavy man, one can imagine the difficulty with which the poor animal catches bis hoofs into the cobblestones as he pulls his load along. As for the upending feature, there is no reason why a passenger should not consider such a diversion possilfle at any moment. That cabs have not hitherto turned upside down with frequency can be attributed to nc other reason than public good luck.

Froji Montreal comes the information that a number of Canadian capitalists have seriously taken in hand the project of connecting the Georgian Bay and Lake Ontario by means of a ship railway. There was talk of this before the Tehuantepec scheme received its quietus by the death of Captain Eads, but never until now as anything more than a possibility. It is now stated that E. L. Corthell, a Chicago civil engineer who was associated with Captain Eads in the Tehuantepec business, has just made a thorough inspection of the proposed route from a point near Colllngwood to another near Toronto, a distance of about sixty-six miles, and pronounced it entirely and easily practicable. The plan is for a roadbed of fifty feet with six steel tracks, and the estimated cos,t is not more than $15,500,000 for a road capable of carrying vessels up to 5,000 tons burden. A corporation called the Hurontario Ship Railway Company has been organized to carry this project through. When that is done and some improvements in navigation of channels connecting the lakfes and of the St. Lawrence River are made the traveler can take ship in the port of Chicago and sail to any seaport on the globe, sixty-six miles of the distance overland, without leaving his vessel. This may be done before the century is out. Then look for the Tehuantepec ship railway, unless in the meantime the Nicaragua canal comes in to meet all the requirements of commerce in that quarter. Truly this is a century of wonders, and those who shall be octogenarians at its close will have seen greater things than have been seen in any other country since the earliest record of history

Devoured the Elephant and Rhinoceros.

This pleasant story4s told of Thackeray by a woman at whose house he visited: After having told a lot of delightful stories, Mr. Thackeray remarked that he must leave, he was so terribly hungry. We told him that we could give him a very good dinner. “There is nothing, my dears, you can give me,” he answered with a funuy sigh, “for I could only eat the cifop of a rhinoceros or a slice from an elephant.” “Yes, I tan,” exclaimed Dot, the 3-year-old daughter of the house. She disappeared into a big cupboard, and soon emerged with a look of triumph on her fat little face, holding in her hands a wooden rhinoceros and i an elephant from her toy Noah’s ark. | Putting the two animals on a plate, she handed them with great gravity t<o Mr. Thackeray. The great man I laugned and rubbed his hands with glee, and then, taking the child in his arms, kissed her, remarking: “Ah, little rogue, you already know the I value of a kiss!” Then he asked for a knife add fork, smacked his lips, and pretended to devour the elephant and rhinoceros.

WHAT WOMEN WEAR.

SOME HANDSOME MIDSUMMER GOWNS. The Fashionables at the Summer Resorts Making Frantic Efforts to Outdo Each Other—Becoming Costumes for the Street and House. Seasonable Styles.

AS the summer resorts unfold their short-lived glory, there will be a scramble on the part of the ultrafashionables to outdo each other In \ the quaintness of ?, \ their costumes and \ in the novel effects | /“of their wateringI / place make-up, and '/ midsummer will be ' sure to bring its mania, writes our ft. New York Correia spondent. It is a little too early to predict exactly

what that mania will be, but it now looks as if it might run in the line of hat’ crowns, and that we shall, ere many moons, t see tho summer girl ducking her head to get her towering sugar-loaf safely through the doorway. Another novelty to which I should call the attention of the men folks is the perfumed underskirt. It really seems to me as if the young men are all destined this summer, if not to die of a rose in aromatic pain, at least to be stifled with the sweet odors which tho summer girl will leave in her wake. The perfumed, or sachet, underskirt is easily made. All you have to do is to ran bands of silk under the lace flounces and stuff (hern full of perfume powders—orris, verbena, lavender, lilac —and the thing is done; and you’ll leave behind you a trail of savory odors. But imagine the effect of several hundred of these sachet underskirts in a crowded ball room, in which tho swaying of these garments will cause them to distribute their perfumes in greater abundance? It does look as though that delicate creature, tho dancing dude, were really in danger of being suffocated with sweetness. At this season of the year a woman’s thoughts are concentrated upon outdoor effects. Tho sunshade is such an effect. When it harmonizes thoroughly with a costume, the result is most pleasing. In my initial illustration the sunshade

A PRINTED FOULARD.

is in harmony with the underskirt and sleeves. In this costume the underskirt and tight sleeves are of a ri h faille franchise, and the bodice, overskirt, and puffed sleeves of striped wool crepe. The collar, tab, and belt are of fine gold gimp. You r> ay make this gown up in dark and light heliotrope.

Nothing can be prettier than a stamped foulard for a young person, and nothing more appropria'e for summer wear. My second illustration pictures such a gown. The skirt has three ruffles made of bias stripes. The (harming little guipure figaro is outlined with ribbon set off with a double bow, as indicated. It is exactly the same at the back. Thero is also a ribbon belt, the sleeves parrying out the same scheme of garniture.

The Eton jacket has developed into one of the rages of (lie moment, but very few of these garments are Eton except in name. The true Eton has small close sleeves, and should invariably be worn with a sleeveless vest, for if you make its sleeves large enough to go over an ordinary gown, you have no longer an Eton coat. The true Eton has tailor-made turn-down collar and lapels. Nor should it ever be made use of as a wrap for muffling up purposes. This is ridiculous. The correct summer girl never such a mistake. Her Eton coat is merely a separato bodice which she wears over different vests and matches her skirts, while the vests run in different materials. The coat must fit the figure snugly. To do this, the vests should have long openings for the straps to pass through. My third illustration presents another very prettily designed figured foulard, with a deep lace flounce and lace basque,

LACK-TRIMMED TAFFETA.

ribbon corselet and puffed sleeves, also banded with ribbon. This gown may be made up very stylishly jn taffeta glace. I see some very tastefully designed i surah blouses, and there will, no doubt, i be a goodly array of them at the sum- I mer resorts. They are inexpensive and dressy. Pale-blue is a favorite color, I with very short basques, and either a:; belt of the same material or one of the fancy belts now so modish. The turn- i down collar and deep epaulets are in ecru lace. Such a blouse should button ! tn frost with gold studs.

The morning costumes at the fashionable summer places have a great deal of dash about them. In fact, that is the study of the modish maiden. She doesn’t care so much for a pretty face as for a fine figure, good carriage, and a certain air of sureness of self. Everything about her is scrupulously well made. She abhors slouchlness as nature does a vacuum. Take her in her blue serge; from beneath her skirt peep out her dainty russets, while her Eton fits her like a glqve. Its left lapel set off with a boutonniere, genuine manfashion. Her vest, in Bome perfectly becoming color, is set off with a deep chevron of guipure, and her neat leather belt, fawn color, accentuates the small, round, supple waist, while from the flaring projecting brim of her Hogarth falls her dotted veil, drawn in graceful folds under her chin and tied a$ the back with its long enis fluttering in the morning breeze. Such is the dashing girl at the Springs, out for a walk on the public promenade. She knows she is perfection, and she has no difficulty in making you think so, too. My fourth shows a simple but always

A MUSLIN DELAINE.

popular summer gown, the muslin delaine. The bodice simulates a jacket, and appears to open on a pleated front. At the waist there is a large bow with long ends. The bottom of the skirt is set off with pleated flounces. There is no doubt a vast difference between the woman who merely dresses neatly, and tho woman who dresses with an object in view, namely, to render herself attractive to the looker-on. No woman is so handsome that she can afford to spurn tho aid of modiste and milliner, and no woman is so witty that she can shine when negligently or unbecomingly dressed. Her. puns may be good, but look at her puffs; her epigrams may be brilliant, but look at her ruchings and pleatings; her learning may be astounding, but look at tho fit of her bodice, look at the bang of her skirt. She certainly must have been thinking out the plot of a play while she was dressing. There is art in dross, and, while it may be to a degree like the lay of Shelley’s “Skylark,” “unpremeditated art,” it is only so in a very slight measure, but like all art it must be acquired by study, observation and reflection.

In my last illustration I set before you a charming toilet for a Saturday night hop, which may be made up in any filmy, gauzy material, the cutout being trimmed with lace, as shown. The ribbon corselet ends at Iho side seams; at the back there is a Watteau bow with long ends. If made up in pale blue, a passementerie band of silver crosses the bust and meets at the back under the bow.

The la 'ed Swiss bolt is a very pretty novelty in leather of various colors. At the back and teont, the two pointed edges are laced with a silk cord. Od each side there is a buckle. This belt goes with silk vests and blouses, so much worn at summer resorts. The lacing cord shou’d be tied at the bottom.

Crepons are much affected by young girls. They are usually made up of a deep chicory ruff on the bottom of the skirt, crossed bodices, double puffed sleeves,, deep cuffs and corselets, the latter being invariably trimmed with three rows of narrow ribbon, brought

DANCING GOWN.

down to a point on the right and fastened with a bow; same scheme of trimming on the cuffs. From what I can hear even young ladies who adore athletics and discuss the points of a game of base-ball will zealously guard their complexions this summer. The tall, slender, pale, refined girl is in fashion this season, and her powder box will be much in evidence even on boating parties. The reason of this is that complexions must be kept in harmony with the delicate tones Of fabrics. I hear it whispered that the young men have resolved to adopt gray as their fashionable color. Why? Because it doesn’t show riee powder. Traveling dresses are made up in soft woolens, the skirts being fully gored, lined with satinet and finished' with a ruehing on the inside. The corsages are pointed in front, have dress-coat tails, and large revere, with a turndown velvet collar. Small flaring velvet cuffs add a finish to the leg o’mutton sleeves. The vest is s parate oi mav be buttoned to the Piling of the corsage. The skirt is gathered at the back. The British Surgeon General writes in defense of the opium traffic which England persists in thrusting upon the Chinese. He even says the Chinese have been benefited by it, that they were formerly addicted to alcohol intemperance, and ho considers that the effects of opium are less degrading. The opium eaters do not engage in brawls or jump on their wives, nor become dangerous victims of delirium tremens. In Germany in spite of the tendency to restrictive laws, there is a provision for trade-freedom, meaning liberty to carry on any trade or profession whatever. Though the government prosecutes all those who use the title doctor or physician illegally, or without due authorization, many a one is permitted to treat the sick who does not himself represent his titles or abilities.

A TALK BY TELEPHONE.

MOTIVES OF THIS NEW BUNKO GAME EXPOSED. Wholesale Cat In Wages in the Protected Iron and Steel Industry Tariffs and Prices Go Up, While Wages Go Down—monopolies and Millionaires, The Reciprocity Fake. United States—Hello! hello! South America—Hello! , U. S. —Is that you, South America? S. A.—What do you want? U. S.—This is United States. You know, we put a reciprocity clause into what we call the McKinley bill, that we passed here last fall? S. A. —Yes, I heard you did. U. S.—Well, that clause authorizes the President to put duties on teo, coffee, sugar, molasses and hides. S. A.—Arn’t you mistaken? I thought your constitution gave your Congress full and exclusive power to lay and collect taxes, duties, etc. U. S.—Yes, so it does, but I haven’t time now to discuss a constitution more than a hundred years old and made to suit different times. As I was going to say, the President can put a duty of 3 cents per pound on your coffee, 1£ cents per pound on your hides, and 2 cents per pound on your sugar; if, in his opinion, you unduly tax the goods imported into your countries from the United States. It is to learn what you intend to do in regard to this matter that I called you up. S. A. —Well now, I'll tell you frankly, Jim B 1

U. S.—Please mention no names. S. A. —I beg your pardon, but this is What I think: If your President wishes to put a tax on these articles—all of which are now on your free lisb—and your people don’t object to paying it, I don’t see why we should. As to what kind of duties we should have, I think we can decide for ourselves without any foreign interference. U. S.—Of course we don’t wish to interfere, but don’t you understand that if we tax our imports of these articles frojta your countries and not from other countries, you will lose some of your trade up hero?

S. A. —Oh, yes, of course we might lose a little with you, but we would gain about as much with other countries. If you tax raw hides and increase their cost to you, your manufacturers will make fewer gloves, shoes, etc., but Europe will make more; so if you tax sugar as you have been doing, your canners and preservers will do less business and Europe will do more in this line. I see clearly that while such a policy might injure us a little it would harm you much more—so much more that I can’t think you would be so foolish as to adopt it, but only intend it for a bluff. No; we don’t care to swap any tariffs this year. U. S.—But wait a little; don’t talk quite so loudly. After I shall have explained a few things you may take quite a different view.

8. A.—Well, go on. U. S. —You see we, have had a high .protective tariff here for thirty years. S. A. —Yes, I know that’s what you call it. I agree, though, that it’s high. U. S. —Well, the Republican party that made this tariff has been telling the farmers and laborors that it was to help them by giving them homo markets, high wages, etc. 8. A.—You didn’t have to give reasons to your manufacturers, I guess. They didn’t object to a policy that Would give them exclusive ownership of your “homo markets” and U. S. Please wait until I am through. As I was going to say, the farmers, who expected everything of protection, became spendthrifts, and, because nearly half of. their farms were mortgaged, and because farms east of the Mississippi River have lost half of their value, during the last fifteen years, they got it into their heads that “protection" was to blame for all their extravagance and foolishness. The same kind of an absurd idea was taking Eossession of the wage-earners, who, ecause they have to do more work or Bee their wages reduced nearly every year, began to think that protection was at fault, though it was explained to them that it was due to over-produc-tion, excessive competition, etc. Well, anyway, by 1890, when McKinley was revising the tariff, a few of us saw ciearly that the protection system could not stand much longer, unless it was again repaired, with a view to helping the larmer. It was for this purpose that I—that is, we —hit upon this scheme of reciprocity to open markets in your countries for our farm products. S. A. —Yes, I see; but you don’t expect to find markets for farm products down here? We are in the farming business ourselves, and unless your farmers look well to their laurels they will soon lose some of their markets in Central America and the West Indies, where we are already selling flour and other agricultural products. It is implements of agriculture rather than products of agriculture that we want. It is strange you did not think of this before you promised the farmers to find newYnarketfe for them down here.

U. S.—lt is unnecessary to castreflections like this upon our intelligence. "When polities is running high hoce* and the tide Is going against us, we must devise some expedient to turn it. We can’t always do what is best or promise what is likely to be fulfilled. S. A.—Oh, yes, I begin your reciprocity was only a piece of "Jingoism” to catch the farmers’ votes and keep the Republican party in power. U. S. —No, not exactly that; but I don’t care to stop to explain everything now. I desire only to give you a few tips so that you will not take matters so seriously, and jump on reciprocity as if it were intended for a sound economic doctrine, instead of a political scheme. This was the mistake made by most of the leaders of Republicanism here when the scheme was first broached. For instance, Senator Dolph said “The cause of protection is being betrayed;” Senator Hale and Tom Reed ridiculed the plan; Major McKinley called it a “Blaine fad,” and objected to having it inserted in his tariff bill; the American Economist, our great organ of protection, ridiculed the idea of “trying to revise this defun t and obsolete system of discrimminations; and this, too, in order that we make the effort to sell packed meats to meat-packers and breadstuff's to the exporters of grain.” I could mention dozens of other Republicans who made fools of themselves by not thinking twice before they spoke. They are all sorry now that they were so premature. It is is amusing now to hear McKinley talking for “protection and reciprocity;” and to read in the American Economist that “reciprocity is the handmaid of protection. ” The truth is that they recognize that Senator Hale spoke the truth when he said, “The reciprocity feature is the part of the measure (McKinley tariff) which has floated the whole act . . . and kept it from being swamped.” Now you understand our predicament. We must make the farmers believe that we really expected that reciprocity would open up new markets for them abroad. S. A. —But isn’t the scheme a sad commentary on your “home market” theory? Doesn’t it admit that protection can’t make home markets? U. S.—l don’t care to discuss theories now when, we are confronted by conditions. But will you not try to help us out by revising your tariff schedules a

little—jnst enough so that we can show our farmers that reciprocity has really opened markets for them, ornt least that it has been the means of inuucing countries to permit our agricultural products to enter their market under lees duty? It matters but little to us that these same markets want manufactured and not agricultural products. Flease make some change so that we can announce that “reciprocity treaties” have been made, and that we can continue to import sugar, coffee, and hides free. S. A. —We will consider your case; but another objection occurs to me just now. Isn’t such a policy of discrimination contrary to the policy adopted long ago by your own and several other American republics, which is opposed to “entangling alliances" with countries? U. S.—Bosh! That’s an exploded idea up here, except with a few Democrats who have had but little practical experience in state and foreign affairs for over thirty years. S. A.—We may be able to accommodate you a little, as you have for years had some of our most important exports on your free list; and, besides, we don’t care to be boycotted by your country. We do, however, think that you should have adapted your reciprocity to fit countries that want agricultural products and that have a large commerce. Our people down here don’t trade much anyhow. The whole of South America takes less than 2 per cent, of your agricultural products, while Great Britain alone takes 60 per cent. Reciprocity with us may help some of your manufacturers in the same way that “protection” has helped them, but it can’t help your farmers and I should think they would soon see through your little game; though if you insist we shall Canada—Hello! hello! Is this United States? U. S.—Y r es, yes, and I am certain I am talking to Canada; she always puts in when not wanted and gives me a cold j chill. Please state your business. C. —I called you up to learn what kind j of a reciprocity treaty you intend to! make with us.

U. S.—We are not considering any reciprocity treaty with you, and we are not certain that we shall do so. We do not care to dicker with you. C. —But our 5,000,000 people purchase as much of you as the other 51,000,000 people on the Western hemisphere, and we are the only oountry that buys more from you than we sell to you. For the last forty years you have had a balance of trade in your favor of over 000, while the balance of trade against you with these other 51,000,000 people was over $1,000,000,000. U. S.—Really, Canada, I don’t care to talk with you now. I would have to. explain too many things. I will only say that the farmers of New York State, so far as I can learn, don’t want free trade with you even “in spots,” such as reciprocity would give, and you know New York is a doubtful State. Goodday.

“Big Labor War Imminent.”

Last week we heard of a big combine composed of Carnegie, Phipps & Co., the Homestead Works, and several other big steel mills. It needed no prophet to foretell the reduction of wages now promised. Give a set of organized manufacturers, especially tariff-pro-tected ones, a monopoly of any product and of the labor of the producers as well, and they may bo counted upon to depress price of labor and enhance the prioe of goods to the full extent of their power. The extent and explanation of these reductions is given in the New York Times of June 10, 1892, as follows: A WHOLESALE CUT IN WAGES. While the high-tariff statesmen are talking glibly at Minneapolis about wages and the protected Workingman, the Republican and high-tariff manufacturers of iron and steel are conspiring to make a great deal of trouble for them and to enliven the approaching campaign with a great contest for a sharp reduction of the wages of their employes. The story was told in the high-tariff Philadelphia Press on Monday last, under the headlines, “Big Labor War Imminent—lron Manufacturers Will Make a Wholesale Cut in Wages—Reductions to Vary from 15 to 50 Per Cent.—Workers in a Crippled Condition for a Fight.” The Press explained that the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers was very soon to be confronted by “a very startling proposition," involving “the largest reduction ever asked for by the manufacturers.” It continued as follows:

“The proposition comes to the association through the Mahoning and Shenango Valley Iron Manufacturers’ Association, which comprises the great establishments of Brown,Bonnell & Co., the Mahoning Valley Iron Company, Cartwright, McCurdy & Co., Youngstown Rolling Mill Company, Buhl Iron Company, Trumbull Iron Company, and all the otner mills in Cleveland and St. Louis. ”

It then set forth the reductions demanded, saying that “the very first item is an indication of the wholesale slaughter in wages asked for by the manufacturers.” This is a reduction from $5.50 to $4.50 per ton for puddling, with additional reductions to-be caused by an increase of the quantity of work required. Said the Press: “The great slaughter comes on the guide, ten-inch, hoop, and cotton-tie mills. Where the rollers, heaters, roughers, and catchers now' make $5.88 per ton, they are asked to accept $4.20, and on grades where they now make $5.13 they arc asked to be satisfied with $4.”

This does not appear to have been foreseen by McKinley and his associates when they largely increased the duty on cotton ties. The price for roiling pipe iron in sheet and jobbing mills is fixed at $2.50 per ton, instead of $3.40. The Press closed its review of the proposed reductions with the following remarks; “The workers will be brought face to face with a stern determination on the part of the manufacturers to force an acceptance of their scale this year, which, if they succeed, practicallymeans the permanent crippling of the Amalgamated Association. The manufacturers are said to be a unit in their determination to accept nothing less than they propose, and, as a consequence, one of the bitterest struggles that have taken place in iron circles in years is just beginning to dawn.” The Iron Age of the9th inst. confirms these assertions and publishes the full scale of reductions proposed. Says this authority: “Large reductions have been made in nearly every department. We are advised that manufacturers' at the above places (the Mahoning and Shenango Valleys and Cleveland district) have a thorough understanding among themselves, and that this scale is in the nature of an ultimatum from them from which they will not recede.” The Pittsburg manufactures have not yet formulated the reductions which they wili demand, but the Iron Age reports that trouble has arisen “at the Homestead Steel Works of Carnegie, Phipps <fc Co.” “It is understood that the reason for this is that the firm have made large redactions in the scale, which the men are not willing to accept. ” The changes proposed by Mr. Carnegie and his associates "mean a clear reduction of about 17 per cent, to every man who works by tonnage. In addition to this, other large reductions are made, in some cases over 25 per cent. ” The workmen have been told that they

must sign the new scale *on or before June 24." i .There are several gentlemen in Minneapolis who should not overlook this news. One of them is Mr. H. W. Oliver, . chairman of the convention’s sub-com-mittee on the tariff, who Reported to the iron and steel manufacturers after tho passage of the McKinley bill that tho rates in the new iron and steel schedule “were those proposed by the manufacturers themselves.” Another is ex- : Speaker Reed, who declared that thq manufacturers had “obtained just what they wanted, ” and who said at Buffalo on Oct. 16, 1890: “They ask me whether I consider the McKinley bill just to the poor. Well, I should say so. A bill which has for its object the aiding of the poor by raising their wages, it seems to me, is a just one.” Mr. McKinley himself should meditate . upon the great reductions now demanded by the iron manufacturers of his own State. Perhaps the convention can be induced to say something in its platform about the impending conflict between the manufacturers and their workmen.

New Sanitary Ware Trust.

When McKinley *hised the duties on sanitary pottery ware from 55 to 65 and 70 per cent, by putting duties on packing cases, the seven manufacturers at Trenton, with one at East Liverpool, Ohio, and one in Baltimore, practically had a trust, though each firm owned its own factory. Since duties were increased the manufacturers, some of whom have made millions in a few years, cut wages about 16 per. cent, after a long strike against a reduction of 10 to 40 -per cent. This method of doing business by “understandings” or “agreements” is not entirely satisfactory to the manufacturers, and on May 28 five of the big manufacturers at Trenton incorporated in one company with a capital of $3,000,000. Those in the combine are the Empire Pottery, Enterprise Pottery, Delaware Pottery, Equitable Pdttery, and Crescent Pottery. Column advertisements of the stock of this new trust in New York papers, say “these five companies manufacture and sell about 75 per cent, of the entire output of the famous sanitary plumbing ware made in this country. The earnings for 1891 will pay the dividends on the preferred stock (8 per cent.), and over 16 per cent, on the common stock, after providing for “the expense of management. The venders express the belief that the economies and improved System in the conduct of business that can be put in operation by the proposed combination of these . companies will still further increase the net earnings.”

The men who had their wages reduced ip 1891 must relish this kind of talk. Consumers who are acquainted with the “economies of trusts” will expect soon to receive another “revised” price list of sanitary ware, similar to the one issued in April, 1891, advancing the price of goods. These same manufacturers also announced that “the manufacture ot these goods requires skilled labor of the highest grade. ” It might be supposed from this declaration that these highly skilled laborers were receiving unusually high wages. In 1883, the Bureau of Labor of New Jersey collected accurate statistics of the earnings of workmen in' a representative pottery in Trenton. They are as follows: Average W orkmen. weekly earnings. llollow ware pressers Jio.SS Dish makers 16.55 Flat pressers 12.18 Handlers 9.1 s J Iggerers 17.10 Turners 12.19 The commissioner said “many of these workmen are among the most rapid operators in Trenton.” Many of the workmen have submitted to several reductions since 1883, making great inroads into their princely salaries. The “economies and improved system” of this new trust may be counted on to close down at least one of these potteries, or in some other way to throw 6ut one-flfth of these men. The dependence of wages upon tariffs is 1 demonstrated with remarkable, clearness in this industry. While duties have been going up wages have been going down. It is the object of a protective tariff, as explained in the Minneapolis platform, to levy duties on imported articles equal to the difference in wages at home and abroad. The duties on pottery not only cover this difference, but, in some kinds of ware, they are two or three times the total labor cost of making such ware in Trenton.

Monopolies and Millionaires.

The New York Tribune has published a list of 4,095 millionaires in the United States to show that the majority of them have not made their wealth in protected, industries. It, however, finds that 1,175 of these have removed themselves thus far from the poor-house largely by the aid of “protection.” After omissions are supplied, which good judges say are numerous, it - will probably be found that there are 5,000 of these tariff beneficiaries, tax-evaders, and land sharks among us. Supposing that they will average $4,000,000 apiece, these few men, less than 1-100 of 1 per cent, of our population, then own $20,000,000,000, or over 30 per cent, of our total wealth, which according to our last census was $63,548,000,000. It is entirely reasonable that 100,000 more persons can be found whose total accumulations will add $20,000,000,000 more, making fully 50 per cent, of our total wealth in the hands of 1-6 of 1 per cent, of our population. It is quite probable that 1 per cent of our population owns 80 p r cent., and perhaps 90 per cent., of all our wealth, and the gap between the rich and the poor is growing wider and more threatening every day. Read in any part of this list and you will be convinced that the sources of every one of these fortunes have been in monopoly of some kind. The greatest monopoly, if the Tribune’s data are correct, is that of land in different forms —lots, farms, mines, etc. This appears to have made more than one-half of our millionaires. The second is undoubtedly that from tariff taxation, giving a few of our manufacturers the monopoly of our markets, a monopoly they have made doubly secure by meank of trusts in nearly every protected industry. Other and less objectionable monopolies come from patent and copy rights, government contracts, etc. The most striking feature of these millionaire producing monopolies is that they are nearly all the direct results of tariff taxation, or they can be removed by direct taxation that shall neither take from the poor to give the rich nor leave any person in possession of what he has not. earned.

Republican Platiorm on the Tariff.

The New York World, speaking of the Republican party, as portrayed in its recent platform, says: “It reiterates its preposterous claim that the country has been made prosperous by taxation—which is equivalent to saying that if crops grow in spite of frosts, frost is good for crops. The argument put forward in defense of the McKinley tariff by Andrew Carnegie,that “it possesses free-trade features to a greater extent than protective ones,” is intended for English use only. On this side of the water the tariff is defended for other reasons. A dispatxh from Guayquii, Ecuador* says that Marie Juneau, a French woman, has given birth to seven perfectly formed and healthy babie3.