Democratic Sentinel, Volume 16, Number 28, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 29 July 1892 — Page 4

®|)e lemotroticSc ntinf l RENSSELAER, INDIANA. j McEWEN, Publishes

CLEVELAND AND STEVENSON.

For President, GROVER CLEVELAND, OF NEW TORE. For Vice President, ADLAI E. STEVENSON, OF rLLIN’OIS.

“Once more unto the White House?” Says Grover; “Well, I’ll go; I think we’ll thaw that iceberg out Before the fall winds blow.” From James G. Blaine to John W. Foster! Think of it! The Quaystone of the Republican arch is missing this year. Mr. Carnegie has thrown the first ■brick at the Republican ticket. The back step of the Cleveland band-wagon is already loaded down. The American workingman will not be “worked” to any great extent this year. Clarkson will not steal the subscription list of any of the Prohibition papers this year. The force bill hangs about the neck of the Republican Presidential candidate like a millstone. If Mr. Harrison does not forgive Mr. Quay after that SIO,OOO bluff he must have had a cold, hard heart. J. WniTELAw Reid is the style in vrhic«js it now appears. Like J. Sloat Fassett, Mr. Reid was known through the earlier period of his existence as “Jakie.” In both of these cases the J stands right out for Jonah. If the Democrats, in 1892, carry the thirty States they carried in 1890, they will secure 357 electoral votes, the Republicans will get 73, and the Farmers’ Alliance 14. The issues are the same in 1892 that they were in 1890. r As Mr. Harrison’s new Secretary of State has not yet threatened to wallop any miserable, skulking foreign power, it begins to look as if the doors of the administration’s temple of Janus might be shut and the interior turned into a receptacle for pub. docs. - ■ ■ The cheerful assurance of the Republican leaders in a Republican victory next fall is based, so far as it has a basis, on the supposition that in 1890 the people were fools, and that they have been educated beauty of the McKinley bill by paying high taxes on the necessaries of life. St. Louis Republic: What right had Plutocrat Carnegie to arm men with Winchesters and engage in private war against American citizens? Is this the nineteenth century, or are we getting back to the days of robber barons with their armed retainers? Have we destroyed the feudalism of aristocrats merely to substitute for it commercial feudalism? Detroit Free Press: The vigor with which Republican spell-binders are delving into the records of profane history to find out what they can about Adlai E. Stevenson is highly amusing. The deeper they go the more clearly is shown the wisdom of Democracy in nominating him as a clean, upright, straightforward man. The whole thing is a device for apologizing for Whitelaw Reid, but each new development of the searchers puts another scotch under Mr. Reid’s wheel. Des Moines Leader: Every interference with trade is a check on the wheels of progress. He who tunnels a mountain, bridges a river, or in any way removes any impediment to the freest intercourse between people is a public benefactor. And he who in any way puts up a barrier to commerce is a public enemy. The people are beginning to see this, and when they do see it in its fullness they will bury the opponents of a tariff for revenue only so deep there will never be a resurrection. \ " Chicago Times: Republican organs in lowa should be careful how they stir up the ire of the People’s party candidate for President. It is unBho knows so upaign methlould tell all s from which nds for his there might camp. Or if ’unds flowing 1884 from the the Repub-

lican party in the Fifth Avenue Hotel, high-tariff organs might conclude that silence would have served them better. The Rocky Mountain News (Democratic) refuses to support Cleveland. It will throw its influence to the People’s party. When it is remembered that Colorado is a Republican strong hold,, it will be seen that victory for the People’s party as against Republicanism in that State wUI inure to the benefit of Democracy. There is ond tariff journal, at least, which knows what duties are imposed for and is not afraid to accept the logic of a tariff like the McKinley act. The Pittsburg Chroni-cle-Telegraph says that England has to import a large quantity of breadstuffs and that “any duty it may impose on those imports must necessarily go into the price it must pay for them.” But according to the Republican platform the imposition of the duty ought to bring down the price to the British consumer; and according to McKinley it should make no difference to him, because the exporter pays the duty. Carnegie and the other robber barons would look with dismay upon the prospect of Democratic success. As was well said by Chairman Wilson in his opening speech to the Chicago convention: “Whoever may be your chosen leader in this campaign, no cablegram will flash across the sea from the castle of absentee tariff lords to congratulate him.” Such congratulations come only to the nominees of Republican conventions. But while Carnegie and other tariff lords congratulated Harrison and Reid in June, the honest workingmen whom they have deceived and outraged may contribute not a little to the betterment of their own conditions by voting for Cleveland and Stevenson in November.

Mr. Cleveland has written a let?ter disapproving of the use of his wife’s name by the Frances Cleveland Influence Club of New York. He claims that the name is too sacred in the home circle, and means so much to him as wife and mother, that it should be spared in the organization and operation of clubs designed to exert political influence. The sentiment does him great credit, and will be echoed in the heart of every true woman in the land. Besides, while Grover is fully aware of the importance of woman’s co-opera-tion, he knows that the battle of next November is to be fought on other grounds than those of mere sentiment. The tariff’s the thing, and Mr. Carnegie has aroused all the feeling necessary for Democratic success. Memphis Appeal - Avalanche: The Chicago Inter Ocean continues to assert that one-lialf the legal voters are not allowed to cast a vote, or if they are permitted to cast a vote, it is not counted. Why the Inter Ocean stultifies itself by circulating such a self-evident and clumsy lie we do not understand. If it will refer to the returns for 1888 and 1890 it will see that Harrison got in the Southern States, excluding Texas, nearly 1,000,000 votes, while the Democratic candidates for Congress two years afterward, when the force bill threatened the South, secured only about 1,100,000. Yet there are two whites to one negro in the South, and the great majority of the whites are Democrats. Will the Inter Ocean explain how, in view of these facts, half of the legal yoters are not allowed to cast a vpte, or the vote is not counted, when the count in the Southern States, excepting Texas, gives Harrison almost as many votes as the Democratic candidates for Congress received in 1890?

There is great unanimity of silence among the Republican exchanges on the subject of the Carnegie murders. When an organ does refer to the matter it is always in an effort to prove that there was no politics in the war at Homestead; that the slaughter at Fort Frick was only the result of a “family quarrel,” in which the public has no interest. Such reasoning is on a line with Mr. Blaine’s famous contention that “trusts are largely private affairs.” Unfortunately for the Republican party, the ordinary run of humanity is not at home in the specious logic of the high-tariff economists. The people understand facts. Mr. Carnegie is the bright and shining apostle of protection. He contributed liberally to the Republican campaign fund, and he has been awarded large contracts by the Government. He has written articles for the magazines on the beauties of protection. Nevertheless he deliberately fortifies his works, reduces wages and hires an army of men to subjugate and shoot down his workmen. There may be no logical connection between Mr. Carnegie> theories and the Homestead war, but there is not time between now and November for the Republican organs to convince the voters of the fact. Mr. Harrison is described as extremely nervous over what he calls Mr. Carnegie’s obstinacy, and well he may be. In the Fort Frick murders he sees his own defeat and the downfall of protection.

SPEAKING FOR ITSELF.

YEA, VERILY MR. M’KINLEY, THIS IS TRUE. The Bobber Tariff Speak. Through the Five Thousand Looked-Out Workmen at Homeatead, Pa.—Wage Reduction. All Along the Line. Wage Reduction, in Iron Hill.. The following, from the Iron Age of June 23, 1892, will give some Idea of the enormity of the wage reductions proposed by the Iron and steel manufacturers and presented in the form of an ultimatum to the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers: The price for bar rolling and heating, 2,240 pounds to the ton, has been cut down from 70 to 60 cents on a 2-cent card; for boiling, from $5.50 to $4.50; for rolling common iron on plate mills, from 72 to 50 cents. Put in tabular form some of the reductions appear as follows: HEATING SLABS AND SHINGLING. " Shingling, 2,240 pounds. Card Rates— oTd rate. New rate. Sc bar Iron (re-hammered) $0.75 $0.50 Jc bar iron “ -.11 .65 Jft bar iron (charcoal) 82)s -62)4 So bar iron “ 1.01 .82)6 Heating, 2,240 pounds. So bar Iron $0.75 $0.50 8c bar Iron LOO .70 GUIDE, 10-INCH HOOP AND COTTON-TIE SCALE. Sizes— Old Kate, New Rate. 1-32 rounds and squares $7.63 $6.70 0-82 5.15 3.15 6- half round 9.50 4.35 54 and 16 oval 8.50 3.20 NUT IKON. Old Rate, New Rate. 27-64x56x1-16 $12.50 $0.63 27-64X9-64 10.00 4.80 15-32x54 4.70 3.60 19-32x14 4.25 8.10 CHANNEL IKON. 2 Inch and upward, base $2.90 $2.18 s4x6-10 and lighter 7.70 3.50 s6xs-16 and lighter 9.50 4.30 T IKON. Djandupward $3.20 $2.40 156 4.70 3.50 CLIP AND WAGON STHAP. 54-, $3.20 $2.30 7- 4.10 2.55 6-16 7.09 3.40 TEN-INCH MILL. 56 oval $3.50 $2.47 >6x3-10 and heavier 3.20 2.18

It is no wonder that 5,000 men are now out at the Homestead Works of Carnegie, Phipps & Co., and that many more thousands are on strike in other iron mills. For several yoars Carnegie and others have been steadily reducing Wages, and importing laborers to make reductions permanent. But never before has the situation been so precarious as now, when wages are cut in two and a death-blow is aimed at the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workors. These men are making a determined resistance, but their fate is in the hands of the multi-millionaires, who can, if neod be, let their mills rot, and live the balance of their lives in luxury on the tariff profits made during the last twenty years. Neither they nor their children need ever want for either necessaries or luxuries. But the iron Workers, they can hold out at best but a few months. Their only hope for salvation now is that the Republican administration shall put its present request In the form of a demand that peac.e be patched up in somo way, at least until after the election, and that no government troop 3 will be allowed to protect Imported laborers oven while they are at work upon government contracts now In the hands of Carnegie, Phipps & Co. These are the bitter fruits of “protection" which Pennsylvania workingmen must eat.

Consumers Never Petition Congress.

The American Economist asks, with a great deal of satisfaction, “will the ‘reformer’ please tell us why the only petition for free wool came from a few selfish free raw-material manufacturers? ’’ and adds as a clincher to this question: “We should think that if the object of the measure were really to provide cheaper clothing for the masses, petitions asking for its passage would have come in from all sections of the country, bearing the signatures of thousands of poor, taxed consumers. But this was not so.” It might be inferred from the way in which the question is put that duties are charged only at the request of oonsumeys, and not at the behest of selfish EaMufdcturers. Nothing could be farther from the truth. effectf upon the consumer aro spread out over so many, and the myriad of those upon whom the tariff bears most heavily—the poor—understand so little the cause of their burdens that p titions seldom, if ever, come from this class. It is those who are to be benefited by protective tariffs —rich, selfish, grasping manufacturers —it is these comparatively few who petition Congress and send paid attorneys to the lobbies, and who, by bribes and threats, get the duty that will rob each of the 65,000,000 consuinors of but a few cents or dollars, but which will put thousands or millions of dollars into their pockets. For instance the A cent duty per pound, on refined sugar is now costing each consumer only about 40 cents per year —so trifling a sum to each that no petition against the duty has ever been presented to Congress, and yet it means an extra profit of $25,000,000 a year to the eighteen or twenty refiners who compose the sugar trust. And it is these latter who have always appeared in the lobbies and committee rooms of Congress in opposition to any restriction of duty. It is the fear of this trust that now prevents both parties from removing a duty which produces uo revenue. The Democratic Ways and Means Committee would gladly remove it, but they believe a free sugar bill could not pass the Senate and would only enable the Republicans to “fry the fat” out of this trust during the campaign. The Economist knows well enough that this is the regular order of procedure and hence its pretended surprise is only to deceive its credulous readers.

At Its Old Tric[?]s.

The Iron Age, of June 30, announces another advance in the price of shot of 5 cents per twenty-five pound bags. It was only June 2 that a similar advaneewas announced, and it was only a year ago that another advance was made. Ten large manufacturers, protected by a duty of 24 cents per pound, have had a trust in shot since Sept. 5, 1890, and they propose to* work their protection for all it is worth. Th« whole ammunition business is McKinleyized and trusted so that everj explosion helps to swell the profits of some trust. Shoot with paper shells and the Loaded Paper Shell and Fowder Trusts are benefited. Shoot bullets or shot and the Lead, Smelters’ and Powder Trusts all reap protected profits. Shoot with cartridges and the Cartridge Trust, which has advanced prices 99 per cent, since it was formed in 1883, takes f.O per cent, of the cost of your cartridges as a protected profit—unless you buy the same brands in Canada for 25 per cent. less. Shoot off fire crackers on the Fourth of July and the Powder Trust will make a protected profit out of your noisy patriotism. Go down into the bowels of the earth aud explode a gallon of nitroglycerine in your oil well tend the High Explosive Trust will hunt you up and mand a tariff tax of you. All of these trusts will tell you that this is a free country and a blessed country.

"rising Wages and Falling Prices.”

The American Economist, the leading high tariff organ, of April 15, 1892, gives the following lucid explanation of how manufacturers can exist in the face of 'rising wages and falling prices:” 'The condition which exists all around

n« —that of rising wages and falling prices—Is not an anomalous one, but is the natural and logioal result of the home competition started Into being by the protective tariff, whloh guards alike the Interests of the manufacturer, laborer and consumer—of the first, by Increasing his total earnings; of the second, by raising the wages received for his work; and of the last, by reducing the prices of the articles he buys. ” Such logical deductions as this ought to please the most fastidious manufacturer. It should be repeated In unison by Carnegie’s 4,000 iron workers while they stand idle out of reach of the hot water hose that now holds the fort.

Steel Rali Prices.

Stories have been in circulation for several days to the effect that there was to be a break In the price of steel rails. These stories had their rise In the gathering in this city of a number of prominent rail manufacturers. They appeared here suddenly on Tuesday, disappeared mysteriously in a body on Wednesday, and reappeared yesterday, with the result that the alley fronting Trinity Church was full of dark rumors; They were, however, without foundation. , The manufacturers, who held a regular monthly meeting, had converted their June meeting into a picnic and gone down to. Sparrow Point, near Baltimore, to inspect the new Maryland' mill of the Pennsylvania Steel Company. During their trip they drank champagne, ate soft-shell crabs, and interchanged views on the iron and steel market, and agreed to maintain the price of steel rails which has prevailed for a year.

Steel rails now sell for S3O per ton, and the manufacturers declare that their profits are only of reasonable size. The manufacturers banded themselves Informally together ten years ago, but it was not until a year ago that they formed a east-iron verbal agreement to hold prices up. They control the situation, *snd are free from competition. Those composing the combination are the Illinois Steel Company, Carnegie Brothers & Co., the Cambria Iron Company, the Bethlehem Steel Company, and the Lackawanna Iron and Steel Company. The following tablo shows how the combination has been able to keep up the price per ton of steel rails in the face of a strong decline in the price of pig iron: 1889, 1890. 1891. 1892. Pig iron SIB.OO $19.85 $15.95 $14.00 Steel rails 29 23 31.75 2.1.92 30.00 The price of English rails, delivered in America (after paying the duty of $13.44 per ton) Is now about $35 per ton. The American manufacturers say their profits, at S3O per ton, is only from $3 to $2.50 per ton. It was said yesterday at the office of Carnegie Brothers & Co. that the price of steel rails would remain as at present. B. G. Clark, of the Lackawanna Iron and Steel Company, made a similar statement. “The market is not active." he said. “The six manufactories which control the situation have a combined capacity of 3,000,000 tons of steel rails per year. I shall be surprised if their combined output this year aggregates over 1,200,000 tons. The outlook is not bright. The trouble with the railroads is that they don’t seem to have money with which to buy rails.”—New York Times, June 24, 1892.

McKinley Crops.

The stimulating and invigorating effects of McKinleyism are nowhere more marked than they are upon the weather and crops in the United States as compared with other nations. Last year it gave us tremendous crops of wheat, corn and cotton and by blasting the crops of Europe gave us good prices for corn and wheat. This year we are promised a repetition of this same arrangement. Bradstreet’s estimates that our crop of wheat this year, including 70,000,000 reserved from last year’s crop, will be 620,000,000 bushels, which, after deducting 368,000,000 bushels for seed and consumption, will leave 252,000,000 bushels for export and reserves —about the same as for last year. The next important question is, will Europe pay big prices for this surplus? As Russia has not yet recovered from last year’s blighting effects of the McKinley bill, and has neither sufficient seed left fill; .sowing nor animals for harvesting, aud as S drought in France is doing great injury (in spite of her attempt to imitate McKinleyism), the prospects are that prices will be high. About tie only doubt as to this conclusipn comes from India, whore fair ofopi "are reported, and from the Argentine Republic, where immense grain crops are reported, which will be exported to compete; with pur grains in all parts of the world, notwithstanding that Blaine, with his reciprocity programme, is reported to have found markets for “barrels of flour" in this same South American country. Mr. Roswell G. Horr, of the New York Tribune, 6aid recently, “I do not claim that the tariff on wheat in the United States at the present time will have very much bearing upon its price, so long as we export that article largely.” The American Economist, another great high tariff authority, expressed this same opinion on March 4, 1892. The modesty of these authorities which prevents them from claiming that all favorable weather, high prices for farm products, and prosperity of every kind is due to protection, should not deter the farmer from making a careful investigation of this as yet poorly understood subject.

Protection “Forever.”

The American Economist, which says its ’’readers are numbered by the millions,” is conducting an educational bureau to give protectionist speakers and leaders “tips" as to how to reply to free traders’ questions. Here is question No. 21, with the Economist’s reply: “How long should a protective duty on an article be retained?” “ForeVer. It finally abolishes itself, and as it then harms no one, it should be retained to guard against future exigencies and future dangers. ” The Economist should have given a few illustrations to make this economic fact clear to a few of its millions of readers who, though they may have equally acute minds, yet are untrained in economic thinking. Perhaps we can assist it. Suppose, for instance, that a farmer has a barbed wire fence in a particularly dangerous place. After it has killed ail of his farm animals that had spunk enough to run against it with any considerable degree of force, it will “then harm no one,” but “it should be retained to guard against future exigencies," when the farmer shall have obtained a new supply of really live animals. Or suppose that owing to imperfect plumbing which allows sewer gas to escape in the house, the proprietor is bereft of his wife and children; the unsanitary plumbing will then “harm no one,” but nevertheless “it should be retained to guard against future exigencies"—such as a second marriage might incur.

Great Authorities Differ.

The American Economist, the “protectionists’ Bible,” said on April 15, 1892, “99 per cent, of the great fortunes that do exist here have been amassed in pursuits that are not touched by the tariff.” The New York Tribune used to talk in-this way, and to prove that it really ! believed what it said it some time ago set about preparing a list of the millionaires in this country, classified as to the manner in which they had made the bulk of their fortunes. The list as completed recently shows that out of 4,095 millionaires 1,170 owe their wealth

mainly to protected Industries. WIIJ the Economist note these figures and revise its estimates, or will it continue its glaring false assertions irrespective of protectionist statistics?

Senator Vest's Broadilde.

Tariff items of late are not entirely satisfactory to Bepublicans who worship at the shrine of “Protection." The Democrats have boldly declared that the system is a superstition and a sham. The Prohibitionists have done the same; and the Alliance and Labor platform will follow suit. Something must be done to stem the tide setting in against “Protection." Bepublicans must not be content with trying to refute “free trade" and “Cobden Club lies," but must do some aggressive work themselves. Spurred on by such sentiments as these Senator Hale, on July 28. concluded to “force the fighting, ” and as a prelude to his challenge to the Democrats, he recited that at “no time has so large a proportion of the American people been employed at so high wages and purchasing the necessities and comforts of life at so low prices as in the year 1892." Then he proceeded to shoot at the wicked Democrats as recklessly as a boy with a new pop-gun shoots at flies. After firing blank charges at “British doctrine,” “balance of trade,” “high prices,” “low wagos,” etc., and triumphantly announcing that “the Eepublicans of the United States gladly accept the issue presented,” he sat down ignorant of the fact that every shot had hit a hornet’s nest Tariff reformers of late have not been satisfied with mere theoretical reasoning, no matter how well founded their theories may be. They have taken the trouble to collect some facts to substantiate their claims. Senator Vest happened to have a desk full of these unEepublican things. He had, in the first place, twenty-one samples of dry goods —coat linings, women’s and children’s dress goods, cotton sheets, corduroys, etc. —prepared by a big New York merchant, showing that these goods, though the foreign price has declined since 1890, are sold higher here now than then —in some cases 20 per cent, higher. In the second place he had a few facts in regard to the increased duty on pearl buttons, cutlery, tin plate, etc., and the increased prices on the same. Next he had a list prepared by J. Schoenhof, exConsul to Tunstall, England, giving the labor cost of producing thirty-nine articles in America and England—the cost in all but eight cases being lower in this country, in spite of our higher wages. Then he had a list of one hundred tariff trusts, prepared by Hon. John De Witt Warner, of the Beform Club, and just printed as a supplement to the New York World. H also had a list of 250 wage reductions, strikes, etc., in protected industries since October, 1890, prepared by the same gentleman for Beform Club use, and to be printed when completed in the New York Weekly World.

Loaded with these and similar facts, Senator Vest did some cannonading that silenced the Bepublican popguns. After he had poured out enough of these facts to fill thirty pages of the Congressional Becord, and the smoke of battle began to clear away, Senator Hale found courage to say to Vest that they had trusts in England also and that “before this debate closes, the demonstration will be given to the Senate showing his inaccuracy.” Senator Vest inquired, “why not give it now’” But Hale’s ammunition'was out, and he was compelled to retreat, saying “that was npt my original purpose." Perhaps he will bring more ammunition and renew the battle. Perhaps he will prepare a list of 250 increases of wages in protected industries sinoe the McKinley bill became a law. Perhaps he will write up one hundred trusts in England that have raised prices there—from 25 to 50 per cent.—and that sell goods cheaper to foreigners than at home. Perhaps he will produce several hundred foreign manufacturers and merchants to testify that they are regularly paying our tariff taxes. Perhaps he will bo able to show that we are making all our own tin-plate and that the price is lower than ever before. Perhaps he will demontstrate’that a duty on moonshine would build up a green cheese industry here. Just now, however, he admits his weakness and lack of facts on these points.

New Use for the World’s Fair.

The Single Tax Club, of Chicago, has sent a letter to Geo. K. Davis, Director General of the World’s Fair, requesting that “on foreign exhibits of dutiable goods at the World's Fair the selling price in the country from which the goods are exported, the transportation charges from point of origin to Chicago, and the selling price in Chicago be stated separately, so that visitors may be enlightened in reference to the influence of our present system of tariff taxation and find out who pays the duty. ” The Director General will undoubtedly comply with this request, as he, on June 29, notified the Secretary of State that placards giving foreign and American prices would be permitted on foreign exhibits. will welcome this opportunity to demonstrate the fact that the tariff tax is paid by foreigners. If these placards will show that a box of window glass that sells for $2.60 in Europe sells for $2.50 here, after paying $3 dnty, and that woolen cloths that sell for 50 cents per yard in England sell for no more here after paying 634 cents duty, then McKinley will hold some trump cards, and his claim will be substantiated. If, however, they should show that duties are added to the foreign cost before Americans can possess foreign-made goods, then the Democrats would come to the front and McKinley would have to take a back seat. It Is a pity that the fair does not occur before the Presidential election.

According to European arithmetics twenty-five years ago, they nearly all wrote a billion thus: 1,000,000,000,000. That plan has been falling so rapidly into disuse that the last edition of Chambers’ Encyclopedia says that with the exception of Great Britain and its colonies, and where it controls, this plan has now been abandoned, and the billion is to-day written and taught as it is in America, namely: 1,000,000,000 is one billion. Many middle-aged men from Europe were in childhood taught that a billion was 1,000,000,000,000, while the same schools now teach it as 1,000,000,000. ability to steal depends upon individual activities, some measure of respect for skill involuntarily accompanies the condemnation. But when the power of government is invoked to help the larceny, we despise the transaction regardless of the tax protection which tariff systems are decorated with, The less we pay for what we need the greater the shriek of the tariffites. Did it rain good things we would all be out of work. Heavens! protectionist editor, what more do you want? You’re chained to the desk now.—St, Louis Courier, June 25, 1892. The rejected reciprocity timber i* now the plank on which Harrison relies to float him safely through the raging waves raised bv the anti-tariff storgi.

MODES OF THE SEASON.

POINTS ABOUT DRESS AND HOW TO WEAR IT. I Many Women Who Send to Pari* for Their Attire Should Send for a Frenchwoman to Show Them How to Wear It. Gotham JKaMilon Gossip, tfew York correspondence:

FASHIONABLY ffrla dressed woman is II not always well dressed. It is one J thing to buy a bonsSi fi net and quite another to know how to Opy wear it. Some one has said that youth is always beautiful; Jf* this is no more true than to say that Ly youth is always A graceful. In rare g cases women have ft JJIL had instinctive Ip-'-' sense of the becoming, but as a rule . i-- the art of dressing jr —■ becomingly must be L ll—.learned like any 1 kUpT other art, by close \ study and deep application. I know a lady who always

makes it a point to send to Paris for her bonnets, and wijen I meet her I feel like advising her to send for a Frenchwoman to show her how to wear them. She would then learn that a Frenchwoman wears her bonnet on her head, and not perched on a towering coil of hair in an altogether ridiculous manner. Nor does a Frenchwoman ever allow her train to drag behind her-on the sidewalk, exercising the functions of a street sweeper. And speaking of skirts, let me call your attention to the fact that in all woolen materials it is customary to set off the skirt with a ruching of the same material. But it is possible to display a great deal of taste in this matter* of ruches. One way is to make a double niching composed of two pleats, set close together and pinked out on each edge. Another style is to set a single ruffle at the bottom and head it with

GAUDEN PARTY CCSTUME.

guipure lace. Some, however, prefer the skirt quite plain, as shown in my initial illustration. Here you see a charming out-door costume which may be made up eii her in wool or silk. In this instance it has a cream ground with a red figure. It will be noted that this dress consists of two parts, a skirt and redingote. The plastron and sleeve puffs are of red silk. At the back there is a half belt of the silk, and the cuffs are turned ba k with the silk. The yoke is covered with eeru guipure. To catch a glimpse of the summer girl’s opening splendor you must run down to the seaside resorts within easy distance of the metropolis. She is wise in making choice of these places to display her dainty gowns, for here she is sure to find throngs of male admirers. You find little else save college boys and rich men’s sons at the distant summer resorts. The business man can’t go so far. He must content himself with the Jersey coast. Your young man in the twenties is not satisfactory as a judge of a brilliant toilet. He knows a pretty face when he sees it, but he has not been educated up to the art of a gored skirt, the glove fit of a corsage or the proper hang of a Watteau fold. He is too apt to be dazzed by the sparkle of two black eyes or led away from a sweet nocturn in two shades of ecru by the sweeter voice of the girl Inside. In my second illustration you will find pictured a lovely summer costume in barege and taffeta glace, very appropriate for a garden party or a lawn party of any kind. The taffeta not only serves to make the plastron, the collar,’ the revers, the sleeves and the bias

FOULARD AND LACE.

bands on the skirt, but it also serves as foundation for the barege. This gown must be made princess and be glovefitting. The plastron is pleated over lining and the dress material cut from under it. The puffed sleeves are caught up with a bow of ribbon. Garden and lawn parties promise to be extremely popular this season, and I have several more charming dresses to show you, each well qualified to figure at such fetes. The exquisite textures and delicate tones now so modish are brought out in their full value by the green floors and darker green backgrounds furnished by the foliage, while the open air lends a c-oior to the cheek and a vivacity to the manner which drawing-room or ball-room is powerless to effect. My third picture presents one of these dainty gowns for a lawn party. The material is a figured foulard, pink geranium, with white flowers. The bottom of the skirt is finished with a narrow scalloped band and below it two tiny ruffles of lace. The dress is set off with a white lace figaro and the sleeves are also draped with lace, Idle Vshaped neck is filled in with a fichu of pleated gauze held in place by fancy pins. The so-called Japanese crepons, largi

and fantastic figures In blue on ecr* grounds, are also very appropriate for garden parties. I saw one made up with huge bell sleeves reaching to the elbows and with lace undersleeves. The corsage was jacket form, and had a deep draped tint in surah of a darker blue. The thing to avoid for these outdoor fetes is all approach to the conventional street gown with its tailor-made look. Strive as far as possible to attain the quaint and picturesque. I set a very good model before you in my fourth illustration. Here you have a lovely empire gown in embroidered batiste, made up over a sky-blue glace taffeta, the batiste being of a lighter shade. The guipure collarette and cuffs are in a salt-gray. You will note how the pleating is done at the front: at the back there is a Watteau in gaufred pleating. The ribbon used is in a light-green velvet. If you would be quite correct, you must set a dainty little toque on your crown of waved hair. Thesfe pretty little bits of fancy straw are set off with Bruges lace or flowers, or both, and are

EMPIRE GOWN.

extremely natty. The summer girl is wonderfully particular in the selection of her hats. She has hats for everything: hats to walk in, ride in, sit in, play in, and flirt in. She changes her hat on the slighest provocation, and often changes her mind in so doing. No politician ever changed his principles with such quickness and readiness. “Beally, Mr. Featherly,” exclaimed a midsummer maiden, “you must not talk so to me—in tfcat strain ” “But you made no objection this morning, Miss Frivelle!” “Ah, but I had my big hat on then, and couldn’t see your face, ” urged the artless maid of modes. Some of the combinations of mauve ana cream are delightful. For instance, an exquisite cream muslin printed with mauve sprigs of flowers is set off with a deep sash of mauve and cream ribbon. The front of the corsage has a fichu of lace brought down under the sash, and the bottom of the skirt is garnitured wfth two tiny flounces, lace embroidered. Some malicious critic has asserted that croquet was invented to display the beautifully clocked stockings so muoh in vogue a lew years ago, and, no doubt, the same critic would assert that lawn tennis was invented in order to give the summer girl an opportunity to display her lithe and graceful figure, for surely no one has ever been able to discover what other object the game could possibly have. There is this about these lawn tennis games, however, tlfat they enable the summer girl to display a natty and jaunty costume as well as a graceful figure before more or less of a crowd of lookers-on. As it is hard for the orator to be eloquent before a beggarly array of empty benches, so it is very difficult for a young girl to show to good advantage in her own narrow circle. She finds no inspiration where

VERY DIKE A BOY.

there is no appreciation, and it is with a pretty gown as with a song well sung, it is a work of art, and calls for an educated eye in the one case as it does for an educated ear in the other. Where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise, and where there is no standard of taste it would be foolish to waste time over dress as a fine art. In my last illustration I set before you an extremely fetching costume for a croqbet party—an outing suit in Mulhouse linen. The vest is striped and has small mother-of-pearl buttons; shirt collar and tie are as ( masculine looking as possible. The 1 pockets are put in vertically, and the cap is of the same material as the vest. The cuffs and cuff buttons must also ba mannish in style. The skirt doesn’t need to be lined, but there is a broad bias band set on as represented. If a dicky be worn instead of a shirt, it will be necessary to hold it in place by two ribbons reaching to the band. A boutonniere is part and parcel of this semimasculine rig, which is extremely becoming to aome girls and positively disfiguring to others. The combination of lace and ribbons continues to be much in vogue. In one instance I saw a lace bodice wound around with ribbon from bust line to the waist, and then there was a loose, full bib falling from the throat to meet the ribbon corselet. The effect on a fine figure is altogether charming. In the matter of sleeves, I may say that the upward tendency has completely disappeared. Now they either droop down toward the elbow or stand out in a straight line from the shoulders. Forevery-dJy wear, as general knockabouts, nothing is so pretty and inexpensive wiihal as a serge skipt aind a foulard blou-re in some light color. Some blouses are made in accordionpleated crepe de chine and so cut as to overhang the waist line, with a lace yoke at the throat and the satne pleated effect in the full upper sleeves. The omnipre ; ent Eton jacket in blue serge looks very tak ng over an accordionpleated blouse of heliotrope crepe de chine. ; Copyrighted, 1892. ' Moderation is tbe , father ot health, cheerfulness, and old age. Excess has so large a family that wo cannot remember the” names of onehalf of them. However, disease, debt, dishonor, destri.c ion and death are among them—not ihe mostklioper ful household in the world.