Indiana State Sentinel, Volume 34, Number 28, Indianapolis, Marion County, 15 August 1888 — Page 4

4

TOE INDIANA STATE SENTINEL, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 15, 1888.

IXDIAXA STATE SEXTKEL . , . , , TERMS PER YEARi tin g! copy - .... ......91 00 Wo ask drmornlJ to bear la mind and select their a state paper when they come to take obscriptions and make up clubs. Agents making op clubs send for any Information esired. Adde LN DIANAP0LI3 SENTINEL, Indianapolis, lnd.

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 13. For President, CROVER CLEVELAND of New York. TOR VlCE-IUESIDENT, ALLEN G. THUIiMAN of Ohl. DEMOCRATIC STATE TICKET. fioTerpor rovmwu t. Mitoh. lieutenant-t'orernor William It. Mtm ' ttVIflMTJ of Mate Koreht W. MlKRS. ' Auditor of ?ttCw- ki.es A. Mrs so. Treasurer o( Stat Thomas b. Htbnks. Importer St;jirme Court Jon W. KlliS. Atton-T-C"neral JoilfC K. WlLi.v. tuperintenJent Public lnitructiou E. I- GrifHTH. Judcenof Supreme Court 'irt llntrict W. E. Niblack. fcecond Kixtrict '.. V. Hows. Fourth lnstrict- Alles Zollars. rHE.SIBF.MUL ELECTORS. At Large Thomas K. Coim and Joh E. Lamw. Firtt litrict, S. P. Vance: rvcond diatrict, C. S. PoMinc: Third distrkt, Chablks L. Jf.wett; loorth district, Nicholas Corsf.t; Fifth district, johs K. F.Ar: Sixth district. Thomas J. hTVDY; PeTenth district, Pavio S. tioouiso; Light h district, S. It. Tlett; Ninth district, Jon F. Mr. Hcgii; Tenth district, P. 1. Dykfman; Klcnth district, Jon N. Ti-bnek; Twelfth ditrlt, Jouji H. A5S; Thirteenth district. M. A. O. Packabd. "Straw Bail Dudley's " Methods. There are thousands oi old soldiers in Indiana, entitled to pensions under the laws, who were unable to get them when Dudley was running tho pension bureau as an annex to the republican machine. Pensions went by favor in those days. It uas very difficult for democrats to get them, no matter how strong a case they made, out. Tensions were granted in hundreds and thousands of instances as rewards for questionable services to the republican party ; they were given as inducements to needy democrats to abandon their principles; and, in short, they were allowed or withheld, to a very large exteut, upon the strength of political considerations alone. Since G rover Cleveland bceame president, and that grand veteran of the union army, Gen. John C. Black, became commissioner cf pensions, there has been a radical change in the methods practiced in that branch of the government. It has been conducted in the interest of the true bcldiers the men who went to the front and did the righting and a vast number cf them who had been denied their rights tinder the corrupt and disgraceful administration of Dudley have been placed on the pension roll which G rover Cleveland has insisted shall be kept a "roll of honor." These old soldiers had been told that if the democrats came into power the payment of pensions would be stopped; that the confederate Boldjers would be pensioned, the rebel debt assumed, etc., etc. Their experience under a democratic administration has opened their eyes, and many of them who have received fioin the democrats that justice which the republicans had denied them for years, propose to vote the democratic ticket next November for tho first time in their lives. The notorious and unscrupulous Dudi ev, whom the truly good Ben Harrison lias chosen as his personal representative on the republican campaign committee, is attempting to counteract the effect ot this by writing to pensioners who have been placed on the rolls by the democrats that they are entitled to more money than they are receiving. He is using the knowledge gained w hile at the head of the pension bureau in the prosecution of this dirty but entirely characteristic teheme. Communications of this character are being sent to all the Indiana soldiers who have been pensioned under Cleveland, although the great majority of them had been unable to get a penny while Straw Bail Dcdlev was conducting the pension bureau. The following letter, from a veteran soldier at Attica, shows just how this game is being worked by Dudley: To the Editor Sir: I tried for fifteen yars to get a pension but could never get toy claim allowed. Wbile Dudley was at the head rf the pension bureau he rejected ray papers aven times. When Black got at the head of the bureau I apjdied and now I draw $21 a month. Now Dudley is t. lawyer (?) at Washington, lie writes me that I am entitled to $31 a month. Why did he reject my papers when he had the power to grajit me a pension? Now he knows I have got a pension and he thiiiks by writing: to me that he can bribe me to vote the free-whisky ticket. Take warning, all you soldiers that have got your pension's under CLEVELAND'S administration, and vote for the man that is a friend of the soldiers, but is down on those that demand Tensions but have no rijht to them. Yours, for Cleveland, George J. Wolf. Attica, Ind., Aug. 7. We warn the old soldiers of Indiana to l on their guard against thi3 rascally attempt to mislead them. Every veteran who was denied his rights by Dudley, 8nd who has received them from Black, will understand that when tho former tells them they are entitled to more money than they are receiving, ie is lying to them for the purpose of influencing their votes. If they are entitled to more than tbey are now getting, they can safely depend upon the administration which placed them upon the pension rolls to give it to them, while they have nothing to hope for from euch fellows as Dudley, who denied them their rights for bo many long years. Every democratic paper in Indiana and in the country should co-operate in the exposure of this villainous scheme of Straw Bail Dudley to deceive pensioners. Down with monopoly taxes ! Mb. Blalne is home at last, and the much advertised reception has taken place. It seems to have been a far less Imposing affair than it was exacted to be, and our private opinion i3 that it will not save Harrison an J Morton. Mr. Blain e's rpeech revealed him as tho same unrarupulous demagogue as cf yore, btiDg

an appeal to the ignorance and prejudice upon which his party presumed so largely when it made that infamous platform at Chicago. Mr. Blaine had nothing to say about free whisky, which he declared himself opposed to in his "Paris message." lie will, we presume, bo the central figure in the republican campaign from this time forward, and poor Ben Harrison will have to take a back seat. A "Fluke." The net result of the republican gubernatorial contest is a "fluke." ' Alvin I. Hovey, the nominee, is a candidate possessing few elements of strength or popularity, and hi3 selection will provoke little enthusiasm. His public record is exceedingly vulnerable, and his personality is not attractive. The convention Mas so thoroughly imbued with the idea that Porter was the only person mentioned for the governorship who could hope to carry the State that when his nomination was seen to be impossible the feeling was that it made little difference who was placed at the head of the ticket. Robertson wad rejected because the machine was against him, and because the I'ouTEK-or-busters held him responsible for tho miscarriage of their plans. There was also a decided disinclination to invite attention to the senatorial conspiracy of 18.87 in which Bex Harrison was the central figure, and which Kop.krtsovs nomination would have brought to the front. Ctmii.uk was not wanted because of his offensiv prominente as a fanatic on the liquor question, Ira Cjias;; was unacceptable for similar reasons to those which operated against Claihack, and Steele was obnoxious to the Porterites. So, by a process of elimination, Hovey became tho recipient of the empty honor. A majority of the delegates seemed to know comparatively little about him, but they knew all about his competitor!, and that was enough. Hovey was taken in a fit of desperation as Harrison was taken at Chicago. Gen. Hovey is an old man, and has been fcedingat the public crib most of the time since he attained maturity. Originally a pro-slavery democrat, he was a member of the constitutional convention of ISjI. In that body he opposed a proposition to incorporate in the constitution a section providing a homestead exemption and went on record as a rabid negro hater. He was afterwards appointed United States district attorney, from which office he was removed by President Buchanan, and was on the supreme bench by appointment for a year or two. He supported Douglas for president in lStK), and entered the union army as a democrat. He changed his political coat, however, and after the war President Grant rewarded him with the Peruvian minion, which he held several years. He was defeated for Congress many years ago by Judge Niblack. and the only elective office he has ever held is the congressional seat he now occupies by virtue of a democratic split in his district two years ego. Gen. Hovey i, like Ben Harrison, an aristocrat by nature. He is haughty, exclusive and imperious, and except when he is a candidate for othce, holds himself studiously aloof from those whom be regards as the "common people." lie has been for years an out and out free trader, advocating the entire abolition of custom houses, and the rai.-ing of all revenue for the government by direct taxation. He is a spoilsman of the most pronounced type and in his letter accepting the congressional nomination two years ago, so avowed himself. Altogether, Hovey has little to recommend him to public favor. He is a demogogue and a political charlatan, and we know of nothing that can be urged in his behalf unless it is his. "war record," and Col. Matson, the democratic nominee, need fear no comparison of war records w ith Hovey or anybody else. Courtland C. Matson will be the next governor of Indiana, and the electoral vote of the state will be cast for Cleveland ami Thurm an. Down with monopoly taxes! Porter Ahead. Mr. Porter has come out of his scrap with Harrison and his managers somewhat disfigured but very decidedly the victor. He brought his old enemy to his feet, and he kept him there for six long weeks, tojing and playing with him very much as a cat does with a captive mouse. He did more than this, for he not only brought Mr. Harrison to his feet but brought all his friends there, too, including every machine politician in the state. He succeeded in having public speeches made in the state convention yesterday upon which the eyes of the country were naturally fixed, in which the declaration was oft repeated (in substance) that the nomination of Porter was a necessity to the republican party and afforded the only assurance of carrying the state for Harrison. This was all very cruel, but it was all very cleverly done. Such an opportunity to deal a death blow to a political enemy seldom comes to a man, and Mr. Porter is not the style of a man to let it go by. He has eaten humble pie at the Harrison table of politics many times. He complained but little aloud, although he grow led a great deal in private. There was no doubt in his mind that his turn would come sooner or later. It came with Harrison's candidacy for the presidency. He first sought to damn him with faint praise at Chicago and to incite a prejudice against him by ill-timed allusions to his grandfather, whose record is not the kind of one that any sensible grandson would want to run on in this year of grace, 1SSS. No one knew this better than Mr. Porter. Then, when Mr. Harrison was unexpectedly nominated, Mr. Porter, quietly nursed and spread the report that Mr. Harrison, unaided b his support in a gubernatorial candidacy, could not carry the state. Conscious of his own weakness before the people, Mr. Harrison fell headlong into tho trap and became an humble supplicant for Porter's help, which tho latter, at tho critical moment; refused to give. Mr. Harrison's friends may grow red in tho face cursing Mr. Porter if they like. They will have a better opinion of his political wisdom after the election. He always intended to humiliate Harrison, but he did not in the first instance intend to decline the nomination. If ho had so intcndeil, he could have called the family around him and submitted himself to the integrity lest a month ago. The truth is that Mr. Porter, only concluded within

the last ten days that he could not carry tho state, and that Mr. Harrison was a doomed man, and, like the wise citizen he is, he jumped out of the sinking boat without caring what the fellows thought who wanted to stay in. Mr. Porter is very smart, as well as very revengeful. "Tho Effects of Free AVool. The Journal has sent out a circular asking woolen manufacturers to put themselves on record as opposed to free wool. Ten republican manufacturers have responded, who declare themselves against free wool, and give various reasons for so doing. One of them declines to allow the use of his name. It is probably true that a great many woolen manufacturers perhaps a majority of them are willing to say, at this particular time, that they are opposed to free wool. Some of them are doubtless sincere in this opinion. But there is reason to believe that most of them are not sincere, and that they aro really anxious for free wool, but want it to come without any active efforts to that end on their part, lest those who are or think they are particularly interested in the retention of the wool duty may take umbrage and seek revenge by attempting to bring about a further reduction in the tariff on woolen goods. The reason for this presumption is found in the fact that it is only three years 6ince the woolen manufacturers' association to which, we believe, a majority of the woolen manufacturers belong petitioned congress to put wool on the free list. We print elsewhere liberal extrac ts from this petition, in which the argument for free wool is very cleverly stated, and it is shown that without it the woolen industry of this country cannot compete successfully with its foreign rivals. We invite a careful perusal of this petition, because it is of itself a very conclusive answer to most of the assertions and arguments presented by the ten gentlemen who exploit their views on the subject in the Journal. We also invite attention to the expressions of a large number of mauufacturersof woolen goods, which we print to-day, in favor of free wool. Among them are some of the most extensive makers of carpets, blankets, flannels, shawls, etc., in the country, and it is especially significant that so many of them hail from Philadelphia, tho hot-bed of high tariff ideas, and tho principal scat of American woolen interests. Several of them, too, are New Englanders. These gentlemen are not theorists ; only one, we believe, says he is not a protectionist ; they are all practical men, w ho understand perfectly well what they are talking about; and we think the case for free wool can be safely rested upon their evidence, which is in direct opposition to that given by the Journals "bwift witnesses." Mr. S. A. Hering, himself a textile worker, speaks for the employes of the woolen industry, and speaks intelligently and well. The facts and figures he submits show conclusively that free wool will promote the interests of the textile workers. Everybody who is interested in this wool question should read what these gentlemen have to say. They more than meet the case against free wool as presented in yesterday's Journal. Down with monopoly taxes. An Outrageous Slander. The capacity of the Journal for misrepresentation and invention seems to be unbounded. The lies which it manufactures and circulates for political effect are innumerable, and Tue Sentinel is too much occupied with the discussion of great principles and the exposure of the fallacies of the free-whiskyites to devote much time or space to the falsehoods many of them transparently eo with which the Journal burdens its columns daily. A specimen Journal lie is the words it recently put into the mouths of Senator Colquitt and Representative Stewart of Georgia, and kept in large type at the head of its editorial page for several days. TnE Sentinel did not deem them worthy of notice, because their falsity was patent, and because, even if they had been true they offered no reason why any man in Indiana should vote for free whisky, Chinese immigration and a prohibitory tariff". So far as we observed they attracted no attention whatever. Senator Colquitt and Representative Stewart, however, are annoyed that they should be so outrageously misrepresented to the people of Indiana, and have authorized The Sentinel to state that the words "We don't want any republicans in our country" were never used by either of them upon any occasion whatsoever, nor any language of similar import. Senator Colquitt is known,all over the country as a high-toned Christian gentleman, and it is not too much to say that he is absolutely incapable of holding or expressing such sentiments as were attributed to him by the Indianapolis Journal. Representative Stewart is also, we are assured, a broad minded, tolerant man, who treats his political opponents South and North with unfailing courtesy. We presume the Journal calls such "bald headed lying" as this an "intelligent waving of the bloody shirt." However, we think it owes Senator Colquitt and Representative Stewart an humble apology and a complete retraction. Will it pay' the debt? The campaign liar must go. Down with monopoly taxes! Protection and Prices. The J'jtirual tries to make a point in favor of the monopoly tariff by stating that the prices of many commodities are now lower iu this country than they were ' under a low tariff. This is true ; but the fact baa no euch significance as the Journal attributes to it. We wonder if this stuff about low prices is one of those appeals to intelligence and conscience, of which Ben Harrison 6poke in his address of yesterday, in which, by tho way, he let the tariff severely alone! Now every person of intelligence kuows that the tendency of prices all over the world is downward. This is tho natural, indeed the inevitable, effect of the invention and employment of labor saving machinery, the discovery and utilization of natural resources, and the vast extension of transportation facilities, which have, to a great extent, annihilated time and distance, brought remote sections near to each other, and promoted the exchange and distribution of commodities. If competition were restricted, and the operation of the lav, of supply and demand were not

obstructed by tho organization of trusts and combines, made possible by a monopoly tariff, nearly every article that is consumed by the people would be cheaper in the United States than it is to-day. The profits of certain small classes would not he 6o large, but life would be easier and happier for the masses. It is strange tho monopoly taxers cannot see that the entire force of their argument is destroyed by the claim that the effect of tho tariff i to cheapen the prices of the Articles on which it is levied. If this were true manufacturers would be injured and not benefited by protection. Tho Journal can make a reputation for itself as a political economist by explaining how a policy -w hich cheapens the price of Iiis product can enable a manufacturer to pay better wages or make more money than he would under other conditions. A tariff can do no one any good unless it enables him to sell his labor or products for a 1 ictter price. Even an "uninstructed political economist" like Ben Harrison can sec this. Down with monopoly taxes! Forty-two Per Cent. Profit a Year. The Journal reprinted the other day from the New York Mail and Express an interview with one John R. Martin, w ho is described as "a principal salesman and confidential employe of the Walt ham watch company," from which the following is taken: "I am going to vote for the system that gives uie not only bread and butter, but meat and other necessities as well. Don't you think I ain right?" The reporter could not say that he was not, and Mr. Martin contiuued: "The present dutj on foreign watches is 25 per cent That is, i'2ö duty must be paid on every lfO watch made in witzer'and or elsewhere. Under that tarilt' manufacturers can hold their own. Our company is tnruiug out 6ome 1,600 watches per day and is behind in its orders." "The workmen must beuefit by this system?" said the reporter. "Ot course they do. Our ordinary laborers, Buch as porter and the like, get no less than $12 per week, while the waies of our skilled laborers in the various branches of the trade are $13 to $40 per week. Of course the majority do not reach the latter figure, but even if our workmen never w ere paid more thau 13 per week, that is better than the $3 per week that is paid in Europe, We have iss and other watch-makers working ia our shops. If you could hear them talk, of the difference between working in this country and in their own you would understand why it is that American workmen are going to s upport their own system. - "The Mills bill," continued Mr. Martin, "proposes to reduce the tariff on imported watches 10 per cent. Now worfcintrmen have a very direct way of reasoning. They reason that a reduction of 10 per cent, in the duty on foreign watches will increase competition between loreiarn manufacturers and those with whom we are employed, and will redu-e the profit of the latter to the extent that in the end the ;iges of the workinemeu will be reduced probably mere than 10 per cent." The Chicago Jeweler, the official organ of the jewelry trade, in a recent issue contains the following: In a recent cne before Justice FERGUSON, at Philadelphia, the court made a ttatt ment of the value of stock io the Elgin watch company. Dy this it appears that the company had. May 1, 18H, capital stock to the amount of M.fioo, and surplus of fcWMol.W, a total of ?l,LMö,415.P6. I'n to the close of 18-7 it had increased its capital and surplus from profits, being $2,02(1,744. or over 213 per cent iu seven years. There had been a 10 per cent cash dividend each year except one, when 20 per cent was divided. These dividend must have amounted to Bt least another million, making a highly creditable showing for the intrinsic value of the "Eldn," and al.o for the efUcieat management of the corn.yii cSairs. It will be seed from the above, which are official figure.-:, brought out in court, that durinz tho last seven years the 11gin company has made average net dividends of over 42 per cent on its capital stock, of which one-third consisted of profits previously accumulated, in addition to the dividends theretofore declared and paid. The Waltham company is understood to make even more money than the Elgin. And yet this man Joun R. Martin has the sublime effrontery to say that these wealthy corporations will be obliged to reduce the wages of their employes, if the duty on watches is cut 10 per cent. Let workingmen study these figures and they will see that it is not the employes of the watch factories but the owners who get the benefit cf the protective tariff on watches. The latter make 40 to GO per cent, a year; the former work merely for the market rate of wages, and are taxed an average of 47 per cent, on almost everything they consume on their clothing, shelter, food, furniture, crockery and medicine. There is another fact which is worthy of consideration, and that is that these companies, which are doubling their capital every two years, compel retail jewelers to handle their goods on such close margins that the sale of watches has become an unprofitable business. Retail jewelers could notsurviveif they made no more profits on other goods than they do on watches. The following communication from a retail jewelry merchant of this city sbed3 more light on this interesting subject: To TUE Editor Sir: Notiein-r the enclosed article above quoted in the Journal on Aniericau watchmakers, regarding Cleveland's free trade policy, etc., I wish to say that this talk from John li. Martin does not give the true facts in regard to our watch manufacturers uskiug for protection in order to ro!) the people and more fully protect themselves, the favored few agaiust the many. It is with them as with all such monopolists. In the nrst place every intelligent reader knows that lTfsident Cleveland does not advocate free trafe, but a reduction of the tariff to meet the actual necessities of the government. The cry about free trade and the democratic party advocatiiitr such a policy id false and merely a cover for the republican policy of monopoly taxation. Judirins from the within stntement from the Chicago Jcicelcr n to the standing of the Kl.irin watch company, Elgin. 111., most any intelligent reader can see at a glance that Mr. John It. Martin's -.tatcmcnt was made wholly in the interest of the Waltham wat'-b company, and not .out of sympathy for their poorly paid workmen. From this showing ot the tliu company it appears that they can easily aflord to increase the wages of their workmen, submit to the tariff reduction aud still make more profit than they oucht to have. Why can't tUcy share a little with the poor retailer that is tloing the work Tor these rich manufacturing companies while they are living in luxury (and not satisfied at that); while the retailers are barely making a living. I think, for one, they have got too much protection now. We don't want free whisky and free tobabco, but cheap clothing and . the necessities of lite at lower prices; plenty of work and prosperous times. Cleveland has maae us a good president; has more than plca.scd his party, and surprised his enemies and made himself solid with the jeople. I think for one, I can aflord to try him four years longer, notwithstanding Mr. Martin's tilly statement A Retail Jeweler. Indianapolis, July 7. We presume we shall now be charged by the Journal with "attacking the watch-making industry." But the Journal will not attempt to meet the figures above presented showing the enormous profits which the great watch companies aro making under a monopoly tariff, at the expense of their

workingmen, of the retail jewelers, and of the people who carry watches. Of that be very sure. Down with monopoly taxes! A Few TarifT Quest ionsTo the Editor Sir: Will you be so kind as to publish in your paper an answer to the following questions or some of them: 1. How does the rate of waes in the United States compare now with 18"i0? 2. How does the rate of wages in 18 K compare w ith 3. What is the freight per ton of steel rails from Seranton to New York? Also, from Lirerpool to New York? 4. When were steel rails the highest? What caused the reduction? 5. When did Germany pas the present protective tariff? !. How does the condition of the German laborer compare now w ith such before the present tariff? 7. What per cent, of English laborers own their ow n homes? What is the present duty on heavy building piper made out of straw, known as straw board? :. What percentage of the agricultural population grow wool? Tariff Reform. Delphi, Ind., Aug. 8. 1. The wages in our manufacturing interies in 1SÖ0 averaged $249.20 per capita; in 1880 they averaged 347.42. One half the increase was made during tho low tariff decade 1S."0-o0; the other half during the high tariff decades, 1SCiO-70 and 1S70-S0. In other words wages increased twice as rapidly under the Walker "free trade" tariff as under the Morrill warmonopoly tariff. 2. The census of 1810 contains no statistics as to wages. They averaged considerably lower, however, than in 1S50. C. We have not the information at hand called for in this question. Tho freight rates both by land and water are fluctuating. 4. In 1S79. The reduction was due mainly to the falling off in the demand caused by a great decline in railroad building. 5. July, 1S7P. 6. The condition of the German laborer is worse than it was before this tariff was adopted. More than two years after it went into effect Wolfgang Schonle, the U. S. consul at Barmen, a republican, wrote to the state department: The fact that the cost of the necessaries of life has almost invariably increased in ratio with the increase of import dnties on household articles cannot be argued away by German economists, and this fact remains suspended, like the sword of Damoclc, over all ecoifomical and social relations in the German empire. These high prices, put in juxtaposition w ith the low rate of wages, are very acutely felt by the laboriuq classes, and to pull through these hard times is a very difficult task for them. Consul Scuonle then gives a comparative statement of the prices of the necessaries of life, compiled by the chamber of commerce at Botham, Westphalia, which shows that an increase in the price of almost ever article for family use followed the adoption of the German tariff laws. Between May 1, 1S70, and May 1, 1SS1, there was a heavy advance in the price of ham, bacon, butter, beans, peas, flour, petroleum, lard and bread. The price of 6ugar and potatoes did not advance, because, says the consul, 'the duties on sugar remain unchanged, and potatoes enter free of duty." He added: When we regard the fact that the laboring classes of Germany have to work hard from one year to another to procure for themselves and their families the necessaries of life, the accumulation of small savings for "a rainy day" is of rare occurrence. Thus, it is not to be wondered at that every year hundreds of thousands turn their backs on their native land, and that the socialistic agitation will, in spite of all restrictive and prohibitory laws, not come to a halt and rest. These facts prove to a demonstration, two things: That protective duties increase the cost of living and do not better the condition of labor. Other testimony of like character is abundant. The following statement is from the repot t of the German chamber of commerce after one year's experience of the new tariff : The hieb duties have greatly enhanced the cost of the necessaries of life, while instead ot wages risinc, as w as predicted, they have either remained stationary or declined, and thecondU lion of the German workman has materially deteriorated. 7. We have no data on this subject The percentage is small, because of the land sj'stem, w hich places almost insurmountable difficulties in the way of the transfer, acquisition and division of land. S. The term "straw board" is not used in the tariff schedules. The duty on sheathing paper is 10 per cent ad valorem; on other kinds of paper, and manufactures of paper, it ranges from 13 to 35 per cent. 9. The census returns do not show, nor is it possible to say, with accuracy, as a great number of farmers raise a few sheep for mutton who can hardly be considered wool growers. The percentage of the agriculturists who are interested to any considerable extent in wool growing is very small. Down with monopoly taxes! A Queer Medley. We find some very remarkable statements in the letters from wool manufacturers, printed in yesterday's Journal. For instance, Henry W. Barrett & Co. of Louisville say that as a result of the tariff on wool the price of that ai tide has diminished. In the same breath they say that the removal of the duty would destroy the wool industry. Now if some inquisitive wool grower were to ask Henry W. Barrett & Co. how he is benefited by a policy that cheapens the price of his product, and how he would be injured by a reversal of that policy, wo wonder how Henry W. Barrett & Co. would answer him. We would give something to know. Tiiey also say that "free wool would bo of no advantage to the manufacturer." If the duty on wool makes it cheaper, as they insist, the removal of the duty would naturally have the opposite effect to make it dearer. In this view of the case, putting wool on the free list would of course be of no benefit to the manufac-

j turer. Eut by the same token it would be a mighty good thing for the wool grower. II enry W. Barrett & Co's statements don't hang together at all. R. P. Gettys of Knoxville, Tenn., says: "We are doing very well under tho existing condition of things, and are willing that it should continue." That reads very much as if Mr. Gettys was roally in favor of free wool. We wonder that the editor didn't file away his note for future reference instead ot printing it. W. A. Hedden & Co. of New Albany, make somo extraordinary assertions, along with somo admissions which must prove exceedingly embarrassing to the Journal, which insists that free wool will not reduce the cost of clothing. W. A. Hedden & Co. assert that it ill reduce the price of

goods "about 10 per cent, varying, of course, according to weight and fineness." What does the Journal 6ay to that? They also 6ay that the price of wool will be reduced 10 cents a pound (the amount of the duty). This is an admission that the duty is added to the price of the domestic article, w hich the Journal stoutly denies. Here is another embarassment. They say that the farmer will lose from cheap w ool a net 23 per cent more than ho will gain by cheap clothing. Admitting the premise upon which this conclusion is based we should like to ask Messrs. Hedden t Co. whether the size of the farmer's family and the quantity of clothing they consume and the extent of his Hocks would have anything to do with it. "No one expects food, fuel or shelter to be cheaper than it is now." So say Hedden & Co. And jet they must know if they read the papers that every friend of the Mills bill expects this very thing. If free wool will make clothing cheaper, as Hedden & Co. admit, why will not free lumber make shelter cheaper, and free salt and a reduction in the sugar duty make food cheaper? We pause for a reply. "No one doubts or denies that a reduction of wages will follow a reduction of tariff." What nonsense. Every intelligent tariff reformer denies it, and denies it most emphatically. They all hold that a reduction of the tariff will result in a general increase in wages. That's one reason why they are tariff reformers. Mr. Alphecs Bircu of Greencastle has some remarks to mako about the reduction in the price of wool, which followed the "slight abatement in the duty," made by the republicans in 1SS3. He says the falling off in price was caused by the reduction in duty, when he must know, as a wool expert, that back in '57, when the tariff was still lower, and Canadian wool was admitted free, it brought a better price than it does to-day. It is a matter of record that the prices of domestic wool have averaged higher under low than under high tariff. Upon the whole, we think it would have been well if the Joumats woolen manufacturers had compared notes before the' prepared their letters, or, failing this, if the letters had been carefully edited and made to harmonize before being printed. This would have avoided the contradictions in w hich they abound. And by the way, we notice that Experts Tiialmax and Merritt did not improve the opportunity to answer certain questions propounded them by The Sentinel some weeks ago, anil which they have entirely ignored. Can't they answer them? Down with monopoly taxes. More Journal" Figures Which Lie. The Journal prints about twice a week a table of "comparative wages" purporting to be "compiled from the latest returns made by the London board of trade." The table, as we have shown repeatedly, is utterly worthless. Few, if any, of the figures in it approximate accuracy. This is true both as to English and American wages. A single illustration will suffice to show that no reliance whatever is to be placed on this table. It gives the average wages of printers in the United States as 40 cents per 1,000 ems. Now, the printer who set up that lying table for the Journal received only 33 cents per 1,000 ems, and he was paid at least 50 per cent, more than the average throughout this country. In only five or six American cities, such as New York, Chicago and St. Louis, are printers paid as much as 40 cents per 1,000 ems. In all the small cities the are paid a good deal less. In Evansville the price is SO cents. In Fort Way no it is 25 cents. In this city printers are working on auxiliary sheets or "patent insides" for 22 cents per 1,000 ems. The table gives the average weekly pay of American printers who work by the week at $13.50. As a matter of fact the average is not above $S or 9 per week. Thousands of country papers in the United States are set up by printers who work for $6 or S7 a week. In the small country offices of Indiana the average rate will not exceed $S. In New England and the South it is very much less. One of the officers of the typographical union in this city informs The Sentinel that the average rate of composition, taking the country through, is less than 25 cents per 1,000 ems instead of 40 cents, as stated in the Journal table, and that the average pay of those who work by the week is less than $0, instead of $13.50 as stated. The editor of the Journal knows, of his own personal know ledge, that the statement of printers' wages in this table is absolutely false, and he has every reason to believe that the figures given as to other occupations are no better. And yet he parades them in his columns, week after week, of course with a view to deceiving the people who work for wages. But as ever -workingman knows pretty well what the average wages is in his own occupation, he will readily detect the principle or lack of principle upon which the table is compiled. If it has any effect upon him it will, no doubt, be to excite his hostility to a cause w hich requires such idiotic hing by its partisans. Down with monopoly taxes ! That Awful Pall.M The passage of the Mills bill docs not seem to worry the New England manufacturers of woolen goods. The following from the New York Commercial Bulletin (X. Y.) shows increased activity in manufacturing circles: At the semi-annual meeting of the Central mills company, Svouthbride, Mass., the company decided to build an addition to the present win on the east side of the mill. The new part will be 12Ö feet in length by 65 iu width and three stories hieb.. The space thus afforded will enable the company tc nearly double its carding. The Slater woolen company, Webster, Mass., will buiid on another story some forty by seventy feet to the old brick mill at the south village. The Windemere woolen mill, Kockville, Conn., is now in a prosperous condition, and expects soon to be running to its full capaei y. The Everett mills of Lawrence, Mass., hae called a meeting of their stockholders to take action on a motion to reduce their stock from fSW.OOO to $WO,0uO, and then to immediately issue $400,000 in new stock to be paid for in cash at par value. Down with monopoly taxes! . A correspondent of the Journal asks it: "Has any republican president from Lincoln to Arthur recommended, in an annual message, the placing of wool on the free list?" And the Journal answers no. Yet the Journal of course knows that President Gua nt recommended the placing

of wool and every other raw material oa the free list. President Aftucr, too, recommended a material reduction in the wool duty. Why does the Journal willfully deceive persons who apply to it in good faith for information? that ia not honest or decent journalism. Blaine at Ills Old Trick. James G. Blaine has returned from Euroje the same shameless demagogua that he w as when he left this country. His sjeech at Madison Square Friday night was a brazen appeal to ignorance and prejudice, and nothing else, as Mr. Blaine's public speeches always have beVn. He rehearsed the old story of the "ill-paid laW of Great Britain," and told his hearers that any reduction of the oppressive taxes now levied in the name of protection would make the laboring people "as poor upon this side of the water as they are upon the other." He deliberately made the statement that "the savings of the wage workers of England, Scotland and Ireland are not near as great as lie to-night in the savings banks of Massachusetts to the credit of the wage workers of that small state" a bold, barefaced, unblushing falsehood. He concluded his speech with this outburst of flapdoodle: I have seen the other side, and I Lave devoted many of the last fourteen months to seeing the condition of labor and of the laborin men in the other hemisphere, and I say without fear of contradiction that in no country of I'u rope, in no part of any country, is the condition of labor comparable to that which it holds ia the I'nited States. Are you willing to crive up that position, or are you willing to maintain it? i ou can maintain it by a strong pull, a long pull and a pull altogether for Harrison aud Morton. No honest man of Mr. Blaine's intelligence would be capable of making such, a speech as this. No honest man, fresh from countries where labor is starving and despairing under precisely the same sort of "protection" ( ?) that it receives in this country, would tell American workingmen that such "protection" was necessary to their well-being. No honest man would invent lies about the savings of the working people of Great Britain and Massachusetts, and palm them off on those w ho, for the most part, do not have access to original sources of information upon the subject. The selection of Massachusetts, a small, long settled, wealthy and specially favored portion of this country, for comparison with the entire United Kingdom was, to begin w ith, a trick to which nobody but a political charlatan would resort But not content with this, Mr. Blaine stooped to an open lie. The facts are that the savings deposits in the United Kingdom in 1SS6 were $iSrt,000,000. In Massachusetts they were $275,000,000. In tho entire United States the savings deposits in lSi were $1,141,OX000, not much more than double the savings deposits in the United Kingdom, while the population was almost double. Mr. Blaine first lied about the difference in the savings of Massachusetts anil Great Britain, and then tried to make it appear that the. imaginary difference was due to the difference in tariffs. Now the fact is, as Mr-Blaine of course knows, that the deposits in savings banks in Great Britain are, and have been for several years past, increasing more rapidly than in this country. From 1S61 to 1SS2 the amount of deposits in the savings banks of the United Kingdom increased from 41,54'i,000 to S3,6öl,000, or 101 per cent., while the population only increased 22 per cent. It is upon shameless fabrications, such as are herein exposed, that Blainb and other defenders of monopoly taxation build up their so-called arguments in its favor. Their premises are as false as their conclusions. ' They dare not state ths facts; they dare not give the tme figures. Their only resources are invention and sophistry. Down with monopoly taxes! Our State Ticket. We present to-day pictures of the teveral candidates on the democratic ftate ticket, with brief sketches of each. The ticket, as will be observed, is composed of good-looking men, and the best of it is that they are all as good as they look. It is universally conceded that a stronger and cleaner ticket was never placed before the people of Indiana by any political party. Four of them were gallant soldiers in the Union army. All are men of character and ability, abundantly qualified for the ofiices for which they have been named, and fully up to the Jeffersonian standard in every respect. Matson, Myers, Niblack, Howk, Zollars, Miers, Munson, Byrne, Wilson, Kern and Gkifi iths make up a ticket which is invulnerable. It is in every way superior to the ticket nominated by the republicans on Wednesday, and ought to be, and we behove w ill be, elected by the largest majority given for any party in this state for many years. What Does This Mean? News. When there appeared to be a possibility of forcing Portes, into the race, the attempt to boom Hovey was discouraged as indiscreet and unwise, not merely for the reason that it might interfere with the Porter movement, but because? it was believed that he would not make as strong a candidate as other men who were available i! needed. There were ominous whispers about opposition that would probably be encountered from that class of voters who take into rigid account the personal habits of the man they are asked to help elevate, and it was quietly asserted by men high up in the party management that he wag not physically capable of making such a canvass as it would be necessary to require from the republican candidate for governor. It was said, too, that his record, w hile particularly strong in the matter of patriotism and friendship for the soldier, was; not absolutely invulnerable.

Hovey's record is of a character to lend a pungent flavor to the literature of the campaign. Will Pee-Trader Hovey challenge Col. Matson to a joint debate on the tarifl question? Who knows that the Cobden club did not dictate the nomination of Free Trader Hovey ? Free-trader Hovey will probably make no tariff speeches in this campaign. It was a parrot and monkey convention. And Mr. Steele, he got no bird. - Hovey is a "back number."