Ligonier Banner., Volume 29, Number 17, Ligonier, Noble County, 2 August 1894 — Page 3

R B R S R B R eTR S R By Arthur W. Marchmont, B. A. Buthor of *¢ Miser Hoadley’s Secret,” *Madelime o Power,” **By Whose Hand,” . Isa,” Be., k. - fCopyright, 1892, by the Author.] CHAPTER XII—CONTINUED. Before she had finished her mother eame in. ' . “Bless the girl, what's the matter?” oried Mrs. Ashworth. “I'migoing out. My Tom’sin trouble, and I'm going to him. Some villains dare to say he’s stolen some of their paltry money, and I'm going to see what it means. I’m going to him.” ~ “You can’t do that,” said Savannah, quietly. Mrs. Ashworth looked from one to the other of the girls in wonder. “Who says that?” replied Mary, laughing scornfully. . “Who'll stop me? Where my Tom is there I'll.go.” *You can’t go to him now where he 45,” said Savannah again. “Why not?” said Mary, her face. flushing: . , ‘ ‘“Where ils he, then?” asked Mrs. Ashworth in the samie breath. -

. “‘He’s probably 1n gaol by this time,” answered Savannah; and at the words Mary cried out, and would have fallen in her weakness if her mother had not caught her and half led, half carried her back to her chair. ‘

Her weakness lasted only a minute, however, and then she sprang up and eried: - ‘ )

“T don’t care where he is. Where my Tom is, there I mean to be,” and with that she turned to leave the cottage.

CHAPTER XIIIL BARY’B SUSPICIONS.

“Stay, Mary; you had better hearall 1 have been told before you go.” Mary turned back, as though she thought the suggestion good. | ““Yes; I should like to hgar it. When did all this happen?” =~ ~¢Not long before I came here,” answered Savannah.

“Did Tom send you to tell me?”

; “No. Icame because I thought it . swould be better for you to hear it from me than from anyone else.” ‘““Tom Roylance a. thief and in prison,” ejaculated Mrs. Ashworth, lifting up her hands in amazement. “Silence, mother,” cried Mary, angrily. “Tom is no thief, ‘and those who have dared to put him in prison will have to pay for it. But now, Savannah, what is it these slanderers say sBgainst my Tom?” “They say that a week or two back something in the accounts was noticed that puzzled them. They said nothing at the time, waiting to see what happened. Then they decided to make a sudden examination into the books, anrd to see whether the money was richt. They came—at least, they went to the cottage—"" ' “Were you there?” asked Mary, quickly, noticing the slip the other made in the use of the words. . “] was sitting: with the old man, and had been reading to him,” answered Savannah, flushing slightly as she spoke. ‘‘Well, they asked at once for the books and for the money, and went into the thing then and there. They were in the front room, and after a time Tom came back to where I was sitting with his father, and he looked very angry and agitdted. He went to a drawergunlocked it and took outa . cash box. _ “] heard him exclaim as he took it into his hands, and then he cried, suddenly: ' oL “‘My God! I'm ruined! I've been robbed! My cash box has been broken open. I had all the money of the sick fnnd in it, and every shilling is gone! - They’ll think I've robbed them.’ “At that moment one of the other men came to the door, and asked Tom if he would take the money into the next room so that they could count it and check it. . ¢ ‘Murstone'—it was Murstone, the over-looker, you know him, Mary—‘Murstone, I've been robbed,’said Tom. ‘The box is empty, and every shilling has been taken away!’ ““Murstone smiled a hard, disbeliev- ~ ing, mocking smile, which drew down the corners of his mouth, whilst his eyebrows went up, 2nd he shrugged his shoulders as he answered: “ “That’s unfortunate,’in a tone that

shawed he didn’t believe a tword of

what Tom said. ‘But come, let us get + back and tell the others of your mishap.’ I !

“Tom’s eyes blazed with rage ad the other’s tone and manner, and I thought he was going to strike him. But he kept his temper, and followed Murstone out of the room, holding the empty cash box dangling from his hand as he walked. ; © “ ‘Poor fellow, I pitied him.’ ) “They did not come in again for some time, and his father lay back wondering what it meant. When Tom came he was alone. . :

“ ‘l’'m going out for a bit, father.” I could read in the troubled look in his eyes that something very bad was the matter. '

“ ‘What is the matter?’ I asked him, getting out of earshot of the old man. ¢ *There’s trouble and a strange mistake about the 'business of the sick fund nioney. These men think I've talen it and they say they must give me in charge. Of course, I can’t stop them if they like to do so. But we shall probably go over at once to Presburn and see the head man there and have the thing threshed out- straight away. Ifldon’t come back to-night, try and prevent my father from worrying too muck, and make some excuse. But I may be locked up. I can’t tell yet.’ ‘ '

“And with that he went out like one dazed and half stupefied.” . “Did he send no message of any kind to me?” asked Mary, jealously.®

~ “No. I?e said no more than % have told you,’” answered Savannah.

“Then I'll go down to his cottage and see whether he has come back yet. Are you coming?” : The two girls left the house together, and on the way to Tom’s home Mary plied her companijon with questions. ‘When they reached the cottage Tom was not there. He had not been back. “I'll wait,” said Mary, quietly, and she took off her hat and jacket and sat down. =

“You’ve no call to wait, Savannah,” said Mary, somewhat ungraciously, after a time. ' = “Why are you angry with me, Mary?” asked Savannah, in her softest voice. ‘‘Tom asked me to stay ‘with his father until his return, if he does return to-night. That is why I am here. But you and I must not auarrel st a time like thia” :

Mary turned to her companion and said readily: ' “I Wwas wrong, Savannah. Forgive me. Butl am full of anxtety about this; it frightens me. There must be some cofispiracy against Tom. He is so good-natured and open and trustful that anyone can impose upon him. I wish he would come.” After a time she rose and made some supper for the invalid, who spoke very little, but lay and watched her as she moved about the room. The old man turned to Savannah: “Will you read to me, child? You will soothe me.” : The girl went to the side of the bed and took up the book that was lying there—it was a copy of the “Pilgrim’s Progress”—an< as soon as Mary had finished her preparations began reading aloud from it. ) - ‘Mary sat apart nearer the door, waiting and listening for Tom’s coming. Presently, she®crept gently from the room and went to the door of the cottage to wait there. This was about ten o’clock: she knew there was a train from Presburn about that time. After a little while she saw her lover’s tall figure coming up the street. He was walking slowly, and his head was bent as though he was in deep thought. She gave a sigh of relief when she saw him, for she had begun to-fear that his not coming might mean the worst. SHBe went to meet him. When he saw her he stopped and started. ‘“Mary, you here?”

' The tears were in her voice as she put out her hands to take his, wanting to make him feel her sympathy.

“] heard there was some -trouble, Tom. Savannah told me.” '

“Why did she speak of {t? She said she would not.” . . “Not to me?” Shewas hurt to think he should wish to have a trouble kept secret from her and known to another. ‘

“I did not want to trouble you while you were ill, Mary,” said Tom, reading her meaning in her question. . “I would far rather know it at once,” she answered. “It is only a cruel kindness to keep your troubles from me.” Then she took his arm, and clung to him and wondered and grieved that he did not kiss her. If she had had a trouble, it would have been 80 sweet, she thought, to have- been able to tell him and to kiss him for the ready wealth of sympathy which would be given to her. " Such sympathy as her heart was bursting to pour forth.

“Let us go in,” he said, after a moment’s pause, in which he had felt embarrassed.

“Can you speak of this before your father and—and Sayannah?" asked Mary. . '

- “You must not stay in the night air, lass; you'll get chilled. Oh! yes; I can gay anything before—them.” DNary guessed what he had meant to say, even before he added, as if to explain away her thoughts: “Savannah knows everything already.” . - They went in, and Mary was relieved to see he was brighter than she had thought. o She half hoped that matters were not 80 bad as she had feared. But thefirst words he spoke killed her hope. They were addressed to Savannah in answer to the searching, anxious look that she directed upon him with th e one-word question: “Well?”

**No, it is not well,” he answered, playing on the word. ‘lt is not so bad as it might be. But—,” and he looked across to where his father lay. -“He is asleep,” said Savannah, interpreting the look. 'Then Tom drew the two girls across the room, and in a low voice told them the result of the journey to Presburn. They had not found the man whom they had gone over. to see. As soon as Tom began to speak of the matter, Mary read in his eyes and voice and manner how real and terrible was the trouble, and how deeply he was suffering, and she longed in her heart to have the task of comforting him. But Savannah’s presence checked her. - :

“What is ‘it they 'say against you, Tom?” she asked. ‘I mean, what is the actual charge they make?” ““That I have stolen the money of the fund, Mary. That I am a thief. You know I have to collect certain subscriptions, and they—well, it is Murstone who is doing it—seem to have got hold of the idea that I have been making the accounts all wrong, and that I haven’t accounted for some of the money.” “What a disgraceful shame!” she cried, angry and indignant at the mere accusation against him. ‘“How much money is it that—" ,

“That I have stolen?” he said, when she hesitated for a momen§ to find a word to use.

“Tom! How can you even joke about such a thing?” she exclaimed. “I mean, how much do they say is

missing?” ' “The amount they speak of now is about twelve or. thirteen pounds; but —Dbut that isnot.all.” He stopped and sighed heavily. :

“What else is there?” asked Mary, laying her hand gently on his arm, while her heart bled at the sight of his troubled eyes. “They dare tosuggest that the books have been wrong for a long time, and that there is much more money ‘than that altogether.” , **Well, you can put the books into somebody’s hands | to-morrow, and show that's a lie,” said Mary. “They’ve taken them to-night.” “Tom, you surely never let them do that! Why, that’s like admitting that things are wrong.” ) -

“It was the only arrangement they’d consent to,” he answered; as if feebly excusing his weakness. ‘“‘But about the money,” she said, after a pause. “Did you give them that as well?” - )

“How could I do that?” heexclaimed, rather irritably. “Didn’t Savannah tell you that it had been stolen out of the cash-box?” -

“Was it the fund money that was stolen?”. !

““Yes, Mary; of course it was,” he answered, again speaking irritably. “Don’t you understand? You know I put the money always in that cashbox just as I collected it, and kept it there until I paid it over to [Lee when he came from Presburn.. When I went to get it this evening, to show that it tallied with the accounts, it was gone. That’s the whole thing in a nutshell.”

The tone in which he spoke hurt the girl. It seemed as if he resented her questions. . : . “But if it was only twelve or thirteen pounds—you have more than that in the savings bank, Tom; and you can give them that, can’t you? Surely they cannot punish you because some one bas stolen the money from you.

r"’l‘!mt, at the worss, would be your loss, not theirs. Bad enough, of course; but not nearly so bad as—as the other.” : : This seemed to disconcert him more than the former questions. He turned away his head, and Mary fancied she detected a quick glance flashed between Savannah and him. “You don’t understand . it, Mary.” His voice was a trifle more unsteady than it had been before. *‘l told them that the money was in the house and in the cash-box.” _ ‘ “But if you have the money to glvqf them, how can it be serious? Money i#¥ money, and twelve pounds taken out of the savings bank is the same to them as twelve pounds taken out of a cashe box. Surely that’s all they want.” Again there was an awkward silence.’ Tom turned away and leant his head on his hand in an attitude of dejection. Suddenly he faced round, looked at the girl as'if she were accusing him, and said—trying again to assume anger in order to cover his confusion: “Yes; it’s' all very well to talk like that., ‘lf I had the money; but what if I haven't the money? And I haven’t.” He lcoked at her half-defiantly and yet half-shamefacedly. ' For a moment Mary could not reply. She glanced into his face, then into Savannah’s, and then dropped her eyes lest he should read the doubts and fears which Eis words- had rfied-. Doubts, not of his honesty—she ha@ no doubt of that; but of something that was even more to her. She knew that only a few weeks before he had had some twenty or thirty pounds of savings, just as she herself had; for they had-talked over all their little money matters like brother and sister. Now vague, disquieting fears as to what he had done with lit, connecting them-~ selves indefinitely in her thoughts with her growing doubts of Savannah, troubled her. But none of this feeling showed itselfin her reply. S “Then you should have relied on me, Tom,” she answered, and her face as she spoke glowed with a smile that ‘ cheered and warmed the heart of the man. ‘‘That will soon be put right. You must have Dbeen strangely troubled, dear, to forget me at such a time. We must get rid of this bother first, -and then we’ll see about who broke into your cash-box. Will yon take this money to Murstone in the morning—or at any rate tell him you have the amount, whatever it may be, that the books malke out to be due?”

“You are very good, Mary,” said Tom, very gently. “Nay, nay; it’s but what I'd look for from you. I'm glad we’ve had the talk. I shall sleep to-night now. But I must go.” Then she .and Savannah left, and Mary walked home with & heavy heart for all her words. :

The more she thought of the interview—recalling Tom’s manner, and what he had said, and piecing it together with his neglect of her during her week of illness—the more she was troubled and harassed and restless. An instinct seemedto warn her that the worst trouble lay underneath the surface, and that it was of a kind which threatened to wreck all her happiness. Of the particular trouble about the -sick' fund money she no longer felt much anxiety. That could easily be replaced. What she feared was a trouble that no money could avert.

. CHAPTER XIV. FROM BAD TO WORSE.

In the morning Mary took her savings bank book to the mill. At breaks fast time she saw Reuben Gorringe, and asked him to let her have ten pounds at once, to be paid back as soon as the money could be got from the bank. Gorringe was only too glad for-her to come to him—glad to let her feel the advantages of the possession of money. ' “Ten pounds, Mary? Of course I will. Is that enough? Here, take back your book,” he said, without having attempted to open it. ‘There need be no talk of such a thing between you and me. What I have will always be half yours. You have but to ask;” and he smiled as he handed the bookout to her, with a bank note for ten pounds. ‘I wish you to see, please, Mr. Gorringe, that there is money in the bank —more than enough to cover this; and if it can be done, I should like you to have security for the money. I am going to draw this sum out at once, and should like you to have the order for it, if that is possible.”

“What a little business woman you are, to be sure,” he said. “But I'll trust you for that amount if you don't want more, without prying into the secrets of your banking account, child,” and he smiled again. ‘““There’s over forty pounds there, Mr. Gorringe,” said Mary, with quiet firmness. ' : g

“Very well,” he said. ‘I know you are in earnest. You won’t have me for a friend, I suppose, so I must be ¢content to be your man of business. This will do it.” He had been writing while he spoke. ‘“There you are, Mary. Sign that and all will be legal.” ; “Thank you,” she said. *I will give it to you the moment it comes.” ““You are very welcome; but of course you know that,” he said. ; He had acted very wisely in yielding to Mary's wish to give ‘‘security” for the money, and he had pleased her as much by his manner of doing the act as by the act itself. 5 She took the ten pounds, together with some which she had at home, and gave it to Tom, telling the latter to pay it at once to Murstone, or at all events to satisfy him that the amount shown to be due was ready to be paid over at any time; and when she had done this she felt lighter hearted than for some houis previously. The work hours passed rapidly in the pleasant anticipation of being with Tom, for the latter had promised to see her directly after the mill closed in order to tell her all that passed. About five o’clock, however, Reuben Gorringe came to her with a look of concern and seriousness on his face, and asked her to come as soon as possible to the office, as he wished to see her particularly. ey ' “What is it?” she asked. *“lsanything the matter?” *I can’t tell you here; come to the office,” answered Gorringe.. ‘lt is serious.”

She stopped all her looms almost as soon as he had left, and followed him. [TO BE CONTINUED.}

He Should Be Sent.

He—What is the difference between the admission to a dime museum and the admission to Sing Sing? . She—Don’t know. What? - He—One is ten cents and the other is sentence. See?—Truth v

CAUSED BY PROTECTION.

The Present Strike the Result of Republican Legislation.

- The promise that the president will appoint a ommission to inquire into the origin and nature of the controversy out of which the great strike grew ought to have & quieting effect on all the parties to the controversy, and on the country as well. Primarily, of course, the commission will have to deal with the conditions at Pullman and Chicago; but it cannot perform its work satisfactorily without going back of all that to ascertain ‘what produced these conditions. If the inquiry is made as broad and inclusive as it should be, and probably will be, it can hardly fail to show that one of the most important factors in the production of the unfortunate conditions referred to has been the protective policy of the government for the past thirty years. The panic of 1893, from the effects of which the country has not yet recovered—if it can be said to have. fairly started on the road to recovery—was due very largely to the culmination of that policy in the McKinley tariff.” The immediate effect of the adoption of that iniquitous measure was the undue stimulation of all branches of industry which had been made beneficiaries under it. Foreign competition being shut out and the right guaranteed to the American producer to control the market and charge what he pleased for his wares, he promptly availed himself of the privilege and proceeded to bleed the consumer for his benefit. For a time he fought off the natural consequence of such a course—the provoking of competition—by resorting tg combinations and trusts; but the inevitable result followed. @ The unhealthy stimulus overstocked the market; prices f{fell; and even while the devotees of protection were shouting that this fall in prices was the real intent and purpose of their policy, it proceeded so far that stagnation came. Work ceased; and tens of thousands all over the country were thrown out of employment and became burdens on a public which was in the worst possible condition for bearing increased burdens. The bursting of the McKinley bubble —to which while it was full the protectionists pointed with so much pride —brought widespread disaster; and the only hope of the country is in that return to right principles for which the country hopes as a result of tariff legislation by the recent congress.” But it is not in its direet results only that the protective policy has proven disastrous to the country, or that it is to be held responsible for the existing conditions. It has done more harm, probably, by indirection than it has directly, though that is putting the case very strongly indeed. During the past thirty years it has been misleading the people to their hurt as to the true province and function of a govercment; and especially of the United States government. One-half, atleast, of the present trouble—if not one-half of the other half—is due to the mischievous notion that it is part of the business of the government to legislate for the benefit of classes. Considering what the government has been doing in this way for the past thirty years, it is not at'all surprising that this mischievous notion should have entered the heads of a great many people. It is perfectly natural that the workingman, when he finds that the government has been passing a law for the express and avowed purpose .of enabling the Carnegies or the Pullmans or any other of the manufacturers in the country to enrich themselves, should conclude that it is not only in the power, but that it is the duty, of the government to pass laws for the express purpose of enriching him also. He has been told all his life that this is a government of the people, by the people,. for all the people, and not for a part of the people—not for the manufacturers alone, but for their employes as well; -and he very naturally wants his share. There is no answer to such a demand but a stern retracing on the steps that have been taken in a wrong direction. The only doctrine to which appeal can be made from the demand/of the workingman is the doctrine of ‘equal rights to all; special privileges to none,;”~and this means the uprooting absolutely of the protective policy. It is to be hoped thatthe commission which is to be appointed by the president will be able to take up this branch of the subject and report to the country upon {t.—Detroit Free Press. S :

THEY ARE NOT DEMOCRATS.

Why the Tariff Reformm Has Not Been i Brought About.

The democratic party is not in power at the national capital. It cannot control legislation in congress. It is helpless to pass an important and vital measure, which was promised in the democratic platform of 1892, and which by an enormous majority the people demanded at the ballot box. The plighted faith of the democratic party stands unredeemed. It has been powerless to fulfillits pledges. The work which it was appointed to do—which declared should be done—has not been done. One year and four months ago a democratic president was sworn into office, and the term of a national congress began with a nominal democrat‘ic majority in both the sg)uate and the house. ! ;

There was no such majority. Eight or nine senators elected as democrats have acted in alliance with the republicans. They have not cast a democratic vote on the tariff bill. They have voted just as McKinley would have voted had he been in the senate.

1t isan error to say that the democrats are in power while a faction of senators classed as such—enough in number to destroy the democratic majority in the senate—are casting republican votes, conspiring with repfiblican leaders to defeat the democratic tariff bill and are in open insurrection against the democratic sentiment of the country.

The president and the house of representatives are united in a determination that the demociatic pledges of 1892 shall be kept in good faith with the people. They have presented a tariff bill which was the best that the necessities of the case would authorize—not perfect, but a long step in advance —a measure of practical reform. - :

The senate refused to accept this measure. Under republican control—by a majority composed of the regular corrupt republican forces and a guerrilla contingent of bogus democrats—the democratic tariff bill appears destined to defeat. If anything shall be saved, it wili be merely what the

house and the president can extort from a hostile, undemocratic senate. The coal senators, the iron ore senators, the sugar senators and the collars and cuffs senator have repudiated democracy, repudiated the platform of 1892, repudiated the popular instruections adopted at the ballot box, and are determined to force on the country a tariff dictated by trust deed, by the monopoly combine and by and by the republicans, or. they will prevent the passage of any tariff bill. These recalcitrants and renegades are not democrats. They are republicans, bearing a false name and carrying false colors.

These senators misrepresented their states, the democratic constituncies of the country and the body of the people. They are a bushwhacking detachment of the party of trusts, monopoly, protection and organized fraud. They have betrayed the country. They have been false to the duty which they were instructed to perform.

1f these false democrats shall be successful now in defeating reform tariff legislation the result will not be chargeable to the democratic party of the nation. It will be simply another republican victory—a 'victory of the: party of trusts, monopolies, class legislation, of corporate greed and extortion, reenforced by a group of sordid and faithless politicians who have violated party allegiance and ferfeited the Hame of democrats. =

This will be a calamity. But it will be no reason for giving up the fight. It will be a reason for fighting “he future battles of reform with increased vigor, courage and zeal. The people have baen betrayed. But the cause is not lost. The contest will be continued. The faithless, the cowardly, the -trimmers and the traitors will be driven to the rear. This reverse will be retrieved. Better men will be ¢lothed with the trust to which these recreants were untrue, and it will be discharged in the spirit of the instructions given by the voters to their representatives. — Chicago Herald. : : i

THE TAX ON SUGAR.

Why the Republicans Stick So Closely to : the McKinley Bill.

{t is obvious that the alluring shibboleth, ‘‘a free breakfast table,” is the influencing cause of much of the opposition to the sugar tax in the pending tariftf bill. There is a fascination in the idea that the essential elements of the poor man’s matutinal meal shall be exempt from all eleme%ts that might add to its cost, and there is a more or less widely diffused delusion that under the present law sugar is free from taxation. -But, as a matter of fact, it is taxed to an extent witho;ut parallel. The two cents a pound, bounty to the growers of raw sugar and the fivetenths of a cent taritf on all the products of the sugar trust combine to create an enormous levfi, and, though it is collected on the clothing and blankets of the, peog)le, and is presented bodily to the beneficiaries, does not in the least degree alter the facts in the case. It is a tax justchesame,'and a tax that'is criminal because it is an unconstitutional robbery. The plain truth of the matter is that because of republican profligacy and the inefficiency of the McKinley bill as a revenue law, the country is confronted by an impending treasury deficiency. To avoid such a' calamity it is necessary to discover new sources of revenue. With that idea in view, the pending bill provides for withdrawing the unconstitutional gratuity to the sugar growers and the sugar trust and divert an equal amount of the money that is taken from the pockets of the people into the treasury. The bounty to the sugar growers will amount this year to about $25,000,000. The ‘‘protection” to the trust is $20,000,000, making a total of $45,000,000 of taxation on sugar, comparatively little of which gbes into the treasury. The pending bill will draw about an equal amount from the people, but every cent of it except that which goes for expenses of collection will go into the treasury and be available for the ordinary expenses of the government, relieving the people of taxes on other necessaries to that amount. .

We would be glad if it were possible to secure this reform in the revenue system without affording protection to the sugar trust, but the democratic majority in the senate is so meager that the defection of a single vote would put the whole measure in jeopardy. THe sugar trust, like all other trusts, is obnoxious to the democratic party, and any legislation that would destroy it would be welcome to the democratic people. But according te the best information attainable it is not possible to accomplish this result. One or two senators who hold title to their seats through democratic suffrage declare their intentions to bolt unless the odious concessions are made to them. The consequence would be the continuance of the McKinley bill, which is what the sugar trust and the republican party desires. The late Gov. Moses once said, by way of encouragement to his carpet-bag associates in the south: ‘‘There are a couple of years good stealing in the south yet.” It is an analogous sentiment that influences the republecans to adhere to the McKinley bill with such marvelous tenacity.—Kansas City Times.

POINTED PARAGRAPHS.

—McKinley is the Eugene V. Debs of American politics. He is the man who tied up the business of the country.—Kansas City Times. —The advice of the president is good. Coal and iron ore must be made free and protection must be denied to the sugar trust.—N. Y. World. ~

——Debs’ strike is the last misfortune of the republican panic 0£1893. We are on the eve of an era of democatie prosperity.—St. Louis Republic. _

——Chairman Wilson’s health is still feeble, but ‘it is gratifying to know that his weakness is not located in the vicinity of his backbone.—Boston Herald. :

——President Cleveland’s letter to Chairman Wilson is manly and straightforward. The president says what he means and means what he says.—Buffalo Enquirer. : - ——People shouldn’tlose sight of the fact that the national treasury was about ready to go into the hands of a receiver at the close of Benjamin Harrison’s administration.—Kansas City Times. ' '

——President Cleveland’s manly and straightforward letter to Congressman Wilson was made public at just the right moment. The democracy of the nation is with honest Grover in this matter.—N. Y. Morning Journal.

S ~ ABOUT ANARCHY. : A Wonderful Bugbear Discovered by a New ' York Protectionist Organ. The ultra-protectionist New York Press is improving the presentoccasion by uttering wild and silly calamity shrieks. It calls the half-fledged Wilson bill the *bill of anarchy” and credits it with all the numerous wage reductions, strikes and riots which have oceurred under the McKinley bill rule during the past year. It says: “The difficulty out of which the disastrous conflict.at Chicago has arisen was directly due to the war waged by Grover Cleveland and the free trade bourbons upon American industrial interests and the American standard of wages,” It says ‘‘the tariff bill framed to’enrich monopoly and to impoverish the northern working man has robbed hundreds of thousands of industrious wage earners of employment and forced them into the depths of destitution. It has closed a host of manufacturing establishments and . compelled a sweeping reduction of .pay in multitudes of others like Pullman.” It says ‘‘the, detestable bill” contains ‘‘the seed of a hundred riots worse

than that at Chicago,”eter . . It is perhaps useless to suggest to the Press: i

1. That its great and beloved McKinley bill guaranteeing high wages and steady employment to all is still in force. Is this mighty bill unable to cope with the mere shadow of the Wilson bill? o 4 2. That if the Wilson bill, which splits MeKinly dutiesin two, is ‘‘framed to enrich monopolies” for what purpose was the McKinley bill framed? 3. That the reduction of wages at Pullman had little or no connection with the tariff discussion. Hundreds of surplus cars having been manufactured to supply the needs of excursionists to the world’s fair it was to be expected that this would be a dull year at Pullman. St

4. That it will not impoverish the northern or any other workingman to reduce his taxes and to provide more work for him by giving free raw materials to his employers. =~ : - 5. That it will not impoverish the northern farmer to give him cheaper clothing, food, shelter and tools and to open up better markets for his products, both at home and abroad.. e

6. That people who live in protected glass houses should not throw stones at those who are laying the foundation for a free trade house. It may be recalled that a few strikes an\d riots, like those at Homestead and at the Ceeur d’Alene mines, occurred before the detestible Wilson bill cast its shadow across the McKinley bill. Also that a list of over 500 wage reductions in protected industries was published in 1892 as the result of the two years of MeKinleyism, and that wage advances were as scarce as hen’s teeth. In fact, it may be recalled that wage strikes and riots were unknown in this country before the introduction of high protection about thirty years ago, which has given us monopolists, mortgages and tramps in proportions to make a most unstable mixture in a republic. . 7. That the McKinley: bill was but the culminating act of republican and protectionist atrocity which has for thirty years been breeding anarchy and discontent by legislating wealth out of the pockets of the hard-working masses into the pockets of the dishonest schemers who, by political jobbery and legislative bribery, control and operate our railroads and protected mines, forests and factories. : o

{ The Press has gotten the shoe on the ' wrong foot. ‘lt is a high mbnopoly tariff and not free trade that is largely responsible for the present anarchistic conditions.—Byron W. Holt. -

TARIFF. REFORM GAINS.

Ad Valorem Duties—Free Wool—Free Lumber—Lower Duties—lncome Tax. .

While it is too soon to estimate all of the prospective gains to tariff reform, it is not too soon to declare that the gains will be greater, rather than less, than in the senate bill which is now in conference. What, then, are some of the distinct gains certain to follow the passage of the Wilson bill? : 1. One of the greatest gains comes from the greater use of ad valorem instead of specific duties. It is not easy for those who have' not given special attention to the subject to realize the great difference between these two methods of collecting taxes. Specific duties collect as mnch taxes from the cheap goods of the poor as from the costly goods of the rich. A taxof §la yard may double the cost of an inferior suit of clothing, while it adds but onetenth to the cost of a first-class suit. If the first-class suit wears three times as long as the inferior suit, the poor man who wears the inferior suit will pay three times as much' taxes as the rich, man who wears the first-class suit. The injustice of specific duties isso great that it would make them intolerable if they were applied to direct taxes where their effects would be seen by all. Thus, a tax of $5O apiece on dwelling houses, which would bear lightly upon the palaces of our millionaires would make rebels and anarchists out of our millions of day laborers who live in houses that cost from $5O to $5OO each. It is not, however, because specific duties discriminate in favor of the rich that they are the rule in the McKinley bill. It is because they afford more certain and increasingly greater protection. Specific duties take no account of the natural decline in prices of goods. As prices fall the rate of protection increases. A duty of $5O per ton when steel rails are selling for $lOO gives only 50 per cent. protection. The same duty gives a protection of 200 per cent. when the price has declined to $25. The tendency of these duties to give increasing protection is demonstrated by the McKinley bill. In 1891 the average rate on dutiable imports was 46.28. In 1892 it had increased to 48.71, and in 1893 to 49.58. The tariff of 1883 behaved in the same way though it contained fewer specific duties. With ad valorem duties the rate of protection is practically stationary. Under the ad valorem Walker bill the rate varied only about 1 per cent. during the seven years from 1848 to 1854. . v 9. Free wool and greatly reduced duties on woolens will be a boon to the ninety-nine out of 100 persons ‘who have to consider prices when making purchases. Nor is it at all probable that free ,wool will injure the wool grower or the woolen manufacturer. It is quite certain to benefit the textile workers of this country by giving them steadier employment. Free wool will give new life to the woolen industry just as free hides, in 1873, gave new life to the leather dressing and leather consuming industries. Under protection the price of wool has declined un-

til, under the- McKinley bill, we have reached a free trade basis and are selling our wools in Europe. The farmer, therefore, even if he be a wool grower, has nothing to fear from free wool. If he is not a wool grower he most certainly will lose nothing and will save. perhaps 25 per cent:in what he pays for woolen goods. Our. exports oft woolen goods, which have: already begun under taxed raw materials, may be expected to increase many fold with free materials. The Wool and Cotton Reporter, of July sth, tells us that during the first week in June and the last - week in May we exported to Great Britain earpets valued at £2.610 ($13,000). This is at the rate of over $300,000 . a year. It says that our export trade in carpets has become firmly established and that one firm ‘‘of late has alone shipped more carpets to Great Britain than the English and Scoteh manufacturers combined have sent to the United States.” A With free wool the demand for carpet weavers will surely increase. T - 3. Free lumber will protect the home industry of building homes. While the benefits.will be but slight in many parts’ of the United States, in some parts they ‘will be considerable. All kinds of sawed, planed® or grooved boards as well as shingles, laths, pickets, shooks, staves, et¢., have been made free.. The value of the dutiable imports of the wood schedule was over $13,000,000 in 1893. Under the proposed bill it would be less than $2,500,000. The saving of duties will benefit all, except the holders of timber lands, who are usually rich speculators often with dishonestly acquired titles. If free lumber causes their land to decrease slightly .in value it will still be worth, in many instances, several times what they paid for it. : o ‘

4. Reduced duties on all manufactures and raw materials, except on sugar, will lower prices and stimulate industry. While these duties have not been reduced as much as was expected they will still be light ascompared with the heavy McKinley duties. 5.~ The adoption of a tax on incomes will do'much to equalize the burdens of taxation. This tax will never rest upon the poor who pay 75 per cent. of our tariff:and internal’revenue taxes. It has come té stay until supplanted by some better direct tax.—Byron W. Holt. : 4 : . ‘ AN OBJECT 'LESSON.

Let American Protectionists Remember What Converted Sir Robert Peel.

The English newspapérs speak of the proposed tariff in somewhat disrespect-. ful tones, and we admit that. considered logically, it is not a meausure . worthy 'of immense commendation. And yet many measures that have at the time of their creation been considered asseriously wanting in good points have, as .time passed on, secured for themselves a respect which they did not primarily possess. The constitution of the United States wasa compromise, giving satisfaction to few, if any, of those who framed it, who plainly announced that they accepted it, not as satisfactory,but as the result of hard necessity. And yef we have succeeded in living under our constitution, and . some later day commentators have . gone so far as to-pronounce it a masterpiece of statesmanship. We would not have’ it inferred from this that we believe that the proposed tariff, which is. essentially a compromise measure, and a compromise. forced under hard necessity, will prove to be a species of legislation calling forth the admiration: of succeeding generations; but what we can say” in favor of the Wilson-Gorman-Jones-Fall River-sugar trust-sea-moss tariff is that it will serve its purpose in ‘the necessary work of object teaching. We might point out to our English crittes that it is as much of an advance toward freedom of trade as was made by the British tariff reformersof 1833, and it was the wonderful success of the English 1843, protective tariff that made a free trader of Sir Robert Peél and many other Englishmen who ‘had - previously been hide-bound protectionists.—Boston lierald. e ;

: The House Should Support Wilson. Chairman - Wilson's speech in moving to non-concur in the senate amendments to the tariff bill, was quiet- and dignified in tone, but indicated with unmistaken clearness his intention to stand firmley for the main features of the house bill. What these are he- left it not at all uncertain. They are free raw materials and ad - valorum taxes. Many of the senate’s swarm of amendments are, as Mr. Wilson admitted, unimportant; but those which take raw materials off: the free list and which slip in trickling specifle . duties at so many points to befog the . taxpayer and benefit the manufacturer, are. .a betrayal of party and asurrender of. principle. ~Chairman ‘Wilson was well @ within the : truth in saying :that the bill as it passed the lhwuse was more conservative than the sentiment of the party and the country warranted anl demanded. -To give up any essential part of that now would be to lose, and to deserve to lose, what little respect the party has left it. The hoase conferrees cannot be too exigent and unyielding in their demands on the senate. They ought to keep it constantly in mind that what they have to fizht is really a small clique of distrusted and discredited democratic senators. The majority of the senate saw fit to give in to this band of “‘strikers,” but it is to be hoped that the house will hold a higher tone with the Gormanites. They will surrender at discretion if met in open warfare.—N. Y. Post: : i ; Hill's Folly. It.is. reall y very foolish for Mr. Hill, after the months of dawdling for which he is not responsible, to step in at the last. moment and delay action when every one else isready to act. This'is , what Hill is doing -in his hopeless attempt to defeat the income tax. He can ' accomplish. nothing. He must know that he can accomplish nothing. —lndianapolis g'ews. “All for Themselves. _ : The sugar trust magnatesdiffer frcm the high tariff barons in one respect,. at. least. They are not hypocrites. They are boldly for liberty to rob the people of the United States in order to put money in their own pockets. They do not, turn up the whites of their eyes and pretend that the sugar tax is for the benefit of workingmen.—Tecumseh Herald. e : . The Income Tax. o ‘Tear of a possible income tax should deter nobody from increasing his income.—Boston. Globe. ; —The senate amended the old phrasa “There’s nothing like leather” by striking out the last word and substituting - sugar.—Philadelphia Ledger., =