July 14, 1888 Vol. IV, No. 2Whole No. 80

THE STANDARD FOR THE CAMPAIGN.

Subscriptions to THE STANDARD from now to the close of the campaign will be received at the following rates:

Single subscription . . . . . 80c Ten or more, each . . . . . 70c One hundred or more, each . . . 65c

“The Standard” is sent this week to a number of persons whose friends have paid to have the paper forwarded to them for four weeks in the hope that they may be induced to read it, examine the principles it advocates and become regular subscribers. Those who receive the paper without having ordered it will understand that it has been sent in this manner and will be sent for four successive weeks without charge to them.

Terms of subscription will be found on the fourth page.

CONTENTS.

The Mills Bill. Governor Hill’s Nomination. The Letter Carriers. A New Jersey Village. Hugh O. Pentecost’s Letter. Free Wool. Straws Which Show the Wind. Trying to Save the Babies. About Woolen Manufacture. Facts, Not Fancies. St. John on the Tariff. Entering the Tariff Fight. Janus Jericho’s Outing. The Socialists Are Right. Shooting Wild. A Dose of Salts. Taxing Ground Rents in London. Yankee Doodle Wants Free Trade (poem). Campaign “Standard” Fund. Men and Things. Our Fourth of July Celebration. The Beating of the Drums. A Farmer’s View of It. Samrandallism. Queries and Answers. Pen, Paste and Scissors. Current Thought.

ANACOSTIA, D. C., July 11.—I am a single tax man, and was made one by first reading THE STANDARD, which led me to read “Progress and Poverty;” but I am disgusted with the Mills bill, and am more than surprised that THE STANDARD should support it. It seems to me a catch-vote affair, and instead of coming out square footed for tariff reduction, it only transfers the robbery from one section of the country to the other. A few articles not represented by lobbyists of wealthy combinations are slightly reduced or freed, only to cover the political intent of the bill and whitewash its cowardly discrimination. Mr. Mills may be a free trader, but his bill certainly shows that he lacks the courage of his convictions if he is one, and further that he is more of a politician than an economist. I agree with THE STANDARD in supporting Mr. Cleveland, who is the only man in his party who has had the courage to define his position; but when I see such a good paper throwing away its influence and alienating its best friends by advocating [any?] such a [hotchpot?] measure as Mr. Mills presents I am more than sorry.

CARROLL W. SMITH.

THE STANDARD has not advocated the Mills bill as in any way representing proper tariff legislation, if, indeed, it has advocated it at all. That it is a catch-vote affair is undoubtedly true, and it is probable that no one knows this better than Mr. Mills himself. But any one who will read the debates now going on in the house will see that if it were not a catch-vote affair it could not get strength enough to make the protectionists really fear it. With few exceptions every member of congress considers it his bounden duty to stand up for the right of any of his constituents who may be interested in a protected industry to get a share of the plunder, even though he may be in conscience opposed to the plundering scheme as a whole. But with all its shortcomings, incongruities, discriminations and timidities, the Mills bill does propose some reduction in protective duties; it does—and this is its most notable feature—put some important articles on the free list. It would, if passed, break the protectionist line and weaken the combination that supports the present monstrous tariff, by taking out of it such powerful elements as the wooi^sic and lumber interests. Even moderate as it is as a measure of tariff reform, and drawn as it is with the view of minimizing resistance, it cannot more than pass the house of representatives and will be rejected in the senate, where the plundering interests are most strongly intrenched. But it has done, and is doing, what is far more important than the passage of any bill. It has brought on and stimulated the discussion of the principle of protection among the people. It has done this as effectively as a better bill could do—in fact, more effectively, in so far as by reason of its faults, it has secured greater strength in the house. For to fully arouse discussion there must be an impending practical measure. And it is the discussion among the people themselves that is of all things most important. The representatives owe their places to their constituents, represent them, and are anxious to please them. And it is the people who must discuss this subject and express their will upon it before we can hope for any real tariff reform from congress. To me the whole protective system is so bad that I care little for degrees of badness; and any bill would be good enough if it brought on the discussion. I hope from this discussion not merely tariff reform, nor even what is commonly called free trade, but such a stimulation of thought on economic subjects as will lead and help to the recognition of the fact that the p. 1, col. 2 [true?] way to emancipate labor, to bring plenty, and to solve the social and political difficulties that are clustering around the pathway of the republic, is to abolish all taxes upon the products of labor and to draw public revenues from that fund which is created by social growth and improvement, thus doing away not only with all the monopolies that are directly and indirectly fostered by our present tax laws, but destroying that monopoly which is of all others the most important—the monopoly of natural elements.

The Philadelphia Times (protectionist) printed some months ago a remarkable article which shows how the strength of protection is derived from combination, and how even the reforms proposed in the Mills bill will divide and weaken it. It said, in a burst of frankness:

If Judge Kelley will take the republican woolen manufacturers of republican Philadelphia into his confidence, every one of them will admit that free wool is a necessity to meet the changed condition of that great industry, and all would say so publicly but for the fear that the wool growers would retaliate upon woolens. If Judge Kelley will take the republican Philadelphia iron men into his confidence, every one of them will tell him that free ores would greatly benefit the iron trade; that the ores imported are a necessity to produce iron for the present markets; that free ores would cheapen their product and enlarge both protection and consumption^sic, and all would say so publicly but for the fear of retaliation upon iron. If Judge Kelley will take the republican tin men of Philadelphia into his confidence, he will be told that tin should be absolutely free; that it cannot be manufactured here even at an increase of 110 per cent duty; that it is an oppressive tax upon the small growers and homes of the land, and all would say so but for the fear that they may be classed as apostates to protection. If Judge Kelley will take the republican coal men of Philadelphia into his confidence, they will tell him that free coal with Canada would enlarge our coal markets five million tons a year and admit probably five hundred thousand from Nova Scotia into New England to aid the languishing manufactures of that section, and all would say so openly but for the fear of retaliation upon their consumers in iron or steel. If Judge Kelley will take into his confidence the republican builders of Philadelphia, they would tell him that free lumber would relieve the whole people from a most oppressive tax, and they would say so in public but for the fear of assailing the protective policy to which they are devoted. If Judge Kelley will take Mayor Fitler into his confidence, he will learn that the Fitler cordage mill can manufacture the entire hemp production of the United States in half the year[;?] he will be told that hemp should be free, and he would be told so publicly but for the fear of retaliation upon the manufactured product.

And so the Tribune, commenting on Mr. Mills’s Tammany speech, says:

At the very threshold we have the ancient but not honorable trick of words—the bill does not abolish all duties, Mr. Mills says, and therefore it is not a free trade bill. The Texas demagogue sadly underrates and insults the intelligence of northern voters. They are perfectly well aware that abolition of a middle link of a chain is ABOLITION OF THE CHAIN.

Cannot our correspondent see this, too?

Mr. Mills may be “more of a politician than an economist.” If that were not so, he would hardly be in congress. But his bill worries and arouses the protectionists more than would a bill drawn by an economist. This bill brings on the fight; a true free trade bill they could just now treat with contempt.

In his Tammany speech Mr. Mills did not, as reported by some of the New York papers, denounce free trade or say that no democrat could be a free trader. What he did say was in substance this:

We have reduced the duty on an average from 47 to 40 per cent. Yet the republicans howl free trade. Free trade is a perfect nightmare to them. The bill is not a free trade bill. It is a long way from it. It is a very moderate reduction. The only thing that is free about it is the raw materials: Lumber, tin plate, wool, chemicals used in manufacturing and a few other articles like salt. The democratic party demands taxation to raise revenue enough to support an honest, economical, and efficient administration of government. It does not espouse free trade but declares now, as it always has done, for taxation on imports, and that taxation to be for public purposes alone, and to bear as lightly as possible on the tax payer.

And then he went on, to the delight of the greater part of his audience, among whom were many single tax men, to make arguments which were in reality arguments for the abolition of all tariffs.

This is not because Mr. Mills is a demagogue, but it is in the nature of the case. The bill is not a free trade bill. Thirty years ago it would have been considered the highest kind of a protectionist measure; but it raises the free trade discussion all the same. And Mr. Mills himself, though he is probably what has been called a free trader, that is a “tariff for revenue only” man, is not a free trader in the real sense of the term. Free trade is really free trade, and the true free trader is the man who wants not merely absolute free trade, but also wants to free that of which trade is only a part— production. Of free traders we can as yet expect none among the democratic politicians, and we must expect to find even few so-called free traders—that is, revenue tariff men—willing to avow p. 1, col. 3 themselves. Free trade has been as much of a bugaboo in this country as “abolition” was before the war, and we must expect the very men who are really doing the most efficient work for free trade to scout it and deny it. But this is only in terms. When it comes to arguments against the tariff they are compelled to make free trade arguments. Mr. Cleveland did this in his message, though he virtually denied being a free trader. The democratic congressmen are doing this in the debate in the house, and democratic speakers must do it on the stump. As I said long ago, before this tariff debate came up, our work will be done by men who will deny us and revile us.

It is so with all great reforms. It was so notably with the slavery question. If anyone will turn to the utterances of the men who formed the republican party, he will find them filled with denunciations of abolitionism; with protestations that they meant no attack upon the institution of slavery where it existed; and vows that they would stand by and enforce all its constitutional guarantees. All they proposed was a measure that to the abolitionists seemed cowardly and trivial—the restriction of slavery from new territory. But in advocating this, their speeches were necessarily filled with denunciations of the institution of slavery. So it is now. And so any one who is at all familiar with the history of great reforms must have known in advance it would be. Yet just as the slave holders were not deceived by the moderation of the republicans, but saw clearly enough that the growth of a party pledged to the restriction of slavery from new territory meant the growth of a sentiment that must destroy slavery, so do protectionists now feel that the democratic leaders, even though in many cases they may not realize it themselves, have entered upon a contest which must end in the destruction of the protective system; and the protected interests are as much aroused, and will make as strenuous a fight, as though the formal proposition of the democrats was to abolish every iota of protection. They know that if their line is broken they are lost.

There is no need for us single tax men to hide our colors. We are not afraid of being “branded as free traders,” and it is our policy in this controversy to show wherever we can that there are real free traders, and in whatever we can to urge^sic the discussion to radical lines. And we can chuckle to ourselves when we read such papers as the Philadelphia Record, which, in the same article declares that ’no question of free trade is involved in the present controversy,” and then goes on to talk about the “Dick Turpins” and “Jack Sheppards” of protection. By and by the democrats will find that they are losing strength by apologizing and denying, and that a thorough going, aggressive fight against the protective delusion is the surest and quickest way to gain support.

The Press publishes in double leaded type, at the head of its columns, the following extract:

As a rule the presidential contest has very little interest for the old world. On the present occasion, however, an issue is involved which very closely concerns Europe, more particularly Great Britain. Mr. Cleveland has taken his stand on free trade, and, although his party managers have considerably planed down his platform, he is universally recognized in the states as pledged to initiate a new departure in fiscal policy. Nor can there be any doubt that he would act up to this understanding were he elected.

The central issue of the contest lies between the maintenance of the present fiscal system intact and its modification in the direction of free trade.

And on that broad question Mr. Cleveland’s candidature naturally and necessarily carries English sympathy.—[The London Globe.

The tory Englishman who edits the Press with an ability worthy of a nobler cause thus seeks to enlist prejudice against his native country in support of a system of robbery in this.

Nothing could better illustrate the essential meanness and un-American character of protection.

Great Britain, Europe, all the civilized world with which we trade, have an interest in the election of Mr. Cleveland and in the breaking down of that policy which restricts our trade and makes us poorer. If we throw down the Chinese wall which protection has built up around our coasts they will share in our increased prosperity, and they will gain still more by our example. We shall be better customers of theirs and they will get in return more of our products. And the spectacle of a great nation throwing open its ports to the commerce of all other nations, will tell powerfully in breaking down those industrial barriers which now divide all the world into hostile and jealous states, carrying on destructive industrial wars, p. 1, col. 4 by means of tariffs, even when nominally at peace.

What will the mugwumps and George do in the event of Hill’s nomination?—[Chicago Tribune.

The mugwumps can speak for themselves. As for George, he will support the republican nominee, unless that nominee is also opposed to ballot reform. He will not follow the example of the Chicago Tribune in advocating a great principle up to election, and then supporting the candidate who represents opposition to it.

[Note: the left edge of this column is damaged for roughly the next 40 lines; the first one or two letters of many lines are lost or faint. Where the word is certain from what remains it is given in full; uncertain readings are marked.]

A remarkable and most suggestive celebration was that of the letter carriers in this city on the Fourth of July in honor of the enactment of the law applying to them the eight hour system. About 2,500 men were in line—some 700 of New York and some 1,800 from other cities. Their neat gray uniforms gave a fine appearance to their marching ranks, and as they wheeled around Union square it was with all the precision of military drill. Especially conspicuous and especially admired was the Philadelphia delegation, over 500 strong, with Postmaster Harrity at their head. Not only was their marching as good as could be, but they seemed to be physically a better conditioned body of men than their New York brethren. Possibly this may be because they have not been worked so hard as the New York letter carriers have been under Postmaster Pearson’s regime. This at least seemed to be the prevailing impression among onlookers.

The evening celebration in the Academy of Music, presided over by the grand marshal of the day, Charles S. Newsom, was an enthusiastic one, and everything passed off as well as could be desired. Congressman Cox, to whose long and persistent efforts the passage of the bill is largely due, received for the third time during the day a “perfect ovation,” and—it goes without saying—made a happy speech. Congressmen McAdoo of New Jersey and O’Neil of Missouri came in for much cheering, and congratulatory speeches were made by Rev. Wilbur O. Crafts^sic, Dr. McGlynn and State Senator Duffy. Watches were presented [to?] the Philadelphia letter carriers who had represented their fellows in Washington; and Postmaster Harrity cf Philadelphia^sic and Postmaster Hendricks, of Brooklyn, both of whom had come to the celebration at the head of their men, and who seem to be as popular among them as Postmaster Pearson is unpopular, made from their box, when called upon, two of the neatest little replies that American postmasters ever uttered. Altogether the letter carriers are greatly to be congratulated on the success of their celebration. And the event, especially to the overworked New York men, was something worth celebrating. Eight hours a day instead of twelve or fifteen! It means much more of life, and of what makes life worth living.

Consider the suggestiveness of the celebration. An “army of office holders!” The oldest man among us has heard that phrase from his youngest days. Here, at last, they were, for the first time I think in the history of the republic, in visible form. The long line of men in uniform that moved with measured tread up Broadway and swept around Union square in military fashion, was a veritable army of office holders, the representatives of a still larger army not bodily present; an army of office holders bound together by common interests and celebrating a common victory—a victory won by their combination and the use of their political influence! Postmaster Pearson, if a civil service reformer, ought not have been absent from such a celebration, or have set his face against it. For it was one of the fruits of civil service reform. When men have a permanent interest in their places, when they are assured of them for life or during good behavior, the incentive and the opportunity to combine to make those places better are much increased. And thus in a certain way the letter carriers’ celebration is suggestive of dangers that may come with civil service reform.

But it is also suggestive of the necessity of civil service reform and of the rapidity with which the functions of government are extending with social development. That a body of office holders so numerous, and charged with functions that are so necessary to the transaction of all business, and to the daily convenience of the great body of the people, should be liable to change with every change in the national administration is not to be thought of. Nor does any one now think of turning over the business of carrying letters, newspapers, and such small packages as are now carried through the mails, to private corporations. But why draw the line at the carrying of p. 1, col. 5 letters, newspapers and small parcels? Is there not quite as much reason that society in its corporate capacity should carry telegraph messages as that it should carry letters? And is there not quite as much reason that it should carry express matter; that it should supply cities with gas and water, and steam and heat; that it should run street cars and transport freight and passengers by railroad, or at least own and control the roads over which freight and passengers are carried? The true reason for the carrying of letters by the government is that the business is in its nature a monopoly. But these other businesses are also monopolies in their nature, and as the development and integration of society goes on, still other necessary monopolies are arising. Thus the proper functions of government—national. state and municipal^sic—are constantly increasing. If we were now to attempt to do what clearly could be done better, more cheaply and with greater public convenience by society in its organized capacity than by corporations, what an army of office-holders might march down the streets of one of our great cities on any occasion they might select or be called on to celebrate!

But is there really so much to fear from such a great army of office holders of this kind as we are at first blush likely to imagine? Supposing the functions of the post office department were to-day performed by one great corporation or half a dozen great corporations, controlling, in virtual treaty with each other, the business in various sections of the country. Would there not be in them a greater available power of political dictation and control than exists in the post office department? In other words, cannot the political power of a monopoly be more readily concentrated and used to affect government when outside of government than when made a part of government. Our experience with railroad and other similar companies certainly goes to show that it can.

Consider what our post office department would be if it were managed as our telegraphs or railroads are managed. Instead of being run with public convenience as its primary object, it would be run for private profit, and that not so much for the profit of the stockholders as for the profit of managing rings. It is a great mistake to suppose, as is sometimes contended, that in leaving what are properly public functions to private corporations, we secure even that intelligently selfish management which is prompted by the interest of the owner. Our railways, for instance, are not, never have been, and are never likely to be managed for the interests of their owners. They are managed in the interest of the managers, not the owners, and the stockholder has been plundered as remorselessly as the public. They have made immense fortunes for managers and managing rings, and for the pirates and wreckers who have manipulated the stock exchange, but with all their unnecessary charges they have as a whole never paid the owners anything like reasonable interest. Their history has been a history of fraud, corruption and spoliation which has no parallel in our governmental administration, even in the worst days of the Tweed regime in New York. What better could be expected from the management of the postal business of the country if it were in the hands of one or a dozen great joint stock companies? And at every proposition to reduce rates, or to in any other way interfere by congressional legislation, would not a vast corruption fund be raised and spent? Nay, would not such a corporation, even in self-defense, be compelled to go into politics, as our railroad companies go into politics, and would not its employes be called on at every election to vote for friends of the company? Clearly, when we come to think of it, the vast business of carrying the mails is less of a political factor in the hands of the government than it would be if in the hands of private corporations. And the men who united together to get a reduction in hours could not be got to unite together for a political purpose so long as they did not feel that their retention in place was dependent upon the success of a political party. The acceptance of the idea of permanence in place during good behavior is destructive of that idea of gratitude to party which makes it even more a matter of honor than a matter of compulsion that the office holder who holds by and from a party should support that party.

The banding together of the letter carriers to secure a reduction of hours does suggest the possibility of office holders, under a rule of permanence, banding together to secure unreasonable advantages. But the real strength of the letter carriers has been the moral strength derived from p. 1, col. 6 the feeling, both on their part and on that of the public generally, that they were asking only what was reasonable. And the difficulty they have had in getting this shows the difficulty that would beset any attempt to obtain what public opinion might regard as unreasonable.

Even the opposition that the New York letter carriers have encountered from Postmaster Pearson, and the reputation he has made for the hard working of his subordinates, is calculated to weaken objections constantly urged to governmental administration of telegraphs and railroads. It seems to his desire^sic to make a reputation for economy and efficiency that has rendered him heartless in imposing work upon his subordinates, and not any pecuniary interest he has had in the matter. Carried to an excess, as this has been on the part of Postmaster Pearson, it is yet illustrative of the fact that the hope of pecuniary profit and the fear of pecuniary loss are not the only things which can cause a man to identify himself with his place, and to act in it as zealously and even as over-zealously as though he were working for himself. The fact is that the real work of running telegraph and railroads is done by men who have no more pecuniary interest than they would have were they government employes instead of the employes of private corporations.

The dangers of corruption and maladministration are greatest in those departments of government that are farthest removed from the public eye and that have least to do with public necessities and convenience. Of all departments of our national government the post office department comes closest to the people. If the men who marched up Broadway on the Fourth of July were to neglect their work for a single day the public would know it and feel it, and an outcry would at once go up. But how long does it take the masses of the people to know, and how little do they care, what is done in such a purely ornamental department as that of the navy. If some bright admiral should run off with the whole thing and sell it for old junk, the people of the United States would know nothing about it so long as the official reports continued and the appropriations were duly called for. Nor would they be a whit the worse off.

It was an army of office holders that marched up Broadway on the Fourth; but not an army of useless office holders. The letter carriers are not “tax eaters,” but men engaged in performing necessary and useful work, and, as the direct employes of the government, performing it in the most economical and satisfactory way. The quicker the day comes that similar office holders shall work our telegraph lines and run our railroads, the quicker will the people at large begin to get the full advantage of the beneficent inventions that have made the telegraph and railroad possible.

But extension of the necessary functions of government and the consequent increase in the number of government employes make it the more necessary that we should as fast as possible cut off unnecessary functions and get rid of useless office holders.

Most important and most pernicious of these unnecessary functions with which we have saddled the general government is that of attempting to direct industry by means of protective tariffs. There are some things which government can do better than individuals; but there are other things which it cannot do. No government, however powerful, however wise, however vigilant, can profitably direct the industries of a nation. To have congress sitting in solemn session, as it is to-day, over the question of how and to what extent various industries shall be encouraged and others discouraged—for the encouragement of one industry by protective taxes means necessarily the discouragement of others—is as preposterous as it would be to manage a farm by the dictates of a town meeting or a manufacturing business by the decisions of a debating club. Free trade is as much a natural individual right as free thought, and it is no more the business of government to interfere with the exchange that a citizen may choose to make with the citizen of any other nation, except in so far as it may involve the public health, the public morals or public safety, than it is to interfere with the views that any citizen may choose to take of the creator, or with the form of worship he may choose to adopt. And this saddling of government with functions that it cannot properly perform and has rightfully no concern with, necessarily wastes its powers and begets corruption. What congress is to-day engaged in, and what has occupied pretty much the whole of this session, is the attempt to distribute “protection”—i. e., the privilege of levying tribute upon the continued on p. 2 →

[Text ends here at the foot of column 6 in mid-sentence; no “continued” line is printed on page 1.]

Stunted by a Boom Fifteen Years Ago—What Its Owners Have to Sell—Fast Trains, Pure Air and Picturesque Scenery.

HACKETTSTOWN, N. J.—This is one of the oldest villages of northern New Jersey. In colonial days it was known as Hackett’s mill, in honor of a member of the family to which Recorder and “Falstaff” Hackett belonged, who then owned a flouring mill on the Musconetcong creek which flows along the eastern border of the town and separates Warren county^sic from Morris. The village lies in the Musconetcong valley, three miles west of Schooley’s mountain springs, and a mile from Mount Washington, the highest point in the state. It is one of the principal stations on the Delaware Lackawana^sic and Western railroad, is the location of the Methodist centennial collegiate institute, and has about 3,000 inhabitants.

Soon after the war the town enjoyed a real estate boom. The population rapidly rose from 1,600 to 2,800; farms were marked off in lots; vacant ground sold at prices beyond its rent earning possibilities; the erection of new houses kept the local builders busy, and tenements were tried on back streets and proved profitable. There was no reason for this boom but the increase of population, and none for that but the discovery of three or four ore mines in the neighborhood. The boom was more an echo of the general booming over the country than the result of local development, and when the collapse came Hackettstown was enveloped in its folds. Every business man became bankrupt. The population fell off a thousand. The town was hopelessly in debt, and for several years one of its methods of economizing was to put out all of its street lights. But gradually new men crept into business, and slowly, very slowly, through a period of nearly fifteen years the place has been recovering. More buildings have been erected and the population is a little above the point from which it fell. The iron furnace which went out with the boom has been fired again, and a silk factory is now in operation. The debt is paid, the streets are once more alight and asmell with kerosene. The Methodists have erected a new and costly church with amphitheatrical auditorium, and the seminary has furnished a sensational murder case to bring the town into public notice. There is a fair foundation for another boom. Nevertheless, the value of land remains almost at the point where it was left when the boom burst. At occasional forced sales well built and handsome cottages are knocked down for $1,200 and $1,500, while vacant land has gone for almost nothing. A large vacant lot in the main street, which could not have been bought for $2,0[00?] during the boom, may be had now for $700. Improved real estate is offered for less than ten times its rent, but goes without purchasers because, as the wise men of the village say, “you can’t realize if you want your money back.”

The town seems destined to become a place of suburban residence. The express time from New York is now one hour and fifty-three minutes. When this is reduced to an hour and a half, as it is likely soon to be, a New York business man will be able to live here the year round as the business men now live in Morristown. And it is well adapted to this purpose. It occupies a high elevation, its air is pure and healthful, and usually cool in summer, while not extremely cold in winter, and it is surronnded^sic by well wooded hills, which offer picturesque localities for cottages and excellent sites for lawns and terraces. Alfred Sully, of railroad notoriety, and a brother of Stokes, of the Hoffman house, have already availed themselves of the advantages of one of these hills for country seats.

Hackettstown is the center of an old fashioned democratic constituency. Within a radius of five miles may be found the traditional voter who annually wheops^sic it up for General Jackson, and all around him are men of the same type who pride themselves on always voting the straight democratic ticket. With them it was Breckinridge in ’60, and McClellan in ’64, and Seymour in ’68, and Greeley (with a grimace) in ’72, and Tilden in ’76, and Hancock in ’80, and Cleveland in ’84, and it will be Cleveland again in ’88. But the republicans are active and intelligent, and despite the majority of hard shell democrats, will cut a wide swath in the independent vote unless more direct and active work on the tariff question is done by the democrats. The republicans are prepared for this issue while the democrats are not. The latter have been voting all these years, “agin the war.” That was their reason for supporting McClellan; in supporting Seymour they voted against the war as hard as they could by voting against the “nigger,” and their votes for Tilden, Hancock and Cleveland were nothing but “in memoriam” ballots—solemn reminders of dead and gone issues. They are, therefore, about as poorly equipped for a real live issue as men can well be. Their adversaries, on the other hand, have at the tip of their tongues all the fallacies of protection, even the latest economic wanderings of the Press.

In fact the Press, if Hackettstown may be taken as furnishing a sample of current politics in country places, is doing wounderful^sic missionary work for protection. The local newsdealer charges an extra profit of one cent on all New York papers except the Press, which he sells for its published price. When asked how he could afford to sell a penny paper without the extra profit which he demanded for higher priced papers he replied that he was allowed an extra profit on the Press as a condition of selling it at the regular rate. The effect may be seen in the familiarity of the republicans with their side of the issue.

This influence is wholly unobstructed in its operation, except for an occasional article in the local democratic paper—the Gazette—which, however, must from business necessity move cautiously in a constituency so ignorant of the question of protection or free trade as is the democratic portion of this community. In the World and the Star the fallacies of the Press go unanswered, and in the Sun, the only other democratic paper taken here from New York, those fallacies are indorsed. Unless steps are taken to place the democrats here on an equality in discussion with the republicans, by supplying them with the facts and principles that so easily expose the falsehoods and refute the arguments so extensively circulated in the interest of protection, Cleveland will get but few votes except those of thick and thin democrats. And I fear that what is true of this town may be true of many another. If the World and the Star continue to shy away from free trade, like a purblind horse from a hay stack, steps should be speedily taken to do their work for them.

LOUIS F. POST.

A Correspondent Finds New Inspiration in It—The Need of Sober Second Thought.

HORNELLSVILLE, N. Y., June 6.—“Welcome back to the path of progress” will be the explanation^sic of every true single tax man as his eye catches the familiar (but of late too infrequent) name of Hugh O. Pentecost; and as he eagerly peruses Mr. Pentecost’s interesting letter, he must feel a new inspiration—an added enthusiasm in our glorious cause.

There was nothing strange in the position taken by our reverend friend. We were all startled when Henry George, without asking us what he should do, boldly proclaimed his intention to co-operate with that party which had raised an issue leading toward the one we are striving to raise. Some of us who had thought it possible to manufacture a party that should, in our own way, strike down that monster monopoly which so long has made of this earth a hell, were disappointed, if not disheartened. We felt that our personality and that of our leader had shrunken and we could not bring ourselves to think of playing second fiddle to the democratic party.

We all felt as Judge James Maguire expressed it, “full of fight,” and we wanted to fight on our own hook, in our own way, and some of us under the excitement of the moment, without fully considering the significance of what we were doing (but, for the moment, sure we were right), began to write letters for publication in THE STANDARD; letters which, one week after they were written would have been gladly recalled, and in many instances were recalled.

On second sober thought we found to our dismay that our philosophy, which had all the appearance of being sound, could not stand the test of careful reasoning.

“He that humbleth himself shall be exalted, but he that exalteth himself shall be abased.” If we would best serve the cause we all love so well, we must learn to think well before we act. But he, who realizing that he has acted wrong, refuses to make all amendment possible, is an enemy of mankind.

Brothers, a new party is born. It is not of our manufacture, but it is ours all the same. No matter how repulsive the old roots and snags from which the new shoot springs, no matter how insignificant, do not despise it. Tenderly care for and nurture it. Do not brush the old rubbish about its roots too carelessly away lest you thereby retard the growth of that which will in due time bear a rich harvest.

GEO. H. VAN WINKLE.

The Secretary of an Association of Wage Workers Shows the Iniquity Wrought by the Present Tariff.

In the New York Herald of Monday last was a long interview with F. A. Herwig, secretary of the Workingmen’s tariff reform association of Philadelphia, on the subject of free wool. Mr. Herwig has taken advantage of the exceptional opportunities offered by such a manufacturing city as Philadelphia to get at the real facts regarding the effects of the present tariff. He begun by telling the following little story:

Some time ago Mr. Thomas Dolan, head of the large woolen manufacturing mills here, expressed a desire for an interview with myself and two other members of a committee who were to go to Washington. Our talk lasted some three hours. Mr. Dolan, you know, has a very large idea of the beneficence of his charity in the matter of providing work and paying wages to his large army of employes. He said to me: “I suppose you are aware that we pay more for our labor than any firm in this country, and almost double that paid by any foreign establishment. Many of our weavers earn $10 a week. We take the lead therefore.” I happened to have in my pocket a letter from Patrick Martin & Son, of Huddersfield, England, giving their schedule of prices, averaging, under favorable circumstances, $7.50 a week. Their machines worked, as I supposed, about fifty-two picks per minute. In this, however, Mr. Dolan corrected me, saying, “Oh, no, they go faster than that—at least sixty picks a minute.” I asked him how fast his men worked, and he said, “About eighty-five picks.” “Now, Mr. Dolan,” I said, “how can you say you pay so much more than they do? At the rate of eighty-five picks a minute your men are earning much more than the Englishmen by your own statement. Mr. Dolan said,”Oh, but remember I have given you the highest paying concern in Europe; it’s next to ours. They have a special trade for their goods, and don’t have to go into open market on competitive sales as we do. Their cloth is sold only to royal families, the aristocracy and snobs of this country.” I replied that my criticism still held good according to his own showing. He claimed first place here; therefore the simile stood all through. Then he went into a discussion of the making of yarn, and declared, as I will explain later, that while we could make pretty good yarn here there were certain lines of yarn we couldn’t make anyhow, “such, for instance,” he said, “as the yarn in this piece of imported English material” (stroking the sleeve of his coat). “Mr. Dolan,” I said, “I thought you said only American snobs used that material here?” At this Mr. Dolan colored up and said, “Sir, I hope you don’t class me in that category?” “No,” I replied, “but you made the designation just now and I couldn’t help referring to it, as you seemed to forget it.”

Then we came down to the necessity of revising the tariff. Mr. Dolan finally admitted that he thought free wool would be the only thing to remedy existing evils, because no amount of patching seemed effective. “Is that your honest opinion?” I asked. “Yes,” he replied, “I have come to that conclusion.” “I am very glad of that, sir,” I answered, “because now we are going to Washington to argue that point very strongly.” “What!” he gasped, “you are not going to Washington to use this as coming from me?” “Certainly,” I said. “Why not?” You say you believe it’s a good thing; we think so, too. Why shouldn’t we urge it?” And we left Mr. Dolan in the condition of a man who had unconsciously let slip his inmost convictions—the reverse of statements made for policy’s sake to business and political friends.

When they got to Washington they called on Judge Kelley, who said they would never derive any real benefits until the republican party was solidly back in power again. Of their interview with him, Mr. Herwig said:

When I called his attention to the fact that the army of workers we represented were of all shades of political opinion, and perhaps it would not matter so much who conferred the benefit as long as it was derived, he became talkative and ended by saying much of the evil arising from the 1883 tariff was the work of “several damned free trade republicans.” Whether he classed the late President Arthur in this category I don’t know. “But, judge,” I asked, “will you give a guarantee if the republican party returns to power we shall not have those ‘damned free traders’ at work again?” “Of course, I will,” he replied; but of course he didn’t.

Mr. Herwig then took the statement printed by John and James Dobson, the great carpet woolen manufacturers of Philadelphia, which purported to give the amount of wool used by the large manufacturers of the country. In this statement the Dobsons say that outside of their concern there are 2,700 carpet looms in Philadelphia, manufacturing 24,000,000 yards of carpet annually. Now to make this amount of carpet there are used 72,000,000 pounds of material, as follows: shoddy, 20,000,000, other adulterants 25,000,000, raw wool, 27,000,000. In the finished product, however, a good part of the raw wool is wasted and scoured away, leaving 10,000,000 pounds of clean wool and 45,000,000 pounds of adulterants. Now at this rate the Messrs. Dobson, who have 180 looms, would use per annum about 1,800,000 pounds of raw wool. But according to their own statement the Dobsons import annually 6,000,000 pounds of wool nominally for carpet manufacture, at the small duty of 2½ cents per pound, and as they only use 1,800,000 in their carpet manufacture, the remainder is, of course, used for other goods which should be made of wool on which the tariff is ten cents a pound. The result of the tariff is thus shown to be that the manufacturer will use four and a half parts of adulterants and one part of wool in carpet manufacture, and will use inferior carpet wools in the manufacture of other woolen goods in order to escape the duty.

In reply to questions about wages, Mr. Herwig said that the labor cost in carpet manufacture was not over eight cents a yard here against fifteen cents a yard in England, and that the actual earnings here do not exceed those on the other side. Scarcely any of the workers here are working full time, and of late wages have been reduced to such a point that the men prefer to be idle. He then said:

While we are casting down idols let us be consistent, and smash right and left. It is a favorite protectionist theme, and is echoed and re-echoed by congressmen from this part of the world, that Philadelphia is the one city where workingmen may and do own their homes. This is campaign rant. It’s not true. Ninety per cent of Philadelphia wage workers own their homes just as long as they can pay their rent—no longer. Mill owners and others own the houses. Here in Kensington, where we are now talking, I only know of two of the thousands of workers who own their homes. Now for proof.

A few days ago 150 men belonging to one of our labor organizations met over here. The majority of them were house holders. They nearly all worked at the furniture upholstery weaving, the highest paid labor. Somehow the question came up about house owning. Finally I said, “Gentlemen, for years I have heard about this great boon of owning homes by workingmen. Please give me a demonstration of its accuracy. You are well paid, representative men. Each man who is an owner kindly hold up one hand.” One hand only appeared—one in 150. A witty fellow named Murphy then yelled out, “Count me in; I own my place—as long as I pay the rint.”

Coming back to the wool question, Mr. Herwig said:

The general interest of the country requires free wool (this is really for the benefit of a very large portion of wool growers and p. 2, col. 5 woolen manufacturers), and the interest of the whole county and of the manufacturers should prevail over the interest of some of the wool growers.

Dr. William A. Graham Tells What Should be Done for Them—Cleanliness, Pure Air and Proper Feeding the Conditions of Their Safety.

This is the time of year when New York reduces her surplus population, and so prevents, to a slight and scarcely appreciable extent, that pressure upon subsistence of which we hear so much. A great many people leave New York during the heated term. Some, who are able to afford it, go to the seaside and the mountains, and come back renewed in health and strength. Others are sent away for short periods by charitably disposed persons. And a third class of emigrants depart for good and all, being simply carried to some near by cemetery, and there left lying in the hope of a resurrection in some future world where there will be room enough for them to live.

Most of this third class are babies. Dr. Nagle of the health department is authority for the statement that during the hot weather about a hundred of them die every day. And in a recent issue of the World Dr. William A. Graham has been telling us by what means this mortality can be lessened and the doom of death lifted from the pale faced little ones who throng our tenement houses and wring their mothers’ hearts with their wailings and their dying:

The poor who dwell in hot, stifling, malodorous tenement houses, which fresh air and cool breezes seem to avoid, are the ones whom disease and death search out these summer days. And it is the helpless little babes in these places who have most reason to dread the coming of the hot season. They pay the death penalty for their bad surroundings, and suffer for the sins and indiscretions of their parents. Right here a word of advice can be given which, if heeded, may save many of these children from the tortures of sickness and the sadness of death. True, so long as it is necessary for some people to live in houses where pure air is almost unknown, the rate of infant mortality will be abnormally high, yet a little knowledge and a little care on the part of those who have charge of children will greatly reduce it.

That is how Dr. Graham begins his lecture. He probably doesn’t mean to say that it is a sin and an indiscretion for parents to live in a tenement house. But he certainly conveys that idea. However, let us see what sort of knowledge and care the tenement house mother must possess and use if she would save her baby’s life.

In the first place, she must understand the importance to the infant’s health of three things, cleanliness, pure air and proper feeding:

To insure proper cleanliness infants should be bathed twice a day and oftener in hot weather. A child always feels better after a bath in cool water. Baby should love its bath. If it does not, the fault lies with those who administer it. Do not splash the water about or get the soap in baby’s eyes. Nor should one give the bath when the child is hungry. The soothing effect of the bath upon the child is noticeable. Quiet, healthful, refreshing sleep is often the result. Indeed, a cool bath at night is better than a narcotic. Sleeplessness in the child means worry and exhaustion to the mother, and this reacts upon the child by affecting both the quality and quantity of her milk. The bath, too, has a marked effect in preventing bowel complaint.

Think of a mother trying to do all this in a tenement dwelling such as Dr. Daniels and Father Huntington have described, where the cool bath must be administered within a few feet of a fierce fire, and the quiet sleep is a simple impossibility.

One of the most important sanitary agents is the air. Effluvia and organic vapors of various kinds become developed in every occupied dwelling from daily cooking, and organic substances saturate all textile fabrics and become a fruitful source of disease. Ventilation is essential to eradicate these noxious vapors, and every room should be thoroughly aired each day by a current of fresh air sufficient to renovate its atmosphere and to remove all impurities. The external air in cities is not, of course, always as pure and free from effluvia as could be desired, but it may be taken for granted that free impure air is better than bottled up impure air, and that the air which has been confined in a room for some time may always be exchanged with advantage for air from the outside.

. . In a circular which the health department has issued the following advice on summer complaint is given:

. . “Keep your rooms as cool as possible, have them well ventilated and do not allow any bad smell to come from sinks, privies, garbage boxes, or gutters about the house where you live. See that your own apartments are right, and complain to the board of health, 301 Mott street, if the neighborhood is offensive.”

Dr. Graham may be acquitted of any wish to mock the sufferings of the poor. He is probably sincerely anxious to do good. But isn’t all this very like a mockery? Where is the “current of fresh air, sufficient to remove all impurities” to come from, if when a window is opened the only effect is to let in the “bad smell from garbage boxes and gutters?” What good will it do to complain to the board of health? Every newspaper in the city, to say nothing of hundreds of private citizens, has been making specific complaints to the health department for weeks past; and still the smells smell on. Will one poor mother do any good by adding her feeble voice to the chorus of complaint?

So much for the cleanliness and pure air. Now listen to Dr. Graham’s advice about the feeding of the baby:

As to the kind of food best suited to young children, it may be accepted as an axiom that unless the mother’s milk positively disagrees with her babe it is better than any artificial preparation. The rule is that that^sic child will thrive best and have the best chance of life which is nourished at its mother’s breast. Even if the milk at first seem to disagree with the child, it will usually be found that this is due to removable causes. By attention to or disregard of hygienic rules the milk may be made healthful or injurious. The mother with an infant at breast should always remember that fact and regulate her diet accordingly. She should avoid sour foods and drinks, and alcoholic stimulants, for these have a direct effect upon her milk. Highly seasoned foods should not be eaten. Pepper has a tendency to dry up the milk supply. A little ripe but not over ripe fruit will do no harm, but care must be taken that it is not green or decomposed. The objects to be obtained from the mother’s feeding are to build up her own strength and to produce a plentiful supply of wholesome milk for the child. Eggs are usually excellent. Milk is good and so is cocoa and broma. Tender meat, if in a perfect state and well cooked, makes excellent food, but it should be taken with other foods indicated above, so as not to put too much work upon the digestive organs. It may be remembered that preferences in food must always be consulted, for the appearance, odor and taste of food is of nutritive value. The mother should avoid, as far as possible, worry and excitement, and it is highly important that she does not subject herself to overheating.

Ripe fruit, eggs, milk, cocoa, tender meat well cooked, no worry or excitement, no overheating. Truly, the baby has a small show for life.

People like Dr. Graham, and there are plenty of them, both men and women, deserve credit for the good they seek to do. They are honestly anxious to relieve the misery they see, and in many cases, doubtless, they do alleviate it to some extent. But social conditions are too strong for them. The crime of society entails the punishment of society. So many little ones must be crowded out of

p. 3, col. 2 life each year because society, permitting individuals to monopolize the common heritage of all, allows them no standing room upon the earth. And so long as the root of the evil is left untouched, all that Dr. Graham and his co-workers can do will be to change the victims, to rescue one and let another perish in its place.

A Comparison of Costs in a Representative Industry Shows that Goods Can be Manufactured Over Five Cents Per Pound Cheaper in America than in England.

The pauper labor ghost on investigation turns out to be much like other ghosts—it will drop its white sheet and run howling away if you will hit it over the head with some good hard facts. If “European pauper labor” means anything it means that the same amount of work will be done in Europe for less remuneration than here, and if this is true as a general rule it should certainly apply to an industry such as the manufacture of woolen goods. But it don’t.

Mr. J. Schoenhof, United States consul at Tunstall, Stafford county, England, has been investigating the cost of manufacture of various fabrics, cotton and woolen, in England, and comparing the results with those obtained from similar investigations in America. The last report, special issue No. 24, contains a comparison of the American and English cost of manufacturing all wool dress goods. The class of goods examined was sackings. In America they are largely used for ladies’ dress. They are made of carded wool, and are of plain flannel weave. Their manufacture therefore includes the processes of flannel manufacture and other operations peculiar to the making of ladies’ cloth.

A factory in Massachusetts which makes this line of goods furnished the figuress^sic for America; a Leeds factory for England. The net results are given in the following table:

That is, with wool at the same price as it is in England, our manufacturers could turn out the finished product over five cents per pound cheaper than the English manufacturer. Moreover, as our domestic wools used for this class of goods are inferior to the English wools, our fabrics are deficient in luster and general appearance.

In view of the proposal to put wool on the free list this table, if accurate, is interesting; and the fact that the American wool growing industry has been steadily declining, in spite of the duty which forces manufacturers to pay in some cases more than double what they should pay for their raw material, ought to go a good way toward convincing both manufacturers and their employes that the time has come for a revolt against the injustice done them.

These Millions of Oregon Acres.

In THE STANDARD of June 23d appeared a letter by William McCabe asserting that the “millions of acres” which the Portland Oregonian declared were to be had “just for the trouble of coming to get them,” existed only in the imagination, and that, in fact, all the valuable land was now in private possession—owned by the railroads, cattle raisers, loggers or speculators. The following letter, written with the purpose of disputing some of Mr. McCabe’s statements, corroborates his general testimony:

WESTON, Kings County, W. T., June 27.—I think Mr. McCabe’s article in THE STANDARD would give a wrong impression of Oregon and Washington territory to a person unacquainted with the country. He would suppose that that all of the public lands of this country was held by the speculators. That they hold a large part of the choicest land is true, and it is also true that mill companies and loggers hold a great deal of timber land, but there is land both in Oregon and Washington territory waiting for the settlers, though difficult of access.

On either side of Puget sound, but mostly on the east side and up the rivers are thousands of acres. This land, when cleared of its heavy timber, would doubtless prove very productive. But, of course, the river bottoms would have to be cleared before it could be made accessible.

East of the Cascade mountains the cattle lords use but do not own the land. When settlers come in the cattle men are obliged to move back.

The Walla Walla country is nearly three degrees from the British line, and there is a big country to the north and west of it; but there is a scarcity of water there.

However, Mr. McCabe truly says that they have no use for moneyless men in this country, and people who wish to take government land should not attempt it with less than $500, and they could find use for more. The country is full of tramps, and train loads of people are coming in every day.

H. C. CROCKETT.

A Land and Labor Club Determines to Support Streeter and Cunningham.

LOS ANGELES, Cal., June 25.—The land and labor club of this city, after mature deliberation, have concluded to reorganize for this campaign as the union labor party. A mass meeting was held yesterday at Painters’ hall, and the movement inaugurated for a vigorous campaign in favor of Streeter and Cunningham. We admit that the platform of the union labor party does not fully satisfy us, still we are not going to wait until we shall all agree on the remedy before uniting. We shall still advocate the single tax, but no argument can force us back into either of the old parties. We are far from condemning the course of our great leader, Henry George, in this campaign, and we desire to express to him publicly our full confidence and esteem, but it will never be said of us that we shout for labor reforms between elections and then fail to vote for the reforms when we have the chance.

We can but regret the fact that a fusion of both parties did not take place at Cincinnati, and have no alternative but to swing into line with the larger body. We can count on 3,000 votes already, and it shall be our endeavor to double that number before November.

A. VINETTE.

[To us it looks as though the Los Angeles land and labor club were more bent on having a reform party than on having reform. But if they will keep to the advocacy of the single tax they will do good wherever they go.—ED. STANDARD.]

Trusts Thrive on that Sort of Disapproval.

Chicag[o?] Herald.

The coal trust has put up the price of coal. This is the way all kinds of trusts will interpret the republican platform, whose disapproval of trusts is more than offset by its promises to perpetuate the tariff under which trusts flourish.

p. 3, col. 3

A Picture of Life Among the Protected Laborers in Pittsburg’s Iron Manufactories—Luxuries to the Extent of Ninety Cents a Day.

The Pittsburg correspondent of the World has been going to headquarters for some tariff facts. He has been visiting the protected laborers of the great iron manufactories—the unskilled workmen who are asked to pay with cheerfulness higher prices for their tinware and potatoes, for their clothing and the lumber in their dwellings, in order that their own wages may be maintained at their present lofty standard, and their own opportunity for employment be made more secure.

Here is a description of the headquarters, and the record of the facts, as the World correspondent found them:

Following the north shore of the Monongahela eastward from the South Side bridge, a row of aged and decrepit shanties is reached. They are filled with pallid humanity, but not overstocked with furniture or the creature comforts of life. Black with age, paintless, carpetless and uncomfortable, these little habitations hug the side of the hills and suggest the nests of the cliff swallows. In summer they are dreadful places to live in. The bare hills tower on each side, making a sort of urn, in which the hot sun turns the dense air fetid. The sewage runs through open gutters. Dishwater and slops are tossed into the streets from doors and windows, and a good, hard rain storm is as great a blessing here as amid the tenement districts of New York’s uncleaned streets.

The student of human life does not have to resort to any strategem^sic to discover the sort of existence which is had in this sorrowtul side of the smoky city. A walk through the street tells all. There are no disguises. The bare, brown doorstep, the table seen through the open doorway, the frowzy bed standing by the open window, all bear their testimony of a comfortless life in plain view of the passer by. You may know how much (or how little) the family has to eat; you may count the household gods or the children or the mangy dogs and cats, or you may know how many times the growler crosses the street to the saloon, if it goes at all, and who gets the benefit of its contents. Courtship and marriage, sickness and sorrow, deaths and births—all go on in the purview of men, for poverty can afford no secrets, and the cliff dwellers of the Monongahela are very poor. Luckily for them the great body of the people have eyes which see not, and the enforced publicity of their life is little harrassed^sic by impertinent curiosity.

Many of the men who with their families exist in these little brown tenements, are humble workers in the big steel works of Jones & Laughlin, the largest rivals of Carnegie, Phipps & Co., who, when they are running full capacity, have over three thousand men on their pay rolls. As they are running the same class of specialties as the Carnegies, Jones & Laughlin are expected to sign the amalgamated scale and go to work, but on the 5th of the month they were swearing by the tariff and all that was holy, that they would never, never resume work until the men agreed to accept lower wages. Taese^sic men, it must be remembered, although they are caught in the jaws of the lock out, have no hand in the quarrel between the amalgamated association of iron and steel workers and the association of iron and steel manufacturers. They are not the well paid rollers and puddlers, but only the common labor which helps the skilled artisans do their work. The amalgamated association neither cares for them nor cherishes them. It will not take them into membership. Some of them belong to the Knights of Labor, but even that order can look for no friendship from the more aristocratic one. Nobody cares for these men, employer or skilled workmen. They are labor, pure and simple, like the mules and the cranes and the tram cars, to be bought at the cheapest figure and tossed away when it becomes incapacitated. If well paid these laborers get a matter of $1.50 per day. But many of the laborers are forced to live and support their families on 90 cents a day.

“The firm of Zug & Co. treats its labor very handsomely,” said Mr. Keating, of the Manufacturers’ association. “We keep it pretty steadily employed and pay it as much as the city does for its laborers, not taking advantage of a large supply, as some firms in Pittsburg do. There are some firms here which pay only ninety cents a day. We have never gone so low as that.”

A group of the human cliff swallows was standing idly about the door of one of their shanties when the World correspondent approached. They were told what President Keating had said an hour or two before, that the tariff benefited the laborers and not the manufacturers; that the workingmen live a good deal more extravagantly on this side than their brethren on the other, and that they have luxuries here which they have learned to look upon as necessities.

“Oh, it’s luxuries,” said a young man sarcastically. “Yes, to be sure. I’d forgotten all about them. There’s my luxuries.” He pointed to the open door, the bare room, to his wife and children, all bare footed and bare legged. “Yes, we have a bit of butcher’s meat in this country against their bacon and pork; whisky against their gin, and beer against their ale. Perhaps our tobacco and our schooling is better, but”—with a strong expletive—“neither the tariff nor the bosses can take this credit. That tariff talk is all in my eye, sir. We all know what it means here.”

“Then you are all good democrats.”

The men looked at each other and laughed. Two out of six were democrats, four voted for the republican party and a high tariff. Indeed, Allegheny county has a normal republican majority of 8,000 or thereabouts. The matter of the alleged “big wages” was next touched upon.

“Oh, you mean the rollers and puddlers?” spoke up an intelligent looking man. “Well, that is a matter of must. It is the amalgamated folks. They’ve got a big club and they know it, and they use it. But precious little they care for our interests. It’s number one with them, like the rest of the world, and for every one that the amalgamated fights for there’s five that has to stand by and wait for the results of the battle. They have to stand the shot and shell, but they know that none is fired for them, though sometimes they get a little benefit from a victory. The tariff hasn’t anything to do with those wages.”

Secretary Martin and President Wiehle of the amalgamated association were asked if the association had any interest in the outside laborers. They admitted that it was not absorbing. As to whether the tariff was responsible for the good wages of the skilled labor they replied with a laugh and said, “Not much.” When asked if the recent demonstration of the manufacturers did not have a political flap in its tail they nodded and winked and said they would rather not be quoted.

All this has a different ring from the stories about “Uncle Tom Torrey,” with which the Rev. Edward Everett Hale has been regaling us. It is just the difference between facts and fancies.

Our Annual Taxation Farce.

New York city’s tax lists for 1888, which have recently been completed, furnish a commentary on our system of municipal and state taxation which might well be used by single tax advocates, both here and elsewhere.

In 1887 the total assessed valuation of real estate (lots and houses) in this city was $1,254,000,000; this year it is $1,302,000,000; increase, $48,000,000. The increase is almost entirely in the Twelfth, Nineteenth and Twenty-second wards. The greatest increase was in the Twelfth ward, where the assessment is $18,000,000 more than in 1887. Land values in this ward have been for several years pretty near as high as they are now, but there has been much building there during the past twelve months. It follows then that the increased assessment was on account of

p. 3, col. 4 the buildings which were put up—that is, it falls on those who have spent their money and used their time and labor to build more homes for our crowded population and more stores for our rack rented store keepers. The same thing is true to a greater or less degree of the Nineteenth and Twenty-second wards.

At the same time, in spite of the continuous congregation of rich people in the metropolis; in spite of the manifest increase of wealth and capital, the assessed value of personal property fell from $253,100,000 in 1887 to $250,600,000 this year, a total decrease of two and a half millions.

The Prohibition Leader Denounces the Protective Robbery.

At a large meeting of Staten island prohibitionist^sic at Port Richmond on Friday night, J. P. St. John, late prohibition governor of Kansas, and prohibition candidate for president in 1884, attacked the republican party for its attitude on the liquor question, and then went on:

“Most monstrous of all, the republican party deliberately proposes to revise our present tariff laws so as to check the importation of foreign goods, and thus reduce the revenue; to shut out all healthy competition and build up giant monopolies—in other words, to keep the burden upon the people’s clothing and food. You little realize how much this tariff is costing you. The suit which I have on (of gray Scotch goods) cost me $35 in Kansas. I have just come from Halifax, in Nova Scotia, and while there I went into a tailor’s shop and asked him what he would duplicate the suit for. He said $20, and before I left he offered to make it for $18. This shows that I paid an extra price of $17 for my suit in Kansas. This set me to inquiring. I thought I would buy a black platform suit. I had one that cost me $70 in Kansas, and the tailor made me one of the best west of England cloth for $35.”

“How about the wages?” some one in the audience asked.

“They say that there men^sic were working for pauper wages. I asked the tailor how much he paid the man who cut and made my suit of clothes and he answered $100 a month. I found the wages of the common laborer there $1.25 a day. They do not have free trade in Nova Scotia, but their tariff rate is away below ours. Now this great republican party, instead of proposing to reduce the tax of $17 or $35 on a suit of clothes, says: ‘No, we’ll take the burden off tobacco and liquors used in the arts, and if that is not sufficient we will raise the tax on clothing in order to shut out competition.’ Thus, instead of taking the burden off the masses, they propose to pile the burdens higher on them. And if this is not sufficient to reduce the surplus they say that they propose to remove the tax from every distillery and brewery and saloon rather than to take the burdens from the necessaries of life. The people of this country will never endure such an infamous proposition. I say that for every dollar of protection extended to labor there is a thousand dollars given to capital.”

Stimulating Discussion in Dayton.

DAYTON, O., July 8.—Although no word has been sent you from this part of the field for a long time, the good work goes bravely on and there is no lack of interest among the members of the free land club. We are paying particular attention to that “protection” part of the enemy’s line. Everybody is talking protection and free trade here now.

Two meetings have been held at Trades assembly hall recently to discuss the following: “Resolved, That protection is necessary to sustain the industries of the country and the wages of the working man.” One thing notable at these two meetings was that at least four-fifths of those present were out and out free traders and not free traders of the “tariff for revenue” sort; while at a series of meetings held at the same place some two years ago to discuss the same issue the situation was exactly the reverse, the majority of the audience being protectionists.

Another course of meetings will be begun on next Thursday evening at the common pleas court room to help along general discussion.

W. W. KILE, Cor. Sec. Free Land Club.

Prof. Garland in Indianapolis.

INDIANAPOLIS, Ind., July 9.—Prof. Garland, of Boston, was with us last Saturday and Sunday evenings, July 7 and 8, and delivered two addresses, the first in front of our court- house and the second in the criminal court room. Saturday’s address was upon the tariff question, and there were about two hundred and fifty or three hundred persons who listened to him. They were seemingly well pleased with his remarks. He handled the subject in a masterly manner, and was frequently applauded. His speech Sunday evening, “America’s inherited disease,” was listened to by only a moderate sized audience, owing to a mistake in advertising the time.

The address was a fine one, and I have no doubt that not a few went away believers.

Our society will hold no indoor meetings for the summer season, conducting out door exercises instead, and we hope to be able to work up a healthy sentiment before fall, when we can again take up the indoor meetings and with better results.

L. P. CUSTER.

In Protectionist McKinley’s District.

CANTON, O., July 7.—Your offer per order of Mr. Shearman, in issue of June 30, I gladly avail myself of, and will, with aid of our friends here, distribute as many of his speeches as may be sent to me. They are convincing to a mind capable of and desirous of seeing the truth, and should be in the hands of every voter. This is Major McKinley’s district, and could he, as the “young Napoleon” of protection, be defeated it might be deemed a victory second only in importance to the election of Mr. Cleveland. There is unmistakable evidence that a revolution is going on in the minds of intelligent men, who, led blindfolded by those in whom they implicitly trusted, have heretofore bowed their unthinking heads and carried on their broad shoulders the increasingly crushing weight of the idol of legalized robbery—protection. Those heads are beginning to use their own brains to think, and those hands hold the weapon wherewith to smash the idol into fragments—the ballot.

S. J. H.

The Movement in Texas.

BLEVINS, Texas, July 2.—I have distributed all my tracts and there is a great demand for more. One of the leading alliance men here says he wants me to get him twenty-five copies and he will help me distribute them. If I had a few copies of the German edition I could use them to advantage.

I have met but one man who offers any objection the movement^sic. Yours for the right,

GEORGE W. JONES.

Profiting by the Occasion.

A Wednesday night prayer meeting was being held in the Methodist church of Adam’s Corners. The attendance was slim, and as the crops were all in no one seemed to be able to think of anything to pray for. At last, after a long silence, Deacon Obediah Jones rose and said: “Brothers and sisters, as none of those present seem to be moved to prayer this evening, and seeing we are all here together, I will improve the occasion by making a few remarks on the tariff.”

p. 3, col. 5

The Reform Club Holds the First of Its Campaign Meetings and R. [R.?] Bowker Speaks.

The first of a series of Reform club tariff meetings was held on Friday, July 6, in the club rooms, 12 East Thirty-third street. Mr. R. R. Bowker was the speaker of the evening. He took the president’s message as a text and drew attention to points that might be efficaciously used in the campaign.

“It is of necessity,” said Mr. Bowker, “to make the discussion of the tariff as nearly a local issue as possible. Mr. Ryder of Sing Sing, who has long been with us in our work for a reduction, demonstrated how valuable this plan of localizing it is, when he went systematically to work in his own town to see how it would be affected by a relief from the present conditions. He found there a population of 10,000, who bought annually $100,000 worth of woolens. Of this one-third was of foreign manufacture and two-thirds domestic. He discovered that the $33,000 of im- ported goods cost double because of the tariff. On the excessive $17,000 at least two-thirds was due to the tariff primarily, while the importer was obliged to get his ten per cent profit besides. But when the investigafor^sic came to the $67,000 worth of domestic woolens that were consumed he made some inquiries which led to the root of the whole excessive expenditures. He found that the tradesmen charged within five or ten per cent of what the imported goods sold for, thus adding $20,000 or $30,000 to the legitimate selling price. This is an exceedingly interesting representation for the people of Sing Sing. You can appreciate how readily they would understand it. Despite the fun made of General Hanoock’s^sic famous remark—‘Tariff is but a local issue’—there was a deal of truth in it, though not in the direction the general intended.

“The president in his message,” Mr. Bowker continued, “estimated that 2,000,000 persons would be directly affected by any change in the present tariff. I think he made a very liberal estimate. It is well, however, to be fortified by arguments on all sides. The agricultural classes should be especially remem- bered. It is a somewhat interesting fact that, granting that there were 1,000,000 farmers and 1,000,000 helpers in the raising of wool, the $90,000,000 maximum annual product of the wool growers would only give $45 to each man, yet this wool growth is one of the strongholds of the republicans. There are, I think, about 312,000 persons engaged in the production of wool for the market in this country. Their labor makes a return of about the same as any other labor—that is about $1 a day. Rice growers, raisers of sugar, barley, and hops, who are also affected by the tariff I should say added together would make perhaps 500,000 workers. Add these to the president’s estimate of 2,000,000 and there you have a liberal total of all the persons in this country who would be benefited by a continuation or an increase of the present tariff. Mr. Hays in his letter two or three years ago to Secretary of the Treasury Manning intimated that the English and French manufacturers of woolens could compete in styles and the like to the disadvantage of our own manufacturers because they had no wavering tariff, but could count all the while upon its remaining fixed at free trade. Thus Mr. Hays unintentionally gave the best argument in the world in favor of free trade. The English and French manufacturers certainly have great advantages, and to show what free trade does for them it is simply necessary to give comparative figures of exportation. Our exportations of woolen goods has rarely reached $750,000, and sometimes has sunk as low as $250,000. The exports of Great Britian^sic amount to $112,000,000, of France to $73,000,000, of Germany to $45,000,000, making a total of $340,000,000^sic in favor of free trade.”

In opening any discussion of the tariff, Mr. Bowker said that it would be well to follow the president’s example, given in his message, and first consider the various way proposed^sic to dissipate the surplus. There are three ways open. “The first is to fund it, the second to spend it and the third to stop it at the sources, which is our way. Then Mr. Mills’s admirable Tammany hall speech is a good one to follow. But bear this in mind always. The Mills bill is not a free trade bill. It only advocates a reduction of seven per cent. Remember this, too, that the proposed decrease of seven per cent is only one-third of the reduction proposed by the republican tariff commission of of^sic 1882 and 1883. Recollect as well that the substance of the Mills bill has been approved and formed part of all of the messages of the republican presidents, from Johnson to Arthur.”

It is proposed by the Reform club to continue these meetings weekly throughout the campaign, inviting prominent tariff reformers both at home and abroad to speak upon the all-important subject.

Waking Things Up in Nashville.

On the Fourth of July a few earnest single tax men gathered in Simmons’s hall in Nashville, Tenn., and formed an organization for the propagation of single tax doctrines under the name of the American land league club. Judge Frank T. Reid was elected president and P. H. Carroll secretary. It was decided to excite popular discussion by holding frequent meetings to debate the land question and kindred economic subjects. A debate was set down for Thursday evening, July 12, and five members appointed to champion the cause of the club against as many outsiders of adverse principles.

The Nashville Democrat speaks in complimentary terms of the earnestness and enthusiasm of these men, and word by mail from the secretary gives assurance of their determination to wake things up.

A Prominent Minnesota Republican Embraces the Free Trade Cause.

In the New York Herald of July 8 appeared a dispatch from Minneapolis, Minn., announcing the bolt of Judge Aaron Ueland^sic, for many years judge of probate of that city, and one of the leading republicans of the state. In an interview Judge Ueland declared against protection, demonstrated that wages do not depend upon a tariff, and gave evidence that he saw at least a part of “the cat.” He is reported to have said:

“I do not believe in protection. I shall vote for Cleveland and Thurman and will be proud to do so.”

“Do you think protection has done anything for America?”

“The people of the United States are like a farmer on a large tract of new, rich land. The work put on his land results in large, abundant crops, he and his family and hired men and hired girls get plenty to eat, drink and wear, and a good home to live in. The servants get good wages because the crops are so large that every one engaged in raising them can have a good share. That is, of course, provided nobody takes the crops away.

“The people in Europe, on the other hand, are like a farmer on an old worn out piece of land. The same amount of work on this land results in smaller crops, and consequently in less to eat, drink and wear, and in poorer buildings and smaller shares for servant hire. But the people on the good, big farm, have not only the advantage of getting more for the same amount of work. Being better fed, clothed and housed, they are able to do more

p. 3, col. 6 work than the others, just as a horse fed on oats can do more work than a horse fed on straw.

“This extra work gives additional returns, and makes the difference between the people much greater. Thus the people of the United States owe their better condition to the richer natural resources of the country and to their ability to do work upon these resources, and not to any protective tariff.”

How to Get People to Take an Interest in Our Principles.

Andrew Garbutt, who resides in Beachmont, a suburb of Boston, and i[s?] president of the land and labor club of Bost[on?], has, during the spring, sent out a circular [letter?] to the citizens of Revere, Beachmont and Crescent Beach on the subject of local taxation. The letter begins as follows:

The assessors of this township are placed under oath, when they tak[e?] [illegible] office, to assess property at its selling value, and yet we find that one class of property is assessed at from one-fifth to one third of its selling value, whilst another class is assessed at about its selling value. To take a few instances out of many:

1. A large estate at Revere, assessed at $1,116 per acre, the selling price is 15 cents per foot, or at the rate of $6,534 per acre.

2. A large estate in Beachmont, assessed at barely 5¾ cents per foot, the selling price is 15 to 20 cents per foot.

These are estates in land held for speculative purposes.

Now take instances of improved property, houses and lots:

3. One property taxed $51, selling price $6,000.

4. A property taxed $30, selling price $2,700.

5. A property taxed $23, selling price $2,500.

It is then shown what the tax on these last three pieces of improved property would be if they were assessed at the same rate of valuation as the first two pieces above mentioned, which are held on speculation. Thus the property taxed at present $51 a year, if valued at the same rate as the property first instanced, would pay only $12; if valued like the second piece it would pay but $21. The $2,700 piece of improved property, now taxed $30 a year, would pay under the same conditions $5.40 or $9.45. The $2,500 piece, now taxed $23, would pay but $5 or $8.75. The letter then goes on to say:

What does this amount to? Does it not amount to this: That if you have improved a piece of vacant land, and put a house on it, you will be taxed for every dollar in it from three to five times as much as the man holding land for a rise? Of course we know the old time worn excuse, “The land is unproductive.” Why? Is it not the easiest thing in the world to keep land unproductive by asking a higher price than any one will give for it? Let us take one of the instances mentioned, No. 3; suppose the owner wished to let, but asked a higher rent than the ordinary rate, and finding no tenant should go to the assessors and say, “My property is unproductive; I want you to cut my tax down from $51 to $12, the tax on other unproductive property of equal value.” Would his unproductive argument avail him? Yet we suffer this trick to be played upon us (in another form) every year. Every year we go on paying the tax of the land speculator, in fact pay him a premium for keeping the town like a desert, keeping population out of it.

Is it not time that we demand that the law be no longer violated, that the oath of the assessors be no longer violated, and that property improved or unimproved be assessed at its selling value, as the law demands? This is not a matter for the assessors alone, it is for the public to demand (if they are tired of law violations and oath violations) an honest assessment—demand that the tenant or house owners shall not be taxed five dollars whilst the land speculator is taxed one dollar on property of equal value.

I have absolute proof of the figures here given. The prices demanded for land by the holders of it I have in their own writing.

An American Republic That We Are Forbidden to Trade With.

Bradstreet’s.

The message of Dr. Miguel Juarez Colman^sic to the national congress presents important facts in regard to the progress of this South American republic. Argentine Republic has an area of 1,125,086 square miles, with a population in 1887 of 3,935,286. It has made wonderful progress in the building of railways. Of the 17 railways conceded, 13 have the guarantee of the government. The guaranteed lines report a length of 7,961 kilometers, the unguaranteed 1,272, making 9,233 kilometers. The contracts for the following guaranteed lines are already prepared: Tartagal Reconquista to Formosa, Bahia Blanca to Ville Mercedes, San Juan to Salta, Chumbreha to Tinogosta and Andalugata, Goya to Monte Caseros, Resistencia to Metan and San Custobal to Tucaman.

The aggregate length of railways in operation is 6,306 kilometers, equal to 3,918 4-10 miles. These roads have carried within a year 7,657,406 passengers and 3,705,876 tons of freight. The gross revenue from the yearly traffic is $23,805,722.15, against expenses of $13,177,172.15, giving a net annual revenue of $10,627,950.14^sic.

The debt of the republic March 31, 1888, was: Internal, $47,100,000, and external, $92,427,000. The latter is expected to be paid off within eight years. Argentine 5 per cents issued in London in 1887 at 85½ were on March 31 quoted at 97, and the 6 per cents at 102 and 104½.

In 1886 the import and export trade aggregated $194,000,000. In 1887 it had increased $24,000,000, of which $9,500,000 were imports and $14,500,000 exports. The gain is due to the increased production of cereals, hides and frozen meats. The suppression of export duties has also contributed to the increase in the volume of exports. Import and export values in the first quarter of 188[8?] show an increase when compared with the first quarter in 1887 of $4,000,000.

In 1884 the total revenue was $46,762,000. The revenue for 1887 was early estimated at $50,522,000, but it produced $58,135,000, or $13,372,000 in excess of the revenue of 1886. The budget of expenses in 1887 was $43,263,000, and $6,756,000 for special laws without special resources, leaving a remainder of $8,116,000.

In the fourteen provinces of the republic are 2,080 schools, with 142,471 pupils. There are 116 schools in the capital of the republic, including 24 graduated, 56 elementary, 20 for infants and 16 for adults. In the 116 schools are 746 teachers, including 224 male and 522 female. In the national territories there are 42 schools, with 64 teachers and [2?],998 scholars.

The total immigration in 1887 was 137,000, and for the first quarter of 1885^sic 40,500. The expected immigration in all of 1888 is about 200,000. The cost of passage from Europe for 50,000 agriculturists and artisans will be advanced to enable them to come to Argentine Republic in 1888. The commissary of immigration has gone to Europe to establish the requisite appliances to promote immigration.

Immigration, colonization and railways are rapidly transforming the country, and as a consequence its productive forces are being multiplied, and the comforts of life there are increased. The field of labor is enlarged, the educational work is taking rapid strides, and internal improvements are receiving attention from the government.

And Something About Grave Defects in Our Constitution.

Donn Piatt in Belford’s Magazine.

We mean no personal disrespect to the honorable member of the house from Pennsylvania in the above use of his name. We only seek to stigmatize a condition of politics that is, if possible, more degrading to the country at large, and to the democratic party in particular, than our corrupt and inefficient civil service.

The tendency in our poor human nature to lose in an organization itself the object for which the party is organized, is strongly marked and well recognized in the recorded history of the human race. It is, if possible, more striking in religion than in politics; but the result is the same in all human organizations. A man will suffer death for a sect whose creed he does not comprehend, and, if he did, probably would not believe in. In the same way the ordinary man will touch elbows with his comrades and march under a banner that has nothing on it but the color to distinguish it from that of other parties of like organization. This deplorable condition was emphasized by Governor Hill of New York when he said that it was platform enough for him to say, “I am a democrat.” This means, if it means anything, that the distinguished politician is a democrat because he is not a republican, and is entitled to any views or no views provided he votes the ticket; and with widespread charity he extends the same privilege to all other democrats. The Hon. Samuel J. Randall’s biography is a luminous history of the same deplorable condition of political human nature.

It is our national misfortune to have in our general government a form that encourages this sort of a weak result. The framers of our great political structure, under which we rank ourselves as a nation, seem to have been animated by two motives. One of these was a fear of the people in whose behalf they labored so earnestly; the other was to steal as much from the states as they found necessary to create a sovereignty from which there should be no appeal. In their anxiety to build a strong government against the states and against the people, the fathers gave us a cast-iron, immovable, unsensitive machine, that is farther removed from popular control than any government on earth. The king of Dahomey, for example, feels a responsibility to his people that is unknown about Washington.

This is no exaggeration; and the student will appreciate the truth we utter the moment the facts are presented. We have a president elected every four years. After inauguration he cannot, during that space of time, be approached save through impeachment, or controlled save by death. We have a senate representing states, renewable every six years. In this, Rhode Island or Delaware or Nevada ranks with New York, Pennsylvania or Ohio. The so-called popular branch, the house of representatives, has two vetoes to encounter in every effort at popular legislation. The members are elected a year in advance of taking their seats and the oath of office, and that house being the only avenue to power on the part of the people, there is an eagerness in the exercise of the privilege that defeats itself. We have a rotation there that destroys the advantage of experience. We have continuously a new house to cope with the settled powers at the other end of the capitol and avenue.

The result of all this is a discouragement of discussion on the part of the people that virtually leaves the party in power without that sense of responsibility to constituencies that marks every other constitutional government under the sun. If an all-wise creator had so constructed the American mind that it would be open to change every four years, this plan of government might work favorably. As it is, while the despotisms of Europe—as we are pleased to call them—are being continually agitated by the gravest questions, we have more elections than a sane mind can follow, with no issue to solve other than what pertains to the offices.

We have our land divided between hostile camps that differ from each other in name only. Politics with us is a species of gambling, with no great stake depending on the result. What is the good of agitating in discussion a great measure looking to a change of administration, when such agitation beats against an immovable rock? Had we a ministry or an administration dependent upon the will of the house, as other governments have, the land would be quickened by a moral and intellectual stimulant that would educate as it advanced, and gather power from its progress.

Nothing of the sort is open to us, and the result is that our elections turn on matters that would stain this page to repeat, and have but one objective point—office.

As the contest is to be settled by a mere count of numbers, to gain adherents is one object held in view; and as opinions are apt to offend, opinions are carefully eliminated. A party platform in this way has come to be a matter of amusement, more remarkable for what it omits than for what it contains. Under this system party leaders are men who divest themselves of all convictions. They seek to harmonize all elements, and so divide their supplications evenly between good lord and good devil. Such a system robs a party not only of its principles but of its courage.

The work of a committee on resolutions at a convention reminds one of a body of undertakers about a coffin. The order given in bated breath is, “Walk lightly; speak low; you may disturb the repose of the dead.” It is as comical as a flock of crows walking warily about a steel trap baited with an egg. A party organized on this proposition resembles the blind horses of a bark mill, where, with the nose of one to the tail of the other, they move round and round, “going it strong and going it blind,” to use the phraseology of the stump—and not caring much whether they grind bark or brimstone, provided they get their oats.

It is the logic of events, as well as the economy of nature, that fits leaders without much intellect for such organizations. That rather rare luxury is not needed and is not called for. The most conspicuous among these is the honorable gentleman whose name is so marked as such a leader that it gives meaning and significance to a term. When we say the country is afflicted with Randallism, all know what we mean.

Returned a democrat by a republican constituency, not from any love of the man or admiration of his character, it is openly claimed that there is not only nothing in the man to harm his strangely assorted supporters, but much in his position to damage the democracy. There is not only no principle of a political sort in Mr. Randall, but there is nothing else save the intense personality or force of character that fetches him to the front in contentions that have no other result than a change of office. If he ever saw a measure that might benefit the country, he never was moved to give it support. If he at any time uttered a sentence one cared to remember, it failed to secure a reporter, and it has been lost to the world. With little intelligence and less culture, he poses as a leader, and holds his own through a lack of humor that saves him from seeing the preposterous absurdity of his pretensions. Take from Mr. Randall’s cast iron countenance its intense solemnity, and two-thirds of the man would be lost. It not only imposes on his following, but imposes on himself.

The political field is thrown into some confusion by the president forcing an issue that calls for no little study and intelligence to determine. Sam Randallism, therefore, finds itself out of employ. All the little captains of hundreds, and the larger captains of thousands, gaze at each other in dejected silence. This president has not only thrown out views sure to offend, but he calls on these subordinates to indorse his utterances.

No more ludicrous illustration of this condition has been given than that of Mr. Randall, when, toward the close of the great debate on free trade in the house, he moved to the front, and found himself, not the ally of the protectionists, but their leader. His effort in the way of argument was feeble, as all his efforts in that direction are; but the startling fact was developed that his lines of democracy overlapped the camp of the republicans, and he stood alone waving a flag on the earthworks of an alien enemy. Even the so-called democracy of Pennsylvania failed to recognize his call for a rally, and declined, for the first time in his life, to trust him as a

p. 6, col. 6 delegate to the national convention at St. Louis. Exit Randall; and let us hope for the sake of the country that Randallism, which means a leadership without principles, and a party without a policy, has disappeared from the political arena.

Watch Cases, Etc.

NEWPORT, Ky.—I would be pleased to know how much tariff is on:

1. Twenty-five cents’ worth of sugar.

2. Twenty-five cent pound of coffee.

3. Fifty cent pound of tea.

4. How would free trade affect the watch case trade! The protectionists throw that back when I say anything about free trade.

J. J. NEWMAN.

(1) The tariff on sugar not above Dutch standard No. 13 and not above 75 degrees by the polariscope test is 1 40-100^sic cents a pound; for every additional degree it is 4-100 cents. If above No. 13 Dutch standard and not above No. 16, it is 2 75-100 cents a pound; above No. 16 and not above No. 20, it is 3 cents; if above No. 20, it is 3 50-100. If adulterated after being refined and the value is not over thirty cents the tariff is ten cents a pound.

2. Coffee is free.

3. Tea is free.

4. The tariff on watch cases is twenty-five per cent of their value. As we export this product very largely even now, its price, other things remaining the same, would not be reduced by abolishing the duty on it. If we had free trade its manufacture would be cheaper by the lower cost of dutiable materials used for alloy and dutiable machinery, and that would lower the price of watch cases. So far as watch case makers are concerned, they would be benefited in two ways by free trade. They could buy what they wanted cheaper, and there would be a greater demand for their labor in consequence of the greater consumptive power of workers in other trades.

The Mills Bill and Pig Iron.

NEW YORK.—What would the immediate effect of the Mills bill, if passed, be on the business of producing pig iron in this country?

W. S. T.

A somewhat greater demand for it in consequence of the enhanced consumptive power of the people, which would follow a reduction in the prices of other commodities, might improve the business. Otherwise the Mills bill, if passed, would not affect the production of pig iron.

Is High Priced Labor Cheap Labor?

BINGHAMTON, N. Y.—Please answer the following questions: (1) What is the average cost for mining a ton of coal in the United States? (2) Ditto, in England. (3) What is the cost for labor in mining the same in the United States; also in England? (4) Does it cost more for labor to manufacture a given quantity of goods in England than in the United States? Give figures and authority; compute from money value.

I maintain that labor costs more in manufacturing $100 worth of goods in England than in the United States. Am I right? Where can I get full and complete official statistics covering the subject? I was a delegate to the Syracuse convention last year, but am going to vote for Cleveland and tariff reform this year. I believe it is the duty of every believer in the single tax on land values to do likewise, and am in thorough sympathy with THE STANDARD in the position it has taken, believing as I do that in electing Cleveland and Thurman, that everlasting bugaboo, “protection,” will receive its death blow, and monopoly receive a setback which nothing else could give it.

C. A. EVANS.

(1) According to the census of 1880 when the average labor cost of mining coal was 80 cents a ton, the average total cost was 97¾ cents, a difference of 17¾ cents between labor cost and total cost. I am told that the labor cost now is from 67 cents down to between 40 and [50?]. Therefore, taking 67 cents as labor cost and 17¾ for cost of material, the total cost would be 84¾ cents.

2. I do not know.

3. Schoenhof, who has made special inquiries into the general subject of labor cost and whose writings may be got through the Free trade club, gives 67 cents as the labor cost of mining a ton of coal in the United States and 79 cents in England. Charles F. Mayer, one of the Maryland operators who testified before the ways and means committee in 1886, gave the labor cost in England at from 80 to 90 cents.

4. As a rule I think it costs more to manufacture a given quantity of goods where wages are low than where they are high. The following figures are from Schoenhof:

In Grosvenor’s “Does Protection Protect?” to be found in public libraries, you will get the history of different tariffs down to 1869; and in the consular reports on labor, in testimony taken before congressional committees, in Schoenhof’s writings, in R. R. Bowker’s “Economic Fact Book,” and in various statistical publications you will get useful information upon the subject. But respecting the particular question which you raise, namely the comparative value of high priced and low priced labor, statistics are meager.

LOUIS F. POST.

The Tariff in Handy Form.

We are in receipt of a number of letters asking for pamphlet copies of the existing tariff, with rates of duties, etc. Such a pamphlet is published by Belford, Clark & Co. We will forward it by mail on receipt of price, twenty-five cents.

PROGRESS AND POVERTY,

An Inquiry Into the Cause of Industrial Depression and of Increase of Want With Increase of Wealth—The Remedy.

BY HENRY GEORGE.

25[0?] pages.

CONTENTS:

Introductory.—THE PROBLEM.

Book I.—WAGES AND CAPITAL.

Chap. 1. The current doctrine—its insufficiency. 2. The meaning of the terms. 3. Wages not drawn from capital, but produced by the labor. 4. The maintenance of laborers not drawn from capital. 5. The real functions of capital.

Book II.—POPULATION AND SUBSISTENCE.

Chap. 1. The Malthusian theory—its genesis and support. 2. Inferences from fact. 3. Inferences from analogy. 4. Disproof of the Malthusian theory.

Book III.—THE LAWS OF DISTRIBUTION.

Chap. 1. The inquiry narrowed to the laws of distribution—necessary relation of these laws. 2. Rent and the law of rent. 3. Interest and the cause of interest. 4. Of spurious capital and of profits often mistaken for interest. 5. The law of interest. 6. Wages and the law of wages. 7. Correlation and co-ordination of these laws. 8. The statics of the problem thus explained^sic.]

Book IV.—EFFECT OF MATERIAL PROGRESS UPON THE DISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH.

Chap. 1. The dynamics of the problem yet to seek. 2. Effect of increase of population upon the distribution of wealth. 3. Effect of improvements in the arts upon the distribution of wealth. 4. Effect of the expectation raised by material progress.

Book V.—THE PROBLEM SOLVED.

Chap. 1. The primary cause of recurring paroxysms of industrial depression. 2. The persistence of poverty amid advancing wealth.

Book VI.—THE REMEDY.

Chap. 1. Insufficiency of remedies currently advocated. 2. The true remedy.

Book VII.—JUSTICE OF THE REMEDY.

Chap. 1. Injustice of private property in land. 2. Enslavement of laborers the ultimate result of private property in land. 3. Claim of land owners to compensation. 4. Property in land historically considered. 5. Property in land in the United States.

Book VIII.—APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY.

Chap. 1. Private property in land inconsistent with the best use of land. 2. How equal rights to the land may be asserted and secured. 3. The proposition tried by the canons of taxation. 4. Indorsements and objections.

Book IX.—EFFECTS OF THE REMEDY.

Chap. 1. Of the effect upon the production of wealth. 2. Of the effect upon distribution and thence upon production. 3. Of the effect upon individuals and classes. 4. Of the changes that would be wrought in social organization and social life.

Book X.—THE LAW OF HUMAN PROGRESS.

Chap. 1. The current theory of human progress—its insufficiency. 2. Differences in civilization—to what due. 3. The law of human progress. 4. How modern civilization may decline. 5. The central truth.

Conclusion.—THE PROBLEM OF INDIVIDUAL LIFE.

The new Land and labor library paper edition of “Progress and Poverty” is now ready, price thirty-five cents. This is printed on better paper, in larger type, is better bound and a considerably larger book than the previous twenty cent edition.

SOCIAL PROBLEMS.

BY HENRY GEORGE.

342 pages.

CONTENTS:

1. The increasing importance of social questions.
2. Political dangers.
3. Coming increase of social pressure.
4. Two opposing tendencies.
5. The march of concentration.
6. The wrong in existing social conditions.
7. Is it the best of all possible worlds?
8. That we all might be rich.
9. First principles.
10. The rights of man.
11. Dumping garbage.
12. Over-production.
13. Unemployed labor.
14. The effects of machinery.
15. Slavery and slavery.
16. Public debts and indirect taxation.
17. The functions of government.
18. What we must do.
19. The great reform.
20. The American farmer.
21. City and country.
22. Conclusion.

PROTECTION OR FREE TRADE?

An Examination of the Tariff Question with Especial Regard to the Interests of Labor.

BY HENRY GEORGE.

CONTENTS:

I. Introductory. II. Clearing ground. III. Of method. IV. Protection as a universal need. V. The protective unit. VI. Trade. VII. Production and producers. VIII. Tariffs for revenue. IX. Tariffs for protection. X. The encouragement of industry. XI. The home market and home trade. XII. Exports and imports. XIII. Confusions arising from the use of money. XIV. Do high wages necessitate protection^sic XV. Of advantages and disadvantages as reasons for protection. XVI. The Development of manufactures. XVII. Protection and producers. XVIII. Effect of protection on American industry. XIX. Protection and wages. XX. The abolition of protection. XXI. Inadequacy of the free trade argument. XXII. The Real Weakness of Free Trade. XXIII. The Real Strength of Protection. XXIV. The Paradox. XXV. The Robber that Takes All that is Left. XXVI. True Free Trade. XXVII. The Lion in the Way. XXVIII. Free Trade and Socialism. XXIX. Practical Politics. XXX. Conclusion.

THE LAND QUESTION.

What It Involves, and How Alone It Can Be Settled.

BY HENRY GEORGE.

87 pages.

PROPERTY IN LAND.

A Passage-at-Arms Between the Duke of Argyll and Henry George.

77 pages.

FORTSCHRITT AND ARMUTH^sic.

(Progress and Poverty in German.)

TRANSLATION OF C. D. F. GUTSCHOW.

439 pages.

PRICE LIST.

Progress and Poverty, paper……………..$ 35 ” ” cloth……………… 1 00 ” ” half calf or half morocco…. 2 50

Social Problems, paper……………… 20 ” ” cloth……………… 1 00 ” ” half calf or half morocco…… …. 2 50

Protection or Free Trade^sic? paper……………… 35 ” ” cloth……………… 1 50 ” ” half calf or half morocco 3 00

Property in Land, paper……………… 15

The Land Question, paper……………… 10

Progress and Poverty, German, paper……………… 35

For sale by all booksellers, or sent postpaid on receipt of price. Foreign editions of these books imported on rder^sic.

HENRY GEORGE, 12 Union square, New York.

p. 7, col. 5

NEW PUBLICATIONS.

THE TRUTH ABOUT TRISTREM VARICK.

By Edgar Saltus, author of “Mr. Incoul’s Misadventure,” etc.

12mo., Cloth, $1. Paper Covers, 50 cents.

In this novel Mr. Saltus has treated a subject hitherto unexploited in fiction. The scene is Fifth avenue, the action emotional, the plot a surprise. “There is,” some one has said, “as much mud in the upper classes as in the lower; only in the former it is gilded.” This aphorism might serve as epigraph to “Tristrem Varick.”

Thirteenth thousand ready April 1.

THE TARIFF ON IMPORTS INTO THE UNITED STATES AND THE FREE LIST,

As contained in act of March 3, 1883, also the Hawaiian Reciprocity Treaty, and extracts from the Navigation and Oleomargarine acts.

Indexed. 12mo., Paper Covers, 25 cents.

ASHES OF THE FUTURE.

By Edward Heron-Allen.

Beautifully printed in the best French style, with an illustrated cover, 50 cents.

“The story is of absorbing interest.”—Chicago Journal.

“The work of a very vigorous and cultivated pen, as well as of a deep thinking and fervid brain. It is the story of a restless lover of too many things, and of too many good women whose hearts he breaks and whose lives he shatters.”—Brooklyn Eagle.

“MES AMOURS.”

Confessions: Passionate and Playful.

Written to me by people, celebrated and obscure, and my answers to some of them. With an introduction and notes. Illustrated, small 4to, with portrait, $1.25. Selina Dolaro, author of the play, “In the Fashion.”

“It is seldom that the English reader happens upon a book of verses so full of French humor as this pretty volume. ‘Ma Belle Amie,’ the opening selection . . . is edited with a running fire of comments that renders it delightful. The ‘afterthoughts’ affixed to all the verses are often very clever and womanish.”—New York Herald.

PRINCE COASTWIND’S VICTORY;

OR,

The Fairy Bride of Croton Lake.

By Mrs. Miles H. McNamara.

With illustrations. Small 4to, cloth, illustrated cover, $1,00.

“A pretty fairy story, which will delight while it taxes the credulity of young readers. The book is tastefully printed and in handsome covers, and inclosed in a box ready for mailing.”—Chicago Inter Ocean.

THE ROMANCE OF A QUIET WATERING PLACE.

12mo. Cloth, $1.00. Paper, 50 cents.

Thirty French illustrations by Graves.

By a New York Society Lady.

A SLAVE OF CIRCUMSTANCES.

By E. DeLancey Pierson.

12mo. Cloth, $1.00. Paper, 50 cents.

A Novel of Incident, Plot and Action. Scene, Fifth Avenue, New York.

IN PRESS:

A DREAM AND A FORGETTING.

By Julian Hawthorne.

12mo. Cloth, $1.00. Paper, 50 cents.

Mr. Hawthorne’s latest and most interesting novel.

HIS WAY AND HER WILL.

Author unknown.

12mo. Cloth, $1.00. Paper, 50 cents.

A great New York Society Novel.

SOPHIA-ADELAIDE.

Illustrated with Portraits of the Princess.

Paper covers, 50 cents.

“The Deserted Daughter of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert.” An awful story of romantic life by a Princess.

CHESTNUTS NEW AND OLD.

By Bill Nye.

12mo., cloth, $1; paper cover, 50 cents.

His Last and Funniest Book.

THE POLITICS OF LABOR.

By Phillips Thompson.

Cloth, gilt top, $1.25.

“An original and masterly work on the great question of the hour, the relations between capital and labor.” Written for workingmen in a clear, plain and forcible style. Competent critics predict that it will be the hand book for laboring men wherever the English language is spoken.

PECK’S IRISH FRIEND, PHELAN GEOGHEAGAN.

By George W. Peck, Jr.

Illustrated by True Williams.

12mo., cloth, $1; paper, 25 cents.

“Mr. Peck has made quite a reputation as a dialect writer, and his Geogheagan Sketches have been well received.”—Milwaukee News.

THE QUESTION OF THE DAY.

ANTI-POVERTY AND PROGRESS.

By Sister M. Frances Clare (The Nun of Kenmare.)

12mo, paper, 50 cents.

“Discusses some of the questions recently brought to public notice by Henry George and Father McGlynn.” She is opposed to the land theory of the former on the ground that it is not in accord with the Christian religion. . . . She criticises somewhat severely several of the clergy of her own church.”—New York Sun.

THE LAND OF THE NIHILIST RUSSIA^sic.

By W. E. Curtis.

12mo, cloth, $1.

Over one hundred engravings. A guide book.

Send for complete catalogue.

BELFORD, CLARKE & CO.,

PUBLISHERS,

Chicago and New York.

p. 7, col. 6

NEW PUBLICATIONS.

Playing at Economic Discussion.

Everybody has heard of the German savant who, having occasion to describe a camel, and laboring under the disadvantage of never having seen one, created a camel within the recesses of his own consciousness, and described that. What sort of a beast was thus produced is not recorded; but it may safely be assumed that could the supposititious camel have been translated into actual flesh and blood, its iniernal^sic economy would have been found seriously different from that of the natural made animal.

What the German did with the camel, a writer in the July Forum, Mr. J. B. Mann, assumes to do with men and women. Intenting himself, like a monk of Mount Athos, on the consideration of his own inside, he drags forth, from his deep interior recesses, an ideal society, in which things are arranged as he thinks they ought to be. This done, he dives again, and produces what he apparently thinks is the labor question. And combining the two creations, he presents us with an article on “Fallacies in the Trades-Unions Argument,” in which he clearly proves that combinations of workers to secure higher wages are essentially foolish, and that the only way to get better pay is to quit striking and do more work. Mr. Mann’s creations are rather nebulous and phantomlike, but still it is possible, by close study, to get an idea of what he means:

It will be seen that the laborer must work along the line of diversity and development. Men instinctively do this generally in the beginnings of a community. One man becomes a blacksmith, one a carpenter, one a mason, one a shoemaker, and so on, in submission to the laws governing labor—the laws of diversity and development. They know, without argument, that two shoemakers and no blacksmith would be a foolish and unprofitable arrangement, and hence employments are divided spontaneously. As society advances the occupations multiply; that is, they divide more and more, and by doing so each person has a chance to select the one which best suits his taste and capacity. And in this way the highest power of the community is developed. The best blacksmith takes the place of the bungler, the good workman in all branches finds employment, and the inexpert retires to some other calling, or perfects himself so as not to be driven to the wall. Society demands the best, and, as it advances, secures it more and more. The best tailor, and the best lecturer, and the best lawyer, are never idle, and they are produced by the law of diversity and development. . . .

The man who can make two shoes in a day will supply double the needs of the shoe wearing community that the man will who can make but one shoe in the same time, and, the world over, will be pronounced the better man. Obviously, two things will certainly follow the introduction of such a workman: the community will get its shoes with one-half the number of days’ labor from the expert workman that were required when they were made by the inexpert workman, and it will have a citizen who will be accumulating capital in lieu of one who could only barely make a living; for it will cost twice as much to clothe and feed the shoe making force of a community when it takes twice the number of men to do the work, and, with double the expense, only half the capital can be accumulated.

Many years ago a distinguished philosopher and writer said that the man who could tell how to make two blades of grass grow where but one grew before would be a great public benefactor. With two blades of grass on the average in lieu of one, we should have double the pork, beef, mutton, hides, wool, milk, butter and cheese, and we could raise twice the corn, wheat, and potatoes; or, if these were not needed in such quantity, we would have to spend only half the time in meeting our wants.

Observe, this is is not^sic a description of what Mr. Mann thinks would be a good state of things; but an account of what he conceives to be the actually existent situation. He really believes that men, in choosing their employments, are at liberty to consult their own tastes and talents; that a good workman is always certain of profitable work; that a man who makes two shoes a day will earn twice the wages of a man who can make but one; and that if only we could succeed in making two blades of grass grow where one grew before, we should all have twice as much beef, etc., as we now have.

Well, it is easy enough to make two blades or grass^sic grow where one grew before. Not two merely, but four, eight, sixteen, thirty-two, sixty-four—it is hard to say what limit can be assigned to the reproductive force of nature when guided by the hand of labor. Why don’t we do it? There is Great Britain, for example, importing food from all over the world to feed her [35,000,000?] of people—why doesn’t she raise two blades instead of one? The answer is easy. The landlords won’t let her. It suits them better to depopulate their country.

Does the man who makes two shoes a day really get twice the wages of the man who makes one? Have seamstresses become rich since sewing machines were invented? Does the young man entering life really find himself at liberty to choose the occupation best suited to his tastes and talents? Mr. Mann need only lift his eyes and look around him to find the answers to these questions. His camel is no doubt a very good camel; but it isn’t the camel.

Mr. Mann’s conception of society is wofully unlike the reality, though it has some faint resemblance to what society ought to be and would be under conditions of industrial freedom. But his idea of the labor question is simply grotesque:

The most obvious thing concerning labor is that it is a commodity. It is a thing bought and sold, and is of little value except under that condition. There is no such thing as society where labor is not bought, sold or exchanged, and we cannot conceive of a civilization which does not make labor a commodity and treat it as such.

When he says this, Mr. Mann is talking, not of something which can be altered or amended for the better, but of a law which “cannot be repealed by man, or overthrown by organizations of classes or individuals.” Labor, this philosopher thinks, not only is bought and sold; but ought to be, and must be, bought and sold forever. Slavery cannot be abolished. You may change its form from chattel slavery to industrial slavery, if you will; but the essential feature of bondage must be preserved, and labor must be bought and sold; its price, of course, rising and falling in accordance with the law of supply and demand.

And having thus stated, in the strongest terms, his acceptance of the argument which absolutely justifies the methods of trades unionism, Mr. Mann coolly flings his beautiful economic law overboard, and tells us that trades unionists are fools for supposing that they can do themselves any good by limiting the number of apprentices and shortening the hours of labor, and thus inducing an artificial scarcity of labor:

Start the shoe business in two towns side by

p. 8, col. 2 > side, making the hours of labor six in one and twelve in the other, and in twenty-five years the latter town will be able to buy the former out four or five times. This, because the capital saved in the several years will have been earning all the time, while the other town will have used up all its earnings from year to year, and will stand at the end of twenty-five years at the same point whence it started. In other words, limitation and curtailment of resources inevitably tend to poverty, and development and use of resources surely tend to prosperity and comfort. The limitations of unions, all of them, are on the line of non-accomplishment, and are avowedly designed to hinder or check production. They are adapted to the theory that with less production wages will rise, and in the rise of wages the laborer will receive as much compensation for one day’s labor as he otherwise would for two days’ labor.

Mr. Mann’s camel has an indigestion in all its seven stomachs at once. It is a very nice theoretical beast, but it can’t swallow and assimilate hard facts. Will a lessening of production really not tend to raise wages? If the criminals in our state prisons, instead of being kept at productive work, were compelled each day to destroy a certain quantity of flour, or unravel a certain number of yards of cotton cloth, wouldn’t that create a demand for the commodity of labor, and so drive wages upward? Would it be a good thing or a bad thing for the building trades if half New York were burned down? Would wages rise or fall if the black death were to come again and sweep away three-quarters of our wage workers? Once more we suggest to Mr. Mann to lift his eyes from the contemplation of his own inwardness and look about him.

It is the same old story. Mr. Mann butts his head against the social paradox, and seeks to ease the pain by the faith cure method of pretending that the paradox has no existence. By and by perhaps, he will be wiser, and looking at things as they really are, he will try to discover by what neglect of economic law it has come to pass that labor finds, in hindering the production from which its wages are paid, the surest way to increase its wages. When he does that he will find the root of the paradox that dazes him in the fact that labor, instead of being an independent factor of production, free to apply itself in any direction where natural opportunities invite, and to keep its entire product as its reward, is treated as a commodity, bought and sold in the market at competition prices, and applied productively or otherwise, as its purchasers prefer. It will cease to astonish him then that wage workers, hampered and oppressed by an artificial scarcity of the raw material of nature, should find themselves driven in self defense to retaliate by producing an artificial scarcity of labor.

The People’s Palace.

Those who have read Mr. Walter Besant’s novel “All Sorts and Conditions of Men,” will remember the author’s description of the ideal “People’s Palace” erected for the benefit of the weary workers of the east end of London. It has been given to Mr. Besant to enjoy the rare delight of seeing his ideal take on actuality, and a genuine “People’s Palace” founded for the very purposes described in his story. And in the July issue of the North American Review Mr. Besant tells us of the palace that he loves, its appearance, its work, its resources, and its prospects. It is an interesting story:

The Palace, as it stands at present, consists only of the temporary sheds and the central hall. Externally, the hall is hideous; but then it is the core of the whole palace, and its exterior will be invisible when the whole is built. This hall, which is capable of holding 6,000 people at a pinch, is well proportioned and lofty; at one end stands an organ and a platform for the use of the singers and performers at concerts; a spacious gallery is built out on either side; a statue of the queen stands over the entrance; the sides are adorned with statues of queens and princesses of Great Britain and Ireland; under the gallery are temporary bookshelves, for the hall is at present the library as well; the body of the room is provided with tables and seats for readers and hundreds of papers from all parts of the world; at the upper end under the platform is the table where the librarians—two ladies—sit to advise the readers, to receive and give out the books. The place is always well filled. On Sundays, especially, when the librarian’s work is done by volunteers, it is crammed with orderly and quiet readers, who find here a place for rest and reading. The opening of the place on Sunday, although fiercely resisted by the local bigots, has proved an unmixed blessing and boon to the people.

At the back of the hall the library is rapidly rising; it will be completed in May or June. It is an octagonal domed room with book accommodation for 250,000 volumes. At present the library contains no more than 8,000 volumes, but is rapidly growing. The anterooms of the library will be given over entirely for the use of the girls who form the “lady members.” They will then have all to themselves, under the government of their own committee, their own music room, tea room, reading and writing room, and conversation room.

At the back of the library stands a long two storied building. This was formerly the dormitory of the school and alms houses which used to occupy the site. Fortunately this block was not pulled down, and it is now, pending the completion of the building, used for class rooms.

The other buildings are a long, corrugated iron structure used for the exhibitions; an iron building, which contains a gymnasium perfectly fitted up with all the modern appliances; a billiard room furnished with half a dozen billiard and bagatelle tables in it, and a refreshment room. There are also the secretarial offices, a small “ladies’” room fitted up for the girls, and the Palace Journal office.

When the whole building is completed, these temporary buildings will disappear. The Palace will contain in itself everything, namely: Social rooms, club rooms, billiard rooms, lecture rooms, reading rooms, apart from the queen’s hall; class rooms, capable of accommodating an immense number of students; chemical and physical laboratories, and all the machinery of a great technical college and palace of delight.

As for the work which the institution is already doing, it is sufficiently varied. It embraces both educational and recreative features. It is intended to instruct as well as to amuse:

The boys’ school, which is carried on during the day, is an attempt to do something for the boys who have reached the fifth or sixth standard in the board schools, i. e., who have a good rudimentary education and have shown intelligence, and whose parents cannot afford to apprentice them to any trade. We take them for years on their leaving school, and instruct them in trades and in the principles which underlie all technical teaching. Thus they are not taught anything ornamental or superfluous. There are classes in carpentry, design, geometry, drawing and chemistry, but none in such superfluities as spelling or French. They come at the age of thirteen or fourteen, and they are to stay for two years, after which they will leave the school to enter upon their trade.

The technical schools are carried on in the evening; they may be attended by those who are not members; in fact, some of the members do not attend any of the classes. They comprise “practical trade classes.” At present nine trades are taught: “technical classes,” which include thirteen branches of work; “science classes,” “art and design classes,” “musical classes,” “classes for

p. 8, col. 3 > women,” including all sorts of dressmaking, and “general” classes, which include the requirements for the examinations of the civil service, short hand, French and German, bookkeeping, and so forth. Only those engaged in the particular trade to which the class refers can join the practical or technical classes. All these classes are full to overflowing. > > It will thus be seen that not only does the Palace provide for the east end of London a great university of technical education, but that it is already, after no more than six months, greatly appreciated. A great body of work is now being carried on, but nothing compared with what it will become when our class rooms are all built and are filled to their utmost capacity.

In the way of recreations the Palace offers two concerts a week, an organ recital on Sunday, a library and reading room—open on Sunday from 2 to 10 p. m.—a billiard room, and a whole host of clubs—chess, cycling, cricket, etc.—organized by the members at pleasure. Flower shows and exhibitions of various kinds are held at intervals; and four balls have already been given, which Mr. Besant assures us were most enjoyable affairs. No intoxicants of any kind are sold within the limits of the Palace.

A curious feature of the Palace economy is the fact that only young persons are admitted to membership. Mr. Besant gives the common sense reason which induced the trustees to adopt this rule:

At the other end of London are two foundations having objects in some respects similar to those of the Palace. One of these has proved a great, a very great, success; the other is as conspicuous a failure; to the former the lads resort in ever increasing numbers; to the latter they will hardly go at all. The chief reason is that men considered old by lads of sixteen—say men of thirty; and men considered in decrepit and advanced age by such lads—say men of forty; men, in fact, of all ages; were admitted to the privileges of the place. Youth will not consort with age; the lads of sixteen refused to sit down in the same rooms with men old enough to be their fathers. With this warning before them, the trustees resolved on making admission to the palace, first, a privilege which, to be prized at all, must be paid for; and next, a privilege to be limited by age. The members of the Palace must be, therefore, not under fifteen and not over five and twenty. There was much complaint at first from those who were over the age, and it certainly seemed hard that because a man was six and twenty he was to be debarred the use of the Palace. As a matter of fact, however, the members do not, as will be seen, enjoy anything like absolute occupation. These privileges include (1) Admission to all the concerts, entertainments and exhibitions free of charge. (2) The use of the library in the evenings (this is to be altered into a separate reading room for their use). (3) The use of the gymnasium. (4) The right to join any of the classes at reduced fees. (5) Admission to the club. (6) The right of taking the Palace Journal at a reduced rate. For this the lads pay 7s. 6d. a year, and the girls 5s. a year, the former a little more than three half pence a week, the latter about a penny a week. This does not seem a very large sum for all these privileges. As a matter of fact, however, when a young man makes the most of the place, attending one or two of the classes, belonging to one or two of the clubs, and to the gymnasium, he finds himself spending about a shilling a week upon the Palace. If he were not here every night he would spend five times that sum in beer, music halls and theaters for himself and his girl.

The Palace has at present about three thousand members, all it can as yet accommodate. When the buildings are completed it will have as many as ten thousand.

As to the social standing of these members, they belong, with the exception of a few clerks, absolutely to the working classes.

They are not of the lowest class; that has been thrown in our teeth; if they were they would not stay in so orderly and civilized a place; but they are “respectable.” They are of those who work with their hands; both girls and lads. Of the former, there are an immense number, for instance, who are connected with the great Sewing Mystery. They are mostly lads in steady work, and they have a trade; they belong to the “better class” of labor.

It only remains to say that the present income of the Palace is about £6,500 a year. Of this the charity commissioners grant £4,500; interest on a bequest of £12,000 provides about £400 more, and the balance is made up of members’ fees and class fees.

College Professors on Taxation.

“The National Revenues, a collection of papers by American economists,” edited by Albert Shaw, Ph.D., and published by A. C. McClurg & Co. of Chicago, contains a number of short essays upon the subject of national taxation. The contributors, with the exception of Carroll D. Wright, United States commissioner of labor, are professors in the various American colleges, and are mainly of that “good God, good devil” school styled by its adherents the historical or inductive. Most of the essays make one tired by their inconclusiveness—by the evident indisposition to take sides on the burning questions of the day, which seems so natural to college professors. This is shown at high water mark in the paper by Carroll D. Wright, which amounts simply to the assertion that there is no way of deciding between the respective claims of free trade and protection save by collecting statistical data and making tables. This objection does not of course apply to Professor Thompson of the university of Pennsylvania, who is here as thorough a protectionist as in the columns of the Irish World, nor to a few of the other papers. Professor Anson D. Moore of Amherst^sic makes a strong plea for free trade with Canada, and inferentially a plea for free trade with Canada is a plea for free trade with all the world. Professor Arthur T. Hadley of Yale contributes a good article against steamship subsidies as a means for reducing the surplus. Professor Arthur Yager of Georgetown college, Ky., points out briefly the un-American and unstable nature of a protective policy and says:

A glance at the history of protection in America will reveal the fact that this policy always encounters from the first serious and wide spread opposition; that the opposition always leads to agitation for tariff reform which grows in violence and volume, causing great disturbance to the immense business interests involved; and that finally, in spite of the advantage of position, of vested interests and money, the protectionists are defeated.

In short, an attentive study of our political history will show that protective tariffs have been begotten of war and disaster; that they have been perpetuated by persistent and powerful pleas for the protection of vested interests; and that finally, after some twenty years of constant agitation, they have been overthrown.

The tariff of 1861 seems to be following the appointed course; and if so, the time for its downfall has arrived.

The article upon “The Tariff and the Western Farmer,” by Prof. James H. Canfield, of the university of Kansas, is an interesting one. Taking Kansas as a typical western state he says:

First, we needed cheap lumber to make shelter for man and beast. But the tariff on lumber has beyond question proved a most burdensome tax; the amount, by most careful calculation, reaching not less than a half million of dollars per annum for each of the

p. 8, col. 4 > last five years, and only less in previous years in proportion to the population. So clearly has this been seen that our legislature, though strongly partisan, a few years ago by a joint resolution asked that lumber be put on the free list. The tribute which we pay is not only expensive, but it is absurd, because it cannot by any stretch of language be said to “build up an industry;” it is inconsistent, because it puts a premium on the destruction of the forests which we are offering bounties to preserve; and it is dangerous, because the deforestation of this country is bringing with it disease and storm and ruin. > > Iron has become a necessity. Its manifold uses mark the advance of civilization. But wherever we have touched it, and we have touched it a thousand times each day, we found—not the mark of the customs officer, we could bear that cheerfully!—but the brand of the Pennsylvanian. That was hard! > > We needed cheap methods of transportation. But up to 1883 we had paid ten millions of dollars more than we ought, more than was necessary, for the track then laid within the state; or we were trying to sustain passenger and freight rates that would pay running expenses and interest and profits on that plant. Since that year we have increased our mileage marvelously, at an extra and useless cost of not less than fifteen hundred dollars per mile. And what is true of our internal system is also true of every mile of the hundreds outside of the state which must be traversed in order to reach our leading markets or to return home. > > We needed good agricultural implements, at the lowest possible prices. But one firm alone, in Wisconsin, manufacturing largely for the western trade, paid in a single year more than thirty thousand dollars increased price (tariff tax) on the iron and steel which it used. Of course, western farmers paid it back, and with interest. In the course of time we erected flour and feed and grist mills, engaged in printing and book binding, began to make our own furniture, went from wagon making to building carriages, began to turn our straw into coarse paper, established little sorghum mills at occasional four corners, a few cities were lighted with gas, one stove foundry came into successful operation; we fenced in the prairies with wire; we marked the resting places of the dead with marble. But the tax kept pace with us; and in all these, in raw materials and in machinery and in added cost of transportation, we bore at least a double tax.

Continuing in this strain to show how the the western states have been taxed on the plea of securing better wages for laborers employed in manufacturing industries in the east, Prof. Canfield points out that wages in the protected industries have been really less than in the non-protected industries of Kansas. The protective duties, he says, have made possible “trusts, syndicates and all manner of nefarious combinations,” but the cry of “pauper labor” loses its force when we look eastward and see that even in pauper labor we can at least compete with the world.”

As to the present condition of the western farmer he says:

And in the face of all this the Missouri valley has prospered! In a certain way, yes. I do not think we have created much yet, not as much by a great deal as we should have done under freedom. There has been a vast shifting of population toward the center of the Union. Nearly all these people have brought money with them, and have expended it here. Eastern capital has flooded the state through the loan offices, and in this way most of the permanent improvements have been made. The increased population has caused a rise in land values. By this increase in values—in the great majority of cases, by actual transfer and by voluntary expatriation—land mortgages have been paid. But they still lie like a cloud over the land. Cities have been built; partly a natural growth and partly artificial. But municipal indebtedness has grown faster than the cities. With the trading class, whose taxes on the whole diffuse themselves most readily, there has been advancement. But the great mass of our population is still rural; and shut our eyes to the facts as we may, is in a depressed and deplorable condition. The most powerful and immediate cause, though not the only cause of this, I have endeavored to set forth in these hasty lines.

Not, indeed, the only cause. The system which makes so many of the western farmers tenants at will, paying from one-fourth to one-half of all they produce to landlords living in the great cities or in Europe, and which compels so many others to begin with a mortgage that is never raised, would steadily drain the rural west, even if our ports were open to the trade of the world.

Generally the contributors to this volume favor the retention of the internal revenue system, if for no other purpose than as a means for obtaining revenue in case of failure of the tariff, but they utterly ignore the power of congress to raise revenue by direct taxes levied upon the states. The effort to avoid the most fundamental of all economic relations, that between labor and land, is very striking, especially when the writers touch the question of wages. Carrol C. D. Wright^sic, the head of the bureau of labor statistics, after all his years of gathering figures, confesses utter ignorance. “The discoverer of the causes which regulate the rate of wages,” he says, “has not yet seen fit to give his name to the public.” Professor John B. Clark of Smith college might, if he choose, send his name to the purblind “statistician.” For evidently he has discovered the causes which regulate the rate of wages, though indisposed to clearly state them. He says, “When land can be had for the asking, wages are what a man can get by cultivating it.” He does not say, but it is nevertheless involved in this, that when land cannot be had for the asking, wages are what a man can get by cultivating it, minus what he must pay for the privilege of cultivating it. It is hopeless to expect any more distinct avowal of the fundamental law of wages from the average college professor of political economy than this. For the radical treatment of questions which involve vested interests he cannot look to a class of men dependent upon vested interests.

Belford’s Magazine for July.

The July issue of Belford’s Magazine is fully up to the standard set by the first, and besides a complete novel, “The Wrong Man,” by Gertrude Garrison, contains a large assortment of varied matter. Among other features are the second part of Frank Hurd’s paper on “Tariff Reform;” a strong article showing how protection robs the southern negro, by Henry J. Philpott, and “A Farmer’s View of It,” by “Sol Putnam,” which we reprint in another column. Donn Piatt’s editorials have all the trenchancy which has made him famous. That on Samrandallism we also reprint. That on “Senator Ingalls’s Record” is a scorching review of the career of the Kansas recommender of Swedish razors. That on “Ingersoll on Conkling” may be judged of from the following extract:

Roscoe Conkling was an honest man, if by honesty we mean the clean hands with which he left public life. And yet no man ever lived who covered with his eloquence and concealed behind his high character so much impurity. Too proud to steal himself, he was not too pure to wink at theft in others. He was not only willing his henchmen and allies should steal, but he hastened to shut off all investigation and protect criminals from being made convicts, and convicts from being

p. 8, col. 5 > punished. Of course this eminent man would have scorned to defend a common fence for vulgar stealings; but when the administration itself, in the hands of the highest officials of the best government under the sun, went into the business, the elevation of the criminals lifted crime into respect, and the senatorial robes could be spread unsoiled to cover and conceal the swag of an administration.

By way of balancing all this attack, Colonel Piatt takes up the defense of Sir Charles Dilke, contending that the scandal against him rests on the testimony of a reckless woman who was “shielding the man she loved behind the condemnation of the man she hated.”

The Tariff Question.

A series of letters by Guilford White of Easton, on the working of the tariff, which were published in the Boston Morning Post from 1883 to 1886, have been reprinted by the Easton free trade and revenue reform club in pamphlet form. They contain many telling facts which show the absurdity and injury of protection. From what Mr. White has to say of the plea that protection has built up manufactures in the United States we make the following extract:

There is not a single branch of domestic manufactures which had not been established in some form in this country long before a protective tariff had been, or could have been, imposed. The production of iron was established and in successful operation while we were colonies (see Bancroft’s, McMaster’s and Palfrey’s histories). Palfrey says, “In the year 1638 twenty families came from Yorkshire and began the settlement of Rowley, Mass., and introduced the weaving of woolen and cotton fabrics.” “They were the first people that set up the making of cloth in the western world.” “They built a fulling mill and caused their little ones to be very diligent in spinning cotton; many of them having been clothiers in England.” “After a little time they began the manufacture of linen.” “The wants of the new community afforded ample employment to the trades of the brick maker, the mason, the carpenter, the tanner, the currier, the cordwainer, the sawyer, the smith and the miller.” “In 1699 the manufacture of woolens had become so successful in the colonies that the woolen manufacturers of England, who claimed a monopoly of American markets, induced parliament to forbid the colonists carrying such manufactures from one province to another, and also forbade them to improve the breed of their sheep.” “Hat making had also become so successful, in consequence of the cheap supply of furs, that the London company of hatters remonstrated, and their craft was protected by an act forbidding hats to be transported from one province to another.” “In spite of these measures Boston hatters made hats equal to the English, and the London felt makers, in 1731, begged that the colonists should not be allowed to wear any hats but those from British shops.” By a reference to Bancroft we further learn, “As early as 1648 Governor Winthrop and others established an iron furnace at Lynn, Mass., and, as early as 1654, fire engines, dies for silver pieces, scythes, pots, mortars, stoves and skillets were manufactured.” In 1652 an enterprise was located in the town of Raynham, near Taunton, Mass. At these works bar iron was made directly from the ore. In 1851 the forge was in full tide of successful operation in the manufacture of anchors, having been in constant use under all sorts of restrictions, high tariff and low tariff, for two hundred years, and continued until about 1865, when Mr. Carey’s ideas and the Pennsylvania philosophy gained the control of our legislation. By reason of our high protective tariff at that time we drove away our carrying trade to foreigners and had no need of anchors. I don’t know of an anchor forge running in New England. Poor old forge, that stood the blasts of two centuries, but could not stand the blast of our war taxes! Protection had absolutely killed it, as also the anchor forge in the town of Pembroke, and the one in the town of Kingston, and nearly all the iron works in the old colony.

In McMaster’s it further reads, “In the year 1788 (three years before we had any tariff), Massachusetts made such quantities of linen that the price had gone down, from New York to Georgia; there were 10,000 cotton and woolen cards at work; in one factory there were 100 tons of nails, and in the town of Lynn 150,000 pairs of stuffed and silk shoes; and how, with a population of 4,500, Ipswich had produced in a year 52,000 yards of silk lace and edgings.” It appears by the first census that Pennsylvania was in advance of all the other colonies in the manufacture of iron.

A New Magazine.

Current Literature begins its life with the issue for July. It is a large quarto volume of ninety-six pages, printed on excellent paper in clear readable type. It proposes, as its name indicates, to furnish each month a consensus of current literature—to tell its readers what the magazines and newspapers of the world are saying—to pick out the gems for them, and save them the trouble of searching them out for themselves. If the new magazine maintains the standard of its first number it will deserve success.

Cranston & Stowe of Cincinnati announce the first number of a beautifully illustrated guide book, “The Picturesque Ohio,” edited by Mrs. C. M. Clark. The first part will be a historical monograph of the river; the second will be devoted to the cities and towns, and the third to the railroads.

[Advertisement] The Mansion House

THE MANSION HOUSE.

SARATOGA SPRINGS, N. Y.

Will be open for guests the first of June.

This house is situated a mile east of the Town hall, Saratoga Springs, and three minutes’ walk from Excelsior spring and park.

It has wide piazzas and a fine shady lawn, with tennis and croquet grounds, and combines the advantages of Saratoga with the greater coolness and purer air of the country. The fine old woods of the park extend from the spring to the village, and the drives and walks through them are always shady and inviting.

The drainage is perfect and the house is supplied with pure spring water.

The office is supplied with a telephone, and a conveyance will make trips to and from the village at stated times. Accommodations for private carriages.

HANNAH T. PAUL,

1317 Filbert Street, Philadelphia.

[Advertisement] Piso’s Cure for Consumption

[Advertisement cut: decorative white-on-black border lettering; top band [PISO’S CURE FOR?] (badly smudged), bottom band CONSUMPTION.]

CURES WHERE ALL ELSE FAILS.

Best Cough Syrup. Tastes good. Use in time. Sold by druggists.

[Advertisement] James Bogan

JAMES BOGAN, PRINCIPAL AGENT for James Means’ $3 and $4 shoes. 226 BOWERY, near Prince street.

[Advertisement] Concord Co-operative Printing Company

PRINTING.

CONCORD CO-OPERATIVE PRINTING COMPANY (Ld.)

104 Elm street, cor. Canal, N. Y.

BOOK, JOB AND NEWSPAPER PRINTING.

p. 8, col. 6

[Advertisement] Unity Congregation

UNITY CONGREGATION. — MASONIC TEMPLE, Sixth avenue and Twenty-third street.

HUGH O. PENTOCOST^sic,

MINISTER.

SERVICES:

Sunday Morning, 11 o’clock.

Sermons published weekly in the Twentieth Century. 3c. a number. $1.00 a year. “What I Believe.” By Hugh O. Pentecost. 300 pages. Elegantly printed. Large type. Wide margin. Price 25c. Address, 56 Oriental st., Newark, N. J.

[Advertisement] George Wilson, Merchant Tailor

“THE APPAREL OFT PROCLAIMS THE MAN.”—Shakespeare.

Spoken three hundred years ago, is no less a fact to-day!

GEORGE WILSON,

MERCHANT TAILOR,

Formerly with Henry Poole, London,

Importer of Leading Novelties,

ENGLISH AND FRENCH CASSIMERES,

[266?] East Fourteenth street, New York.

P. S.—Send postal card and you will be waited on with samples at office or residence.

[Advertisement] R. Crowe, Tailor

R. CROWE, TAILOR, 11 ANN STREET (Third Floor), New York. General Repairing, Altering, Cleaning and Scouring Done. Communication by Postal Card promptly attended to.

MISCELLANEOUS.

[Advertisement] The Keystone Watch Club Co. 

[Advertisement cut: ornamental border with ribbons bearing tiny lettering (city names, [illegible]); at upper right a watch-case seal showing a keystone, lettered KEYSTONE WATCH CLUB CO. and [NEW YORK PHILA?], with the surrounding legend PHILA. OFFICE 904 WALNUT STREET.]

THE BEST WAY

To get a First-Class Watch is in our Co-Operative Clubs.

Fine Watches at the Lowest Cash Prices, ONLY

$1.00 A WEEK.

Thousands of the best $38.00 Gold Watch ever made are selling in our Co-Operative Clubs. This is the Best, Cheapest. Most Convenient, and only co-operative System of selling watches. The watches are American Lever Stem Winders, containing every essential to accuracy and durability, and have in addition, numerous other improvements found in no other watch. They are absolutely the only Dust and Damp-proof Movements made in the World, and are jeweled with genuine Rubies. The Patent Stem Wind and Set is the strongest and simplest made. They are fully equal for appearance, accuracy durability and service to any $75 Watch. Our co-operative Club System brings them within the reach of every one.

The Keystone Watch Club Co

904 Walnut St. PHILADELPHIA, PA.

$10 OUR 14-Karat Gold Filled CHAIN is guaranteed to wear 20 Years, and is [33 1/3?] 14-Karat Solid Gold

*Look for the stamps —K. W. C. Co. 14 K. FLD.— and buy the BEST.

AGENTS WANTED.

We refer to any Commercial Agency.

For Sale by

[Advertisement] Canned Goods (Organized Labor)

[Advertisement cut: circular trade-mark stamp lettered HAND MADE and M. M. P. A. around a central device.]

Trade-Mark.—Registered.

Canned Goods

WITH THIS STAMP IN THE BOTTOM OF CANS ARE

Free from Poison,

AND ARE MADE BY

ORGANIZED LABOR.

[Advertisement] The Great American Tea Co.

[Advertisement cut: a tea canister with smudged lettering, [GREAT AMERICAN?] and the initials [G. A.?] [illegible].]

GOOD NEWS TO LADIES.

Greatest offer. Now’s your time to get orders for our celebrated Teas, Coffees and Baking Powder, and secure a beautiful Gold Band or Moss Rose China Tea Set, Dinner Set, Gold Band Moss Rose Toilet Set, Watch, Brass Lamp, Castor, or Webster’s Dictionary. For particulars address

THE GREAT AMERICAN TEA CO.,

P. O. Box [289?]. [31 and 33?] Vesey St., New York.

[Advertisement] Charles B. Schaidner, Photographer

CHARLES B. SCHAIDNER,

PHOTOGRAPHER.

2280 Third avenue, cor. 124th street, New York.

Children’s Photographs by instantaneous process a specialty

[Advertisement] Holland’s Coffee and Dining Rooms

HOLLAND’S COFFEE AND DINING ROOMS,

[123?] Fourth avenue, Bet. [13th?] and 14th sts.

[Advertisement] Mrs. Agatha Munier Atkins

MRS. AGATHA MUNIER ATKINS WILL continue to receive pupils in solo singing and vocal sight reading at her residence. [223?] E. 32d street, New York.

[Advertisement] Coogan Bros.

[Advertisement cut: engraving of a five-storey store front with pedestrians and a horse-drawn wagon in the street. Lettering on the building: COOGAN BROTHERS; WHOLESALE [AND RETAIL?] FURNITURE CARPETS [&c.?]; two further signboard bands [illegible]; on the shop-front fascia “125 COOGAN BRO’S 121”.]

COOGAN BROS.,

CARPET AND FURNITURE DEALERS,

COR. BOWERY AND GRAND STS.

SINGLE TAX CLUB MEETINGS.

[Notice] To the Single Tax Men of West Virginia

TO THE SINGLE TAX MEN OF WEST VIRGINIA: Will the single tax men in West Virginia please send their addresses to me at this point. Send the names of all the George men you know of in your neighborhood and be particular to give post office address. A state organization is proposed and any suggestions or information will be carefully considered. W. [I.?] BOREMAN, Parkersburg, Wood county, West Virginia.

[Notice] Kansas State Lecturer

KANSAS STATE LECTURER.—THE undersigned state lecturer and member of the state central committee is now ready to respond to calls for work anywhere in the state of Kansas. Address Rev. W. M. GOODNER, box 353, Larned, Kan.

[Notice] Cleveland Land and Labor Club

REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CLEVELAND land and labor club are held on Monday evenings at [8?] o’clock, room 6, No. 56 Public square. Everyone is cordially invited to attend our meetings.

[Advertisement] Briggs’ Pianos

[Advertisement cut: engraving of an upright piano wreathed with foliage at left, with a ribbon/banner reading “SEND FOR CATALOGUE”; display lettering at right.]

BRIGGS’ PIANOS

C. C. BRIGGS & CO.

5 APPLETON ST. BOSTON MASS.

MANUFACTURERS OF

GRAND · SQUARE · & · UPRIGHT

PIANO FORTES

GRACEFUL DESIGNS · · SOLID CONSTRUCTION

MATCHLESS TONE · · BEAUTIFUL FINISH.