nals, from Republican papers like the "Commercial Bulletin" and the "Daily Advertiser," from wellknown and responsible firms, that already on six hundred articles where duties have been raised, prices have been raised also; and these articles, almost without exception, are the common necessaries of life. We are quite willing that this question of prices should be submitted, as it must have been already, to the test of every man's experience in making his purchases.

We have also shown that these high and increased duties are many of them a grievous burden to the industries of Massachusetts, and against them those industries have protested. We have shown that against the increased duty upon lime and tin plate and other articles there came the formal protest of some of our industries; that when under this bill it was threatened to put back the tax on hides, from every leather and boot and shoe centre in Massachusetts there came an indignant protest because such tax would be a grievous injury to those industries. And yet, notwithstanding their protest, that tax still hangs over that industry, and may be imposed on Jan. 1, 1892, unless some unforeseen relief appears.

We have shown, as facts admitted now by our opponents upon the stump, that our iron and steel industry has declined, that our glass industry has declined, that our ship-building has declined, that our foreign shipping has declined, that our copper-smelting industry has gone, and that other industries have been injured by this taxation of raw material.

We have also shown that since the high-tariff policy our great industries, whose principal raw material has been free from duty, have grown much more than our industries whose raw material is taxed; that our silk, our paper, our cotton, our leather and boot and shoe

industries, largely free from this burden of taxation, show a larger growth than our woollen industry, which is hampered and embarrassed by such taxation.

In the light of these facts it is evident that some of our great industries have declined by this tariff taxation, that some have been stagnant, that some have greatly prospered, and that the line of cleavage seeins to be free raw material. We have, therefore, a right to say that those sons of Massachusetts who gave their voices and their votes to put this burden of the McKinley Bill upon our people and our industries were false to the interests both of our people and the industries of our Commonwealth; that they permitted other sections of the country to reap benefits by such taxation at the expense of Massachusetts and New England.

We have further shown that though such taxation is claimed by the Republicans to be for the benefit of labor, yet in no protected industry has any one pointed out any benefit that has come to labor in that industry, or any rise in wages since the passage of the McKinley Bill; but, on the contrary, we have proved that upon the working-man, as upon all our people, has come the additional burden of higher taxation.

A few words only about the boot and shoe industry, which is so important in this part of our State. That is the greatest industry in Massachusetts, measured by the number of persons employed in it. An injury to that branch of manufacture would affect more people than any other in our State. The product of that industry in 1885 was $115,000,000. The value of

the stock used was over $70,000,000. Much of that stock is leather, the raw material of which, hides, is free from these tariff taxes; but a large proportion of it is made up of articles upon which there is tariff taxation. I have here a list, that has already been

published, of forty of these articles which go into the manufacture of boots and shoes, upon all of which the McKinley Bill raised the tariff, and upon twenty-seven of which the price has since been raised.

Do you think that that higher price is any benefit to your boot and shoe industry? Does it not make the cost of its product greater, and with a higher cost will there not be less demand? Will not this less demand mean that fewer goods will be made, and so a less demand for labor, which can only result either in a shut down of work or a cut down of wages?

Is it not true that when its principal raw material, hides, was threatened directly with a tariff tax, there came a unanimous protest from all the boot and shoe manufacturers in the country against that tax as a burden to their industry? And yet, by the terms of the McKinley Bill, the President is compelled, on Jan. 1, 1892, to declare a duty of 11 cent per pound on hides, unless by that time reciprocal relations are established with the countries from which hides come. From such countries, where no reciprocity treaty has yet been made, we imported last year $24,000,000 worth of hides and skins. The fact that with some smaller countries reciprocity treaties have been made, compels the President in good faith to them, as well as by peremptory provision of the law, to enforce these taxes against the other countries, so that it seems inevitable that on Jan. 1, 1892, the tax on hides will be put back.

There is one thing that will prevent the imposition of this tax, another sweeping Democratic victory for tariff reform. That will quickly lead Congress to relieve the boot and shoe industry from this injury which now hangs threateningly over its head. I do not see how any manufacturer of boots and shoes, I do not see how any employee in that industry, who is vitally inter

ested, as all must be, in its growth and prosperity, can hesitate to cast his vote for the Democratic party and tariff reform, which means relieving his industry from present taxation, and also preventing this grievous and threatened tax on hides from being again established.

The leather and boot and shoe industries certainly cannot have forgotten the great impetus and growth that came to them when in 1872 the tax upon hides was removed, nor can they have forgotten the fact that every year since then we have been exporting millions of dollars worth of finished leather and boots and shoes made here by our workmen, and sold in foreign markets in competition with the labor of the world.

SPEECH

AT DEDHAM, OCT. 9, 1892. STATE ISSUES: THE MEAN

ING OF TARIFF FOR REVENUE.
TARIFF UPON PRICES.

THE EFFECT OF

I am glad to come
Here is a sturdy

THANK you for your welcome. here to open the campaign. Democracy, which year in and year out has seen the light and followed it.

Here through this whole community, too, is a body of independent men, who, seeking only the truth and good government, have broken from their old party associations to follow where their conscience and convictions led them. We welcome them to our ranks, and recognize in their support an unselfish and unprejudiced indorsement of the principles, the policy, the truth, and the justice of our party's cause.

I am glad to be here with the distinguished representative from this district [Mr. Williams]. His conspicuous ability, undaunted courage, loyalty to Massachusetts, her interests and her beliefs, have made him render her that faithful service which a grateful State is glad to recognize and indorse.

Our numbers and enthusiasm are proof that there is no apathy within the Democratic ranks, but confidently, with a firm belief in the justice of its cause, our party means to renew the fight and repeat the victory of 1890. It believes that victory was the deliberate, emphatic judgment of Massachusetts, that the time has come when war taxation on the consumption of the people should be reduced; that special selfish interests should