To one who has watched with sad interest the gradual decline of the cotton-factory industry in New England, and has marked the deterioration of its operatives, it has often seemed as if something might be done to restore this great factor in our national prosperity to its early influence and importance. Many schemes have been advanced by political economists, but, thus far, they have borne no fruit, and at this present writing, the Massachusetts Legislature itself has placed the whole subject in the hands of the Committee on Labor, who are to report on the several items submitted to its decision. While I would not venture here to discuss the various points on which this committee is to report, I cannot forbear calling attention to the first section, which relates to the “Dingley Tariff.” This section enquires, substantially, whether the Dingley tariff has had any influence in producing the present stagnation of the New England cotton industry. As a help to the solution of this question, or a suggestion at least, I will venture to quote from an article in the report of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor, on “The Age of Factory Establishments,” where it is stated that “Quite one-half of the whole product of the State is made by manufactories which were in existence before 1860, and most of these establishments were founded in the industrial period following the beginning of the reduction of the tariff of 1828; and it can be said, with truth, that the great manufacturing industry of Massachusetts was planted in low-tariff times.” If this statement is correct, of which there can be no doubt, it has a significance worthy of attention, when we see the downward movement of the cotton industry under the present high-tariff. It was these “low-tariff times” that enabled working-people to buy goods that would last, which they cannot do in these days of “home production” shoddy, protected, as it is, by the Dingley tariff. And, without entering into the discussion, it would seem that a low tariff is certainly desirable for working-people, at least, since it enables them to get the best there is for their money, whether it be of foreign or domestic manufacture. An able writer has said: “The great trouble with the New England mills now is, that the people want a better class of goods which can compete with other textile products.” This is certainly true, as applied to the buyer. A person of limited means can better afford to buy goods of foreign manufacture, no matter how high the tariff is. For woollens we look to England; for silks, to Lyons or Zurich; and lighter material must be of French manufacture. And the dealer says to you, as the best recommendation for the goods you wish to purchase, “It is _English_, or it is _French_ goods, that I am showing you.”