New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-10-19
MRS. ROSE ON THE TARIFF AND THE
CONDITION OF WOMEN.

MRS. ROSE ON THE TARiFF AMI IN"
CONDITION OF WOMEN.
Mrs. f. l.. RosE has favored us with five pa
ges in continuation of the discussion com
menced BY her criticism in The Post on late
article in The Tribsne, arguing that thor
ouChly Protective Tariff would greatly improve
the condition Of the Women of this country IN
respect to Work and Wages. We do not make
room for her letter at this hurrying time, be-
cause good part of it is made up of citations
from our first article, intended 20 prove that
The Tribune commended Protective Tariff as
the only reform required to vsnquish all the
evils and redress all the wrongs TO which Wo-
man is now exposed. We certainly did not
mean that. and if our language will bear the
construction that Mrs. RosE puts upon It, we
ask the privilege of qualifying it by the known
and Olt-expressed convictions propounaed
tbrougb these columns We do not lind It
practicable TO put all we know or think into any
one article. and whosOeyer shall hereafter IAN
CIV he sees, in any article embodying our ardent
convictions on the subject of Protection an
implication that nothing else than Protective
Tariff is required to secure Social Sluiennl-
um. is entreated 10 understand that we mold no
such opinion, whatever the necessity oil ore'i-
~ in our daily lucubrations may enable MN 10
deduce from any one article. Instead then'
of printing Mrs Ross criticism, we ask every
reader who takes any interest in the matter 10
turn back to our article of the 18th inst, and
see exactly what we did say, and, in the light OF
the explanation here given, see whether IL will
bear the construction she puts upon 1t.
Mrs. ROSE insists that Woman needs legal and
social equality with Man, to which we makeno
objection We have done our best to secure at
tention to the demands and arguments urged
in her behalf But we insist that this does not
at all affect our argument to which Mrs. ROSE
took exception; and as she still insists that
Protection has done nothing and can do moth
inc for our WOmen.we will restate our position,
as follows:
Ii is agreed betweenus that Woman sphere
is more restricted than it shOuld be-that she
ought to have a wider range of employment ana
be better paid for her work. If the aggregate
of employments open to Woman were doubled
her average compensation could not tall
TO be enhanced Now we are buying
from abroad some Fifty Millions worth
of Silks Laces, Cotton, Linen and Wooden
Fabrics. Artificial Flowers, &c, &c,
which are mainly the product OF ie-
male Labor, and paying for them with the
rude, bulky staples of Agriculture, manly
produced by Mems labor. In other words, we
are hiring Two Millions of Women to work for
us in Europe and paying them with the pro-
duets of Mems labor in this country. Ii this
policy does not restrict the range OF employ
ment for Women in America thereby seriously
diminishing her average compensation, then we
cannot reason. And We have no more doubt
than of our own existence, that Protective
Tariff which would transfer to our own shores
the production of the Silks, COttOns, Linens,
Laces &c which we are now buying OF Europe
would increase the annual earnings of the Wo-
men Of our Country from twenty-five to nifty
per cent. This is what our former article ell
dcayored TO show We regret that is has not
convinced Mrs. RosE, but We are confident that
the Obvious, palpable sOundness OF positions
Las commended them to the appreciation of
The great mass of our readers.