Democratic Northwest. [volume] (Napoleon, Ohio) 1869-1894, 1881-04-07

PAPER, for example The duty on that
commodity &C is 20 per cent al ualoreH.
Most Of the articles which enter into
i S manufacture or are required in the
process Of making II are increased in
price by protection. The result is that
the price Of paper to the consumer is
increased nearly Is per cent; that is, if
the tariff were taken of paper and the
articles used in its manufacture, paper
would be Is per cent. cheaper to the
buyer. The paper mills Cor five years
have produced nearly one hundred mil.
lions of dollars worth of paper year.
The consumers have been compelled to
pay fifteen millions year TO the man
ufacturer more than the paper could
have been bought for without tariff.
In five years this has amounted to $751;
900, 900, an immense sum paid to pro-
lection. rs q tax upon books and
newspapers; it is tax upon intelll-
gence; it is premium upon ignorance.
So heavy had the burden of this tax
become that every newspaper man in
the district have the honor to repre-
sent have appealed to Congress to take
the duty off. The Government has de-
rived little revenue from the paper du-
tv. 1t has gone almost entirely to the
manu- acturer, who himself has not
been benefited as anticipated, as will
presently be seen. These burdens have
been imposed to protect the paper
manufacturer against the foreigner, in
lace of the confident prediction made
by one of the most experienced paper
men in the country, that if all protec-
ton were taken off paper and the ma
terial used in its manufacture the man
ufacturer would be able to successfully
compete with the foreigner in nearly
every desirable market in the world.
Take blankets also for example. The
tariff on coarse blankets is nearly 100
pr cent ad val0rem. They can b
nought IN most of the markets of the
world for 81 pair Yet our poor.
who use the most of that grade of
blankets, are compelled to pay about
81 a pair The Government derives
little revenue from it, as the importa-
ton of these blankets for years has
been triAing. This tax has been a
heavy burden upon the poor during
this severe winter, tax running into
the millions to support protection.
Heaven save country from a system
which begrudges to the shivering poor
the blankets to make them comfortable
in the winter and the cold
A SECOND OBJECTION.
Protection has diminished the in
come Of the laborer from his wages.
The first factor in the ascertainment
of the value of wages is their pur
chasing power, or how much can be
bought with them. If in one country
the wages are S. day and in another
only 81, if the laborer can in the one
country with the 81 purchase more of
the necessary articles required in daily
consumption. he in fact is better paid
than the former in the other who gets
S. a day. Admit for moment that
protection raises the wages of the Ia
borer. if it also raises the price of
nearly all the necssaries of life, and
what he makes in wages he more than
loses in the increase of prices of what
he he is obliged to buy As already
stated, head Of family who earns
$500 per year is compelled to pay
SlO0 more for what he needs, on ac-
count of protection. What difference
to him is it whether the one $l0O are
taken out of his wages before they are
paid, or taken from him afterward
in the increased price of articles he can
rot get along without? In both cases
be really only receives $500 for his
years labor. The statistics show that
the average increased cost of twelve
articles most required in daily con,
sumption in 1874 over 1860 was 81
per cent, while the average increase of
the wages of eight artisans, including
cabinet makers, coopers, carpenters,
painters, shoemakers tailors, tanners
and tinsmiths was only 60 per cent,
demonstrating that the purchasing
power of labor had under protection IN
thirteen years deprecated l94 per
cent. But protection has not even
raised the nominal wages in most OF
the unprotected industries. l find that
the wages of the farm hand, the day
laborer, and the ordinary artisan are
in most places now no higher thar
they were in 1860. But it is conf
dently asserted that the wages ofla-
borers in the protected industries are
higher because of protection. Admit
it. have not the figures for 1880
but in 1870 there were not 100000 OF
them; but of the laborers in other in
dustries there were $4,000, 900, ex-
elusive of those in agriculture, who
were 100000 more. Why should
the wage of the half million be increas
ed beyond their natural rate while
those of the others remain unchanged
N, XNL,, cboulI tho marac OF tine