Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-11-28
LABOR AND TIE TARIFF.

the decline IN prices, to disproportloned
"wages, and to the probability that the
"tariff on steel rails will be reduced from
1928 a ton, as at present, to Sl4 ton. J"
The decline in prices has been brought
about by two causes, namely, overproduc-
ton and excessive greed. As to the alleged
disproportioned wages, good deal of ex.
PLANTATION seems required. The implication
of course is that wages are too high.
Against that theory, however, must be
set the admission of A. S. Hewitt, be.
fore the Tariff Commission, that the COM
pany in which he is interested made last
year a profit of 70 per cent. Now we
have here a curious middle, though it is
what always happens when the effects of
Protection are brought under analysis. Il
is alleged by the protected iron men that
though they made 70 per cent. profit last
year, they will be compelled to close their
works because wages are "dispropor.
I" toned" and because reduction of the
duty on steel rails is apprehended. What
do these men mean when they speak of ''dis-
proportional wages? II they mean that
the wages they have been paying are dis.
proportioued to the profits they have been
making, no doubt the statement is correct.
But they cannot mean this, because they
are trying to make it appear that re-
duction of the tariff would ruin them.
Through the operation of the tariff the
price of steel rails in this country until
very recently was 40 per cent. higher than
the price of steel rails in England. That
is the impost levied upon the railroads,
and through them upon the public, for the
alleged protection" of the American rail
makers. But a staple argument for Pro-
lection always has been that it makes
wages higher. How is it, then, that these
iron men talk about the "disproportioned'
rate OF wages, as source of injury to
them? According to them 40 per cent
of Protection, and 70 per cent. of profit on
their capital, has not sufficed to bolster
them up. After all they are still in i'm.
minent danger of pauperism, aud unless
they are allowed by Congress to keep on
sucking the blood of the country they " i'll
not be able to pay any wages at all.
At this moment 10000 operatives are
about to be or already are thrown out of
employment at the beginning of winter,
not because their employers cannot afford
to pay them current wages, for that ia a
palpable misrepresentation, but because
their employers think to compel Congress
to let the tariff on steel rails alone, by
Stimulating distress and poverty. The
truth is that the tariff does not make or
keep wages high, and the proof of this is
not fer to seek. The number of persons
engaged in coal and iron mining, iron and
steel Manufactures, in silk, cotton aud
wooden manufactures, in 1850, according to
the census, was in round numbers $50, geo,
OF whom two-thirds were men, and one.
third women aud children. The total pop
ulation of the country in that year was
80, l55, 7S3, SO that the persons engaged in
protected industries amounted to no more
than one and one-half per cent of tie
total population. The amount of wages
received by these $50, 900 persons in the
census year gave each one little over
$500, or at the rate of 81 per day for 300
days. Now this rate of wages, as pointed out
IN paper presented to the Tariff Commits
sion, is "less than that of foreign lsborers
who are employed in work which cannot
I" be subjected to foreign competition less
" than the wages of those to whom coal,
iron, and steel and cloth are raw mate.
=" rails; less than the earnings of persons
who may be numbered by millions in
. stead of by hundreds of thousands,
"whose commerce with the world is OBJ
80 structed under the mistaken pretense
that foreign competition may subject
them to lower rate of wages"
The fact is that Protection does not raise
wages, or keep them high. The protected
industries are continually trying to reduce
wages, and they do not pay higher wages,
or as high, as many unprotected industries.
The advantage of Protection to the work.
ingman is all moonshine, but the disad-
vantages weigh him down at every step.
1t does not secure him higher wagee, but
it does make living costlier to him it does
diminish the purchasing power of his
wages; it does expose him to be turned
out of his employment at the beginning of
winter, by men who, while making 70 per
cent. profit on their invested capital are
yet too poor to run their works unless the
whole country is taxed to contribute to
their enormous gains. Professor Sum.
ner punctured the Protectionist wages
fallaey very completely, in his paper read
before the Tariff Commission. He said:
1.-THE interests of the man who pays wages
" and those of the men who receive wages
:" are antagonistic. The one wants wages
Glow and the Other wants wages high. The
=" Protectionist legislator pretends to step
Gin between them and satisfy both at
"once. am going to make your wages
"' high, says he to the wage receiver.
"f What, then will become of me p says
the wage payer. L will make wages
"' low for you, he replies. How is that
cry the laborers and all their friends,
you are going to make wages low? 2 No.
" replies the legislator, Il mean that I
will make the price of the products
' high, which will have the same effect
"' for the employers But how is that p
4" cry the consumers, you mean to make
''prices high by law No. replies the
Legislator, / do not really make prices
' high; it only looks SO. My measures
4" really make prices low" And the
Professor goes on to say that certainly
"the problem of universal happiness is
:" solved if we have found out how those
who buy need pay little, and those who
"sell may at the same time receive much
how prices may be raised Tor the pro.
"ducer and lowered for the consumer a.
"the same time"