The Newberry herald. [volume] (Newberry, S.C.) 1865-1884, 1883-02-22
The troublesome Tie.

Maekey to make the duty on cotton
ties 80 per cent. ad valorem instead
of / 4-10 cents per pound as pro-
posed in the bill.
Mr.. Aiken spoke, stating that he
had learned among many other
things that the whole country de-
mands revision Of the tariff; that
this revision must protect labor, or
the manufacturers pocket will suf-
fer; that this revision must protect
the manufacturers pocket or labor
will undoubtedly suffer; that 80 per
cent. of the value of tue manufac-
tured article is labor; that 80 per
cent. of the value Of the manufac-
tured article goes to the employer,
while 10 per cent. goes to labor;
that majority of the Republicans
on this floor, while clamoring for
protection to labor, legislates the
profits of labor into somebody else's
pockets; and that if Republican
statistics are to be credited there
are more men protected by the
tariff than there are laborers in the
United States.
Mr.. Aiken refuted the statement
that the planters Of the South sell
their cotton ties, for which they
pay four cents, as so much cotton.
He showed that the price Of cotton
was fixed in Liverpool. He also
showed that when the system of
deducting a fixed percentage for
tare in Liverpool was adopted the
cotton crop was wrapped in East
India bagging, weighing full two
and a quarter pounds per yard.
To-day it is baled in New England
bagging that weighs less than one
and half pounds per yard, and
which is sold to the cotton-planter
in rolls of fifty and one hundred
yards each, every roll of which
when measured at the gin-house
falls short from one to three yards.
And the ties, too, are invoiced at
forty bundles to the English ton,
and he doubted if any planter ever
found ffty-six pounds in bundle.
He never found one to weigh over
fifty-fve pounds, and he had weigh
eti hundreds. And yet, the tare is
the same as when the East India
bagging was used. See how the
cotton planter is feeeed.
Mr.. Aiken went into the history
of the cotton tie, and said that it
could not be claimed that the man.
ufacturers of cotton ties had been
driven out by "the pauper labor of
England In 1880 there were six
cotton tie manufactures in the
United States. The profit upon
their investment of $70,500 amount
ed to $54,0S4. or, after deducting the
cost of salaries, insurance, &C., an
annual income Of over ID per cent.
The cotton tie manufacturers SIM
ply shifted their labor from cotton
ties to hoop iron, which under a
prohibitofy duty paid better.
Tie Southern cotton planter had
struggled on from year to year
trying to solve the problem of grow
ing cotton with free labor, without
appealing to the government for aid
or Lounties, battling against Gov
ernment taxation, disorganized
labor, English protection to East
India cotton, and thousand Of
obstacles only known to himself,
until to-day he produces the con-
trolling cotton crop of the world.
lis example Mr.. Aiken COM
mended to the manufacturers of
the United States. The wages in
many portions Of his State, and in
all tie Cotton States to q certain
degree, are onc-half the gross pro-
ducts of their annual toll. If he
understood the multiplication ia
BILE, every bale of cotton offered for
sale by a farmer since the 1st day
of January, 1888, contained 10 per
cent. OF labor, for he felt warranted
in saying it cost him 10 per cent.
more to make it than he received
for it in market. Therefore, in
stead of taxing this labor more
heavily he would relieve it By leg
Of some Of its multifarious
expressions, and he knew of3no
point at which to begin better than
by placing cotton ties on'tfe free
list.
The amendmsns~of Mr.. Mackey
was defeated~6y a vote of l0I nays
to 81 yeas