Morning journal and courier., 1883-02-16

often pressed upon the public attention il
 may be well to consider it. Workingmen ir this country can purchase beef, pork, nut
 ton, cheese, flour, corn meal, fruits and veg.
 etables, and some other things, cheaper than
 these articles can be purchased in England. There many laborers do not purchase meats oftener than once week or month, on &C.,
 count of their low wa es and the high price of provisions and they do not have. the | fruits and vegetables which conduce to
 health, which the workingmen of the Uni
 ted States enjoy. As to clothing, the Eng
 in Lsn ianorer has the advantage of the Amer 1 lcan, but neither of them expend large | sum of money in clothing and if the American workingman would live as the European does, the cost of his living would not be greatly in excess of that of his transatlantic neighbors. But the American laborer lives better than the European-he wastes more in provisions than the Euro pean laborer eats. If he would live on oat meal, potatoes and brown bread, (no meat, few vegetables, no fruit,) the cost of his
 living would be not much in excess of the European. The European laborer is obliged
 to live on cheap food and be content with cheap clothing. In Holland the women earn
 fifteen cents day, the men forty cents. In
 Italy thousands work for fifteen cents day
 and few get over thirty five cents. In Eng
 land the workingman in a machine shop or
 ship yard gets perhaps eighty cents a day.
 In the On1teQ OEaG6S 3z or SZ. 5U. The la-
 borer ln the United States wears better cloth
 ing, but if he would be content with the
 clothing of the English or the Hollander, he
 would not save ten dollars year on account
 of the tariff duties on cloths and clothing.
 Good ready made suits are sold in this coun- try for SIS; fair and comfortable ones for SIP. Rents are rather higher here but look at the comfortable rents of the American
 workingman compared with those of the English, Dutch or Italian they are better and more comfortable. An American laborer with one room for his entire family, blouse and five cent calico for his family, and soup and oatmeal only for food, could live just about as cheap as the English laborer. But he gets better wages here, and has better food clothing and shelter. Let us not reduce him to the European standard. The day laborer here earns from $500 to $400 year. The mechanic and skilled laborer earns from $500 to $75O 8 year. The European day laborer $40 year-the skilled laborer $35O. The American laborer can live better-have better food, better clothing and more comforts, and put $50 or aS100 every year in the savings bank, and finally buy for himself a cheap but comfortable home. The Euro pean laborer can do nothing like this. The European laborers understand this, and they come over by hundreds of thousands. All come who can get money enough to pay for l 8 steerage passage. They come because l their friends who are here write to them and l tell them how much better they can live here | than there much better the opportuni | ty is here for promotion, for getting some | money ahead and for securing home.
 It is not true-nor does it begin to be true | that tho cheaper living of the European | laborer compensates him for the poorer | wages he gets there, in comparison with the higher wages of the laborers in the United | States It is not true that the United States can as yet abandon it's policy of protection, lessen the wages of laborers, and secure for them a cheaper living which will compensate them for the reduction of their wages Nor is 1t true that this country would become more prosperous by the reduction of labor ers' wages and 8 reduction of the cost of l living It would not be so prosperous on low wages as it is now, for good wages to la borers have an influence upon almost every kind of business There are eight or ten millions of laborers, of all classes, in the United States. It would make vast differ if the average of their wages should be re- duced from $1 50 to 75 cents day.
 As to the farmers, there can be no doubt as to what their best interest is. They could not afford to have the naanufactories crip- pied, and one or two millions of employees turned into the fields to compete with them. Better that they should be employed by pros- porous manufacturers, and consume the far mers' products, at good prices. large per centage of the farmers of the country-an of them in New England-are dependent upon the manufacturing villages around them for markets and good prices for their products.
 But we hear some persons talk of the principle" Shouldn't we act upon princi- pie? It is sound principle that an individual shall take good care of himself. It is true principle that 8 nation shall defend and pro- sect it's own interests. Governments are es- abolished for the purpose of protecting per sons and property. Base is the government hat will not defend it's soil and protect the ! interests of it's people. But isn't the princi- pie sound that permits people to sell in the best markets, and to buy where they can buy cheapest? Let us see about that It is only hundred years since the United States | government got upon it's legs and was fairly able to go alone. We are competing with | governments over 2,0O0 years of age and who have been in the field for and who have, under monarchical forms of government and immense standing | armies, crushed labor to bare subsistence- to cheap living and almost to rags. We are to move onward and upward. We are entering upon career of great prosperi- ty. Let us suppose case. If Russia could | send to our shores millions of bushels of ! wheat at ten cents bushel, and all the four we could consume at one dollar a barrel, ! would we permit her to do it :? Why not :? | Why, please tell us not permit our people to ouy flour at a dollar a barrel /? Because it would crush the agricultural interest of the West. It would end the vast development of riches in that region. It would bring to 0eggary prosperous community and at once 1 reduce wages to starvation point. Starva | ton, when they could buy flour at dollar a barrel! Yes, because they couldn't earn the dollar. The floods would not be more de. structive over the land that they cover. It would not be permitted. Now our young ! interest is growing in every State and beginning to prosper. One of these days it will be independent It is an important interest, employing two millions ! of people. European manufacturers cG71 ' compete with and destroy some of it's branch ! es, if we permit them to come in on equal terms, with no taxation upon their goods | Shall we permit them to do it t?-and, in per- hitting them to turn adrift whole communi- \ ties of our laborers and submit to & great ' in the price of labor-for what ! To permit the editors of the New York World and the Hartford Times to buy their | pantaloons and ulsters at 8 cheaper rate ?-to save to those gentlemen $50 or $1OO year in clothing, while we deprive two million aborers of $200 year each in wages Why the newspapers would lose more than they could save in the loss of the sale of their papers. On principle, then, let us tighten the burdens of trade as much as may be but let us be careful in protecting and preserving our young and growing indus srial interests, which afford employment and lair wages, and assure to every State in the Union degree of prosperity which would disappear were they crushed or crippled
 All cases of weak or lame back headache,