New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-08-18
Average weekly ............-..-.- 6 81 300

Beginning with the p0tterleS, WHICH dTC
especially important TO many voters IN New
Jersey, il should be said that a complete table
of wages in thirteen kinds of work In that
State and Great Britain has been quoted from
the census volume, as to this industry, III
preference to other statistics which are less
complete as to male workers. But the latter
give wages of women, lads and girls. who are
about one-third Of the workers in this indus
try. and will therefore be separately examined
hereafter. The Mills bill cuts down duties
from GO to so per cent on decorated ware,
from So to o per cent on plain china ana
from So to 80 per cent on common crockey.
Yet it is pretended that the proposed duties VIII
"more than cover a difference in wages
which exceeds 10 per cent, according to the
New-Jersey quotations.
The paper manufacture is another which
reduced duties would affect. The Mills bIA
would cut down duties from 20 to 20 per cent
on paper hangings, from 20 to . per cent on
sized and from 5 to II per cent on unslzed
PAPER. Yet the difference in wages between
this country and Great Britain is 8l.3 per
cent. TO the mind of a Democratic statesman
n duty of 12 to 2 per cent more than covers
a difference of over 80 per cent in wages. In
cotton goods average duties Of 40 per cent are
proposed, and ad valorem duties that evasion
and fraud may be more easy; the difference IN
wages in the principal occupations OF this man
ufacture is 1916 per cent. In the silk man
ufacture the duties are only so per cent; the
difference in wages is 81 per cent in the occu-
nations which can be compared. The car
makers see it proposed to cut down duties on
carriages of all kinds from 35 to 80 per cent,
but their wages are 58.7 per cent higher than
| in England. The carpetworkerS in this state,
| PENNSYLVANIA and Connecticut will be especial
" interested to see that Mr.. Mills cuts down
duties on foreign carpets from Al "a to 40
per cent, pretending that 0 per cent is enough
to "cover the difference in wages" which APP
pears from official tables to be SO per cent.
The Mills bill does not put iron ore on the
free list only because Mr.. Cleveland's friends
did not dare to treat producers in Southern
States as they treated producers of copper in
Michigan, or Of lumber in that State and Wis
consn. or of salt in Newly ork. The duty OF
IRE is but Al per cent while the difference il
wages Of miners between this country ant
Great Britain is 111.9 per cent. The bill re
duces the duty on pig iron, now 56.6 per cent
to about 50 per cent, while the difference il
wages in iron furnaces is 55.6 per cent so tha
the advantage offered to foreign producers
not large But producers of pig iron canno
live unless the manufacture thrves, and th
bill reduces about one-eighth the duties OF
bar IRON now only 500 per cent, although
the difference in wages between this countr.
and Great Britain is 77.2 per cent. stu
more ugly blow is intended in placing Tin plate
on The free list, Of which the imports are al
ready over 100000 pounds, and IN re
ducing from "a. 33 to 55 per cent the duty Of
steel rails, the difference in wages in these a
in other rolling mills being 77.2 per cent.
These comparisons suffice to show that Tn
Mills bill does not more than cover the diner
ence in wages" between this country and Grea
Britain, as Free Traders pretend. 1t was de
hberately intended not to protect, and there
fore it gives the foreign producer the adyan
tage in every industry of which wages hay
been examined. With wages in Log occupa
tions 92 per cent higher in this country tina
in Great Britain, as official records show, coul