The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1888-05-05

poorly paid of any country. The different
States and Territories into which this great
country is divided, and between which there
is no embargo upon trade, differ among
themselves in respect to wages of labor. The
difference in wages in the same industries in
different sections of the United States is well
illustrated in the following returns Of wages
in the iron industries of different States made
under the census of 1880:
Unskilled laborin blast furnaces in Virginia,
81 cents per day; in Alabama, 9S cents; in
PENNSYLVANIA, Sl.O9, and in Mississippi, 1.29.
Skilled labor in iron rolling mills in Alabama.
1925 per day; in Massachusetts, 81. 20; in
Pennsylvania, 5000; in Ohio, S3.S7; and in
Kentucky S4.62. The yearly average wages
in the aggregate iron industries of the differ
ent sections of the United States are reported
as follows: Eastern States, SAT-; Western,
1896; Pacific, 1854; Southern, 1904.
"Where two employers run after one work
man, wages rise; but when two workmen run
after one employer, wages fall. In this
country cheap public lands and manufactures
are the two employers running after the one
workman, and wages are high. In England,
where there is no public land there is only the
one employer, manufactures, after whom all
workmen run, and wages are low.
In the United States those industries which
are not protected pay the highest wages In
the building trades, where foreign competition
is impossible, the wages paid are nearly
double those of many foreign countries. Ac-
/ cording to the last census the average yearly
wages of the unprotected railway employe
was $3.50, whilst those of the protected iron
workers are only 1872.
1t is true that wages are higher in America
than in Europe, but it is also true that they
are higher in England than in France or Ger
many. have seen it stated that the average
weekly wages in fifteen employments in free
trade England were S7.07 as compared with
an average of So. GA in the same employments
in protectionist Germany. And though the
products of low-priced German labor, with
the exception of wines, liquors, and tobacco,
are admitted free into England, wages there,
as we have heretofore shown, have risen more
rapidly than in protected America. If the
competition of cheap German labor does not
operate to reduce wages in England, why
should the American laborer, more than
5000 miles away, need to be protected from
| it? 1t seems TO me moments thought should
convince him he has nothing to fear from a
reduction of tariff duties to n revenue basis,
"'for nine tenths of all the arts and manufac
lures of the country exist by reason of neces-
sity and not by reason of any system Of reve-
nue. laws; not by any discrimination in the i'm
position of duties; not from any cause which
it is in the power of legislation to promote,
except by assuring personal safety, the enforce
ment of contracts, and an honest dollar as
the unit of money"
! Owing to great natural advantages, which
the tariff neither gave nor can take away, la
Dor intelligently applied will yield larger re-
turns in this country than in Europe, hence
it commands better wages. 1t has always
been so, and to this fact we are mainly indebted
for the immigration which for the last two
/ hnn1ra1 has bnaO prOw1Inu ghnrng
and swelling our population.
Who is the laboring man for whom protec-
/ ton is asked? Is not the settler who pre-empts
q home in the far West, tolls early and late,
withstands all untoward circumstances, and
labors longer than from sun to sun to lift the
mortgage off his little farm, in every sense
laboring man? Do you protect him by retain
ing tariff tax ON lumber which he uses to
construct his house, the nails that hold 1t to-
gether, the carpet that covers his floors, the
stoves in which he burns taxed coal, the
barbed wire that incloses his fields, and the
iron out of which are made all his farming
utensils? And do you treat him fairly when
you tax the salt with which he cures his sun
protected" pork, while the salt with which
the New Highlander cures his protected fish
! is not taxed?
The American workingman, who is COM
/ PEELED to sell his labor here at home in COM
petition with that of every cline, is surely not
/ benefited by prohibitory tariff which com
4 pels him to pay an increased price for nearly
\ every article that enters into his daily use.
/ Free trade in labor, but protection for
everything which labor must buy, is so mani
! ifestly unjust as to merit universal condemna-
| ton.
At the other end of this Capital the Pres-
dent has been charged with wanton disregard
for American interests and American labor,
| because he has asked Congress to reduce the
burden of unnecessary taxes and to stop the
accumulation of money in the Treasury for
which the Government has no present need.
| But the message in which he directs attention
| to the forgotten millions of our country
men will withstand all the assaults which the
| apoogists of protection can make upon it.
| No other message ever carried such welcome
news since "Peaee on earth, good will to
/ men, was proclaimed. If in this message he
made no reference to the Deity, as has been
alleged, he adhered strictly to the Constitution,
which mentions neither the Almighty nor the
''protective" tariff. Laughter and applause.
| In this connection it is useless to discuss
Stree trade because whatever that may be
in theory it can have no practical application
in this country so long as the people prefer
indirect to direct taxation. There must be
revenue, and very large revenue, to meet the
public expenditures, pay the interest, provide
for the extinguishment of the public debt and
discharge the nations obligations to its pen
| sioners, and many other items of expenditure
which the people tolerate under a system of
indirect taxation. While, therefore, this
stealthy method of taxation must continue to
supply the great bulk of the revenue of the
| Government, both constitutional obligation
and wise public policy demand that import
duties be confined to their legally prescribed
/ ITO he 1abfc and yrovt1a for
| the common defense and general welfare.
! This restriction of import duties to their con-
stitutional use can not now be Opposed by the
arguments which Mr. Clay urged in support of
| his american system"
At this time no general distress pervades
the whole country" There is no alarming
diminution of the circulating medium, except
such as the protective policy has caused by
accommodating an immense surplus in the
Treasury. There is no universal complaint
of the want of employment and ''no conse-
quent reduction of the wages of labor On
| the contrary every condition of trade and
business proolaims national prosperity and
individual happiness. There do and always
will exist poverty, wretchedness, and want
among sixty millions of people-'For ye have
the poor always with you" Poverty can
neither be repealed, abolished, nor prevented
! by Congressional legislation. No system of
human laws can convert the thriitless into the
j frugal, the improvident into the saving, the
dissipated into the temperate. The present
condition of our trade and business, aside
from constitutional consideration, offers no
excuse or Justification for tbs further c6ntina-
ance of system of high protective duties,
and when that system pours into the Treasury
more revenue than the Government requires,
and creates a surplus, which lying idle in its
vaults, hampers and binders the commercial
transactions of the whole country, Congress is
confronted with duty, the failure to discharge
which would be criminal. Two streams pour
! their constant currents into the Treasury,
both proceeding from the purses and pockets
of the people. The one brings its contribu-
tons from whisky and tobacco, the other ex
torta Its tribute from the necessities and com.
forts of life. Their combined supply is no
longer needed, and one or the other must be
cut off. Which shall it be? Free whisky or
| free vol; free tobacco or free tin? Shall the
internal revenue or the customs duties be re-
duced or shall there be compromise, taking
here a little and there a little, regarding no
principle upon which the revenue is founded,
but adopting the shilling expedients ola pater-