Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1888-04-26
CHEAP" -"
New York Tribune.

NeN fofE GEfDlnF.
Cheap things, the tariff reformers want.
Well, if man can make his pair of
shoes for himself, better than he could
buy, and in spare time that would other
wise be unemployed, can he possibly
buy cheaper shoes at any price? Why,
he would be Just so much out of pocket,
if his neighbor should sell him a fine
pair of shoes for sixpence.
Why should the country throw away
its money buying things which its un-
employed labor could produce? The
whole Nation, like one man, has so many
hours for work every year. with which it
must pay for all its purchases. Part of
them are not employed. Some men are
unemployed all the year. some have work
part of the year only, some are on a
strike because their wages do not suit.
some are idle because people do not
earn enough to buy all that certain fac
tories could produce, working full time.
Altogether, let it be supposed that the
unemployed labor is equal to the full
time Of one man in an hundred, say
100000 men, each 800 working DAYS.
Then 1S0 million working days 60 to
waste in year. If part can be put into
the making of tin plates, which cost the
Nation ST, 900, 900 last year, would not
the Nation save just that sum, less the
trif1e it would have to pay for the tin
used in coating! That would occupy
not tenth of the wasted days labor.
But If the foreigners should offer us tin
plates at quarter of the present price,
which would be the cheaper, the i'm
ported plates costing only S4,250,000, or
the domestic tin plates costing days Ia
Dor now wasted? The Nation has to sup
port somehow all these unemployed men.
as it stands; it gets nothing for their
keep, and it could get tin plates. Which
IS the cheaper. to use labor now idle, or
TO keep the idle labor alive and send
SI7 100000 to England for tin plates:
Then there are left more than 170
million working days going to waste.
Last year We brought from abroad $10,-
000,009 worth of wool, because it was
''cheap," and $44,000,0O0 worth of wool
len goods for the same reason. This is
why good many of the men are not
employed. Which would be cheaper, to
pay $60,G30,000 for "eheap" wool and
woollens, or produce them with labor
now wasted. "But it would cost too
much TO grow wool here or to make
woollens." Just the other way; it costs
too much to keep in idleness a people
who ought to be making wool and wool
lens, but who are deprived OF work by
large imports. Let it be supposed that
60,000,000 days' work, the years labor
Of 200,000,000 men and women, would
produce what We import. Somehow,
they now eat up and otherwise consume
what costs 1925 yearly for each person,
or $25,000,000, and we now pay $780,
for what they don't produce, but
gladly would. That is not cheap
wool, nor cheap clothing. If Europe
would send US the goods, and Australia
the wool, at cost of $40, 100000 Instead
of s60,000.000, the entire cost to the Ma
ton would Still be S20,000,000 for
things bought and S25,009,000 for the
keep of idle workers. Made here, the
same things would cost the keep of the
200,000.000 workers now idle, and
enough besides TO make them seif-re-
specting American citizens. That would
be cheaper wool than any Australia can
ever grow.
The dearest goods the Nation can
possibly buy are those for which it pays
the keep of idle men and women who
would gladly work. The foreigner who
wants to send goods here to take the in
dependent manhood from an American
oughtto be required at least to contribute
what it costs to feed and clothe him.
But when President Cleveland proposes
to increase the army of idle men and
women in order to get cheaper wool and
woollens from abroad, he does not know
the meaning of the word "cheap."