Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1888-09-12
ENGLISH vs.. EUROPEAN WAGES.


cuSs.
We commend to the attention of our
high protectionist friends the case of
Spain. 1t is the habit of the enemies of
tariff reform to speak as if England, free
trade England were the country of low
wages. They conveniently overlook the
fact that the highest wages in the world
outside of the United States are paid in
England and that the higher the tariff the
worse is the condition of labor If, as
matter of fact, England proves anything,
it is that free trade raises wages. To say
that her workmen are not as well off as
ours proves nothing, for their country is
not naturally so favorably conditioned as
the United States. What it becomes the
high prOtectiOnist TO show is the reason
why all the protectiouist countries of
Europe are greatly behind England in point
of wages. If the competition of pauper
labor is what the American workingman
has to fear, WHY is it that the English
workingman has not succumbed TO his
less fortunate continental neighbors2
There is no answer to this question that
does not involves confession OF Judgment
against the notion that it is the tariff
that regulates wages The hope of the
monOpoiSJs is that the American work
ingman will not discover the truth Their
expectation is that he will not learn that
England is not by any means the whole
Of Europe, and that the difference in our
favor, as against England is not greater
than the difference in favor of England
against other countries This matter is
suggested by what IS now going on in
Spain. The Spanish people ought to be
the most prosperous i'll the world if high
tariff could make them so: but. in truth.
they are not at all to be envied. Wages
there are half less than in England;
their manufacturing interests, though
covered all over with protection, have
long been languishing, and their agricul-
ture, despite the bounty of the soil and
geniality of the climate. is in a pitiable
condition. All this has at last given rise
to sharp contest between the protec-
tectionists and free traders. The latter
are now insisting that the way to improve
trade is to liberate it, and the way to en-
rich industrious men is to reduce their
taxes. The free traders insist that the
protectiouist theory has failed utterly,
and is making bad worse every day. The
protectionists, on the other hand are talk
ing quite after the manner of our own
monopolists. They want more protection.
They demand tariff so high that foreign
| goods will be altogether excluded.
American -four and meat ought, they
say, to be shut ont to the end that
the Spanish farmer may flourish, and for
the benefit of the Spanish weaver they
would close their ports against English
fabrics. What, however, the Spanish
protectionist omits to say Is, that the low
price of labor is part of the trouble. He
cannot claim as our monopolists do that
high wages is what makes a protective
tariff necessary. He has not got to the
length of holding that the American
farmer invades his markets because Of
the cheapness of American labor Tn.
sum and substance of the Spanish case il
that the protectionists there have beef
driven to the logical extremity of thei
position and forced to declare for what i
practically the Chinese policy, which i
precisely where the United States woult
be landed in time if the monopolists ha'
their way.-Brookly n Citizen.