The weekly register. [volume] (Point Pleasant, Va. [W. Va.]) 1862-1909, 1888-08-22


tire labor cost Is there any danger. to
clisanical industry in reduction Of I. 4 per
cen The demand of the government Tor
reyenne win more than double the entire la
boI' efst, 90 that the Labor is mob endangered
j Bat h seems a little strange that as The tariff
j .is iet'ied to protect American labor and the
Iro' Hon IS Sa.S7, that the laborcr only gets
There seems to be a leak somewhere
next IS earthen and glass ware The
4 dur under the existing law is $685. on
eyer s1o0; by this bill it is s5s.17. And
I tins 3 from trade, too.
Speaker, if $52. Ia taxation on 500
worm of property imported into the United
iSta.tts from foreign coun ries is free trade,
IN SRfdis namo viii some one tell me what is
nsss,.lt by the term protection7 LApplaiise.1
tNelii these manufacturers are alarmed
aiaprt cheap foreign labor, too, and they
Eg.tnt protection enough, they say, to cover
the d diiierence between wages in Europe and
leTe One of our consuls in England tells us
that tho average labor cost of earthen warein
/ the United States in 1852 was 46lS per cent,
and = Staffordshiro, England, 4T15 pen cent.
u tslis be true, our labor is cheaper than the
foreign But if the foreign labor cost moth
ius, then we have left per cent. enough to
! pay Z ne wllole labor CO.'S Of our faanufact-
uEss The labor cost of earthen and glass
/ ware, as shown By the census OF 1850, was Al
per celt aud we have left So. II per cent.
4 W. isiit that all of that 59.55 per cent. did
i.llot u .s;,p hofer, only Al per cent. hav-
ing found its wav to his pocket
The next schedule is metals. We have re-
duced the duties from an average Of 4O.77
| per cent undcr the present tariff to IS AZ un-
der the pending bill This is reduction of
! $3.50 on Sl00 worth of imported metals
There is nothing revolutionary in that, moth
| ing to excite alarm, and it is a long way vet
1 to free trade reduction on pig iron from
$500 to $3.50 per cent still leaves it with a
heavy duty, and the tax of SO per ton which
/ we pronnse is the war tariff rate of 1863 The
| reduction of the duty on steel rnils from 81.
| per cent to 81. 81 leaves duty higher than
it WINS from 1865 to 1870. 1t was then - per
cent. In 1870 the duty was changed to a spe
/ cific rate of S2S per ton. The equivalent ad
yalorcm was then about 90 per cent. 1t
4 seonled reduction Doubtless it was done
| uiidcr tho prctense of preventing underyalu
alton end fifaad-tlIat is, the false preteuse
under which specific duties rlasquerade-but
when English rails came down to S2GG9 per
ton in 1879 the duty on steel rails, though re-
naming the same per ton, amounted to 104
per cent Why should the present exhorbit
AIT duty be retainedl Steel rails can be
r1adc as chcaply in this country as in Eng
land or elsewhere.
received a letter a few days ago from
| gcntleman engaged in steel manufacture who
|
Alabama ut n total cost of SIG per ton, and
at a labor cost of IS per ton. Tho average
Price of tho steel rails imported last year was
| $50. i6 per ton. From 1870 to 1873 inclusive,
steel rails were cheaper i'll tho United States
than in England and cheaper here because
| they could bo produced at lower cost here
than i'll Europe. And if they could be made
cheaper here for four years why not all the
| CiIne! From 1870 to 1875 the importation
! foil
| English price Inst year was $40 10; the aver
age American price for the sa;no time was
S5I. IL; difference i'll price, S1G.gT; tariff duty,
! $l1l Now, if the Steel Rail association
could make rails as cheap i'll the United
! States in 1873 as they could be made in Eng
land, they could do it i'll 1887, and the S1G.9I
difference In price was put i'll the pockets of
the manufacturer. 1t is claimed to bc in tho
| interest of the laborer, but he only gets from
SO to s. per ton; tho balance goes TO the
manufacturer to make millionaires of men
that they may build castles in Scotland anG
| go coaching through l2or mountains. lap
plcuse on the Democratic Sile.I
We havo reduced the duty on steel rails to
4 S11 Iser ton 1t is equivalent to moro than
| double the entire labor cost of tbs rails On
| wood ard wocdenware we found the present
l'a' es averaging IS per cent, and we reduced
them to i7.4oper cent. That is too small to
require further notice.
On sugar we reduced the rate from as Is
| per cent to G2.3l per cent. This is the
largest reduction made on any schedule ex-
ccTt tho wooler. Tho reduction of tho reve-
mo on sugar proposed by the bill II SII T59,-
I'D, and, excepting the woolen schedule, is
nearly twice as much us all the others com
/ biaed. That is heavy cut, but nobody
seems to be distressed about it.
| The complaint about sugar is that we did
| not reduce enough. We have dealt moro
hsrshly with sugar than with any article VIC
| have left on the dutiable list. Yet gentIe-
men on the other side tell us We have been
| sectional; that we have protected sugar. aud
rice, and aimed at tho destruction of
northern industries Tho charge is absurd
| We hnvc not looked at tine section wherc any
article is produced in order to determine
| what we would do. We have tried to deal
Tnirly with all, and in doing it we find that
we have cut it far heavier than iron, or glass,
or earthenware, or woolens, or cottons, or
hemp, or jutc. or lax In Short tie cut on
sugar is nearly twice as much Gs all tho
others put together. [Applause.l
As Democrats, we believe that tax is a
tribute from the private property of citi-
zen exCcted by law for the support of gov
ernment. We believe, with the comnlenta-
tcrs and economists, that it-iS burden, and
that it ought to be so laid as to be as light as
| possible on the taxpayer.
| Now, Mr.. Speaker, we get by the present
| duty on sugar and molasses about S5S,cOo.-
Geo per annum. According to the estimate
| of the gentleman On the other side who
offered the amendment providing for free
sugar and a bounty to the sugar grower, the
present rate of duty affords protection to the
domestic sugar grower equal to S6,o00,OGo, so
! that the whole cost to the people is 4,GcO,-
COO. In order to get eG2,0OO,0 900 of rcvenue
from manufactures of iron and steel, and
woolen and cotton goods, the people have to
| pay S50o,0eo,C00 to $Gc0, 0,o09 Coo. We pro
Cluced in 1880 S61O COO, Geo of all manufactures
of lion and steel 1t is certainly over $780,
000,co0 now. We produced about Ss75, ,0o0,-
| COO each of cotton ard woolen goods. These
! figures L have from tho bureau OF statistics
Now, if protection protects. and that is
| wha5 it is for, it increases tho price-of the
| domestic product nearly as much as the
| price of the imported product plus the duty.
This is admitted by tho gentlemen who
offered the proposition FOR tho sugar bounty
and by those who supported him. This is
admitted by the constant arguments made
by the other side, that if we reduce cottons
aud woolens and iron and steel TO 40 per.
cent they will be ruined This argument
admits they are getting more than that now.
! OF these three branches Of manufactures we
are Eproducing today fully 81, 100000 900
VOL th If they are projected 40 per cent. it
costs the people $500. .0Oo. 600 to get sGO,O00,-
Now, which is the better tax to Keep, the