Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-09-30

and the high price of labor must reduce
the profit on the product. Still the
manufacturer asks for higher tariff
to pay the operatives a higher
price and also upon raw materials to
compete with "the pauper labor" of
Europe. 1t is obvious that if this protec-
ton has the effect claimed for it, then
every raise of the tariff the
wages of the operative ought to be in
creased in the same ratio as the benefit
on the factory product would de-
crease. How can this keep
the manufacturer Does it not
place him at the mercy OF his rival who
has free raw material and lower wages,
while, by virtue of the tariff, the home
producer pays the higher price for raw
material and wages? If the demand
should be granted and the artificial
advantage given to labor, it would
deprive the domestic producer OF
profits and destroy him. Therefore
l conclude that the demand for high tar
if to maintain high wages is not in the
interest OF labor, but the advantage
is pocketed by the manufacturer The
superior advantage of the domestic man
ufacturer is found in this, that
he seeks to lift the tariff to the highest
possible rate under the pretense of pay
ing the highest prices for American
labor and competing against foreign
rivals who use cheaper labor called
pauper labor" Being secured
in a high protected rate, he
does not employ American labor
unless it is as cheap as foreign
labor that may be brought here. The
low price of foreign labor is used to re-
duce American labor to its minimum,
and the home laborer must COM
pete in that free labor market.
The raw material used in many of the
protected industries is paid for by the
Governments specific duty. fixed upon
the product of his rival; hence the fac
tory cost here, by reason Of the specific
duty and the low price of labor
! is as low as the same article can be pro-
duced by the foreign rival. And this is
shown conclusively by the fact that our
domestic manufacturers annually ship
millions of their products into those coun-
tries against whose pauper labor they
are protected and undersell their rivals.
BY reference to statistics on exports it will
be seen that we exported in 1887 of do
mestic manufacturers about $136, ,000, 900,
all of which was sold in foreign markets
and a large part Of it-such
as watches, jewelry, cutlery, tools, sew
ing machines, etc., were sold much
cheaper in foreign countries than the like
goods were sold here. The protective
tariff now in force enables the
the leborer under the patriotic pretense
OF benefiting the laboring people of this
country. He clamors for the highest
rate OF tariff for the express purpose of
paying higher price for labor
than his rivals pay in Europe, and
his demand is granted, the rate is made
high. AS have shown, he buys the
lowest priced labor he can get in the un-
protected labor market, and produces the
product Of his factory often cheaper than
his foreign rival. The laborer is told by
Republicans to vote for them, because
they are his friends; and the word pro-
lection means to protect his labor against
pauper labor. Now let us see by actual
test, if the Republicans are friendly to
labor. To practically illustrate the
claim that the laborer receives some part
Of the tariff rate, we will take an exam
pie OF one ton OF steel rails and one ton
of structural iron produced at the Edgar
Thompson works in 1887, now owned
in part by Mr.. Carnegie. The
cost was ascertained through arbi-
traitors in making settlement
between labor and the mill owners, and
is no doubt perfectly correct.
The cost of ton of steel rails is ... 1926. 70
MateIia and waste ..........$ $22.70
Lapor. OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES, 4.O9
Total. ................... -. .$26.79
The percentage of labor on the cost Of
one ton is 1925 per cent. The selling
price of steel rails in 1887 ran from $37. so
to $44 per ton. Taking the lowest price,
it will be seen the profit was $lO.7l per
ton; or when the selling price was $44
per ton the profit was $17.2l per ton.
Labor, therefore, if it had shared in the
selling price, would have been benefited
by the tariff, but this was denied and the
percentage of labor in the selling price
was only 1907 per cent. The tariff, So
per cent, was made to help the laborer
yet he did not receive one cent in the en-.
HANGED profits by reason Of this tariff.
Take still stranger case of ton of
structural iron produced at the same
works in 1887. Cost of one ton of struc-
tural iron, $2S.02. Cost of labor on this
ton, $5.33, or 10 per cent. of the cost of
production. The tariff on this ton is 1O2
per cent. or $2S.S8 duty. The selling
price in 1887 was $66 per ton, showing a
profit over the actual cost, including
labor of $2S.02, to be $37.9S on each ton.
The $5.53 actually received by labor was
10 per cent. of the cost of production, but
it would be only 81 per cent. of the SELL
ing price. Mr.. Carnegie receives $37
net profit on every ton, while labor does
not receive one cent. You may take
similar illustrations in every protected
industry and demonstrate that labor
does not share the benefit created by the
artificial price fixed by the tariff. In
the last case mentioned can any Repub-
lican explain why the tariff should be
1925 per cent. on one ton OF structural
iron, and 10 per cent. on diamonds? The
manufacturer alone reaps the ben
eft of the high protection, and under
the benevolent pretense of helping
labor, does more to oppress and injure
the operatives than any other class OF
capitalists.
BY such unfair and fraudulent means
labor is oppressed and crushed under
the iron heel of as rank despotism as
ever existed in any King-ridden country
on earth. In the confidential circular
sent out by James P. Foster, May %,
1888, from the headquarters Of the Re-
publican League of the United States,
demanding contributions to carry on the