The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1888-09-05
A STARCH MANS SOPHISTRY
HIS ATTEMPTS TO DIsToRT FACTS
Specimen Falsehoods and FalIacies of tho
Monopoly Taxers-Trying to BamboozIe
WOrkingmen and Farmers
Mess OF Rank Absurdities.

Some one has sent THE SENTINEL a COPY
OF the Madison Courier of the 23d ult
containing an article from the pen of one
s. D. Phelps of New York, who avows him
self the author of an anonymous pamph.
let relating to the tariff on starch. recently
reviewed in these columns The article
In question is an attempted reply to THE
SENTINEL's criticisms upon this pamphlet,
and is certainly one Of the most extraor-
binary productions that has ever come
under our notice. When we say that for
several months we have regularly read the
Journals fearfully and wonderfully made
editorials on the tariff" and that
we now measure our words care
fully, the reader may be able to
form some conception of the character OF
Mr.. Phelps latest performance. But
when we add that in this article Mr..
Phelps, in one and the same breath,
claims that the existing duty on starch is
not prohibitory, and admits that only l
per cent. of the starch consumed is i'm
ported; that he asserts that the duty on
starch does not increase the price to the
consumer, and that the reduction OF the
duty would close our starch factories, and
straightway tells the farmers that they
may gain few cents on starch" by the
passage of the Mills bill; that he assumes
that the starch industry cannot survive,
with a protection of 47.47 per cent, as
afforded by the Mills bill, while the aver
age protection to American factories IN
der the present monopoly tariff law
Is only AZ per cent; that while
admitting that we import 10 starch
now to speak Of, he ventures
the assertion that there is not starch con-
Germ in the United States that paid last
year greater dividend than per cent, ="
and that he personally knows of seven
starch factories that can be bought for
one-half the cost of the plant" and bases
on this an argument" against the Mills
bill; that in one paragraph he shows how
Germany protects" starch, and in another
saws that starch workers in Germany get
only 56 cents a day; that he tells the farm
ers that they get 10 cents pound more
for their corn because OF the duty on it,
although he has but just asserted that the
price of starch is not increased by the
duty on that article-when we say that this
man Phelps does all these things in a
single article, the reader will readily con-
clude that more illogical, incoherent
confused, contradictory, ridiculous and
absurd plea was never put forward by an
advocate of monopoly taxes since the sys-
tenn Of reciprocal rapine first gained a
foothold on this planet. And the con-
clusion will be entirely just.
We will say, however, that we do not
believe Mr. Phelps is really such an ass as
he writes himself down. He only takes
&ko.r IL g. hot ill ~ ILL.,
that they will not detect his falsehoods or
see through his tallacies, but will swallow
the whole mess. But he is mistaken.
Now, as to this duty on starch, it is not
an important matter. The starch indus
try is insignificant. Our production OF
starch is only 2l-l000 OF our total manu-
featured products. Comparatively little
capital is invested, few hands are en-
ployed and the amount paid out in wages
is tritiing. The consumption of starch is
also small, and the tax on it is only very
light burden on the people. So lar as the
general public is concerned, it matters lit
tie whether the tax on starch is l cent
or 2 cents or D cents pound. We
should therefore devote little or no space
TO Mr.. Phelps manifesto, but for the
fact that its fallacies and falsehoods so
forciblv illustrate the trickery and hum
buggery which the whole brood of monop-
oily takers are trying to practice on the
people in this campaign. We shall there
fore analyze it at some length.
And first we will say that this man
Phelps, who asserts that the duty on
starch does not increase the price of it, is
the same person who told the manufac-
terers in the pamphlet already mentioned
that reduction of AZ per cent. in the duty
meant reduction of AZ per cent. in the
price of starch! Apparently Mr.. Phelps
thought starch was all tax-that it
contained nothing else. The SENTINEL
showed the absurdity ofthis statement by
a little sum in simple arithmetic, and
we observe that Mr.. Phelps doesn't re-
peat it. He says nothing about it,
which is probably the most judicious
course, under the circumstances.
Now let US take his propositions Serid-
tim. No. is:
The duty on starch is not prohibitory, and
has never been prohibitory in this country
under any tanff act. The imports of starch
into the United States for the fiscal year end
ing June 80, 1888 were very much larger than
In 1887, 1886, or 1885.
Something certainly prohibits the impor-
tation of starch. If it isn't the duty, what
Is it? That is the object of the duty isn't
1t? Mr.. Phelps says "only about / per
cent. OF the starch consumed is imported"
That is substantially true. In the census
year (1SS0) the value of our starch product
was s. Az ZAP. Last year we imported
only g, 572 worth. 1t will be seen that the
domestic manufacturers have a monopoly
of the American market. II they do not
make money it is not because of foreign
competition, as Mr. Phelps admits. Per-
haps they have been protected to death"
Who knows?
PROPOSITION No. is this:
Wages in the starch factories in the United
States are not at a minimum. The average
rate Of wages paid starch operatives in En-
gland and Germany does not exceed 90 cents per
day, or considerable less than one-half the
average rate paid to workmen similarly en-
ployed in the United States. / know whereof
j speak in this regard from personal observa-
ton and investigation In this country and
abroad
Now let us see what wages are paid in
American starch factories, and taking Mr..
Phelps statement as to English and Ger
man wages as correct, let us find how
much s'protection" the American manu-
facturer needs to balance the difference in
wages.
The census returns for 1880 of the
starch industry show:
No. establishments--....... 80
Capital invested 328 z56
Hands employ 3ils
fad N wages Dbl
value OF .....s4yl 900
Value Of Al, 7f2
The foregoing is for the whole United
States. Now let Us look at the figures for
~