Evening journal., 1888-09-18
TARlEs rAlK.
Wages and the rarin *.

New York Tribune.
The fact that farm labor has gained in
earnings since the protective system was
adopted in this country more than twice
as much as British farm labor has gained
in the same time has peculiar signif-
canoe which will be better understood
when the rate of increase in other wages
has been considered. Professor Leone
Levi. in Great Britain the best author
ity whose figures are accepted and used
in discussion by the ablest advocates
Of the British policy, makes the
increase in average earnings of in
dustrial labor 16 per cent from 1867 to
1884 1t should be remembered that in
Great Britain there were no such remark
able change in the nominal rate of wages,
from 1860 TO 1867, as there was in this
country in that period Of currency depre.
cation here Mr.. Schoenhof's and other
statistics show substantially the same
rate of increase in agricultural earnings
from 1860 TO 1880 that Professor Levi
! finds from 1867 to 1894, and there is every
reason TO believe that the increase in
other wages was for the two periods sub
stantially the same.
The only comparison Of wages in this
country which, like that Of Professor
/ l4tNlt HIS tHiUIutfu WAkth III lluflY III
dustres, is that of Commissioner Carroll
d. Wright, now Chief Of the Bureau of
Labor Statistics under President Cleve-
land who reported in 1888 that the adj
vance in wages in Massachusetts, since
1860 had been over % per cent. This
would not be quite double the rate fixed
by Professor Levi for British wages But
Commissioner Wright's figures were for
Massachusetts, alone; they did not en-
brace the same industries for the two
dates compared, and there is no claim or
indication that they represented earnings
in the same establishments or in the
same kinds of work Mr. Wright com
pared the average in thirty-one indus
tries in 1860 with the average in twenty
four Of the same and in ten other indus
tries in 1888 which IS obviously an
unreliable method There is intrinsic
evidence, too, that the same establish
ments were not reported at different
dates; thus, in clothing Mr.. Wright re-
ported the average at 1881 in 1880 and
@l2. lB in 1881, and in leather at so 63 in !
1880 and $l2 53 in 1881, and in furniture
at 500 in 1880 and $12.42 in 1881 |
Such differences can come only from re
porting wages for diiferer establishments
in the different years. To appreciate !
how widely wages vary in different estab-
lishments, It may be noticed that ons con
cern IN Massachusetts, according to the |
census, paid an average Of only $1.01 in |
cotton manufacture, while another paid |
an average Of $l41 l2 in the same |
manufacture and in the same year.
Another fatal defect in nearly all com
parisons is that no account is taken of |
the relative Importance of industries |
considered, or of the number Of workers |
engaged in each A decrease of IS. 81 in |
average weekly wages Of 16lS workers
in ship-yards, in Massachusetts, tables 1
outweighs more than three times over.
the increase in the wages of 80, 044 opera.
tives in cotton, woolen and silk manufac-
lures. Inspection of the census report
also teaches that no comparison of wages
at a single locality or in a single estab-
lishment is Of much value isolated
instances appear in which lower
wages We're paid in 1880 than in
1860 though the average in all estab-
lishments Of the same kind
shows a gTeat increase. A paper mill in
Georgia reports an average of only 81
cents daily for thirteen classes of hands,
while another in Pennsylvania reports an
average Of 81 daily for the same thir-
teen classes Of hands. Differences in the
kind of work done, not EXPIRE ssed in the
general name given to an establishment,
often involve wide differences in the
wages paid Unless the same establish
ments are reported for both periods. and
wages of hands engaged at the same
kinds of work, the comparison can have
but little value.
All these objections an6 causes of err
ror are more fully avoided by the re-
turns given in the census volume of
wages than in any other source of
information yet discovered. For hun
dreds of establishments the wages paid
each year for twenty years or more are
given, covering the same class Of hands
and the same kinds of labor in about
Z, ,0OO distinct occupations or positions.
Here il may fairly be assumed that the
average of daily wages paid 70 twenty
kinds of hands in a particular establish
ment in 1860, and to the same kinds of
hands in the same establishment in 1880.
measure the difference in rate of
wages in that establishment. and
that the average for es-
adjustments so reporting in all parts Of
the country, in any branch of industry,
correctly measures the difference in rate
OF wages paid in that industry. Then
the number of hands i'm each industry in
1850 being known, it can be reckoned
how the sum which that number would
have earned at the average in 1860 com
pares with the sum which that number
would have earned at the average wages
in 1850, and thus the relative Importance
Of the different industries IN number of
hands employed can be taken into ac-
count.
BY this method more correct compari-
son Of wages at different periods than has
ever been made hitherto is based upon
precisely the same official evidence for
both dates drawn from the books of pre-
cisely the same manufacturing establish
ments, and Governing the wages of pre-
cisely the same kinds Of workers. This
proves that the advance in
American wages from 1860 to 1880, III
manufacturing, mechanical and mining
industries was more than double the
rate Of increase in British wages. as re.
ported by Professor Levi.
LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE.