New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-08-01
VAGES AND THE TARIFF.

Certain papers THINK they are arguing oh
the tariff question when they repeat that no
one can prove that protection increases wages.
Then they observe with all the solemnity OF
an owl, that wages are always higher in new
countries than in old, that they are higher in
England now than In Germany or France, and
that it is fraudulent device OF PrOtectlonists
to attribute the admitted rise in wages in 1860
to the protective tariff. The only confusion
of mind about this matter is with those who
know least alb out work or wages Working
men and employers both know that the policy
which encourages an increase in the number of
establishments, and consequently in the de-
mand for labor, necessarily helps to advance
wages But it is worth while to notice some
of the current fallacies.
Wages were higher in Great Britain, before
that country ceased to protect its industries,
than in Germany or France, before those coun-
tries began to protect. For forty years Great
Britain has been trying free trade, and for a
few years Germany and France have been try
ing protection. The consequence is that in
Germany and France wages are now rising
while in Great Britain q serious decline has
been prevented only by the power OF trade
associations, which do nevertheless cut down
actual though not nominal wages, when they
compel many establishments and thousands OF
men to be idle in order that the rest may get
some work at the old rates.
This country is comparatively now, true
1t was newer in 1860, when Democratic free
trade had its latest test AS country gets
old, according to free-trade theories, wages
fall. AS this country gets old the fact is that
wages rise they are 80 per cent higher, to say
the least, than they were when the Democratic
policy ceased to govern. The advance here
has been in spite of the most marvellous
migration of labor ever known in human his
tory Over 8, 900, 900 workers have come to
This country and yet wages have risen; some
thing like half of them have come from Great
Britain, and yet wages there have risen COM
paratively not at all.
The man who cannot understand facts such
as these may at least be capable of compre-
hending that the closing of one mill out of
three in any town will tend to put down wages
there. The men thrown out Of work will seek
it at the other mills, and if not in that town
then elsewhere. So the stoppagc Of thousands
Of mills, in consequence of the passage OF a
Democratic Tariff BILL would throw out Of
work a great army OF Work1ngmen. 1hese
would seek work in other places, driving down
wages there, for dire necessity would compel
them to underbid somebody else or to starve.
| But where else, in what other occupation, are
these men to find work? Not in farming, for
thousands of farm workers are to be thrown
out of work they are now required to take
care of sheep, and wool growing will be made
improbable by the same bill. Thousands
more are engaged in raising other products
which 1T would be Improbable to raise after
the Mills bill had passed. New land. and more
wheat growing Does not everybody know that
the wheat market is supplied already that
prices run close to the cost Of raising and
transporting? What else are these men to do :?
Until the free-trade theorists answer, they have
no business to reiterate the impudent pretence
that the tariff has nothing to do with wages