The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1888-09-05

they work 'all the year around. as New
York manufacturer in his testimony be-
fore the tariff commission swore they
did, and their yearly earnings
average S174.72. This is 59.3
per cent. of the yearly earnings of an
American starch worker (average) and
4l.5 per cent. of the average yearly earn
ings of q starch worker in Indiana, and
he gets more than the starch worker of
any other state. The labor cost in dol
lars worth OF starch in the United States
averages 1888 cents; in Indiana it aver
ages only la cents. 1t will be seen that
though the starch workers in Indiana get
better wages than in any other part of the
United States the labor cost of starch is
smaller here than elsewhere-a paradox
which puzzles the monopoly takers, but
which is easily explained. The Indiana
starch-maker gets more than the New
York starch-maker because he produces
more, as the census returns prove. They
both live under the same tariff; have the
same protection :" and if tariffs regulated
wages, they would receive the same pay.
But it is their productiveness that counts.
The New York manufacturer pays smaller
wages because he pays more for his raw
materials (corn and potatoes are higher in
New York than in Indiana.) So
his gross product per hand
is smaller, and wages in proportion.
American workingmen get better wages
than those abroad, as a rule, for the same
reason that Indiana starch-makers get
more than New York starch-makers, be-
cause they produce more, and not because
they are taxed from the crowns of their
heads to the soles OF their feet" The
cheaper the raw materials the greater the
average product per hand, in any in
dustry; the greater the average product
the greater the average wages Thus it is
that the Mills bill, by cheapening raw ma
terials, and thereby increasing productive
ness land at the same time increasing con-
sumption or ''demand') would increase
the wages OF labor.
But this is depression. What we de-
sire to emphasize is the fact that this talk
about the difference of wages in home
and foreign starch works as a pretext for
opposing the Mills bill is the sheerest
humbug. AS we have shown from the
mouths of the starch manufacturers them
selves, 500 worth of starch at the factory
represents the United States through
Sl2.335 paid for wages. The Mills
per cent. or S47.27 on every 500
WI III Vi 6IdICu. Illus j LAllS Jill De-
comes a law, no foreign starch
can come into competition with domestic
starch until tax of S47.27 has been paid
to the government on every hundred dol
lars worth OF it. We do not know what
the labor cost of starch in England or
Germany is, but we will assume, 10 be on
the safe side, that it is nothing; that the
English and German starch-workers labor
for nosMng and Find themselves" Then
the account between the American manu-
facturer and his foreign rival would stand
thus:
American manufacturer pays for labor in one
hundred dollars worth Of starch. SO
MS foreign rival 90 90
Extra cost of labor to Amerio.n-...........Si2 50
The Mills bill gives the American "protec-
tom in every one hundred dollars worth Of
Deductng the extra cost Of his labor II 80
Leaves balance in his favor of.............ss4 "a
on every one hundred dollars worth of
starch he produces.
In other words, the Mills bill gives the
manufacturer protection of nearly four
times the entire amount OF has labor cost, or
bonus OF 80 per cent. over and above
all he pays out for labor. Before any
English or German starch can be offered
in this market it must be charged with
tax per 500 valuation OF S47.27. The
American manufacturer pays not penny
OF this. Take starch representing 500
Exclusive OF labor cost at factories here
and abroad. Give the foreigner his labor
free; charge the American Sl2.93 for his
labor. Here is how the omparison will
stand before their respective products can
be offered in our market:
American starch without labor 90
Add cost Of II 80
sli2 80
Foreign starch without labor or duty 100 %
sl47 q
Deduct American. 1i2 80
Balance in favor Of S34 %
Here we give the foreign manufacturer
his labor free. His goods have to bear
the cost of transportation thousands of
miles; he pays more for his raw materi-
ais, and the only advantage he has (aside
from the cost of labor, which we have
counted as nothlng) is cheaper plant,
and this advantage the Mills bill will de-
prive him OF to great extent at least, by
cheapening the cost OF machinery. etc.
The starch manufacturers of Indiana,
who pay ia per cent. for labor, who get
their raw material cheaper than their for
eign rivals, and many of whom
have free fuel, certainly need no more
than 47.27 per cent. protection" to
enable them to pay present wages and
make as much profit as at present.
Having tried to humbug the workers in
starch factories. Mr.. Phelps attempts to
bamboozle the farmers with the idea that
they are protected on corn and get more
for it because of the starch factories.
Thus:
The annual capacity -four domestic starch fac
tories for the consumption of corn is estimated
at II. 600 bushels, or more than one-third as
much as our total exports OF corn last year
1t requires $50 900 acres of land and IA, 400farm
ers TO produce the corn annually consumed in
our starch works. II the Mills bill were to
become a law and the starch factories were to
close { p what new outlet or industry would
the farmers find for their IL $50 600 bushels of
corn? If our domestic manufactures are 10
close, the workmen now employed in them
will have to 90 from the wheel, the spindle and
the forge, to the pillow, the reaper and the hoe.
Instead of being consumers OF corn they will
have 10 become producers; and instead of hav-
ing mouths being fed by farmers at home. they
will be engaged in feeding mouths in foreign
countries at such prices TOR grain as the for
eigners may dictate.
One is at loss which most to admire in
this; the easy assurance with which the
writer hints that with protection cover
ing four times the entire cost of their
labor, the starch factories would be COM
PEELED to close; the colossal gall which it
takes to tell the farmers that they do not
already sell their corn Eat such prices as
foreigners dictate" or the exquisite
idiocy of the assertion that if starch maxi