Workmen's advocate. (New Haven, Conn.) 1883-1891, 1890-01-04


before the committe to urge the contin-
uance of the IS cents per ton duty on
iron ore. Their chief plea was the "pro-
lection Of American labor" They con-
tended that it enabled the mine.owners
to pay higher wages and drew a glowing
picture Of the prosperity of the miners
but when pressed to say how much
was paid for mining ton of ore they
professed their inability to answer the
question. The fact is that they could
not have answered it without showing
the scandalous profits Of the owners on
the one hand and the still more scan
dalous decline in the wages of miners
on the other hand.
1t is perfectly true, that, owing to the
rapid development of the iron industry
in this country, the number of wage.
slaves engaged in digging iron ore is
constantly increasing; yet their wages
are constantly decreasing. Their num-
Der increased 106 per cent. from 1870 to
1880; but their wages decreased in the
meantime from $201 to $135 per tom
and their annual earnings from $455 to
1901, or more than 80 per cent. True,
again, the price of iron ore fell in the
meantime from $3.50 to So. go; but of
the 80 cents reduction the laborer had
to bear 66 cents, or twice as much as
his idle employer, whose profits, instead
of being diminished by the reduction,
were vastly increased by the demand at
the lower price. AS we write, we have
not at hand the latest data but we shall
soon obtain them; and from what we
know of the condition of the iron ore
miner we can already assert that the
figures will show, for the last ten years,
still greater decline of wages per ton
and annual earnings, in the face of
stupendous increase in the profits and
property of the mine owners.
And here let us make suggestion.
Let the ore miners send to the Com
mittee of Ways and Means an intelli.
gent delegation, to deliver III their name
a little speech, substantially like this
"GENTLEMEN:-It is claimed by our
bosses that duty of rs cents per ton is
necessary to cover the difference be-
tween the cost of labor in this country
and its cost where it is cheapest. In
acting upon this representation, Con-
gress intends-so at least it declares
that we laborers should be neneflte to
the full amount of the aforesaid rs cents
per ton. But our bosses rob LIS of
most, if not all, Of the duty imposed for
our own special "protecton,' paying us
hardly more, and perhaps less, than is
paid abroad. Now, in the law you are
about to pass, provide that the National
Government, this good Government of
ours, instituted as you say for the pro-
lection of American labor, shall levy the
duty of 70 cents per ton, not only upon
foreign, but upon domestic ore; and
that such duty as is collected upon the
domestic ore shall be paid over to us
laborers-who extract Indirectly, by
that good Government of ours, insti-
tuted for the protection of American
labor.
and in case our bosses should want
Us to work for nothing lover and above
the rs cents duty levied upon them and
paid to us by our good GOVERNMENT, or
for any sum above the aforesaid IS
cents less than the wages paid abroad,
provide, Furthermore, that the duty on
domestic ore shall be so raised as to
give us at all times wages equal to those
paid abroad, plus rs cents"
Let the coal miners, and the iron work
ers, and the cotton operatives, and every
trade engaged in protected industries,