Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1890-05-01
FACTS FOR FARMERS.
Female Labor in Tariff Protected Fact
cries and Farm.

l mean now to demonstrate to my
| friends, the farmers, the undoubted
| fact that, far from the most protective
| policy that the world has ever seen dur
ing quarter of a century in this coun-
| try elevating and lettering the condi-
| ton of the working classes, it has had
the tendency of degrading domestic life,
and putting labor and hardships on these
| that are least able to bear them. First,
| will compare the female labor in fact
cries of this country in 1860, under II
years of a revenue tariff, with that in
1880, under 20 years of a protective tar
if.
In 1860. after IA years of revenue tar
if this country employed in manufact-
cries the following hands, namely:
Males above Is years old O349
Females above Is years old .--.--..-.-... 270s91
Now. I call the attention of my read
ers to the most significant fact that in
the factory labor under a revenue tariff no
hands-whether male or female, accord
ing to the official statisuics-were en-
ployed below the age of 10 years Now
let US turn to the year 1880, after 20
years of blessed protection which, 1t is
claimed, made this Nation happy:
In 1880 there We're employed in manu-
factories males above Is years I, C25 :ss5
Females above - years. l,tS9
Children from 10 to 15..--...........-. 161,.2l
In the first place we find that protec-
ton has naturally doubled the hands
employed. but it has, unfortunately,
nearly doubled the female labor, viz:
from 270, S97 in 1860 to 531. $50 in 1880
If protection is such blessing and
gives full work and good wages to IA
theirs of families and husbands, why
should the female labor double? Be-
sides this, what sham, swindle and
disgrace is protective tariff which has
enlisted Isl. 1921 children under the age
OF - years to work in factories? Is it
not as clear as sunshine that this slaugh-
ter of the innccents of Isl, 900 children
in the factories is simply for the pur
pose of having cheap labor? If these
Isl, 900 children We're not allowed to be
employed would not their places have to
be taken by persons above the age of
fifteen years, who naturally would get
! higher wages? Again. by employing
531 500 women the factories are only
employing cheap labor. OF what earthly
use is a protection of so, 80 and even 100
per cent. on wooden goods, or 40, 80.
and even 20 per cent. on cotton goods if
VIC HttNt W tlHpIty tHt oc1Ldo cAooo VI
labor which, when it is employed in
| Europe. we sheer down as pauper labor?
Has not this protective tariff proved
curse by introducing the employment
of children at all? We have it on sta
tistical record that no children below
Is wears old were employed in factories
before 1861, and anybody who chooses
to consult the census returns Of 1880
+ln q linn
vol. ,, page $50.
And now as to the employment of fe-
males. Let me show the contrast be-
tween the farmers employment of fe-
male labor and the employment of fe-
male labor by the pampered protective
industries.
The farmers in 1850 employed in the
United States and Territories
Male laborers 7ooo'9ss
Female labor. ................ 5a5lo
which is little over ~ per cent. The
manufacturers employed
Males above Is wears old 2 OPS; }}o
Females above Is years Old. 530,639
which is about Fl per cent, besides the
ISL, 900 children.
But this is not all OF the agricult-
ural employment of the $3.50 females
we find that the II cotton prod uCing
States. namely, Alabama, Arkansas,
Florida. Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi,
North Carolina, South Carolina. len
nessee. Texas and Virginia, employed
537. 314 females, which, as every Ameri-
can will understand, is colored labor by
females who for the last $50 years have
been. as it were, to the manor born. and
who, after all, are mostly employed in
picking cotton. which compares to the
close labor in the walled factories as
roast beef pares to oatmeal cakes.
ANYHOW. we find that the farmers who
live in the West and Southwest and pro-
dccc our breadStutfs, cattle and dairy
products only employed in 1880 81, 1876
females as laborers on their farms. All
honor to the farmer. He does not hook
for cheap female labor. He does not
press children of tender age into en-
ployment. He pays full and manly
wages, and treats his white help as his
equal. | speak of course of those mill
ions of farmers employed in raising
breadstuffs, dairy produce, etc. But
they are taxed by those of their fellow
citizens who employ weak women and
children of tender age, and who by the
grace of a protective tariff make them
pay % per cent. in average more on
nearly all manufactured articles they
use on their farms and in their house
holds.
The other day Senator Dawes made a
speech at the paper manufacturers
meeting. The worthy Senator is IA
nous protectionist and took occasion
to dcplore the inadequacy of protection
on worsted goods. Now, it is fact
that in the worsted-mills of the United
States there were employed in 1880 the
following hands:
Males above II years OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES -. 40
Females above Il years 9,473
Children less than ID years ..--..-......... 1870
This is an edifying exhibit, is it not,
when we find an industry that employs
double as many women and children as
men? OF course. the reason is simple;
cheap labor is sought for and got.
Well, then. The Senator, as | said, de-
pioced the inadequacy Of the tariff on
worsted goods and wants the duty
raised, which in other words means
that the people in general, and the
farmer in particular, who use most OF
the worsted goods, shall pay higher
price for it. Now, my worthy friends
| mean you, tax-ridden farmers-what
do you suppose is actually the duty on
worsted goods under the present tariff?
Let me enlighten you.
In 1856 find by the Government re-
turns that the duty on worsted goods,
L 10,