Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-03-29

account Of which is given elsewhere
in this issue, has suggested these re-
Elections. The speakers, six in num-
Der, were all young men OF exceD-
tional ability, and possessed Of intel
lectual capacity and attachments
which promised much for the future
career Of each, and they all seemed
earnest an honest in advocating and
supporting their respective views.
There were 4 gOodly number Of
ladies present. but a glance over the
audience showed it to consist main
y Of young men who have hitherto
shown a taste 70: intellectual sub
jects. The character OF the Assem-
blage in this respect was marked.
To lay before such a gathering Of
eager and receptive minds, argu-
ments or data Of a kind that would
be misleading, would be to
10 injury that might be
grave and irreparable. \
weighty responsibility rests upon
the speakers upon such an occasion,
and if they fail to properly discharge
it, they become legitimate subjects
# criticism. They are such in any
case, for the reason that they invite
he public to listen TO and consider
their views and arguments.
While much might be said in
praise Of the entertainment given
10 the audience who listened TO the
Iebate last evening, there We're fea-
lures connected with It which
would have been dificu to elimin-
ate from 1t, but which should be
guarded against as far as possible.
both by speakers and listeners. The
5peakers in the Affirmative laid be-
fore the audience statistics. or al
legged statistics, in support OF free
trade, which were obviously be-
You'd the power OF any human
being to check, that is TO sus-
tain or refate by sound logic
based upon sure premises, anG
the defenders OF 4 protective
tariff did the same thing. Among
these statistics, for example, were
figures which purported to represent
the national wealth Of this country
at different periods prior TO 1850.
The champions Of free trade had 8
lot Of figures which went to show
that the country prospered most un,
der a low tariff, and the advocate.
II protection had = lot Of figures
covering the same periods OF time
which went TO show that the cOun.
try prospered most undera protective
tariff.
Now these figures were worth.
'ess. They were mostly fictitious.
Prior to 1850, no method existed by
which accurate statistics upon thi.
.uhject were or could be collected
or preserved, to enable any person
TO conclusively show the relation
5etween national prosperity and the
,ariff. To tell, for example, the
mount Of our national wealth in
he year 1920, with any degree Of
,ertainty, lies beyond the power Of
nan. Figures that purport to re,
present it may be far too large oil
much too small. There exist Nc
means Of checking them. Hence a
Iebater msy make them what he
pleases with the happy conscious
ness that 50 long - he remains
within the bounds Of reason, no
human being can convict him Of
error.
Ifaa investigator makes a book
worm Of himself and searches
through the literature Of the subject
from remote dates till now, he al
ways finds the same conflict in fig
uFes and assertions, Of arguments
and statistics, aud il lac he both
logical and conscientious he will
reach the conclusion that the tariff
problem must be solved by lines Of
argument having some other basis
than the alleged statistics which
writer's and speakers upon the sub
Jet commonly use, for when such
figures are no. downright foIgeries.
Jhey are almost always too incom-
plete to be Of any value.
As an illustration of this point we
reproduce figures relative 10 the
sugar industry which one Of the
speakers presented: Total value of
the product for the year 1857, s24a,-
10000; total amount of wages paid
for the labor producing that amount
Of sugar, $1,000, 600; amount Of the
riff ON that quantity OF sugar if it
Sere, imported at 3 cents per
pound, SI5.OJO,OO0; amount which
sugar manufacturers are enabled,
because ofthe tariff, to "steal'' from
tue sum they ought TO pay for
wages, 81, 100000. These figures
were laid before the audi
ence on blackboard, but
few if any persons presen
could give them proper analysis or
at the time. Now
they mean that the labor which pro-
duces S2s2 worth of sugar is paid
only 81. This is prepOsterOus; 81
would not pay for the labor en-
pioyed to haul the sugar cane from
the field. From these figures IL
would appear that the manufacture
ems pay their employees 81 while
SO from them, In other
words, more than ten times as much
is stolen from employees as is paid to
them, and but for the iniquities of
the tariff the employees in the sugar
Industry would receive ten times as
high wages as they now do, without
increasing the puee at which sugar
IS sold to the public,
We refrain from further comment
upon or analysis Of these figures
In a dozen ways it can be shown
hat they have no necessary connec-