The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1890-01-03

tn at distance being worth its ful
value in the market. Now, though
wheat has been lower during the las
five years than at any time since tn
advent of railroads, a bushel of tina
grain grown upon what was once tn,
Great American Desert is carried from
Topeka to New York for 25 cents-hal
its selling price in Western Kansas
LOO miles away. Farmers have fel
the saving hand of genius. Manure il
spread. ground is plowed, seed is sown
the ripcned stalk is cut and the grail
thrashed by machinery. One mar
and three horses can pillow as mucf
ground with one pillow as two men ant
four horses did with two plows former
ly; one man with a seed drill will SOW
seed on twice as much ground as hi
could If sowing broadcast by hand
one man with a self-biuder will put il
sheaf as much wheat as twelve person:
did before the reaper was invented
On the whole one man does as mucl
work on the farm now as two men die
under the old regime, and more in
come linee of work. But the man who
went three or fonr times between two
corn rows with his single shovel pillow
received half as much as he does now
when going but once between the
rows. In harvest time, the "cradler'
received 81 to $1.25 day; he cut three
acres, and two persons followed" him
receiving together az much as he did
There was So to So so and board day
for three persons for putting three
acres of wheat into sheaves. The cost
is much less now. But what has be
come of the displaced hands, and
what better off are the workers to-day
in view of the altered conditions o.
living? The farm tenant, with hi:
garden and potato patch, his COW pas
tur and firewood, his pigs and hi:
home-spun clothes, is not common
now. A mans work is worth more
than it was when everything was done
by hand, because he can do more in 8
given time, and he receives more in
wages; but things over which it has
no control have SO changed that his
expenses are now necessarily greater
than they were then, so that, while il
need not, yet in fact it does cost him
much more to live than it did In the
days of the fail and the hand-loom
1t is true that the farm. laborer of to
day, whatever be his wages, is no bet
ter off-does not save any more-thar
his predecessors of half century ago
And what about the farmer himself
He uses labor-saving machinery. He
can and does work more acres with
much less help than in other days, he
produces rs much grain to the acre,
raises as many cattle, hogs, sheep and
horses, works as hard and steady, but
is he gaining? Has he saved anythingt
On The contrary is he not in debt and
falling behind? Is he not losing rather
than gaining ground compared with
his fellow men? His crops have moi
fallen off, but their value in the market
is less by 80 to so per cent. than they
were dozen years ago and before that
time. He is paying all the way from
s to Is per cent. for the use of money
money which goes up in value while
his products go down. His taxes
have not diminished a penny, while
his crops are cut short one-half in pay.
ing power. The census reports show
well for the farmer. In number and
value farms have increased, farm i'm.
plements have been multiplied many
times, and live stock increases yearly.
But the average farmer is not growing
richer.
(The condition of the wage.workers is
next takenup-mechanics,b builders and
skilled workers. The writer traces tie
causes that have led to the enormous
increase in productive capacity, and
asserts that the cost of manufactured
products has decreased 25 per cent. in
40 gears, and of transportation IS per
cent. He admits substantial benefits
by reason of this, and continues:l
Our wage-workers earn more and re-
ceive more than they did formerly.
But do they receive enough? Do they
receive as large share OF the profit Oh
their labor as their fathers did when
they worked in their own little shops
by the wayside half a century ago?
What profit is there for the workman
on 33-cent pair of shoes, or On Scent
yard of cloth. The shoe factories and
the cloth factories are owned by rich
men. Do they receive more than their
proper share Of the profit, what little
there is. Oh the mems work? And the
yes, the women. Three
cents for making shirt, IL cents for a
pair of trousers, so cents for a coat
there is no need of asking what share
of the profit they get. Work and
the daily round all through
the weary years. Advances in wages,
real though they are, have not kept
pace with the growing necessities of
the working people.
How is this state of things to be &C.
counted for? Is not the workman
worthy of his hire? Ought not the
producer to be first paid? Ought he
not to be permitted to provide for him.
self? Who may rightfully despoil