Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1890-11-01
INVENTION AND PROTECTION.
Inconsistency of the Republicans in Oppos-
Ing Cheap Goods abor.Savlng Machin-
cry and Pauper Labor-Protection Is

Inconsistency of the Republicans in Oppos-
Ing Cheap Goods abor.Savlng Machin-
cry and Pauper Labor-Protection Is
Fogyisin-
If we let in the cheap goods of for
eigners, say the protectionists, we throw
our labor out of employment We are
not able to stand this flood of cheap
goods-it will ruin u.s.
But brethren, let us be consistent
We have all come to the conclusion that
the man who invents machine that
will do the work OF ten men Is a bene-
factor of the community. There is no
doubt on that point now, although when
the first reaping machines were put into
our wheat fields some of them were
burnt by the laborers, who thought they
were going to be ruined.
The sewing machine even was looked
upon by many, when it was first intro
duced, as the deadly enemy of all sew
ing-women, dressmakers, etc What
shall these women do? it was asked.
They have but one way to make liv.
ing; and If you take that away they are
done for If you introduce this new
tangled machine one woman will do the
work Of ten. Nine women out of every
ten sewing-women will inevitably be
thrown out of employment Letus have
no sewing machines!
But everybody knows that these
gloomy predictions of old fogies were
not fulfilled. The reaping machine did
throw some laborers out of employment;
but the production of wheat has been
enormously extended and cheapened,
and this cheapening process has been
of incalculable benefit to all the people
of the earth. So with the sewing ma
chine; it has created an enormous de-
mand not only for sewing, but for cloth
OF all kinds; for women use great deal
more material and require great deal
more sewing in making garment now
than before the invention OF the sew
ing machine.
But whether some people lose en-
ployment or not, the voice of human
progress is that invention shall go on
and do its perfect work. Let it reduce
the necessity for human toll TO the low
est possible point 1t is not pleasant to
labor; let us have as little of it as possi-
BILE. If the farmer can reap ten acres
of grain in day with machine, let
him do so; why compel him to groan
and sweat through ten days, or else hire
nine men to help him?
Thisis all as plain as A BCnow. Hence
we encourage inventors in every posi-.
BILE way We give them patents for a
number of years toenrich them; and we
build monuments to them as benefact-
ors of the race. They are the un-
crowned kings Of industry, and We point
the young to them for examples
Now a curious question is, why do our
protectionist lawmakers keep up Pat
ent Office at Washington? Why do they
encourage inventions by patents? Do
they not see that such course is in di-
rect antagonism with "the principles OF
protection"
Protection is organized fogyism.
How so?
In this way the admission Of cheap
foreign goods has precisely the same
effect as tho invention Of new ma.
chine. That is to say, the public is
enabled to satisfy its needs with less
expenditure Of labor-we get what we
wantmore cheaply.
Let us take case like this: The peo.
pie of this country need every year, we
will suppose, million 81 woolen hats,
total cost s., 600, 900, of which labor
gets 81, 900, 900, Now, some bright fell
low in hat factory invents a machine
that does the work OF four men and re-
duces the cost OF this hat to 81. The
cost Of the whole lot is then 81. 00O 900
Three-fourths OF the hat-makers are
thrown out Of employment and mus
| find other work.
That Is hardship on these men
doubtless. But what does human prog
ress demand? That there should b
as little toll as possible-that a day.
labor saved to each OF 1000 900 men II
buying their hats Is a more importan
gain 10 the community than that s,oO