Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1891-09-03
4 POLICY NEVER TRIED.
President Harrison's Sop for American


Workin gmen.
The presidents disposition not to
| talk politics on his Bennington trio
was not proof against the tenn ptation
offered by an audience of working men
at Troy, \. Y. Il am sure said he,
that you realize here in large de-
gree the benefit of policy that keeps
the American market for the American
workmen." This ELECTED applause. but
whether it came from the officeholders
in the crowd or from the worSingInen
themselves is not stated.
If the workmen from the Troy shops
applauded the presidents remark they
did SO because they had been misled by
interested parties. There is no policy
that keeps the American market for the
American workmen. There never has
been such a policy in this country, and
the president should have been aware
of the fact
A market is place where men buy
and sell. Workmen, like other people,
desire both to buy and sell, and unlike
some other people, their sales and pur-
chases usually balance, or nearly so.
They are as much interested in having
a favorable market to buy in as to sell
in. Under the policy advocated by
Mr.. Harrison and his associates neither
is so favorable to the wOrhmen as it
would be under a system less restricted
and artificial. What the workmen has
to sell is his labor. This he sells in
free-trade market. in competition with
all the world. There is no tariff on
the importation of labor. There is no
legislation to check imports Of foreign
laborers. The contract labor law may
be mentioned as an exception, but it is
well known that the law is constantly
violated evaded by the pampered
minions of protection. 1t is clear
from the statistics of immigration that
it has not had the effect of checking
imports of cheap labor from abroad
The republican party seeks to extend
protection to the domestic manufac
turer by shutting out foreign competi-
ton, in whole or in part and there is
a constant tendency toward prohibit
Dry rates. In fact, the benefciaries of
the tariff are never satisfied with any
thing less than prohibitory rates, and
numerous instances may be cited where
the Mckinley bill increased rates that
We're already virtually prohibitory, no
doubt for the purpose of offering pre-
miums for the formation of trusts !
The republican party is very fond of
fairfield trusts, because com binationS
of that kind are obliged to contribute
literally to the campaign fund in order
to maintain their privileges. If the re-
publlcanS were sincere in their declara- |
tons that they have framed high tariffs
for the benefit of worlingmen, they |
would apply the same policy to for
eign labor that they do to foreign prod |
ucts. They would seek to shut it out
from competition with the American
workingmen; to diminish the supply of
labor, and SO to augment the price. |
That they do not do so shows |
that they are seeking to benefit the en-
ployer and not the employe.
We do not wish to be understood as
advocating the exclusion of foreign la
borers. 1t is no part of the democratic
policy to do this: but it is logically a !
part of the republican policy, if that |
policy were really what they say it is |
when they address themselves to the |
worllingman. They advocate policy |
of restriction, of exclusion of the !
products of foreign labor. They re- |
strict foreign competition in prod ucts, |
but they leave competition in labor I'M
trammeled. This shows the insincer
ity Of the claim that their policy is die
tatcd by regard for the laborer.
There is no effort to keep the Ameri- |
can market for American workmen to |
sell their labor in. Our worlxmen sell |
their labor in competition with cheap .
labor from all parts of the world, ex
ceDt China. Go to the factories and |
the mines owned by the men that are |
allowed to write the monopoly sections
OF our tariff laws and you will find |
them filed with Hungarians, Italians
ard other foreigners. few of whom can
speak our language, and vast numbers
OF whom have no intention of becom
ing American citizens. These men
were employed because their services
could be had at lower rates than those
of american laborers, and their pres
ence shows how baseless is the claim
that the American market is kept for
American wOrkmen.
Now let us look at the other side of
the American market namely, the mar
ket in which the American workmen
buy their supplies Is this regulated |
for their benefit? Quite the contrary
They must expend their wages, earned |
in a free trade market for labor, in the
purchase of merchandise rendered arti-
ncldIlY scarce anu 1Il8il DN ii ldflI leFIeu
for the benefit Of their employers and
others engaged in protected industries
On all dutiable articles they find an
average protection ofsabout so per cent.
When they eXpend S160 of their wages
for dutiable articles they get only what |
500 would buy abroad the difference
of $50 goes either into the treasury or
into the pockets of some monopolist |
That is the sort of market that is pro-
vidcd for the American workmen in
which to expend the wages which they |
earn in competition with the labor of |
the world.
The claim that protection is for the
benefit of American labor has nothing |
to rest on except the difference of |
wages here and abroad. That differ
ence existed before the revolution, |
when the American colonies were a
part of Great Britain. The price of |
labor is regulated by its producsiveness
and the law of supply and demand. 1t |
is the operation of this law and the SUI
perior productiveness OF American Ia
Dor that have made it higher here, and |
not protection. The advocates OF the
protective system, while prating of love
for the American workman, arc doing all |
they can to neutralize the advantages |
he enjoys, partly by increasing the sup
ply of labor and partly by giving him
a dear market in which exDpn6 his |