The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1891-09-01
TUESDAY SEPTEMBER !, 1891.


to land, labor and capital, is an Inter
csting one and will be read We doubt {
not with the same degree of interest
that We have read 1t ourselves. Never
we do not agree with our friend
upon all the points he assumes. We
agree that the form of government
does not necessarily increase or de-
crease wages, but the laws of those
governments certainly have that ten
dency, Whatever influence a protee-
tive tariff may have in a country like
Germany, 1t can hardly be denied that
the Mckinley bill has the tendency to
keep up good wages in the United
States. Then Mr.. Kreer says:
THE fact is, that tariff like any
other tax, lessons production and
hampers exchange, thereby not only |
lessening the amount which goes to |
labor as wages, but also that which |
goes to capital as interest, for all taxes
that arc levied ON anything which is
the joint production Of land labor and
capital lin process Of exchange) is
nearly all paid by those who have no
Wealth.
We think we are the friend, OF labor
end yet we cannot see things as Mr.,
s-reer sees them. Our friend makes
the same error that every one does
VINO opposes protection, OF calling the
tIrin tax, when this tariff he calls a
tax goes directly into the pockets of
labor. Farther, Mr. Kreer says: If
man rents a house he must pay all the
taxes against it, fire insurance and
water rent; included also an amount
necessary to keep up repairs, together
with the current rate of interest OH
the capital invested in the house." In
that sense the renter does what our
friend credits him with; but this is II
specious kind of argument that will
not hold good, In fact, ought not n
man with money in property get six
per cent interest for IL over and above
the other expenses incurred2
Here is a man with house that cost
$4,000. At six per cent on the cost that
house would rent for $40 per month or
Sl20 per annum. Then comes the on
sets to that. The city tax on the house
would be $500; the water tax would
be s10; the county tax would be 81; the
Insurance would bes3;and the expense
for repairs would be s25 the average
year. These would foot up :7O year
and leave the landlord but $50 rent for
his $1,000 house or 2% per cent. on
the amount invested, 1t would be I'M
reasonable to maintain that the rent
OF $40 per annum should pay all in
terest and all expenses. The owner is
entitled to six per cent. clear on his
property to equalize it with labor.
Then, of course, labor or the renter
has to pay rent to meet all other ex-
2penses, and we cannot see that there
is anything SO very oppressive TO labor
In all this.
As our friends turn of mind runs
in this direction allthrough we quote
farther; Last year a Republican con-
gress appropriated one Thousand
million of dollars, of which enor
nous sum 90 per. cent. will be pail
by those who have their labor to sell
We differ entirely with our friend ii
the assertion, but even admitting il Il
DO true, does not 30 per. cent Of it go
back to labor again in the building ol
n navy, in the repairs Of hmhoIs an,
rivers, in the erection OF pabli4 W prks
in the carrying of mails md In hun
t,reds Of other respects2 In genera