Freeland tribune. (Freeland, Pa.) 1888-1921, 1892-06-16
FALSE PROTECTION.
UNNECESSARY. TAXATION FOR THE
BENEFIT OF MONoPOLlEs.

in Europe and the United States.
Hence No Need for Protection.
1t was Henry Clay who clearly point
ed out the fact, which modern protec-
tionists seem entirely to have lost sight
| of, that low wages did not mean low
cost of production. AS an instance of
this fact he cited the case of Asia and
Europe. Wages in Europe, he said,
were many times higher than wages in
Asia, but because Of the great use of
machinery in Europe and of the greater
intelligence and skill Of the workmen,
particularly in Great Britain, manufac-
tured articles which require any con
siderable amount Of labor are manufac-
tured infinitely cheaper than they can
be manufactured by the natural exer-
tions" of the countless millions of un-
skilled, poorly paid and poorly fed Ia
borers of Asia.
The rapidly increasing use OF machin-
cry since Clay's time has made this fact
even more manifest now than it was
then. II is the low wage countries of the
globe that supply the agricultural prod
ucts and the raw materials of manu-
faeture to the high wage countries, and
1t is the high wage countries that manu-
facture these raw materials into all
kinds of articles clothing.
ships, furniture, farm and household
implements-with which tosupply them
selves and to sell back to these high
wage countries. Hence it would seem
that if the tariff ON manufactured ar
ticles is needed to protect labor, the
countries most in need of such tariff
are the low wage countries Of the earth.
This, in fact, is the rule. Italy, Russia,
Spain and other low wage countries of
Europe are heavily protected against
Great Britain, France, Germany, Bel
gium and the other comparatively high
wage countries of Europe. Great Brit
ain, the United States, France, Germany
and Belgium, the high wage countries Of
the earth, are the greatest exporters of
manufactured articles. There can be
but one explanation-it is cheaper to
make costly articles where wages are
high than where they are low. This has
been demonstrated In detail by many
statistical experts.
Edward Atkinson has recently given
us long list of articles for which the
labor cost to manufacture is less in the
United States than in any country of
Europe. g., pair of shoes which it
costs thirty-eight cents to make In
Massachusetts, costs from sixty to seven
ty-fve cents to make in foreign coun-
tries of Europe. He expresses the opin-
ion that the labor cost in nine-tenths of
the manufactured articles is less in the
United States than in Europe. To the
question that may be asked here by pro.
| tectionists, why then do we not sup
ply more of the manufactured articles
Of the world than Great Britain" it may
be replied our failure to do so is not be.
cause of the difference in labor cost OF
the product, but because Of the excessive
taxes levied by the United States upon
the raw materials and the machinery of
production. Remove this tax and our
restrictions upon our shipping, and we
will soon be exporting more manufac-
tured articles than Great Britain.
In view of these facts let us notice the
woolen industry in this country.
One of the first effects of this heavy
protection" which we will observe is
the decline in the number of woolen
mills in the United States from 1891 in
| 1870 to l 100 in 1880 and to ,3l2 in 1890.
The value of the goods manufactured
increased from $267, 1859, ,9l3 in 1880 10
$685., ,23l, 100 in 1890. 1t is apparent, then,
that the exorbitant duty on raw mate
rials tends to drive out small capitalists
and to leave the business In the hands of
monopolists. The next effect has been
to make the price of woolen goods in the
United States nearly double what they
would have been without such protection.
This additional cost to the 65,000,0
of people in the United States is not now
less than $l00,o00,000 per year. But
even with these high prices the woolen
industry cannot be said to be in -four
ishing condition-the increased value of
the product being only about equal to
the increase in population since 1890
The weight of taxation upon the raw
materials is sufficient to prevent the
growth Of the industry even with these
exceptionally high prices.
Another curious effect is that while
the duties have increased the price of
raw material to manufacture, it has not
apparently increased the price of domes-
tic wools- AS pointed out by John Sher-
man in 1885, the price of domestic woods
has declined from 81 cents in 1867 to
46 cents in 1870; 43 cents in 1875 to 36
cents to 40 cents in 1888.
But that part Of the tariff to which we
here wish especially to call attention is
the part levied for the benefit of labor.
Under the Mckinley bill this part varies
from 80 to so per cent, and will average
about As per cent. AS this duty is levied
to cover the difference of the labor cost
in this and other countries, it may be
well to inquire what this difference act
ually is.
The Hon. Carroll D. Wright, COM
missioner of labor, has for some time
been making special investigations in
to the cost of textiles in Europe and
America. Advanced sheets, showing
this cost, were prepared for and used
by the Hon. A. B. Montgomery in
his speech in the house March II,