The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1892-08-13
TARIFFS, STRIKES AND WAGES.

review of the discussion growing out Of
Homestead trouble is SO unprejudiced
and SO true in every detail that it
deserves place in current literatnre:
The labor troubles at Homestead have
started lively discussion between pro-
tectionists and tariff Teformers as to
whether the tariff had anything to do
with those disturbances. TIE protection
lists point to the fact that labor troubles
and strikes occur in free-trade England
as frequently as In protectionist Ameri-
ca. and that therefore it cannot be said
that the tariff is their cause and free
trade the remedy. This is unquestion-
ably correct. But in one very important
respect the answer is not sufficient. One
OF the main arguments constantly and
v0cifer0usly urged in favor Of high pro-
tectiye duties is that they are not only
to aid the manufacturer in making in
dcstrial production profitable, but that
the tariff is especially intended to amel-
iorate the condition OF the American
workman beyond anything hitherto
known. 1t is to secure to him constant
employment and high and steady wages;
it is to enable him to own his house and
lot. to have the comforts of home and a
considerable amount Of the enjoyments
OF civilized society; it is to insure him,
unless he be very imprudent. against
wantand care in his old age; it is, in
short, to secure to him conditions of life
with which he would have every reason
to be content. Such promises have been
and are poured into the ears of working
men, especially at election time, when
the labor vote is wanted for the protec-
ZIONIST party.
A large portion Of the labor vote ha
actually been won in that way for the
high-tariff policy and it is by no means
surprising that the working-men should
have taken the representations made to
them seriously. According to what they
have been told, they have reason to be-
lieve that the tariff laws were specilical-
ly Tor their benefit; that in the matter Of
employment and wages the American
w0rking-men are to be much less depen.
dent upon the state of the labor market
and upon the vicissitudes OF business
than working-men in free-tradc coun-
tries are; that they may claim share in
the profits made by the establishments
in which they are employed with bet
ter right and to larger extent than
may be claimed by working-men notpro-
tected by tariff; end they will be taken
excellent care OF somehow, whether by
their employees or by the power that
made the tariff law. 1t is easy to see
what notions Of right and what expecta-
tlons Of benefit may thus be encouraged
in the minds of the credulons, and how
those minds are thus prepared fer the
exciting appeals of the agitator.
But the tariff laws say nothing about
wages or continuity Of employment.
The fnltilment OF the promises made by
the protectionists in behalf of the tariff
is not provided for in the statute That
fulfilment is left to the most immediate
benehciaries OF the protective system,
the manufacturers. There may be man
ufaeturers who run their establishments
MS benevolent institutions. ard who
think first Of their working-man and
last OF themselves; but it is not in
human nature that there should be many
OF this kind. Most manufacturers viii;
manage their business on ordinary busi-
ness principles. They will have keen
eye to their own profits. II managers OF
stock companies, they will consider tia
matter Of Justice as we'll rs of pride to
secure large dividends to the silarchold-
ers. They will ordinarily pay the work
ing-men not as much as they might, but
a. mneh as they must; or, to express it
less hardly, although their profits might
allow it, they are not likely in the pay
ment OF wages to go much beyond the
market rate. Ard whenever profits are
endangered by unfavorable circumstan-
ces, they will resort to whatever may
serve to prevents a deiciency-a reduc-
tlon OF wages among other things.
The working-man, who is not an un-
reasonable being, will submit to re-
duction Of his wages when Ee secs the
necessity OF it. Bat he will be he more
unwilling to admit such necessity un-
der any circumstances, the more reason
he has been given to look upon himself
as at least one of the intended beneii-
Charles of the laws which have done SO
much to make hls employer rich. He
will be rather inclined to argue that
under these laws he had hardly had tho
full share Of the benefit that was prom
tsed to him, and TINT somebody else has
onlswfnlly made off with large portion
q what was the working-man's due.
Atdsf upon this view Of the case, the
buckingham wosE- out Tor himself a