The free press. (Poplarville, Miss.) 1890-19??, 1892-09-29
MCKINLEY WAGES
BREAK DOWN.

HISTORY OF THE SMALL LIST OF BOGUS
WAGE ADVANCES THAT NOW sup
PLIES TWO PARTIES WITH CAMPAIGN
MATERIAL - BRIEF FACTS IN RE-
GARD TO EACH CASE.
The Hon. John Dewitt Warner, of
the New York Reform Club, has COM
pleted his investigation of the twenty
eight cases where, ACCORDING to the
American Economist and other high
tariff authorities, wages have been adj
vanced in protected industries since
October, 1890. Trustworthy examiners
were sent to each place to get the facts.
Their reports were of such nature that
the Reform Club has published them as
a number of Tariff Reform, and the New
York Weekly World gave them a,.full page.
It will be remembered that the Re-
form Club had prepared and published
in the World and lin Tariff Reform list
of nearly 500 wage reductions and lock-
outs in protected industries since the
Mckinley act took effect. The protec-
tionists who had promised higher wages
with the Mckinley bill and had been
shouting higher wages ever since, began
so get uneasy because they could not
tell anxious inquirers exactly where
wage advances had occurred. They be-
gan to search, feeling confident that
wages must have advanced IN many of
the thousands of protected mills in this
country. They sent out circulars to
manufacturers asking them to report the
per cent. that wages had been advanced
in their mills since October, 1890. In
this way and in other ways they got
together what purported to be list OF
wage advances. Apparently it did not
occur to the American Economist editor
(or if it did he was so anxious to publish
the list that he did not consider the
consequence of an exposure) that the man.
ufacturers might misstate facts, 1perhaps
to get free advertising, or, it may be, to
attract laborers to their mills. The
twenty-three cases of "wage advances"
were published with flourish in the
American Economist. Republican papers
were not slow in copying the list. At
last Mckinley had been vindicated and
the "free trade liars" silenced. But the
one great fault with the list was that it
was short; indeed it was its brevity that
betrayed it in more ways than one. 1t
not only exposed the meager results OF
great promises, but it offered induce
ments to investigation which a more
formidable list would have precuded.
If the protectionists were attempting
game of bluff they should have made a
list of several hundred advances-so
many that it would be very big and
very expensive piece of work to make
inquiry in regard to all. But twenty
three cases were Just enough to challenge
investigation. Ii few of them could
be shown to be incorrect, the already
small list would be diminished so that
even Republican editors would be
ashamed to publish it. 1t was not ex-
pected by Mr.. Warner, when he began
the investigation, that the whole list was
n fraud and that he would, in the ma.
iority of cases, get wage reductions for
his already long list. The following are
the brieiest possible summaries of the
list, the quotations being from the
American Economists list of examples
Of wages advanced under the Mckinley
tariff, showing increased per cent:
"1. Haskell & Baker Car Company,
Michigan City, Ind. 10 per cent"
Wages were reduced from 12t to
25 cents per day in 1899, and restored
l2l cents in May, 1890. No change
IL. fpln not tonLr aiIapf
-. Wooster u Stoddard, Walden,
N. Y, per cent"
Strike in May, 1892, caused read
justment of wages by which some got
more aud Others less-total effect not
certain.
"3. Camden Woolen Company, Cam
den, Me-, 10 per cent
Four looms got raise because they
changed to heavier work; weavers earn
ings were not increased.
"a. Rider Engine Company, Walden,
n. Y, per cent.
No advances in ten years, but ieduc-
tons of 10 and l2b per cent. since 1854.
s5. Hawthorne Mills Company, Glenn
vile, Conn, Is per cent"
one man huNahCeu lIoth Si'iv W
si.25 in July, 1892, and nearly all OF
the 300 employees reduced from 10 to 20
per cent. since 1890.
''6. Alfred Dodge, Dolgeville, N. T.,
90 per cent"
Alfred Dodge has for years had sys-
ten of encouraging employees to work
for little and to expect more, by advanc-
ing the wages of twenty or twenty-five
cf his more industrious workmen shil-
ling at the end OF the year. In Febru-
airy, 1891, forty or fifty received this
advance but in February, 1892, no ad-
vance whatever occurred and many en-
ployes were disappointed. Numerous
reductions each year fully offset these
punched and widely heralded advances.
~. Lake Superior Lumber Company,
ssult St. Marie, Mich, 15 per cent"
No advance at all was made in this
planning mill; report was purely for
political reasons.
"S. ]. G. Bass, Roxboro, N. c., %
ner cent "