Audubon County Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Audubon Co., Iowa) 1885-1894, 1892-07-07
TARIFF PRO AND CON.
SOME PERTINENT QUESTIONS
AND ANSWERS.
Ask Your Democratic Candidates to
Disiodge These Arguments II They
Can-secrctary Tracy's Great Work
A Few Nuts for tho Opposition,

Few Nuts Tor tho Opposition,
Q-What class is most benefited by
q protective tariff?
A,--The worltingmcn, We cannot
have free trade In this country unless
we level the conditions of American
worlsingmcn down to the conditions OF
European worlSingmen. IL is said that
the manufacturers and capitalists get
the benefit Of protection. We hear
this every day from those who seem to
want free trade, II the worSingman
gets so cents dry on the other side of
the water and comes here and gets W
day, who gets the dollar and halff
II the pay over there is rs cents u day
and the pay here is So day, II the
manufacturer is able to give s2.25, be-
cause of the protective tariff, who gets
the dollar and half? Not the manu-
facturer nor tho capitalist, but the man
WIN works.
q How has protection benefited
laborP
A.-under u revenue tariff but few
opportunities were offered to labor
Protection has given steady employ
mcnt to workiugmon aud thus II has
raised wages. Under freo-trado tho
fields of employment opened to tho
laborer were both few and contracted.
lie had practically TO choose between
the ship and tho farm. Frce'trado
prevented any diversilcation of in
dustry, and consequently any diversiii-
cation of employment Wages were
low because there was little demand
for labor II was the saying
OF Richard Golden that when two work.
men were running after one master,
wages were low; but when two masters
were running after one workman,
wages were high. The tariff has
opened mp SO many fields OF industry
in which capital has sought most
eagerly To engage, that tho
American workman hns been pursued,
not by two, but by twenty masters.
The demand for labor has made wages
high. Again, the tariff has raised the
rate OF wages, because IL has made
agriculture more profitable. The profits
in farming, | have already shown, con-
stituted the minimum of wages that
could be paid in the manufacturing
Industries Now the tariff prevented
the oyer-production Of agriculture, and
thus increased the aitractiveness OF tho
land. The tariff has thus raised the
minimum rate of wages Wages, how
ever, have risen far above this mini
mum. Lnborcrs have engaged In iw
dustrics more prolific OF wealth than
agriculture. Thoso industries are tho
result OF protective tariff. With the
development of manufactures the gross
product OF the naton's industry has, IA
l have shown, beeA increased; and ns
wages are paid out of this gross pro-
duct they have also Increased.
But free-traders contend that n pro-
tective tariff can raise wages only
nominally, not really, The greater cost
Of living, consequent upon the higher
prices, Is, they Contend II complete
offset to the higher rate of wages.
Now, this matter has been settled
automatically. Col. Wright In his
comparative Wages and Prices, 1850
1888, Massachusetts and Great Brit.
ain" declares that, although wages In
Massachusetts, are ~ per cent, higher
than In Great Britain the cost Of living
is only about II per cent higher than
In Great Britain. This proves the fal'
lacy of such charge,
How Protection Helps Labor.
Q.-llow do protective duties result
In an increase of wages?
A.-The duties when collected con
stitutc revenue. The point here is that
the revenue is equal TO the collected
duties. But the duties when collected
result also in an increase of wages and
IL In protection. A certain percentage
of our duties results In an increase OF
wages, and another certain percentage
of them in protection.
The duty on the foreign producers
cost Of goods imported into our market
increase wages here, but does not effect
protection. The duty on the foreign
producers profit on such goods results
in protection, but not in an increase in
wages.
The duty Of II per cent on the cost
(SiD0) OF the goods, increases wages by
Sii. The duty of II per cent on the
profit (Ss), equal S3.2s, effects pro-
lection. The sum OF the two, Sal plus
s3.9s, equal Sii.2s, which Is the duty.
If the profits were 7 per cent and the
duty 80 per cent, wages would be in
creased by 80 per cent (of Sl00) equal
$40, and protection secured by 30 pei
cent (of so equal So So The sum OF
/ the two is S3S. So, which is the duty
collected. Thus $50 plus ~. SO equals
1882.
II is plain that the increase in wages
Is independent OF profit while prote;
ton is wholly dependent on profit. j
there were no profit there would stu
be high wages IL production continued
but there would be no protection.
but here two extremes meet, for II
producers profits were very large, ou'
average rate of duty would not ncces
sarily check importations in the least
Free traders will please notice the
/ point have thus explained.
Government should Protect Its Labor
/ Q.--Is it the duty of government
to give employment TO its citizens?
Alt is not primarily the duty of .
/ government to employ its subjects bu
| it is its solemn duty TO create and Sc
cure every possible opportunity fol-
4 such employment. 1t should at nj
| times strive to elevate the condition o.
| it's laborers. Capital can protect itself
but labor is helpless. The first aut
| highest duty of government is L
protect the weak. To procure employ
ment for its subjects is one of the bes
possible ways of caring for the poo
and the weak. II protective tariff
affords employment to labor at living
wages, it is the duty of the go 'crn
ment to enact such law.
! The elevation and development of al
the people should be the highest ain
of the nation. The elevation is neve
complete until every man is occupie'
In the labor Of Iove"-tho labor of hi
Al. {. r.. 4 .t..x a..