The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1892-10-21

ZIONIST.
NO.I.
For The Eris.

| j.
| For The Egis.
In the course of a friendly correspondence
with gentleman of Chicago, he being an ex-
IRENE protectionist, challenged me to an
| swer the questions given below before our
club, and for his and several Democratic
friends benefit, also of Chicago. The matter
being OF general interest as bearing on the
NIT my reply to you for publication. This gen.
tleman in his letter states: Since the steel
workers OF Homestead earn paid wages based
on the selling price of steel billets, with the
stipulation that in no case should the price be
counted lower than a certain named figure
known as the minimum and since it is we'll
known that though the company named 500
per ton as such minimum the strikers demand
ed that it should be S24, and since it is also
Were selling at in this COUNTRY maj and IN
England for S1S per ton, now what would no
doubt be very instructive to your club would
be for you TO answer the following:
II. If the tariff was rem owed would not steel
billets sell in this country for SIS per ton?
-. If so, would not the minimum of the
wages scale have to be reduced to SIS per ton p
1 have replied as follows: Your letter of
Sept. 4th was not lost en- route nor has it been
laid aside as unworthy OF attention, neither
you attributed to that eminent Texas states
man, Senator Mills, go soak your head"
AT the time received your letter was very
busy and supposed had till Nov. Sth to reply
to your tariff points, l thought it best to wait
till should have time in which to investigate
the subject your questions bore directly on.
political regeneration am not without con-
siderable for those Democrats whom you re-
ferred to as in danger of being led astrays by
tariff maintaining wages. You accuse us of be-
ing free traders. This is your party's cry,
noticeable chiefly in lacking the slightest eie-
ment of truth. While we advocate reduction
of tariff duties we do not propose to go down.
ward in the rate of duty on the scale that you
protectionists seem inclined to go upward. l
am not aware that the Democratic party
charges the Homestead troubles directly to the
tariff. No thoughtful man would do SO. In
my humble opinion the tariff had nothing to do
directly with the Homestead strike. But we do
affirm that the advocates and defenders of the
Mckinley bill made the claim that it was legis-
lation i'll the interests of the workingmen that
his wages be either increased or maintained,
but certainly those men were justified in not
expecting q reduction of wages.
Mr.. Mckinley in support of his bill said
I'VE have not been so much concerned about
the prices of the articles we consume as we
have been to encourage system of home pro-
duction which shall give fair remuneration to
domestic producers and fair wages to Ameri-
can workmen." Now if this statement of Mr..
Mckinley were true, in effect the steel work
ers' wages should have been increased rather
than reduced, for the duty on steel was increas
ed.
Not having any knowledge of the details of
the iron business, / cannot keep so close to the
direct question as otherwise would. nor do I
think it is necessary to do so in order to sustain
Il negative answer to your questions; for by
their character they must be met by inferential
reasoning. Moreover, your questions are based
on mere differences and not on logical conclu-
sionS.
Your first question implies a conclusion on
your part that Democratic success means re-
moval of the duty on steel. We propose in the
future, as we have practised in the past to
recognize the constitutional provisions for
revenue, both in spirit and in the letter. The
tariff of 1888 made steel billets dlltiable at As
per cent. I'D val. The Mills bill proposed no
change.
But admitting removal of the duty it does
not necessarily follow that the price would de.
hat w fal M of
billets would still be governed by the law of sup
ply and demand. The duty has not kept the
price up TO- the agnfes OF t s when olefs
Nor were wages reduced during the period
covered by the decline in the price to the pres
ent of S2250 per ton, until about the time the
Mckinley duties went into effect. The profits
on billets during the three years prior TO last
June must have been enormous, or else the de-
cline i'll price was due to Il decrease in the cost
of production. which think is the proper as
sumption. When we contemplate the probable
effects of removal of the duty on steel billets
we must also assume that the removal of
duties will also extend to the materials
entering into the production of billets.
Now, with cheaper raw materials and
our acknowledged efficient labor is it not fair
to assume that we can produce billets much
cheaper than at present? How much cheaper
it is not necessary to state, but certainly cheap
er, and being cheaper, the market for Ameri-
can billets would be extended, which means
additional employment to labor. 1t must be
borne in mind that steel billets do not represent
end, like steel nails, but serviceable only
when formed into something else. Bilets
should therefore be classed as raw material.
They are clements of manufacturing, and their
value depends upon the extent to which they
enter into the various manufacturing indus
tries. If they enter largely into manufacture
ing, which is the same thing as being in great
are too good business man not to recognize
the law OF supply and demand. Whatever has
price Is obedient to this law, whether billet or
labor. This law is old us human tariff.
In looking over the Baltimore Sun | notice
the following paragraph in the New York cor
respondence: During the past week sixteen
steamships landed in port 5,095 cabin, $40
Storage passengers. In the corresponding
week OF last year twenty steam rs brought to
us 1874 cabin passengers and 1924 immi-
grants in steerage berths. The falling off in
immigration has had a very important conse
quence in social circles. 1t has resulted in
practical famine in the domestic help market
and famine prices are prevailing. At this sea-
son Of the year it has been usual to have about
1000 immigrant girls week arrive who desire
to enter domestic service. The ruling rate
used to be about S14 month. Now it has run
up to SIS and $40 with q scant supply at that"
This affords q striking evidence of the above
named law in operation, and it also indicates
what might be the result of free trade law,
for we have absolute free trade in labor.
Your second question implies that every re-
duction of the tariff would be accompanied by
a corresponding reduction of wages. 1 have
| indicated above that the rate of wages depends
upon higher natural law and not upon an
artificial tariff law. The Homestead scale was
not based on the tariff rates. Crhe scale was
largely influenced by the labor organization,
which will not effect permanent remedy of
the evils complained of by the laboring class.)
Had the Carnegie people consulted the Nc
Kiney act and based the wages scale thereon,
there would not have been a Homestead strike,
us shall endeavor to show.
plank in the Republican platform says:
ION all imports coming into compe-
| ton with the products of American labor there
should be levied duties equal to the difference
between wages at home and abroad" What
consistency do we find here? Mr.. Carroll ID.
Labor Commissioners labor
cost in this country and i'll Europe on IL ton of
steel billets. In the United States S1.1S to
81 60 in England SO cts. The difference be-
tween the cost here and abroad appears to be
73 cents taking the maximum United States
cost According to the plank quoted above,
the duty should be adjusted in harmony with
the above stated difference, 73 cents u ton,
whereas the medium rate of duty on ton of
billets appears to be . of a cent per pound,
when the import is valued at cent to 1.4eents
per pound. which would be equal to S15.6S on
ton, 2210 pounds, valued at ! A cents per
pound Presumably the laborer gets the IS
between $50 IS and 73 cts! There is this view
also to take of it.
have figured out from various reports that
the entire labor cost on II ton of steel billets,
from the ore to the billets, in the United States
is S1O27; in continental Europe So 81, show
ing difference in favor of the European of
SLIGO per ton. According to Republican logic
the duty should not exceed this difference, and
therefore the duty could be reduced S14.0S or
the difference between Sl5.6S and SLIGO, with
out causing necessary reduction of wages
But in my humble opinion the Atlantic Ocean
affords the American manufacturer all the
protection he needs to secure the home market
With the increased demand for labor which
the opening of wider markets would bring
about, the probabilities are that wages would
advance. In England wages are higher than
in France, Germany or Austria, while each of
the last three countries have high tariffs as
against Englands free trade policy. If we had
no duty on iron ore, iron and lumber of other
things, 1t is quite possible that we would get
the cost of bfllets down to s1s per ton and if
we did we could sell so many more of
them that our labor supply would be wholly
insufficient, and with competition for it the
laborer would get a larger proportion of
the cost than he now does. Its true, probably,
that some of our manufacturers would not get
rich so fast as they have done and are now doing
but so far as the workmen are concerned the
advantage would be with them.
GEO. X. STEPHENSON.
R You can escape just
~ about one half the ills that