The weekly tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1891-1894, 1892-05-21
MAY q. 1892.
PROTECTION AND WAGES.

The question of wages is one or the
greatest moment to the laboring men OF
the country and they naturally favor a
tariff policy under which the labor market
would be stimulated, and under which
labor would command the highest price.
Republican organs and speakers assert
that a high protective tariff increases
the value of labor while they invariably
associate low wages with free trade. No
reliable tables of statistics are produced
by them to prove either declaration, yet
the cry is iterated and reiterated that
low a and free trade are ~inseparably
connected. The cry has become the pol
itical stock in trade of the uniformed
republican prints in the country.
1t is we'll known that the price of labor
like the price of any merchantable ar
ticle depends upon the demand for 1t.
When two employers run after one work
man labor brings the highest market
price. but when two laboring men run
after one employer the price OF labor
falls. Hence the price of muscle is reg
ulated by the demand for it. 1t follows
then that a tariff which increases the
demand for labor is the tariff the wage
earners of the country want. The mat
ter then resolves itself into one plain
question, Which is the better for the
laboring men of the country, a high pro-
~tective tariff or a low tariff: If only one
answer could be given to he question
there would not be two great political
parties occupying different grounds up
on it.
The republican party holds that a
high protective tariff keeps out foreign
manufactured goods and products and
therefore stimulates home manufacture
ing e .erprises ana home products.
This would be sound doctrine IT we
could consume all we could manufacture
and produce. But we can't wear out all
the wooden and cotton goods we manu-
facture nor can we eat all the breadstuffs
we raise. We export the surplus OF the
latter TO feed the hungry in foreign
countries, but we can't export u sur
plus manufactures. for the tariff which
shuts out foreign manufactures shuts
ours in. Our manufacturers must pay
a heavy duty upon their imported raw
materials which so increases the cost OF
production hat they cannot compete IN
foreign markets with countries wherein
manufacturers get their raw material
free. Therefore they are compelled to
cut down the outputs Of their factories
to the home demand for them and at the
same time thev cut down the number of
employees and wages.
The democratic party contends that
with free raw materials and a tarlfl for
revenue only labor would find abundant
employment and cheaper rates OF living.
Free raw material would enable home
manufacturers to compete with foreign
producers of like articles in any market
in the world. They would largely in
crease their outputs and find employ
ment for a larger number OF men to
meet their foreign trade. The re-
publican party takes issue with
democrats upon these propositions
and appeal to laboring men for their
support and votes. constantly drumming
in their ears the same old story about
high protection and high wages and
"Iow tariff and low wages" In support
of their assertions they institute com
parsons between wages and cost OF hv-
ing in this country of high tariffs with
the a and cost of living in free-trade
England. But the recent report::of Mr..
Carroll ID. Wright, commissions OF la
Dor, does not support the contention OF
republicans.
Mr.. Wright's report. which he recently
sent from his bureau to the president
gives a pretty fair general view OF thu
comparative wages and cost OF living II
Great Britain. Germany, France, anc
Switzerland. The following figures taker
from his report show the average wages
and cost of living in the cotton anc
wooden industries in the United States
and Great Britain;
UNITED STATES. (ottohs, Wooiehs
Tasrf i;u;no 81 81
Net income. ............
GREAT BRITAIN.
Wages or income ...... ...,....S op S'm
Cost of living ...-......,. .N2 PS
Net income. .,." .,..,..... ~
1t appears by these figures that tn