Freeland tribune. (Freeland, Pa.) 1888-1921, 1892-10-10
Protection Inconsistency.

The argument of protectionists is that
high tariff shuts out importations-
thus freeing our manufacturers from the
competition of these foreign, "pauper"-
made goods. Doing SO, it enables them
to get better prices for their products
thus enabling them to pay their work
lngmen better wages. Isn't this their
plea? Then why do they persist in say
ing that high tariff (the Mckinley for
lnstance) cheapens the cost of goods to
the consumer? If it IL true that high
tariff, restricting competition, cheapens
the cost of goods, then how can they af-
ford to sell their goods for less and pay
labor more?
Very naturally monopoly of the
market would enable our manufacturers
to pay better wages-but because it en-
ables them to it is no sign that they do.
They get all the benefit of protection;
they have free trade in labor, and they
buy their labor in the cheapest market,
and they sell their goods not as low as
they can, but for as much as they can.
1t is ridiculous to argue that high
tariff does not add to the cost of import.
ed goods to the consumer, and it is non
sense to argue that high protective
tariff is levied for any other purpose
than to restrict the importation of for
eign goods and to give our manufacturers
monopoly of the market-and it is
absurd to imagine that goods enjoying
monopoly of the market would be sold
as cheaply as if they were sold in open
competition with other goods of like
nature.
Up to the close of the war the protec-
tionists argued that capital mot labor
must be encouraged, and up to the en-
action of the Morrill, tariff law, which
was a war measure, for the purpose of
raising revenue for the government in
its hour of great need, tariff of from
to IL per cent. was considered ample.
1t was argued all along, till after the
close of the war of the rebellion, that
labor, by reason of easy access to cheap
land, commanded too high wages for
our manufacturers (capitalists) to engage
in competition with the manufacturers
of the overcrowded old world. Encour-
agement to capital through MONOPOLY
of the market and cheaper labor, which,
as John Sherman said, would result
from the act to encourage immigration.
was and is the sole aim and object of a
protective" tariff.
1t is a fact that Notwithstanding the
higher prices we all have to pay for our
goods, labor receives no benefit from
protection. American labor seeks for
employment here at home with imported
pauper labor, and is forced to pay two
prices for what it buys. 1t may be
curious to many, but little thought will
convince anyone that wages are higher
In unprotected than in protected indus
tries; and it is further fact proven by
government statistics compiled by pro-
tectionists, appointed by Republican ad-
ministrations, that more highly protect
ed the industry the lower the wages.
For instance, the highly protected WOOL
en- mills of the east are filed with men
working at "a week. Unprotected
engineers, tiremen, carpenters, masons
printers, ETC., work for no such wages.
AS matter of fact high protective
tariff restricts the importation of foreion
goods, lessons the work of the foreigners
throws them out of employment or at
least cuts down their wages. Then
these foreign workmen come to America,
where it is held out to them that we
have high wages. They overcrowd the
labor market and run down wages.
Aside from this, the high tariff gives our
manufacturers monopoly of the market
and they charge high prices for their
goods. This restricts consumption OF
the goods--lessening prodution and the
demand for labor to manufacture the
goods. This, of course, leads to a still
further reduction of wages.
With free, unrestricted trade with all
the nations of the earth every section OF
every country of all the earth would en-
gage in that industry 10 which it is best