The Neihart herald. [volume] (Neihart, Mont.) 1890-1901, 1892-11-05
NEIHART MEAGIER COUNTY, MONT, NOVEMBER,
Fallacies Refuted.
Ridiculous Argument Prompt
ly Punctured. Wages Alb
solutely and not Relatively
Lower in Europe than in the
United States.

Lower in Europe than in the
United States.
The Tribune published letter written
to the New York World by Mr.. j.
Schoenhof, which it strongly indorsed,
containing certain arguments in favor
of free trade. 1t was intended that the
following editorial should be printed in
the same issue as the communication
whose theories it controverted, but the
two got disunited:
Mr.. SchOenhOf's main contention is
that the productivity of the American
workingman is far greater than that of
his foreign competitor, and that this is
why his wages are higher, but that he
is paid no more than Europeans for the
actual amount of work done.
Schoenhof says that he found in min
ing coal that the German miner is paid
but little more than one-half per ton
what the American is paid-79 cents
against STAG to $1.63 in Illinois to SLIT
in Ohio per ton. Mining coal by the
ton is piecework, and workman makes
wages in proportion to the amount of
work he does. AS the American gets
about twice as much per ton he makes
double the wages of the German coal
miner. This simple fact places Schoen.
hof's arguments hors de combat, so to
speak.
What is true of coal is true of all work
paid for by the piece. Unless the head
of the establishment is in q great hurry
to fill orders it matters little to him that
one man does his work more rapidly
than another man. What he has to pay
for work is the thing which interests
him, and it is the sum he has to pay the
workman, and not the number of hours
or minutes the workman is employed,
which fixes the price the employer asks
for the goods made in his factory.
The wages of compositors in Chicago
are nearly double what they are in Eng
land, and the price per 1 200 ems is also
about double. Supposing it to be true,
which it is not, that the American COM
positor working by the l 900 ems is twice
as swift as the English one, what differ
ence would that make to the employer
when he has to pay twice as much for
filling a column as the English employer
does? 1t would be for the interest of the |
newspaper to employ the English COM
positors at shilling per 1000 ems, |
which is about their pay. The quantity
Of matter to be set up would be the |
same i'll both cases, but the cost of COM
position would be reduced half. The |
English printers might have to work
longer hours or more of them might |
have to be employed, but neither of those
things would affect the total cost of COM
position. That would depend solely on
the rate per thousand.
1t follows then that where work is |
paid for by the piece the employer is
concerned only about what he pays for
the work done, and not the length of |
time it takes the workman to do it.
1t appears from the various reports on
labor in foreign countries that all piece
work is paid for at far lower rates there
than here. Furthermore, the prices paid
for piecework regulate and govern to a
great extent those paid for work by the
day or hour. The price paid working
man for his days labor is based on an
estimate of what the average man
would do if he worked by the piece. 1t
is midway figure between what the
best and the poorer workman would |
earn.
Hence it will be seen that the lower
wages of Europe are lower absolutely
and not relatively. They are not lower
because the men work slower, but be-
cause they get less for each yard of cloth
they spin, each ton of coal they mine.
each pound of steel Or square foot of
glass they make, each l 900 ems of type
they set, and so on to the end of the
chapter.
1t is claimed by the free traders that
the operatives in American cotton mills
tend more looms and spindles than those
in foreign factories. Supposing it to be
so, those operatives are but very
small per cent. of the total number of
workingmen and women in the United
States.
But to end this controversy with
final and convincing argument, the fact
remains that nearly all the competitive
goods made in Europe, no matter what
their ''cost of production" may be, are
offered for sale by those who make them
at prices much below those asked for
similar goods made in this country.
Why? Not because the foreign manu-
facturers are satisfied with much lower
profits; not because they get their raw
materials much more cheaply, or be-
cause transportation costs them less, but
because they pay less per yard or pound
to their labor for the products turned
out And that is just why they can
undersell American manufacturers if
the protective duties are taken off, and
ruin their business, close them up and
drive them from the field, unless Amer
ican workmen will consent to reduce
their wages about to the per cent. of the
protection which Democratic free trad
ers would repeal.-Chicago Tribune.