Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1892-03-30

Undoubtedly he would. If prices
would really fall correspondingly, the
wOrkngman's condition would not be
changed for the worse. But this is a
supposition which is opposed to all eX
perlence and facts. Let us take an illus
tration: When o rich man goes to a
shoemaker in this country and has his
feet measured for q pair of shoes. which
are to be made to order and exactly
fitted to the peculiar shape of his foot,
he undoubtedly pays more than he
would pay for similar work in England
or in Europe. Our shoemaker gets two
and three times as much as the shoe
maker OF other countries, and it is but
natural that, even allowing perhaps for
his greater skill, the product of bis la
Dor should be dearer.
But take, on the other hand, pair of
shoes made by the wonderful machines
which can be found in any one of our
great factories, which cut the leather.
sew the shoes and finish them, almost
entirely without the intervention of
human hands, one machine turning out
hundreds of pairs of shoes daily. Can it
be for moment supposed that the mere
fact that the wages of the Workingman
who tends to such q machine are low
cred would make any appreciate differ
ence in the price of one of those
hundred pairs of shoes which that ma
chine turns out? Certainly not And
yet it is just the laboring classes who
buy this kind of shoes.
That this is SO everyone knows.
Many a freetrader has unwlttingly adj
mitted it, and even that rabid reform
err" exConsul SchHnhof, has gwen in
valuable testimony on this point, when
he said that all substantial articles of
1.-The wholesale process OF manufacture"
are cheaper here than in free-trade
England, but that things made entirely
by hand are dearer in the United States.
So we see that while lower wages would
undoubtedly mean lower prices for the
splendid raiments and luXuries of the
rich, it would not make much differ
once in the prices of machine-made ar
ticles purchased by our workingmen;
and thus lower wages could only mean
diminished purchasing power, fewer
comforts and lower standard of living.
But this is not all. Cannot the work
ingman see that wages have not the
slightest connection with the cost of the
hundred and one things which go to
make up his expenses? Will the thou
sand dollar mortgage on his home be-
come less than a thousand dollars be-
cause he earns lower wages? Will the
debt he owes be smaller because his in
come is less 3? Will the scent car fare
be reduced, or the price of newspa-
per, or the admission fee to the lecture
or entertainment? No, these things
will cost just as much as before, 80 that
lower wages simply mean more labor to
purchase smaller amount of them.
The intelligent Workingman cannot
but see that higher wages, not lower
prices. must be the watchwOrd in the
battle to better his condition. AS Wen
dell Phillips used to say:
The handspring of our progress is high
wag5S-WageS at such a level that the
wOrkinGmen can spare his wife to preside
over home, can command leisure, 60 to
lectures, take a newspaper, and lift him.
self from the deadening level of mere toll.
That dollar lett after the bills are paid on
Saturday night means education, indie
pendence, Self-reSpect, manhood; 1t in
creaseS the value of every acre near by,
fills the town with dwellings, opens public
libraries and crowds them, dots the CONT
nent with cities and cObwebS it with rail
ways. The one remaining dollar lnSureS
progress and guarantees millions to its
owner, better than a score Of statutes. 1t
is worth more than a thousand colleges,
and makes armies and police SupertiuOuS.
Question No. 10. The American Economist
says that if the tariff on agricultural mach1n-
or could be imported. Why then keep duty
on it?
This will be recognized as question
answered in these columns before.
We pointed out that it was a favorite
method of the free trader when con-
fronted with the fact that American
products are actually cheaper and bet
ter IN many lines than similar products
in any other country under the sun,
10 hot + 10 hoG
been let out of his tariff tax bubble, at
least SO far as the products in question
are concerned, to try to avoid the ami
hilating conclusion by fallaciously rails
ing the entirely distinct and indepen-
dent question, Why then is tariff neces-
sary. Before answering this second
question, the first, which is one of fact,
should be disposed of and the signif-
canoe of it's answer clearly grasped.
Do agricultural implements sell more
cheaply here. quality considered, than
in any other county? No free trader,
if he be self-respecting and at all con-
versant with the facts, will deny that
they 90. What follows? That farm
implements are not "tarif-taXed" by a
single cent; that the keystone of the
free trade arch has fallen out. After
these admissions are wrenched from
Gl0 11GO tIdSlC1 VIC al Ill u pOolUlOA w
take up the other question, Why is a
tariff kept on these things?
AS matter Of fact, the tariff law does
not say word about agricultural ma
chinery from beginning to end. 1t does
say that
Manufactures. articles or wares not emu
merated Or provided for in this act, COM
posed wholly or in part Of iron, steel, lead,
copper, Nickel pewter, zinc, gold, silver,
platinum, aluminium, or any other metal,
and whether partly Or wholly manufact-
ured-
shall pay duty Of As per cent ad valo-
rem. Farm implements fall under this
classification, or rather they would if
imported. About as many free trad
ers as protectionists can be found
among manufacturers Of farm i'm
plements, conclusive proof thatthe tariff
has nothing to do with fixing prices.
If they are mentioned at all, it is doubt
full if they would bear any duty. But
no one thought 1t worth while to ask
for the removal of the duty on them,
since it Injuries no one. So it remains
45 per cent, as it stood in the old law.
The Mills bill placed it at 40 per cent.
II voCfC Tho fraa 4ro6or 4O chow