The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1892-09-25
WHAT "PRorEcTIoN" DOES.

/ what is now claimed by its friends that it
4 has accomplished. is equally astonishing
with the character of its construction. In
the first place, when Major MCKINLEY in
troduced the measure, he SAID: Your
committee have not sought by the proposed
legislation to further cut down prices at
the expense Of our own prosperity.
We have not believed that our people,
already suffering from low prices, can or
will be satisfied with legislation which
will result IN lower prices.n So the Nc
kINLEY bill was enacted into law to raise
prices that new industries might be
brought into existence. the old ones have
ali increase of business, labor receive u
larger remuneration Tor work performed,
and the money of our country kept at home
among our own people. Such was the
task to be performed by that So enam-
ored were the advocates of the measure
with the philosophy or high protective
tariffs, that they scoffed at the idea of hav-
ing cheap goods, and in the madness of his
infatuation for high prices the present Re-
publican nominee for president said that a
cheap coat implied cheap man. Soon
after this the two great parties went be-
fore the country on the election of mem
bers to the House of Representatives on
this issue and the overwhelming defeat of
infatuation for high prices, and of late
they have been trying to show that the
MCKINLEY bill lowered the cost of living
and increased wages; nor is there even so
much as shadow of intimation that cheap
clothing implies cheap man.
The claim that the MCKINLEY bill
lowered the cost OF living was disproved
by Senator CARLISLE on the floor of the
Senate, and in the same speech the senator
showed that whatever increase there had
been in wages was in the unprotected
industries Of the country. A leading
Democratic paper, the New York World,
gathered facts to show that since the pass
age Of the MCKINLEY bill, there had been
500 strikes, lockouts and reductions of
wages IN protected industries. To break
the force of this showing the Ameracdn
Economist, the organ of high protection,
published list of twenty eight protected
industries in which it was claimed wages
had been increased. An investigation was
industries with the following result:
In one case the firm was invented and no in
vestigation was possible. Another was a coun-
try saw mill employing two men who had not
heard of any advance. Still another was an in
ventor employing man and boy, who had
raised the latter's wages from % to 30 cents per
day. In yet another the raising OF one mans
wages in factory the only foundation for
the report; while in every case where wages
had been raised it had been done either before
the MCKINLEY bill was passed. or was q re-
sumption OF cut rate granted to prevent
threatened strike.
Such are the straits to which the advo-
Gates of high protective tariffs are driven
by their opponents. Yet they hope to elect
the next president of the United States
On, well, hoping is pleasant pastime; and
meantime we who do not believe in tariff
robbery can amuse ourselves at the incon-
sistencies and absprdities of Republican
high tariff doctrines.
The MCKINLEY high tariff law was en-
acted to raise prices-so It was avowed by
its author; but when it was learned by
general election for members to the House
OF Representatives that the country was in
favor of lower prices presto change the
MCKINLEY bill lowered prices
The MCKINLEY Dill was intended to help
the working men in the United States
This was it's special virtue, the one thing
above all others for which it was formed.
Presumably its author laid awake nights
to so construct the law that it would help
the leboring class. The very highest claim
made for the increase of wages since the
passage of the bill was presented by Sena-
tor ALDRICH, OF Rhode Island, on the floor
of the Senate. The claim was that wages
had increased npy-tive-hundredths of
one per cent But lol 1t was shown in
the same hall, and but three days later.
that whatever increase had taken place in
wages was in unprotected industries. So
far from increasing the wages of men en-
ployed in protected industries has this pet
scheme Of Republican legislators been that
wages have decreased in the most highly
protected industries to the amount of
eighty nine one-hundredths of one per
cent. The statement is based on the re-
port Of the Congressional committee ap-
pointed TO make the investigation.
tectiye tariff heightened the wool on the
backs of the sheep, and increased the an
nual clip from two to six pounds per head
but the advocate OF high tariff stands
dumfounded when you tell him that cor
responding increase has taken placs with
horses, horn-stock and even asses-poor
dumb brutes that are compelled Is 90 about
without protection. If it has been PRO
tection'' which has lenthensd wool on the
backs of sheep and increased the annual
clip per head. has it been the want of pro-
lection which has given the correspond
ingiy increased value to horses and cattle!
Is it not clear that it has been the care and
common sense policy OF our farmers and
stockmen. who have constantly been inn
proving their breeds of stock and as a re- |
suit have more valuable animals both in !
the kinds whose products are ''protected-
and those which are not protected? About
the only effect that high tariff can be
shown to have on sheep is that it gives the !
the wool-grower the lowest price market
for his product in the world in a country
where only about half enough is produced
for the consumption of our people.
We close this writing with q statement
of those wonderful things that Repubi-
can high tariff law is supposed to be able |
to do:
!. Protection increases prices of articles |
in this country
2. Protection decreases the prices OF articles |
manufactured in this country.
3. Protection is absolutely necessary in order |
to I'll the gap between the wages Of home and |
farairrr labor