The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1892-10-11

lind the cost of living less / will yield
the entire argument.
The United States Senate Finance Com
mittee, after an exhaustive examination
of the subject over a wide field, found this
TO be true. They examined articles falling
under seven classes: Food, clothing,
fuel and lighting, house furnishing goods,
| drugs and chemicals, metals and imple-
ments, lumber and building materials.
The resnlt showed an average decline
in May, 1892, of 3.4 per cent. as compared
with prices just before the Act passed IN
1880.
The committee also found that wages had
slightly advanced. Reduced to money.
the committee found on an average in
come of 5000 for each family there was a
saving by this increase of wages and de-
crease of cost of living of S325, 600. 900.
And this is called robbery by the Demo-
cratic platform.
In a recent speech at Providence, r. l.,
Mr.. Cleveland SAID: Sat any rate, the
consumer has found life harder since this
| reform Mckinley bilIJ than before, and
II there Is working man anywhere who
has had his wages increased by virtue of
| It's operation he has not made himself
known
Fortunately for the yindication of
| truth and the right most important off,
clal report has been given to the world
that completely refutes Mr.. Cleveland
ana his party platform on this subject.
Chas. +. Peek was appointed Commits
sloner OF Labor for the State of New
originally by Mr.. Cleveland and reap
pointed by Governor Hill. 1t comes to
| us with the highest sanction and must bs
accepted as true.
| The period embraced in the report is
| the year Immediately before the McI<in-
| Icy bill took effect and the year immedi-
ately after. The statistics relate only to
the wholesale manufacturing establish
ments.
| Mr.. Peck says as to his motive: More
| work, higher wages. shorter hours of la
Dor and unexampled prosperity were
| among the inducements held out to the
! wage carriers by tho advocates of protec-
| ton.
''On the other hand, the advocates of the
policy iof tariff for revenue only con-
tended that only through reform of
! our tariff laws, 4. e., reduction OF our
revenues to q basis OF raising Just suffi-
cient money to defray the expenses of
| government, economically administered,
could all these desirable results be at
| tanned.
SIT was by reason of this situation. no
| less than with view to establish the
truth OF talsity of the premises taken by
| the two great political parties of the
country, that | finally decided to make
the subject of THE Effect of the Tariff on
| Labor and Wages one of special investi-
! cation. 1t has been my endeavor to in
yestigate only that phase OF the subject
| which relates simply to the increase or
decrease OF production and the rate Of
wages paid"
There were sixty-seven industries
covered and included in his table show
ing Increases and decreases of wages and
amount of production.
He continues in his report: at is need
less to comment upon the separate fig
| ures or the totals included in the table;
| they tell their own story simply with
absolute truth.
| 1T appears there was a net increase in
wages Of S6,377 .925 in the year 1891 as
! compared with the amount paid in 1890,
and net increase of production of S3l,-
! Bio, 80 Is in the year 1891 over 1890.
"A simple analysis of this table further
| demonstrates the interesting fact that of
the sixty-seven industries covered II per
| cent. of them show an increase either of
wages or product or both, and that there
were no less than S9,7l7 instances of indi-
| v1duaI increases of wages during the same
| year"
He then submits another table showing
comparison Of the average yearly earn
| ings. OF this table he says
The figures included in the above
table NO. p are in strict harmony with
the facts established in table No. l.
"Of the siXty-eight industries included
| 70 per cent OF them show an increased
| average yearly earning in the year 1891,
while the total average increase of yearly
earnings Of the 900 employees was
$23 Il.
1.-THE average of yearly earnings of the
| employees in the fitty-one trades showing
an increase was SAB 81 in 1891, as COM
pared with 1907
! In speaking Of the report Mr.. Peck
says: Tariff whether levied for reye-
nue. only or for revenue with incidental
| protection of American manufacturers
and American labor, is certainly a cues
ton of such vast import as to enlist the
most thorough and dispassionate investi-
! cation at the hands of the American peo-
! pie. And while my present report has
under the law been confined to the State
| of New FORK, its results can but be taken
as indicative of the conditions existing
| in every section of our country where
manufacturing and Industrial pursuits
| are followed
| submit this evidence as conclusive of
our case, and as Overwhelmingly re-
futing Mr.. Cleveland and his platform.
| He said: IF there is a workingman
/ anywhere who has had his wages
| increased by the operation of the Nc
| kinley bill he has not made the fact
| known"
| Here are S9,7l7 rising up in Mr.. Cleve-
| lands own State and making known the
fact.
| Mr.. Peck's report is being attacked all
I along the Democratic line; but no one
| has had access to all the figures from
which he drew his conclusions. We
must accept these conclusions until he is
| dlscredlted as man and a statistician,
| and this has not been and cannot be done.
WAGES OF FARM LABOR.
| The Department Of Agriculture has
| issued an important pamphlet covering
| the whole subject of farm labor irf the
| United States, for q long period of years.
l cannot go into the details of this report.
| 1t shows that in fifty years, since IS40,
| farm wages have nearly doubled
| At the beginning Of the war the aver
age was about Sll per month. Wages
rose rapidly upon the withdrawal OF
about 100000 of soldiers in the two
/ armies, and the present average rate per
annum is now stated to be $751; The av-
erage in Great Britain is 500; France,
SIPS; Holland, 500; Germany, 800: Rus
STA, 500; Italy, $50; India, $50. These
| tables also show slight increase of wages
since 1890.
! SUGAR.
/ want to say a word about the import
ance of our Republican legislation as to
! sugar. In the ten years before the Nc
i Kinley free sugar bill passed we had i'm
ported sugar, emitting molasses, Of the
value of SS57, 500. 0S9; on this we paid duty
of $500, 3l0,3 43; total OF 81 1853, 900 432, be-
! ing an annual average OF about SI36. Co.,
! coo. In 1890 we consumed of sugar l,309,-
| SIS tons: we made of cane sugar I36. SOB
| tons; excess over production, LIZA, 365
! tons.
| 1t is hard to realize the significance of
| these figures. We paid out more money
| for our imported sugar in 1880 than we
| got for all our wheat exports that year,
and this had been going on for years and
! years