The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-08-24
A TARIFF DISCUSSION.
Mr. W. Fl. HI. MscCurdy Replies to
Democratic Assault on Mckinley Law.

PoRr TOWNSEND, Aug. 10. 1892
MI. Thomas B. Hardin-Sir: Yours OF the 18th
inst, addressed to me and published In the COL
umns of the Seattle Telegraph, met my eye a few
Gays ago. and though / have not the honor OF
your personal acquaintance, and do not remern-
Der, indeed, that ever before heard Of you; and
though do not know by what authority you
take up Colonel James Hamilton Lewis cause,
or whether you have any power OF attorney or
other right to appear for him and Join issue In
the matters alleged against him in my letter TO
which you take exceptions, but make no perth
nent reply, waive all informalitiss. and, since
you come in such humble and docile spirit TO
acquire little Information in regard to things
OF which you seem to be none too we'll informed,
will proceed to answer you In my humble way.
In the drst place. then, Mr.. Hardin, you will
note that what said about the tin-plate in
dustry was on the authority OF Mr.. Ira Aver. an
agent Of the C1ited States treasury department,
specially appointed to investigate and report
upon that industry In the United States a.
affected BY the Mckinley bill. Whether Mr..
Aver agrees with Mr. Morrill, or not does not in
terest me, and cuts no figure in this controversy.
shall not waste any time in the inquiry a. to
their agreement or measurement
You evidently labor under the delusion. that
having shown by the testimony of Mr.. McPhef.
son from whose statements you quote, that the
Eastport sardine-packers have to pay SIC, 900
more per annum for tin plate that goes into
their cans. you have made a case against the Re-
publican policy OF protection to American labor.
Does not Mr.. AcPherson's statement support
that policy7
Does he not, as quoted by you, say that the
burden imposed on the tin cans which he uses
In his sardine factory makes no difference what
ever In the wages of his employees, but fails on
the owner OF the plant? Its not 4 very grievous
burden at worst: for he says, in substance. that
q box OF tin plates, which now cost 81 more
nd fhA AZ ta.s a1aAH
cans-and IL you figure carefully you will find
that one dollar divided by 1000 gives one-tenth
OF cent additional cost on each can. Now Mr..
Hardin 1t your witness had testified little
further ho might have told you that by this
same Mckinley tariff the contents of these same
cans are protected by a duty equivalent to 10
cents per pound, and that. but for this proteo-
ton the fshermen, and their wives and dsugh-
tiers, OF France and Italy would be putting up
sardines for the American market. and the
nsnermen, OF Eastport, and their wives and
daughters, would have to look to some other in.
dustry for these excellent wages which for five
months in the year they draw from the sardiue
business. With the cheap labor, cheap tin
plate, and nominal ocean freights against it,
the sardine fishing of Eastport would DO ami.
Inflated.
You try to be pathetic over the fate OF
daughters and wives who are compelled to work
beside their husbands and fathers for the aver
age pay of $14 per week for five months in the
year. notice that Mr.. McP says the season 10
from April Is to December IS This II eight in
stead Of five months, as he afterward In general
terms states it But let 1t be five months for
argument sake. Now mark what follows. He
says the workers are mostly wives and daugh-
tiers OF the fishermen and that "they work in the
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. monument OF ourRepubiican
policy of protection to home iudustry-aud
some Of them, the girls presumably, attend
N mi Ind NJ Hap5i hiatt ho
average earning of these auxiliaries to the sup
port OF the family ID not their whole earning;
Tor "they work In the factories" Two hun.
dred and eighty dollars for five months work il
no mean stipend, amply sufficient in the East,
where every necessary OF life IL from 20 to 30 per
In comfort am sorry they do not get more.
but see no reason to waste pity or psthos on
their case. II had the ordering OF things
would make the sardine season continuous, but
a. now constituted the fish are obstinate and
persist In attending to business for only five
months In the year, and We are compelled to
put up with their arrangements Of this matter.
1t 10 hard on both employers and employees to be
compelled to lose their fishery employ.
ment more than half the year; but
sec no remedy for It at pres
emit Now, Mr. Hardin, having hope made
1t plain to you it 10 to me- If there can b any
reliance on price current reports and the state
q
States treasury department., that the laborsrs,
male end female, of the sardine industry suffer
neither loss nor hardship on account OF the one
tenth OF . cent added to the cost OF each can
BY reason of the new tariff and that the same
tariff that adds this Insignificant burden to the
packers protects them to the extent of lOcents
per pound on their canned fish, and thus gives
them control Of the American market, see no
reason to shed any tears over the unfortunate
sardins barons Of PASSPORT Mr.. Mop. refused,
a you notice, to say that he was not making
money in the business. He was asked the cues.
ton and evaded replying by the trite remark
that the price was regulated by the demand
and supply" and finally said I'VE pack moro
than can be used at present" OF course he
does and 80 does every packer OF all kinds Of
canned goods. There il season to can and
season to sell and Q season to consume, and they
are not contemporaneous. / suppose from the
tone OF Mr. McP.'s testimony that he would like
to have the present tariff On tin plate removed
and An additional duty put upon the canned
bear none of the burdens Of the tariff. His
statement that Q removal of the duty on sardines
would not affect bis business furnishes fair
test OF either his intelligence or his candor.
Since reading your letter have received the
report OF the chief OF the bureau OF statistics Of
the treasury department for the quarter ending
March 81, 1892, and find that ia this quarter
tue VI iii pAhtt3 SIuOuutel 10 S,cSt.SJo
pounds, of the value of $1,629.75O; that in the
corresponding quarter of last year the tin plate
imports amounted to 1o.5oS5Ol pounds, valued
at $2,076,5S4, and that the difference in price
during the two quarters was 17-40 of q cent per
pound, which would be about IS cents per box
in favor of 1891. We certainly expected the
price Of tin plates TO be considerably advanced
temporarily under the operation of the tariff.
and are greatly surprised at this very fneignin.
cant enhancement Let u inquire into the