Freeland tribune. (Freeland, Pa.) 1888-1921, 1893-03-20
IGNORANCE AND PREJUDICE.
Proof That They Are the Only Supports of
Opposition to the Eight-hour Day.

Proof That They Are the Only Supports of
Opposition to the Eight-hour Day.
An editorial in that excellent newspa-
per, the Cincinnati Times, gives the fol-
lowing illogical reasons for opposing the
s-hour working day idea, it being the re-
mark OF newspaper man to a working
man: III you succeed in your object"
(that of reducing the hours of work to
eight, says the editor, 'you will raise the
cost OF the manufactured article on which
you are employed fully 90 per cent, and
don't you know that if that particular ar
ticle goes up 90 per cent other necessa-
ries of life will be- apt to follow in sympa-
thy with it, and will you not find at the
end OF the month that it will require $50
instead of $40 to pay your current ex-
penses? The article you are making ad-
vanced 20 per cent, the price of living, of
rent, of clothing, Of food, ETC., would be
likely to advance 20 per cent also, and
~ per cent of $50 is $40. How are you to
be benefited if your opportunity to save
$40 month is destroyed? Don't you see
that the burden of 10 hours pay for
hours work will finally fall on your own
shoulders?"
No, we won't see anything of the kind,
and the suggestion is another sample of
the failure of the general run of educated
men to grasp economic truths. The re-
suit Of reduction of the hours of work
to eight per day would not raise the cost
of manufactured articles anywhere near
20 per cent nor anywhere near the extent
it would raise wages.
This can be easily shown
The cost of the labor on manufactured
articles since the advent of improved
machinery is hardly 1.-THE of the cost of
the finished article itself. In the old days
of hand work the greater factor in the
cost of all manufactured goods was the
labor put into them. 1t is not so today.
Take almost anything-boots and shoes,
clothing, machinery, for instance-and2 90
per cent added to the cost of labor would
not raise the price of the completed arti.
Gle per cent
Take the labor employed to make a
typewriting machine, for example. A
machine that sells for $1O0 costs about
$1S, and of this cost not more than S15 is
for labor. Suppose we add 90 per cent
to the cost of this labor, and we have So,
which would make the price of the ma
chine $l03 instead of $3.50, as by The
Times reasoning. Take the cost of shoes,
again. A shop of 800 hands will make
5000 pairs Of shoes per day, or 20 pairs
to each employee. Suppose the average
wages of all the hands-men, women and
boys-were 50 per day, and this is high
estimate Twenty per cent ON this in
cod cost of lahn,. xfyp,711 l,o 30
upon each 20 pairs of shoes, or the sum
OF p cents upon each pair.
In the manufacture of clothing we
have not at hand exact knowledge of the
cost of manufacture, but it is safe to say
that factory employing 100 hands will
easily make 300 suits per day. Estimat-
ing their wages at So per day-a high
average-and we have about 70 cents per
suit added to the cost of clothing as O
result of the increase in cost of produc- |
ton there, and if we add 10 cents to the
cost of the production of the cloth for the
suit as an additional result of the de-
creased hours of work we have so cents
added to the cost of the suit. But we
will willingly allow an additional cost of
81 or So, and then the workingman could
afford to purchase it if one-fifth were
added to his wages.
Again, the fact that under eight hours
workmen would ultimately receive one
fifth more pay will probably puzzle rea
soners like the one just referred to. Blu,
as the value of everything depends upon
the supply of it and the demand for it
there should be no difficulty in realizing
that the increased demand for workers
would raise the value and cost of their
services. Eight bushels of wheat or ap
pies are not worth as much as 10 bushels,
but when there is no surplus of them
when the demand is equal to the supply
people are often glad to pay much more
for eight bushels of either than they pay
for 10 when their is glut in the market.
There is not the slightest moral or ma
terial reason for opposition to reduc-
ton of the hours of work. All objections
to it arise either from ignorance or preiu.
dice.-New York Dispatch.