The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1893-02-18
A Poor Plea For Protection.

A Poor Plea For Protection,
a prize of two hundred dollars was
offered some, time ago by the New York
Mail and Express for the best essay on
tariff-from protection standpoint OF
course. The umpires were Senators His
cock and AIdrich and Governor Mckinley
They awarded the money to lady, Isabel
NIcElheny, OF New York, and Republican
papers have been publishing it with glee.
fit is to be viewed as the best the pro-
tectionists can do, it ought to have wide
circulation, that the weakness of their
cause may be appreciated. 1t consists
principally of a number of hackneyed
assertions, some of which are untrue and
others which, if true, have no necessary
connection with the tariff.
Here are the principal arguments used,
If such they may be called; ~ am pro-
tectionlst because 1 am woman, still
more so because am working woman"
q am protectionist because protection
means comfortable honest s'because
protection means American homes as
against European homes, American wages
as against European wages lis silk
dress or a new bonnet the one essential to
a woman's happiness? Will men never
tire of telling US that we sell ourselves for
dress?'' 'sIn my shopping tours l have
found the price Of imported dress goods
about the same on average as before the
MCKINLEY tariff; some ara far less in
price. - II cannot see how any unprediu-
diced person can deny that the tariff has
built up our industries.n Women get
by far the largest share of the wages
paid for manufacturing the goods and
selling and making the garments. -
HWhy talk of cheapness through
free trade when cheapness is lbut another
name for idleness?'' "Let them look at
the homes OF free trade England and
other parts of Europe, and see if they
have the courage to ask American women
to live in them?'' Protection undoubt-
eddy means more factories and they mean
more production. !" "Ninety-nine per
cent. OF the wealthy men of this country
have risen from the ranks of labor-from
working for days pay. That can be said
of no other nation. Protection has made
it true of this" Every wage learner with
bank account is a capitalist. Protection
therefore brings capital and labor together
as one.' Therefore put me down as q
protectionist.
There is the substance of the whole es-
say. Two hundred dollars for that lot of
fol-de-rol! Nothing in it but bald asser-
ton without the sign of hair of reason
ing. 'tProtection does this, protection
does that, protection does the other
thing" Not syllable of proof is Of
Tered and some OF the statements refute
themselves.
There are great many ladies in the
United States who are vigorous advocates
OF tariff reform. Suppose they we're to
say they are women, therefore they are
free traders. Would not they be as ra-
tional as Mrs. McELHENY? She declaims
against cheapness as q desideration of
free trade, and praises it as consequence
of protection. Factories in America are
also the result of protection, so she af-
firms; what about the factories in afree
trader England?
1t is evident she talks at random about
homes in England and other parts of
Europe, as though there were nothing OF
the kind anywhere but in the United
States. There are thousands of poor,
toiling white slaves in this country who
would rejoice at the comfortable homes of
many working people in Great Britain.
What about the low wages in Germany,
far lower than they are in England, and
the poor living there that would make
an English laborer shudder? Germany is
a protected country. Are low wages,
novels for homes and black bread for prov
ender the results of protection in that
country?
And what about the tenement houses of
New York and other big American cities.
the sweater system in vogue and the hor-
rible poverty OF the poorly paid denizens
of The sitting and disease-smitten pur-
lieus of Boston, Philadelphia and Chi
cage? Are these the effects OF protection?
We do moi say so, but an assertion of that
kind would be just as sensible as the two
hundred dollar rawlings of the New York
protecilonist. Let us look for a moment
at two reports; one from New York, the
oTl7-S from Chicago.
The New York State factory inspector,
in his annual report for 1892, saws:
ia total of 9,06s different establish
ments have been inspected, EMPLOYING
s6s, 1866 people, 1877, $50 of whom were
women, of which number As, 02O were
women under 81, and there were 14.O11 /
children under 16 and over IA years of age.
There were less than 200 children under ID
years OF age found employed during the
Tho ksou+i.crrvoo+iucrD el,-,.