The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1893-02-18

last year has been in operation for seven
months, and the department has devoted
a major portion of its time to enforcing
its provisions. 1t has proven most salu-
tary in checking the abuses which were
daily growing greater in the crowded dis
tricts OF New York and some other cities
in the state. Some 900 women and
children are employed in these shops.
All ready-nade clothing now sold, re-
CARELESS of grade, is made in the sweat
shops, either wholly or partially. There
are about $50 wholesale clothing manu-
facturers in New York City alone, and of
these all but about ten have their work
done in tenements and sweat-shops. The
cloak trade, which is distant branch of
manufacture, relies almost solely upon
the tenement house and sweat workers.
1t would appear like exaggeration to de-
scribe the excessive filth which is seen on
every side in these houses. There are a
number of trades which are carried on
with all the worst features of the sweat
ing system, such as the making OF hats,
caps, suspenders, underwear, cigarettes,
waists and neckwear.
Senator NooNAN's committee, sent by
the Illinois legislature to investigate the
sweating system IN Chicago. made sicken-
ing discoveries.
I'm one shop eleven persons were work
Ing In room 7110 feet in size and in this
den four children were suffering with the
In oh, re
were found in the last stages of diphthe-
ria. In still another three children were
found tossing about in the delirium of
scarlet fever. In all of these dens the
manufactured products were piled about
the patients and all the work was done in
a disease-laden atmosphere. From such
dens as these come many of the cloaks
sold by the State street establishments
and worn by the middle and upper classes.
THE wage system in vogue in these
dens Is specially interesting to the labor
element. One Polish shop pays rs cents
per week for girls not over 10 years OF
age Twenty-four are employed in a
room 20x16 feet in size, In another den
sixty five girls were crowded into room
20x40 feet in size, with an eight-foot cell
ing. Wages average g to 81. 90 per week,
seven days, twelve hours day. A den
at 1856 Forquer street, pays 80 cents a
dozen for making trousers complete.
At 10 Bunker street seventeen employees,
huddled together in small room, make
knee brooches for 40 cents a dozen, COM
plete. Two OF the employees do the
pressing in basement which has no floor
except the damp earth. At p Kramer
street, in frame shanty 23x30 feet in
size, with a seven foot ceiling, twenty
seven employees were found at work.
Water closets had been frozen up since
cold weather set in, but the proprietor
cheerfully looked forward to the advent
of summer! Wages here run from S1.75
to "a. 80 per week.
How does all this comport with the
roseate tinting of the protectionist eulogy
on American wages and womans "largest
share' in what is ''paid for manufacture
ing the goods and selling and making the
garments?n
Is it fact that protection has brought
labor and capital together in the United
States? Did it do that at Homestead?
How was it at Ceur d Alene? What about
the strikes and discomfort and struggles
of labor organizations in mining and
manufacturing districts throughout the
country? Does protection protect the
wage worker? Is it not especially in the
of the capitalist designed for his
benefit and supported by his money?
Are there no savings banks for working
people in England? Are the hundreds of
thousands of pounds sterling deposited in
them the result of free trade? Why not,
if the savings in the "bank accounts'' of
wage earners in America are the effect of |
protection?
The eminent protectionists who award
ed the prize to Mrs. MoELHENY must |
have been very hard up for something to
prop their falling theory. The prosperity |
of working people and of the country has
been enjoyed in spite of the high tariff |
and not as its consequence. 1t is no more
to be credited with the high wages and |
plenty where they prevail, than debited
with the low wages and poverty where
they exist. And it is sophistry, dishon-
ssty and deception to foist such essays
On the public as arguments for system
which the country has repudiated and
which its promoters would be wise in let
ing severely alone.
-.