Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1893-09-14
REEDS TARIFF TALK.
The Ex-Cxar ventilates His Views on -
An-Important Question.

REEDS TARIFF TALK.
The Ex-c.ar ventiIates HIS Views on q
All-Important Question.
In his speech on the bill TO repeal the
silver-purchasing clause OF the Sher
man act ex-Speaker Reed did not as
sert. as some of his party associates
have done, that the trouble that now
afaicts the country is due to the fact
that the elections of last year put the
democrats in power. It is clear that
MIR. Reed has too mach regard for his
reputation to take 20 absurd position
as that, and, besides, he knows that his
people would not sustain him in it.
Still, he could not resist the tempta.
ton to intimate that the dread of tariff
reform has something to do with the
present stringency. He evidently felt,
however, that this was dangerous
ground, and he touched the question
with great caution. After promising
that he did not regard the Sherman act
and he did not consider an apology
necessary for calling it by that name
as alone responsible for the present
condition of affairs, he went on to men,
ton the stoppage of hundreds and
thousands of mills all over the country
as ut the bottom of the disaster. Now
Mr.. Reed knows very well that COM
paratively few of these mills stopped
until the monetary stringency set in,
and that the prospect of improvement
in this respect has caused many of
them to reopen within a week. The
closing of mills would not, of itself,
tend to produce a general scarcity of
money, though it would, of course, pro-
duce it among the employees of those
particular mills Elsewhere it would
have just the contrary effect. The
closing of the mills would lessen the
demand for money and cause it to &C.
cumuluate in the banks. The reverse
of this is what has actually happened,
showing clearly that Mr.. Reed has mis-
taken the effect for the cause. In other
words, the money stringency caused
the closing of the mills, and the closing
of the mills is not responsible for the
financial disturbance.
Mr.. Reed was pleased to express the
opinion that the democratic congress
will not so revise the tariff as to bring
the workingmen back to the condition
of workmen under the Walker tariff.
This is very kind of Mr.. Reed, and in
one respect we quite agree with him.
The tariff will never put the working
man back to where he was in 1916. be-
cause the tariff has not brought him
out of the condition in which he was
at that time. Improved machinery and
the general progress of discovery since
that time have put it in the power of
workmen to earn more than they could
in 1916, and accordingly they receive
more for their labor. This is true as
we'll under free trade as under protec-
ton, for the causes have operated
everywhere, at least in civilized coun-
tries. It is not admitted, of course,
that protection has not deprived the
laborer of part of his share in this i'm
provement; but certainly it has not
been sufficient to neutralize it alto
gether.
There is, however. a subtitle and mis-
leading suggestion in the selection by
MIR. Reed of the era of the Walker
tariff for comparison as the condition of
the workingman. 1t was intended to
make the impression that his condition
was then peculiarly bad, whereas it
was better than it has ever been be-
fore. During all that period wages
were continually rising. According to
the report of a committee appointed by
republican senate, the average of
wages in 1876, the year the Walker
tariff was enacted, was only 1913 per
cent. of what it was in 1860, after the
law had been in operation for fourteen
years In other words, the workman
who earned $50. 80 in 1916 was earning
500 in 1860, and in the same proportion
for those earning larger sums. At no
time during the operation of the
Walker tariff were wages so low as in
the year when it was passed, and with
two or three exceptions there was an
improvement every year of the four
teen. During the same period the
prices of commodities declined 6I per
cent, so that the purchasing power of
wages was increased nearly &c per
cent under the Walker tariff.
We are very glad that Mr.. Reed is of
the opinion that the democrats are not
going to ruin the country by tariff re-
form. At all events, it is not likely
that tariff reform under democratic
auspices will have SO disastrous an
effect upon the party of the country as
the legislation of the congress which
was dominated by Mr.. Reed.-Louis-