Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1893-09-23
REEDS TARIFF TALK.
The Ex-C@ar ventllates His Views on an
All-ImpOrtant Question.

IAnlfF lAINs
h Ex-CsAr Ventilates His Views on an
AlI-Important Question.
In his speech on the bill TO repeal the
silverpurchasing clause OF the Sher-
man act ex-Speakcr Reed did not as
sert, as some Of his party associates
have done, that the trouble that now
a~fiicts the country is due to the fact
that the elections OF last year put the
democrats in power. 1t is clear that
Mr.. Reed has too much regard for his
reputation to take so absurd a 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. lie 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 forcalling 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 at the bottom of the disaster. Now
Mr.. Reed knows very we'll 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 ac-
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 nleased to evnress ,b.
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 If Mr.. Reed and in
one respect we unite agree with him
The tariff will never MT the working.
man back TO where he was in Is46 he.
II 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 mt If in the novver of
workmen to earn more than thev could
in 1876. and accordingly thev receivc
more for their labor. This Is true as
well under free trade as under nrotec.
ton. for the causes have onerated
everywhere. at least in civilized conn.
tries. 1t is not admitted. of course.
that protection has not deprived the
laborer of part of his share in This i'm.
but certainly it has not
been sufficient to neutralize f. alto |
There is, however. a subtitle and mis-. :
leading suggestion in the selection hv
Mr.. Reed of the era of the Walker
tariff for comparison as the condition of !
the workinpmon. II was intended IN
make the impression that his condition
was then peculiarlv bad whereas II
was better than it has ever been he.
fore. During all hat period wages
were continually rising. According IN
the Dor of a COMMITTEES apnointed hv
a republican senate. the AVERAGE Of
wages in 1916, the year the Walker
tariff was enacted, was only so.3 per
cent, of what II was in 1850 after Tho