The morning call., 1894-01-17
FREE TRADE AND WAGES.

A correspondent takes exception to a
statement in THE CALL to the effect thai
1t is admitted that wages under free trade
would come down but contended that the
cost Of living would decrease in proper
tion. Our correspondent quotes Congress-
man Johnson of Ohio in support of the
position that the tariff cannot affect wages
Mr.. Johnson says:
You cannot protect labor by putting Import
duties on goods. 1t may increase the
profits Of favored capitalists; II may build up
trusts and create great fortunes; but 1t cannot
raise wages. You know for yourselves that
what your employers pay you In wages does
not depend on what any tariff may enable them
TO make, but on what they can get others 10
take your places for. =
When MIR. johnson said that tariff duties
could not raise wages he doubtless merely
intended to say that he did not see how
they could; and yet in the second para
graph quoted he shows how duties may
increase wages. Employers, he admits,
pay such wages as they have to pay to get
work done. In other words, they pay one
competent person what they can find an
other competent person to do the same
work for. Now. there is about a fixed
number of labOTers in the country. Ii
work for this number is increased wages
will go up; if il is decreased wages will 90
down. Tariff duties increase the amount
OF work done in the country, and, cOnse-
quently, the rates of wages. If our CORE
spondent doubts that duties increase the
amount of work done in this country let
him study the progress of the iron and
steel industry in this country. Let him
pnmnaTR the nrndnpfS Of q profaatpH ir1
dustry at present with the products when
protection began. Let him give brief at
tentiOn TO the following news item, dated
London. January 10:
A dispatch to the Times from Cardin SAYS:
The Mckinley tariff Is still working disaster In
the export trade OF South Wales The tin-
plate trade with the United States amounts to
only one-thrd OF the productive capacity and
has been al standstll for the last six months.
over 5000 workmen are unemployed, and a
number OF others are indirectly affected. The
loss In wages is computed at e12,00O weekly,
the employers losing $4,000 weekly while $50
out OF 500 mills are idle. There is great dis
tress among all employees and many families
are living on 5 shilliDgS pence weekly.
There is more tin plate used now than
there was when the Mckinley act was
passed. The work in that branch of in
dustry that would be done in Wales is
done in this country. For each man out
of employment in Wales there is a man at
work in the United States. While the
Mckinley act does not arbitrarily raise
wages it creates conditions which enable
competent men to command good wages.
Now, 1t is not important whether or not
Mr.. johnson, sit gle-tax man, admits
that free trade will lower wages. THE
CALL did not say that it was universally
admitted. In the discussion reported
before the Ways and Means Committee
while the Wilson bill was under considera-
ton there was no contention that a reduc-
ton OF duties would not cause q reduction
of wages. The contention was that the
cost Of living would be so reduced that the
workingman would be as well off under
low duties as under high duties.