Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1894-01-25
THE WILSON BILL AND WAGES.
False Alarm of Monopolistic American
Manufacturers.

THE WILSON BILL AND WAGES.
Manufacturers.
From many quarters we hear of re-
auctions of wages in manufacturing
establishments. and from more we
hear threats of reduction in case the
Wilson bill becomes law. The reduc-
tions which have actually been made
are the results of the business depres-
sion, which is due primarily to the
panic of last summer and the inevitably
slow and painful process of recovery.
The threatened reductions are vocifer-
ously declared to be the necessary re-
suit of the lower duties For twenty
years it has been preached and pro-
claimed that high tariff makes wages
high, and that low tariff means a re-
duction of wages to the pauper limit
of Europe. We are told that now we
shall have the proof of the pudding in
the eating. What is the truth of the
matter?
The notion that the general high
range OF wages in the United States is
due to the high protective system is
really one of the most preposterous of
nomic subjects which have had vogue
in this country. The reader who will
look in the books on political economy
to see what they have to say about
wages and about the causes which
make them high and low will find
plenty of difference of opinion on this
topic among the economists; but the
one thing he will not find any reput-
able writer to say is that the protective
system makes wages high or that a
free-trade system makes them low. If
the books are supposed to be the works
OF abstract theorists, who keep far
from the realities of life, we need only
regard few simple and obvious facts
of history to discover that a high tariff
cannot be the cause of high wages.
This country has tried almost every
sort OF tariff system, beginning in 1889
with duties which the protectionists of
our day would consider outrageously
low, and ending century later in the
Mckinley tariff act, with duties which
the free-trader considers outrageously
high. Throughout all the vacillations
of tariff policy, under revenue tariffs
and moderate tariffs and extreme tar
Lib wages ilcIe idtC UCCA StSt1tll'y
higher than in European countries.
The simple explanation is that this is a
country of rich and abundant resources,
developed by an active. energetic and
ingenious people, in which the great
productiveness of industry insures d
high range Of material welfare Wages
with US are high from permanent and
abiding causes, and, fortunately, do
not depend ON tariff legislation Or any
other artificial prop.
With this it is not inconsistent to adj
nit freely that the wages of some par
ticular classes of laborers, IN some
limited groups OF manufacturing indns-
tries, may be seriously affected by the
duties. The high duties of the last
generation have forced into existence
some industries in which the efficiency
of labor and capital is not up to the
general average, and in which the
manufacturer who pays high wages TO
his worlSmen is not compensated by
their greater skill, energy and rroduc-
tiveness. In industries OF this sort the
free competition of foreign producers,
paying lower wages, would compel
either reduction of wages or ali
d
there is really such connection be-
tween the duties and high wages every
one would say that congress should
proceed with the utmost care, and
should not expose to . sudden reversal
of fortune or a sudden change Of occu-
patton the worl1lnen whom our tariff
legislation has induced to enter into
weakened industries. The same is
true of the capital mbarled in them.
Vested rights should receive their due
consideration. We believe they have
received their due considerable in the
Wilson bill. There may be reductions
that go beyond the danger-line in some
particular duties; but have we not been
told that even the Nc
kinley bill made mistake or two?
The common-sense and the political in
terest of the democrats may be trusted
to prevent them from making changes
that promise to be really destructive;
and the testimony of the protected
manufacturers as to the effect of duties
must be received with the same allow
ances us tae pleading of 4 lawyer for
his client.
But the number of shaky and de-
the whole manufacturing system, is
insignificant; and in any case there is
no threat of free competition from
abroad. From the clamor which has
been raised it might be supposed that
the Wilson bill gave up all protective
duties entirely, and that all foreign
goods were going to come in on easy
terms. The fact is that the Wilson
bill is a careful and conservative meas
ure, and that the duties, even as re-
duced, still leave large margin OF pro-
lection for the domestic manufacturer.
1t must be remembered, too, that the
temptation to make partisan capital
out of reductions anu threats of reduc
lions OF wages is one Of the many bad
results OF that unfortunate alliance OF
politics and manufacturing which has
marked the history of the last ten
years. The manufacturer who objects
to the Wilson bill because it will cut
down his profits or compel him to in
troduce economies and improve his
methods to meet foreign competition is
likely to proclaim that he will reduce
wages. just as he will virtually compel
his operatives to sign petitions against
the tariff bill, all with the hope CT
staving off the inevitable. No doubt,
too, many manufacturers are in good
faith fearful of the consequences of the
proposed measure. They have Leen
told for years that their business de-
ponds upon the tariff, and that they
cannot pay their wages unless bolstered
up by the tariff. They are fearful and
of what may happen. and
they Join in the general alarm. Under