People's voice. [volume] (Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas) 1890-1917, 1897-06-17


house while the Dingley bill was be-
Ing discussed was made by John C. Bell,
OF Colorado. With facts which are In
dispntable, and logic which is unan-
swerable, be exposed many of the fall
lacies of protection. His exposure of
the absurd claim that protection helps
the workingman Is especially good.
Here is a part Of 1t;
But cpr friends upon the other side
say that they levy tariff for the bene-
Mt OF the wageworkers. say to you
that any tariff bill. | caro- not from
whom It comes, that does not contain
provision for prohibiting the free In
flow OF immigration from foreign couD-
tries Is oblivious of the rights OF labor
and Is opposed 70 the interest Of all
wage-workers. tApplause,)
Protection is always asked In the
interest OF others Now. observe how Il
is asked In behalf Of the poor laboring
mnn-just enough to cover the differ.
ence between the European scale Of
wages and Our own. What hypocrisyt
Who ever heard of the laboring man
getting rich manufacturing2 The sta-
tisticians clearly figured from the Gen.
sus OF 1880 that about six per cent. 90
our dutiable list would cover the differ
ence between the European wage sched-
ule and ours, or that about IS per cent.
I'D VNlorem covered the entire labor cost
Of our list of 1880. While the manufae-
turer then asked for the poor laborer his
six per cent he got for himself at the
hand Of congress six times six per cent.
us there any reason why high tariff
effects wages injuriously? Yes; by
enabling employers to build up a VI
cious trust system for the manufacture.
er and against the laborer. The high
tariff makes the manufacturer com
plete master of the wage-worker.
in the review OF X. G. Dun e. Co.,
in their weekly review Of trnde, dated
February ~. 1t is stated:
"'No other event of the week ap-
proaches in importance the disruption
OF the steel rail pool. In twodays,' says
the report, after II greater tonnage Of
rails wns probably purchased than the
entire production of tho last year, re-
ported at 100000 tons, and Instead of
$2S in December and SOS In January,
SIT is now the price at which works
east and west are seeking orders. And
further, says the report, the Carnegie
company has been selling at SIT, Chi
cago delivery. These sales will employ
many thousand hands, with an impor.
tant decrease in the cost Of track laying
on renewal Of railroads.
Now, my friends, let ne ask you,
was it the rising or lowering price that
employed these thousands OF men,
Our friend. Mr.. Hopkins, OF Illinois
tells Of the benefits of higher duty Oh
iron and steel. Did the steel rail poo
need more tariff? What Is the differ
ence In giving the manufacture g
double profit through high tariff oil
through u pool? Do they ever SHARE
the profits OF the pool with labor? No
VIII they ever share the profits of G
tariff Never.
ut takes no political economist 4
answer these questions. II the UniteC
: States manufacturers can reap twic.
The profit under high tariff by limit
Ing themselves to the home market ant
cunning hall time. why should they ruI
full time and invade foreign markets
They never will. They will sit dow
comfortably and sell their limited sup
ply OF goods for increased profits, max
ing them more than whole. while tb'
iaborer tramps the country In search o
r work Just az he DOES under the trus
: svstem.
1T is unfortunate that the hum
drum OF the tariff has been sounded &
l tie ears Of the people until many o
them really believe that foreign trad
Is unimportant. II not a curse VIII,
2 did the breaking Of the steel rail poe
e put 80 many men to work. II was be
Z cause the consequent lower price 70
. iron aud steel brought most liberal O,
ders from abroad as well as at bomt
Suppose the tariff had been prohibitip
and we would have been confined to Ii
home market Would the manufae
!. tursrs have made 80 many goods7 NJ
!. but they would have doubled thei
profits on what they did make, Tn
people could not have bought 30 man
because OF the increased price Wh
would have suffered? First, the wor,
Il men. because they would have ha
l. fewer goods to make, secondly, Ii
{ consumer. because be could not hav
I bought 30 many at higher price. VIII
q would have been benefited? The mar
= ufecturer, because he might have mad
and handled less goods. made doubl
profit and really have gained. as
i would have bad fewer to handle for Ii
Il same profit
{ This bill will increase the manufs,
e turer's profits on the individual art
h cles, but viii lessen the power Of th
. people 10 buy or use bis wares.