The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-03-27

manufacturers meet with disaster ana
failure In business than amass great ior-
tunes even under a protective poIcy.-Ie-
tersburg Index-Appeal.
There Is nothing in the paragraph auo'-
cd from Tho Times TO provoke TINS UNI
neighboTly rotort. nor s. there anything
in the argument of the lndex-Appeai !"
contravention OF the contention OF Inc
Times. Indeed, the reply OF the muck
Appeal IS IN It's reasoning concession
tnat the extra dollar which the purchaser
paws for suit OF clothes under pro-
tective tariff IS tax which he pays
10 the manufacturer Let us see.
The extra dollar Is presumed, and II IS
clear that It Toes not go to the govern
mont. for, rs the context indicates we
were talking about an article of nome
manufacture. which does not have TO
PASS through "a custom house before CO.
ing into consumption. II the Government
docs not get the extra dollar. who does2
The Index-Appaal says. as we understand
II. that It is intended for the labo-ing
man. but Il also says In the next breath
that high tariff or low tariff, the labor
unions TX the wages Of employees. and
that the employer under low tariff finds
himself confronted with the dilemma OF
having 10 manufacture and sell in COM
petition with low wages abroad at prices
less than the product cost him. or quit
business. What then. according to the
II It
tive tariff? Obviously To- enable the
American manufacturer TO increase the
price Of his product. Who. then, gets
the extra dollar?
The contention that the labor unions
have forced the issue and made a tariff
tax necessary is no denial of the simple
fact. as stated by The Times. that the
extra dollar goes to the manufacturer
and not TO the Government.
But we deny that manufacturing can
not be proGtably carried on in this coun-
try in spite Of the difererce in the price
OF labor against The American manufac-
turer. One If the largest manufacturers
I'm the United States Of agricultural i'm
plements recently told the Committee on
Ways and Means that he wanted no pro-
lection on MS product, and that all mat
he asked for was an open market. lie
then went on TO explain that American
labor was at the higher price cheaper
than foreign labor, because of It's su-
pcriority, and that with superior labor
and superior machinery he found 10 dii-
nculty in selling his goods abroad in com
petition with foreign manufactures.
If anything more DO needed to support
the contention Of The Times, it IS found
I'm the following extract from recent
editorial in the New York Herald.
1t is well known that the present duty
on many articles enables the manuiac-
turer TO add its entire amount 10 the
price he exacts from American consum-
crs. while he is exporting the same ar
ticlcs and after paying freights and com
missions Is unlersclling the foreigners IN
their own markets. i New Yorker re-
Gently carried across the ocean bicycle
for which he had paid one hundred dol
lars. Thinking TO astOnish the natives,
he paid duty at the German frontier
and rode into a town, whore he was leo
10 a local agency maintained by the
American manufacturer and shown the
same wheel on sale for the equivalent Of
soventy-hve dollars. Thus the imposition
Of Il duty of thrty-ive per cent. on sew
ing machines cycles. and similar arti-
clos does not add TO the revenue but
merely authorizes a few millionaire man
ufacturors to tax the American people for
their private benefit
We believe that the New York Herald
makes prctensions to metropolitan jour
ualism. and so the Indictment of zig
norance and malevolence' applies TO that
journal with tho same force that it APP
plies TO Tho Times. We are quite con-