Semi=weekly graphic., 1897-07-31
Id A5st{ls , II3 t18I.
PROTeeT4r& CAN clYe NOTHING TO WCBsiNliaE8 .9isiLe LABOR
 I8 0H Tae FREE Li8T

is4a4 a4siteisJ.a satE.fHf sl Ehe Y CHtf-= Low
 Prices sti.ali4ta f.olA Consumption and
 praaaatle+ s44aple of stes4 Jtau Pool.
 Chr 0f tfg best spsschez made in the house ohil= fba Iilgiae bill a.s being dia u4sed x usae l9 John G Bell of Colorado #iia .act5 which afo indis- pu.able and lQs which is auauswer- abie hg eEl8ssd fnaBy .1 the fallaeies Of pIoleetion His exposure uf fha absurd claim that l1oieefien heiFz the work ingmgn is especially scod Hero ia a part of it:
 tButn friends ppan Che other side gay thatthey levy tariff for the hene- fr of the v azr8 crkers. l say 10 you ;hat any tafiH Li3l. 1 care Let from whom it cemes. thas does not contain a provision in prohibiting the fee in. flow Of imHi grafton 94oa foreign eoah tries is obhEims of the rights ef labor and is oppos1d to inc interest af all wage0ofbe1s. Applause,
 Protection Is always asked in tht interest Of others. Now. observe how it is asked in behalf of the poor laboring maa-just enough to cover the differ euce between che European scale of wages and our OWL What hypocrisy Who ever heard af the laboIing man getting rich manufacturing? The sta tisticiana clearly figured from the cen gus uf 1880 chat about 6 per cent on our datiable list Wouid cover the differ. eHee between the European wage sehed. ale and ou1a, or that about Is per cent ad yaiofem covered the entire labor cost Of eur list of 1880 While the manufac turar then asked for the poor lahoreI his 6 per cent he get for himself at tbt hands of congress six times per cent
 9Is there any reason why high tariff affects Wages injuriously? Yes by en. abling employers to build up a yieious trust system fer the manufacturer anu against the laborer. The high tariff makes the manufacturer complete mas. ter of the waaeworker.
 "In tha review of k. G. Dun < Go, ia thei1 weekly review of tFade, dated Feb. 2 1t is stated:
 No otEer event of the week ap. breaches in importance the disruption of the steel rail pool in two days. says che report. after it greater tonnage 6i rails was probably purchased than thl entife production of the last year, re. ported at Sa0 GOO tons. And instead Of SIX in December and $25 in January S17 is HOW the price at which works east and west arc seeking orders And further, says the report. the Carnegie company has been selling Ut ST, Chi cago delivery. These sales will employ many thousand hands, with aH impor- tant decrease in tho cost of track laying on renewal Of railroads
 &oW, py friends, let me ask you, was il the rising or lowering price thai employed these thousands If men2 OuT friend Mr. Hopkins of Illinois tells of the benefits of higher duty on iron and steel Did the steel rail pool need more tariff?
 What is the difference in giving the manufacturer q double profit through a high tariff or through pool: Do they ever share the profits of the pool with labor? No. Will they ever share the profits of tariff? Never
 Ut taEes no political economist te answer these questions If Che United States manufacturers can reap twice the profit under high tariff hy lmiting themselves to the home market and running half time, why shcald they run full time and invade foreign mar kets? They never will They will sit down comfortably and sell their limited supply of goods for increased profits making them more than whole, while the laborer tramps the country ill search of work juss as Le now does under the trust system.
 Ut is unfortunate that the humdrHm of the tariff has been sounded in the ears eff the people until many of them really believe that foreign trade is un, important, if lot culse Why did tn, breaking of tho steel rail pool put SC many men to Merk? ItWas because the consequent lowered price for iron and steel brought most liberal orders from abroad as well as at home. Suppose the tariff had heen prohihitiye and we would nave been confined to the home market Would the manufacturers have made 50 many goods2 Ne but they would have doubled their profits cn what they did make The people could not hay0 Goupht 70 mauy because of the increased price. Who would have sui ferad. First, the workmen, becapse they would have had fewer goods io make, secondly, the consumer because hs could net have bought so many Ut higher price Who would have been ben efited2 The manufacturer because he might have made and handled less goods, made double profit and really have gained. as he would have had few CT to handle for the same profit
 "phis bill will increase }he manufac. turer's profits on the individual mt cles, nut will lessen the power of the people to buy CT use his wares
 1t is the poverty of the buyer, moi the producer, thai must le relieved be- fore things will thrive.
 The manufacturer has every facility to produce but no facility to sell
 It is the consumption that must first be stimulated. and that will stim. ulata productions.
 There aro but few crumbs ill this bill to aid the oppressed farmer of the interior or the laborer, but thousands of things to further oppress him. Higher sugar, higher salt, higher lumber, high CT clothing higher manufactured prod ucts and absolutely nothing to raise the nripa Qf lnbOr-a biph tariff m, lahn,,ts