New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-07-12
WHAT THE TARIFF DID.
THE DROP IN MINERS WAGES CAUSED
BY THE WILSON LAW.
NOVA SCOTIA COAL ADMITTED TO NEW ENGLAND
MARKETS CROWDS ouT WEST vIRGINIA's
PRoDYcr-DEMoCRATs ALARMED AT
TfEIR RESPONSIBILITY FOR
PRESENT CONDITIONS.
!BY TELEGRAPH To THE rnrBrxE.I


.BY TELEGRAPH To THE rnrBrxE.I
Washington. July 1.-THE close relation b.
tween the Wilson Tariff law and the present
strike Of the coal miners is the subject OF much
comment among tariff students and members
Of Congress generally. That the reduction which
that law made IN the tariff coal caused great
reductions In the wages Of miners II easily
shown, and that the drop In wages was prac.
tcally coincident with the reduction in duties
: upon coal is generally recognized by those IA
inilar with the subject
President Ratchford OF the United Mine
Workers Association. in a communication to
The New-York Herald" dated July g. says:
miner's wages ir the Western Pennsylvania
field ranges from - to A. cents per ton in thin
veined districts. arr from 81 to - cents per
ton In the thick-veined In 1Sc} the mining
rate in thin-veined districts was 20 cents. and
in thick-veined % cents per ton During the
same year the rate in Ohio and Indiana was 20
and % cents respectively. Now IL is 81 cents.
with reduction proposed in Ohio TO - cents per
ton. This ratio holds good in general way all
along the lines Illinois. portion Of Iowa. East
and Central Pennsylvania and the Virginias
are all equally affected.
These figures indicate a reduction in rates for
mining Of from 20 to 80 cents per ton since 1888
1t was in December 1888 that the Congress
which framed the Wilson Tariff law met. and
the work upon the bill which reduced the coal
tariff 3J cents per ton was begun. II was prom
sed that that bill would take the entire duty or
coal. and. as framed by the Ways and Means
Committee and passed by the House. 1t did place
| coal upon the free list. The Senate. however.
restored a part Of the duty on coal. making the
rate - cents per ton. and the bill when It be-
! came law reduced the tariff rate on bitumnous
coal by % cents a ton. the rate under the Nc
! Kney law having been - cents a ton.
That the entire reduction OF wages which
miners are complaining Of has occurred since the
| beginning of work upon the Wilson Tariff law.
and that the reduction is nearly the same as the
reduction made in the tariff duty by that act, Is
| of itself a remarkable coincidence. end would
almost warrant the assumption that the tari6
reduction caused the reduction in wages
1t is not necessary however merely TO assume
this or tc depend upon theory alone to show that
the reduction in the tariff caused the reduction
in rates for mining 1t IS susceptible OF proof
from facts known 10 every man interested IN or
acuuainted with coal mining and coal operations
Of the last few years Before the passage OF the
Wilson Tariff bill visitor 10 Newport News, the
seaboard terminal of the Chesapeake ana Ohio
Railway might have seen at any time from -FOUR
to a dozen coasting vessels lying in the DOCKS
awaiting the arrival Of coal trains from Virginia
and West Virginia. loaded with coal destined to
be shipped to New-York and New-England. No
sooner had the Wilson tariff taken effect than
these vessels disappeared as completely -
though they had been engufed in mid-ocean.
The reason was simply that the rate OK duty
on coal under the Mckinley law such a.
to exclude foreign coal from New-England or
Eastern ports. but the reduction Of the rate
to 40 cents per ton by the Wilson law permitted
Nova Scotia coal to enter the Northeastern At
Virginia coal could not compete with IT, The
Nova Scotia Goals are cheapy mined. and as
many of the mines extend under water. II 10
practicable to load the coal directly on vessels.
and thus place it in any of the Eastern United
States ports at very low prices.
The result Of this reduction in the tariff was
that the Nova Scotia coal took the place In the
East Of tha, from the West Virginia mines ana
| that the West Virginia n.ine-own-rs ana opera
tors were compelled 10 seek market elsewhere:
Railroad rates to the West were reduced ana
! coal which had formerly gone TO New England
! went West and came in,o competition WIN the
| coal of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois. The price OF
| coal in the Western markets tumbled; then loi-
| lowed a rate war between railroads and between
| mines and mine owners, a reduction IN wages
for mining at the East. followed by reductions In
the West. until miners wages became lower
| than they had ever been known under the pro-
tective policy of the Republicans.
Other causes have operated with equal GER
tainty in keeping down the prices which IL was
possible TO pay for mining. The activity ana
| prosperity Of the miner primarily depends upon
! rhe activity and prosperity OF the manutactur'
ers since machinery Is moved by steam. In tho
| production of which coal must be consumed
Whatever increases the NUMBER OF mus anu
| gives employment to mill hands increases wo'n
| for the miner but whatever reduces the numpeI
| of mills in operation. shortens the number OK
| hours or dminishes the number Of mill oper-
| a,ivas s as much against the interests or the
| miner as II Is against the interests or the me-
| chanic The suspension Of work In factories.
! business establishments OF various KINDS ana
industries of all sorts in all parts OF tme county,
ras,i,,rp from the operation OF the Wilson Law
caused a great reduction In the demand LOT cos'
and combined with the depressing enect OF I'm.
nortations TO reduce the demand Tor the iaopt
/ ~ tho miners and the price paid FOR their SER
vices While the amount OF coal actually I'M
! por,ed is only about four million tons a year:
| enough To throw out OF employment apout e'sn'
| Thousand miners. the loss In markets To AmsII-
! can mines hy the suspension Of manufacturing
/ has been greater. l.. ,.oL.A
Tho nresent strike of the coal miners Is looked
unon with great alarm by Democratic ieade.s
nara II calls attention directly ana pointediy to
! th fact that their legislation is beyond question:
responsible for the reduction OF wages M@nlon; @
pprdino IN President Ratchford. has occurred
sircn the inception Of that legislation. NO. onIy
! &c the Democratic party responspIe ior 'ne ~.
dnction of 35 cents per ton Whien causeu ~ ,, .n,s
! reduction in wages. but many or the men now
! o"s, nrorinent in its councils and as its leaders
urged and even demanded a remova, Oh sne .n .hs
tire duty on coal. placing 1t absolutely upon ,ne
| free list which would nave uouD''esS S"' '
! reduced the wages or miners .,.o-,o.
| Wuliam I Bryan. whose name and theories
! ,, 70 no aspeciay prominent In the approach
ing campaigns in the coal mining stats stats, was a.
one OF the most earnest and active memners o'
| IN u',ng ~ his party which demanded the re-
.I'e , -, tho entire duty on coal saying In .
sneech In Congress on January l., ls?t;
The duty on coal is indefensipie; me aaSy ac
an coal is nothing but subsidy. when the pec.
o , - -, Tho sea coast are compelled TO pay 20
nne ihe transportation companies Take the ,ar,n
| off from coal 50 that the New,Ensiana m,amu- manu-,
Sac,mrers can buy 1t for less, and they can manu-.
taa,,ro more cheaply, and then 10y cutting down
,hs tarif on the products OF their factories. w
! an comnel them To sell at lower price 10 sos
| neonle OF the South and west
|