The Hocking sentinel. [volume] (Logan, Ohio) 1871-1906, 1902-10-30

feSCgat1On ana ngurSS anu. according
to bis letter. ''wasted his time" draw
ing misleading conclusions" which have
no scientific value"
Mr.. Bliss shows In his article:
First.-That the rise of nearly so per
cent in wages from 1903 TO 400 Is ac-
counted for by changes In census meth
dds.
Second.-That Mr.. North. before he
became chief statistician for manufac-
tures. severly criticised the lS:N census
on wages.
Third.-That the methods which fic-
titiously raised wages In the laaO CEN
sus were carried still further In l9O0.
Fourth.-Thut even these methods
did not prevent wages from showing q
decline Of Ia per cent from 1880 to
1900.
Fifth.-That wages probably declined
10 per cent from 1890 to 1900.
Sixth.-That II the same methods had
been used IN 1900 a. were used In 1880
few. II any. states would show wage
advances.
Seventh.-That the methods used lead
to the most absurd conclusions. such 40
an average" number which 10 less
than the lowest number considered.
Eighth.-That the Aldrich report
was also juggled to make wages ap-
pear high In late years.
Ninth.-That the Aldrich and census
reports do not agree as to when wages
advanced.
gienth.-That Rtatisticinn North and
Labor Commissioner Wright areknow.
ingiy popularixinE the errors Of our
census rpportA
EIeventh.-That the census atatis-
tics on farms and on child la.,oe are
absurd and have been juggled.
The principal trick Cf the cen
sus juggirrs In done in this way,
1natead OF dividing the total
amount Of wages paid hy tho
total numipr Of wage earncrs 70
whom wages are paid they divide by
the average number employed for
the year This would iR misleading
even II all Industries were working
full the entire year 1t is false and
absurd for short period Industries II
tesuited IN nearly doubling the wages
u the lumher industry in Michigan
and Wisconsin from 1870 to 1870,
whilc wages in the plnninS mill indus
try declined sharply. OF course. as
these are kindred industries. wages 60
up and down In both ut once. But
In the lumber industries
Is only for about half a year. Hence
the average" number Of wage earn
ers for twelve months ID only about
half the actual number employed for
six months. and when the total of
wages il divided by this smaller num-
ber the average" wages are about
So important il this change in meth
Cd that while average earnings In
are reported In the census
pf 1900 at $4l1-1O they would have
been only $35l.72 II the lumLer and
timber industry had been omitted. IL
the other short period industries had
been, omitted or II the same methods
bad been employed in 1900 as In lSS0.
he average earnings In Michigan and
Wisconsin instead Of increasing 10 per
,ent or Is per cent would show a de-
Zine Of 1O per cent or more. The
'tates With few short period industries
nearly all show decline In earnings |
rom 1870 to 1900. und probably nearly |
Ill Of the states which show increased !
would show decreases II |
treated.
The abSard.ty Of the averages"
method Is seen clearly In the canning |
where the greatest numher !
4 wage earners employed was 1885,
w. the least number 45.lO6 and the
average number 364O1. aud ip the
'uilding glass industry. where the
'reatest number was 1890. the least !
6O59 and the average" ll,0O2. Here
Ve have an average lower than the
east IL not this the climax Of sta.
istical absurdity? And yet our CEN
us makers are great men-that 10.
hey know how to make great show
nc for prosperity when wages are
teadily declining. These are the men
rho are serving a. arbitrators In set
ling strikes. They understand their
usinesA -.