West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1903-07-23
JUGGLING STATISTICS.
More of Carroll d. Wright's
Faliacious Figures.
ABSURD SYSTEM OF AVERAGES"

A smooth scheme For RafsinE wages
ON Paper-wage statistic. Abso-
futeiy worthless-His Function 60
Popularire Statistical Errors.
The Hon. Carroll ID. Wright. COM
missioner Of labor. is again earning his
salary and serving the Republican par
" and the trusts back OF IL by pub
fishing fallacious wage statistics. He
Is perhaps our smoothest juggler OF
statistics. He can give and has given
points TO our new director OF the cen
sus. Mr.. s. n. ID. North. and that is
saying much. for Mr.. North has an
unenviable record In this respect.
Mr.. Ii. J.. Bliss In his pamphlet, "Our
Juggled Census" has not only demon
strated the crooked methods OF our
census officials and the absolute worth
lessness OF its wage statistics, but he
has shown. by their own admissions,
that both MFR. Wright and Mr.. North
are knowingly popularizing the errors
or our census statistics. One OF these
errors consisted I'm changing tho "aver-
age"number of wage earners to mean
average not for the actual time en-
ployed, but for twelve months. BY
this change the average wagesr I'm
short period industry which runs
for six months only are double what
they should be.
Thus, II cannery runs six months
I'm year, employs regularly 100 per-
sons and pays $4,000 I'm wages, the
average earnings OF the employees are
SINK aoah 81 -.
North however used another method
I'm the 1900 census. He added together
the average number OF wage earners
for each OF the six months and then
divided by twelve, tho number of
months in the year. lie then divided
the total wages paid by this average
number. Observe tho result I'm the
above case. which is typical OF series
of industries: 100%6=6O0; COO -t12=5O,
the average" number OF employees:
s19,5oo+ +5o=$390. the yearly earnings
of each employee, which is at the rate
OF $15 per week.
Thus by this juggle OF average
not only are apparent wages double the
actual wages, but an average" is oh.
tained which is actually only one-half
the lowest number employed Mt any
time. OF course such averages are
impossible and ridiculous, although the
1900 census is filed with them. OF
course such averages are slick de-
vice for raising apparent wages or TO
cover up heavy declines, for in spite
or all their devices they could not con-
ceal all or the decline in wages from
1890 TO 1900. Equally, of course, both
Mr. Wright ana Mr.. North. who are
bright men, understand the absurdities
and fallacies of this method of aver
ages, for they have admitted them In
private letters. IL is fair, then, to con
clude that when they repeat their
wage statistics in lectures and pub
lished articles they do 30 with intent
to deceive.
But this is not all. They. sometimes
discuss entirely fictitious statistics as
IL they were genuine. Thus I'm Boyce's
Weekly, of March IL, 1903. Carroll ID.
Wright, under the heading, Industrial
Progress-Real and Nominal Wages"
makes the following statement;
Taking 1850 as a basis, nominal
wages have increased nearly 20 per
cent while prices, taken as a whole,
are % per cent lower than in 1890.
Thus the purchasing power OF
wages at tho present time, measured
by the course of wholesale prices, Is
about so per cent higher than in 1880.
- A very good illustration of this
can be made by taking single .indi-
yidual and seeing how be would have
stood at different periods. A Journey
man carpenter received 81 a day in
1850 $3.50 I'm 1906, $40 I'm 1891, SO In
1895 and S3.45 I'm 1901, and these arc
actual rates for the years named. He
could have purchased certain quaint
ties Of commodities necessary for the
support OF the family and taking the
same quantities and the same articles,
with varying results. His earnings
were SO, $2f, $500, $1S and S20.70
week for the years named respective
ly After purchasing the given articles
In 1860 he would have had $2.40 left;
in 1866 he would have had S154; I'm
1901 he would have had $7.21; In 1896
no would have had $40. while in 1901
he would have had S11.10 to spare"
Thcso statistics are chock full OF err
rors. The fallacies of the wage sta
tistics OF the Aldrlch report from
which Mr.. Wright has evidently taken
some OF his statistics, have been well
demonstrated by Mr.. Charles -. Spahr
and others. They are numerous and
very important and are the product OF
Sir. Wright himself. But at best they
DO not represent average wages, but
only tho wages paid In certain mills,
md we may be sure that these same
mills paid more than the average
wages. There may have been carpen-
ters I'm each OF the years named who
received tho wages specified by Mr..
Wright, but such wages were not tho
average wages Of carpenters nor any
thing like the average. Thus the cen
sus report of 1000 tells us that the av-
erage wages Of carpenters In 1890 were
$3.50 and In 1900 Sf102 per week. It
Is ridiculous to suppose that carpen-
ters' wages rose from sff.O2 in 1900 to
$2O70 in 1901. It should also be OBJ
served that while carpenters wages
declined ~ per cent from 1890 to 1900,
according 70 the census, they rose IL
per cent from 1901 to 1901. according
TO Wrlghte figures II should also not
bo forgotten that the census figures
were made up by tho ridiculous system
Of averages and that as carpenters
work only about eight months n year
If Mr. Wright is right for once-the
census wages are about 30 per cent
higher than they should be.
But Mr. Wright's statistics nr0 abb
surd on their face. Ho says the car
penter got SIS per week I'm 1896 and
had $40 left after purchasing his
commodities and that he got S20.70 in
1901 and had sit.1O left after purchas-
ing the same commodities. Thus the