The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1904-08-26
LABOR COST" STANDARD.
Another Chapter on the Subject OF
Tariff Revision.
From Wednesdays Daily.

Tariff Revision.
From Wednesdays Daily.
"The measure of protection should al
ways be at least equal to the difference |
in the cost of production at home, and |
abroad" Republican National Platform.
This is distinctively the Roosevelt
idea"-except that he makes it the ga
Dor cost"-incorporated into the tumble
of inconsistencies framed by Lodge be-
fore the instruction among Massachu
sets republicans compelled his recent
somersault. 1t is what President Roose-
Welt urged upon congress in two mes
sages, and has repeated in his speeches.
1t is absolutely inconsistent with
stand patterson, and especially so with
the advanced stand pattitude of Me-
Cleary. Mr.. Miller very properly, in his
open letter to McCleary, asks him if he
favors a tariff framed on the Roosevelt
idea. We predict, that he will either not
answer or will dodge that question. We
purpose to give few facts bearing up
on this standard for measuring protec-
ton, standard all revisionists will ac-
cept.
The Mckinley tariff lowered the rate
on sawed boards to 81 thousand feet.
The Dingley law restored the rate to So,
Mr.. Tawney, we regret to say, being
very active and influential in securing
the increase. Mr.. McCleary devoted part
of his zone minute" speech to lumber and
it's tax. Having shown" he says, shat
the duty on lumber was practically un-
profitable, then showed that such ac-
ton would be entirely out of harmony
with the protective policy" Two years
,, ago, when this tax was criticised, he
, said there are "two sides" to the ques-
ton. He has since got down on one side
and maintains it is the only side. A tax
of So thousand on boards must be
maintained to "enable" the makers of
lumber to pay their employees the wages
Ouc AlIieI lCdH OlhlilSLllcli.
When the Dingley bill was in the SEN
ate in 1897 it was objected that the pro-
posed raise of the tax one hundred per-
cent was needless as a protection of our
lumbermen against Canadian competi-
ton, and the senate adopted resolu-
ton ASKING Commissioner of Labor
Wright to ''send to the senate state
ment of the cost per thousand feet of
producing white-p pine lumber in the Uni
ted States and in Canada, the statement
to include the cost of lumberinr in the
woods, and the cost of manu-. acturing
of mill VOL, including also the cost of
stun.iage." Mr.. Wright made report
complete except as to cost in the woods,
where he found details so different that
comparison could not be made, though
the cost should be less here because of
the better methods used, such as ice
roads and log railways.
Five representative mills were select
ed in each country. In our mills he
found the average wage rate to be $l.9l
for workmen in the mills; STAG in the
yard, or an average in both of Sill In
the Canadian mills he found the average
wage in mill to be SLAB; in yard, $l.395
or an average of $l.426 in both. Turn
ing to the labor cost, the point of view
of the manufacturer always, he found
that the labor cost of producing thou
sand feet of lumber in our five mills
averaged for work in mill $O.55; in yard,
$036, total of all labor cost of $O9l46.
In the Canadian mills he found the aver
age labor cost in mill to be 1914; in
yard, $0.4965, total labor cost of
$l.2392, or $0.3246 greater than in our
mills. He farther found that the aver
age production per day. per man in our
mills was, in the mill, 3,50S feet, and
in yard, 1874 feet, while that in the
Canadian mills was 1927 feet in the
mill and LAB feet in the yard
In view of this condition, in view of
the measure of protection called for by
the national platform and urged by the
president, Mr.. Miller's first question, in
the open letter to his opponent which he
print today: Would you favor tariff
ION lumber) built on the line of differ
ence in labor cost here and abroad? Tor
on difference in "cost of production'') is
both pertinent and timely In view of
the higher wages paid here, but lower
labor cost, does Mr.. McCleary think that
the next revision may need to be up
ward, not downward" on lumber? With
this showing by a republican commits
sioner of labor and the chief statistician
of the country-that it costs our lum-
bermen 32.46 cents less for labor to make
a thousand feet of lumber than it does
the Canadian, does he still think that
"today in my district there" should be
mo more life in the free lumber cry
than there is in last years birds nest"
st. Paul Dispatch.
Mn "a nIIrCr AR FnCn