Rocky Ford enterprise., 1904-10-21

expenditure for food was $500 per fam
lily. or 42.53 per cent. of the average
expenditure for all purposes. This data
was corroboratei by other Information
In less detail form. from 25.iiO families.
and 81 is entitled To be accepted as rep
resrntatiye.
The most cnrsory examination of the
above table reveals the fact that the
purchasing power OF wages. measured by
retail prices OF food. was . per cent.
greater In 1908 than In 1898. and this
In spite OF the fact that the hours per
weci; had been reduced 81 per cent.
But more conducive to the wide dis
semination of the prosperity than these
proofs OF the Increased purchasing pow
rr OF wages. Is the fact revealed In the
column giving the relative number OF
persons employed In the establishments
Investigated. Between 1891 and 1903 the
increase In the number of employees re-
eclvIng these wages with increased pnr-
chasing power was 3i.3 per cent. while
In the meantime tho population Of the
United States only Increased Il per cent.
bemoeraes's Last Resort.
Dishcar,ened and disguised with the
Wide distribution Of prosperity In the
homes. workshops and bank accounts Of
American wage earncrs. demonstrated By
these figures. the Democrats appeal To
railroad labor - afIoniiaE the most ae-
curai- barometer Of wages" Here. they
say. "a large proportion Of the employees
arc union men. whose wages are cou,'
parstiveiy stcady."
Then the eompil~rs OF the Democratic
campaign book begin to jussis with tho
very atcras-s and percentages they as.
feet 60 dcsplsc. They Institute cotnpar!.
soas between lsr.. when railway wages
were at high tide. AMI 1901. whea they
bad scarcely recovered from Democratic
recession Of is;eI. is;s'. They suppress
;hs fact that the statistical average o.
railway wages was less ancc;~f By tho
Democratic hard tines than the average
OF other Industries. for the obslsas rea.
son that a. forces were rr'iue~i In NUN.
bcrs the proportion OF high priced etn.
pjoyes retained because Of their expert.
enec was greater.
They also caaeinas their comparisons
with the year ~aiins June 50sh. ipu,.
well knowing that tho statistics Of the
Interstate Commerce. Commission for
that year only reflect . month OF two
OF the adrsne, In railway wage. OF tia;
calendar year. which di No: reach nsoi
tide until juiy. 100. No; until The
statistics Of the Interstate commercc
Commission so.' the year irni.1fpt arc
pub'ished nes; summer will it be pos.
sihle TO make an authoritative cotnpsri.
son OF the wages of railway employees
aud the cos; o: irln< In tho year 1900.
But the report of the Commission for
the hsr,i year innJ 10 asaiistNc. and I,
furnishes the following daia.N which
throws ii<hs on tho rich slice oNpros.
rrriis which hss sstt... ss.-Aa.s - a
NrMrtR Ann CoNrrSvSTts~s or
RAILWAY EMrLoSEs rs THE H:Anx
Year Sutats~r Co.r,<~pss ss.s
ind ...............i.si.ysls Gtsys,i.tis
INT ............... ssast.6 &Es upi. Sis
trerv,sc per cent. tot o1s
incr.ssr Of eotntenssfioa relatively
"ref butnprs ssssss..s...s...s...... I'll
That this relative Increase Of epmpea.
sa'iou. compared with that in the nun.
ber OF railway employees. does no, tell
the whole truth is proved by the follow.
Ing table:
AVERAGE DAILY COMPENSATION or
.EETAtS blsTtNCrtSE CLASSES or
HALLWAY EMPLOYEES ron Jttg
1EAHs ENDING JUNE surIt ISM;
AMI. ipa wide sixteenth sunuai fetsart
ef the statistics Of railways In the pi,,siis
s.F. -