Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1911-03-30
TARIFF NOT NEEDED
kiGhLT SIGNIFICANT FIGURES IN
PULP PRODUCTION.
Arguments Of "ssandpat" Statesmen
Clearly Refuted-Fsw Industries
u the United States In Real
Need Oh Protection.

The report Of the tariff board on tbs
comparative cost of producing pulp
and print paper In this country and.
Canada shows very clearly that we
need no tariff at all on these products
for the purpose Of protecting our Ia
Dor, since the labor cost is about the
same in Canada as in this country. In
mills In which the cost Of production
is lowest there is practically no Diff
ference in total cost The figures on
print paper, for instance, are $25.SS q
ton In this country, as against $25.lf
in Canada. The labor cost In Canada
is the higher. There is a considerable
difference as against us In the mills
in which the cost Of production Is
highest. And the effect is to max an
average cost that is greater in this
country than in Canada. But labor
cost has little or nothing to do with
It. Where Canada produces more
cheaply it is because of her greater
command over raw material, an ad-
vantage which, under reciprocity, she
will share with US. The average labor
cost of producing print paper is pre-
cisely the same in both countries. We
lose almost exclusively on raw mate
rails. Our average labor cost Is lower
for sulphite pulp, slightly higher for
wood pulp, and the same as that OF
Canada on print paper.
Surely we should all be able to see
how useful may be the reports OF a
tariff commission. Here we have a
clear demonstration that we need no
tariff on these products. There is no
necessity for protecting labor, which
stands even shouldered with Canada.
AS for the other differences in cost all
that is needed to level them Is a freer
access to stores of raw material. On
such a showing as this 1t would be
difficult for even the most determined
-. ~standpat statesmen to convince the
l people that any protection was needed
by these industries. Another thing Is
made clear, and that is that m many
J, cases the cost of production is mucf
higher than it ought to be. The diner
v ence is not In wages, at least not en-
r tirely. The great discrepancies cal
a be explained only on the theory tina
It the mills are old and out-of-date, O
l. badly located-perhaps both. And tn
it question Is as to how far we shout
Q go in protecting industries whose cos
v of production is high only becaus
j. they do not keep up with the march G
h progress.
We know that extreme protectio
al does tend to check the modernizatio
IS of plants. AS long as men can max
IT money with old machinery, as, {
Is course, they can If protection is sui
Id GENTLY high, there is no reason WI
they should put in new. Men learn
W time to rely on the government rath'
I'd than on their own energy and r
"a sourcefulness. All that the paper az
as pulp men seem to need is cheaper al
more abundant raw material, and
* really progressive management. Re-
at procity will do much to help the
ri With that it Is not probable tn
ed there will be any considerable diff
no ence In the costs Of production in t
two countries, The facts as given
ey this report of the tariff board are pr
ty good ammunition for't the tariff
lid visers. Their official character, a
lb- the fact that they were compiled
a board appointed by a Republic
I'm president give them q significance tn
can hardly be missed. A careful
ku curry by any honest, fairminded a
asst capable men, no matter what tn
Sc tariff theories, could not fail to sh'
he that mighty little protection is need
BY any industry in the United Stat