Potosi journal. (Potosi, Mo.) 1894-1929, 1915-07-07

report of : bfll to revise the cott6r
schedule. assuming cotton manufac
lures to be SO per cent labor, would
rob factory employees of about s..
00O, 600.
No one doubts the sincerity Of Mr.
Underwood. He is splendid man. 1
good scholar. q fair speaker. and q
really strong In everything except
legislation. He was thoughtless
enough to believe that he could ride
into popularity on the strength q
these two bills. the enactment oi
which he himself estimated as above
] would cost American labor $50 900 ,00(
In wages per annum. Is 1t not strange
that he should have one such loose
gear?
As Secretary Shaw was won't to say
IN his wonderfully lucid tariff
speeches, -The children in the eighth
grades know II we import next yeal
what dad made last year. that dad will
be looking for work, and they will be
looking for bread"
Comparatively few people, public
speakers. or writer's, appreciate what
the loss of days productive labor
means to q country like ours in a
single twelvemonth. Suppose a man
works today at some productive EN-.
plOyment and receives $500 therefor
He expends this for foor and clothing.
The merchant pays this out to the pro.
ducer of food and clothing, who in
turn pays 1t again to labor. Twenty
that this wage completed the circuit
and reached labor ten times in twelve
months. Having improved business
facilities since then it probably
reaches labor once a month or twelve
times per annum. Thus every $500
man who is idle this year, when he
was productivity employed last year.
takes from the aggregate of commerce
'$24.O0 for every day thus unemployed.
A million 500 men out Of work two
hundred days spells the loss Of a.
eoo.ooQo 900 In domestic commerce.
A year ago the papers published a
report OF luncheon given by Judge
Gary to noted ironmaster OF Eng
land. and quoted the guest as having
said. to the effect, Some years ago
q man came to me and said. I think
should be able to support my family
on three days work per week, and
when work six days in the week l
recognize that am robbing some poor
fellow Of three days work." To this
the ironmaster replied, Passing over
the question whether your culture,
your happiness or your worth as q
citizen would be enhanced by three
Idle days per week, want to suggest
that II you could support your family
with three days work per week, and
you did work six days, you would have
sufficient money to employ some other
man for three days. Do not suppose,
therefore, that by remaining idle
three days you are giving some one
else employment. By remaining idle
three days you are robbing some poor
fellow Of three days work, which you
could otherwise afford to employ him
to do" Neither Mr.. Lincoln nor Mr..
Mckinley could have stated this Ioai-
cal and unanswerabIe deduction with
greater eiearness. Wa are told that
Mr.. Lincoln. when questioned about
the tariff, at one time said in sub
stance, Il don't claim to know much
about the tariff, but as l understand
1t, II we buy q ton of iron in England,
we get the iron and England gets the
money. but II we buy ton Of iron pro.
duced il the United States, we get
the Iron and we also keep the money"
Presumably the Underwood tariff
bill was enacted to increase imports
II it has failed as you indicate, and as
all previous tariffs for revenue failed,
then of course, It win not yield reYe-
nus and NE will have to again submit
to q bend issue. which has been one
Of the incidents Of each ana every
Democratic administration, when both
houses Of congress have been Of the
same complexion. Now do not sug-
gest that the treasury was depleted
when Mr.. Cleveland was taaugurafed
1t was depleted, ana naturally de.
pletsa.
Following election day in 1892,
the country recognized that a low
tariff was inevitable; business pre-.
pared for it, and no merchant import
ed dollar's worth Of goods that he
could defer. This, Of course. has been
explained again and again, and yet
many speakers and writer's persist tn
charging to the Harrtson administra.
tiop the effect of anticipated misdeeds
Of q forthcoming Democratic admins
tration.
Since duties are collected only upon
imported articles, it follows that q bill
for revenue only Is a bill for no other
purpose than closing American FAC.
tories, turatpz their employees into
the streets, and substituting imported
for domestic products. If Il has any
other result In even the slightest de-
gree Il 10 not 4 tariff biii for revenue
only.
A potent factor in keeping down I'm.
portations during 1914 was the selling
Of American made manufactures at OF
below cost, in wild scramble to keep
plants open at least part time, and
there was a total absence Of full time
faetery operations, which produce in
good times, surplus stocks that we
can afford to dump" abroad at con-
cessions In price.
There Is another reason why imports
have fallen off, which think should