Democratic Sentinel, Volume 12, Number 39, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 19 October 1888 — REDUCE THE WAR TAXES [ARTICLE]

REDUCE THE WAR TAXES

FALLACIES OF THE HIGH PROTECTIONISTS EXPOSED. Falsity of the Pretence that Workingmen Are Protected by the Tariff Against the “Pauper Labor of Europe”—Passage* from a Speech by Hon. James K. Jones, of Arkansas, in the V. S. Senate. The fact remains that while oar tariff taxes are so laid as to bring into the national Treasury about $200,000,000 per annum they take from the people for the benefit of the protected industries many times this sum. This legislating by indirect and unfair means against the masses, and in favor of the industries is so arranged as to come like a "thief in the night,” and it is next to impossible to tell accurately how much is abstracted, but enough is known to know that it aggregates perhaps a thousand millions of dollars each year. It has been so estimated again and again by skilled and competent men, after the most careful examination. This is protection pure and simple, and this is what the Republican party solemnly declare shall not be abandoned. The pretenses under which this system of naked robbery is defended are various, inconsistent, and unphilosophieal. When it wbb just beginning, the purpose was alleged to be to protect the "infant industries.” The understauoing was that this was to continue but a limited timo, and the quantum of protection was quite moderate indeed, being rrom 5 to 15 per cent, prior to the beginning of the present century; but as time has passed and the infants have grown and waxed fat, instead of being willing to stand alone, they have grown strong enough to defy for years all efforts to reduce their share of “pap,” until now, in this year of our Lord 1888, at tne end of a century of national life the convention of a great party has boldly declared that—“We favor the entire repeal :of internal taxes rather than the surrender of any part of our protective system.” And upon this declaration in favor of free whisky rather than cheaper clothing and necessaries, the venorable and able leader of jirotoctlonists exclaimed in his place in the House of Representatives: “Now Lord lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, for mine eyes have seen the salvation of the Republican party." This exclamation on his part is not to be wondered at, for he had long since turned his back on this faUe pretense and had said twenty years ago that he would—“protect every feeble or infant branch of industry and quicken those that are robust.” The Republican party now boldly declares that “the protective system must be maintained.” All pretense that it is for a temporary purpose or for infant industries is at last laid aside, and the American people are put upon notice that their slavery is to be, not temporary, as at first promised, but eternal. I thank the Republican party for throwing off the disguise and avowing ti.eir real purpose. The Democratic party on the o.hor hand declares that it — “indorses tho efforts of our Democratic representatives In Congress to secure a reduction of excessive taxation.” And thus the issue is joinod. The Democratic House of Representatives have reported and passed und sent to us for our sanction a bill providing for a moderate reduction of taxation, a reduction of the present ‘ average tax of 47 per cent, to about 42 per cent. To this the Repub.icon party will not agree, but will either adhere to the declarations of the Chicago convention and boldly advocate highpriced necessities and low-prioed whisky, or else, driven by the public sintimentof an outraged people, they will pretend to abandon this doctrine and offer some reduction of tariff taxation which will relieve the people as little as possible; while “keeping the word of promise to the ear will break it to the hopewhich will remove those taxes only whicn are collected by the Government, and will allow those more oppressive and unjust which are collected by the manufacturers to remain. This pretense of protecting infant industries having been practically outgrown.and a ojntury of protection bavin" demonstrated that the infancy of these protected industries is to be eternal, the protectionists found it necessary to present the pretense that labor has in some way an interest in this, and they at once declur themselves “devoted to tho protection of American labor and industries." That they are devoted to the protection of the industries —to the manufacturers —needs no proof; their conduct demonstrates that. But their conduct just as conclusively proves that they are not devoted to the interests of American labor. The truth is “they are blindly wedded to the corporate power of the country and have no proper regard for the interests of labor. ” That the manufacturers reap a rich harvest from protection is self-evident, but that the laborers receii e auy benefit from it is as certainly untrue. Every citizen knows that the supply and demand, the regular matket price, will regulate the price of luhor. As has been well said, when there are two laborers and only one employer the employer will fix the jrico of labor, hut when there is one laborer and two employers the laborer will make tho price. Those wno have put tnemsolves to the trouble to notico havo s en reductions in wages immediately upon tno increase of tho tariff too Often to bo misled by any pretense tua, tue object of the tarin is to protect labor. The protectionists themselves demonstrate the dishonesty of th s pretense. The claim is that American labor cannot compete with the poorer fed and poorer paid labor of' Europe, and yet, white they liavo covered our statute-books with laws to keep out the products of the labor of foreigners, have lined tho coasts with custom-i.ouse.s and coveied the seas with ships to prevent the impoitation ot the products of labor, they have not made an effort to prevent the importation of the very labor itself against the products of which the laws uro passed, und they rejoice that “men were on the iree-Hst,” and consider them “tho most valuable commodity we can import,” while their candidate for President “can not easily le. go of the old idea that ours is tho free home of all comers.” .

Trie fabric is protected ver3Uß the foreign fabr'c, but tLere is no protection to the laborer against the foreign laborer. The very men are brought into this coun.ry to drive Americans out of the protected industries because these foreigners will work cheaper than Americans, as the investiga.ions of the Horse com mitt so recently in session in New York show, wages having been reduced OH per cent, in some instances, ■while protection lias been kept up *ll the tpne ; and ye„ the plain people of tr is country aro asked to oontinue this tax upon themselves to enable thes > psts of unjust laws to pay high wages to American labor. Upon this subject Mr. Powderly, a leading representative of labor, recently used the following language: “Nino million seven hundred thousand immigrants have landed since 1860—more than the combined population of New York and Pennsylvania, and as much a i the total population of Arizona, Arkansas, cai.fornia, Colorado, Connecticut, Dako a, .Delaware, Florida, loaho, Kansas, I omsiaua, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon, Khode Island, Utah, Washington Territory, West Virginia, and Wyoming. The population which came prerious to 1860 was civilized ; that which comes to-day is, in a great piophr ion, semi-barbarous “So long as this ride of unrestricted immigration is permitted to sweep in tuev will take no steps to reform conditicns at borne. We must check it at once, or, insieuiof Americanizing those who coma, they will Europeanize us." These proofs of the falsity of the pretense teat labor is protected by the turiti "against the pauper labor of Europe" are not needed to convince the masses, as their experience teaches them that the protected industries will get all they can by protection and pay just as little as possible for labor. The tariff was enormoußly increased during the war. This was done to raise revenue, as the Government required extraordinary -ums in the emergencies of the period. It was distinctly understood at the time that these extraordinary rates of taxation should continue only so long as the emergency continued, and the promise of reduction has been repeated a thousand times since by the leading men of the Republican partv, But those who are reaping the lion's share of the profits of this sys em, having become accustomed to the vast advantages they derive from it and being now the absolute masiers of the Republican party, will not consent to any reduction, but insist instead that the system shall become perpetual. Let us see for a moment how the products of labor in some of our industries are distributed. A manufacturing establishment is worthless without muscle and brain. It would seem that In the distribution of profits in such an establishment the relative value of money and men could, be easily ascertained and that each should have the fair products of his contribution to Success. There should be a fair co-operation

between labor and capital. If th* reports made by the manufacturers themselves to the census bureau in 1880 are to be believed there is now no fairness in this distribution. Let us examine a few tables. din cotton manufacturing there were, according to the tables in the census reports in 1880, employed— Capital in mills, etc $208,280,3-16 Operatives 172,544 Wages paid $42,040,510 Value of material used $102,206,317 The value of product was $192,090,110 This gives as the average of wages paid the operatives in this industry $243.65 per year. Let us see about how valuable, relatively, the manufacturers consider their capital and the men they employ. Deduct the total amount paid for materials used, $102,206,347, and also the amount paid for wages, $42,040,510, from the value of the product, and we have left $47,813,233, the net profit in one year upon an investment of 8208,280,346. We have been told in glittering generalities about “the brotherhood of man,” the “dignity of labor,” and the great importance of the American workingman. Any amount of eloquence, pathos, and gush has been expended upon him here and elsewhere, and in many instances with the fervor and spirit of him who thanked God that he was not as other men, those of us who come here from the South have been taunted with the fact that slavery once existed in our section of the Union. Sometimes people talk for effect, but of course no man here would obscure hard facts by eloquence and glamour. As, however, this is a practical age. 1 want to see how much of the sympathy which goes out from these good people to labor generally finds its way to the laborers at their own doors, and how much of this fine talk is for “campaign purposes merely," and how much is, likesomeof our cheap novels, “founded on a fact.”

Hy a simple calculation, which any school-boy can make, the above fii,ureß show that the millowners, alter having all that they have spent fn the current year for wages and for matorial used, returned to them, then take as much for every sum of $1,075.28 invested as they pay for a year’s work to an operative. The operative works tho year through for $243.65, and the manufacturer takes for liis profit $243.15 each year for every $1,075.28 invested in his mill. In other words, in his opinion the cash value of a man who feeds and clothes himself and works faithfully is $1,075.28. But to follow this idea up a little, I examined the table for woolen manufactures, and found that there were employed in capital and labor for different items as follows : Capital invested .... $96,095,564.00 Hands 86,504 Wages and salaries paid $ 25,8)6,392.00 Value of materials used. 100,845,611.00 Products (whole value) RL.00j,721.00 Average wages per hand , 298.77 Amount invested In plunt to produce same amount, after deducting wages aud material 84i,95 Here, then, we have the owners of the woolen mills insisting that the sum of $840.95 is of equal value to one of their men in whose welfare we are assured they feel such a deep and abiding interest. They are willing, in the liberality of their great hearts, to give u> oue of thsir laborers after he has fed aud clothed himself and his family, provided he keeps well and does good and faittiful work, just the same amount that they take for the use of $846.95 capital invested in this “industry” which mußt be protected against the cheap products of Europe. The census reports also show that there are invested and employed in Bessemer and openhearth steel manufactures as follows: Capital $20,975,999.03 Hands 10,395 Wages paid $ 4,930,349.00 Value of materials used 30,826,928.00 Products 55,805,210.00 Average wages paid in this industry per hand 452.53 Deduct wages and materials from gross products as before, and we find $14,0i7,933 as the net product per annum on tho investment of $20,975,99 ). After repaying total amounts paid for material and wages, this yields to the manufacturer 1 $425. 3 not profit upon every amount of $675.66 invested. Yet when there is a proposition to reduce the tariff on steel rails the laborers are notified, by the-xeport of the Mills bill of the minority of the Committee on Ways and Means, that any cut comes upon them, as follows : “If tho majority desire to insure the handing over of our steel-rail morset to our English rivals, the proposed duty of sll will accomplish this purpose, unless the workingmen who are employed in producing the raw material and finished products of our steel-rail workß ure willing to accept still lower wages than they are now receiving, aad the railroad companies which transport the raw materials are willing to greatly reduce their freight rates. Have the majority any assurance that the workingmen aud the railroad companies are willing to accept those conditions V" Think of it! For every $675.66 invested these people are pocketing clear as much as they pay their laborers gross, and yet thoir friends defiantly announce that they will remit none of this “pound of flesh," but that any reduction in their tariff will be taken out of the wages of their laborers 1 And the laborers are told that all this is in their interest. 80 we find that the gentlemen who own these great “industries" consider the amount of $073.66 as the proper equivalent of a man—his actual cash value. Looking at these figures who would doubt that the purpose of this system of taxation is to “protect industries,” and who would, in the face of this record, pretend that the laborer has any interest in it? Hut why is it that a cotton manufacturer does not demand as muon upon his investment as the woolen manufacturer or tue Bessemer steel manufacturer?

Invested in cotton manufacturing it requires $l,O/5.28 to yield the manufacturer net the gross amount his operative gets for a year s labor, which is only #248.65, wliilo 88*6.95 invested in woolen manufactures pays the owner as much as a laborer i eceives in that industry, while .■8675.66 invested in Beßsemer-steel manufactures yields as much net as is paid a laborer gr 05 5.8452.53. .8452.53. it would only take 8592.0/ of the capital of the woolen mills to yield 8243.05, the wages of the cotton-mill operatives, while 8345.72 would yield to the Bessemer-steel man as much as the cotton manufacturer pays his operatives. So, 8345.72 of stock in a Beseuiersteel works will produce just as much net, year by year, as the labor of an operative wi.l gross in a tOuton mill; yet we are told, and asked to believe, that this protection to industries ik a malterof interest to the laborers. That “it is the laborers as well as the industiics that are protected,” and that those labotoia have a fair snare of the products of their own labor. I cal* attention to one mote fact in connection wi.h this. The average idrill on cotton goods is 40.17 per cent.; on woo.ens is 67.21 per cent.; and upon Bteel rails -is 81.33 percent. In a cotton mill with so per cent, protection a man is worth -r 1,075.25, in a woolen mill with 67 per cent, he is worth 8845.95; and in Be seiner steel rails .with 8l per cent, he is worth 8b75.06. As the tariff goeß up the value of the man goes down 1 Mr. President, the wrongs ol African slavery have been often and pathetically told, the marring effect of tnat great curse upon the progress and development of our country has been argued with great force and ingenuity ; the inhumanity of the system has stirred the deepest feelings at the North, and doubtless amongst these very people; but the time never was when any slaveholder would have insulted a slave by considering him for one moment worth only the miserable, paltry sum of 8675.661 But such is the estimate put upon the tree laborer now by these taskmasters, whose grinding extortions render insignificant, by comparison, the barbarity of the Egyptians, who “inode the children of Israel to serve with vigor and male their lives bitter with hard bondage,” which called down upon that wicked and selfish people ihe vengeance of an offended God. This unjust-distribution, the belittling of labor and magnifying of capital, has aroused the attention of the laborers tuemseives, and they are trying to compel a readj stment. The laborers in protected industries are urged to vote for a continuance of these wrongs upon the plea that they are benefited thereby. There doubtless is a class of persons who are so selfish and unfair as to be willing that the masses may be robbed if only they can be thereby benefited, but 1 am persuaded that this is not a large class. The American citizen as a rule demands fair play, not only for himself but for all others as well; he is unwilling to see any injustice done. He believes that justice to each is the best interest of all, and that “the injury of one is the concern of all, ” and when the real nature of this unjust taxation is fully understood the mass of the laborers themselves will repudiate it and Bcorn to receive as theirs the result of the labor of other men, even if it should appear that labor gets some share of the profits of protection. And when they learn, as they will, that, they are being used simply as a convenience in the robbing of others, and that they get no part of it, they will rise in their wrath, and indignantly overthrow the system. The truth is, our difficulty in manufacturing in competition with the world iB not one of la-

bor cost. Americans “used not aforetime’to confess themselves Inferior to anybody; they are not now. Investigation has shown that, owing to the better work, tne superior ski.l. and machinery la this country the labor cost of the product of American labor is often lies than the labor cost to English or other foreign producers. But if this is true our manufacturers cannot produce goods as cheaply as their English rivals, for the reason that they are handicapped by the tariff. It was stated to a committee of Congress that the machinery of a mill which cost $300,003 in this country could be had by au Englishman for $200,000. The tariff was the cause of this difference. Iben when the tariff is paid upon all the material used In such a mill, it is clear that with the same labor cost Americans can not produce as cheaply as an Englishman, consequently Americans are driven out of th? markets of the world, the English being able to manufacture geo is and sell them at a profit at prices that Americans can not produce them. The only market open to Americans for the product of protected industries is our own home market, and this they confess by their actions they keep only because tne law compels the American people to pay higher prices for their goods than any other people on earth will pay. If the American manufacturer had the right to buy his machinery as cheaply as his English rival and could procure his material on as favorable terms, I have faith enough in the thrift, energy, and intelligence of our people to believe that they con “hold their own" against the world, aud t hat without any reduction of wages, I believe that our manufacturing interests would, under such a system, spring forward at a rate that would startle the world; and without asking any advantages of anybody, without skulking behind this Chinese wall, protection, that our manufacturers, on account of superior skill of our workingmen, could and would pay higher wages, and hold our own markets and also those of the world against all competitors, and that our people would then have their goods ou as favorable terms as others. This mode of taxing our own manufacturers, so as to render them unable to contend for a share of the foreign trade, iB so manifestly suicidal that to avoid in some degree the effect of our own folly we have adapted our system of drawbacks, Under which, when a manufacturer imports certain materials to be manufactured and then reshipped abroad for foreign consumption, the tariff tax paid by him ou the importation shall be refunded to him upon reshipment after manufacture. The design of this, of course, is to enable our manufacturers to compete for foreign markets by giving them their raw materials free whenever they manufacture for foreign consumption; but the outrage of the system is that the very same article, manufactured by tho same man, when intended for American consumption, is taxed, discriminated against, so that the foreigner under this system is by American law deliberately provided with American products at lower rates than Americans can have them.

under this system we have in the last three years remitted upon articles intended for foreign consumption the am iunt of 823,336,030.89, while if these same goods had been kept here for American consumers not one cent of this great sum would have been remitted, and still the people are expected to believe that we are only protecting our poor, discriminating in their favor against foreigners. Having tried this in a few articles, such as sugar, tin-plate, etc., this plan of discriminating against our own people and in fav r of foreigners so captivates the protectionists that one of their champions, the Senator from New Hampshire (Mr. Blair), on the 16th of December, 1886, presented the following resolution to the Senate: “dissolved, That the Committee on Finance be directed to inquire into the subject, and if in their opinion it be for the public interest to prepare and report to the Senate a bill providing for the payment of a rebate upon all imported materials which are incorporated with domestic materials and exported to foreign countries for sale, thereby providing for the extension of our foreign trade by placing the domestic producers and manufacturers upon a fair basis of competition with foreign producers and manufacturers in foreign markets without reducing the price of American labor or in any wise interfering with the existing prices of labor or production in the home market." In presenting his reasons for the adoption of this resolution, Mr. Blair said: “It has seemed to me for a long time that upon this line there could be legislation which, while not interfering with the control of our own markots for our own manufacturer and producer, would yet give the opportunity of a great extension of our foreign trade, and that, too. without disturbing the laws under which our domestic prosperity has been built up, and by the preservation of which alone can that industry and prosperity be retained." In other words, Mr. Blair wants absolute free trade when we are to manufacture for foreigners, but when Americans are to be suppliod he wishes the taxes piled up, “heaping Ossa upon Pelion." He wishes goods manufactured here and sold to all the pauper laborers of the world at low prices while the American consumer Is to pay the old high rates. This seems to be a very cunning device. The foreign consumers not living under our laws, we cannot compel them to buy from our manufacturers ; hence it is necessary that our manufacturers must be relieved from the tariff for enough to enable them to make their goods and sell them as cheaply as foreigners. This enables them to enter into competition with the pauper labor of Europe successfully, but Mr. Blair and our protectionists are very careful that the American laborer shall not tie permitted to buy these American productions aB cheaply as these lavored forei ners do. 1 confess that until I saw this resolution introduced by a leading advocate of protection I did not believe that auy human being could be found on this continent who would openly advocate adopting a general plan by which Americans were to manufacture" cheaply far the benefit of foreign pauper laborers, while in direct and plain terms is would be proposed to exclude by name the American consumers from all participation in its benefits. Centuries ago there was almost no trade among the nations of the earth, and what little there was was slow, difficult, and dangerous. What a protectionist's paradise, when there was practically no commerce among the nations of the earth ; yet who wishes the old order of things restored? If this theory of protection, of restriction. and embarrassment pf trade—for after all that is just what it means—is the truo idea, then all facilities of commerce are a mistake or worse. The cheap and quick transit across the ocean, the communication by steam and lightning is a great misfortune. It is astonishing that anybody in this age should advocate a doctrine which lends to such a conclusion, yet such is the result of protection. It would turn back the wheels of progress ; would clip the wings of the lightning; would undo all that the marvelous advance of this age has done, and leave us unknown to th 9 world.