[St Louis Age of Steel.]

A leading manufacturer of strictly modern, up-to-date machine tools, in New England, who has recently returned from a five months' tour among the machine shops of Great Britain and on the Continent, announces his conversion to the doctrine of Free-Trade, and bases his arguments solely on the marked superiority of the American mechanic, both as a skilled and rapid workman and as a designer of improved tools.

He cited an instance, in support of his argument, of an annual statement made by a very old and leading English manufacturing concern, which showed that on a capitalization and equipment valued at $600,000, with 400 skilled workmen employed, the output of the shops that year had been, in value, $400,000. He compared this with his own works, the equipment of which he valued at about $200,000, with not over 200 men employed, and yet having an output of about $70,000 worth per month.

He argues from this that the improved character of tools used and the high class of skilled workmen employed in his works produce results, as here shown, so greatly in favor of the American manufacturer that he can successfully compete with European manufacturers, even though the American wage rate is double that paid abroad, which he admitted.

In this same connection, this gentleman dwelt with much enthusiasm on the fact that European manufacturers

were becoming large purchasers of the most improved American machine tools for their shops, for the very good reason that these tools enabled them to greatly increase their output with the same shop force. He offered it as his opinion that in a short time, so general will be the use throughout Europe of either improved American made tools, or of foreign made duplicates of the most desirable American tools, that the superannuated, slow and clumsy European tools now used will be discarded.

This means, of course, that the productive capacity of foreign machine shops is sure to be greatly increased, both on account of the greater capacity possessed by these modern tools, but it goes without saying, and will surely come to pass. that the European workman, stimulated by the genius displayed in the design and construction of the American made or European copied

tools, will greatly increase his own genius and facility, so that European machine shops will gradually approach our own in the skillfulness of their workmen, and in their output per man. But all this time European workmen will be getting only the present rate of wages, with which, my friend asserts, they are well satisfied. When this is accomplished, and supposing our Tariff laws should be repealed-which, thanks to the wise judgment of American vot ers there is no fear of--where will the American manufacturer stand? What other way of retaining even our home markets will there be but to reduce wages to a level of those paid the European workmen? The very viper which we are now so cordially and assiduously warming in our own avaricious bosoms will turn its deadly fangs into our own flesh, with what results history has often, in the industrial records of our country, recorded, unless the saving shield of a Protective Tariff shall stay those deadly fangs.

Free-Trade Inconsistency. Lord Curzon's demonstration that the Indian duties on bountified sugar are not only reconcilable with Free-Trade, but carry out its first principles, is neat, though it lacks the merit of originality, insofar that Cobden himself made a similar announcement. We are even more pleased with Lord Curzon's view that Free-Trade principles may, and ought to be suspended when they cease to be utilitarian. Our passion for FreeTrade is founded on the belief that it is far and away the best policy for this country; but exceptional cases must modify all hard and fast practice. Countervailing duties on bountified sugar are as consistent with our FreeTrade views as the existence of a deficit In the budget is with the solvency of the nation.--London Financial News."

TARIFFS AND BUSINESS.

Prosperity and Protection Coincident; Likewise Depression and Free-Trade.

[Milwaukee Wisconsin.]

William L. Strong, president of THE AMERICAN PROTECTIVE TARIFF LEAGUE, condenses the Tariff history of the United States into a nutshell, as follows:

Broadly speaking, we have had Protection in 1789, 1812, 1824, 1828, 1848, 1861, 1890 and from 1897 to date. We had Free-Trade or very low Tariffs in 1780, 1816, 1832, 1846, 1857, 1894. As a matter of fact and of record, the results, condensed to minimum of expression, bave been as follows:

Under Protection we have had : 1. Great demand for labor.

2. Wages high and money cheap. 3. Public and private revenues large. 4. Public and private prosperity great beyond all previous precedent.

5. Growing national independence. Under Free-Trade we have had:

1. Labor everywhere seeking employment.

2. Wages low and money high. 3. Public and private revenues small and steadily decreasing.

4. Public and private bankruptcy nearly universal.

5. Growing national dependence.

Any one who doubts Mr. Strong's conclusions will be converted by looking up the matter for himself. Take the dates when we have had "Free-Trade" Tariffs, and see whether they do not correspond with periods of industrial and financial depression. Take the dates when we have had Protective Tariffs, and see whether they do not correspond with prosperity. How would the American laboring man or business man like to go back to the Wilson Tariff, for instance? The good times now bathing the United States in sunlight began soon after the election of McKinley in 1896, which in itself contained the prophecy of the passage of a Protective Tariff measure like the Dingley law. Under the operation of that law the people are flourishing, while the national treasury is in more healthful condition than it was at any time during the administration of President Cleveland, from March 4, 1893, to March 4, 1897.

Such a conclusion is a misconception. The paramount cause has been to correct unbusinesslike methods, that of -disposing of their products at ruinous prices. The latter is the true reason for concerns in the same lines entering into combinations.

Hundreds of firms and corporations did not favor combinations or trusts, yet while they entered them with reluctance they appreciated the advantage that the new departure was liable to develop. Hundreds of firms in the beginning of their careers have been unable to compute the exact cost of their wares and often parted with them below cost. They only realized their errors when they were on the verge of bankruptcy. Their losses taught them to increase values. Very often competitors are broad-minded enough to convince neophytes that it is preferable to conduct business on a co-operative plan of prices than to continue a competition which tends to precipitate a suspension of affairs.

For the past fifteen vears merciless -competition has been the order of the day in almost every line of manufactures. Brains, constructive ability, commercial sagacity and capital were never -sold so cheap. The beneficiaries of such a condition were salesmen, countinghouse employees, superintendents, high priced labor, and wage earners. Prophetic promoters and stock operators who gamble on honest labor clearly perceived that ultimately ruin must confront manufacturers.

The depressed condition of manufactures under the Wilson law made it comparatively easy for promoters of industrial combinations to operate with success, the conditions being highly favorable. They interviewed the owners of various plants in the industries, and finally organized them into a solid phalanx for their own safety, thus insuring them at least a living profit on the capital invested, without considering any remuneration for providing the sinews of commerce and devising ways and means required to keep chimneys smoking and the labor field employed, which in these days requires greater ability and means than in former years, since there has not only been over-production but over-competition.

It does not necessarily follow that if

ten or twenty firms combine in a legitimate attempt to protect themselves wage earners suffer. Each member of a combination or trust has a business of its own, and they will continue to manufacture and dispose of their products through a central distributing agency. A weak member may have his works closed and his workmen transferred to a stronger member of such combination, thus maintaining the working forces intact.

The gains in dismissing 90 per cent. of salesmen and nearly a similar proportion of counting-house employees do not remedy the evils or materially increase profits of selling goods at or below cost. The gain is wholly in the restitution of a fair manufacturing profit which collaterally enables employers to advance wages. Relentless competition invariably leads to the production of inferior goods and to general adulteration. The formulation of Protective measures on a uniform schedule of rates between contracting parties must necessarily raise the standard of quality to the consumer, inasmuch as manufacturers by receiving a reasonable margin of profit can afford to be honorable in their dealings. Besides, the economics are improved, in every direction, by enormously increasing the purchasing power of consolidated interests. Prior to the formation of industrial concentrations wages were depressed. How could it be otherwise, with manufacturers operating their works with little or no profit? Manufacturers, like the general business community, are not merchandising for their health, nor are skilled and unskilled workmen toiling for the mere love of exercise. Both employer and employee comprehend that self-protection is a fundamental law.

These revolutionary changes are based on absolute necessity. The socalled watering of stocks, a method which the people understand, and which can be applied to any legalized commercial bodies, is justifiable, since the margin between the actual value of the plants and income represents “good will" and "trade-marks." One firm with a capital of $250,000 may show profits per annum of $50,000; another with $500,000 will only show $25.000, and so on to a greater or lesser degree. The largest profit earner is entitled to his proportionate share of the capitalized stock based on actual earnings.

There is no doubt that many corporations, including legalized monopolies, are chargeable with criminal inflation. As a rule this reflection does not apply to strictly legitimate enterprises. The latter class usually adjust their inequalities in a practical manner, or withdraw for conscientious motives.

1 discovered in my contact with the world that individuals who constantly

condemn legitimate commercial combinations consisted chiefly of an impecunious or prejudiced class that never entered profoundly into causes of such formations; yet they roundly abuse them, claiming that in controlling the output they regulate prices in such an arbitrary manner that the consumer is compelled to pay more for corralled goods. In a vast majority of instances this charge cannot be sustained. It is often the reverse; the goods are furnished cheaper. The same individuals that inveigh against trusts and combinations, when they come into possession of industrial stocks that pay excellent dividends, will, with mercurial rapidity, turn a mental somersault, and in the most vehement language laud the new departure as one of great advantage to the consumer, and define trusts as public benefactors.

Whether trusts or combinations will or can be permanent is an enigma. I am not an advocate of trusts unless they benefit the consumer. The above statements are, nevertheless, founded on incontrovertible facts so far as they refer to manufacturers of indispensable and staple articles.

GEORGE J. SEABURY. HOT SPRINGS, VA., March 31, 1899.

Once Derided, Now Adopted. Sugar fed with a home bounty and shipped to India is now to have the bounty scalped off by an import duty of corresponding amount, the purpose being to Protect the vast and indigenous trade based on free enterprise and industry, and which the subsidized products of foreign countries tend to destroy. The economics of sugar are intricate and curious the world over, from Wall Street to Hindoostan, and the statesman or stock operator who tries to regulate them sometimes finds his hands full. That is what Lord George Hamilton, Secretary of State for India, promoter of the Protective scheme for that country, may do, but the soundness of the principle which he advocates is unimpeachable. Protection, spurned and derided for fifty years, daily gains favor in the politics of the Empire as the century draws to its close; even the relics of the Cobden Club being too feeble to utter forth a bleat of remonstrance.-New York "Tribune."

A Democratic contemporary heads Ninety some late telegrams as follows: " Thousand People Rejoicing.-Wages Being Raised in the New England Cotton Mills-Advance to Wheeling EmployMen ees. 100,000 Affected.-Wages Being Advanced in all Parts of the Country-Greatest February Known." It has at last heard of the coming of general Prosperity.-Steubenville (Ohio) "Herald."