SUGAR, COAL, IRON AND WIRE.

Secretary Carlisle's Letter to Senator Harris, August 15 1894, as to Receipts and Expenditures.

TREASURY Department, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,

Washington, D. C., August 15, 1894.

DEAR SIR: Your letter advising me that the House of Representatives had passed and sent to the Senate bills putting sugar, coal, iron ore and barbed wire on the free list, and requesting "an official statement from you (me) as to the effect that the passage of these bills, or either of them, would have upon the revenues of the Government," is received, and in response I have the honor to say that, according to the most careful estimates that can be made, if no change is made in the proposed revenue legislation which has recently passed through Congress, the total receipts into the Treasury during the current fiscal year will be as follows:

Estimated revenues for fiscal year ending June 30, 1895.

The estimated receipts for the present year from the proposed tax on incomes and playing cards, and the proposed additional tax of 20 cents per gallon on distilled spirits, are, it will be observed, much less than is stated in the various tabulated statements which have heretofore been used in the discussion of these subjects, but I am satisfied the amounts here given are approximately correct.

The proposed income tax will not become payable, by the terms of the bill recently passed, until "on or before July 1, 1895," which is the close of the fiscal year; and it is estimated by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue that

by reason of the large stock on hand the receipts from the tax on playing cards will not amount to more than $1,000,000 during this year.

The estimated increase of receipts on account of the additional tax on distilled spirits during the present year has already been prevented to a great extent by the withdrawal of large quantities of goods from the bonded warehouses and the payment of the tax thereon at 90 cents per gallon, and this process is still going on.

The total expenditures during the current fiscal year will be as follows:

Civil and miscellaneous, including deficiency in postal rev

$90,000,000

56,000,000

33,000,000

10,000,000

143,500,000

30,500,000

$363,000,000 15,000,000

The duty on sugar propsed in the recent bill will, according to importations of that article during the fiscal year 1893, yield an annual revenue of $43,478,958, and the duties on the other articles mentioned in your communication would yield, under that bill, about $1,000,000; that is to say, iron ore, $270,920; coal, $436,149; and barbed wire, fencing wire, and wire rods, of iron or steel, when imported for the manufacture of barbed-wire fencing, about $300,000.

It will be seen, therefore, that if sugar alone is placed on the free list, the expenditures during the present fiscal year will exceed the receipts to the amount of $28,478,058, and if the duties are removed from all the articles specified in your letter the deficit will be $29,478,058, not including any expenditure on account of the sinking fund, or the payment of $2,363,000 of Pacific Railroad bonds which will mature during this fiscal year.

In view of the existing and prospective requirements of the public service, I am of the opinion that it would not be safe to place all the articles enumerated in your letter, or even sugar alone, upon the free list, without imposing taxation upon other articles or subjects sufficient to raise an annual revenue of about $30,000,000.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully yours,

Hon. ISHAM G. HARRIS,

J. G. CARLISLE, Secretary.

Acting Chairman Senate Finance Committee.

NOTE. The bonds of the Pacific Railroad guaranteed by the Government, to the amount of $2,362,000, mature during the present fiscal year; and this amount is not included in the above estimate of expenditures.

Tariff Reform.

SPEECH

OF

HON. ROGER Q. MILLS,

OF TEXAS,

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES,

Tuesday, April 24, 1894.

The Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, having under consideration the bill (H. R. 4864) to reduce taxation, to provide revenue for the Government, and for other, purposes

Mr. MILLS said:

Mr. President, we have the cheapest labor on the globe. We have the poorest paid labor in proportion to the work our laborers do that is to be found on earth Why so? Because we work by machinery, and one laborer in this country produces in some cases five, ten, and even over ten times more than is performed by the man who is doing the same work in other countries. Great Britain approaches more closely to us than any other country in the world, but she is behind us. We can produce the things we are producing cheaper than anybody else on earth can do it, if they can do it at all.

I have a statement here to which I want to call the attention of the Senate and of the country and especially of the wage-workers. Some time ago, looking over Mullhall's Dictionary of Statistics, I came across a statement in which he gives the number of persons employed in manufactures in all the different countries of the world that are manufacturing to any considerable extent. He gives the total value of the product made in each country and the number of persons employed. By dividing the number of hands by the value of the product we get precisely the amount of value turned out by each hand. This statement shows that for 1888 the United Kingdom had 5,189,000 persons employed in manufacture;that they turned out a product worth $4,100,000, 000, and the product per hand was $790. France had 4,443,000 persons employed. They turned out a product valued at $2,425,000,000, or $545 per hand. Germany had 5,350,000 persons employed. They turned out a produc valued at $2 915,000,000, or $545 per head. Russia had 4,760,000 employed. She turned out a product valued $1,815,000,000, or $381 per head. I will print this table and will not go over it all. The United States had 3,837,000 persons employed, who turned out a product valued at $7,215,000,000, or $1,880 per head.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D. C., February 6, 1894. MY DEAR SIR: In response to yours of January 18 and January 26, I have the honor to state that from the very best sources which I have been able to consult,

I estimate the average annual earnings in all manufacturing industries in the countries named by you to be as follows:

1. United States, $347; 2, Great Britain, $204; 3, France, $175; 4, Belgium, $165; 5, Germany, 155; 6, Austria, $150; 7, Switzerland, $150; 8, Italy, $130; 9, Spain, $120; 10, Russia, $120.

The above estimates have been made, so far as the United States is concerned, from the actual number of persons employed and the total wages paid to them as shown by the census of 1830; for Great Britain they have been made large y from British figures, and for the other countries the estimates have been made from statements originating with foreign authorities and verified by facts collected by agents of this Department. While the actual figures given in the above estimates may not be more than approximately correct, the proportions, I feel sure, are fair. I am, very respectfully. CARROLL D. WRIGHT,

HON. ROGER Q. MILLS,

United States Senate.

Commissioner.

The average annual rate of wages is for 1880. The number of hands and value of product is for 1888. The relative comparison is the same. The wages in all countries would be higher in 1888 than in 1880. But the relative differences would be substantially the same.

I am now making a comparison based on the wage rate of 1889. I am not talk. ing about 1890. I am taking the annual average wages paid in 1880 and comparing it with the product of 1888. It makes no difference, as I said before, that the wages are of 1880 and the product of 1888, for relatively they are the same thing. The wages for 1888 would have been a little larger in all the countries, but it is amply sufficient for the purposes which I have in view. Now, let us apply this. Seven hundred and ninety dollars' worth of product per hand in Great Britain cost in wages $204. In France $545 worth of product cost $175 for wages. In Germany $545 cost $155 for wages, and on going down I will print this table, so that all can read it.

Table showing number of employees, total value of product, value of product per employee, annual average wages paid per employee in manufacturing industries in the countries named below in 1880.

In the United States $1,880 worth of product cost $347 for wages. Now, our friends point to the fact that the workman in the United States gets $347 for his

annual work; in Great Britain he gets $204; in France he gets $175; in Germany $155. Ours is the high-priced workman, and these are paupers, but when we come to look at the fact, that our people are paid less than the foreigner for the amount of work they turn out, the boot is found on the other foot.

Now, let us carry this this thing out. Let us take the labor cost in other countries of $1,880 worth of product and compare it with ours. The $1,880 worth of goods imported into the United States is the thing that is to test the condition of our workmen. When the goods come here then the labor cost of a given amount of goods is compared with the labor cost of the same amount of goods in a foreign country. One thousand eight hundred and eighty dollars' worth of goods cost in this country $347 for labor.

Now, then, we imported from England last year $1,880 of cotton yarns that cost for labor in England $485, and in the United States $347. The labor cost in England was $138 more than in the United States, but our tariff taxes it $935 to protect our labor against competition with the Englishman. We imported $1,880 worth of kid gloves from France that cost for labor in France $604; in the United States $347. The labor cost in France was $257 more than in the United States, but they were taxed $1,165 to protect our workmen against competition with the Frenchman. We imported from Germany $1,880 worth of woolen goods, the labor cost of which in Germany was $535, which was $188 more than in the United States, but they were taxed $1,985 to protect our workmen against competition with the German. We imported from Russia cables, cordage, and twine valued at $1,880, the labor cost of which in Russia was $593, which was $246 more than in the United States, but it was taxed $487 to protect our workmen against competition with the poorly paid Russian.

We imported $1,880 worth of buttons from Austria, the labor cost of which was $689, or $342 more than in the United States, but these buttons were taxed $2,699 to protect our workmen against competition with the Austrian. We imported $1,880 worth of silk piece goods from Italy, the labor cost of which in Italy was $922, or $575 more than in the United States, but they were taxed $940 to protect our workmen against competition with the Italian. We imported $1,880 worth of iron ore from Spain, that cost for labor $620, or $455 more than in the United States, but it was taxed $802 to protect our workmen against competition wi h the Spaniard. We imported from Belgium $1,880 worth of window glass which cost for labor in Belgium $569; or $222 more than in the United States. but it was taxed $1,936 to protect our workmen against competition with the Belgian, and we imported from Switzerland $1,880 worth of laces and embroideries which cost for labor in Switzerland $651, or $304 more than in the United States, but they were taxed $1,128 to protect our workmen against competition with the Switzer.

*

Germany imports cotton yarns from Great Britian and weaves those yarns and sends them back and sells to Great Britain the cloth that is male from them. France imports cotton yarns from Great Britain. We import cottons yarn from Great Britian. There are certain things we cannot compete with; there are certain things England cannot compete with; and there are certain things that other countries cannot. I submit here the table I have prepared, that Senators and others may examine it: