FREETRADE V. PROTECTION.

Evening Star, Issue 7154, 7 March 1887, Page 3

FREETRADE V. PROTECTION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sib,—You correspondent "J.N. " left the stage with rather an undignified curtsey, and the Protection League now put forward a letter from the City of the Plains. What is the object of that letter ? Does it go to prove that Protection would benefit a few manufacturers? I don't think Freetraders deny that. But when your correspondent poses as the friend of the working man he overshoots the mark. He advises us to read a book which he says will convince us that the working man in America has derived great benefit from Protection, and a little further on he says that " Freetrade has been the cause of retarding the privileges of laborers; and the cause ot the rise of wages and reduction of time in labor in England and other places has been the powerful organisation of trades and their unions. In proof of this we had just lately a big strike in America for the purpose of reducing the time of labor from ten to eight hours. Now, sir, if there is any deduction possible from this that would benefit his cause, your correspondent should have proceeded to show that in Freetrade England the cupidity of manufacturers forbade the boon of shorter hours, whilst the Proteptionists of America readily granted it; or, if he likes it'better, that in the former case labor could not force it, whilst in the other case it did. We know that absolutely the contrary is the fact. That in Freetrade countries the hours of labor are shorter than in Protectionist countries I think no one will deny. I forward you a list of the wages paid in America and showing the hours worked, and in no case are the hours worked less than nine, and in most cases ten. The wages, when the extra of

living is taken into account, are not so high as here, and the reports of the Knights of Labor and of the Commissioner of Labor prove conclusively that Protection is impotent to increase the comforts of the working man. The Commissioner of Labor reported that in 1885 the number of unemployed in America was 998,839, and the report adds, " meaning by unemployed those who would be employed in prosperous times." In a repprt prepared for Government it was shown that only 5 per cent, of the population actually benefited by Protection in the United States; and it is a noted fact that the tariff was saved this year, not by the vote on the lines of party politics, but by the combined influence of iron manufacturers, sugar manufacturers, and squatters. Even the protectionist journals waxed wroth over the fact that the wool could not be got into the pountry for the actual clothing of the people. Working men of Dunedin, be not misled. What you want is the establishment of local industries on a sound and equitable basis, not the creation of factions wj>ich will rule your House of Representatives here as in America, if once you allow them to get hold. Labor, like water, finds its level very quickly, and wages sink fastest in those countries where the sickly nurselings of the State are fed by the taxes paid by the poor; but the industries themselves claunthe btate as their parent, and, by the manipulation of State machinery, are enabled to hold their around against the will of the people. Upon what other grounds are the poor of America robbed of cheap clothing, and the poor of Germany of Created fy the State, these industries would require to be paid out State before they will part w|th the goodwill $ but

of its spending power in both instances, yei Staff recompense, under the system Where is the justice of such a law Working! men, do not make the mistake of confouXgtwo things.. What you want and what we all want, s wprk, and wages sufficient for comfort? but asystevwhich requires the aid of the State, and which looks upon the State machinery as its legitimate property, may sepurea few of you—--5 per cent,, perhaps, as in the Vnitea Stated-work, but cannoj; guarantee you wages, and may also rob you of political rights, which it took you some time to acquire. Sir, I am glad that the Protectionists have thrown out the challenge to compare Germany with New Zealand, ana with your permission I shall try to do so in my next. —I am, etc., iBEiHEIT. Dunedin, Maroh 3. , [We shall publish on anther pafjaslqn the table furnished by our correspondent.— ED. E.S.}