STARTLING UNEMPLOYMENT. Official Statistics Show 3,500,000 Fewer on Payroll Than Year Ago-Condition Stresses Need of Protection-American Market Wrecked by Imports-Unemployment Greatest ProblemImports During 1920 an Increase of 35 Per Cent. Over 1919, While Exports Increase Only 4 Per Cent.-Only Timid Souls Fear Tariff Retaliation. Correspondence AMERICAN ECONOMIST. WASHINGTON, January 26.-Startling figures of unemployment in the United States have been given to the press by the Government Employment Service. They indicate a decrease of almost 3,500,000 in the number of workers carried on industrial payrolls in the current month against the same payrolls for January, 1920. More than one-third of the men and women who were listed as employes in these industries a year ago, are no longer on the payrolls. In 182 cities, with a population of 32,560,953, the same figures show a present “unemployed" total of 1,802,755. Nor is the situation improving. Reports from all over the country indicate that instead of larger payrolls, the industries of the nation are still decreasing their employment lists, are still cutting down hours of work, and are still eliminating the workers for whom the present business conditions make employment unprofitable. Could a better argument be found for a speedy passage of genuine Protective Tariff legislation? Under the present Free-Trade Tariff law, the imports for the calendar year of 1920 totaled $5,279,000,000, by more than a billion dollars the largest in the history of the country. it any wonder that American industries have found it impossible to keep up a 100 per cent. record in the face of such a deluge of foreign wares? Is Now they are paying the penalty. Now they find it necessary to cut down production, and cutting down production means cutting down payrolls. It is all buncombe to say that this is due to any breakdown of foreign markets. It is the breakdown of American markets that is at the root of this evil of stagnant industries and vanishing payrolls. The imports included almost $2,000,000,000 worth foodstuffs, raw and manufactured. Canada sent in a deluge of grain. The American farmers, who should have been entitled to the first opportunity to feed the American nation, had to sit idly by while a foreign deluge swamped their markets and wrecked their prices. Caught beneath this flood of foreign foods, the American farmers had to sell their wares at a sacrifice or hold them in their granaries. What was the result? The buying power of the American farmer vanished correspondingly. And it was the disappear ance of the buying power of the American farmer that represented the greatest individual item in the decreased consumption which closed up American factories and threw their workers into the streets. The Free-Trade excuse is that while the American farmer was cut off our list of consumers this enormous purchase from foreign nations enabled the latter to buy from us the more heavily. Which again is buncombe, for the foreign nations did not buy and cannot buy enough from us to make up for this deficit in the American farmer's purchases. The foreign nations bought the lion's share of their needs in other markets, which can produce more cheaply than we can produce, and they will merely transfer to those countries whatever of credits the increase in our imports has given them. It cannot be emphasized too often that it is the American market that maintains American industry in prosperity and supremacy. And it is the consuming power of the American market that alone can restore normal conditions and call back to the factories the millions of unemployed who now wander about the streets and are forcing the reopening of the FreeTrade soup houses that have always been the saddest monuments of our economic fallacies. It is worth while reprinting some of the figures of the United States Employment Service to give a picture of the conditions which that Service found in American industries. Comparative figures from thirty-five states and the District of Columbia revealed the astounding fact that the industries in these states which employed 9,402,000 workèrs in January, 1920, reported only 6,070,648 in January, 1921, a decrease of 3,331,352, a decrease of 35.4 per cent. Think of that, in these states, the actual percentage of those still employed was only 64.5 per cent. of the figures of a scant twelvemonth ago. To make the figures cover the country, the Employment Service found it necessary to estimate the unemployment in the remaining states and totaled these at 142,114, thus giving an aggregate decrease of employment of 3,473,466. At the same time, it made up elaborate tables of the results of detailed surveys of actual unemployment in 182 cities, and found that this totaled 1,802,755. For the difference between the decrease in payroll totals of 3,473,466 and the actual unemployment estimates of 1,802,755, it is easy to account by the likelihood that the other 1,600,000 represented women workers who have gone back to their homes and farm workers who have left the overcrowded cities for the farms. But the problem of the 1,800,000 unemployed will be the biggest problem the municipalities of the country will have to face during the remainder of the winter months. Actual increase in employment is still far off. Despite roseate reports from various optimistic observers, there has been little to indicate that we have passed through the worst of the industrial depression. The fact that Congress is not likely to pass the Fordney Agricultural Tariff bill will not help this situation. It is probable, however, that the Employment Service figures will play a prominent part in the debates that are scheduled in the Senate. They seem to sum up the whole Protective Tariff situation better than anything else can, and to point most accurately to the weak spot in our economic position. The Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce has compiled the statistics of our foreign commerce for the calendar year of 1920. They are the largest-on both sides of the ledger-for any year in the history of this nation. The imports in 1920 totaled $5,279,000,000 against a 1919 total of $3,904,000,000-an increase of 35 per cent. They aggregate nearly three times the total for 1913, the last year before the war. The December, 1920, imports aggregated $266,000,000 against $321,000,000 in November, 1920 and $381,000,000 in December, 1919. The 1920 total of exports was $8,228,000,000, against a total of $7,920,000,000 in 1919. So our exports increased only 4. per cent. over the preceding year, while the imports increased 35 per cent. The 1920 exports were nearly three and onethird times the 1913 figures. The exports for December, 1920, totaled $720,000,000 against $677,000,000 in November, 1920 and $661,000,000 in December, 1919. The excess of exports over imports amounted to $454,000,000 in December, 1920, and to $2,949,000,000 in the calendar year 1920, compared with an excess of $301,000,000 in December, 1919, and $4,016,000,000 for the calendar year of 1919. There is something refreshing in the bulletins which are being issued by the Republican Publicity Association, on various phases of the Tariff question. The latest manifesto concerns the Free-Trade plea that a real Protective Tariff law in the United States would invite retaliation: "Timid souls, indeed, are those who would thus determine the policies that shall be adopted by the greatest nation on the face of the globe! Fear of retaliation would be their guide apparently not only in Tariff legislation but in the determination of all our other national policies. "Do these men ever stop to think to what despicable condition the people of the world would be subjected if fear of retaliation were to be the guide of their conduct? Suppose, for instance, that a farmer whose fields are unfenced and who contemplated putting up a fence to keep his neighbors' live stock out of his fields and gardens, should hesitate to exercise his right to build that fence for fear his neighbors would 'retaliate'! Suppose that men generally should hesitate to put locks on the doors of their houses for fear someone else would 'retaliate'! Suppose that businessmen should hesitate to compete aggressively for trade for fear their competitors would 'retaliate'! What a slow world this certainly would be if in either their private or their public affairs the people of this nation and of other nations, should fail to take steps for the promotion of their own welfare through fear that someone else would 'retaliate'! "The old saying that 'God hates a coward,' is no more true than that the whole world despises a coward. If the United States is to determine its policies according to its apprehension that others may 'retaliate,' then all other nations of the earth will cease to have respect for this nation and will proceed immediately and persistently to take advantage of our craven attitude to promote their own selfish interests at our expense. "The United States contemplates no injustice to other nations. It has set up certain ideals of its own, particularly with reference to standards of living for its working men, and in doing this it has not sought to injure any other nation. Other countries are absolutely free to set up such ideals as they may choose with reference to the standards of living of their people. Experience has demonstrated, however, that in order to maintain the American standard of living it is necessary to protect the American producer from the destructive competition of nations maintaining lower standards than ours. For the accomplishment of this a Protective Tariff is necessary. "Now we are warned by men who hold citizenship in the United States, and who profess pride in Americanism, that we must not take steps to Protect our own working men and our industries lest other nations which maintain lower standards take offense and retaliate.' They would make fear the dominant influence in determining national policies. our "Fortunately, the exponents of the doctrine of fear are in the minority." OSWALD F. SCHUETTE. A Tariff on Nuts. An exchange says: "A Tariff on nuts is proposed." No wonder Free-Traders are opposed to any changes in the Tariff. We know of nothing more dangerous to the welfare of the country than the FreeTrade "nuts." Our own product is bad enough, but when it comes to importations 'of the foreign varieties, we depart from our usual custom of not demanding prohibitive Tariff rates, and demand one which shall operate as the "Chinese wall," which the said "nu.s" are prone to rave We do not favor a licensing system, for fear that the "nut" industry might be able to make such a showing of the depletion of the market in domestic "nuts" tha. the licensing board might admit a few of the foreign variety, enough to cover the nutty demand for a period of six months. That is the great danger; the licensing board might number a few "nuts" among its membership. over. Business Failures. For the week ending January 20, and the corresponding week in previous years, the business failures in the United States are reported by Bradstreet's of January 22 as follows: Week ending Weeks corresponding Jan. 20, Jan. 13- -to this week1921 1921 1920 1919 1918 1917 New England 47 41 11 15 73 82 Middle 90 100 19 36 34 56 Western 89 108 26 28 39 89 Northw'st'n. 21 51 11 13 64 87 Southern 167 186 25 24 24 23 Farw'st'n.. 25 35 12 12 21 41 Total.... 439 521 104 128 255 388 Argentine and other foreign countries are profiting, at the greatest degree of expense to the American farmer, and as a result of Democratic Free-Trade legislation; but this is one of the bald-headed mistakes that will be promptly corrected by the in-coming Republican administration.-Anita (la.), Record, 12.30.20. Smith & Dove Mfg. Co., by H. A. Bodwell, Treas., Andover, American Tool & Machine Co., by H. W. Woodworth, Treas., Boston. L. C. Chase & Co., by Frank B. Hopewell, Boston. Forbes Lithograph Mfg. Co., by William S. Forbes, Boston. George Frost Company, by George A. Frost, Pres., Boston. C. E. Riley, Boston, Mass. Florence Mfg. Co., by Wm. Cordes, Treas., Florence. Farr Alpaca Co., by Frank II. Metcalf, Treas., Holyoke. Esleeck Mfg. Co., by A. W. Esleeck, Pres., Turners Falls. Charles H. Lang, Wakefield. Goodell Company, by Richard Goodell, Pres., Antrim. A. W. Sulloway, Treas., Sulloway Mills, Franklin. Nashua Gummed & Coated Paper Co., by W. L. Carter, Treas., Nashua. New Jersey. Standard Bleachery Co., by James J. McKenzie, Pres., Carlton Hill. Thomas H. Hall, Jersey City, N. J. A. F. Bannister, Newark. The Heller & Merz Co., by Eugene Merz, Treas., Newark. The Paterson Parch. Paper Co., by Wm. F. Brunner, Pres., Passaic. Weidman Silk Dyeing Co., by F. S. Cowperthwait, Treas., Paterson. Empire Tire & Rubber Corp., by C. E. Bound Brook Woolen New York, H. W. Acton, New York, Henry Ahlborn, New York. American Encaustic Tiling Co., Ltd., by E. Kohler, Pres., New York. American Hard Rubber Achelis, New York. Co., by Fritz by A. E. Chester A. American Lithographic Co., F. D. Dodge, New York. B. F. Drakenfeld, Jr., New York. H. R. Duval, Pres., Amer. Beet Sugar Co., New York. Clift & Goodrich, by E. I. Goodrich, New York. J. H. Emery, New York. Lehmaier, Schwartz & Co., Inc., by J. L. Gitterman, New York. The Linen Thread Co., by W. W. Barbour, Pres., New York. Manning Maxwell & Moore, Inc., by P. M. Brotherhood, V. P., New York. Oxford Paper Co., by F. E. Tufts, New York. Railway Steel-Spring Co., by E. McCormick, V. P., New York. William Ryle & Co., New York. Shreve & Adams, New York. S. Stroock & Co., by Joseph Stroock, New York. James Talcott, Inc., New York. Pharmacal Co., by Charles R. Parmele, New York. Cary Mfg. Co.. by S. C. Cary, Pres., Brooklyn. Chelsea Fibre Mills, by G. W. Ekstrand, Comptroller, Brooklyn. The Continental Torn Works, by Thos. F. Rowland, Pres., Brooklyn. J. Sklar Mfg. Co., by E. J. Sovatkin, Sec., Brooklyn. Charles Clifton, Buffalo. U. S. Gold Leaf Mfrs. Assn., by F. II.Scardefield, Sec., Brooklyn, The American Laundry Machinery Co., by II. A. Winant, Ass't Treas., Cincinnati. The U. S. Playing Card Co., by John Omwake, Pres., Cincinnati. The Cleveland Worsted Mills, Co., by Geo. II. Hodgson, V. P.. Cleveland. The Friedman-Blau-Farber Co., Cleveland. M. A. Hanna & Co., Cleveland. The Kilby Mfg. Co., by John C. Nierath, Sec., Cleveland. The National Woolen Co., by I. C. Glauber, Mgr., Cleveland. A. H. Heisey, Newark. The Edward Ford Plate Glass Co., by C. E. Husted, V. P., Rossford. The French China Co., by W. M. Jones, Sebring. Gill Brothers Co., by John Beiswanger, V. P.. Steubenville. LaBelle Iron Works, by II. W. Metfaltz, V. P., Steubenville. Pennsylvania. A. F. Huston, Coatesville. Chipman Knitting Mills, by W. E. Chipman, Pres., Easton. Thurman Mfg. Co., Germantown. American Plate Glass Co., by John Willis, Follmer Clogg & Co., by H W. Hartman, Firth-Sterling Steel Co., by D. E. Jackman, Susquehanna Woolen Co., by George H. Rambo & Regar, Inc., by Wm. M. Wood, Henry Bower Chemical Mfg. Co., by W. H. Joseph H. Bromley, Philadelphia. Dornan Brothers, by T. Benton Dornan, Friedberger-Aaron Mfg. Co., Philadelphia. Archibald Holmes & Son, by Wm. L. Holmes,. J. R. Keims Co., Inc., Philadelphia. John Lang Paper Co., by E. H. Morris, Geo. W. Lefferts, Philadelphia. Quaker Lace Co., by Joseph H. Bromley, Roosevelt Worsted Mills, by F. Quittner, Sauquoit Silk Mfg. Co., by W. H. Rass- The Simons & Struve Hosiery Co., by Walter Jacob W. Walton Sons, by John Walton, John Williams Mfg. Co., Philadelphia. Alan Wood Iron & Steel Co., by John W. Logan, Sec., Philadelphia. E. R. Wood, Philadelphia. Pittsburg Clay Pot Co., by J. E, McKelvey, Sec., Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh Lamp, Brass & Glass Co., by Textile Machine Works, by F. Thun, Treas., International Salt Co. of N. Y., by P. Silas Scranton Bolt & Nut Co., by L. M. Horton, Hazard Mfg. Co., by M. H. Sigafoos, Mgr., D. Goff & Sons., Inc., by Darius Goff, Treas., Lebanon Mills Co., by Hanson Thayer, Lymansville Co., by B. Halliwell, Treas., Manville Co., by C. Wells, Treas., Prov- Seneca Glass Co., by Chas. F. Bouhler, Sec. The Homer Laughlin China Co., by W. E. Appleton Wire Works, by G. E. Buchanan, Bradley Knitting Co., by J. J. Phoenix, Nekoosa Edwards Paper Co., by L. M. Alexander, Pres., Port Edwards. Of action at the meeting, the most im- portant was its declaration regarding emergency Tariff legislation recommending the re-passage of the Payne-Aldrich bill of 1909, to take the place of the present Underwood law. After thorough discus- sion and minor amendments as to phrase- ology the preamble and resolution as print- ed on the first page of the AMERICAN ECONOMIST was unanimously adopted. The general operations of the Tariff League for the year were presented by the Treasurer and General Secretary, Mr. Wilbur F. Wakeman, from which we quote what might be described as a "continuous performance." Indeed, every working day With Congress in session and many in- dividual Industry Tariff Bills under con- sideration, we gave our best efforts to the presentation of the necessities of every industry to the Ways and Means Com- mittee H. R. and to the Finance Commit- tee of the Senate. Our work can be best described as daily activity before and An incident of extreme pleasure and honor was that the American Protective Tariff League entertained Mr. and Mrs. Warren G. Harding at Chicago throughout the Republican National Convention. Our financial statement shows that dur- ing the year ending January 15, 1921, our receipts and disbursements have been as Balance Jan. 15, 1920...$1,314.67 Receipts to Jan. 15, 1921.54,528.52 Disbursements to Jan, 15, 1921... 54,365.70 New Defenders and Contributors. We have had the honor of receiving to membership, fifteen members during the Biltmore Tale Co., Inc., Asheville, N. C. Eastern Talc Co., Boston, Mass. Elastic Spring Knit Corporation, Mohawk, The Kenton Hardware Co., Kenton, Ohio. Charles Roome Parmele, New York, N. Y. Fletcher D. Dodge, New York, N. Y. C. J. Tagliabue Mfg. Co., Brooklyn, N. Y. Los Alamitos Sugar Co., Los Angeles, Cal. Charles A. Fulle, New York, N. Y. H. E. Verran Co., Inc., New York, N. Y. Buffalo Forge Co., Buffalo, N. Y. Monongah Glass Co., Fairmont, W. Va. We have enrolled fifteen new members during the year and the total enrollments amount to 773 against 781 last year. We have had three resignations, but have dropped names from our list by order of the Executive Committee, owing to un- willingness to contribute to our work. You will notice that the authorized con- tribution was paid by 373 members against Our connection with the newspaper press of the United States is much smaller than heretofore, but we believe no less effective. During the year 1920 a very large number of newspapers went out of existence or were consolidated, owing to the high cost of production. This elimi- nation of the smaller or weaker publica- tions resulted in a questionnaire to all publications, regarding the continuation of our service and the number of papers con- nected with us was thereby reduced from Tabulation of our newspaper connec- . The new publications of 1920 included: No. 6, "Campaign Speakers' Primer," No. 5, "American Industry Will Be No. 15, "Why Commercial Travelers Are Realizing that the Text Book of the Republican National Committee was not satisfactory in its application to the ques- tion of Protection vs. Free-Trade and not in harmony with the Republican National Platform of 1920 and previous years, we accepted the manuscript of the Hon. Leslie M. Shaw, former Secretary of the Treas- ury. This was aided by our worthy mem- ber Mr. Frederic E. Kip, who was person- ally responsible for the first edition of five thousand of this valuable document. As you know this document covered many Issues other than the Tariff, but it was so one of the Tariff Leagues' series of documents for use in the campaign of 1920 and thereafter. We had most general inquiry for the document and made a large national distribution to editors, speakers, members and Commercial Travelers. No. 5, "American Industry Will be Slaughtered," was the third revised edition of this document, based upon wages paid in Japan as reported in the last Financial Annual of the Department of Finance, Tokyo. As in the past, very general distribution was made. Document No. 15, "Why Commercial Travelers Are Protectionists." This was the fifth edition, new and revised of this document and in harmony with our experience proved one of the most effective documents used by us. "Summary of Tariff Information." the beginning of the special session of Congress early in 1919 the Ways and Means Committee, H. R., Washington, Hon. Joseph W. Fordney, Chairman, decided upon a most searchinng investigation upon which to base general Tariff revision. Congress authorized the gathering of this information and it was decided to call the publication when ready the "Summary of Tariff Information-1919," but the ramifications of the investigation were so great that the Tariff Information was not ready for the printer until September, 1920, and was re-named "Summary of Tariff Information-1920." Commercial Travelers' Bureau, It sometimes seems that each department of the American Protective Tariff League is the most important, but for effective distribution and influence, no department exceeds the usefulness of the Commercial Travelers Bureau which has been developed for a period of about twelve years. We have 12,215 Representative Commercial Travelers connected with us all of them loyal Protectionists who do as much for the cause of Protec tion as any agency. Immediately after election day our complete lists of commercial travelers were reviewed, corrected and perfected and are ready for any emergency, especially the Tabucongressional campaign of 1922. lated by states, the representation is as follows: For member, Board of Managers to serve two years, Class of 1923: A. F. Huston, Pennsylvania. For member of the Board of Managers to serve one year, Class of 1922: Charles E. Perkins, New York. Mr. J. C. Fee of West Virginia was added to the Advisory Members of the Board of Managers. Utah and the Tariff. The wool-growing industry is one of the most important in the State. When the country went on a Free-Trade basis the effect of that Tariff removal was but little noted. since war conditions came almost immediWith ately and the price of wool soared. the war ended, however, its effect became apparent. But 10 per cent. of this year's Wool clip has been sold and stock men have suffered heavy losses. The desire for a change has thus been accentuated. Utah is not the only State where the FreeTrade Tariff enacted by the Wilson administration had brought depressing effect upon business and industry. The effect has been nation-wide.---Mananoy City (Pa.) RecordAmerican, 11.1.20. Protecting and preserving the home market for Americans is the first duty of America.-Anita (Ia.), Record, 12.30.20. Congressional Tariff Committees. Communications on the Tariff question should be addressed to all members of Congress, or to the following members of Committees in charge of Tariff legislation, Washington, D. C. WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE, H. R. Republican Joseph W. Fordney, Chairman 1920 35 Nev. 8 315 7 N. J. 242 74 N. Mex. 8 Calif. 217 N. Y. 1.81 112 N. C. 209 210 N. Dak. 31 5 It was found that there was no authority Ga. for any general publication of this and through the kindness of Chairman Fordney we were able to obtain a special edition of "Summary of Tariff Information1920," which has been mailed to every member of the Tariff League. The issuance of this great volume contained the text of the Tariff laws of 1913 and 1909, with general information, interpretations, comments and descriptions and uses of all importations, and is proving of the greatest value to our members. Such a distribution has never been attempted by any agency or society heretofore. Mo. Mont. Neb. Distribution. The distribution of the publications of the Tariff League for the year ending January 15, 1921. amounted to 9,022,597 pages of Tariff Literature. Elections. The election of Officers, Members of the Executive Committee and Board of Managers resulted as follows: A. H. Heisey, President, Karl G. Roebling, First Vice-Pres. Treasurer and Gen'l Secretary. Lyman B. Goff, Rhode Island, For members of the Board of Managers to serve for four years, Class of 1925: B. A. Van Winkle, Indiana, H. C. Lovis, New York, Henry W. Watson Democrat Claude Kitchin Henry T. Rainey Cordell Hull John M. Garner James W. Collier Clement C. Dickinson William A. Oldfield Charles R. Crisp John F. Carew Whitmell P. Martin FF American Economist DEVOTED TO THE PROTECTION OF AMERICAN LABOR AND INDUSTRIES. NEW FREE-TRADE'S RECORD OF UNEMPLOYMENT. Official Report Shows 3,500,000 Idle in the United States. Following the enactment of the FreeTrade Underwood Tariff, and prior to the breaking out of the late war in Europe, unemployment was so great that the FreeTrade New York Times, possibly as a partial atonement for its part in inflicting Free-Trade upon this country, established different places in New York City whence it doled out bread to the unemployed. Any needy family or individual could secure bread at any of the said places upon application. In itself, this was a commendable act of charity, but it by no means atoned for the advocacy of the Free-Trade heresy, and the repeated misrepresentation of the effects of the Protective Tariff indulged in by that paper for many years past and up to the present time. At the time referred to there were thousands upon thousands in idleness and want, the direct result of Free-Trade, which always brings want and suffering under normal conditions, if it is proper to refer to the conditions existing under Free-Trade as in any way "normal." But the full effects of Free-Trade had just begun to make themselves felt when the war broke out and created an abnormal condition, thus suspending the normal operation of economic laws. The war created new needs and destroyed normal productivity in the warring nations. Such nations soon became unable to even supply their own needs and hence could not enter into competition with our own producers in our own market. Thus a kind of Protection was afforded to our industries as against the industries of Europe. After the signing of the armistice economic conditions were still unsettled, and still are, for that matter. However, it took at least a year for the situation to so become clarified as to permit the effects of the Free-Trade Tariff to begin to make themselves seriously felt. Then began an era of feverish buying of foreign products and the consequent displacement of domestic production. The consumptive capacity of the country being limited, the huge importations necessarily forced the lessening of domestic production. The result was foreseen and predicted by us. In the nature of things unemployment must follow. It has followed, with the result that there are more idle workmen in the United States at the present time than ever before in our history. $3.00 a Year. Single Copy 6 Conta This statement is made on the authority of the official reports issued by the FreeTrade administration, which certainly is entirely without any reason for exaggerating the situation. The United States Department of Labor has conducted an "Un-· employment Survey" in connection with its "Employment Service." The survey was begun December 15, 1920, and was completed January 15, 1920. In its report, which was given to the press for release on January 26, the following statement is made: "Comparative information from thirty-five States and the District of Columbia indicates the number employed in industry January, 1920. The number employed in industry Reduction in employment.. 9,402,000 6,070.648 3,331,352 the State of Mississippi (not included above) 35,000 10,000 Estimated unemployment in the State of Alabama (not included above) Estimated unemployment from 41 leading industrial centers in the States of Arkansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Texas. Montana. Idaho, New Mexico, Arizona, Utab, Nevada and Kansas Total 67,114 3,473,466" That is, there are now practically 3,500,000 idle workmen in the United States. Not a very good showing for Free-Trade. Be it noted that the year 1920 is the first year since the enactment of the Underwood Tariff that it has had an opportunity to become fully operative. The result has been the importation of five and a quarter billion dollars' worth of foreign products and the consequent idleness of three and one-half million American workmen. Those figures should never be forgotten. The report of the survey is too voluminous for us to reproduce in full and we can only summarize some of its salient features. One of the tables is entitled: Estimated Population in Leading Industrial Centers and gives the estimated unemployment in 182 of the principal industrial cities in the United States. The country is divided into nine districts, the population according to the census of 1920 and unemployment of each of the cities being reported. The 1st District comprises the following states: Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut, the total population of the reported cities being 3,325,355 and the estimated unemployment 250.158. The 2nd District comprises the states of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, the population of the cities reported being 11.727,605 and the unemployment 577.743. The 3rd District comprises the following states: Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and Wisconsin. the population of the cities reported being 7,652,493 and the unemployment 594.393. The 4th District comprises the following states: Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska and Kansas, the population of the cities re |