LABOR AND WAGES IN EUROPE AND THE UNITED STATES.

While the difference in the cost of labor in European countries and in the United States has been alluded to by a majority of the witnesses, and the higher price of American labor urged as a reason, in almost every case where witnesses have asked for increased rates of duty, it is to be regretted that the evidence taken before the Commission as a whole does not contain more than half a dozen carefully prepared comparisons of wages at home and abroad. This may be due, in part, to the fact expressed by one of England's most eminent statisticians, that "No one, unless he shall have made the attempt to obtain information as to the rate of wages, can be aware of the difficulties opposed to his success.' But while fully realizing the obstacles, it must still remain a matter of regret that so many of the most intelligent witnesses entirely neglected to give anything more definite than to say that wages were about fifty per cent. higher in America than Great Britain, and that labor in the other European countries is proportionately lower than in England.

A few statements were received from artisans themselves and persons representing them. They, too, fail to furnish any definite information, but here and there a terse statement of some value may be found. For example, it is an undisputed fact that while in all, or nearly all, industries in the United States the workman receives a larger income than his fellow-workmen in Europe, on the other hand his rent, clothing, and possibly his provisions cost him more here. Yet it must be remembered that he lives in a better way and has more of the comforts and luxuries of life, so that in the end, if his surplus earnings are but little in excess of the European, he has worked no harder, is more of a man, and occupies a position some grades higher in civilization than the European, or, to quote from the words of a witness:

As American labor, owing to various causes, requires and demands a higher wage to supply its wants, needs, or luxuries-that is, to own a decent house, read books and papers, pay pew rent and doctor's bills, send his children to school, and buy good clothing for himself and family-the American manufacturer must pay 100 per cent. higher wages than his foreign competitor, as well as higher taxes and rate of interest. Another witness (testifying about the manufacture of saddlery hardware), who has had experience in bringing over English workmen, said: In order to keep these men in our employment we have to allow them fully as high wages, or higher wages, than they were receiving in England. The reason for this is that the cost of living in this country is much greater. Men who are able to make five shillings a day in England want to make here at least $20 a week. We have men in our employment who make from $27 to $30 a week. The reason for this difference in wages is on account of the scale of living. In England they are content to live on plain food and ale and cheese, and the families all assist in the labor, while here the children do not want to work-society is different, and they are sent to school-and the larger salaries are based upon these different social conditions. The laborers in this country have to pay more rent, and the cost of living in every way is greater; therefore they must have larger wages. The result is that our goods cost us double the amount as far as the labor is concerned. We had a filer in our establishment who made $27 last week, and lost one day's work during the week. That same man in England would work for one-half that sum and be fully satisfied with it, because he would be able to live on the same scale with his neighbors. But here he is not satisfied with lower wages.

110

One of the most striking comparative statements of the rates of wages in the United States and in foreign countries, was that given by the manufacturers of cotton thread, which, owing to the fact that they have similar manufactories in each country, and are paying persons working on the same kind of machinery, from information obtained from the counting-houses of two establishments with the same system of bookkeeping and covering the same period of time, it may appear upon the face to be very reliable. But when the two locations are taken into consideration, part of the force is destroyed and the whole statement should be qualified on account of the isolated condition of the Paisley manufactories.

It must be borne in mind that the Scotch mills draw largely from the country population where there is an excess of females, and their wages are low, but that when the owners came here they planted their factories in large metropolitan centers, like Providence, R. I., and Newark, N. J..and they have to compete in getting their labor (for this nice grade of work in spinning and twisting) with factories that are going into simpler work. With us it is a different case. Their statement is truthful enough on the face of it, but it would be unsafe to draw any general conclusions as to the relative cost of labor at home and abroad from this statement, which applies so particularly to the case it describes.

"The fortuitous dispute of an English labor trouble" enabled one witness to present a valuable table in regard to the average earnings for three months for each man engaged in fifteen potteries in England compared with the earnings of a similar number of potters at Trenton, N. J. The result of this inquiry (complete tables of which will be found in the testimony) shows that the manufacturers of pottery in the United States were paying a little more than 113 per cent. above the rate paid in England for the same work.

Statistics were presented at Cleveland to show the disparity between the wages paid and the labor cost in this country and abroad in some manufactures of iron, as follows:

It is also shown that while the cost of English and Scotch iron, without duty, laid down on the wharf at New York, is $14 to $16 a ton, including freight, the average cost of labor alone in the manufacture of a ton of charcoal pig iron in this country, as gathered from nineteen reports from that number of owners of charcoal furnaces in the United States, was $16.68, divided as follows:

Labor in ore, per ton of metal....

Labor in limestone, per ton of metal.

Labor in transportation and handling to the furnace.

Labor for charcoal..

Labor in smelting..

Labor in transportation and handling of pig iron to nearest market..

Total...

$3 30

35

1 60 740 2 33

170

16 68

Mr. Marshall, of the Montague Paper Company, Massachusetts, stated that in England machine-tenders were paid in July, 1882, 89 to $10 per

week; that girls were at work doing the labor we employ men to do, the girls doing for 10 shillings, or $2.40 per week, what we pay men $9 to $10 per week for, and that rag-room and finishing room girls receive in England $2.50 per week, while our girl help received $5 to $7 per week for the same kind of work. Mr. Stowell stated that rag-engineers received in England $4.50 per week, and here he paid them $13.50 per week.

The following table was submitted to the Commission at Saint Louis, and shows the amount paid per month, in francs, to workmen in glass manufactories:

The Silk Association showed that they paid their operatives, in addition to receiving less work from them, about 100 per cent. more than the same class of work people receives in England; over 200 per cent. more than in France; over 300 per cent. more than in Italy, and a still greater percentage than is paid in Germany, as follows:

The above comprises all the facts brought out by the testimony on the wage question. A few statements showing the rates of wages paid by the iron ore producers were presented to the Commission after the testimony had closed, and were considered worthy of publication in the appendix, with some statistical exhibits furnished by Special Agent Joseph D. Weeks, who has charge of the labor statistics for the Census Office; also some tables of Carroll D. Wright's, and, for comparative purposes, a series of tables furnished by Mr. Robert Giffen, chief of the statistical department of the Board of Trade, London, England. This was all the information that the Commission thought worthy of publication, and both in the case of Mr. Giffen's figures and those of Mr. Weeks, the years 1877, 1878, and 1879 are taken.

In 1874 Mr. Young, then chief of the Bureau of Statistics, published a useful volume which he called "Labor in Europe," and in which he attempted to give not only the wage quotations at home and abroad, but also the prices of commodities. The book is valuable in regard to wage quotations; but when he comes down to the cost of living he bases his results on too small data.

Laudable attempts have been made by the State Department to furnish information in this line, and in 1878, under Secretary Evarts, a pamphlet was issued entitled "State of Labor in Europe." The data for this volume was obtained from the consuls. Some of them took great pains to prepare their returns carefully, while others sent statements of little or no value.

The most valuable work that has been done in this line in the United States is that accomplished by the bureau of statistics of Massachusetts, and that now in course of preparation by Mr. Weeks. The bureau of statistics of Massachusetts never publishes statements of wages except as taken from the books of the counting-rooms of the concerns, and involving thousands of operatives. They never publish wages as given to a few persons, or for one part of the State. The advantage of this method, is that if errors occur in any one place, the wide range of inquiry acts as a check. This is true of the work being conducted by Mr. Weeks, who employed very careful men and sent them to the countingrooms, and wherever the proprietors could give the wages for a series of years comparisons were made. No such work as this was ever done in England, or, with the exception of the State of Massachusetts, in this country, until it was inaugurated by the superintendent of the tenth census.

From the tables which the Commission publishes in the Appendix, as taken from the reports of Mr. Giffen for Great Britain, and those from Mr. Wright's forthcoming report on the factory system, and those of Mr. Weeks, the Commission draws the general conclusion that in some divisions of cotton manufactures and textile labor the wages in America do not greatly exceed those in England, while in other subdivisions they will range-like spinning, for instance-from 30 to 40 per cent. greater in this country than in Great Britain. As shown, in Paisley, under exceptional circumstances, the difference reaches 113 per cent. These facts demonstrate the absolute folly of undertaking to compare the wages of Great Britain with the wages in this country on the basis of percentages.

An examination of the exhibits of Mr. Giffen and Mr. Weeks shows that both in the earthenware and glassware and iron industries the percentage of difference often reaches 100 per cent., and in some cases even more. This, in a less degree, is true in all the building trades, judging from the exhibits of Mr. Giffen, and the general knowledge of H. Mis. 6- -8

the Commission, as no similar tables for the United States were obtainable.

The last Congress appointed a committee of its own members to examine into and report upon the subject of wages at home and abroad. This may result in some valuable additions to the statistical information on the subject, and it is to be hoped that, as the wage question so vitally affects the tariff legislation, an effort will be made on the part of Congress to pursue this inquiry still further.

The following tables of the wages paid operatives in some of the principal industries in Great Britain were furnished by Mr. Robert Giffen, chief of the statistical department of the board of trade. They are for 1877 and 1878. It is to be regretted that the figures for 1880 or 1881 could not be obtained; but Mr. Giffen assures the Commission that wages in England have practically undergone no change since that time:

IRON MANUFACTURES.

BAR ROLLING.

Hours of labor, 66 in Darlington district and 50 in North Staffordshire district.