The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-04-30 00:00:00

TUESDAY iTIORAING, APRIL 30, 1844.

We have before us the result of another month's
incubation of the Anti-monopoly "Young Men"
of Liverpool, in the shape of their " Free Trade
Circular, No. 4"; and, at the risk of having pre-
sumption imputed to us, in venturing to grapple
'with the production of this concentration of politico-
economical wisdom, we take the liberty of offering

upon it a few observations.
The Circular commences with noticing an adver-
tisement which has recently appeared in a local
journal', in which an extensive estate in the county
of Renfrew is offered for sale; and it is set forth as
an advantage that " it includes a town of 1200 in-
habitants chiefly engaged in the cotton manufacture,
and that there are ample means of increasing the
existing, and of introducing various other branches
Of industry and manufacture." The owner of the
estate in question, or his ingenious auctioneer, goes
on to dilate upon the prospects which its purchase
holds out to any enterprising speculator, and
clenches the matter by stating, that, " notwith-
standing the general depression of the times, and
a competition which has lately arisen in the neigh-
bouring markets," the rents of the estate are as high
now as in the time of war prices, and that ".the
recent sets continue to be made at an advance on
the former rents."

A case like this the most philosophical writers of
Circular No. 4 conceive to be " plain and convin-
cing evidence of the folly, not to say injustice, of
attempting to encourage agriculture at the expense
of the manufacturing and trading community"—
the folly and injustice, viz., of our present system.
Under the operation of that system has grown up
this town of 1200 inhabitants, " chiefly engaged in
the cotton manufacture" ; and, at the same time, it
has maintained the prosperity of the estate upon
which such town is located. Where is the proved
folly here, most logical youths ? Manufactures and
agriculture have here gone hand in hand, the one
lending vitality and prosperity to the other. It is
not said that, whilst the latter has prospered, the
former has declined ; but, on the contrary, we are
told by the advertiser that in the town in question
" there are ample weans of increasing the existing,
and of introducing various other branches of industry
and manufacture"! But let us go a little further
with our Circular writers :

"The fact is, in the little document from which we have
Just quoted, the ' main element of the value of the land'
comes out distinctly and intelligibly, as a matter of busi-
ness, not only unquestioned, but adopted (whenever they
have an estate on sale) by those who are accustomed on
other occasions to denounce the manufacturing system in
the most unmeasured terms. It is true that not every
great landowner can boast that the stability of his rental
is secured by the thriving manufactures upon his estate,'
but even the most sentimental of auctioneers does not
fail to notice the excellent roads, canals, and other mo-
dern improvements, by means of which the splendid
property he has the honour to offer is brought within a
few short miles' of some great market for the manufac-
turing districts."

Just so, gentlemen. The "main element of the
-value of land" is the enjoyment of near markets
and thriving consumers : we thank you for the ad-
mission that there are such beings as " thriving"
consumers under our present system. No man in
his senses doubts the fact ; and as it is an advan-
tage to the agriculturist to have near markets and
thriving manufacturers, as consumers, for his pro-
duce, it cannot be so bad a thing for the manufac-
turer to have a near market and thriving agricultu-
rists, as consumers, for his goods. The " main
element of value" is not, we should imagine, a one-
sided element, but of general application.
Now, let us just inquire what might possibly be
the effect of an application to this Renfrewshire
locality of the nostrums of our anti-monopoly gen-
tlemen. Repeal the corn-laws, and of course we
shall be assured that the town of 1200 inhabitants
engaged in cotton-spinning will become one of
double the population and wealth. But what be-
comes of the agricultural population of the estate ?
They have lost the advantage of their near market,
which has henceforth to be shared with the foreign
growers of bread stuffs. We have been told al-
ready, as a disadvantageous circumstance, that they
have had to compete with "neighbouring markets";
and they will henceforth have to compete with mar-
kets which can undersell them 50 to 60 per cent.
They cease in great part, under such circumstances,
to be advantaged by the prosperity of the manufac-
turing town, except in so far as, instead of remain-
ing substantial farmers, they become milkmen and
market gardeners for its squalid and swarming
population ; and we leave it to the world to say to
what extent this can be an advantage to compensate
for the prosperity they have resigned.
We have perhaps occupied mire time and space
with this piece of silliness than it deserves. It con-
tains, however, within itself as amusing a specimen
of the kind of " convincing evidence" (±) of the al-
leged impolicy of the protective system, and, at the
same time, of the folly of superficial and pragmatical
boys meddling with questions above theit compre-
hension, as we remember to have met with. L t
xis just point out to these juveniles the number of
suicidal conclusions which, as free traders, they
have succeeded in deducing from this advertise-
ment.

Ist. Under our present restrictive policy, which
" encourages agriculture at the expense (!) of the
manufacturing and trading community," we have
" thriving manufactures."
2ndly. Under a system which Mr. Cobden and
others have spent years in endeavouring to prove
injurious to the agriculturists themselves, agricul-
ture has prospered, and the interests of not only
landlords, but farmers also, have been advanced,
as is proved by " recent sets" on this estate " con-
tinuing to be made at increased rates."
3rdly. It is admitted that the prosperity of the
British farmer depends upon the extent to which
he is permitted to enjoy—to "monopolise," if you
like—the home market. _ _

4thly. It is a necessary sequent of the-above,
that the manufacturer is benefitted by the prosperity
of neighbouring agricultural consumers.
Finally. A strong instance is adduced of actual
benefits derived under our existing balanced system,
whilst we are reminded that the promised benefits
to arise from any other system are unproven and
problematical.
But it seems that it was mainly for the purpose
of shewing the small comparative amount of taxa-
tion to which the land of the country is subject,
that the advertisement is referred to. The adver.
tiser (the agent for the landlord, be it remembered)
bad stated the produce of the rental thus :---

Gross rent and returns as now let £9,420
Deduct public burdens, Bd. in the pound 305

Remains FREE RENT.

Upon this statement the very sagacious writers o.