The Massachusetts spy, and Worcester County advertiser. [volume] ([Worcester, Mass.]) 1825-1831, 1831-08-31

FREE Trade. We this day publish an
other article from the pen of " A Friend to
: Free Trade" which s6ews how fine look
ing structure the theorist NAV build with
out any substantial foundation. The Iadi-
cal error of this writer appears to be, an as
sumption that all trade is merely barter
an exchange of one commodity for another,
without reference to that convertible rep
resentatlve OF property, which money fur
nlshes, and which serves to regulate and
balance trade in such manner, that one
nation may, for centuries-nay during all
time, proftably buy, and not only buy but
consume, the productions of another coun-
try, which does not, in return, take single
article other growth or manufacture. When
the British manufacturer sells his goods, he
sells them for the most he can get, and
neither asks more nor less because they are
eventually destined to a country that does
or does not, furnish the raw material from
which it is made. So, when he purchases
his stock he buys that which comes cheap
est according 10 the value, without refer
ence to the place where it may have been
produced, and will give no more for Brazil
ian cotton than ours if it is no better, not
wlthstanding they might be heavy purchas-
ers OF British goods and we might not. 1t
ls said that we are not 1.-THE only producers
of cotton" but it IS admitted that other
countries have not been able to " furnish
the English market upon terms as favorable
ms we have DONE" The reason is, that they
have other employment for their labor which
yields greater return than it would in rails
ing cotton at the price we can afford it at. So
long as this is the case they will not divert
their labor to this less productive business.
But even if it were possible to induce the
British dealer to give per cent. more tor
other cotton than they would have to pay
for ours of the same quality, IA suppositon
too ridiculous to be Supposed it would then
advance the cost of their goods so much
that our manufacturers, working our cotton,
would be able to undersell them in the mar
kets they have usually supplied, and would
thus make a sale OF our cotton.
We think we may safely assure "a
Friend to Free Trade" [if he keeps writ
ing,we wish, for convenience sake, he would
assume shorter name,] that his fears, if
the tariff continues in force, that we shall
be able to get nothing that we want for our
cotton, except specie, and that that will
become valueless, are entirely unfounded.
The wants of every nation, for such COM
modltles of other countries as cannot be
profitaby produced within its own limits,
are indefinite, and the importation Of them
is limited only by their means of paying for
them. So long, then, as we have any thing
to sell that others want, we shall take as
great an amount from abroad, and, although
we may buy of one and sell to another, yet,
amid all the multfarious business transac-
tions of the world, such is the course of
trade, that, in the end, that which we sell
pays for that which we buy.
Although we do not admit that the amount
of foreign exports affords the slightest ind-
cation of the prosperity of country, yet we
would here state one fact, as in direct op-
position to the theory of our correspondent.
" In 1923, the year before the abominable
tariff of 1924, we exported l73,000,0 900 lbs.
of cotton and 756, 900 bbls. of flour, togeth-
or worth 25,400,000 dollars; and in 1926,
204 millions of pounds of cotton and S5T, 900
bbls. of -four, worth together 500, 100000,
the quantity and value being both increas-
ed. in defiance of the awful predictions to
the contrary" The returns for the year
1880, are not yet received, but we have no
doubt they will shew similar result as
compared with years previous to the revis-
ion of the tariff in 1928.
We have not attempted reply in detail
to our correspondent. We did not deem it
necessary. We have, however we think,
thrown out such suggestions as will be fatal
to bis theory, in the mind of any rejecting
man. Again, we say, the true question at
issue is, whether the same amount of labor
Will procure less or more of the necessares
and con1eniences of life than they would
before the tariff system was adopted. That
the same amount which then would give
family bare subsistence, will now support
them equally well and leave surplus, is no
torious TO every man who knows any thing
about it.
If, then, the Agricultural portion of this
community wish to see more general and
widespread ruin, than ever before has been
experienced, to overspread the country, let
them give their support to the " Free Trade
Convention"
We intend at another time to shew the
necessity of protection to manufactures of
articles which can be made here lower than
they can be imported, and to present some
farther views Of the subject generally.
-cAsx