Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1843-07-28
FACTS FOR TSRE PEOPLl
BY OLIVEk H SMITH.
CONTINUED J
MONOPOLIES,

Tree lTdue Heu1 hnu tney as democrats,
are opposed 10 all monopolles If this
were So II were indeed grieVious OBJ
lection; but can there be monopoly iu
any trade or business, whether il be-
cotton or woollen mandatory, me-
CHANCES establishment, q mercantile
concern, or house of public entertain
meDt, so long as these empIoymenls are
left open alike 10 the competition, capi
Ia and industry Of al9 Will not capi-
tal find its level 10 its investment, and
is it pretended that any particular bu8i
ness can enjoy an excess of prof in
country like this, open 10 free compeI-
Iion? II one employment is more prof.
table than another, others will imme.
diately resort 10 it. If The Washington
Hall is supposed 10 be making too much
money as house Of entertainment,
there arises at The next square a Pal
mer House TO divide it. II a cotton fac
tory at Richmond is supposed 10 be do
ing well, Mr.. West establishes an ex
tensive cotton factory al Indianapolis,
to share the market and divide The pro
fits Let US suppose that these manu-.
factories are, as the leading modern
free trade democrats contend, odious
moDopoIes; will ii be contended that
the British manufactures are the less
SO? Most certainly not; but on the con
tIary. il a large amount Of capital con-
centraIed ata gwen point and employed
in single manufactory, constitutes a
monopoly, then the British manu- lacto-
Ties as far surpGss ours as The amount
OF their investments exceed ours. The
question then arises, seeing that we
have 10 sustain manufacturing monopo-
lies at least, which shalt we maintain
and support-the American monopoly
that purchases corn, beef, pork, -four,
and olher agricultural products, 20 sup
port the labor OF our own citizens,
while they manufacture our cotton,
wool, hemp, flax, and other material
that enters into The different articles in
domestic use; or the British monopoly,
sustained by The British labor, British
raw materials, and British produce, to
be paid for either by American gold or
silver or American produce, after dc
Quoting heavy duty 10 be paid by The
American producerY We ask a candid
answer. But it is said that The British
manufactured articles may be bought
cheaper than the same article can be
made for here; and hence il is argued
tina. the tariff should be reduced We
have already stated how this matter
stands, but lei us illustrate ii here again.
Whether an article is cheap or dear de
peuds upon circumstances The price
may be low, and yet the medium Of
payment render it dear; at the present
time a farmer can afford to pay higher
nominal price for any article 10 the pro.
duce Of his farm than he could get the
same article for in money; the one he
has TO spare and the other he has not.
A farmer and halter join lands, the
farmer needs hats for his use, and The
halter needs corn, beef, and pork for his
family; il suits these persons TO ex
change The articles. Now it's not very
mate rial what price either puts on his
article it is but an exchange al last
but suppose al the moment that these
industrious men were making the eX-
change, pedIar should drive up with q
load OF English hats, and offer to sell
one 10 the farmer for fifty cents less than
the halter asked for his, but required
cash instead Of produce in payment
would The farmer by taking the cash
from his drawer and paying for the hat
while his produce lay upon his hands
without market, gel the article cheap
er than if he had bought 1t from his
neighborf But suppose he had in fact
bought the hat for fifty cents less than
his neighbor asked, and was bic TO sell
his produce SO as TO replace the cash he
had paid ou for the hat, how then would
the account stand next Year, The hat
ter must quit his business because his
customers could buy cheaper hats; oI
course he must turn farmer. The a.
mount Of produce would be doubled, and
so would the demand for hats; the ped =
lar arrives again with his British hats
he has now TWO families 10 supply in
stead Of Que; his competitor has been
driven from his business TO farming by
he cheap hats, and he now puts not on
lv the othor half dollar on the price oI
his hats, but adds 50 per cent, so that in
the two years the farmer has paid a
higher nominal price for bis hats than il
he had bought lham from his neighbor
and The price for his produce has been