Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1843-05-13

being subjected with their limited means, TO
overpowered by the concentration Of the capt.,
and the pauper labor of Europe to crush then
that those rnonopoIis,s may have tho exclusiv
markets Of America for their goods. TIL
field is open. hence they afford to make ten
porary sacrifice TO reap the reward 10 the end =
Hear Lord Brougham on tina, very point, and Sc
how precisely he sustains there views.
The imports to this country Of 1915, amounte
to 81 ID 600, 900, while the exports were but So.
1000 600 Tho embargo nd the had proves
to be nurseries for our domestic manufactures
and they were fast rising to the point OF supply
ing the demand at cheap rates. Great Britain
sav this, and at once applied the power che pos
sessed through her vast capital and cheap labor
10 crush the American manufacturers; hence the
| excessive exports from that country 10 this in
1915. These exports were made, beyond ques'
ZION, at great sacrifice on the part OF the British
manufacturer, but their object was to destroy our
manufactures at blow, and not to make profit on
their goods. Lord Brougham in his speech in
Parliament let out the secret. He says:
.The peace Of America has produced somewhat Of a
similar effect, though very far from placing the vas,
ports which it with those TO the European
market the befoe both because ultimately the Ame
will pay, which the exhausted of the
renders very unlikely and ii .eeU north shiie
KIT to s7ifIE IN The cRaDIE those RLsiNG
JM.4.NUF.4C7UREsin the United states"
l, is one objec, Of the protective laws to pre-
ven, this. The American manufacturer requires
only to be protected in a healthy and uniform
competition with others. The tariff for protec.
ton gives this, while the external and internal
competition brings down the manufactured article
TO the lowest price for which il can be afforded;
the supply at all times being greater than the
necessary demand Of any given article, the man
ufac,ufer well as the merchant or trader, being
in direct competition with other manufacturers
and traders, at home end abroad, it is impossible
that any article can remain day above its low
est minimum. But manufactures are
MonopoIiss,
Say our leading modern democratic free trade
tnes., ars .Aay az dAHan"r>te- Opposed 20 sss
monopolies. If these were So it were indeed n
grievous objection; but can there be a monopo-
ly 10 any trade or business, whether it be q cot
ton wooden mandatory, mechanics estab-
lishment, mercantile concern or a house OF pub
lie entertainment SO long as these employmen's
are left open alike to the competition, capital and
industry Of alif Will not capital find in its in
vestment, and is il pretended that any particular
business can enjoy an excess Of profit in coun-
try like this, open to free compe,i,ionf IT one
employ ment is more profitable than another. 9TH
ers will Immediately resort to it. IL the Wash
ington Hall is supposed to be making too much
money house of entertainment, there arises
At the next square Palmer House to divide it.
If a cotton factory a, Richmond is supposed 10
10. aiv
cotton factory at Indianapolis, to share the market
q nd divide the profits. Let suppose that these
IRE, as the leading modern free
trade democrats contend, odious monopoies; will
i, be con,ended that the British manufactures are
the less sol Mos: certainly not; but, on the con.
trary, if q large amount Of capital concentrated
at a given point and employed in a single manu-
factory, constitutes a monopoly, then the British
as far surpass as the amount
Of their investments exceed ours. The question
then arises, seeing that we have to sustain man.
monopoIies at last, which shall we
maintain and support, the American monopoly,
that purchases corn, beef, pork, flour, and 9TH
or agricultural products, to support the iaoour OF
our own citizens, while they manufacture our
cotton, wool, fax, hemp. aud other material that
tiers into the different articles in domestic use
or the British monopoly, sustained by British la
Dor, British raw materials, and British produce, to
be paid for either by American gold or silver or
American produce, after deducting heavy duty
to be paid by the American producerf We ask
candid answer. But il is said that the British
manufactured articles may be bought cheaper than
the same article can be made for here; and hence
i. is argued that the tariff should be reduced. We
have already stated how this matter stands, but
lie, US illustrate it here again. Whether an ar.i-
Gle is cheap or dear depends upon circumstances;
the price may be low, and yet the medium Of pay
ment render it dear; at the presen, time a farm
er can afford TO pay higher nominal price for
any article in the produce of his farm than he could
ee, the same article for in money; the he has
to spare and the other he has not, A farmer and