The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1850-07-25

ity Of every community, not ~ the collective
name Of IN ever-changlng section Of society,
but ss that Of permanent, hereditary caste OF
unfortunates. from which no one ever energies.
or only enough TO stand as exceptional instances.
In reference to men 20 regarded, men to whom
the prime want Of animal life is 70 often spar
ingly grsti6ed, it Is not strange that writers
should reason much as if the prophecy, "man
shall not live by bread Alone" had never been
uttered. 1t Is we'll enough, then, for the econ
omists Of England to put the insufficiency of
the supply Of food At the command Of the la
borers in the front ground among the causes of
crime, and to commend the policy which tends
to increase that supply upon moral consider
atoms.
On this side the Atlantic there il no Difficult
ty on the score Of food, either In respect to
quantity or cheapness. We have attained that
first step in the Economists rising scale Of re-
quisitss to social welfare. "On that" it con-
tinues. "depends division Of labor" Certain
ly division of labor suggests itself, as the natu
raj consequence. Under real system of free
trade, system which removed as far as pos
sible the impediments in the way of mems
following the bent of their inclinations, diversi-
ty Of employment would follow. A large por-
ton Of the food-growers would become manu-
hcturers Of clothing, and would in other ways
SGT themselves to work to create the sans
abundance in the various objects of human de-
sire, a. in the elements of nutrition. But il SO
happens that tho gentlemen who profess them
selves the exclusive friends Of free trade-the
Manchester school Of economists and their
American disciples-are bent upon thwarting
their natural tendency. They labor to persuade
this countrymen not to take the second step up
the ladder, and to distrust their proclivity to
division of labor a. u species of infatuation. Or
rather, they legisate in such a way as TO prevent
trade from following its instincts, (talking all
the while about free trade,) and then try 10 re-
eoncie the subjects Of their restraint in this
fashion.
In England they say to the people, "Why is
it that you are 50 foolishly bent upon dividing
labor, and want to raise more breadstuffs? Let
America raise corn for you, and stick to your
old tradss-spin cotton and buy your corn" In
tho United States they preach the same lesson
backwards. Here they say to the agriculturist,
"Why is it that you cannot see when you are
well Off What madness tempts you or any
Of you to desire to change your employment
and try to make calicoes and cutlery2 1t is
cheaper and better for you to buy them at Man
chester and Birmingham. To be sure, our
friends there say, with abundance of food, which
you have got, comes division Of labor; but it
shall not come if we can help it. In the name
Of free trade we forbid it."
JOSEPH SURFACE, with his "noble sentiments"
and ignoblo practice, is a fair type of the
consistency of tho Pharisees who wear the
mask Of free trade on both sides of the water.
But who does not sec that this talk about scar
city Of food as the cause of crime is but con-
venient mode Of avoiding the embarrassment
which might result from mentioning low wages.
What calls itself free trade abhors the idea of
high wages, and chokes down the words, when,
rs in this case, they must have risen to the lips.
When the Economist fell into moral vein, one
would have thought it might have remembered
HOOPS Song Of the Shirt, and that it could
scarcely have forgotten those lines of an elder
poet describing his sensations:
And near thousand tables pinned for food.
High wages include, every body who
does not get them discerns with sufficient
clcarness, abundance of food, and clothing, and
shelter, and education, moral and Intellectual,
with all their accomplishments of contentment
and virtue; low wages exclude them all Free
trade thinks the great desideratum is to under
sell tho whole world; as it looks to the foreign
markets, it necessarily depends for success up
on chespening labor. In England this is frank
y avowed. In this country Mr.. BUCHANAN
avowed it, with great caution and hesitancy.
He was, in fact, driven into it, if we recollcct
rightly, by Senator DAVIS. Generally. how
ever, among the disciples Of Manchester, on
this side Of tho Atlantic, it DISCUSSES itself
in congra,ulation upon the cheapness of our
land, and cIhortatons to policy which will
forever keep them cheap. 1t comes to the
same thing, however; for the value Of land is
nothing more than the labor which has been
expended in bringing i, to its existing condi-
ton.