New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-02-12

Tpy TRrBUsE only its dreaded phantom prove
this and nothing more
We certainly desire not to speak Unexpectedly
of al respectable opponent, bu'bow The editors Of
The .d,pexdeMt could admit into its columns such
silly verbisge IS this, We fail to imagine. ID they
forget the support they have given to the Kans"
enterprise Or did they then think 1t was wrong
srtifcially 20 stimulate emigration Bat, leaving
Kansas out Of view, it would seem that the natu-
raj flow of immigration il good and Wholesome
thing Now will somebody tell us what 10 this
natural flow, and how it 10 determined Do PEG.
ple-we mean the mssses-c)me from beyond
the Atlantic, except because they can Ind here
stesdier work and better wsges' Has our natu-
raj flow any other cause or any other limit In
migrants resort hitler, not 70 benefit America,
but to bepef. themselves; and just so long they
can improve their condition by coming, they will
condrue to come; and just 90 fast a, the country
increases in wealth and property as compared
with Europe, will the number of immigrants in
crease. The present calsmitous state Of business
among US, must arrest immi grafton: men will no.
come here to stsrve; but let affairs revive to-
morrow, and the natural foT will begin again.
However, our astute economist ventures little
further. immigration is good when it supplies US
with useful labor and is equazed BY demand;
but if you set up a new branch Of industry, and
enlarge the demand little, your equazed immi-
grafton becomes pernicious. Such 10 his PROPOSE
ton. Now, it is true that If you enact that any
new branch of production shall be protected BY
spt cial duties, you at once make demsnd for
skilled laborerI in that branch; and in obedience
10 the demand they come. and then coming is
ruinous But our cOtenpOrary Omits to inform
US why the supply of the new demand is any mora
hurtful than was the supply of the cd one. The
new demand lie just as much for useful labor as
the old one, and works in the same way, AMI yet
one is injurious, and the other is not. Why,
what nonsense 10 this even for ne wspaper which,
while contendiDg for freedom on one side, o. no
other .ustains the pro.Slavery policy Of South
Carolina, The Journal Of Commerce and the Mis-
souri, slave drivers
But this is not all. Our sspent professor of
Know-Nothng political economy, informs US that
when we impose duties to protect tie eat sblish-
ment here Of any brsrch of industry-which he alb
surdy calls applying an artificial stimuus-she
cheaper labor Of Europe at once comes in to
crowd Americans out of that branch; forgetting
that it is something the latter either do not Jet uu-
derstsnd, or have practiced only on the most lin
tied scale. How can the new foreign laborers re-
duce American wages in trade Anne leans have
never worked att On the contrary, is it not
evident that the introduction Of the new trade
and lis woIkmen, lie great beDef! to the com
mubity, and to every man init The farmer has at
his door market for more grain, meat and vege-
tables, the shoemaker has more orders for shoes,
the halter for hats, the builder for houses, and
with every other pursuit. Thus each mans labor
in that community becomes more productive and
valuable than it was before the arrival Of the
strangers-while, what is Of the greatest import.
ance, the country produces within itself com.
modify for which it has hitherto had to pay
money abroad or run in debt. Such Is the effect,
and the whole effect, of Projections and we chal
lenge The Independent to adduce a single instance
in which it has diminished the wages
Of any number of American laborers. Or does
our contemporary propose to charge upon Protec
ton the unprecedented flow Of immig grants for the
pat eight years. during which the country has
suffered under the Free trade tariff, which Messrs
Polk and Walker, by the help of fraud imposed
upon it Or 10 the Protection afforded since
le50, by the effect of the crest Californian and
Australian discoveries, part Of the "ruinous
policy" which has brought too many foreign
laborers upon us' But why should The IHde-
pendent thus dodge and evade the question
Why not frankly ayow lite Nativism-though it
may seem to be of mean and pitisble sort-or
as frankly retract it--or else cultivate the gra:e
of silence on the question
But We deny totally the allegation Of our CO.
temporary that the presence Of such laborers in
the country has caused 8 reduction Of wages.
What Is the extent Of that reduction, in whist
trades has it been felt, and when did 1t take
place Is it in domestic labor, or in mning-the
two branches most exercised BY foreigners Did
it happen last pear, or year before, when the
price Of labor was higher than ever, and when
one could hardly get work done at any rate Of
compensation Or shall we be told that it has
taken place since the commencement Of that great
colapse-natural result of Free trade-amid the
ruins Of which We are laboringi Perhaps the
universal distress and the stoppage of all kinds
of work now existing are to be laid to the charge
of the immigrants. The E1pres, has propounded
that rage conclusion, and The Independent, if it
chooses, may adoptit.
But The Independent discerns in this journal a
special horror or hatred Of Great Britain and Of
British Free trade. Now we disclaim any feeling
Of illwil toward any portion Of the human race,
but especially that from which we are more i'm