New-York tribune., 1871-11-20

sold farms in Canada and bought or made
farms in this country, for the kindred reason
that they could make more by farming in TINS
country than they could in their own. Yet
here they have to pay part of the interest
on our great National Debt and help support
our grand army of pensioners, and are (Frre-
Traders say restricted to our one market i'll
stead of the two markcts-thc home and the
foreign which, according to Frcr-Irade
logic. they have their choice of under
FrccTradc Aud again: OF the thousands
of cmigrants landed in the Canadas'
u majority push straight for tins coun-
try; while Of those landed az our
ports, not one in hundred makes Tor inc
Canadas. These are our proofs that INC
Canadian laborcr is not "as well OFF, at home
n, "his neirbbor on Our side of the frontier"
They are in substance the same rs thoSe py
which we prove the head OF river 10 DC
higher than its mouth
But Mr.. Mill suggests that the arts OF pro.
"duction are less advanced, ana the iaoot VI
"thc community less efficient i'll Canada tnah
ain the United States" Precisely. We have
advanced the arts of production and the enl-
| cicncy of our labor by Protection, ana we
mean to keep doing it. In other words: we
have shortened the average distance between
grower of Food and producer of Metals,
Warea and Fabrics, so that, of every hundred
bushels of grain grown on our soil, seventy
five are exchanged for manufactures and
| only twenty five expended in transportation,
while the Canadian farmers get about fifty
bushels to their manufacturers, and spend the
other fifty in transportation. SO much we have
| gained by Protection; and we mean to do better
and better every year. Whenever ninety-ilvc
pcr cent. of our annual consumption OF Metals,
Wares, and Fabrics, shall be produced on our own
soil, orr farmers will have still greater adj
vantage over those of Canada (uDless she
changes her policy and our labor will be still
more efficient than now.
Now let us sec how this phase Of the con-
troycrsy originated. Mr. Mil, in his letter OF
last January. saw fit to say:
al" S OF course true that the general wages OF Labor
in America are above tho Englishleve AMI. II these
high wages wero tho effect OF Protection J. Tor one
should wish to Protection abolished But IL IL
not because of Protection that wages IN America are
high it is because there s abundance OF lana Tor every
borcr and every laborcr Is at liberty to acquire it, AZ
long as this abundance OF land relatively 10 population
continues, wages will not decline
To this we promptly responded:
"No Sir! land is still abundant and cheaper in
the Dominion Just north Of than ~ here yet wages
are very much lower there than here. Why They
have light taxes modest debt and that choice OF two
markets which your disciples think advantageous to
the farmer yet they the border to work In our
forests fields and factories, helping us develop
our easing the burden of Debt because
they can do better among than ut home So, you see
Mr. MIL that abundance Of cheap, fertile land does
not account for higher wages. We had that in
1877 90 yet labor went begging for employment at
any price; and We know good twohlnded Yankee
work through long hayng season In 1913 in Scwanp-
shire for hnf bshcl Of IndaA. corn per day That
labor in that locality would now command thrice tho
quantity. Mr.. Mill. you will have to try again."
MIR. Mill has just "tricd again With what
succcss2 You have both sides before you:
,Ju1rn