New-York tribune., 1873-08-02
FREE TRADE ISSUES.
LABOR IN ENGLAND AND AMERICA,

SIRs Some three weeks ago addressed to you
letter in which pointed out several capital blum
ders Of Mr., David A. Wells in his speech before
tho Golden Club. pronounced on assertion of his
that breadstufis, coin and bullion, provisions leaf
tobacco, petroleum and lumber, were products,
threefourths of the value of which represented the
gifts Of God and the other one-fourth labor of the
most unskled and poorest paid description"-to be
utterly irrcconcable with the accepted definitions
of value. To that opinion l am disposed TO adhere.
III Mr.. Wells is right, the whole science of Political
Economy topples to the ground. But Mr.. Wells is
egregiouSly wrong, and the science continues
to exist. The defense of Mr.. Wells has
been attempted in two ways. That on
which most labor seems TO have been ex-
pended is personal abuse of your humble servant
have been called an antediluvian," bogus
free-trader" and 81 person signing himself Man
chester and pretending TO be an English Free
Trader My "laborious stupidity" my "inco-
herencc" and my ''incapacity to reason have been
dilated on. / have been danced around and bullied
like small newsboy by big one. am told that
the plug was whitfield to the size of the mouth to be
stopped" and am likened 10 :" small and NANCY
cur barking at "gEsat American economist"
Much good will all this do the of Free Tradel
Much assistance will it afford to the great Amer-
can economistp
The second attempt to bring off Mr.. Wells tri-
umphantly is through insinuation that both you,
Mr. Editor, and the writer hereof are ignorant of
the existence of Mr.. Rcardos theory of rent well
as of the distinction between natural and market
values If the editor of The World had not been in
haste TO misIepresent he would have noticed that
in my structures on the statement of Mr.. Wells
was careful to state that rent dd not in this coun
try enter into the value Of agricultural products
certainly not to any appreciabie extent. What
Prof Carnes says of Ricardo is very true, but that
same Ricardo most acutey exposes Adam
Smiths Inconsistency in not uniformly taking
labor as the standard of value. That the
relative value of commodities depends on the
amount of labor necessary to produce them is the
essence Of the definition of the word value. Rent
scarcity values and market values merely mOdi
cations of it, and of no Importance in the case be-
fore us repeat once more, if Mr.. Wells can be
sustained in asserting that the exports of the
United States derive their value from any other
source than the labor expended on them, then Adam
Smith, David Ricardo. and John Stuart Mill are no
longer authorities as TO the definition of the term
value.
Let us suppose Rent to exist in this new country
aud to be an element in the value of wheat corn
potatoes lumber, sc. Mr.. Wellss statement must
then be interpreted to that only onefourth of
the value of the commodities named is due to labor
and the other three-fOurtbs to Rent, in the sense
given to that word by Ricardo John Stuart Mill
and other English writers on Political Economy
That is TO say oDefourtb of the money received for
wheat sold IN New-YOrk for expectation pays the
cost and fair profits of inland transportation, pays
the farmer for his labor and gives the farmer and the
carrier profit their capital at the ordinary rate
The other treeonrths goes to the farmer as Rent by
virtue Of the monopoly which he has of fertile and
well-stuated land need not point out the alb
surdity of this, the prevailing opinion being that
the farmers. as a class, have for years been
making rather less than the average profits 1t Is
clear that they cannot be the most ground down OF
all producers, and at the same time in receipt OF
Rent at the rate of three bushels out of every four
they produce. 1t is little significant that the
word Rent, in the Isense in which ii enters 80
largely into English treatses on Political Economy,
is not defined in either Webster's Worcester's
Dictionaries. The thing itself can hardly be made
intelligiblc to an American.
am told with much gravity that the market
value of commodities differs from their natural
value, but don't see how that is to help out Mr..
Wells unless in the particular cases III question the
market value is peTsstently above the natural
value whereas great pains are akento set forth that
the reverse is the case If the latter be the fact the
cost of the labor which necessary to produce the
articles and bring them 10 market is greater than
the money received for the commodities and the
capital invested fails to receive its due return, and
will speedily seek some other employment. l be-
leye that Ihaye correctly stated the principles of
David Ricardo and John Stuart Mill The very
words of Mr. Wells are sufficient to prove that he
did not have the English doctrine Of Rent in his
mind al all for it would be absurd to class your
farmers with the great English land mOnOpoists as
in receipt of Rent, and at the same time describe
the labor of those self-same farmers as the "mOst
unskilled and poorest paid" of all labor.
sorry attempt is made to decry the facts that
food is more important to the aborer than all other
commodities that the superior oheapness of food in
America more than compensates for the dearness of
clothing and that the purchasing power Of the
wages of an American laborer is superior to that of
the wages of an En- gsh laborer. AS the relative
cost of various articles of food, I am perfectly
willing to take New England and New-YOrk prices
for comparison with those ruling in London "
The nasons Of London are just now agitating, and
threatening a strike, in order to secure another
advance in their wages of one cent an hour, they
having obtained similar advance a year ago.
They are now receiving SID an hour which is equal
TO SS 20 = week. working 80 hours, which is the
average time. The Massachusetts, mason (see Table
ILL., Labor Report gets So day, which is equal to
S15 IS a week in gold taking tho premium at Is.
Now find that mason of EdgartOwn. Mass, re-
ceiyiug wages at this rate and earning $500 year,
and having family of five persons besides himself,
OF six in ALL to support, consumed In year bar
rels of -four 25 gallons of mOlasses, 120 pounds
of meal l2 pounds Of tea Is pounds Of coffee. It's
pounds of sugar, 100 pounds Of soap, & pounds of
starch. 80 pounds of butter Is pounds OF cheese 20
pounds Of lard 25 pounds of rce 50 pounds OF fresh
fish, 100 pounds of salt fish, Is pounds OF poultry, 40
quarts Of beans. 182 gallons of milk, $40 eggs ID
bushels Of potatoes 100 pounds of beef 10 pounds OF
- Il.