The anti-monopolist. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1874-1878, 1875-12-09

the premises reiterated by every economist of
the protective school, or from the logical and
eloquent arguments necessarily repeated in
Congress and from the press and forum, but
To the operatives, in whose behalf they were
most unequivocally and avowedly levied.
This brings us to the third query-to-wit.:
HOW AND WHY ARE THESE TRUST FUNDS DIVERT
ED FROM THE TRUE BENEFIC1ARIEs?
Simply because the people, through their
own agents, have, by the most culpable neg
ligence, allowed the employers to receive the
same, as part of the price resultant from the
sale Of the protected fabrics, when common
sense would have dictated that legislation
should have provided that the augmentation
of prices resultant from the tariff, avowedly
levied for the protection Of American labor,
should have accrued to the
AMERICAN LABoRER.
One portion of our American laborers has
ever been on its guard against thus allowing
into those Of the employing class and by such
default to exist only on the sutferance OF others
That this class is
THE FISHERMEN OF NEW ENGLAND,
whose s'protection" has been, mainly, not in
the s'ways that are dark aud tricks that are
vain" so insidiously worked in our present
tariff system, but honestly and squaraly, by
the receipt OF bounties, and as the business is
"run on shares or on the
eco OPERATIVE PRINCIPLE"
every man and boy on board knows just what
share is coming to him, whether, LIST. Directly
resulting from the sscatch'' of fish; or. Cd. In
directly resulting from the ''bounty,' which is
but another name tor prot Give duty know
that some high tariff men will say that | have
omitted one important element which previous
legislation has insisted on projecting, to-wit.:
Capital To this respond, or, rather, repeat:
that our government has offered any amount OF
money free of interest to all and any on the
easy condition that they shall become national
bankers. American capital now needs no pro-
| lection.
| The summing up of the above is this: Con-
| tnue your tariff for the protection OF Ameri-
can labor, but let the distribution OF results to
the operatives be effected exactly as it has been
| for the last century to the Massachusetts, fisher
men. JOHN u. DREW.
Elizabeth, N. j., Nov. -, 1875.
Now while we do not believe in the
principle OF taking bounties out of the
common taxes of the people and giving
them to any pursuit on any pretence,
nevertheless, it any SUCH ''encourage-
ment" is to be bestowed we would in
| finitely prefer that it be taken directly
and openly from the national treasury,
and divided among tue workmen en-
gagged in the pursuit to be benefited.
We would then know, LIST. how much is
taken: and, I'd, who gets it. The West
would feel hundred-iold more inclined
to best W its largess upon the poor work
men Of Fall River, for instance, who are
to day in absolute want, than upon thelI
lOrdiy EMPLOYERS with their fifty millions
OF capital.
What say you. Mr.. Drew, to direct
taxation, levied upon the basis of wealth
free trade with foreign countries; aut
national bonuses to the workingmen OF
such pursuits as suffer most from Eu O
pean competition? Then supplement
this with the national government ex
ercisng the exclusive right to create al
the money OF the country, gold, silver
copper or paper; and thus save interes
on that amount Of its debt and cores
ponding taxation to the people.