"Seth, dearest Seth," 'twas thus the father said,

"Thou know'st--ah! better none, for thou hast been

A pillow to this else forsaken head,

And made, if love could make, life's desert green--

The dangers I have braved, the ills unseen,

The weariness and woe, that, round my feet,

Lay even as fowlers' nets; and how the wrath

Of an offended God, for blossoms sweet

Strewed briars and thorns along each rugged path:--

Yet deem not that this Night no hope of Morning hath.

VI.

"On darkness Dawn will break; and, as the gloom

Of something all unfelt before, downweighs

My spirit, and forth-shadows coming doom,

Telling me this may be my last of days--

I call to mind the promise sweet (let praise

Be ever His, who from Him hath not thrust

The erring utterly!) again to raise

The penitential prostrate from the dust,

And be the help of all who put in Him their trust.

VII.

"Know then, that day, as sad from Eden's home

Of primal blessedness my steps were bent

Reluctant, through the weary world to roam,

And tears were with the morning's dewdrops blent,

That 'twas even then the Almighty did relent--

Saying, 'Though labour, pain, and peril be

Thy portion, yet a balsam sweet of scent

For man hath been provided, which shall free

From death his doom--yea, gain lost Eden back to thee.'

VIII.

"Although thy disobedience hath brought down

The wrath of justice; and the penalty

Are pangs by sickness brought, and misery's frown,

And toil--and, finally, that thou shalt die;

Yet will I help in thine extremity.

In the mid garden, as thou know'st, there grows

The Tree of Life, and thence shall preciously,

One day, an oil distil, of power to close

Sin's bleeding wounds, and soothe man's sorrows to repose.

IX.

"That promise hath been since a star of light,

When stumbled on the mountains dark my feet;

Hath cheered me in the visions of the night,

And made awaking even to labour sweet;

But now I feel the cycle is complete,

And horror weighs my spirit to the ground.

Haste to the guarded portals, now 'tis meet,

And learn if, even for me, may yet be found

That balsam for this else immedicable wound.

X.

"Thine errand to the Angel tell, and He

(Fear not, he knows that edict from the Throne)

Will guide thy footsteps to the Sacred Tree,

Which crowns the Garden's midmost space alone:

Thy father's utmost need to him make known;

And ere life's pulsing lamp be wasted quite,

Bring back this Oil of Mercy;--haste, be gone;

Haste thee, oh haste! for my uncertain sight,

Fitful, now deems it day, and now is quenched in night."

XI.

Seth heard; and like a swift, fond bird he flew,

By filial love impelled; yea, lessened dread

Even of the guardian Fiery Angel knew--

And through the flowery plains untiring sped--

And upwards, onwards to the river-head--

Where, high to heaven, the verdant barriers towered

Of Eden; when he sank--o'ercanopied

With sudden lightning, which around him showered,

And in its vivid womb the midday sun devoured.

XII.

And in his ear and on his heart was poured,

While there entranced he lay, an answer meet;

And, gradually, as Thought came back restored,

Uprising, forth he hied with homeward feet.

Sweet to the world's grey Father, oh how sweet

His coming on the nearest hill-top shone!

For now all feebly of his heart the beat

Returned; and of his voice the faltering tone,

Meeting the listener's ear, scarce made its purpose known.

XIII.

"Beloved father!" thus 'twas through his grief

Impassioned spake the son, "it may not be,

Alas! that, for thy misery's relief

Wells now the promised balsam from Life's Tree.

And must I say farewell--yea, part with thee?--

Droop not thus all despairing: breath may fail,

And days and years and ages onward flee

Ere that day dawn; but Thou its beams shalt hail,

And earth give up its dead, and Life o'er Death prevail.

XIV.

"Astounding are the visions I have seen:

The clouds took shapes, and turned them into trees

And men and mountains; and the lands between

Seemed cities, dun with crowds; and on the seas

Dwelt men, in arks careering with the breeze;

And shepherds drave their flocks along the plain;

And generations, smitten with disease,

Passed to the dust, on which tears fell like rain;

Yet fathers, in their sons, seemed age grown youth again!

XV.

"And the wide waters rose above the tops

Of the high hills, and all looked desolate--

Sea without shore! Anon appeared the slopes,

Glowing with blossoms, and a group elate

Eying an arch, bright with earth's future fate,

In heaven; and there were wanderings to and fro;

And, while beneath the multitudes await,

Tables, by God's own finger written, show

The Law by which He wills the world should walk below:

XVI.

"And ever passed before me clouds of change,

Whose figures rose, and brightened, and declined;

And what was now familiar straight grew strange,

And, melting into vapours, left behind

No trace; and, as to silence sank the wind,

Appeared in heaven a beautiful bright star,

Under whose beams an Infant lay reclined;

And all the wheels of nature ceased their jar,

And choiring angels hymned that Presence from afar.

XVII.

"And then, methought, upon a mountain stood

The Tree, from which, as shown to thee, should flow

That Oil of Mercy--but it looked like blood!

And, to all quarters of the earth below,

It streamed, until the desert ceased to know

Its curse of barrenness; the clouds away

Passed in their darkness from the noon; and lo!

Even backwards flowed that brightness to this day,

And, Father, showed me thee, encircled by its ray:--

XVIII.

"It showed me thee, from whom mankind had birth,

And myriads--countless as the sere leaves blown

From wintry woods--whose places on the earth,

Even from the burning to the icy zone,

Were to their sons' sons utterly unknown,

Awakening to a fresh, eternal morn:

Methinks I list that glad Hosannah's tone,

From shore to shore on all the breezes borne!

Then, Father, droop not thus, as utterly forlorn;

XIX.

"A long, long future, freaked with sin and strife,

The generations of the world must know;

But surely from that Tree--the Tree of Life--

A healing for the nations yet will flow,

As God foretold thee."

"Freely then I go,

For steadfast is the Lord his word to keep,"

Said Adam, as his breathing, faint and slow,

Ceased; and like zephyr dying on the deep,

In hope matured to faith, the First Man fell asleep!

THE VOICE OF NATURE.

'Twas in a lone sequestered dell,

And on a summer's eve;

The sun's last glances ling'ring fell,

As loath the spot to leave:

For never sun more blithely rose

To light a scene more fair--

Day never had so sweet a close,

Or night a charm so rare.

And I have climbed the rocky steep

That cuts the vale in twain,

And gaze adown the lonely sweep

That seeks the vale again.

I gaze on many a stately dome

Of high imperious name,

On many a low and humble home

Unglorified by fame:

But all are wrapt in deep repose,

And not a sound is there

To tell how swift the River flows

Between the banks of Care.

Unmarked, the stream of life glides on

To that Eternal Sea,

Where earthly sun hath never shone,

Nor aught of earth can be.

And this, to me, is as a spell

That binds me to the night--

That bathes each wild untrodden dell

In waves of mystic light.

There are who say this wondrous world

Is but the work of chance;

That earth, like some huge scroll, unfurled,

And wrought its own advance;

That senseless atoms blindly grew

Into a world of light;

That creatures no Creator knew--

That death's eternal night!

O Man, with aspirations high,

_Is_ this the end you crave?

Oh Man, with soul that cannot die,

And perish in the grave--

Are all the wonders prophets told

But wild delusive dreams?

And can it be that human mould

Is but the clay it seems?

Shall love and virtue live on earth,

And with the earth decay?

Shall faith, and hope, and stainless worth,

Pass like a dream away?

Come forth, thou false and subtle sage!

Creation read aright!

Cast off the gathering mists of age,

And clear thy clouded sight!

Throw down, throw down the guilty pen--

Break off the stubborn mask:

The creed thou dar'st assert to _men_,

Its truth of _Nature_ ask!

At morn, at noon, or sacred eve,

On land or on the sea,

The lightest sound thy step may leave

Shall breathe "Eternity!"

Come tread with me this dizzy height,

And, through this waste of air,

Gaze out upon the forms of night--

What is thine answer there?

The moonlit fields of waving corn,

That ripening harvests fill--

The bubbling springs where lakes are born,

To man subservient still--

All speak of HIS unbounded love

Who caused those streams to flow,

Who fed those fields from founts above,

And made the harvest grow.

And wheresoe'er the broad moon's rays

In matchless beauty fall,

They mirror forth to thoughtful gaze

The Hand that fashioned all.

There's not a plant upon the earth,

There's not a tree nor flower,

But bears the stamp of heavenly birth,

The proof of heavenly power.

The very leaf on which you tread

Was wrought with wondrous hand,--

A fragment of a volume dread

That speaks to every land:

A book unchanged from age to age--

The same since time began:

For Nature is a living page

That preaches God to man!

CHARLES WILTON.

BRITISH LABOUR AND FOREIGN RECIPROCITY.[29]

We hear a great deal at the present day, not only from pretended

philanthropists, but from well-meaning and conscientious people, about

the "Rights of Labour." In fact, the term has become so hackneyed

that very rarely is any popular speech delivered from a hustings, or

elsewhere, without its occurrence as a marked and leading principle,

which the speaker is determined to uphold.

But general terms are almost always susceptible of wide and

contradictory construction; and when we come to analyse this phrase,

"the rights of labour," and to consider the different interpretations

which have been passed upon it, we are forced to arrive at the

conclusion, that very few of those who use the words have any distinct

idea of the meaning which they ought to convey. One man considers "the

rights of labour" as identical with the operation of the maxim which

exhorts us "to buy in the cheapest, and to sell in the dearest market."

Another defines those rights to mean, "a fair day's wage for a fair

day's labour." And so the term is bandied about among us, repeated and

reiterated, until it has fairly lost the semblance of anything like

clear significance.

Meanwhile labour, in this country at least, is loudly calling for the

recognition of its rights, whatever those rights may be--not for the

shadow, but the substance; not for the name, but for the reality.

Labour in Ireland is struck down and paralysed--paralysed in its first

natural function and duty, the production of food, although millions

of acres, capable of yielding large returns of cereal produce, are

either unbroken or withdrawn from the tillage of the plough. Labour in

Scotland is becoming daily less remunerative; the northern population

is driven to emigrate by thousands, or to take refuge in the cities

and towns already redundantly supplied. Wages are decreasing in the

Lowlands; the poor-rate is multiplying fast; and the greatest source of

our wealth, the iron trade, is in a state of lamentable prostration.

Labour in England, by far the richest country of the three, is scarcely

better remunerated. In the rural districts, we hear of lowered

agricultural wages and growing discontent; in the towns, we are told of

mills closed or put upon short time; and, from the metropolis and the

larger cities, we have accounts of misery and destitution which, did

they reach us from missionaries in a heathen land, would fill our souls

with horror, and our hearts with righteous indignation.

To that call, proceeding from the labourers themselves, we cannot and

we dare not turn a deaf ear. We must listen to it, appalling as it

is; and examine into the cause of it, if we wish society to remain

as it has been. We must allow no preconceived ideas or impressions,

generated, perhaps, by the delusions of the last few years, or of many

years, to stand in our way when so frightful a calamity approaches as

the destitution and demoralisation of the working and producing classes

of this mighty empire; for we may as well expect a fabric to stand

after its foundations have been worn away, as suppose that a state can

exist without the support of those who are, in reality, the artificers

of its whole wealth and produce.

Would to heaven we could persuade men to throw aside, not for a time,

but for ever, their party notions, and, what is still more difficult,

their selfish interests; and induce them to look this great question

broadly and fairly in the face! They will not find it treated of in

their politico-economical treatises--those wretched collections of

sophisms compiled by the dullest and most blear-eyed of mankind, which

have been accepted in our day as monuments of transcendent wisdom.

They will not find the question mooted at all in the tomes of their

conceited statists: but if they step beyond that dreary range, and go

forth into the scenes of busy life, they will hear it discussed, always

eagerly, sometimes ably, sometimes incompetently, in the workshop, the

forge, the factory, the cottage, and the mine; and they may then form

some idea of the importance which the working-classes attach to that

much-abused term--"the Rights of Labour."

The mere general discussion of such a point implies that there is

something amiss, either in our social or in our commercial and

national system. With regard to the first, we think there can be no

argument. Unless some totally new evangel has been reserved for these

latter days, Socialism, as it is understood on the Continent, and

even partially among ourselves, is a wild and miserable delusion. It

has been tried, over and over again, under circumstances far more

favourable for its development than any which are likely to occur

again, and has invariably failed. Nay, the tendency of Liberalism

has been to sweep what modified Socialism might exist in a civilised

community away. Guilds, corporations, the chartered privileges of

burghs, have all vanished, or been reduced to shadows, and nothing

is now permitted to stand between the employer and the employed.

Socialism, through the law, can have no existence. It may, indeed,

lawfully rear and extend itself, if it can, on its own simple merits;

but, tried by that test, it simply resolves itself into a new form

of labour, liable to competition as before, and powerless to affect

prices, by which labour must ever be estimated.

Our firm and fixed belief is, that what are termed social grievances

are simply the consequence of a faulty or erroneous commercial and

national system. Vapid and superficial writers have talked a great deal

about what they are pleased to call the "_Laissez-faire_" tendencies

of modern statesmen--intending thereby to convey the impression that

Government is not active enough in its regulating and modifying

functions. According to our view, this is a most unfounded charge,

as against either the Government or the Legislature. We can discern

no lack of activity--no want of interference: on the contrary, we

are inclined to complain that changes are too common and rapid. This

is an evil to which governments, based on the popular representative

principle, are peculiarly liable; and the skill and prescience of the

modern statesman will be more conspicuously shown in restraining than

in encouraging the spirit of change. Why complain of want of activity,

or of culpable negligence, when the fact is before us that, during

the last few years, the whole of our commercial system has undergone

a radical change, which has affected, more or less, every source

of labour, every branch of industry, every application of capital

throughout the British empire? We have been the reverse of idle, both

at home and abroad. At home, not one single interest has escaped the

ordeal of experiment; abroad, we have subjected the colonies to forced

operations, from the effects of which it is exceedingly doubtful if

they can ever rally, at least under our tutelary care.

These alterations and changes were no doubt intended by their devisers

to be productive of good, but they may in reality have been productive

of evil. It is impossible to foretell with certainty the effect of any

sweeping change, even when the elements of calculation appear to be

within our own control. When they are beyond it--as must be the case

whenever we assume the co-operation of foreign independent powers,

without securing it by treaty--the uncertainty is still greater. It

cannot be denied that the late commercial changes proceeded upon

the assumption of reciprocity, and that this assumption has been

proved by experience to be utterly wrong. So far, then, they have

not answered the expectations of their framers. Free imports may be

advantageous or the reverse; but they have at all events failed in

producing reciprocity, and in converting foreign nations to our insular

commercial doctrines. It would be, to say the least of it, becoming in

those who advocate the maintenance of the present system to remember

this, and to mitigate the arrogance of their tone; for, undeniably, the

most important half of their prophecy has fallen to the ground.

Still it remains to be seen whether, in spite of the absence of the

promised reciprocity, we have derived any material advantage from

the change; and here men will differ according to their methods of

estimation. Those who are determined, at all hazards, to cry up the

advantages of Free Trade, will point to a balance-sheet of extended

exports as a sure index of the prosperity of the nation. Is it, after

all, a sure index? The whole amount of our national exports is but an

infinitesimal portion of the annual creation of wealth in the country;

it consists of the products of only a few branches of industry, and

represents the employment, not of the masses of the population, but

merely of a small section. Some of these branches, indeed the most

important of them, do not possess the first guarantee for stability and

endurance. _They depend for their existence entirely upon the supply of

foreign material._ But for the cotton-wool of America, the factories of

Lancashire would be shut up; and we shall presently have occasion to

inquire what likelihood there is of an extended, or even a continued

supply. Increased exports give us no account whatever of internal and

home consumption. During the last year, with a limited supply of raw

material, owing to a deficient crop, we have sent away more cotton

goods than before. What is the natural inference from that, as to the

capabilities of the home consumer?

Neither is it fair to select any two or three branches of industry

which may be flourishing, and to parade these as an index of the

prosperity of the whole country. If Free-Trade had not been productive

of advantage to _some_ classes, it would not have been tolerated so

long. We know perfectly well, and are prepared to admit, that at this

moment some trades are doing well; _but then they are thriving at the

expense of the great body of the community_. Such, for example, is

the linen-trade of Dundee, supported at the present time by a large

demand from abroad for coarse textures, the origin of which demand

may be traced to the Free-Trade measures. That cheap provisions,

owing to the imports from abroad, should be a great advantage to the

operatives engaged in this kind of manufacture, will admit of no doubt;

but how does that affect the general prosperity of the nation? Those

operatives work for the foreigner, and are fed by the foreigner. Their

contributions to the national revenue, through the customs' duties

and excise, cannot be taken as an equivalent for their decreased

consumption of British agricultural produce; yet how often is such

an instance as this paraded as a proof of general prosperity! After

all, it is, perhaps, the only branch of importance which is prospering

at the present time. The woollen trade has been steady, but not more

profitable than before. The cotton trade we know to be depressed; and

the iron trade, one of our most valuable staples, because the raw

materials of the coal and ore, as well as the manufactured article, are

of British production, is at present worse than unprofitable.

We state these things, not as proofs of the inefficacy of Free Trade,

but simply as tending to show that no sound inferences as to the

general prosperity of the country can be drawn from the fact that

exports have increased. The only criterion is, and must be, the

condition of the working classes. We have already pointed out the vast

depreciation of labour, and the want of employment which is visible

over the three kingdoms; and we have alluded to the two most formidable

symptoms--pauperism and extended emigration. How these unchallenged and

admitted facts are reconcilable with the idea of general prosperity, it

remains for our philosophers to show.

To what, then, is this owing? We can only attribute it to one

cause--the total disregard of the interests of the British producer.

Politicians may attempt, as they have heretofore done, to explain

away evident and startling facts on trivial and insufficient grounds;

journalists may affect to sneer at the representations of the

sufferers, and to turn their complaints into derision; economists may

offer to prove the fitness of existing circumstances, upon certain

immutable laws of which they were the sole discoverers; demagogues may

strive to divert attention from the lamentable consequences of their

misdeeds by attacking other institutions; but the fact of general

depression and distress remains uncontroverted and incapable of

denial; and so it will remain until the national policy is altered.

It is now precisely twelve months ago since we drew the attention

of the public to the actual state of British agriculture under the

operation of Free-Trade prices. We then, and in subsequent articles,

quoted the deliberate opinion of those who favoured and carried the

repeal of the Corn Laws, as to what remunerative prices in reality

were; we called as witnesses the late Sir Robert Peel, Mr Wilson,

M.P. for Westbury, and others--and showed that, according to their

judgment, not that of Protectionists, wheat could not be grown with a

profit in this country unless it commanded in the market from 12s. to

16s. more per quarter than was at that time the average of England.

We were told in reply, by our antagonists, that the depression was

merely accidental. Hardly one of them ventured to say that they had

anticipated such a result, or that such a result was desirable: on

the contrary, the farmers of this country were told to believe that

the low prices current were simply the consequences of an exuberant

harvest, combined with the first impulse of new importation, and that,

from sheer want of material, the latter would speedily subside. At the

close of another year, and after another harvest materially differing

in quality, we find prices actually lower than they were at this time

twelvemonths. Nor is this the case with grain alone, but with cattle:

thus demonstrating how hopeless is the condition of the British farmer

under the operation of the present law.

That the impending ruin of the agriculturists, who constitute by

far the most important body of British producers, and therefore of

consumers in the home market, would speedily react upon every branch

of industry, we foresaw and foretold; and the result is now before us,

evident in each day's reiterated tale of distress.

Notwithstanding all this, we are assured in certain quarters, that at

every hazard the experiment must go on; that, having once embarked in

a career, however dangerous, we must persevere to the last; and that

protection to native industry is inconsistent with the genius of a free

and enlightened people.

Let us see whether it be so. And, as to judge of this question we must

look elsewhere than to Britain, let us try to discover the extent to

which the principles of Free Trade are acknowledged in other lands,

where freedom, both of sentiment and action, is claimed quite as

enthusiastically as in our own. It is worth while knowing how far our

opinions on this commercial subject have been responded to, not by

despotic states, wherein the popular voice might be suppressed, but

by the most liberal and enterprising countries, which, we were told,

waited only for our example to engage in the work of reciprocity.

Among these we are surely entitled to reckon Switzerland and

Germany--including in the latter denomination that powerful

confederacy, the Zollverein, which embraces the Hanseatic towns. These

are Protectionist--determined at all hazards to maintain their doctrine

of fostering native industry, and meeting us, not with reciprocity,

but with augmented customs' duties. The following extracts from the

last modifications of the general tariff of the Zollverein may be

instructive:--

MODIFICATIONS OF THE GENERAL TARIFF OF THE ZOLLVEREIN.

IMPORT DUTIES ON, OLD DUTY. NEW DUTY.

Cotton twist, unbleached, per cwt., £0 6 0 0 9 0

Iron, raw, do. (Free.) 0 1 0

" pig, rails and raw, cast and refined steel, 0 3 0 0 4 6

Linen, viz.--

Yarn, raw, per do. 0 0 6 0 6 0

" bleached or dyed, 0 3 0 0 15 0

" boiled with ashes, 0 1 6 0 9 0

Thread, 0 6 0 0 12 0

Manufactures, raw, 0 6 0 0 12 0

" bleached, &c., 1 13 0 3 0 0

Woollen manufactures, 4 10 0 7 10 0

The law which gave a tariff to Switzerland on the 30th of June 1849,

commences by enacting "that all the articles which are imported into

Switzerland, are, with certain exceptions, specified by the present

law, submitted to an import duty," and proceeds to impose duties of

various kinds on all conceivable articles of importation. So far from

being in favour of Free Trade, the Swiss nation is distinctly opposed

to it; because, as in France, the people engaged in those important

branches of industry are fully alive to their interest, and exercise

the power they possess to render the revenue laws subservient to it.

Next comes France, upon the example of which country, and its

reciprocal sentiments, Mr Cobden almost perilled his case, when he

undertook his crusade to stir up that enthusiasm for free imports

which, according to his view, lay burning at the heart of every

people throughout the civilised globe. We have reason to know that

the accounts of his reception in France, which appeared in many of

the London journals, were absurdly exaggerated; and that, beyond the

circle of that small and despised clique of whom M. Bastiat is or

was the head, it was the reverse of flattering, until he arrived at

Bordeaux. There, indeed, the winegrowers of the Gironde prepared an

ovation for the statesman who had opened--or rather who, it was hoped,

would open--the ports of England to the produce of their generous

vintage. But when, in answer to one of his entertainers, more practical

or suspicious than the rest, the hero of the League was compelled

to avow his opinion that wine was a fair subject for taxation, the

disheartening announcement was made that, if the wine duties were not

repealed, Bordeaux did not interest itself at all in the question of

Free Trade. Nor can we at this moment discover a country visited by

Mr Cobden, whatever may be its form of government, that has fulfilled

those "confident expectations" which he announced with such singular

energy. It cannot be said that democracy has made no progress in Europe

since 1846. The gallant and mighty people of France are now in full

enjoyment of all the rights of man, and have only to indicate their

will to their representative governors, and it is obeyed. Have, then,

free imports followed in the train of liberty? Englishmen are not

likely soon to forget how the enfranchised people of France first made

use of their newly acquired power; and, though with steadier and more

regular action, the great French Republic has held on its protective

course up to the recent opening of its Chamber, heedless alike of

the lectures of M. Bastiat, or the example of England. Indeed, there

appears to be a tacit agreement on this one subject among all statesmen

and all parties. Once, it is true, the eloquent though unsuccessful

voice of M. de Lamartine was heard prophesying, in mystical phrase, the

speedy triumph of brotherhood and interchange; but, by some association

of ideas which we do not pretend to understand, the Free-trader of

Meudon shortly became chief of that government which established the

communist National Workshops. We have waited in vain to hear from any

statesman of note a criticism on the President's most Protectionist

Message, or any decided expression of dissent; and why is this? Because

the French people, the small proprietors, the peasantry, the workmen

of Lyons and Mulhausen, the manufacturers "of woollen[30] cloths and

tissues, of cotton cloths, leather, earthenware, glass, and objects of

luxury, have found ready and advantageous markets" under the existing

system, and are prepared to defend Protection to the last drop of their

blood. The rulers of such a people know, that to deprive their labour

of Protection is but to inaugurate the reign of Communism, to establish

anarchy, and to insure their own immediate downfall.

So much for the Liberal states of Europe. Let us next turn to America,

wherein no corrupt aristocracy sheds its baneful influence upon

society; where an unsectarian and generous instruction is given by

the State to all; where no standing army is at hand, first to inflame,

and then to gratify the unwise lust of conquest; where the people are

really the source of power, and a free press enlightens them as to its

proper exercise. There surely, if anywhere, we shall find political

economic truth enshrined in the heart and tariff of the nation, and

the pestilent heresies of Protection given up to the ridicule of a

wise and discerning community. A glance at the present tariff, and an

examination into the relations between "the plough, the loom, and the

anvil," on the other side of the Atlantic, may consequently afford some

useful information to us who are now subjected to a policy which is

sacrificing the first to the two other members of that great industrial

triad. Mr Carey, the well-known statistical writer of America, has,

in _The Harmony of Interests_, supplied us with ample materials for

conducting such an inquiry; and we can safely recommend his remarkable

work to all who wish to investigate the causes of the progress and

decline of industrial communities.

Governor Pownell in 1769, arguing in the House of Commons against

taxing our North American provinces, had the prophetic wisdom to

foresee--what some few American politicians of the present day, and

the leaders of our own Manchester school do not yet seem rightly to

comprehend--that the time must inevitably come when America would

cease to depend upon English industry for manufactured goods. "They

will abominate," said he, addressing himself to the people of England,

"as sincerely as now they love you; and if they do, they have within

themselves everything requisite to the food, raiment, or dwelling of

mankind; they have no need of your commerce." A dim perception of this

truth has at last impelled the Manchester Chamber of Commerce--the

oligarchy by whom the destinies of this empire are swayed at the

present time--to despatch a Commissioner to India in search of

cotton-growing districts, whence they may obtain certain supplies

of the raw material, and, we hope, of markets for the manufactured

products thereof; for to us it is evident, that the "model republic" is

henceforth to be relied on for neither the one nor the other.

Is this a bold or unauthorised assertion? Let us see. Who has forgotten

the prophecies, or rather the confident assumption, of that entire and

unlimited reciprocity which was to prevail between Great Britain and

America, the moment after the former power announced her intention of

admitting free of import duties the produce of the latter? Certainly

we have not, though the memories of many people in Manchester and the

adjacent parts may be more fallacious. In common fairness we must allow

that, so far as argument could be drawn from mere hypothesis, the

advocates of Free Trade were entitled to make the most of America. No

other country could afford them so plausible a plea for reciprocity.

Through absolute necessity, the cotton manufacturers of Great Britain

depended upon America for their yearly supply of raw material. America

hitherto had taken a large proportion of our manufactured goods--being

content that the cotton, before it reached her in a textile fabric,

should twice cross the waters of the Atlantic; and she also was a large

customer for our coal, our iron, and other commodities. The terms

were still unequal, at least for endurance. Britain could not do--at

least Manchester and its dependencies could not--without the supply of

cotton wool; but how if America, by rearing factories and furnaces,

could contrive to do without either our calicoes, or our coal, or our

iron? For a long time it was supposed that this was impossible--that

the Americans had not sufficient capital to embark in manufacturing

pursuits--and that nature had denied them those plentiful stores

of coal and iron which are to be found in the British islands. The

following tables, brought down to the latest accessible dates, will

demonstrate the fallacy of that idea:--

BALES OF COTTON WORKED UP IN THE UNITED STATES.

Northern Manufactures. Southern Manufactures.

1843-44 347,000 None.

1844-45 389,000 None.

1845-46 423,000 30,000

1846-47 428,000 40,000

1847-48 531,000 75,000

1848-49 518,000 100,000

The annual production of American coal and iron is as follows:--

Coal. Iron.

1821 to 1829, average tons, 37,000 90,000

1830 142,000 165,000

1832 318,000 210,000

1834 451,000 210,000

1835 to 1841, average, 250,000

1837 881,000

1842 1,108,000

1844 1,621,000 380,000

1846 2,343,000 765,000

1848 3,089,000 800,000

In the increase here exhibited lies the reason why the League made

such a desperate, and unfortunately successful, effort to overthrow

the whole protective system of Great Britain; and also the reason why

America refuses reciprocity. The Manchester men began to see--there

being no want of shrewdness among them when their own individual

interests were concerned--that their game had not only become

hazardous, but must ere long prove desperate. They had already many

rivals on the continent of Europe, who were, equally with themselves,

customers to the Americans for cotton wool, and who fenced themselves

against the introduction of the Manchester fabric by hostile tariffs.

That, however, was nothing in comparison to the appalling fact, that

the very people who found the raw material were actually in possession

of the means of spinning it themselves, and seemed bent on doing so by

their progress from year to year! In vain did our manufacturers and

chambers of commerce try to demonstrate to the Yankees that they were

not only committing a foolish but a most unnatural action--in vain did

they assert, as a fundamental doctrine of ethics, that Britain ought

to have the manufacturing monopoly of the world; and as a fundamental

principle of economy, that it was far more for the advantage of a

nation which produced the raw material to forego its manufacture, than

to rear up within itself a new and lucrative branch of industry. Their

ethics and their economy were alike scouted; and no wonder, for both

propositions were repugnant to common sense, to ascertained results,

and to reason. If it is indeed a law of economy that a nation which

produces the raw article ought to confine itself to that production,

and not to undertake the finishing and manufacturing process--then,

by the same reasoning which was attempted to be palmed off upon the

Americans, our wool, instead of being made up at Leeds or Bradford,

should be straightway shipped off to Saxony; and the product of our

iron mines transported to Sweden, there to undergo the necessary

process of smelting. It is perhaps the strangest feature of the age in

which we live, that such absolute and self-evident nonsense as this

should not only have been uttered on platforms, and received with

applause by crowds of congregated merchants, but have been gravely set

forth in our public journals as a doctrine of the highest value.

There is, however, no such thing as a universal code of political

economy. The Americans listened and laughed, and ran up their factories

faster than ever, and ransacked the bowels of the earth for their

inestimable strata of minerals, believing with a proper faith that

they would not have been placed there unless it was intended that man

should convert them to his use. Our cotton manufacturers, being thus

situated, had some reason to despond. The nation that gave them their

raw material, and that was also their best customer for fabrics,

seemed on the very point of deserting them in both ways. True, a much

greater quantity of cotton than was ever yet grown might be raised in

America, but then the demand, though great in itself, has limits; and

an unusually large crop has the effect of extinguishing profit to the

grower. This will be better understood by the American estimate of the

value of crops:--

Crop. Amount of Product, lbs. Estimated Value, dols.

1844 812,000,000 65,772,000

1845 958,000,000 56,000,000

1847 711,000,000 72,000,000

1848 1,100,000,000 60,000,000

The estimate for the latter year, says Mr Carey, was that made at New

Orleans before the occurrence of the frosts and freshets, which, we

presume, raised the price of cotton wool. We see, however, from this,

that the small yield of 1847 was infinitely more profitable to the

grower than the large yield of 1845, and this will explain the reason

why the culture of cotton cannot be indefinitely extended. It therefore

became necessary, at all hazards, if cotton-spinning in Britain was to

be maintained in its former palmy state, that some further concession

should be made to America, to bribe her, since she could not be forced

to abstain from the encouragement of her own manufactures.

That bribe was the removal of the import duties on grain and provisions

to Great Britain. Let the secret instigators of the movement--the men

who organised the machinery of the League--disguise the fact as they

may, that, and that alone, was the actual cause of our lowered tariffs

and the ultimate repeal of the corn-laws. The Manchester Chamber

hoped--most vainly, as it now appears--that, by giving a new stimulus

to agriculture in America, at the expense of the vast body of British

producers, they could at least ward off the evil day when the American

manufacturer should be able to annihilate their trade, by depriving

them of the enormous profits which they realised on the conversion

of the raw material into yarn. What these profits were will appear

from the fact that the price of cotton wool at Liverpool, in 1843-4,

was 6d., whilst twist was selling at 10-1/4d.; and that in 1844-5,

the price of wool having fallen to 4d., the market value of twist was

11-3/4d. Hitherto the prices, as fixed in England, have regulated those

of the world.

That the late Sir Robert Peel, himself a scion of the cotton interest,

should have been swayed by such considerations, is not, perhaps,

remarkable; but that any portion of the landed gentry, of the producers

for the home market, the labourers and the mechanics of Great Britain,

should have allowed themselves to be deceived by the idea, that

diminished or depreciated production could possibly tend either to

their individual or to the national advantage, will hereafter be matter

of marvel. We who know the amount of artifice and misrepresentation

which was used, and who never can forget the guilty haste with which

the disastrous measure was hurried through both Houses of Parliament,

without giving to the nation an opportunity of expressing its

deliberate opinion, feel, and have felt, less surprise than sorrow at

the event. With British feeling, however, we have at present nothing

to do; our object is to trace the effect which our relaxation has

exercised upon American policy.

The American tariff of 1846, denounced by the Protectionists of the

States as injurious to home interests, and supported by the Free-Trade

party, imposes, among others, the following duties:--

Duty per

Centum.

Bottles, 30

Bread, 20

Candles, 20

Cheese, 30

Coal, 30

Cotton goods, (cord, gimps, }

galloons, &c.,) } 30

... thread, twist, yarn, &c., 25

... caps, leggins, stockings,}

&c., } 20

Duck, 20

Flax, 15

Flour and meal, 20

Grain, 20

Iron, 30

Lead, 20

Leather, 20

Provisions, 20

Soap, 30

Spirits, 100

Sugar, 30

Tobacco, unmanufactured, 30

... manufactured, 40

Wool, 30

These duties are somewhat lower, though not materially so, than the

former tariff of 1842; but they certainly offer no inconsiderable

amount of protection to home industry and produce. We have already seen

the progress which has been made by the American cotton manufacturers,

iron-masters, and miners; and it is now quite evident that, unless

that progress is checked--which it only can be by the will of the

Americans--our exports to that quarter must naturally decline. This is

not our anticipation merely; it has been expressed openly and anxiously

in the columns of the Free-Trade journals. In the iron districts of

Scotland and Staffordshire, the apprehension that henceforward the

American market will be generally closed against them, is, we know,

very prevalent; and the following extract from the report of the

_Morning Chronicle_, (April 11, 1850,) on the condition and prospects

of the iron trade in the spring of 1850, applies exactly to the opening

of 1851:--

"The present state of our commercial negotiations with the

United States, particularly in relation to the exportation

of iron from this country, promises greatly to aggravate

existing evils. It is feared by many largely interested in

the iron manufacture of this neighbourhood, that the efforts

of Sir Henry Bulwer at Washington to obtain a modification

of the American tariff, with respect more especially to the

importation of iron, will prove abortive for some time to come.

Our exports of iron from South Staffordshire are said to be

already considerably reduced; and should our Transatlantic

friends continue, as they threaten, their restrictive

commercial policy, business in these important manufacturing

districts must of necessity be still more limited than it is at

the present moment."

What the prospects are of future relaxation may be gathered from the

following extract from the message of President Fillmore to Congress,

which has reached us whilst writing this article. We observe that the

_Times_ is bitterly chagrined to find that the President "has stated

and commended the false doctrine of Protection." Was it to be expected

that he would have done otherwise, seeing that the vast majority of the

American public are thoroughly imbued with the same doctrines, however

false and heretical they may appear in the eyes of Manchester?

"All experience has demonstrated the wisdom and policy

of raising a large portion of revenue for the support of

Government from duties on goods imported. The power to lay

these duties is unquestionable, and its chief object, of

course, is to replenish the Treasury. But if, in doing this, an

incidental advantage may be gained by encouraging the industry

of our own citizens, it is our duty to avail ourselves of that

advantage.

"A duty laid upon an article which cannot be produced in

this country, such as tea or coffee--adds to the cost of the

article, and is chiefly or wholly paid by the consumers. But a

duty laid upon an article which may be produced here stimulates

the skill and industry of our own country to produce the same

article, which is brought into the market in competition with

the foreign article, and the importer is thus compelled to

reduce his price to that at which the domestic article can be

sold, thereby throwing a part of the duty upon the producer of

the foreign article. The continuance of this process creates

the skill, and invites the capital, which finally enable us

to produce the article much cheaper than it could have been

procured from abroad, thereby benefiting both the producer

and the consumer at home. The consequence of this is, that

the artisan and the agriculturist are brought together; each

affords a ready market for the produce of the other, the whole

country becomes prosperous, and the ability to produce every

necessary of life renders us independent in war as well as in

peace.

"A high tariff can never be permanent. It will cause

dissatisfaction and will be changed. It excludes competition,

and thereby invites the investment of capital in manufactures

to such excess, that when changed it brings distress,

bankruptcy, and ruin upon all who have been misled by its

faithless protection. What the manufacturer wants is uniformity

and permanency, that he may feel a confidence that he is not

to be ruined by sudden changes. But, to make a tariff uniform

and permanent, it is not only necessary that the law should not

be altered, but that the duty should not fluctuate. To effect

this, all duties should be specific, wherever the nature of

the article is such as to admit of it. _Ad valorem_ duties

fluctuate with the price, and offer strong temptations to fraud

and perjury.

"Specific duties, on the contrary, are equal and uniform in

all ports and at all times, and offer a strong inducement to

the importer to bring the best article, as he pays no more

duty upon that than upon one of inferior quality. I therefore

strongly recommend a modification of the present tariff,

which has prostrated some of our most important and necessary

manufactures, and that specific duties be imposed sufficient

to raise the requisite revenue, making such discrimination

in favour of the industrial pursuits of our country as

to encourage home production without excluding foreign

competition. It is also important that an unfortunate provision

in the present tariff, which imposes a much higher duty upon

the raw material that enters into our manufactures than upon

the manufactured article, should be remedied."

So that America, the great democratic state on which we relied for

reciprocity, is going ahead, not, as our Free-Traders foretold, in

their direction, but precisely on the opposite tack.

What is there wonderful in this? Was it likely that a country,

possessing within itself the raw material in abundance, and, so far

as cotton was concerned, having a virtual monopoly of its growth,

should for ever refuse to avail itself of its natural advantages,

and to stimulate agriculture by giving it that enormous increment

of consumption which must arise from the establishment of domestic

manufactures? Does not common sense show us that, the nearer the

point of exchange can be brought to the exchanging parties, the more

advantageous and profitable to both parties must that interchange

necessarily become? Unquestionably it is for the interest of the

American planter to have the manufactory brought as close as possible

to his plantation, seeing that thereby he would avoid the enormous

charges which he bears at present, both in land carriage and

freightage--charges which, of themselves, go a great way towards the

annihilation of his profit. Add to this that those charges on the raw

material necessarily enhance the price of the fabric when converted by

British machinery, and again transported to America, and it must become

evident to every one how largely the American planter is interested in

the foundation and success of American manufactures. The interest of

the agriculturist is equally great. For him a steady market at his own

door, such as extended manufactures alone can give, is the readiest and

most certain source of wealth and prosperity. What he wants is regular

consumption, and the nearer the customers can be found, the greater

will be the demand, and the more profitable the supply.

We need not, however, argue a matter which has been already settled on

the other side of the Atlantic. It suffices us to know that, in all

human probability, America will persevere as she has begun, taking

every advantage which we are foolish enough to give her, and yet

adhering to her system of protecting domestic labour, and of riveting

more closely than before all branches of industry by the bonds of

mutual interest. Such clear, distinct, and philosophic principles

as are enunciated by a late American writer make us blush for the

confused, absurd, and contradictory jargon which of late years has been

proffered to the world, with so much parade, as the infallible dicta of

British political economy.

"A great error exists in the impression now very commonly

entertained in regard to national division of labour, and

which owes its origin to the English school of political

economists, whose system is throughout based upon the idea of

making England 'the workshop of the world,' than which nothing

could be less natural. By that school it is taught that some

nations are fitted for manufactures and others for the labours

of agriculture; and that the latter are largely benefited by

being compelled to employ themselves in the one pursuit, making

all their exchanges at a distance, thus contributing their

share to the maintenance of the system of 'ships, colonies,

and commerce.' The whole basis of their system is _conversion_

and _exchange_, and not production, yet neither makes any

addition to the amount of things to be exchanged. It is the

great boast of their system that the exchangers are so numerous

and the producers so few; and the more rapid the increase in

the proportion which the former bear to the latter, the more

rapid is supposed to be the advance towards perfect prosperity.

Converters and exchangers, however, must live, and they must

live out of the labour of others; and if three, five, or ten

persons are to live on the product of one, it must follow that

all will obtain but a small allowance of the necessaries and

comforts of life, as is seen to be the case. The agricultural

labourer of England often receives but eight shillings a-week,

being the price of a bushel and a half of wheat.

"Were it asserted that some nations were fitted to be growers

of wheat and others grinders of it, or that some were fitted

for cutting down trees, and others for sawing them into lumber,

it would be regarded as the height of absurdity, yet it would

not be more absurd than that which is daily asserted in regard

to the conversion of cotton into cloth, and implicitly believed

by tens of thousands even of our countrymen. The loom is as

appropriate and necessary an aid to the labours of the planter

as is the grist-mill to those of the farmer. The furnace is

as necessary and as appropriate an aid to the labours of

both planter and farmer as is the saw-mill; and those who

are compelled to dispense with the proximity of the producer

of iron labour are subjected to as much disadvantage as are

those who are unable to obtain the aid of the saw-mill and the

miller. The loom and the anvil are, like the plough and the

harrow, but small machines, naturally attracted by the great

machine, the earth; and when so attracted all work together in

harmony, and men become rich, and prosperous, and happy. When,

on the contrary, from any disturbing cause, the attraction is

in the opposite direction, and the small machines are enabled

to compel the products of the great machine to follow them,

the land invariably becomes poor, and men become poor and

miserable, as is the case with Ireland."

In short, the American system is, to stimulate production by creating

a ready market at home, and, as the best means of creating that

market, to encourage the conversion of the raw material within the

United States, by laying on a protective duty on articles of foreign

manufacture. The British system now is, to discourage home production,

and to sacrifice everything for the desperate chance of maintaining an

unnatural and fortuitous monopoly of conversion, not of our own raw

material only, but of that of other countries. In the attempt to secure

this exceedingly precarious advantage--which, be it remembered, does

not conduce to the prosperity of the great majority of the nation--our

rulers and politicians have deliberately resolved that agriculture

shall be rendered unprofitable; and that the bulk of our artisans,

who can look to the home market only, shall henceforward be left

unprotected from the competition of the whole world. It needs little

sagacity to predict which system is based upon sound principles; or

which, being so based, must ultimately prevail. Our economists never

seem to regard the body of British producers (who, as a class, are very

slightly interested in the matter of exports) in the light of important

consumers. If they did so, they could not, unless smitten by judicial

blindness, fail to perceive that, by crippling their means, and

displacing their labour, they are in effect ruining the home market,

upon which, notoriously, two-thirds even of the converters depend. The

stability of every state must depend upon its production, not upon its

powers of conversion. The one is real and permanent, the other liable

to be disturbed and annihilated by many external causes. A country

which produces largely, even though it may not have within it the means

of adequate conversion, is always in a healthy state. Not only the

power, but the actual source of wealth is there; and, as years roll on,

and capital accumulates, the subsidiary process of conversion becomes

more and more developed, not to the injury of the producer--but to his

great and even incalculable advantage.

The natural power of the production of Great Britain, as compared

with other states, is not very high. Its insular position, and the

variableness of its climate, renders the quality of our harvests

uncertain; but that uncertainty is perhaps compensated, on the average,

by our superior agriculture, and the vast pains, labour, and capital

which have been expended on the tillage of our land. Our meadows,

downs, and hill pastures have, however, been most valuable to us in

furnishing a better quality of wool than can elsewhere be obtained in

Europe--an advantage which our forefathers perceived and wisely availed

themselves of--for, as early as the reign of Edward III., manufacturers

from Hainault were brought into this country by the advice of Queen

Philippa, and laid the foundation of the most prosperous, healthy,

and legitimate trade which we possess. Ever since, the woollen

manufacture has been inseparably connected with the interests of the

British soil. Few luxuries, or even such articles of luxury as are

now considered necessaries, can be grown in Great Britain. For wine

our climate is unsuited; but there is nothing whatever to prevent

us--except a system which calls itself, though it is not, Free

Trade--from growing the coarser kinds of tobacco, and from establishing

manufactories of sugar from beet-root. Our stock of minerals is

great--almost inexhaustible--and to this fact we must look for our

singular pre-eminence during so many years in Europe. Our unlimited

supply of coal and iron gave us an advantage which no other European

nation possessed--it was, in fact, virtually a monopoly--and upon

that we built our claim to become the workshop of the world. Nor was

the claim in any degree a preposterous one. That singular monopoly of

minerals--for such it seemed--gave us the actual power, if judiciously

used, of controlling the process of conversion, not only here, but

elsewhere throughout the globe. Manual labour, it mattered not what was

the distance, had no chance at all against the triumphs of machinery;

and hence our commerce extended itself far and wide, to savage as

well as civilised nations, and our arms were used to force a market

where it could not otherwise be obtained. This, if not our strength,

was undoubtedly the cause of our supremacy, and even of our extended

colonisation; and as we obtained command of a raw material of foreign

growth, so did we adapt our machinery to convert it into fabrics for

the world.

It is by no means a pleasant matter to recur to certain particulars in

our commercial and manufacturing history. We found the East Indies in

the possession of a considerable manufacture of cotton, the producer

and the converter being there reciprocally dependant. _That_ we have

stopped, the object being to compel the Hindustani to receive his

clothing direct from Manchester. And we have succeeded so far that,

last year, our exports to Hindostan were so great, that, by lumping

them in the general account, our statists were able to furnish what

appeared to many a convincing argument in favour of Free Trade, though

in reality it had nothing to do with that question. _But at what

cost_ have these operations been made on India? Simply at this, that,

whilst destroying the native manufacture, we have also curtailed the

production of the raw material. Of the rapid diminution in its amount

let the following figures tell:--

IMPORT OF COTTON FROM INDIA TO ENGLAND.

1844 88,000,000 lbs.

1845 58,000,000 "

1846 34,000,000 "

But raw material we must have, else our machinery is of no use.

We have had so long a monopoly of cotton-spinning that we have

accustomed ourselves, spite of nature, and spite of fact, to believe

that our whole destiny was that of cotton-spinning. We ignore all

history in favour of that particular shrub; and, pinning our faith

to export tables--concocted by the weakest and most contemptible of

charlatans--we make no hesitation in avowing that the prosperity and

destiny of Great Britain is indissolubly entwined with our monopoly

of cotton twist! That would be simply laughable, if we had not

absolutely legislated on, and committed ourselves to that theory. We

stand just now, in the face both of Europe and America--we know not

whether we ought to exclude the other quarters of the globe--in the

most ridiculous possible position. Our economists are permitted to say

to them--"Send us your raw material, and we shall be proud and happy

to work it up for you. Don't be at the pains or the cost of rearing

manufactories for yourselves. That would entail upon you, not only a

great deal of trouble, but a vast expenditure of capital, which you

had much better lay out in improving your extra soil, and in bringing

it to good cultivation. We can promise you a ready market here.

Our proprietors and farmers are unquestionably heavily burdened by

taxation, but they must submit to the popular will; or, if they choose

to dissent, they may sell off their stock and emigrate to your country,

where doubtless they will prove valuable acquisitions. You, we are

well aware, are able to provide us with food cheaper than they can do

it; and cheapness is all we look to. We shall even do more for you. We

agree to admit to our market, at merely nominal duties, all your small

articles of manufacture. You may undersell and annihilate, if you can,

our glovers, hatters, shoemakers, glass-blowers, and fifty others--only

do not interfere with the larger branches, and, above all, do not touch

our monopoly of cotton."

It is now obvious, and we believe generally acknowledged by those

who have most practical knowledge of the subject, that the monopoly

is broken up. America is seriously addressing herself to the task of

applying her lately discovered stores of coal and iron to practical

use; and, as we shall presently have occasion to show, she has no need

to train workmen for that purpose, since the great emigration from

this country supplies her with practised hands. That her rivalry will

be of the most formidable description there can be no matter of doubt,

for she will still be able to retain command of the raw material, and,

retaining that, to regulate the price of cotton and cotton goods at

New Orleans, instead of permitting Liverpool or Manchester to dictate

authoritatively to the world. Whether the Manchester Chamber, finding

their last move utterly abortive in securing monopoly, may succeed

in rearing up plantations of cotton elsewhere than in America, is a

point upon which we cannot speak with any degree of certainty. That

they are alarmed, and deeply alarmed, at the prospect before them is

evident, not only from the representations made in Parliament, and the

desponding tone of their organs, but from the experiments which they

have instituted for the purpose of ascertaining whether some other

vegetable product may not be used as a substitute for cotton. Even if

they were successful in one or other, or in both of their inquiries,

it seems clear to us that they never can hope to regain their former

ascendency. They must be exposed to the competition not only of

America, but of the Confederation of the Zollverein, which now receives

from the United States a large and increasing supply of raw material.

The following table will show the extreme rapidity in the growth of

that consumption:--

Average from

1836. 1837 to 1841. 1843. 1845.

Raw cotton, quintals, }

exported from America } 152,364. 200,093. 306,731. 443,887.

to the Zollverein, }

Although it never can be agreeable to know that any important branch of

trade in this country is retrograding or falling into decay, we cannot

affect to feel much sympathy with the cotton manufacturers, and that

for several reasons. In the first place, their trade was a factitious

one, not founded upon or tending in any degree to promote the real

production of Great Britain, but avowedly rendering us dependant to a

dangerous degree upon foreign supplies. Secondly, there can be no doubt

that our demand for the raw material has had the effect of perpetuating

slavery in the southern states of America. And, lastly, we cannot

forget that we owe all our present difficulties to the machinations

of men connected with the cotton manufacture. The doctrine that the

strength of Britain lay in its powers of conversion, not in its powers

of production, originated with them; and in their selfish eagerness

to maintain a monopoly, even then in a precarious position, they made

no scruple of sacrificing every interest which stood in their way.

Our readers cannot fall to recollect the arguments which were employed

by the champions and leaders of the League. America, whether as an

example or an ally, was never out of their mouths. We were to spin for

America, weave for America, do everything in short for her which the

power of machinery could achieve. America, on the other hand, was to

forego all idea of interfering with our industrial pursuits, in the way

of encouraging her own children to become manufacturing rivals, and

was to apply herself solely to the production of raw material, cotton,

corn and provisions, wherewith the whole of us were to be fed. Our

statesmen acted on this faith, assured us that we had but to show the

example, and reciprocity must immediately be established, and opened

the British ports without any condition whatever. The consequence

was an influx of corn and provisions far greater than they expected,

which at once annihilated agricultural profits in Great Britain, and

is rapidly annihilating agriculture itself in Ireland. We were told to

take comfort, because the very amount of the importations showed that

it could not be continued; and yet it is continued up to the present

day, and prices remain at a point which, even according to the estimate

of the Free-traders, is not only unremunerative, but so injurious to

the grower that he must lose by the process of cultivation. The actual

labourer was the last sufferer, but he is suffering now, and his future

prospects are most miserable and revolting. The smaller branches of

manufacture, and the multitudes of artisans employed in these, have

felt grievously the effect of lowered tariffs, and, even still more,

the competition which has been engendered by the amount of displaced

labour. Our large towns are the natural receptacles for those who have

been driven from the villages, on account of sheer lack of employment;

and ever and anon philanthropists are made to shudder by the tales

of woe, and want, and fearful deprivation, which are forced upon the

public ear. And yet few of them appear to have traced the evil to

its source, which lies simply in the legislative discouragement of

production, for the sake of a system of conversion which can offer no

means adequate to the wants and numbers of the competing population.

Our exports, when we deduct the value of the raw material, constitute

in reality an insignificant item in the account of our annual creation

of wealth. The greatness and prosperity of Britain never did, and never

will, depend upon the amount of her foreign trade, though that is now

regarded by our statistical quack-doctors as the sole criterion. What

we must depend upon is the home trade, and that can only be prosperous

by maintaining the value of production. For how else, save from

production, are the labouring population, or indeed any of us, high or

low, rich or poor, as we may call ourselves, to be maintained? All of

us derive our subsistence from the earth, and beyond what is reaped

or redeemed from its bosom we have nothing. If, for example, there is

no market for iron, the furnaces will be blown out, and the ores left

unworked; if there is no market for agricultural produce--that is, a

remunerative market--the fields will be left untilled. What, then,

becomes of the converters?--for whom do they work?--or how do they

acquire the wherewithal to purchase the food which the foreigner may

chance to send them? Let Ireland answer. That unhappy island is at

this moment paying the last penalties of Free Trade. It stands before

us as a beacon and warning of what we must expect, and cannot avoid,

if we continue to discourage production, in the insane hope of thereby

stimulating conversion; and perhaps we cannot do better than quote an

American opinion as to the cause of its wretchedness and ruin:--

"With this vast increase in the importation from abroad

has come the ruin of the people of Ireland. Deprived of

manufactures and commerce, her people were driven to live by

agriculture alone, and she was enabled to drag on a miserable

existence, so long as her neighbour was content to make some

compensation for the loss of labour, by paying her for her

products higher prices than those at which they might have been

elsewhere purchased. With the repeal of the Corn Laws that

resource has failed; and the result is a state of poverty,

wretchedness, and famine, that has compelled the establishment

of a system which obliges the landowner to maintain the people,

whether they work or not; and thus is one of the conditions of

slavery re-established in that unhappy country. From being a

great exporter of food, she has now become a large importer.

The great market for Indian corn is Ireland--a country in which

the production of food is almost the sole occupation of the

people. The value of labour in food throughout a population of

eight millions, is thus rapidly decreasing."

To every word of this we subscribe, and we beg to say, further, that

this is not the only instance. A large portion of Scotland has been

absolutely pauperised by Free Trade. The condition of the western

Highlands and Islands is most appalling; and unless Ministers and

members of Parliament are prepared to do their duty to the children of

the soil, they are utterly and execrably unworthy of the trust which

has been committed to their charge. It is with a feeling nearly akin

to loathing that we peruse accounts of Brobdignag glass-houses, and

sham exhibitions of the industry of nations, reared at an enormous

cost, when we know that the men who ought to be the producers of our

national wealth--and who might be so, were they not made the victims

of a heartless and senseless system--are being driven in hundreds from

their hearths and homes, and cast upon the wide world, without a roof

to shelter them, or a rag to give them covering!

All this, and more--for every day brings its fresh tale of woe and

wretchedness--is the consequence of free imports. And how stands the

account the other way? Where is the counterbalancing advantage? It may

be that the ruin and prostration of Ireland and the Highlands is no

great loss to the indwellers of the towns, the men of the factories and

counting-houses. It may be that they are not at all affected by such

misery, or that they care to listen to it, notwithstanding that the

victims are in the sight of God as valuable beings as themselves. It

may be that, in consequence of such suffering, or rather by creating

it, they have derived some advantage large enough to compensate for the

havoc, by enabling them to give a livelihood to thousands who would

otherwise have been unemployed and destitute. If so, where is it? Has

America reciprocated?

NO! AND AMERICA WILL NOT.

America laughs at the whole crew of Manchester conspirators with

sovereign and undisguised contempt. She wants nothing from them--she

will take nothing from them. Secure in her own position, and possessing

within herself every requisite for greatness, and--what is more--for

the happiness and welfare of her children, she regards with scorn the

attempted compromise of the crippled converters, and, while she rejects

their offer, gives them a burning rebuke for their treachery to their

native land.

So far from discouraging her manufactures, she intends to protect

them; so far from concealing her mineral wealth, she has resolved to

develop that to the utmost--judging, and rightly judging, that it is

alone through the "harmony of interests" that a nation can be truly

prosperous.

Her rebuke, as contained in the documents before us, which we firmly

believe convey the sentiments of the wisest men of the Union, is

perhaps the most poignant that ever was cast in the teeth of a

civilised and Christian community. It resolves itself into this:--

"You, producers, mechanics, and artisans of Great Britain, who are

deprived of your labour, which is your only heritage, for the sake of

a few men, who will neither take your produce nor avail themselves of

your skill, come to us. We require hands to till our savannahs, to

excavate our ores, to work at the furnaces, to weave, and to spin.

Labour with us is not as in your country. The producer shall not be

sacrificed for the sake of the converter, or the converter subjected to

the precarious mercy of the producer of another land. Here, at least,

you will find an entire harmony of interests. Foreign customers you

need seek none, for every requisite of life is secured to you in return

for your labour."

And, lest it should be thought that we are putting words into the mouth

of the Americans without authority, we shall presently have occasion

to quote from the remarkable work before us.

The repeal of the Corn Laws, and of the duties levied on provisions,

have enormously, as we all know, increased the exports of America.

The following tables will show their amount, and, in the case of

provisions, the increase since the lowered tariffs came into operation.

AMOUNT OF AMERICAN EXPORTS OF GRAIN AND PROVISIONS.

GRAIN AND FLOUR.

Flour. Wheat. Corn. Cornmeal.

Year ending barrels. bushels. bushels. bushels.

June 30, 1848, 958,744 1,531,000 5,062,000 226,000

Aug. 31, 1849, 1,114,016 4,684,000 12,721,000 88,000

PROVISIONS.

Beef. Butter. Cheese.

barrels. lb. lb.

1840, 19,631 1,177,639 723,217

1841, 56,537 3,785,983 1,748,471

1844, 106,174 3,251,952 7,342,145

1849, 133,286 3,406,242 17,433,632

Pork. Hams. Lard.

barrels. lb. barrels.

1840, 66,281 1,643,897 7,418,847

1841, 133,290 2,796,517 10,597,854

1844, 161,629 3,886,976 25,746,385

1849, 253,486 56,060,822 37,446,761

Now, if the doctrine of the Free-traders is a true one, it will follow

that the imports of America must be on a scale corresponding to the

magnitude of the exports. If that be so, the fact will be evident on

the face of their revenue accounts. We turn to these, and find the

following results:--

CUSTOMS REVENUE FROM THE IMPORTS TO THE UNITED STATES.

Dollars.

1844-5, 27,528,000

1845-6, 26,712,000

1846-7, 23,747,000

1847-8, 31,757,000

1848-9, 28,346,000

How, then, and in what shape, were these enormous exportations of grain

and provisions paid for? Not certainly in goods, for if that were so, a

corresponding increase would be apparent in the revenue accounts. The

answer is quite short--in gold, and in that commodity which ought to be

regarded as far more valuable than gold--MAN.

It is a fact of no small interest, that the ship-owning corn-merchants

have willingly sold grain in Liverpool for less than they could have

got for it in the States, in order to insure the return cargo--that

which they find so profitable--emigrants. Mr Blain, who was engaged for

many years by the Jews of London and Germany in valuing the growing

crops of America, gives the following account of this apparently

unreasonable process:--"The shipowners of America are making much

money by carrying emigrants to the States: they are now extensive

corn-merchants, and are buying largely at very low prices, it being

better to carry wheat across the Atlantic, and sell it at 2s. per

quarter less than it cost, than buy ballast, which is very dear in

the American seaports."[31] Steam, too, is now about to be applied

in furtherance of this traffic, and we read of magnificent steamers

built expressly for the corn and emigrant trade between New York and

Liverpool. By the way, with freights at 6d. a barrel of flour, (the

rate in September 1849,) equivalent to 1s. per quarter of wheat, what

becomes of the once favourite sophism, that the Atlantic afforded a

natural protection of at least 10s. to the English farmer? Nor should

it be forgotten that the American farmer finds it his plain interest

thus to part with his surplus production, procuring in return that of

which he stands so much in need--labour; and the vast emigration from

the western states to California has rendered European labour more

valuable and welcome to him than ever.

"We imported last year," says Mr Carey, "about three hundred

thousand persons. Estimating their consumption of food at

twenty cents per day for each, there was thus made a market on

the land for the products of the land to the extent of _twenty

millions of dollars_. This transportation required the constant

employment of two hundred and fifty thousand tons of shipping,

and ships carried freight to Europe at very low rates, because

certain of obtaining valuable return cargoes. The farmer thus

obtained a large home market, and the power of exporting

cheaply to the foreign one; and to the conjoined operation of

these two causes is due the fact, that wheat and flour have

continued so high in price.

"We may now, I think, understand many curious facts now passing

before our eyes. Food is so abundant in Russia, that it is

wasted, and yet among the large exporters of food to Great

Britain is this country, in which it sells at a price almost

as high as in Liverpool, and now even higher. The produce

of Russia has to bear all the charges out and home, and the

consequence is that the producer remains poor, and makes no

roads; and thus the cost of transportation, internal and

external, continues, and must continue great. The farmer of the

United States sends his produce to market cheap, because the

return cargo, being chiefly man, is valuable, and the space it

occupies is great. He therefore grows rich, and makes roads

and canals, and builds steamboats; and thus is the cost of

transportation, internal and external, so far diminished, that

the difference in the price of a barrel of flour in Pittsburgh

and in Liverpool is, when we look at the distance, almost

inconceivably small.

"The bulk of the trade of Canada is outwards; and the

consequence is that outward freights are high, while our

imports of men and other valuable commodities keep them low

with us; and therefore it is that the cost of transporting

wheat and flour from our side of the line is so much lower than

from the other, that both now pass through New York on their

way to Liverpool. Hence it is that there has arisen so vehement

a desire for commercial reciprocity, and even for annexation.

The protective system has thus not only the effect of bringing

consumers to take their places by the side of the producer,

facilitating the consumption on the land of the products of

the land, and facilitating also the exportation of the surplus

to foreign markets by diminishing outward freights, but the

further one of producing among our neighbours a strong desire

for the establishment of the same perfect freedom of trade that

now exists among the several states, by becoming themselves a

part of the Union. Protection, therefore, tends to the increase

of commerce, and the establishment of Free Trade; while the

British system tends everywhere to the destruction of commerce,

and to the production of a necessity for restriction.

"We see, thus, that if we desire to secure the command of

that which is falsely termed 'the great grain-market of the

world,' it is to be effected by the adoption of such measures

as will secure valuable return freights. The most costly and

the most valuable of all are men; the least so are pig-iron

and coal. The more of the latter we import, the larger will be

our surplus of food, the higher will be the outward freight,

internal and external, the greater will be the waste, and the

poorer will be the farmer. The more of the former we import,

the smaller will be our surplus of food, the lower will be the

outward freights, and the more numerous will be the commodities

that can go to Europe, to be given in exchange for luxuries

that now we cannot purchase."

So much for the American views of reciprocity. Secured by her system

of tariffs, which she is now about to heighten, against the effects of

foreign competition, America is resolutely bent on availing herself

to the utmost of all the vast natural resources which she possesses,

and to render herself wholly independent of the conversion of foreign

countries. By following such a course she must, as her population

increases, grow in greatness and in might, as must every nation wherein

labour is estimated and cherished according to its proper value, and

the rights of the domestic producer and workman guarded with untiring

vigilance.

One word as to the prospects of the British farmer. We know from

undoubted authority that in many parts of the United States, for

example Ottawa, excellent land may be purchased for £1 an acre, broken

up for 7s., burdened by no poor nor county rates, and unconscious of

the presence of the tax-gatherer. Land such as this can, indeed, afford

to produce corn at an almost nominal price--ballast for the ships that

shall bring back the overweighted and ruined yeomen and peasants of

England to New York and New Orleans! But, vast as the immigration has

been, the production of food has greatly outstripped it; and as fresh

tracts of virgin land are, year by year, brought into cultivation, and

internal communications opened or improved, we see no reason whatever

to believe that the export of grain to England will diminish, or the

price of that grain be enhanced. Let our readers bear in mind the

wonderful development of the mining and manufacturing resources of

America, to which we have just directed their attention, and then see

how, in spite of, or far rather concurrently with that, the production

of food also increased. We again quote from _The Harmony of Interests_.

How great was the increase may be seen by the following comparison of

the returns under the census of 1840, and the Patent Office Estimates

for 1847:--

Wheat Barley Oats

1840 84,823,000 4,161,000 123,071,000

1847 114,245,000 5,649,000 167,867,000

----------- --------- -----------

Increase 29,422,000 1,488,000 44,797,000

Rye Buckwheat Indian Corn TOTALS

1840 18,645,000 7,291,000 377,531,000 615,522,000

1847 29,222,000 11,673,000 539,350,000 867,826,000

---------- ---------- ----------- -----------

Increase 10,577,000 4,382,000 161,819,000 252,304,000

Showing an increase of not less than 40 per cent in 7 years, during

which the population only advanced 23 per cent.

How much of this surplus produce may be expected to find its way into

the English market, we do not pretend accurately to foretell; but

when we find that, without the inducement of an unrestricted access

to it, in 1846 America was able to raise her exports of grain to

thirteen millions of bushels, from six millions in 1845; and in 1847,

with only the preparation of a year, to twenty-six millions, we think

Lord Fitzwilliam is quite justified in taking it for granted that

the price of corn in England will not rise above its present ruinous

average. Attempts, no doubt, will be made to show that the emigration

to California has deprived the Western States of the labour that is

required to raise these enormous crops. Our answer is, that 300,000

souls were added by immigration to the population of the United States

in 1849; and that our own emigration returns for 1850 show that the

tide from England is flowing in that direction with unabated force.

So last year, when the great and unexpected import of French flour

was adding to the depression, and stimulating the complaints of the

English agriculturists, the Free Import authorities explained it away

as a forced unnatural importation which must speedily cease, as France

was an importing, and not an exporting, county, and the price of corn

there was naturally higher than in England; and yet we learn from the

same organ of public opinion which favoured us in the summer with this

satisfactory explanation of the French importations, that in the month

of November last, the prices of wheat, flour, and bread were all much

higher in London than in Paris. In its City article of November 14th,

appeared the following comparison of the present prices of wheat,

flour, and bread, in London and Paris:--

"The highest price of wheat of the first quality in Paris is

24 francs per 1-1/2 hectolitres, which is equal to 36s. 8d.

per quarter; and the highest price of white wheat of the first

quality, in London, being 48s. per quarter, it follows that

wheat is 30-7/8 per cent dearer in London than in Paris. The

highest quotation of flour of the first quality in Paris is 29

francs 95 cents the 100 kilogrammes, which is equal to 29s.

11d. per sack of 280 lb. English; and the highest quotation of

flour in the London market being 40s. per sack, it follows that

flour is about 33-5/8 per cent dearer in London than in Paris.

The price of bread of the first quality in Paris is 27 cents

per kilogramme, which is equal to 4-5/8 per 4 lb. loaf English

weight; and the price of bread in London, at the full-priced

shops, being 6-1/2d. per 4 lb., it follows that bread is 40-1/2

per cent dearer in London than in Paris."

We apprehend that a difference of thirty or forty per cent is

sufficient to tempt the French corn-grower, or miller, into the

higher-priced market which lies so conveniently open to him; and

thus from the model republic of the Old, no less than from the model

republic of the New World, must the English farmer expect to see for

the future those supplies of grain and flour pouring in, which shall

prevent his produce procuring a remunerating price. To complete the

picture, it should not be forgotten that both these exporting countries

impose considerable duties on the importation of grain and flour, and

thus afford us a perfect specimen of that reciprocity which all Liberal

governments and free nations were so anxious to establish, according to

our sapient rulers, in 1846.

We do not think that we need add any further argument to what has

been already said. Our antagonists, the Free-traders, have been

allowed--what they required and what was fair--time for the working

of their experiment. Ample time has been granted, and we now see

that it has failed in every particular. They said that it would

induce reciprocity; it has induced higher opposing tariffs. They said

it would secure for Great Britain the manufacturing custom of the

world; on the contrary, foreign manufactories are springing up with

unexampled rapidity. They said it would increase the demand for iron;

it has prostrated it. They said it would give full employment to all

our labouring population; it has displaced labour, and driven our

working men by hundreds of thousands to emigrate. They said it could

not attract such an importation of foreign grain and provisions, as

permanently to beat down prices in this country below the remunerating

level; it has already brought such an influx of these articles, that

the grower of grain is impoverished, and the breeder of cattle ruined.

They said it would be the commencement of a new era of prosperity to

Ireland; it has laid it utterly desolate!

Are we, then, obstinately to persevere in a course of policy so

evidently obnoxious and detrimental? Are we still to crush down labour

for an end which is now proved to be impossible of attainment; and to

tell the working classes, that because our rulers have made a false

step, they and theirs must submit to descend into the hideous gulf of

pauperism? These are questions for the nation to consider--questions

of unparalleled magnitude, both for the present and the coming time.

If we are not so to persevere in our folly, there is no alternative

left but to build up our commercial system anew upon wiser and sounder

principles. It cannot be expected that we shall ever again possess a

monopoly of the manufactures of the world. We must be contented with

that share which our skill, and energy, and undeniable resources can

command; and if we wish still to retain possession of the vast Colonial

Empire which has long been our pride and boast, we must foster,

stimulate, and protect the industry of the colonists as sedulously and

anxiously as our own.

After all, we may possibly, at no very distant period of time,

have reason to be thankful that the experiment has been made,

notwithstanding all the misery and loss which have accompanied the

trial. For, if anything could have broken down the free independent

spirit of Great Britain, and rendered it callous and listless to

external aggression or insult, no better method could be found than

the complete adoption of a system which must have made us perpetually

subservient to the wants of other nations, doing their work to order,

and receiving wages in return. In order to emancipate ourselves from

this state of threatened Helotism--the state which the disciples of

the Manchester school regard as the most enviable upon earth--we must

attempt to re-establish perfect harmony and mutual co-operation amongst

all the interests of Britain, to give productive labour its proper

place and pre-eminence, and, since we cannot secure for convertive

labour the command of foreign markets, to take care that, in the home

market, it is not exposed to any undue or unfair competition. We hold

by this proposition, well understood and energetically supported in

America, that "when a nation makes a market at home for nearly all its

products, other nations have to come and seek what they require, and

pay the highest price; and that, when it does not make a market at

home, markets must be sought abroad, and then sales must be made at the

lowest prices." If this be true, it will follow that the way to sell

at the highest prices, and to buy at the lowest, is to buy and sell at

home.

FOOTNOTES:

[29] _The Harmony of Interests, Agricultural, Manufacturing, and

Commercial._ Skinner, Philadelphia.

[30] President's Message, November 1850.

[31] _Liverpool Mail_, Nov. 2, 1850.

_Printed by William Blackwood and Sons, Edinburgh._

Transcriber's Notes:

Simple spelling, grammar, and typographical errors

were corrected.

Punctuation normalized.

Archaic, colloquial, and non-standard spellings retained as

printed.

Italics markup is enclosed in _underscores_.

Greek text is transliterated and enclosed in ®registration signs®.