The Monopoly Question.

57

"traced distinctly into the hands and stomachs of some other "portion of his countrymen, who must be mulcted of it if this "mode of shoe-making be given up. I stand, therefore, on the "vested rights and interests of these labourers, and trust that "no Anti-Boot-Law League will be lightly allowed to interfere "with the present happy settlement."

Now the answer to all this is, that there is a third party who is missed out of the account; and such an omission is competent to vitiate the best of reckonings. If the extra or second 10s. had not been given to the ingenious amputator of boots, where would it have gone? It might have been applied to cover the head or the hands, the legs or the thighs, instead of the heels of the owner; or it might have been appropriated to cheer the stomach of his man-servant or his maid-servant, his ox or his ass, or any thing that was his. But in some way or other, it would have been laid out for his advantage with some other trader, to whom and to his dependents in as long a train as are concerned in making Mrs. Barbauld's bread-and-butter, it would have been just as solacing and advantageous as it is now to the people who live by making leather to be cut to waste. This trader, therefore, and his dependents, make the missing third party; and it is on the non-perception or concealment of this third party that the whole mistake or fraud has rested.

Will anybody deny, that if this third party could be pointed out, and warned of their danger from the intended establishment of the system of shoe-monopoly which was to deprive them of their custom, they would be as loud in their protests, according to their means, as the shoe-monopolists could be upon the other side? And if this third party cannot be personally defined, before or even after the fact, inasmuch as a man cannot always accurately tell what he should have done with his ten shillings if the "artful dodger" had failed in the attempt upon his pocket,will any man set down his name as maintaining, that the existence of this third party, if they could be picked out of the crowd, is a whit less substantial in consequence?

The losses of this third party, then, form a perfect balance and set-off against any and all the gains obtainable by the monopolizing Crispins. And this amounts to nothing but saying, "Spend the money here or spend it there, and as far as the

spending only is concerned, the 'good to trade,' as the popular "phrase is, must, in the aggregate, be all the same." Nobody believes that trade is to be encouraged by an abstract taking from tinkers to give to tailors; or that national wealth is to be created by clothing the soles at the expense of the shoulders. The sharpest or the dullest chairman of a "Patent Shoe-making Company," durst not venture, in the greatest warmth of after

H

58

The Monopoly Question.

dinner zeal, to show cause why such an assertion should be risked before the public.

This, then, makes a complete and entire set-off,-and of things, as a logician might say, perfectly homologous, or of similar constitution or composition,-against all the gains of the monopolizing workers of leather. And consequently, the loss of 10s., or 10s. worth, to the consumer,-the grievous and intolerable fact that he gets nothing instead of something for the 10s. which he parts with,-stands out an entire and uncompensated injury. The gains of the lawless shoemaker, may be set off against one magnitude of equal dimensions, but not against two magnitudes of equal dimensions, nor against one and any other magnitude beside. That 10s. which is the measure of the loss to the consumer, will also be the measure of the sum of the dishonest gains to all possible leather-cutters, curriers, and others who may be concerned, and likewise of the gains of which the party called the third has been deprived, is a proposition evident to the practised student in such matters; but is not a proposition whose rigid establishment is essential to the case in hand.

Transfer now the question to the case of somebody who should demand that wine, to be called Oporto, should be created at home by means of hot-houses, at 40s. a bottle, instead of being brought from Portugal for 4s. And his plea is, that there is no bad economy in it, but on the contrary, much patriotism; and for the reason, that all the extra price, which is 36s., is to be honestly expended upon coals and colliers, gardeners, glassmakers, and other estimable citizens, whose interests ought to be vastly dearer to us than the savings to be made by making ourselves dependent on foreigners for a supply.

Here then is, in the first place, to be stopped the foreign trade or trades, by which, through a process either direct or roundabout, port wine was procured from Portugal. Four shillings out of the consumers' payment per bottle, instead of going to support this old trade or trades, is to go to support the new trade of hot-housing; from all which, no difference in the aggregate appears to arise, and therefore this 4s. need not further be alluded to. But the consumer is to pay 36s. more to the new trade of hot-houses, and this he must subtract from what he would otherwise have laid out with some other trader or set of traders at home, to whom it would have been just as good as to those who are actually to receive it. The gains and losses, therefore, of these last two traders or sets of traders, make an exact balance to each other; and the consumer of the wine stands out an injured man, to the amount of the 36s. which, under the new regime, he is to pay and get, nothing in

return.

The Monopoly Question.

59

And this is all nothing but what would take place, if a private individual were taken with a mania for making his port wine at home. Bating any amusement he might contemplate from the process, he would be a manifest loser to the amount of the difference of price; and when the operation, instead of being carried on through one hand, is carried on through many, the wonder would be, not that the result in the aggregate should be the same, but that anybody should have been found to expect it would be different.

Proceed now to a case, which as being less visibly extravagant, presents more room for the exertion of individual interests, and of that clap-trap patriotism which professes to seek the public gain through the public loss. And let the case be the one so often debated, of the glove-makers. From France, gloves shall be supposed procurable in England, by means of foreign commerce, for 2s. a pair. An Englishman declares that he can make gloves equally good for 3s. a pair; and he demands of us, upon our patriotism, that a tax shall be laid on the foreign article of at least 1s. a pair, in order that he, as his phrase is, may be enabled to "compete" with the foreigner; in other words, that the English consumer of gloves may be cut off from the power of getting them at 2s. through foreign commerce, and be obliged to give 3s. at home.

Here then, as in the wine case, a foreign trade is, in the first place, to be cut off, which used to pay for the gloves at 2s. a pair to France, and the custom transferred to the English artist who can make dear gloves. So far, then, there is no difference in the aggregate; and of these 2s. no more needs be said. But a further sum of 1s. per pair is to be taken from the English consumer, and given to the English maker of dear gloves, instead of being given to some other trader or traders at home, who would have given their customer something in return. These last two parties, therefore, are to be set-off against each other, and the consumer gets nothing, instead of something, for his shilling; which amounts to an unbalanced loss.

If ever, therefore, the glove-makers, or other parties similarly circumstanced, come to parliament with a petition for what they will call "protection," some hard-hearted" Leaguer " should incontinently rise and ask, "Do we clearly understand you, that your prayer is, that 4s. may be taken from other "people, in order that 3s. may be given to you?"

But if this is the truth with respect to all monopolies, it must be applicable to the giant monopoly, which is the monopoly of a nation's food. What further multiplication of evil may arise out of the magnitude and peculiar nature of the cause, must for brevity be referred elsewhere.

60

The Monopoly Question.

On the question of compensation for the giant wrong, the points to be remarked are, First, That the fact of its being a giant, prevents the question from being perplexed by a demand for contemporaneous compensation for a multitude of minor monopolies, which would go to make the whole impracticable.

Secondly, That a demand for compensation, or more strictly retribution which is multiplied compensation, has in all ages been the great machine by which injustice has been repressed.

Thirdly, That as the food monopoly has cut against the honest interests of commercial and manufacturing industry in a way peculiar to itself, so it happens, providentially, to admit of compensation by a simple reversion of the engine. A bounty on the importation of foreign corn, of a magnitude and for a period not indefinite, but bearing a reference to the magnitude and duration of the past injustice, is the practical and familiar manner of proceeding to make compensation for the wrong.

Fourthly, That though it is most absolutely conceded that a bounty on the importation of foreign corn is not good political economy per se, a strong case may be made out for the policy of adopting it for a limited extent and period, as the means of recovering so much of the trade which ought to have been British, as may yet be within the reach of human aid. It is plainly within the limits of possibility, that there might be a national advantage from it in this direction, though there should be a national loss in some other, and that the first should be the greatest.

Fifthly, That the substitution of a bounty on importation for a limited period, for a duty, is not in the smallest degree opposed to all the changes being made by some sort of gradations, as the necessity of the case seems to imply. And it is totally unconnected with any obligation to come to a fixed duty as a preliminary; the whole being as easily effected by successive changes in the grades of the existing scale.

In conclusion, it may be permitted to enumerate among the reasons for increased expectations of success, that the resistance on which the working classes were put, at least in England, on pretence of obtaining the Charter, has resolved itself into a project of a very different nature, namely the handling of a hundred and twenty millions of the public money, of which part was to be given to the landlords for their co-operation, and the remainder divided among individuals under an engagement to pay certain interests and rents, on the strength of which no man would be found voluntarily to advance £100.; and so far this may be considered as a strategem of the landed enemy, which to have exploded is to have destroyed.

LITERARY NOTICES.

ENGLAND IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. NORTHERN DIVISIONPART I.-LANCASHIRE. How and Parsons, London. LANCASHIRE : ITS HISTORY, LEGENDS, AND MANUFACTURES— PART I. Fisher, Son and Co., London.

We should scarcely have undertaken to notice the above works, (a first number being generally so poor an index of the object intended either by author or publisher), had they not been evidence of an increasing interest in the social condition of "the North of England," and a proof that, in putting forth this journal, we have not thrust ourselves forward uncalled for. Here we find two publishers of enterprise and judgment, at an immense cost and labour, devoting themselves to illustrate the genius, the talent, and the energy of a district surpassing any other part of our country, but too negligent to illustrate itself. We have evidently thought too little of ourselves, so, henceforth, we must plume our wings, and soar with the highest, having especial care, however, of the old proverb. These works are of very different characters: that of How and Parsons being infinitely the superior. It contains three times more literary matter, and is well illustrated by numerous wood engravings, with a map of the country, and a beautiful vignette by Creswick. It is written also by Dr. W. · C: Taylor (author of "'1 he Natural History of Society," one of the most interesting books of modern times), a gentleman fully acquainted with his subject, and whose style is at once light and graphic. We shall refer to both, however, when further advanced.

WANDERINGS IN NORTH WALES. BY THOMAS ROSCOE, Esq. London: Tilt and Bogue, Simpkin and Co., and Orr and Co.; Wrightson and Webb, Birmingham; Webb, Liverpool; Simms and Dinham, Manchester.

The name of Roscoe is dear to us, and when it appears in connection with that of North Wales, and with pictorial embellishments of the highest character, we cannot but anticipate complete success for a work, which abounds in light and pleasing sketches, and deals forth a variety of information on antiquities and history, interspersed with agreeable descriptions, and interesting anecdotes. The scenery of the British Alps cannot be too often represented to us, and many of those who hunt after "exotic follies" would much better occupy their leisure time, and spend their superfluous cash in the beautiful vallies of North Wales, and the ancient retreats of our country's independence, than in jabbering bad French and worse Italian, ordering uneatable beefsteaks, and posting with true John Bull rapidity and exclusiveness over the domains of our more companionable neigh

bours.

This new and much improved edition greets us at a seasonable time,