{"character_count": 1665, "word_count": 292, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9722999930381775], "ccnet_perplexity": [1763.5999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
II The Plsbeiaa has loading Editorial as.
sartine that Manufactures have generally ad,
vanced in price since the present Tariff was i'm
posed while Agricultural products have declined
To back this assertion, il gives table of alleged
prices of Cotton Goods and Flanneis last Spring
and now, showing an average rise of about 70
per cent. Bu, the knave who makes this state
7pent TO prejudice Manufactures very careful o
suppress the related fact that Cotton, tbs Agri-
cultural Staple which is the basis of this manu-
iac,ure, has risea fifty per cent. during the same
period. So of Flannels: the rise IN Wool has
been fully equal to that of Woolcl Goods, al
though American fabrics were so low last Spring
that the Pebeian & Co. were chuckiing over the
failures of leading manufacturers. Now times
are better, and goods sell more favorably because
the couatry is able to buy them, and the cry IS
raised that Manufacturers are making ttcenty or
thirty per cent by their business. This is false
again. A few lucky makers of fancy goods
have made large dividends, but the average divl-
donds on Manufacturing stocks has not exceeded
seeen per cent. even in lS43, with an increasing
market and Cotton rising III price. II any man
of means doubts this, why won't he engage IN
Manufacturing He can buy stocks IN good
companies ct par, or he can buy factories now Of
feting at auction, their former propriesors having
failed in the business. II most Of those who talk
OF twenty or thirty per cent. as an average or
general dividend On Manufacturing stock did
not ksow they were deceiying, they would be en-


gagged IN the business before month. But they


go know beiter.