{"newspaper_name": "Delaware journal.", "edition": "01", "page": "p1", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 4087, "word_count": 701, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9670000076293945], "ccnet_perplexity": [2195.89990234375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
lists, is an absurdity. The current OF your hosti-
ty runs strongly against New England, and its in
corporated companies which you politely st!ie j" the
overgrown vuures of the East,'' ready to gut their
raveuous appetites upon the minor manufacturers.
Excuse me. sir, but this is slang-lashionable,
grant you, with s'certain privileged class" OF
politicians but not the less ridiculous and untound-
ed for that. If the woollen's bill had become law,
the New England manufacturers would have no ad-
vantage over those Of Delaware, for instance. but
such as they might derive from their skill and in
dustry and if they surpass in these, it is our
fault, not theirs. incorporated companies have no
advantages over g individual establlshmen,s,' ex-
cept as they facilitate the accumulation OF capital.
The members of the incorporated companies OF New
England, are liable to the utmost extent ct their
private fortunes, for the debts of the company. We
have incorporated companies IN the Brandy 'lne,
and we may have more, if it should provsnecessary
to combat the Eastern 'monopotes" with their
own weapons. But the woollen manufacturers on
the Brandywine have no dread of " the vultures of
the East;' they estimate perfectly the nature OF
those anxieties which abroad relative to these
same birds of prey, and they would have gladly en-
countered them, taons, beak and all, under the pro-
lection of the much abused woollens bill. of last
winter. They acre in favour Of that bill; and this
single fact is worth volumes of defamation aud
faataropade about Eastern monopoly privileged
classes and moned aristocracies.


You assert, that il the woollens bill had become
law, ..the wool grower was in worse condition."


than before. Iwonder Sir, that you did not add aao-
ther argument derived from the same school with this,
namely, that it was scheme to pick the pocket OF
the poor, because it laid additional duty on low
priced cloths. Both objections are fallacous at
war with common sense and retuted by experience.
Unless you can prove to me- that by increasing the
demand for given article, you diminish the price
value of the article-you can scarcely establish
the position that the protection Of the wooen manu-
facturer will njure the wooI-grower, or render his
condition 1porSe. The fact is, and every practical
and disinterested man will tell you sothat the only
way to assist the wool grower is to protect the manu-
facturer. All the duties, that you can lay on WOOL
will fail to benefit the frcemen, unless the manulac-
turer is protected, because they cannot create a
home market Protect the manufactures. set him
| in full operation, and you create home market
for the material, at once. at the farmers door,
which will protect him abundantly, if not q cent Of
duty be laid on foreign wool because the American
farmer can raise wool as cheap it be raised in
any other country. The woollen's bill of last win
ter, then, SO far from rendering the condition of the
the wool grower worse, as you assert, would have
benefited him to the same extent that it would The
manufacturer 1T would have made an increased
demand for wool, which in the nature of things must
have been supplied by the American farmer know,
sir that this idea is not original with youit is one
of the many subterfuges coined for the occasion, by
men who had involved themselves in a dilemma and
wished to put good face upon it. The representa-
tiyes of Pennsylvania and New York, when they
rendered to their constituents an account Of their
conduct in relation to the woollen's bill, were driven
to this kind of logic-hence the thrice told tale
about Eastern MOBILES and monopohes. and neglect o
| the farmers. There were two gentlemen in the
Senate, however, of your own party, who rose supe-
lor to the cabal around them Mr. Mahon Dicker-
son of New Jersey, and Mr.. Henry NJ. Ridgely Of
Delaware, who were both friends of the wnolen's
bHl-contrary to your assestion,-that both our
Senators opposedit


shall take up this subject again, and in the mean.


time, subscribe myself


i a friend Of Manufactures.