Summary

Various The Economist, Volume 1, No. 3

The practice of confining trade by the invisible, but potent chains of law, has been a curse wherever it has prevailed. In England, more dependent than other nations on the extent of its commercial intercourse, it may be said to have operated as a scourge. The most terrible inflictions of natural evil, storms, famine, and pestilence, have not produced an equal amount of suffering. Indeed, it has combined the characteristics of the worst of those evils. It has devastated, like the storm, the busy hives of industry; it has exhausted, like famine, the life and vital principle of trade
Source: Gutenberg

Various The Economist, Volume 1, No. 3

I belong to the class who have their sole dependence in the land, and have no direct interest in trade or manufactures; and feel as strong a wish for the prosperity of agriculture as the Duke of Buckingham, or any other of the farmer's friends; but I consider the interests of all classes of the community so intimately connected, and so mutually dependent on one another, that no one can rise or prosper upon the ruins of the others.
Source: Gutenberg

Various The Economist, Volume 1, No. 3

Were the farmer (or rather the landed proprietor) to gain all that the consumer loses by the corn monopoly,—if it were only taking from one, and giving to another—without any national loss; though this of itself would be bad enough,—it is perhaps the smallest part of the loss which the manufacturer sustains; for the same law which hinders him from going to the best and cheapest market to purchase his food, at the same time necessarily excludes him from a market for the produce of his industry; and by diminishing the demand for his labour, lowers his wages or throws him out of employment.
Source: Gutenberg

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature