The term, "pauper labor," is therefore a false one. And when these robbers--the employers of home labor--talk of protecting their laborers against the competition of "_the pauper labor_" of other countries, they do not mean that they are protecting them against the competition of _actual paupers_; but only against the competition of that immense body of laborers, in all parts of the world, _who are kept constantly on the verge of pauperism, or starvation_; who have little, or no, means of subsistence, except such as their employers see fit to give them,--which means are usually barely enough to keep them in a condition to labor. These are the only "pauper laborers," from whose competition our own laborers are sought to be protected. They are quite as badly off as our own laborers; and are in equal need of "protection." What, then, is to be done? This policy of excluding foreign commodities from our markets, is a game that all other governments can play at, as well as our own. And if it is the duty of our government to "protect" our laborers against the competition of "the pauper labor," so-called, of all other countries, it is equally the duty of every other government to "protect" its laborers against the competition of the so-called "pauper labor" of all other countries. So that, according to this theory, each nation must either shut out entirely from its markets the products of all other countries; or, at least, lay such heavy duties upon them, as will, _in some measure_, "protect" its own laborers from the competition of the "pauper labor" of all other countries. This theory, then, is that, instead of permitting all mankind to supply each other's wants, by freely exchanging their respective products with each other, the government of each nation should rob the people of every other, by imposing heavy duties upon all commodities imported from them. The natural effect of this scheme is to pit the so-called "pauper labor" of each country against the so-called "pauper labor" of every other country; and all for the benefit of their employers. And as it holds that so-called "pauper labor" is cheaper than free labor, it gives the employers in each country a constant motive for reducing their own laborers to the lowest condition of poverty, consistent with their ability to labor at all. In other words, the theory is, that the smaller the portion of the products of labor, that is given to the laborers, the larger will be the portion that will go into the pockets of the employers. Now, it is not a very honorable proceeding for any government to pit its own so-called "pauper laborers"--or laborers that are on the verge of pauperism--against similar laborers in all other countries: and all for the sake of putting the principal proceeds of their labor into the pockets of a few employers.