LORD SALISBURY ON FREE-TRADE.
(To 7118 Roma or THE "SPECTATOR."] Sne,—You are pleased to say in the Spectator of July 30th that Lord Salisbury made an " effective " reply to Mr. Gladstone'e claim of the approval by the civilised world of his Irish policy. The retort was in the form of the question whether Mr.Gladstone would accept the opinion of the civilised world on Free-trade. Every one knows that the effectiveness of a retort in the eyes of a third person is measured by prepossession, and I am there- fore surprised at such a comment from you. I am prepossessed in favour of Free-trade, and I do not consider the reply effective at all, for these reasons s—Free-trade is a question of scientific economics which it is the achievement of Cobden to have partially popularised. But it remains a scientific question still, and the judgment of experts, not the vox populi, is the right tribunal of appeal in this as much as in astronomy. Now, it is notorious that experts—that is, political economists— are almost to a man Free-traders. Even the German economists who support Prince Bismarck, do so on the ground that Protec- tion is necessary for countries that start late in the industrial race. They generally acknowledge that the conditions which justify it do not exist in Great Britain. Mr. Gladstone may safely take the scientific opinion of the civilised world on Free. trade. It happens that the question is intentionally mixed up with military and political considerations, and that the people support Protectionist Governments for a variety of reasons in which economics play a relatively small part. In astronomy, the issues are unmixed, and every one accepts scientific opinion, whether be can explain it or not. If the economic question could be confined within its own limits, the same result would follow. The Home-rule issue, on the other hand, is, in its out- lines, a simple one,—the arguments against it belong to the school of prophecy. Between woeful facts and woeful prophecies the people can fairly judge; while the confusion of interests which envelops and obscures the Free-trade question forbids us to interpret the practice of nations as the " opinion of the civilised world."—I am, Sir, dm., [We also are prepossessed in favour of Free-trade, and it was on that account that we considered Lord Salisbury's reply effective. But we totally disagree with our correspondent on his second point. We regard the constitutional question of Home-rule, virtually of Federation, as in the highest sense a question for experts,—quite as much so as that of Free-trade. —En. Spectator.]
Previous page
