PROTECTION AND FREE TRADE
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—During the past few months several communications have come into print in the Spectator in regard to. the present state of opinion- on this side of the Atlantic about the advantage secured under the American Protective system: The majority of 'these communications have taken the ground that the U.S. has grown rich as a result of maintaining its system of Protection.
A large number of our citizens of theRepublid take a different - view. They admit that during the past century there -has been a very large development in the wealth and prosperity Of the -United States. .They contend however, that this advance has been, - not on account of, but in. spite of, the the Protective system. • They point out as the larger factors in increasing the .wealth of the country its great natural resources, the enterprise and inventive capacity of the people, the -intelligent use of capital (secured, of course, before the War) from European investors and, by no means -the least Of these causes, the freedom of trade relations enjoyed among the forty-eight communities extending over a great part of the Continent, presenting a larger example of free trade than has before been known in the history of :the world. Any American citizen who should venture to suggest that there could be possible advantage in putting up barriers to-day to the trade between Massachusetts and Louisiana, or New York and California,' would be dismissed as an idiot. Yet I find it difficult for any Protectionist friend to make Clear, if there be advantages for both sides in freedom of trade between Maine and Massachusetts on the south, 'why there should be diSadVantage to either party if similar freedom should be -giVen between Maine and New Brunswick on the north.'
It • seems to us elementary to contend that freedom of exchange is a -natural right for all human beings. The Protection of home- industries by means of a tariff raises the cost- both of Hiring and of production. This diniinishes the consuming power in - the home market and interferes with the ability of the Yrodheers to coinpete abroad. If a tariff statute does- not add to the cost of the articles that may be imported, and gives an opportunity also for similar additions to the articles of the same class that are maim= factitred in the horn& eduntry, it does not fulfil Its aim of giving Protection. If,' however; - the cost of the inipinted article is increased and there,cothes to be a corresponding increase, as large as it can be safely made in the face of 'competition from outside, it is evident that the consumer has to pay more for the things that he needs. It is estimated that not more than 10 per cent. of the citizens of our Republic secure even a form of advantage from the tariff schedule. In fact, as the manufactured article of one producer constitutes the raw material for another, it is probable that the number Of citizens who secure businesS advantage from the tariff, which has always been Shaped directly" by the protected interests, is less than 10 per cent. of the -poptilation.- This minority secures proceeds, and sometimes very large proceeds, at the expense orthe other -90 per dent. of the citizens. - The farmers have' been the -most-abilSed Class under our Protective system; and they are beginning to wake up to the fact. Their larger prOductions are, of course, sold in the markets Of the world and at prices fixed in competition With producers throngliont the world. On the larger number, however; of the articles required for the running of their farm"; and for the maintenance of their houSeholds, the cost to the farther is largely increased through the exactions of the tariff duties. There are increasing indications that the farmers of 'the country are going to demand either subsidies for them- selVes or reductidn Of the. burdens that interfere with their i'Vhlle the country its as a whole ProSperaui, it is aPparent that rugby divisions of -itid-uStries -find the `reStilti of the Protective tariff thisatiSfactciry, e and there is an increasing Wave of protest.-eoinhig "up froth 'different parts -of the country in regard to the: unnecessary burdens of :increased taxation: ) The bankers of "the -country pointing out the absiirdity of 'pressing- fOr the -c011eetioii3Of debts: due ;.1.6 the U.S. from Europe when these debts can be - paid-Only in goods; while at the seine • tinie-inexecising_ the burdens to the linportitiiin of those goods. The sinanufactiters -*Yid have a surplus of Production to sell are ..also becoming restive under the diffi- culties of securing markets abroad, _while _blocking the importation of the foreign productions with which, under the system of exchange, American goods must bepaid Ior. _ Prince Albert said, as far back as May 30th, 1851, in opening the first of the WOrld's ExPoSitioiis, that " international grievances_ were chiefly due to the ignorance of the peoples of each other. Do all that can be done," said Prince Albert, "to further free intercourse, and with the exchange of goods there will cothe'in exchange of ideaS, of ideals and of personal - - . .. relaticins.". This will do much to maintain the peace of the world and to Secure, what is the vision of the twentieth. - • century, civilized relations among the nation_ s.-1 am,
Previous page
