The newspapers of last Saturday published a very striking letter
dealing with the fiscal controversy signed by fourteen Professors and Lecturers of Political Economy, among whom
are Mr. Leonard Courtney, Mr. Edgeworth, Mr. Alfred Mar- shall, Mr. Smart, and Mr. Carman. Their convictions, they says are opposed to certain popular opinions, and =them they offer observations under seven headings. The most important of these are a denial of the assertions that increased imports from abroad involve diminished work at home, and that a tax on food would not increase the price. "The suggestion," say the signatories of the letter, "that the public, though directly damnified by an impost, may yet obtain a full equivalent from its yield is incorrect, because it leaves out of account the interference with the free circulation of goods, the detriment incidental to diverting industry from the course which it would otherwise have taken, and the circumstance that, in the case of a tax on foreign wheat—English and Colonial wheat being free—while the consumer would have to pay the whole or nearly the whole tax on all the wheat, the Government would get the tax only on foreign wheat." The letter winds up with the observation that "in general, those who lightly undertake to reorganise the supply of food, and otherwise divert the course of industry, do not adequately realise what a burden of proof rests on the politician who, leaving the plain rule of taxation for the sake of revenue only, seeks to attain ulterior objects by manipulating tariffs." Owing to its extreme quietness and moderation of tone, the letter is a very effective one. We note that Professor Foxwell and Professor Ifewins, writing in Thursday's Times, challenge the right of the Free-trade Professors to speak for any one but themselves. Their letters do not otherwise call for special comment.
Previous page
