The Sun.
London, England, 1852-12-16 00:00:00

FREE TRADE.

(FROM A CORRESPONDENT.)
The Prophet, according to Cowper, left good Mahomme-
dans an injunction to abstain from eating a certain un-
named part of a swine. His faithful followers, however,
take upon themselves to decide, each of them for himself,
that the part he least prefers must be the part prohibited
by the prophet ; and thus, " Mahommedans eat up the
Hog"—or, as Jonathan would express it in genuine Yankee
lingo, admissible in these days of free trade, " they
go the whole Hog." But the pork-loving Jew, so
we learned at least from our grammar-school com-
panions, altogether surpasses the special pleading
of the carnally-minded Mussulman ; for the former,
as the story went, plunges the joint of pork into
a pail of water, bids it go down pork and come up
mutton, and after this unsectarian proselyte baptism,
enjoys every part of the forbidden flesh. We must say
that many of our senators have just reminded us of this
baptismal, regeneration of the pork. Free trade has of
late years become most pleasant food for politicians, it has
satisfied the hungry electors with bread, sweetened their
tea and tarts with two spoonsful for one of sugar—given
them a cup of coffee at half price or of doubly good quality,
and cheapened almost everything; yet„ marvel of marvels,
it has overfilled the Exchequer I What, then, could poli-
ticians in office do without it ? How could they face the
well-fed electors on a dissolution, if they dieted themselves
on the husks of restrictive duties ? Accordingly, numbers
of them having lived on that trashy food in opposition, no
sooner found that, at the end of a few months, they must
show themselves for approbation to the sovereign electors,
--than, instanter, they betake themselves to the food
forbidden to their faith ; but the food indispensable to
a well-favoured countenance in the eyes of the electors,
and an ample number of pale-faced Protectionists fatten
themselves for the borough hustings on free trade. Scarcely
had they seated themselves on the treasury benches, ere their
leader provided them with an ample budget-feast of the
tabooed aliment, and with astonished looks at first, and
some grumbling from the more dyspeptic subjects, nearly all
have fed, more or less heartily, thereon ever since. Marvel-
lously have they changed their looks for the better. Their
anxious, care-worn, minority countenances have dilated to
the sleek fatness of a majority of nine to one ! Nine
months' dieting on free trade has wrought the wondrous
transformation.
But how overcome the scruples of their faith ? How
venture, with an easy political conscience, not merely
to taste, but to live upon, what their time-honoured
creed proscribed ? Free trade ! why it had, in virtue
of the persecutions suffered for refusing it, be-
come the most loathsome idea conceivable. Short and
easy was the process. An Hierophant with a double portion
of his father's genius stood forth with magic powers. He
brings the odious thing to his font. "Go down," says he,
" free trade and come up unrestricted competition." He
spoke—and behold the loathsome was lovely in every eye.
The thing was still acceptable to its old friends, the name
became well-pleasing to its new ones, and the long severed
in faith unite at least in practice, and go together into the
same lobby. Curious sight—Mr. Cobden and Mr. Disraeli
making for the same door in order to divide.
After all, however, the old name must come back again.
We cannot do with so long and Latinized a phrase as " un-
restricted competition." If those who have studied at the
Universities have time, organs of speech, and etymological
knowledge suitable to it, not so "mechanics, tradesmen,
farmers, and so forth." Free trade they understand, and
free trade they still will say. And we will say it with
them ; we like "free" better than " unrestricted."
There is a Saxon origin, a heartiness, a positivity,
a British twang in the word free, wholly wanting
in the other—which is, on the contrary, Latin—
chilly and negative. And Trade, too,—it is a
friendly, social, prosperous word, in pleasant contrast
with the ill-tempered, gladiatorial, quarrelsome word—
" competition." We wont have it then, ant we will have
the old good-tempered, hearty words—" free trade " back
again. If the Protectionists wish to have it inscribed on
the coffin-plate of protection, as the name of the enemy
who slew their pet cock robin, why, so let them ; but now
the funeral is over, and all is covered with the dust and
ashes, let language return to its usual course.
Something, too, is due to the memory of the great
Scotchman, the very patriarch of free trade, Adam Smith.
All the tribes of modern economists own him as their
common father ; all have, hitherto, accepted the name he
gave to his theory of commerce. He baptised it by the
name of " free trade." He nursed, cherished, and de-
fended it under that name ; its successive schoolmasters
and actors have known it by that name ; universal custom
has adopted the patriarch's nomenclature; and it is too
late in the day now to part with the paternal name
to suit the whims of any half-hearted foster nurse.
It is nearly 80 years. ago since the " Wealth of Nations"
broke in upon the general ig,norance of the eighteenth century
So profound was that ignorance, so hopeless the cause then,
that the philosopher utterly despaired of his country ever
adopting the principle of which he had demonstrated the
soundness. Perhaps there is hardly a stronger encourage-
ment to be found in the history of speculative thinking,
and its final triumph in practice, than the contrast be-
tween the vote of the 26th of November, 1852, and the
language of the philosopher, confident in his principle yet
hopeless its triumph, in 1776. Read them together :
Voteof the House of Commons. Adam Smith, Book 11. cap. 2.
" That it is the opinion of "To expect, indeed, that
this House that the improved the Freedom of Trade should
condition of the country, and ever be entirely restored in
especially of the industrious Great Britain is as absurd as
classes, is mainly the result to expect that an Oceania or
of recent legislation which Utopia should ever be estab-
has established the principle lishal in it. Not only the
of unrestricted competition prejudices of the public, but,
(Free Trade)—has abolished what is much more uncon-
taxes imposed for the pur- querable, the private into-
pose of protection, and has rests of many individuals
thereby diminished the cost irresistibly oppose it."
and increased the abundance
of the principal articles of
the food of the people."
What fearless and honest investigator need be discou-
raged after this? One could wish in this case, as in so
many others, that the departed could return to enjoy their
triumph ; to see that in the old weary battle of the brains
against the dullards, intelligence and truth were the con-
querors at last ; that the laughed at theorists are sure to
become, in time, the guides of universal practice. In con-
nection with the paragraph quoted above, there is a clause
which may console tho 53 with the remembrance of the
honours once borne by their tribe. " The member of Parlia-
ment," says Smith, "who supports every proposal for
strengthening this monopoly, is sure to acquire not only
the reputation of understanding trade, but great popularity
and influence with an order of men whose numbers and
wealth render them of great importance." How little did
the philosopher imagine that such members would, in
1852, be regarded as an intractable residnum in the House
of Commons, whose heads would be likened, in the "lead-
ing journal," to the East India Company's preternaturally
hardened cannon balls, which no process could melt, or
render serviceable for aught but ballast ! No, it will never
do to deprive.the offspring of Adam Smith of lithe name
given him by his desponding parent in the hour of his
birth, and that, too, at the very time when he arrives at
maturity. One word more as to " Free-trade" versus
"Unrestricted Competition." Fair play is the thing for
Englishmen ; both sides must renounce calling ill names.
The religious sects, in courtesy, give each other the names
chosen by each sect for itself. None but bigots talk of
Papists, schismatics, and so forth, now. In politics we
have exchanged Whig and Tory for Liberal and Conserva-
tive. We must do the same on this question. Monopolists
is, in truth, the scientific name of Protectionists ; but as they
prefer the latter name, we indulge them with it; they must
'reciprocate the courtesy, and not wish to designate by the
ugly epithet " unrestricted competitionists," those who de-
light in the cheerful, well-known, and hearty name of Free-
traders. At present the new converts have had it their
own way. They have registered their old opponents in
the journals of the house under the name given by their
antagonists, but they have registered themselves under the
name of their own choice. They have triumphed in the
word-fight, if the Free-traders remain encamped on the
field of battle. •

IS KIRWAN A MURDERER?