New-York daily tribune., 1856-01-16
A DIFFERENCE.

A DIFFERENCE.
We have often enough expressed our notions OF
the meaning and purpose of British Free trade.
The world is full, however, of people who imagine
these catch-words to mean Just what would be
inferred from combining their signifcatiOns taken
out separately from a dictionary. As we are
obliged TO conduct newspaper, not altogether for
the benefit of wise men, but contrarywise, IN
great measure for the enlightenment Of fools, we
expect to keep repeating proofs and Illustrations OF
truths often told before. That which we offer now
comes on this wise. A proposal was made by Com
mittee of the Canadian Legislature for the mutual
abolition of customs duties upon the productions OF
Canada and tie West India Colonies. The report
of the Committee in question was submitted too
late in the session to be brought before the House
ofAssembly; but the Governor General communi-
Gated to the then Colonial Secretary, Sir William
Molesworth, the fact of such proposal having
been made, and the Colonial Minister, in dispatch
TO the Governor of Barbados, took occasion to
give the views Of the Imperial Government on the
subject as follows:
Her Maiestys Government would regard the pro-
posed arrangement very Objectionable on the
80 far as such arrangement is concerned the Colo
MES who entered into Il from the rest of the Empire.
Secondly that it would be injurious not only to the
interests of consumers in the Colonies, who were
party TO the arrangement but TO the interests OF pro-
ductrs in every oherpa of the Empire; and, Thirdly.
that il would be INCONSISTENT WITH TBE lMPERIAL
Policy OF FRTT TRADE.
at il the earnest desire of her Majesty Govern.
mert TO maintain and extend policy which shall
closely unite together by ties of mutual interests the
whole of her Maiestys Colonial Empire with the
Mother Country. To such policy any measures tend
ing to form the Colonies ntoseparate groups with Pc
cuiar and exceptional commercial relations, would be
opposed and her Majesy's Government therefore
trust that they will not be asked to submit for her
Maesys approval acts or ordinances giving effect to
measures OF that character"
This is not the first instance in which we have
obtained valuable information by Overhearing John
Bull talking TO himself or to his dependents.
Supplemented people are apt to suppose that the
removal of any restrictions or impediments in the
WY of customs duties on the commerce between
any two communities is a step, SO far as ii goes,
toward the universal freedom of trade. Such an
arrangement between Canada and the West Indies
is, however, pronounced by the Colonial Secretary
"iDconsstent with the imperial policy of Free
trade" and he proceeds to define that policy as
"one that shall closely unite together by ties Of
mutual interests the rhoe Of her Mcjestys Colonial
EMPIRE" Ifthe sentence stopped here, it would
be entirely consistent with the general understand
ing of the meaning of terms but not So" nih
"he mother country" is the significant conclusion.
Now it is impossible to find any other meaning
in this declaration, than that Free trade, in the
British acceptation and as sought in the imperial
policy" signifies freedom for everybody to trade
with England, and the prohibition of every arrange
ment which, by facilitating freedom of commerce
among other countries, would diminish the neces-
sity of their resorting to the English workshop
Of the world
We have tried in vain to guess why the Sec
retary declares that reciprocity of exemption
from duties would be injurious to the interests
" of consumers in the Colonies, who were party
" to the arrangement" We can indeed understand
how such a thing might be upon the protective
theory that duties on imports, by stimulating do
mestc production reduce the cost of those COM
modities which are fit subjects for protection.
But, upon the hypothesis of the advocates of Brit
sh Free trade that the price of the domestic
commodity is enhanced to the extent of the duty
imposed on its foreign rival and is therefore paid
by the consumer We cannot imagine how the
mova OF such duties can prove injurious to them.
Did the Secretary mean TO admit the doctrine OF
the protectionists lfnot, then what did he mean
When Canada wants limited reciprocity with
the United States, that is Free trade, and England
goes for il. When Canada wants unlimited re-
ciprocity with the West India Colonies England
anticipates the request with blank refusal, and
declares it to be not Free trade at ALL but quite
the opposite. Upon our construction this is quite
ineligible; but TO those who fancy that the words
Free trade " really mean something else than a
swindle and delusioD, it must be little perplex-
ing. We shall be happy to hear their explanation.