The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1869-04-14
lF0r the Democrat.
Horace GfSelS 7 on Protection.

McCuAAOcnsB tl4I |InOS6
who do not buy, need not expect to
sell - as If ENGLAND did not buy
anything! Mr.. Greeley holds, also,
that our commerce may thrive with
out the eXpOrtati n of any Of our raw
materials, and me adduces the caSe of
English commerce In support of this
opinion. / tried 10 show that, be-
cause England, " hich has little raw
material. and which has a large sur
plus OF manufactured articles, pros
pors without exporting raw material,
IL does not follow that we could 50
prosper, who caD produce raw mate
rial without limit, and can compete
with foreign tries in no other de-
| partmeut.. -T
The Tribune goCs on to state what il
considers TO be the true influence of
protection on commerce. ''The truth
Is, protection determines the kind,
not the quantity of our imports and
exports" 1.-THE truth Is, protection
determines the Lind" and for that
very reason ths quantity also, of our
imports and exports The quantity
| OF our imports will bear some proper
ton to the demand for imported arti-
cles. BY limiting the number of the
articles imported, We limit that pOr-
ton of the market which the import
er is permitted tO supply, and SO d.
| minish the gross imports of the coun-
try. Instead of Il system, for exam
pie, that freely admitted steel, broad
cloth and linen, If we impose q tariff
that will exclude steel and broadcloth,
ii cannot be supposed that u i'm
ports IN linen alone will be equal to
what they formerly were of the three
articles. Protection, therefore, deter
mines not only the kind of our i'm
ports, but in virtue that very fact, the
quantity also.
/ shall not stop to insist upon the
disingenuousness of comparing the
increase of French commerce under
protective duties fIom 1927 till 1886,
which was 1874 per centum with
that Of English commerce under
free trade regime from 1877 till 1856,
which was So per cent. 1 may just
say in passing that in 1897 France had
not recovered from the prOstration
consequent upon he panic of the pre-
ceding years, and that her commerce
being then com Jaratively small, q
small absolute increase would be q
large percentage Of the whole while
In 1917 the commerce of Britain being
edual to that Of half the rest Of the
world, it must have required a very
largeab5olutt inc. ease to tell to the ex'
tent Of % per cen upon it. l will
venture to say tn It in the periods Mr..
Greeley selects, the absolute increase
of English ere was double that
of French commerce. England is
herself far from thinking that free
trade has injured her commerce or
retarded its growth. During the free
trade agitation every Tory newspaper
in tho country opposed the movement.
To-day q single paper could not be
found that would advocate 4 return to
protection. Certain branches of in
dustry may have suffered, as for eX
ample the manufacture of silk, which
hiss been altogether destroyed; but
nobody thinks the country has on
that account been injured. Professor
Faweett, NJ. p, for Brighton, refer
ring to the effects OF free trade, says
that under 1t commerce expanded
amazingly. From 1913 till 1860 our
exports rose from 60 to lA5 millions
of pounds sterling. In 1917 We I'M
lported 800 millions pounds Of cotton,
and 50 millions pounds Of tea and in
'lIS56 we imported 1000 millions pounds
OF cotton and 90 millions pounds
of tea For IA my years before
this period the trade OF the c0un'
try was stationary" He who writes
for readers OF ordinary intelligence,
and appeals to the history of British
commerce in proof OF the disastrous
results OF free tide Is n bold man.
\, Among the Indians, II Is q mark OF
coWardice to wear the hair short on
the top OF the had. So big q scalp
lock as Mr. Greeley displays in the
article under revisw has not often been
worn before IN antagonist.
NJ. Greeley gives many figures to
.v.lv.a kkuk ar -. nnrF5 knrn uraof1u
increased under "a high protective tar
III, and that under free trade there has
been little or no increase Under
free trade, for example, our imports
ara stated to have increased less than
IL per cent. from 1857 till 1860; while
they Increased 6B per cent. from 1865
till 1868 under a high tariff. II this
be true, nothing Further Is wanting TO
prove the ruinou nature of free trade.
II the inpcrta uf the country have
Increased under = tariff and in eOnse,
quenee of il, then a tariff we ought tC
have But whilr partisan assertion:
must ever be rect lived cum gTdJlO sails
! mus De excused for o than or
binary degree Of hesitation to accept
a statement in Itself so Improbable
1t Is stock argument with protee
tionists, Let. Us look It straight in
the face, and see what 1t leads to. il
is the avowed OH, ct of those who ad
Vocate protection to diminish thi
quantity imported of certain com
modities, so as to puI foreign compe-
tition ont of the way of the home
manufacturer. Tut If Mr.. Greeley'i
statement be CORRECT this object Is hes
secured by free trade. If less of for
eign commodities is imported undeI
free trade than under q tariff, the in
terests of our manufacturers are beS
served by free trade. If the pFoteG
! zionist statement Is true, why cry on
for a tariff on the ground that with
out 10 there shall be such u glut of tor
eign goods that our home manufac
: turers will be driven out of the mar
ket? The protectionist adopts a mos
: extraordinary line of argument u
says his system fosters native indus
= try by excluding foreign productions
and ia the next breath he declare
IL 50 promotes commerce that unde
it our imports Increase SO per cent. II
. the same time they required to in
crease less than J. per cent. under tn
!, rival system. II will not do to sa,
that this Increase ia due to augmente;
demand for Articles exempted from
: tariff, for these Rrd too few 10 aJcoUn
fOy go great q difference. Now if OH
: imports are increased by a tariff, VII,
all this elanioF for q tariff on the par
; Of tine manufacturing interests?
imports are dimiR lshed by free trade
then is mot free trade tile best prote,
ton for home industry. r.
1t seems to me that Mr.. Greeley
reasoning is of a very suicidal chara(
ter. When he undertook TO defen
protection, I-for cue did HnSeXDect
y see 50 sCIlfful a mIstsF of fence, stQm
bile so awkwardly over hiSoWn sworC
I have sen wasp, in its efforts {
= selfdefenee, sting Itself to dealt
Protection II such a wasp. A systeI
! which - 80 tho U.nanxrH 10 annrnrf ~