The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1871-09-22
Free TraLe-Revenue Reform.

The October number OF the atlantic
Monthly contains an article by Mr. Edward
Atkinson, of Boston, written in answer to
the demand of leading protectionst for a
plain statement Of the principles OF the Free,
trade party, and Of the effects those princl-
pies are expected to have on American in
dustry. All that we can do, in this place, is
to indicate the line Of Mr.. Atkinson's argu.
ment, with the hope OF encouraging the
public to an investigation Of the principles
upon which it is based. Although the sub
ject is one Of Importance to every person
who consumes materials, or makes use o
manufactured articles Of any kind, it is. un'
fortunately, closed question to the great
body OF the people. The very A B c OF Free
Trade is unknown 10 those who are most
concerned in the overthrow OF the Protective
system. There is always, therefore, the dan
ger that political economist, however sim
cere and disinterested, may write above the
heads OF his readers, or give them what
seem to be tine-spun theories in place OF Wis
ible and tangible facts. Weare glad, then, to
find that Mr.. Alkinson's paper is clear in
statement, sound in reasoning, and directed
to practical end.
In answer to the first part OF the question
submitted to him, Mr.. Atkinson says that
the Object OF the free-trade economist is
othe most ample consumption OF every arti-
"cle called for by men, at the cost OF the least
'spossible effort to obtain it." When, how
ever, capital interposes tax between the
producer and the consumer, "for the pur-
! "pose OF causing more rapid accumulation
ssof capital" consumption is diminished,
an6, in the case OF the poorer classes, almost
stopped. Thus the rich are made richer and
the poor poorer. 1.-The theory OF protection
''is to enforce temporary scarcity and dis
stribution OF annual product under the force
s.of law, in such o manner that q few are
supported at the expense OF the many
"The theory OF free exchange is to promote
.phe greatest abundance, and distribution
"meda!ed with by statutes only so far as the
projection Of the ignorant from fraud makes
STATUTES necessary"
Abundant consumption can only he Sc
cured by free exchange OF commodities.
1.-THE most extreme protectionists admit that
ssome foreign exchanges are reasonable and
'proper; the free-trader claims that all for
''eign exchanges are expedent and profit
sable" This limits the question to this:
II some exchanges which men make are fit
and profitable, why are not all exchanges
equally so? The proteclonist replies that
we want to make our country independent in
case OF war. But iron, coarse clothing and
food are abundant in this country, irrespect-
i've Of q tariff, and these will supply our
needs in war. The proteclionist reJoins that
we must have diversified industry. That
is very true, but the entire force OF the pro-
tective argument consists in substantially
limiting the term manufactures" to the
production OF iron and steel in their crude or
primary forms, and to the production OF
textile fabrics from cotton, wool and flax.
These constitute but a very small part OF the
industry OF the country, and the whole num-
Der OF persons TO whom they give employ.
ment is ''less than the number OF immigrants
''who annually land upon our Shores" But
the many, according to protectionist doc
trine, are Of less importance than the few.
For instance, the locomotive builders, boiler
makers and car-makers-all whose materials
bear high duty-far outnumber the iron
and steel makers and owners OF the forests.
And yet the former find that their consump-
tion OF material is obstructed by tariff i'm
posed in order that the latter may be sup
ported One effect OF the tariff is plainly
given. II the railroads OF the United States
could obtain years supply OF steel rails at
what they now cost in Canada, "the saving
''would constitute a fund more than equal 10
"the capital invested in steel-rail mills, and
"nearly if not quite equal to the entire in
''vestmenl in all the steel works OF the Uni
'ted States"
"The next argument of the protectionist is
that, because wages are high In this country,
the cost OF all our product must be also hign,
and, conversely, that the labor oil other corin-
tries Is pauper labor, and therefore the cost Of
their product must DC low. Hence, it is alleged,
we must exclude the product of pauper LABOR
lest our own be degraded. The tree-trader
may admit all The alleged facts, but must deny
the conclusion, since II is almost universally
true that high wages are paid only for that in-
tellgence and skill which results in low cost OF
products, and also that pauper or ignorant
labor is costly and dear. We pay for the pro-
duct Of pauper labor, when imported, with
commodities produced by our most sklliul and
best-paid laborers. The further rejoinder TO
this argument is, that even If the skilfu! for
| eipn laborer receives such low wages as 10
| make 1t fit 10 call him pauper, 1t does not fol-
low that the thing he produces will be at low
cost, since wages form but an uncertain critic
rion OF cost"
Here is an example OF the influence OF
"pauper labor" In yard OF cashmere
sold in the United States at ST IS, the cost
OF the labor of manufacturing is about %
cents. Admitting that the wages OF the
operatives in our woollen mills are one-fourth
more than those paid in Europe, the differ
ence in cost would be oRly ST cents yard; /;
and before the foreign goods could be sold
4