The Daily state journal. [volume] (Alexandria, Va.) 1868-1874, 1873-04-05
SATURDAY EvE'G, APRIL 5, 1878,
EngIand's Supremacy Endangered
the Eufure Of Virginia.

In recent number of the London Stand
ard, there is two column editorial on the
subject of /" Epgland's supremacy endan-
gered by the price of coal, " in which that
journal handles the Gladstone ministry,
and the carly adoption Of the free-trade
policy Of the government, from more
philosophic and comprehensive standpoint
than is usual in political journalism.
The writer goes on to speak Of the
commercial treaties concluded at different
times with view to free trade, or that
partial reciprocity in commercial advanta-
yes which has latterly been the boast of
English craftsmanship, and concludes, by
asserting, that, for obvious considerations,
the policy of the government must be
changed, at least in respect to coal, or
their free-trade treaties will prove to
be concessions Of advantages to the other
nations of Europe for which there will be
noiadequate return, either in trade, manu-
featuring industry, or commercial reciproc-
ity. sls'.'
Speaking of the free-trade treaties with
France, Austria. and Germany, The Stand
ard says: too aiEla.a q a
We cannot but think that those treaties are
condemned by their consequences as well as by
their want of reciprocity. We obtain ed by hem
nothing that we had not long ago conceded to
ns notnfs Sos tree othsSs IN
privileges, generally, of the most favored ma
ton. We had nothing of this kind to give in re-
turn, our early adoption of the free trade policy
having long since conceded all such advantages
to all nations Whatsoever ., y
The concessions of which the writer
speaks are those to be found in the limita-
tons Of their rights of taxation, apart
from protective taxation, which had been
abandoned by the British government graz
tultously and in advance of her CONNER
cal treaties. In this way they left their
aliesin full possession of the right Of tis-
cal taxation, and the partial possession Of
the right Of protective taxation, while they
had absolutely renowned the latter and
consented to limit the former. The Stand
ard dwells at length upon this absence OF
mutually in the practical operations of the
treaties referred to, and of the commercial
disadvantages resulting from an attempt
''to bride their neighbors, like petulant
children, t. their own good" q.
On the subject Of coal the article treats
much more at length than in the othel
staples Of England, and attempts to draw
a distinction, which is manifestly withou
a difference, as between coal and othe
Misunderstanding that it should not come
within the general law of free trade, i
being for the interest Of England to expor
as little of this productive power as posi-
BILE, which is necessarily limited in quantity
and the natural store-rooms of which ar
beng rapidly exhausted. The STANDARD
demands that an export duty shall be lait
upon this product, as it tends to becom,
more costly in proportion as a create
quantity is removed from the country, ant
where it cannot be produced all ibitt1i
by human labor, as may be the case witt
corn, cotton, and other natural products 0
the soil. 1t is plain to be seen that eve
The Standard is too strongly welded t
theoretic principles to be shocked by such
trife as a redictio al dbsWd,tm for Goa
is just as much product of labor applie
to the earth's surface as corn or cotton
the only difference being that nature ha
already applied her productive energies I
the, coal beds, while they are left t
their natural application in producing tn
vegetable products named. Coal is veg
etable product developed by labor, Will
corn and cotton are vegetable products pre-
duced from labor. They both requir
laborto be applied in their production, an
they are both vegetable products Of III
earth; SO that we do not see why the on
should rot come as legitimately within tn
general law of free trade as the other.
In, fact, in another portion of the article
under anotherhead, The Standard overlook
the distinction it attempts to draw between
coal and the other products of the earth
and asserts it to be the duty of govern
mentto step in and say: 1Eiss 70
Your first dutyis to your country and no
while It's people are Starving snail you sem
their food 10 other lands. The right of selfpro
lection in Il community is paramount to all ind
viduai rights, and we Will not allow you 1
double your fortunes at the cost of hundre
Thousand deaths by hunger.''i The case OF Goa
diffeIs from thatof corn only in degree In Eng
land coal is almost as much an article of prim
necessity ds bread and it is, therefore, an articl
on which, in extreme cases, 1t might be the dut.
of the STATE to lay an embargo, in order 10 r.
serve for its own subjects the whole of the ma
tive supply. YHg 80 tfI
This is virtually a surrender of tn
whole argument in favor Of free trade; fo
what is true Of English coal and breadstuff
may be equally true of any of the othe
leading exports of that country. An ex
port duty may operate as benefcially t,
government in point oil revenue, and a.
detrimentally tofconsumers in respect Il
price, as import duties. 1t is true that by
means Of coal all the factories of England
are worked, and her swarming million
employed; and the supply of coal in tina
country is absolutely limited, and that t
no distant day. Every ton of coal exporte'
from England is a ton withdrawn from he
manufacturing wealth and power, and mus
hasten the time when her supremacy mus
give way to that of this country, and whel
no people in the world will clamor NOR,
fiercely for protective duties than those 0
of England.