The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1879-07-18

give very different aspect TO The mat
Ter, and forces us to come to very dlf-
ferent Conclusions.
These periods may cover number OF
years, and, compared with the ordinary
life of man, may seem 10 be long time,
and safe TO use to make up theories,but
in the life of n nation, may be but
small measure of time, and Jas UNSAFE
TO found them, as from q mans expert
ence of a day, or of a single experiment.
The cases cited are periods in this coun-
try's history when the policy has been
the trials of the experiments Of low or
revenue tariff, aud then the changes to
those of higher or protective tariff. The
prosperity under the former,
and the repression following the adop-
ton of the latter, being cited to prove
case in favor of the adoption of some
thing as nearfree trade as possible. The
great accumulation of wealth by Great
Britain since the adoption of the sys-
TEN of free trade is cited to prove the
great benefit of that system, and in IA
vor of its universal adoption by all ma
tons.
Now it seems to us that the weak
ness of these arguments are apparent'
take for instance the periods cited in
this ,country's history: those cited as
evincing prosperity have been those fol-
lowing the opening of our ports to the
manufactures of the old world at mere
| ly nominal rates of duty, which were
marked by the importation of great
quantities of foreign manufactures far
too great TO keep out of debt; paying
those countries for manufacturing our
material into products for our use as
we'll as tor transporting the material
and products both ways, has always
proved to our disadvantage, and newt
ably brought us into debt, until our in
dustries manufactures and otherwise)
hive languished, and TO save ourselves
from bankruptcy we have been Obliged
to adopt policy of protection. Then
the work of reducing our expenses and
paying off our Indebtedness has been
the order of the day, causing temporary
depression and hard times.
The hard times we have experienced
since the war, is used in the article re-
ferred to as an argument against pro-
lection. Let us see what there is in the
experience of that period that will JUS
tiry the use of this for that purpose.
When the war commenced we were
importing largely and we were in debt
to foreign nations. During the war we
had the enormous expenses OF that 10
meet, and out of our own resources,
and crippled for help, we were obliged
to take upon ourselves gigantic burdens
and run in debt heavily, but under the
operations of the tariff enacted during
the war we have been able to restore
our credit abroad, by paying of our
foreign indebtedness, while not only
keeping square at home, but meantime
actually paying off large portion of our
national debt and gradually accumulat-
ing snch an amount Of capital as to re-
duce the rate of interest lower than ii
has ever been before in this country.
Meantime, under this same tariff, we
have developed our own resources and
i perfected our manufactures to such an
extent that we can not only supply our
own markets with better and cheaper
goods bat are already disputing the
possession of the older marke6s, and in
the very face of the older manufactures
uuderselling and outrivaling the excel
lence of their goods; and here comes in
the weakness of the free trade system
as reliance Tor national prosperity and
wealth. England is at this time groan.
ing in disinay at the appalling fact that
We are not only selling her the products
of our soil IN grain and meat cheaper
than she can raise them, and she can nc
longer pay for them in her manufacture
ed articles, but that our own manufac
lures are competing with hers, not only
in her colonies, but at her very doors
until many of her wise heads are crying
for protection tariff to save her from
starvation and bankruptcy. Although
the slowness of the Briton to acknowl
edge the necessity for change is pro
verbal, hunger and financial ruin arr
great promoters of quick perceptions
and the party of protection in England
is growing rapidly, and unless she cal
induce all other nations to adopt free
trade with her, she will soon be obliged
to change her policy to one of protec
ton. Her statesmen are too good fin
anciers not to see she cannot long buy
more than she sells without becoming
poor, as we have surely done under al
i, our low or revenue tariffs, and this, JUS
as surely as we must grow richer under
our present system as long as we man
ufacture our own goods and sell to 9th
er nations moro than we purchase Of
them. A marked case of the effects o.
these two opposite systems may be cited
in the cases of Germany and France
At the close of the last war between
these nations France had been invaded
her country despoiled, and she was laid
under very heavy contribution as the
condition of peace and the withdrawal
of the forces OF her conquerors, while
the provinces of that conqueror were
left intact with all his resou rces unin
paired by invasion and the contribution
exacted of his conquered foe to pay the
expenses be had incurred in conquerlna
, her. In these widely differing condi
tons we find them at the close of the
war; but Germany adopted the fire,
trade system, and France that of protec
ton. France to-day is prosperous