Morning journal and courier., 1880-10-22
PROTECTION AGAINST FREE TRADE.

J ! I-Noraoich Star.
 PROTECTION AGAINST FREE TRADE. To the Editor of the JOURNAL AND COURIER:
 have read, with no small degree of inter est, the communications from Professor Sum- ner to the Register, in which he undertakes
 ''to show the benefits which would accrue to American business men and workingmen if protection was overthrown and tariff adopted which was adjusted for revenue only" The truth of his proposition that repeal of the protective tariff would remove certain burdens from the general public, as distinguished from the per sons directly engaged in the protected indus tries, was, from the first, sufficiently appar- ent to my mind. But by what line of argu- ment he could demonstrate that those who are now deriving their livelihood from these protected industries would be benefited by such repeal was unable to conjecture. In his letter of Oct. 14th, however, the Professor at once solves my doubt, and turns the edge of his own weapon, by the following state ment: ''I start with the assumption that each American is competent to manage his own business, choose his own occupation, order his own life, and seek happiness ac- cording to his own ideas of it.''
 Now if this assumption is well founded, if every man among us has command of his own life and capabilities, and can at pleasure turn his attention from one occupation to another; in other words, if on the failure of any particular industry, the workman therein can, if he chooses, instantly find re- munerative employment at something else, then the position of the learned author as to the effect upon the workman of the destruction of his protected industry may be impregna- ble. On the other hand, if the assumption is false, if those who are engaged in these protected industries could not immediately upon their destruction, find equally remu- nerative employment at something else, then the destruction of these industries must, at least temporarily, deprive the workman of his livelihood and be terrible disaster to him.
 It does not seem to me that the question whether this assumption be true or false can remain long unanswered in the mind of any practical man. It is a matter of experience to all of us that special training in one occu- patton to certain extent units the work man for other labor of a differ ent character, and question is know very little of any particular work and therefore do the drudgery of all, but of those who have been trained in our mills and fac tories and machine shops, and have taught their eyes and hands certain movements and perceptions peculiar to their trade. Does not every man, who has ever tried it, realize that in a new occupation much that has thus been learned must be unlearned, and that the very habits which were serviceable to him in the former, are hindrances to him in the latter kind of labor? What American work man would consider the saving to him from the removal of duties on protected goods any equivalent for the loss of time and money consequent upon Gn enforced aban- donment of his present employment and the acquirement of the skill and experience necessary to carry on another with success?
 Suppose, however, this difficulty to have been removed, and the workman to have qualified himself for new employment, the new employment is by no means certain to be open to him. In some portions of his let ters the learned author seems to assume that all that the laborer has to do is to be willing and qualified for his work, and work will be provided for him. But it takes t~o to make bargain and for every employe there must also be an employer, or willingness and ability to work will not benefit the workman. 1t does not need an extended observation of the present state of the labor market, or of its state at any time during the past eight years, to satisfy us that the various fields of skilled labor are already filled with laborers and that to precipitate upon the unprotected 1n- dustries all the labor now employed In the protected industries would cause great suffer ing and destitution somewhere. We have seen enough of this during our recent ''hard times" Of the million or more tramps, who lately wandered over our country, houseless and unfed, how many thousands were skilled laborers, deprived of work in their own special art and unable to find employment in any other? And what would it be but re- petition of this very state of things If, in the present more prosperous times, two or three millions of skilled workmen were turned adrift by the destruction of our protected in dustries
 Among a certain class of writers agricul- 1 ture is considered as the panacea for these | evils ''Let them go on the land and become farmers and producers is the prescription | of these learned social physicians. But this proposed remedy is wholly impracticable | Farming is itself art and requires some | degree of skill and experience on the part o1 1 the farmer. It requires capital as well, both | for the hiring or purchase of land, and build | ingS and stock and for ma1ntaln1ng himself | and his family till his first crop is harvested
 How many of our skilled workmen could, ii | they had the opportunity, become skillful l and prosperous farmers, taking up the occu | patton at their time of life and with wive. | and children untrained and unsuited for az ricultural pursuits? How many of then
 have the capital to hire or buy farms in ths
 East, or to transport themselves and theil belongings to the West and support them til | ttey can live from the product of the soil
 Individual cases where this is possible nc doubt there are, but that the great army oi
 skilled laborers who are now engaged In oul
 protected industries can be changed into pros porous farmers by any operation short of 1 government subsidy or miracle, IS wlle
 chimera If the farming meant by our writ | CTS is that of farm servants as d1st1ngulshee | from hirers or owners of the soil, hardly think that any of them dare propose 1t, II unequivocal terms, to our American work | men. That they are ready to become, ol l that we are ready to have them become,
 class of underlings, working for the lords o1 l the land, hewers of wood and drawers o1
 water for some petty master of hundred
 acres, at wages paid largely in farm produce | I have no idea The condition of such ser 1 wants, (if there were 8 large class or them,
 and that of serfs would resemble each other
 too nearly for the safety of our institution, 1 and the preservation of free and enlightened | civilization.
 l I could pursue these reflections much fur
 ther but 1t seems to me that 1 have said ane
 suggested enough to demonstrate that prac
 tically the American is not free to choose hi l oco,,notioY1 and direet hig own life: that he is