The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1881-11-18

Free Trade ideas are rife in all pa.
pers nowadays. One can scarcely pick
up paper in which some political
economist has not ventilated one OF
more of the time-honored doctrines
held by the advocates OF this system OF
international exchange These items
are but the forerunner of q strong eff.
fort to be made in Congress this win
ter to reduce the tariff ON many of our
imports.
| Whether there is truth in the doc
trines held by free traders or not, their
arguments are subtle, if not convinc-
Ting. They are glittering sophistrieS
OF the truth, and years OF contest have
not determined which. If, as is held,
tariff duties for protection of home in
dustries simply diverts labor from ma
tural channels and engages it in indug-
tries that are profitable simply because
of the protection afforded, the people
are the losers. They would be gamers
in two directions apparently if protec-
ton should be removed. Labor en-
gagged in these industries would be
freed and allowed to engage in pur-
suits profitable without protection.
The price of the protected goods WOULD
fall to the cost Of production in coun-
tries where they can be produced
cheaper than they can in this country.
If tariff duties are placed 80 high as to
unable the American manufacturer to
keep out his European competitor,
he thus gets the control of the market,
and then by combinations establish
large monopolies and run prices up to
any figure desired, the people are
again the losers. Eycn the large tax to
which they are thus subjected does not
become American capital. for it is di-
Vided up with the European capitalist,
whose money supports even American
industry. and goes to augment his
boarded millions. The free trader
does not have it all his own way.
There are few. points on the protec-
ton side that have never been salts
factorily disposed of. 1t would seem
as though the national welfare and
safety of q country demanded that it
should have within itself the means
of self-defence in times of war. Our
great industries that have grown up
under protection are not a days
growth. They could not be rebuilt in
day. An impending war would, at a
moment when all the energies of the
country were devoted to say agricul-
ture, the acknowledged pursuit in
which labor and capital can most prof.
itably engage without protection, find
the country very poorly prepared to
meet it. The north could never have
overcome the south in our civil war
had it not been for the industries that
grew Np in the north under protective
tariff, and which were wanting in the
south. The backbone of the confed-
eracy was broken as much by lack of
supplies in the south as by the superior
military power Of the north. Had the
coal, iron, and other minor natural re-
sources Of the south been developed as
they had been in the north, the rebel
lion would not have ended as it did.
Whether the industries which have
grown up under protection and been
fostered by it now need the same pro-
lection is doubtful. OF course there
will always be cry for more protec-
ton by those who make their money
by it. If it were possible to give just |
such protection as is necessary and no
more to these industries, SO that Their |
would be fair competition, it would
be the best way. But these tariff du-
ties need constant changing. Protec- |
ton should be just sufficient to enable |
the American manufacturer to COM
pete honestly with the outside pro-
ddcer.
There is mistaken notion that re- |
moval Of protection would relieve us
from the monopolies that have grown
up under the present system. Let the
various protected industries of the
United States be broken by the re-
moval Of the tariff and the fires would
hardly be out before prices would 60 in
to the sky. We would have to pay the
European monopolist instead Of the
that would be the only diff
ference.