Shenandoah herald. [volume] (Woodstock, Va.) 1865-1974, 1884-07-25
Blaine'S Protection Views
coNrlNuEp FRoM LAsr wEEK.l

"In the foregoing summary OF
legislation upon the tariff, the
terms free trade and protection are
used in their ordinary acceptation
in this country-not as accurately
defining the difference in revenue
theories, but as indicating the rival
policies which have so long divided
political parties. Strictly speak
ing, there has never been propo-
sition by any party in the United
States for the adoption of free
trade. To be entirely free, trade
must encounter no obstruction in
the way Of tax, either upon export
or import. In that sense no nation
has ever enjoyed free trade. As
contradistinguished from the theory
of protection, England has realized
freedom of trade by taxing only
that class of imports which meet
no competition in home production,
thus excluding all pretense of
favor or advantage to any OF
her domestic industries.
England came to this policy
after having clogged and embar-
rassed trade for long period by
the most unreasonable and tyran-
nical restrictions, ruthlessly en-
forced, without regard to the inter
ests or even the rights of Others
She had more than four hundred
acts of Parliament regulating the
ta~ on imports, under the old
des. nations Of tonnage and pound
age, adjusted, as the phrase in
dicates, to heavy and light com
modities. Beyond these, she had a
cumbersome system of lawsregulat-
ing and in many cases prohibiting
the expectation Of articles which
might teach to other nations the
skill by which she had herself SC
marvelously prOspered.
"When by long experiment and
persistent effort England had car
ried her fabrics to perfection; when
by the large accumulation of wealth
and the force of reserved capital
she could command facilities which
poorer nations could not rival;
when by the talent Of her inventors,
developed under the stimulus of
large reward, she had surpassed all
other countries in the magnitude
and effectiveness Of her machinery,
she proclaimed free trade and per-
suasively urged it upon all lands
with which she had commercial
intercourse. Maintaining the most
arbitrary and most complicated
system of protection so long as her
statesmen considered that policy
advantageous, she resorted to free
trade only when she felt able to in
wade the domestic markets of other
countries and undersell the fabrics
produced by struggling artisans
who were sustained by weaker
capital and by less advanced skill.
SO long as there was danger that
her own marts might be invaded,
and the products other looms and
forges undersOld at home, she rigid
ly excluded the competing fabric
and held her own market for her
own wares.
"England was, however, neither
consistent nor candid in her adj
vOcacy and establishment of free
trade. She did not apply it to all
departments of her enterprise, but
only to those in which she felt con-
fdent that she could defy compe-
tition. Long after the triumph of
free trade in manufactures, as pro
claimed in 1916, England continued
to violate every principle Of her
own creed in the protection she ex-
tended to her navigation interests.
She had nothing to fear from the
United States in the domain of
manufactures, and she therefore
asked us to give her the unrestrict-
ed benefit of our markets in eX-
change for a similar privilege
which she offered to us in her
markets. But on the sea we were
steadily gaining upon her, and in
1S52ij5 were nearly equal to Der in
aggregate tonnage. We could
build wooden vessels !at less cost
than England and our ships eX-
celled hers in speed. When steam
began to compete with sail she saw
her advantage. She could build
engines at less cost than we, and
when, soon afterward, her ship
builders began to construct the
entire steamer Of iron, her advan-
tages became evident to the whole
world
"England was not content, how
ever, with the superiority which
these circumstances gave to her.
She did not wait for her own theory
of free trade to work out its legiti-
mate results, but forthwith stimu-
lated the growth of her steam