Morning journal and courier., 1885-10-22
is as strong as it ever was; and her eager. ness to fetard their progress has found no

o is as strong as it ever was; and her eager ness to fetard their progress has found no abatement
 5. The necessity that existed in the inter-
 ests of morality, as well as of self defense,
 for intefposing some obstacle to her designs
 in this respect may possibly be indicated
 most clearly by showing what have been the
 consequences of her success in cases where
 no such obstacle was permitted.
 Two impressive examples of this kind pre-
 sent themselves. TheEe are but two countries
 which EnRland has been able to compel to
 submit to her theories. These are Ireland
 and India. They are the only countries, ex-
 ceptine England, in which free trade notions
 have had full sway. They are the only countries
 that are periodically swept by famine, which
 is poorer and more wretched may be hard to
 determine. Within forty years the popula- tion of Ireland has decreased by three mil
 lions. In her hills are iron ore and coal
 Upon the backs of her sheep there is wool.
 Our cotton is as free to her. as it is to Eng
 land.. But England has paralyzed her indus trial power and her children have nothing to
 do but to fly from home, or to starvs. No
 body can doubt what Ireland would do with
 the protective tariff questions if she could do as she pleases.
 In India, the native. cotton making indus
 
 when the Englishrnen who have gone there to attempt manufacture, tried to protect themselves with small import duty. Man chester ordered it to be stricken off and off it came.
 The people, forced into agriculture in huge | masses, far in excess of the requirements of that agriculture, are miserable beyond de- scription. The problem of the disposition of the surplus population works itself out, al- most periodically, through the instrumental ity of famine Crop disasters, which in this l country or in England would do no general harm, give in India certain promise of widespread death from hunger It is said l that 38 ,00O, ,O00 people in India have died of famine during the last fifty years. No more impressive illustration could be given of the fact that export of raw material and import of manufactures involve continuous loss of wealth and ultimate ruin. India supplies the proof that purely agricultural country is inevitably poor country.
 6. The protective tariff system was adopt ed by our government as defence against the policy which has helped to produce these results. That it has accomplished its pur- pose will hardly be denied by the most eager free traders. That this country would not have grown to individual greatness without such protection may be asserted boldly; first, because no nation; not even England, ever did reach large industrial success without protection; and; second, because every na- tion, excepting England, which has adopted her notions either has gone to ruin or has sought again the shelter of the tariff. Both Germany and France have tried free trade for brief space in recent years, and both have re-enacted strongly protective tariffs. If tariff protection, indeed, cannot be jus ti6ed upon moral grounds. it be re- garded as 8 remarkable proof of the perverse immortality of the human that every government which has the power to do so has enacted tariffs defense against British aggression. But anyone who has his eyes upon India and Ireland is entitled to ques- ton if England, in fact, has monopoly of the political morality now extant in the earth.
 2. But the protective system was defensi- ble when our industries were yet to be ere ated, can it's maintenance be excused now
 that they are strong, and rich and prosper ous?
 It is, of course, to be admitted that there
 is now little danger that England, even if we
 had free trade. would reduce us to the in dustrial condition of the Irish and Indians.
 But the reason why that danger does not ex-
 ist is that the protective system has existed. We have grown so strong behind the shelter
 of the tariff that we might be able to defy
 foreign competition if we were willing to ac-
 cept the conditions which would inevitably
 follow the withdrawal of the protective du-
 ties. Those conditions are the large reduc-
 tion of the wages of the laborer.
 The principal reason why England can un-
 dersell us is that she pays less for the labor
 put upon her fabricated material. There are
 those who deny that the tariff is the chief
 cause of the higher wages paid here. But
 this possibly can be proved. The fact that
 the effectiveness of protection appears to be
 shown by the circumstance that wages in the
 building trades, by nature absolutely protected from foreign competition, are very much higher than they are in the trades that are partially protected by the tariff. There is further proof in this fact: Raw cotton is as cheap here as it is there; perhaps even cheaper, and yet England can sell her cotton goods at lower prices than ours can be of fered at, for the simple reason that it costs less to make them in that country than in this.
 If we are to enter upon an open industrial
 struggle with her our wages must go down first of all. But if such war begins where will it end? The first decrease will not be the last. If we cut wages to her level she must reduce hers still further, and then we will have to make another reduction. Who
 can believe that such proceeding would be of any advantage to us or to the general cause Of public moralitya
 s. To get things cheap is not as some of the free traders affirm, the best thing for
 man. Things may be much too cheap for
 the interests of morality, as when they are
 made cheap by starving and degrading the laborer who produces them. The evidence is strong that laboring men are in better
 condition when prices are high. What would be the effect upon our work peopls if they should ever be brought into
 free competition with those of India
 and Chinas But if we are seeking for cheapness that is the conclusion we
 push for. To keep the masses in deep and hopeless poverty is manifestly to infict in jury upon society. Religion teaches that the poor have special spiritual opportunities; but it does not commend that it's disciples should remain poor, nor does our church i'm
 pose poverty upon any of her sons-except the clergy.
 If there were no other reason why we should decline to engage with England in such 8 contest for cheapness might find one in these facts: The results to her of her methods has been that her poor are among the most miserable and degraded in Europe; that one-fourth of the total immigration to ! this country is from the British Islands, and l that she now has the doubtful honor of be- ing the only great civilized nation of the | earth whose professional paupers include | one -thirtieth of her population and require $40, ,OOO, 900 year for their support On the other hand we have no pauper class: we able to consume 92 per cent. of our | own products; we give better chance of ad- Yancement to the humble than he can find l elsewhere, and we have a population of la | borers who live better, behave better, know more, save more and are more valuable mem
 bers of society generally than any other la- | boring population in the world!
 l The maintenance of the superior social con- dition of our work people is so important ! that it may be regarded as one of the essen | tials to the success of our national institu- tions. Where there are manhood suffrage
 and absolute political equality, the degrada- | tion of the laboror would inf1ict grave injury | upon the government. But, it is safe to say
 that no legislation is possible, or, if possible
 can be permanent which will produce such
 results. The reason why the protective sys l tenn has been steadfastly maintained in l this country is, that the mass of the workers | instinctively understand that the system is
 the one great safe guard against this degra- | dation.
 l It is more than this It is the part of ou1 political machinery which by maintaining 1 good wages and the dignity of the workman
 helps us to fulfill one of the greatest of ou, functions, that of demonstrating to the world I the worth of the individual man, the safety of permitting the equality of men and the | injustice and iniquity of the European sys- tems which we based upon privilege But 1 says the free trade moralist, how about the brotherhood of man? Is it fraternal is it generous, is it manifesting Christian spirit ! !,