The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-08-26
n FLAG,

LOWERING THE FLAG.
unfortunately for the returning pilgrim.
his readers will ask why, if a protective tariff
is just the thing to relieve England's distress.
a protective tariff, borne with remarkable
keroism, has not prevented distress in Amer
ica."
This is the comment Of the Louisville
Courier-Journal upon the remarks of Senator
Edmunds since his return from England.
Something is gained when a hare Drained and
vaporous free-trader can be compelled to adj
nit into his calculations that free trade has
not brought unspeakable blessings to Great
Britain. The claim is that all the depression,
and stagnation, and evil, of which the United
States is a victim, result from the protective
system, and that free trade would give all
workingmen employment, fill with orders
every factory and shop, extend our trade with
the world, and make the entire country to
bloom and blossom as the rose. No less "a
diant a picture is ever painted by any
free-trader. while the pigments used by the
editor Of the Courier Journal have been such
as harmonic with the redundant ecstasy of
his nature. So we say that it is great gain
in the intelligent discussion of:.this question,
when there is a concession On the part of a
free-trader that neither his theory nor yet
that Of the protectionist is a perfect and com
plete panacea for all the evils to which human
society and the body polite is heir. The
sensible protectionist willingly comedies that
a protective tariff will not do everything-will
not make over human nature; will not stop
waste; will not prevent the ravages of war;
will not prevent anation from payingits debts
to itself and the world; will not, in
short, do any other miraculous thing. The
claim is, however, that, all things else consid-
cred and the force of ali other influences
properly appreciated, the protective system,
wisely and judiciously applied, is the best for
a nation, and particularly for such a nation as
the United States, with its structural, and
social, and political, and economic differences
from the balance of the world. In the dis
cussion of that question, the protectionist
confidently appeals to the verdict of history
and Of experience, as well as Of sound a priori
reasoning. Let a comparison be instituted
between the industrial advance of Great
Britain and Of the United States within the
last thirty years. Let a contrast be made
between Great Britain and the United
States during the past twenty-five
years-the United States with its tremendous
civil war; its years of waste and its years Of
profligacy; its years of inflated currency and
its years Of struggle to reach solid ground.
Run a parallel between the condition of the
workingmen of the United States and Of
Great Britain to-day, or at any time duringthe
past quarter of a century. Fix the ratio of
increase, if possible, in the lives and homes
of the great mass of the industrial laborers of
the two countries-of their material, moral,
this be done fairly and candidly, and the pro-
tectionist gladly welcomes a sober Judgment
upon the merits of the respective industrial
systems upon which the two countries have
proceeded. But we did not intend to be be-
trayed into an argument; our only purpose
was to note with pleasure that even so rabid
an apostle as the editor of the Courier-Journal
has been forced to admit the possibility that
free trade might not be the all be has so
persistently asserted.