Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1888-10-12
TERRITORY OCTOBER 12 1885,
The OregOnian as a Free Trader.

that the tariff question is simply a
question of wages, and attributes the
difference between the wages in Amer
lea and Europe to the protective sys-
tenn OF this country. 1t may be easily
Shown that this is not true. The Ore
gOnidn, before its apostasy, spoke on
that subject these wise words:
eff the American policy Of protec-
tiOn il sound it can stand better on its
own merits and arguments derived
from the highly favored circumstances
in which our people are situated than
on boastful presentation of their con-
dition under protection in comparison
or contrast with that Of the people OF
Great Britain under free trade. All
the conditions of industry and life in
the two countries are so different that
no real comparison is possible, and any
attempt to force it, for the purpose of
proving free trade bad for Great Britain
and protection good for the United
States, only involves an illogical argu-
ment. 1t is uhdeniably true that, as a
rule, the condition of our working
classes is better than that of the work
ing classes of Great Britain. The rea-
sons for this are SO obviously found in
natural circumstances that any en-
deavor to trace them to the fiscal and
economic systems Of the two countries,
which systems, respectively, are the
outgrowth and product of natural cir
cumstances, and not-at all their NOV
ing cause, is lame indeed. England is
q small country and an old one. Her
own soil will not support One-half her
population. Her industry must turn
manufactures, or her people will starve.
She labors under the disadvantage,
then, Of having to import her food and
at the same time to produce goods
cheap enough to command the worlds
markets. These conditions make the
policy of free trade absolutely neces-
sary to her. Under it. her population
and wealth have largely increased, and
moreover there has been vast improve
ment since she adopted free trade in
the general condition OF her working
people. Such country, with no new
lands and no natural resources remain
ing undeveloped, is not making new
farms, building new towns and cities
and creating new activities, subject
only to continual limitations. On the
other hand, the United States is, first
of all, y food producing country.
Cheapness and abundance of food are
great factors in any estimate of Cir
cumstances that contributes to the
well-being OF people. Again, as null
titudes move West and take possession
of the country, its natural resources,
aided by their own moderate labor,
make them rich. Upon millions of
people have prosperity or influence
thus been bestowed, and the work is
now going on with greater rapidity and
wider distribution than at any former
time. These considerations alone will
show how little our protective system,
which is the habit with many to pre-
sent as the sole source of the prosperi-
ty Of the American masses in contrast
with that of the working people of
England, really has to do with that
prosperity. In England every indus
try is Overcrowded. With us there is
no crowding, for "the West" takes off
the surplus population; agriculture is
a resource to multitudes and England
furnishes market for their products,
while new industries, including the
building OF towns and cities and the
creation of immense values in real es-
tate, cause the enrichment of the
whole communities and the making OF
great States.
every attempt, therefore, to con-
trast the conditions of life in the
United States under protection with
those of Great Britain under free trade
is effort wasted, because protection and
free trade are not the main elements OF
the subject, but only the incidental
matters. There is, however, another
difference to be noted. So benefcent
and bountiful is nature with us, and SO
little have natures resources been ex-
hausted, that the United States would
continue in general prosperity either
under the policy of protection or that
of free trade. In England, on the other
hand, protection would be the hight of
absurdity. Except in articles of food,
England can undersell the world, and,
therefore, has no need to protect her
manufacturers; and protection of her
farmers by tariff on food products
would be ruinous to her manufactur-
ing population. For comparison OF the
respective benefits of free trade and
protection it is necessary to take coun-
tries in which the conditions of life are
somewhat similar. For instance, take
England and Germany. The latter ad-
heres to protection; the former main
! tains free trade. Is Germany a richer
or more prosperous country than Eng
land? Is the average condition Of her
people better? Wages in Germany are
not higher than in England, but in
many employments lower; while the
English wage-worker has an advantage
over the German in the purchasing
power OF his days wages, as applied to
many of the necessaries Of life and
such OF its luxuries as workingmen of
the old countries venture to indulge
themselves in. In America we have
cheap food and free lands. In what
country of Europe do these conditions
exist? These advantages alone will
account for the better fortune of our
people as compared with that of the
people of every country of Europe.
They depend no more on our protect