The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1889-10-10
EooNomIo 1Aw.nmPAnr,AL.


In reioinder to few words about /
England as q prosperous free trade /
country published in the NEWS a few
days ago, the Kansas City, Kansas,
Gazette has the following which we |
take from the body of its article. It |
says:
England is not free trade coun-
try per Sc, and is only SO when it VIII
best advance her interest, and It must
be rendered that she is simply huge
Misunderstanding district. having limited
agricultural resources, therefore, i u
60 her interest to let in free khe bread
stuffs she SO badly needs. England mas
compelled Ireland to be a free trade
country. etc.
We don't know just what is meant
by "a free trade country per se,'' but
we do know that she is free trade in
the sense that her tariff duties are nom
protective.
.'She is simply huge manufacture
ing district. y Precisely; and what
makes and keeps her SOP Is it not the
fact that she has the good sense to adj
NIT the raw materials for her factories
free of duty9
There are huge manufacturing dis
tricts in this country also, destined to
become huger still, which draw their
sustenance whence? Why from the
agricultural and producing classes,
their neighbors and fellow citizens.
Surprising England adopted our policy
of high tariffs and should compel her
factories to confne their operations to
supplying only the people of
Great Britain with their wares
how soon would she become
bankrupt and tens of thousands of her
laboring men and artizans thrown out
of employment?
The fact that she manufactures not
only for herself. but for a large portion
! of the world besides, from which the
major part of her revenue is derived,
accounts for her commercial pre-emi-
hence and prosperity, does it notP She
has home market as we'll as we, but
she does not permit one class of her
people to work it like gold mine and
trust to it alone, as we do.
AS for her compelling Ireland to be
free trade country, that is nonsense.
| If that we're the extent of her infiic-
tions on Ireland, she would be fortu-
nate country. If England prOspers SO
| wonderfully under tree trade, why
| should not Ireland? The laws OF
trade and of political economy are not
pactial aud one sided, are they? Eng
land compels Ireland to a condition
far worse than that implied by the
words free trade.' Two hundred
years ago, she absolutely prohibited
any manufacturing in the island save
that of linen and few unimportant
things that did not compete with Eng
lish wares. That inhibition still ex-
exists, as it does wheresoeYer else il
her dominions she has the power tt
enforce it.
Let us suppose Ireland is separated
from England and adopts protection
as We have. it. She will have to buy
her raw material abroad. The tariff
on it will enhance the price of the man
ufactured article. How then coulC
she compete with English made good
which paid no tariff tax? Plainly sh,
could not sell doll r's worth abroad
and like our manufacturers, would b.
, compelled to market her wares a
! home, and of course, compel her PEG
pie to pay higher prices than now 70
, them. AS Ireland is only half the siz
, of Kansas, it is easily seen that a few
} manufacturers, protected by tariff
wall, would have the island completed,
} at their mercy to fleece and plumber a
will.
Consider these things. Brother Mar
!, tin, calmly and without prejudice, an
we think you will agree with US, tina
next to landlord robbery, and equal
as odious and paralyzing to Irish in
{ dustry and activity, would be the pro
tective tariff you advocate. 1t Woul
/ simply add one class of robbers to al
p other, and the people would be the lie
gal prey of the landlord and the ta(
! tEIsV lord