The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1889-04-04

Epgland. 81 tba. time, was oyercro~ded
with population. The islsod WAS small
and much u tbe laud was held by large
estates which could not be broken mp
without revolution aud change Of gov
erament Consequently there wss little
room for expansion 10 The dirrcilootot az.
roalinre The growth must be mado 10
otter directions Bright aud Golden
both saw this and that there was practi
cslly bu, ons road open, that Of msnuisc
lures. But there was no home market Tor
so Large 40 amount Of mauuisctured goods,
then England must manulacture for the
world ,gla
THIS was a grand idea. could it be sue
cessiully carried oulf The very first re-
quisile was that the goods should be
made chesply. To do this the operatives
must live ehesply, aud the tax on corn
must 90, This might ruin agriculture 10
England bnt that being the lesser interest
it were better to lose that than the chance
to control foreign markets in msnuiactur-
ed good AT that period England was
very much like ship in storm. A por.
ton OF the cargo must be thrown over
board or the ship would very likely go 10
the bottom. Bright and Golden decided
that agriculture must take its chances
with free trade and the main reliance must
be made on manufacturers, and, since
this was to he the case, protective duties
would do no good. Cheap goods was their
only hope. by uuderselling other nations
they could obtain vast market and the
work shops and factories OF England would
be kept busy.
II was greatly to the credit Of England
and to the craftsmanship Of Bright and
Golden that this policy succeeded. There
is no question that England prospered
greatly during tho years that succeeded,
but it was after all onesided develop.
ment. From that day to this agriculture
in Great Britain has been on the decline
until it has ceased to be remuneratiye, and
English farmers now say they are threat
ened with starvation. Englsnd's boosted
growth has not been symmetrical. Hem
med in by narrow island it could not be
from the very nature OF things, but il she
could not grow in one direction she must
in another or cease growing 1t would
have been vastly better in the long run,
could she have grown IN every direction,
and her agricultural resources could have
kept pace with her manufactures.
She is now very much in the condition
Of man who has lost his arms. By hard
work be has taught himself to do many
things wonderfully well with bis toes. h
has even learned to do some things better
with his toes than other people do with
their hands, and thus he manages to get q
good living. but after all hands are better
than toes to work with and peopls will
learn how TO use them b. the best advan-
tage. and in the long run will beat toes
that are ever 30 well trained. A perfect
man hs, both hands and toes. aud the ma
ton that is nearest perfection is the one
that has room enough aud resources
enough to expand 10 every direction.
II this definition OF perfect nstion ia
correct than the United States comes the
nearest perfection OF any nation on earth.
We are not crampe1 for room Ia any d.
rection. Oar resources OF all kinds that
tend to make a nation happy aud prosper.
Gus are practically inexhsus,ible. All il
is necessary for us 10 do Ii to preserve and
develop what we have At home. We need
not compete With England ia trying to
make our goods cheaply because onr large
agricultural interests furnish home mar
ket for our manufacturers. Ga the other
hand II We manufacture our own goods We
furnish the best kind Of market for our
agricultural products. Each industry
helps all Others. We can grow in all di
reetions aud thera is practically no limit
20 our chances for development.
We believe that il Richard Golden and
John Brish, bad lived 10 America Instead
Of Eueland they would have advocated
very different policy from What they did
there. The conditions are totally different
Indeed Bright. evidently, bad no idea tha,
protection was rninins the Uui,ed States
for be frequently spoke Of our marvellous
growth snl predict "a sonderful things fer
our future.
oae simple illnsirstian explains the vast
difference betwrsn tie two countries The
Uniied States imposes duty Of 20 per
cep, on almost all agricultural products.
This il practically wba, the corn laws did
10 Eogland raefe ii was oppressive he
cause England could not raise nearly
enough fos her population. Here II - not
becsuse ve can raise enough
aud some 10 spare j, 10 certain that.
owing 10 orr abaudsnce. the tsrif on ~
rieultural products, with the exception Of
wool and po,siors, makes very little dill /
.ereses with the price. The price il Ger
isinIy not oppressive On snyihing No raise
Why then, II is asked. do ne keep tariff
on these sr.ielcs since 1t does 90; material
" sfssri the price. sinply TO keep our
oxn market Cspsds cAn raise wheat As
cheaply ~ ne can. Were there no isrid
% wheat part Of her produet would be
d aste,ed here and thus displsce just 40
much Ameriean grown ~hes,. 10 hi.