Thomas County cat., 1890-02-06

1883 in Bristol, Glasgow. Liverpool and
London. The percentage of increase.
since we have passed from the protective
system of the navigation law into free
trade is IN Bristol 66 per cent, in Glas,
cow IS per cent, in Liverpool (for differ
ent classes) from Is per cent. to 70 pei
cent, and in London from 45 per cent. to
SO per cent. No such return, at once ex.
act and comprehensive. can be supplied
in the case of the rural workman. Blu,
here the facts are notorious. We are as
sured that there has been an universal
rise (somewhat checked, fear. by the
recent agricultural distress). which Cairo
and other authorities place at go per cent
Together with this increase of pay there
has been q general diminution OF the
| hours of work. which Mr.. Giffen places
at one-fifth. If we make this correction
upon the comparative table. We shall
| find that the cases are very few in which
The increment does not range as high as
from so to 10S per cent.
Within the same peri d the prices of
the main riicies Of popular consumption
have certainly declined The :lsborer' 8
charges, except for his abode, have actu-
ally diminished as whole. For his
arger house rent he has better house.
To the government he pays much less
than he did, and from the government he
gets much more and the increase Of his
money wages corresponds to real gain.
If it be said that the tale have told is
insufficient and the wages ought still to
rise, this may he so. and rise hope they
will, but protection had no such tale to
tell at all. For the working population at
large is meant stagnation, depression.
in many cases actual and daily hunger
and thirst. in some unquestionab.e and
even gross degradation.
GREAT WASTE OF PROTECTION.
International commerce IS based, not
upon arbitrary or fanciful considerations.
but upon the unequal distribution among
men and regions of aptitudes to produce
the several commodities which are neces-
sary or useful to the sustenance, comfort
and advantage of human life.
The argument of the free trader is that
the legislator ought never to interfere, or
cnly to interfere so far as imperative fiscal
necssi y may require t,witn this natural
law of distribution.
All interference with it by govern
ment in order to encourage some dearer
method of production at home, pretence
TO a cheper method of production abroad,
may fairly be termed artificial. And ev-
cry such interference means simply a
diminution of national wealth. If region
A grows corn at home for fifty shillings
which region can supply at forty. and
region manufactures cloth at twenty
shillings with which region A can supply
at fifteen, the national wealth of each is
by the ten and five shillings
respectively.
So much for the waste unavoidably at
taching to dearnesS of production. But
there are other and Vt worse descrip-
tions of waste. as to which | know not
whether America suffers greatly
from them. but l know that in this cOun-
try we suffered from them or ev"usly
Il der the sway of protection When the
barrier erected by protective duty is so
high that no foreigner can ov-rleap it.
that duty enables the home manufacturer
not only to charge high price. but to
force on the consumer bad article Thus
with an extravagant duty on foreign
corks. We had for our own use the worst
corks in Europe. And yet again. protec
tion causes waste of another kind in a
large class of cases. Suppose the natural
ofthe protective duty to
be 30. But cheapness requires minute
care, economy and dispatch at all the
stages through which production has to
pass. This minute care and thrift depend
mainly upon the pressure of competition.
There were among us, and there may BE-
many producers whom indo-
tempts to neglect; who are not sufficiently
drawn to resist this inertia by the attrac
ton of raising profit to maximum. for
whom the prospect of advantage is not
enough without the sense of necessity.
and whom nothing can spur to a due
nimbleness of movement except the fear
of not being able to sell their articles
In the case / have supposed. the second
10 per cent is free margin whereupon
this Incidence may disport itself; the
home producer is not only covered with
what he wastes through ne' essity, but
for what he wastes from negligence or
choice; and his fellow counirymen have
to pay alike for both We suffered griev-
ou>ly from this in England. for often
times the rule Of the producer is. or was,
to pro 'uce not as well rs he can, but IA
well only as b. must And happy ar.
you if. through keener energy or mor
conscience in production.
you have no similar suffering in America.
There is yet another point which can