Mexico weekly ledger., 1890-01-23
onipiled for the i.s-ig-r-
FREE TRADE.
Ely THE RIGHT HON. W. E. GLADSTONE.

What follows is brief synopsis oi
Mr.. Gladstone's article on Free Trade
III the North American Repieu:
Mr.. Gladstone begins by showing,
Through official reports, that the wages
II labor were increased from 20 to leO
per cent. in Great Britain by the re-
peal of her corn laws, and that at the
same time there was decline in the
prices of the main articles of popular
consumption. Such, continues Mr..
Gladstone, have been the economical
results Of Free Trade as compared
with Protection; and its political,
moral and social results have been
equally satisfactory. If 1t can be said
this tale is sufficient, it ought also to be
said that Protection has no such tale to
tell. For the working population it
meant stagnation, depression and, in
many cases. actual daily hunger and
tiIrst and in some even gross degra-
is.tion. I will venture to say that,
taking the case as a whole, 1t would be
iifficult to match in history the picture
which Great Britain now presents OF
progress, achieved mainly through
wise laws, from stnted means and
positive want towards comfort and
advance for the people.
PROTECTION VIEWED IN IT'S FIRST AS
PECTs.
With the view, however, of present
ing the argument for leaving trade to
tho operation of natural laws, in the
simplest manner shall begin with
sorne postulates which I suppose to be
incapable of dispute. International com
.nerce is based not upon arbitrary or
fanciful considerations but upon the
unequal distribution among men and
.egions Of aptitudes to produce the
several commodities that are necessa-
~ to the sustenance and comforts OF
life. If every country produced all
commodities with exactly the same
degree of facility and cheapness it
would be contrary to common sense to
incur the expense of sending them
from one country to another; but the
Inequalities are so great that one re-
yion can supply some of the needs OF
the other, Notwithstanding the cost OF
transportation at lower rate than tn.
after can produce. This condition OF
supply when untrammeled by law is
the handspring of natural distribution
md the argument of Free Trade is,
that legislation ought not to interfere
with natural law except where imper-
ltive fiscal necessity demands it. All
Interference by government to encour.
Lge dearer production at home in pre-.
ference to the introduction of cheaper
articles from abroad is. to say the least
artificial aud means diminution ol
natural wealth, and capitalists and Ia.
borers, where such legislation exists
have 30 much less to parcel out al
their respective shares of industrial
product. In my view, continues Mr.
Gladstone, however dignified may b.
the source from which it proceeds, Pro
lection is simply an invitation to waste
with the authority of law. Protection
says to the producer, "Grow this OIL
manufacture that at any expense and
don't be afraid; your waste shall be
laid OH national shoulders" II Piotec'
ton could be equally distributed il
would he fair as between classes; bu,
| it cannot be thus equally distributed
until g. country is found without inter.
est in exporting some of its commodi'
ties. 1t is beyond human wit to secure
to the growers of cotton, wheat and
corn in the United States the tenth
part ofa cent per bale or bushel be-
yond the prevailing prices Of the coun'
tries to which they are exported, AID
if. under these circumstances, they are
forced to pay a manufacturer protect
ed prices for what they need II
is robbery, legally perpetrated
Again, as wealth il accumulation
dependent upon the net surplus left in
dustry. after defraying the costo Of pro
duct.on, to make the surplus largest IL
to raise national wealth to its maxi
mum; but Protection increases ex'
penses and thus reduces accumula
Protectionist is to the contrary of al
this. His contention Is that Protec
ton is mine Of wealth; and that q
greater aggregate Of profit results from
what 10 called keeping labor and
capital at home than from permitting
them to seek employmenta abroad. But
II this be SO, why is Free Trade among
the several States of the Union so dc
sirable and remunerative9 No one, ]
think, will venture 10 answer tina,
profits are larger in protected than in
unprotected industries, because the
best opinions testify that in the pro
tected trades of the United States
profits are hard pressed by wages
and there can hardly be found any
one that will contend that waste al
the expense Of communities oughI
to be encouraged to benefit classes.
RELATIoN BETWEEN PROTECTION AMI
HIGH WAGES.
Admitting that there is to be seen IL
the United States the co-existencs O
high wages with Protection, but deny
ing the relation of cause and effect be
tween them, 1t may be asked whether
1t Is All universal proposition and con
tention that in no case can wages b,
raised by Protection. The answer il
that no country can raise Its aggregat.
wage-fund by Protection, but mus
inevitably thereby reduce 1t. Pr,
lection u contrivance for producing
dear and selling dear by shutting ou
foreign competition. Nevertheless f
! is possible that In some trades wage.
may be raised by 1t at the expense o
| communities, What is contended fol
y, that It would be preposterous +
refer the general high wages Of th,
United States to such causes. / canno
see how the wages Of agriculture ar,
| enhanced by the protection Of manu-
facturers and yet their relations ar
similar ard from that fact IL woifff