St. Landry democrat., 1891-02-14
Protection Versus Free T rade.

Protection Versus Free 7 rade.
Editor American:
| have to thank you for the courtesy OF
YOUR columns for my former article, and
especially for your long Comment upon IL.
Having failed to state my position with
sufficient emphasis to be understood, l
must ask your further indulgence for
few facts to back up the assertion mot
assumption if you please) that "Engla
prosperity was built up by the most rigid
adherence to the principle of the Mckln-
lev bill" and that *'lreland's poverty,
misery and woe are the result of
Englands free trade policy. l will be as
brief as possible.
England was first in the modern move
ment of manufacturing by labor saving
machinery, a'beginning little more
than century ago. She pos
9 sed certain special advantages not
possessed by other nations. Her insular
position Afforded her protection from in
vssion. Rich and extensive beds of coal,
iron and lime stone, furnished her with
the first essentials to the new development,
skilled labor and capital were more at her
command than at the command OF any
other nation. To make the most of these
advantages, she early adopted the policy
of drawing to the little island all the
skilled labor that could be induced to
come from other countries, by snch laws
as tended to encourage the immigration OF
the best artisans. and to discourage the
emigration of such, going so far ID the
way of encouragement, as 10 make IL
criminal offense to entice skilled artisan
abroad 10 engage in his art III another
country. Under these laws, an artisan
1ifyht ha
ordered back under penalty of the con-
Gscstion OF his property. BY the same
policy, it was attempted to contine the
knowledg e of lsbor-saving machinery to
the island of Great Britain. The impor-
tation of valuable machinery, or models of
machinery, was encouraged, and the ex-
portation was prohibited. Colonies and
| dependencies were allowed to engage in
| mapufacturing and commerce only at the
pleasure of the home government Among
! the grievances sent up to the throne from
| the American colonies was this:
You named the ports and nations TO
which alone our merchandise should be
carried. and with whom we should trade
All of the colonies and dependencies
| Ireland included. were so regulat 7d as 10
! increase the Industrial and commercial
mower OF the island of Great Britain
| None of them were permitted to share IN
her prosperity. When separation be-
tween the mother country and colony
came. and the power Of British Legislation
ceased to operate as check upon In
dustrial development, policy of destruc-
tive competition was adopted, such as was
urged by Lord Brougham at the close OF
The war of 1912 cit is well worth while,
SAID the noble lord, ito incur loss in the
first exploration, in order, by the glut, to
st,te in the cradle those infant manu-
features in the United States which tue
war forced into eXistance' and nothing
but the retention of the double duties,
laid for war purposes, prevented the
"stiti ing."
But the protective policy did not stop
with the encouragement OF artisans ano
the requirement OF machinery, 1t pro
tected in the most effective manner the
products of the two, either by the laying
on of heavy import duties, or Dy absolute
prohibition Take single example, bal
IRON, covering period OF about oo years
from 1112 to about 1870.
The Colliery Guardian, of London, II
1877. published list OF these duties
The list is very interesting, given mere
with approximate accuracy 10 our money
namely from 1872 to 1873, S1O per ION
1877 to 1902, $l5; 1906, $50; lSO6 TO ISL
s25: in the five wears ending 1918, $50.
At the last date, and continuing to aoou
1925. 1he duty was made discriminating
so as TO favor English shipping. BY thl:
law bar iron brought in English bottoms
. was admitted at pounds 10 shilllngs; L
in foreign bottoms, pounds Is shilIngs
6 pence q discrimination of about 20 ton
These rates, remember, were OF
bar iron, a crude product. The next step
: though a short one, was more costly
The same authority says:
I "Iron slit or hammered into RODS, ant
! iron drawn down or hammered less thal
! three quarters of an inch was made to pa,
8 duty at the rate of 20 pounds per ton.
+ nearly 500!
Q These ara only samples taken at ran
; dom. Further examination Will dlsclos
= the fact that the rate of duty increased a
the product was more highly wrought
and importation of many ARTICLES was pro
hibited
l. In view of these facts, what becomes o
: YOUR statement that Sin England the rulin
a classes had their wealth chiefly in lands
n and their efforts were directed chief
It towards protecting the products OF lano
e But this by no means ends the chapter
5 It appears, incidentally, in the foregoln
: ron schedule that shipping was earv con
g idered q suitable object for protection
l. The discriminating duty of 1912 was bu
y a first step however to the most gigant1
o scheme for encouraging" shipping ths
y thu world has ever seen. In 1871, ID
It government made liberal contracts Wit
y private ship ards to build iron vessels Il
IS the navy. This policy laid the founoatlo
, of the great yaros that have since studde
y the seas with iron ships. This was TO
It lowed in 1910 with the su5sidlzing
e. steamship companies for the carrying
foreign mails, for example,. the Cunal
line of four vessels received the hrst yes
about $500 for a round trip, or s4l3. 0l
l, in the year the next year, S55O. OOO
IL 1916 with two vessels additional, $|Oo, 90
re In 1910 a mail line to the East lndle
d China and Japan was established ana 7
Ie ceived for the service the first year y III
& 500; and the second year the sum VI
IS doubled. In 1850, a similar line got
a contract to carry the mails to the we
y Indies and Brazil, for ten years, at Sl, %
t. 900 year. l.,
ID This was the beginning of policy th
at continues to the present day. bet"e'
in 1910 and 1880 the British governmeal
Us pald Tor tnlS sefNlco ooou' 9,.1,.
of an average of five and half millions
as year. .
It, Thus we see that England protected t
products of the factory, the field, shipph
interests, every thing that might add
prosperity of the people. SO that WIN
it. free trade came to be discussed, In t
or language of one of her own statesme
she 'had the world by the heels and b
at nothing to fear from competition. WI
if | the change of policy2 1t can be told II