Arizona weekly citizen., 1891-01-24
rsrEREDATTHEFosToFF1cEA 2D-CLAssM MATTER
w. L. VAIL. Editor.
FREE TRADE sELFIsHNEss.

The theory of free trade has very apt ly been pronounced "a science based on assumptions" The correctness of this diagnosis finds confirmation in the nerv- ousness of the average free trade advo- cate when confronted by the cold facts of history and business experience.
 No country has ever succeeded in at taining national prominence in the ab- sence of a rigid regard for the defense of those industries rendered practicable by reason of natural resources and the ability of its people to make and keep themselves in most part independent of business rivals in other countries.
 England is at once the inspiration of free trade evangelism in the United States and the model to which free trade attorneys invariably point to their ideal of economic government. Yet, within recollection of men now living, when modifying its policy, the British Parlia- ment repealed code of laws, certain provisions of which would make the protective features of our present tariff seem the extreme of conservatism. It was not until after three centuries of protection, and when confronted with the fact that British acres could not longer meet the demand for bread and meat for British tables, that Parliament ventured to repeal the corn laws and to remove the barriers of defense from about those products of manufacture that rigid protection had brought to a unparalleled perfection.
 This chapter of British history, though so rigidly excluded from the speeches of those who are seeking to anglicize the policy of this country, and given no place in the pages of literature with which the Golden Club so literally supplies its American allies, is none the less one that the patriotic student of the situation cannot afford to ignore. Nor should he fail to recall the fact that the policy of protecting her industeries so long as protection seems essential to supremacy, is one that Great Britain has never altogether abandoned. Every important line of steamships owned by British capital and run from British ports is defended against damaging competition by subventions that con- stitute guaranty of interests upon necessary investments, but British con- suls are quite generally under instruc- tions to act as agents of such lines if their services are required.
 Another form of British protection is now claiming attention of our cabinet and minister to England. Represents tives of the department of agriculture have for some months been in England under instructions to minimize the ex- pense and endorsements heaped up against American live stock under an assumed fear of contagious diseases, but in reality to ally the restlessness of British farmers and stock raisers over American competition. @
 Great Britain has ever been prompt to handicap foreign competition when its freedom was likely to operate to the pecunlary disadvantage of her subjects. The pressure for free trade with this country is no exception to this rule of national selfshiness, and will be revers- ed as the change from protection was made whenever the exigencies of Brit ish interests seems tc require such a step.