The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1891-12-03
4 HEAVY INDICTMENT.
A French Opinion of Proteetios-Tke
May Robbed for The Eew.

Z
calling forth such an opposition TO pro-
i lection as would not have been possible
I If the government had not been led away
+ by our LcAinleyisn II the direction Of
higher taxation. An evidences Of the
( opposition called forth by the French
McElaley.srl may be seen in d new
magazine, L. Monde Econonique, which
his been recently established in Paris
This journal Is resolutely opposed 70 the
whole system q protection.
IL . recent number cf it II. Paul Beau
f regard draws such Il true and heavy in
dicJueut agains: protection that il can
DC rad with profit in cur OWN land.
The writer says:
We hold il Is self evident that every
protective measure Is unjust, because
such system has for its object the en-
rcament : . small number Of individ-
uals ct tba expense Of the others When
a duty Is imposed upon wheat and meat
tie farmers may dispense with the i'm
pToFeIIcEt Of their processes Of culture,
but consumers are obliged to pay more
dearly for their food. This, therefore. is
TO take oUt Of the pockets of ali the profit
which IS given to the few. There is 10
process Of reasoning which can show
that this is not unjust.
Nov, if this is the case with every
restrictive tariff measure, what is to be
thought when these protectionist claims
reach the degree of extravacance which
we see today: So long as the protected
classes were not yet masters Of the sittfa-
ton they simply pleaded that the state
should let them live. They could not
continue, they said, with their own re-
sources-they must lie helped. Would
it not be an advantage to France to have
within her borders a complete cycle of
production, and not be tributary to any
nation for its supplies? If the sacrifice
was a burden, at least patriotism i'm
posed ii.
What do we see today? The same
party, believing itself secure Of a major
ity, has lost all moderation. Petition
gives place TO threats, which are speed
ily carried into execution. There is no
longer question of living at the expense
Of others, but Of suppressing them and
getting rid entirely Of their competition.
Deplorable enough III itself, the protec-
zionist reaction serves still further as the
occasion, as the pretext, for struggles in
which the strongest destroy the weakest.
Such are the civil wars, which promote
private vengeance.
What, we ask, must be the effect of
such spectacle upon public morality?
IS 1t right that the state should become
the distributor of fortunes to some at
the expense Of others? Do the protec- |
tlonists reflect that by the side of the |
manufacturers and capitalists enriched |
or ruined there viii be thousands of |
worKinen, here plunged in misery, there |
the witnesses of or the sharers in a sud
den and unjust prosperity?
From such & spectacle they will con- i
clude that the state can do everything. |
that everything that it DEGREES is legiti-
mate, that it is easy and right for it to |
secure the welfare Of its favorites By |
drawing, whenever needed, upon the |
purse Of others, and, arguing from their
number, from their wants. from their
precarou5 situations they viii demand
to be those faYoritas.
This IS the open path to socialism.
state socialism first and socialism urliIn-
tied atrerward. Being accustomed to a
moderate protective tariff, many have not
been able to see this truth during the
past thirty years, but now it is becom-
As as clear as daylight. The socialists
have never been deceived in the matter.
They have always pointed to protection
as practical application of their own
theories, but an unjust enc, as it operates
for the advantage Of the rich.