Morris tribune., 1892-09-21

humping SIouilu 1ok PtsiV "a sNNS 49, FNs-.
| of German manufactures. Inc coun-
try was no longer able to sustain It's
growing population, and the emigration
to this country reached enormous figures.
The heavy outflow of people to America
| dates back to the first years of depres-
sion produced by the free trade policy.
A majority of the Norwegian born
citizens of Minnesota and neighboring
states have come to this country since
then. To them the picture outlined
above will be very famihar'
They left Norway az free traders
and many of them have probably re-
manned free traders ever since. Some
possibly never dreamt that free
trade had anything whatever to do with
their coming to America. But IL they
look back upon the conditions in their
old homes in the light of their wider ex-
perience, they cannot fail to perceive
that Norway's tariff for revenue only
was the main source of the evils from
which they fled.
The severe lesson was not taught en-
tirely in vain. The period of pinching
was a good time for reflection. Some
began to question the infallibiity Of the
Golden gospel. AS usual in the
politics of Norway, the farmers
took the lead. They had suffered
severely from American competition
and were rapidly going to the wall.
They wanted protection and had the
power to enforce their demand. The
writer happened to be on visit in Nor
| way some five years ago, when the pro-
lection sentiment began to make itself
| felt. The discussion and reasoning of
| the people We're curious. Nearly every
| body was firmly convinced that free
trade was all right and protection all
wrong. Still the conclusion was that
there was nothing to do but to apply the
remedy of protection. The hands of the
country were tied, however, by COM
mercial treaties. For the time being
| little could have been done in the way
of increasing the duties on manufac-
tured articles, even if the country had
been ready for the change. A cautious
beginning was made by raising the
| duties on agricultural products.
| The experiment was satisfactory,
and gradually further steps were taken
in the same direction. Meanwhile the
protection sentiment attained greater
strength and consistency. A demand
arose for protection of manufacturers,
| and it is plainly only question Of a
very short time when the tariff of Nor
way will be revised with view to pro-
tecting home industries. The last
| .+o,+b;,r ,,o1o a baoip,,inp Ruf w, Il;,
opinion is clearly in advance of legisla-
ton. Norway has very promising posi-
bilities in the line of wooden manufac-
lures, and the people demand ample pro-
lection for this industry. They do not
regard an ad valorem duty of so per
cent on woolens as too high price for
the boon of wearing home made clothes.
However, it is the heavy burdens a
tariff for revenue only throws upon the
common people which thus far, mainly,
has attracted the attention of Norwegian
statesmen. This burden had at last be-
! come unbearable, and the last storthing
| found itself compelled to do something
| to relieve it. 1t reduced the duties on
sugar and Illuminating oils, although
it could not do so except by resorting to
the extremely unpopular measure of i'm
posing direct tax on property and in
comes. AS is well known, this form of
taxation is preferred to any other
| by a small number of theorists;
but the great majority of both
| parties in Norway were opposed to It at
heart. Its adoption was the work of
necessity.
How to provide sufficient revenue will
arrays be one of the main objects of
tariff legislation in Norway. In other
words, she is compelled to keep more or
less close to the path of a tariff for
revenue. Even if the majority desired
it, she could not at this time adopt a
tariff for protection pure and simple,
because such tariff would not produce
! sufficient revenue. The Norwegian
people know this perfectly WELL Their
| change of heart on the tariff issue is
| therefore all the more remarkable. The
country is still hampered and its hands
! tied by bungling commercial treaties.
| They all contain the favored nation
clause, an un-scientiic, unbusiness like
| arrangement which generally impairs
| the usefulness of such treaties and often
! destroys their value. What will best
subserve Norway's interests in this re-
| spect is of course separate reciprocity ar
| rangements with the various nations
| with which she has intercourse. This
| would enable her to revise her tariff
| duties with greater freedom and with q
| view to giving greater and more effective
protection to her home industries.
Norway's painful experience and her
efforts to get away from disastrous
tariff policy adds a fresh chapter to the
history of destruction and ruin wrought
by free trade. This lesson may be
studied to great advantage by our
own people. 1t illustrates plainly and
forcibly how thoroughly free trade saps
and drains the strength of nation. only
to leave it helpless wreck on the rocks
of general impoverishment and bank
ruptcy, unable to supply its wants be-
cause incapacitated for production either
for home consumption or exchange
Nearly every newspaper in the North
west has many readers whose expert
ences in their old homes form part of
this very lesson. The change in the
public sentiment in Norway as evidenced
by her recent tariff and fiscal legislation
must needs appeal to them with
particular force. But here we are met
by the curious coincidence, that while
the Norwegians in Norway have been
endeavoring to get away from free trade
considerable number of the Norwe-
gians in America have kept on worship
ping the old idol and voting for the very
policy which drove them out of their
native country. Generally speaking, the
! Norwegians in America are ahead of
their kins1nen across the sea; but in this
particular instance they seem to lag far
behind. NIcoLAY GREysTAD.