The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1894-10-17

such desperate straits as to absolutely
falsify the truths Of history during the
past foul years in order to bolster up the
| desperate and ruined cause Of mad pro-
lection in the United States?
Were there no strikes, lOckOuts, re-
auctions of wages, ruin of manufacturing
establishments or discharge of WOrkmen
in the state Of Indiana during the four
years Of McKinleyism, now so happily
passing away2
In addition to these strikes, lockouts
and reductions Of wages in the protected
| industries Of the country during the two
years following the passage Of the Mckin-
ley law, Bradstreet's also shows that the
number Of failures in all kinds of bust
ness in the United States for the first
two years after the Mckinley law was
passed aggregated 22,523 and carried total
liabilities amounting to over three hun
dred and seventy-five million dollars.
These are some of the happy conditions
existing In the United States under the
Mckinley law"
Mr.. Bell, in the course Of his magnli-
cent argument, gave a solution Of the
hitherto puzzlng question Of the balance
of trade which will give republicans much
to mediate upon for the balance of the
campaign. He said:
Governor Mckinley calls the Wilson
bill bill 10 increase impOrtations,' and
argues that If importatiOns are increased
the production of home goods and the
be diminished IN . corresponding degree.
This, as we have before shown, does not
follow. but the contrary. The Mckinney
law was designed to increase eXporta-
tons and restrict impOrtatiOns, and the
governor brings forward g cloud of
figures to show that It had that effect,
and from this fact argues that * was
largely beneficial 10 the country. This is
simply a revival of the mercantile sys-
TEN. which was exploded by Adam Smith
fNueas1 hot
can bring about an excess Of exports
over imports the difference will return In
money, gold and silver, and that the
country which receives its balance in this
gold and silver will be richer than by the
receipt of the balance in goods which this
money WOULD buy. II is the old and
thoroughly exploded protectionist sOphism
that a nation is enriched by expectations
and impoverished by impOrtatiOns 1t is
on the same principle as 10 say that In
dianapOlis could be ruined next year by
rolling in upon her increased millions in
corn, wheat. live animals. brick, lumber
and other kinds OF produce. when, as a
matter OF fact. everybody knows that it
would simply buiid up and enlarge and
strengthen all kinds Of business here, and
that other millions Of goods would roll out
Of indianapolis to pay for the additional
millions which rolled in.
The balance of Trade.
so it will be with the country at large
if additional millions roll in from foreign
nations. In this case additional millions
will roll out to pay for them, and all
kinds of legitimate paying business in
this country will enlarge and fructify and
expand, and all kinds of employment and
trade will feel this renewed and enlarged
life in every nerve and in every artery of
their existence.
In other words, Governor Mckinley
seems TO be thoroughly saturated with the
deluSiOn of the mercantile systematic
protectionist sOphism of the balance of
trade
1T has always been one of the dreams
Of the advocates of a protective tariff
that to secure a balance of trade in our
favOr-Jhat is to have our exports ex-
coed our imports; in other words. to send
more goods out of the United States than
were brought into the United States
was a contamination devOuuy TO be
wished and they have as pcrsistentIy
claimed that such balance in our favor
Conclusively showed that our people were
in the enjoyment of prosperous times,
while a balance of trade against us as
certainly showed that he were experience
ing hard times. 1t is not necessary for
me 10 show at length the admitted fact
that all trade is mere barter, that Is, ex-
change of goods for goods, and hence that
the reverse of this is true. and that when
our imports exceed our exports, instead of
being an evidence Of hard times and loss
TO our people, il really shows the exist
ence of better times and more certain gain
10 our people.
'Inasmuch as all foreign trade Is simply
an eXchange of goods for goods by indi-
vidu7ls with individuals, it follows. as
matter Of course that II one individual
gets more, and greater value of goods
from the foreigner than he gives to the
foreigner, he Is not getting poorer, as
pr0tectOn.sts claim. but is, in fact. get
ting richer. For instance. say an Amer
lean leaves the port Of New York with
10000 bushels of wheat, valued at 81 a
bushel 1t is thereupon entered on the
custOm-house books as $50 900 exported.
Tie sells that wheat in Liverpool says for
so per bushel. and with the $50. 900 thus
obtained buys English goods, puts them
on board a vessel and brings them to New
York When he arrives in New York
the same custom house official will enter
upon his books an item Of $4,000 as i'm
ports.
Now. as you will readily see. in this
case the exports are 100000 while the I'M
ports are $4,000. The balance of trade Is
thus against us $4,000. and prOtectonists
claim that we have therefore lost SO. 600,
but do You think you could convince that
American who sold the wheat that by ex-
changing $4,000 worth of American wheat
for $4,000 worth Of English goods he had
lsot 10000? L hardly think SOL
ITO further illustrate, say the 10000
bushels or wheat valued at the custom
house in New York at $40. 900, had failed
10 reach Liverpool, but had, like Nc
Ginty.' gone down to the bottom Of the
sea-. In this case the books would show
$4,000 as exports, and nothing as i'm
ports. The balance of trade would. there
fore, be $4,000 in our favor, and, accord
ing TO protection logic, the country has
gained 800, 900; but could you convince the
Yankee exporter of this wheat that this
was true? Try it,
Gain to the People.
Now practically, all foreign trado-all
exports and all impOrts-are made UP of
individual transactions between indi-
viduals Of different countries, as shown in
this case. 1t is thus concluslvely and un-
deniably shown that an excess OF i'm
ports over exports, instead of being an
evidence of loss to our people. Is IN fact
an evidence of gain to our people.
ITO turn from logic to experience, and
to still further illustrate the principle l
am trying to make clear, 1 have here a
report recently made by the chief OF the
bureau of statistics at Washington. d. c.,
which shows that during the fiscal year
ending June 3d. 1894. the excess Of eX-
ports over imports was 1921, 14S, 1886. In
other words. this report shows that the
balance Of trade was over 1921, 100000 in
our favor. This being true, according to
the contention Of our prOtectionist friends,
our people should have simply reveIed in
prosperity, wealth and happiness during
he cf hut harr dor. 60