The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1896-06-19


course. Nothing useful can come OF
discussions conducted on these hypo-
thetical lines There is. however. enc
matter connected with the controversy
which NAV be touched on with profit
The Drotectionisfs occasionally attempt
TO prove that free trade must be wrong
because Golden was wrong when he
prophesied that if England would Only
adopt free trade. all the nations OF the
earth would follow suit. and that with
in ten years the days Of tariffs would
be over. Remember these words and
then consider the present state OF Eu-
rope and America" say the protec-
tionistS, and they go on 10 ask what
possible faith or dependence is 10 be
placed in the views OF 4 man who
prophesied after this fashion Cob
den was wrong on this point, therefore
he was wrong when he advocated free
trade; so runs the logic OF the protec-
tionists. A moments reflection viii
show the abSurdiJy OF such n conten-
ton. CObden's policy and Cobden's
prophecy have no such interdepend-
enoe as this. Because man cannot
phOphesy correctly. it does not follow
that he cannot make a correct state
ment Of fact Suppose Newton, after
he had formulated the law Of gravita-
ton, had been so rash and so unwise
as 10 prophecy that all the world would
instantly recognize the truth Of its dis
covery. The world did not such thing.
but remained for a time incredulous
and indifferent The prOphecy-n he
had made it-would then have failed
utterly But it would have been there
fore reasonable TO argue that the law
Of gravitation was unSound: As
suerdly not The law If OyerthrOwn
must be Overthrown on It's own de-
merits. So with Cobden'S policy and
prophecy. The failure of one does not
involve the failure of the other. and
e-traders may feel quit uninjured by
the signal want Of success in Cobden's
attempt to forecast the future. The
policy Of free trade, when impugned,
must be impugned directly and with
reference to facts and arguments ger
name to the matter.
But though we hold that the policy
of free trade is quite untouched by the
fact that Golden was wrong when he
said that some day it would obtain
universal acceptance, we have no de-
sire To speak Of free trade as if it were
an infallible dogma, which it is sinful
and heretical TO challenge in the slight
est degree We do not wish 10 take
higher ground for the policy Of free
trade tan that of political convenience.
We believe that policy Of free trade
is a policy both politically and econom-
icaIy expedient and one conducive TO
the prosperity, and therefore TO the ma
terial happiness and well-being OF the
country adopting it. But though we
hold this view as to the benefits Sc
cured by free trade as strongly as IL
can be held, we are perfectly willing
TO consider all proposals for minor
notifications of the policy on their
merits We have no patience with
those who shout down such proposals
with they cry that they are contrary
10 free-uade principles, as II those
principles were necessarily Incapable
of the slightest alteration Take, for
example, the way in which the very
reasonable proposal to prevent the inn
porta ton Of live cattle into our ports
has been met by the more fanatical
section of the followers of Golden.
They show that it is an interference
with the perfect freedom Of trade, and
then assume that IT must therefore be
injurious Free trade is good for the
country. The prohibition Of the i'm
port Of live cattle is opposed TO free
trade. Therefore the prohibition Of
the import of live cattle is injurious.
Sue is the syllogism of those who see
rampant protection in a necessary mea-
sure of sanitary precauuOn. IN truth,
freedom Of trade Is only good for the
country when it's effects are good. The
fact that these effects are almost al
ways good does not, however, preclude
the possibility of exceptions. II is,
therefore, the duty Of our statesmen
not merely to talk at large about the
principles of free trade, but to inquire
in detail whether the case in point is
one of those rare instances when re-
strictiOn of trade is more convenient
and beneficial than freedom. In fact,
the truth is with Burke when he said
that nothing absolute can be affirmed
ON any moral or political question
We confess that we cannot feel any
alarm as 70 our present fiscal policy be
reversed, and one of protection adopted
in its stead. No doubt there Is a GER
tain amount Of prOtectiOnist chatter
in the air just now, but IL does not
we imagine, have any very great ef-
feet on the nation II we may be par
d0ned for quoting Burke once again.
We should hken the situation - that
described in one OF his most famous
political metaphors. The grasshei-
pers. he points out make lar more
noise than the stately cattle who are
grazing in silence IA the same field
Yet no one considers the grasshODpers
to be as powerful or as important as
the oxen our prOtecuon3st grsssiioi'-
pers also make = great deal u noise
Row and again, but We must not forget
70 take into account The rest Of the IA
ton who are consuming in silence the
products Of free trsde- y proof that
the nation Is perfectly wei satisfied
with its present fiscal policy, and does
not mean 20 change IL Is 10 BE- found IN