The Montgomery tribune. (Montgomery City, Mo.) 1892-1910, 1903-11-06
soPHIsTRY OF FREE TRADE.
weakness of the Democratic Policy
Laid hare by the Head of
III Treasury.

Secretary OF the Treasury Shaw has
the knack Of putting things conclsely
and pointedly. This is a valuable fac
ulty to M called upon, as he often is, to
discuss publicly questions OF great i'm
portance. especially those relating 10
economic and fiscal matters. says the
Troy Times. In a speech at Akron. o.,
a few days ago. the secretary put much
truth In small compass when he said:
"ono OF tho most Important problems be-
fore tho American people T. that Of mar.
kctH. III thls all parties agree. But while
the parties agree on the importance OF the
ultimate fact. they DO not agree upon the
methods TO be pursued In the accomplish
ment OF the desired end. The plan pro.
posed by the minority party Is to throw
our COMMERCIAL doors wide open for the
free importation Of products OF foreign
labor Members Of that party insist that
" We do this W. shali OF necessity have
unresttioted access 10 ,ir markets 81 other
countries They urge that II we will hut
allow Europe to ciothe ", furnish US our
glass. out carthenwsfc. our hardware. our
steel rails, our structural iron and every
thinR else We produce, We shall thus Sc.
cure a most wonderful export trade.
They Insist that the way for US to cap.
turc the markets Of the world u TO throw
our markets open TO tho world. The logic
OF this opinion l.. n We give away what
We have We shall then nave an abundance.
england has had free goods for half u
century. but she has never had free trade.
She has run against the tnrir ut che en-.
trance Of every country she has attempted
TO invade. aud now her colonies having
become vigorous. arr begging 90 impose
duties upon her products. and Mr.. cham.
bctiain resigns his position In the cabinet,
and at the time OF life when most men
are about to retire TO the qulet Of their
homes goes out 20 make tho nght OF his
llie In behalf Of protection. There IL great
dinereDc" between free goods from for.
sign countries and free trade In foreign
countries.
Think OF A. our farms produce ti."".-
0"sp. our shops aud factories produce
more than nil the shops and facturlss OF
any other two countries On the map by
t."""","1 per annum. tn. productive
capacity. without Implications. amounts 90
~tls""p""o. out Of which We export In
round numbers t.j"vu"..o and import
N.on"n"n We. therefore. consume prac-
ticallJ - per cent Of al W. produce. Sup
pose W open the doors and ALLOW
Europe 10 clothe us ana furnish our
manufactured products, who will consume
tho products % our farms, and what shall
w. do with the products Of our ftciorics7
NO. W Will take reasonable care OF our
own, throuthkiug fhoHo VINO can uUufd u
10 bu1 some Of their luxufiss abroad. and
from tho Importation Of iuNurlrs-,accs.
Jcw"iry ami fancy fabrics-wr viii collect
a good portion Of our revenue u We Will
sell Oug surplus Ia foreign countries"
This dispOAss of n great deal Of free
trade sophistry. The fact Is. that with
all the citing of EnRland's example thst
country does not possess ana never has
had free trade. As Secretary shaw points
out. IT. wi ports are practically free 10
rcciprocate. aud there Is much pith In his
statement that there IL great difference
between free goods from foreign coun-
tries and free trade In foreign countries. "
England with lis free trade has no moro
succeeded In getting such free access than
has the United States with lis "~prohlbi-
tive" duties.
The cas Is clear. n Is better to pro-
tect your " and take chances on other
nations buying ot you than TO throw
open your Industries ia foreign competi-
tlon. with the possibility Of not pro-
ducing any manufactures which they
want to purchase,