Arizona republican., 1907-08-31

are pretending neutrality, and yet as-
 sisting the enemy. the limits of war are
 at once enlarged. In the old days the
 right of search might be justified on grounds which cannot carry convic-
 ton in these. The high seas are now
 the essential highways of commerce
 and the paths of travel Great Brit
 ain has now forty million hun
 gry mouths to supply. Now if Eng land is rot at war. and two other na-
 tions are at these grim loggerheads the right of search of any British ship
 on the high seas by one or the other or the belliSerants might put an end to
 her commerce and would certainly be a serious drawback to her trade. But here international law has put in a wise word for the extension of the courtesy of nations. It has been sug- gested that there should be a guaran- tee given by neutral nations that cer-
 tain ships, carrying mails, passengers and ordinary commerce, have been eX- amined in the home ports and have no Icontraband of war on board. It is in these ways that we ma" ameliorate
 the climate of war, and it Is by gradu- ally pruning the haggard branches
 that We may hope that it's upas growth
 may die down and be no more a pest
 on the peace of the world. But it was
 rather in connection with the war of
 peace that I had desired to say some
 thing today. We desire to recognize
 that tariffs are ramparts and that
 ramparts are war and that while these
 ramparts exist. which protect the mar
 kets of our rivals from our peaceful aggression and so deprive our capit- alists of the return on their capital and our workmen of the wages they
 might earn, and thus produce lower
 wages in our country. an increasing
 number of unemployed-the blow
 off at the safety valve of emigration. and distress, that it is the duty of the state to have a care for our commerce and our industries. just as much in
 this state of belligerancy as in the case of actual war: and that it is the
 imperative dut- of the state to take
 means to mitigate the rigors of this so-called peace. There are other mat
 ters 10 be considered in this connec-
 ton. There is a fallacy in relation to
 wages deeply rooted in the working mans mind. It is that each man should receive as much money for as
 little work as possible Much recent
 socialistic legislation has been in this direction. Men making laws for
 themselves have in many countries enacted statutes giving a minimum
 wage and determining a maximum la
 Dor da-. That for the individual would
 no do-bt be an excellent institution.
 both for labOrers as a whole-for the state as unit-it is suicide. How can we still cling to the belief that every man. selfishly seeking his own ends. even ic he seeks them by means which are on the right side of the law, will conduce to the benefit of the commu-
 nity? The economists who hold that creed are fatalists. We know better, and re see that the state may regu-
 late labor so as to secure benefits for the state. which could not be secured
 by the unchecked dictates of greed m the individual We hold also that the state may so regulate or modify our relations to other countries as to con- duce to the benefit of the whole work
 ing communit-. This leads one to consider the curious reason which has dictated the doctrine that the work man. knowi's; what is best for himself. is also doing what will be best for the community. IL seems to be founded on a belief ir the incompetence of the state to do anything in relation to trade. Here, however we have the valuable lesson of international law before our eyes. The freedom of the states from an- international law or convention might with as much reason have been uryed as tenet as the free dom ot the individual from all state control in the pursuit of his needs and greeds. What we are aiming at in re- lation to law and commerce is an or ganized empire. and, if possible. an organized world. That these would make Cor peace in the widest sense none could doubt The larger the unit the less the strife. We desire to see the organization of the world. not by the chance called Free Trade. but by the wisdom of statesmanship in a great and extending commerce. Mutual un- derstandings. treaties, conventions and even the writings of jurists are the foundations of the law of nations: so mutual understandings. treaties and conventions. and even-although here We have a doubt-the writings of economists ma.' be made the founda- tions of international trade-why should we not enter into commercial treaties with foreign nations for the reduction ot their tariffs? In all our international law there has been mu- tual concession. So 1t is with our commercial alliances. We must be prepared to give preferences if we are to receive preference; we must be pre- pared to withhold the free entry into our markets from those who shut the door of their markets in our faces. That the achievement of a great inter- national trade by means of such a policy is possible, I believe and. al- though l am b. no means convinced that free trade is absolutely the best for every nation under all circumstan- ces. I am convinced that freer trade than the nations now enjoy could be better for the great nations who are even during the soft peace" carrying on the tariff war with one another and