Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1916-01-07


in the Glasgow (Scotland) Herald.
which, in turn. is quoted in Com
merce Reports issued by Secretary
Redfeld's Department of Commerce:
One of the results to be expected
from the (British) duty on motor
cars is the transfer from foreign
countries of such parts of the work
of manufacture as can be as welI
or better done in the United King
dom. This was foretold when the
tax was announced, and already
the anticipations are being real
iZed The -- Co. of America,
who produce one of the most popu-
lar of the low-priced high-value
machines on the market have In
contemplation the establishment of
large works in this country, and
member of the American concern
is on his way across to investigate
the matter.
The Herald then remarks that the
saving in transportation, combined
with cheaper British labor, should
justify the proposition on its merits.
Some time ago the British. govern
ment published tariff schedule, plac-
ing a large number of products on
the dutiable list, automobiles being
dutiable at thirty-three and one-third
per cent, an increase of 10 per cent.
of the present rate of duty in this
country, under the Democratic law,
on cars valued at less than two thou
sand dollars. The British tariff was
laid ostensibly as a war measure, but
the people of England do not expect
to revert to the old free trade policy
after the war. There will be read
justments of the tariff along scientific
bases, but the school of Golden has
passed away.
There was a time when the eff
cheney of England in the manufacture
of steel. textiles, etc, was greater
than that of any other nation. With
her none could compete. BY 1916
machine work had largely displaced
the old system of hand labor in Eng
land. Companies and corporations
had displaced the small factories in
which were employed a few Journey
men and apprentices. 1t was during
the period of 1910 to 1860 that Eng
land entirely abandoned the policy of
protection, threw her ports open, and
invited the free admission of the
products of other countries, in COM
petition with her products. What
was the real motive of this free trade
agitation? George B. Curtiss, in his
industrial Development of Nations, +"
says:
The policy of protection has been
practiced for the purpose of build
ing up the industries of England
and making her the greatest manu-
featuring center in the world. This
Her people had now reached so
high a degree of proficiency, in
manufacturing, through their skill,
capital and inventions, that they
were enabled to manufacture much
cheaper than any other country
and. therefore, at that time needed
no protection.
In order to find foreign, markets,
therefore, and gain free admission
thereto, it was necessary to induce the
people of other countries to adopt
free trade. and England could not
consistently argue to that end with
out herself having adopted a free
trade policy. The adroitness with
which England piled her argument in
the United States is best evidenced by
the fact that in the nonmanufacturing
districts of the South to-day the free
trade theory is uppermost. The fall
lacy of that argument is best proved
by the fact that as manufacturing in
dustries gradually develop in the
South the free trade notions are
brushed aside.
For a long time past England has
wanted to return to a protective
policy. She has learned the value of
it from her severe competition with
Germany, which supports high pro-
tective wall. The war has given her
the opportunity, and protection will
not again be surrendered. Meanwhile
we may expect American capital, in
whatever industry it may be found ad-
visable evading the low duties of a
Democratic tariff law and setting up
in business in England, or in other
countries, where protection is assured,
there to employ foreign labor, at low
er wages, and send the product to
America to compete with industries
already crippled. and further reduce
the chances of the American laboring
man.