The silver state. [volume] (Winnemucca, Nev.) 1909-1925, 1922-08-01
Ford's Patent Protection

Quite likely some people will be misled
by the plausible but fallaciOus statement
recently made by Henry Ford that "the
purely industrial or commercial enterprise
that is worth anything at all can stand on
its own feet" His statement is used as an
argument against protective tariffs and
ship subsidies The assertion made with
such positiveness will be accepted as true
by those only who refuse to study history
Mr.. Ford has established an enterprise
which he probably thinks is an illustration
of an undertaking that Stands on its own
feet" He has no government subsidy; he
needs no protective tariff. But the fact is
that the building of his great enterprise
was made possible by protection afforded
by the government under patent laws His
patents may have expired, but in the days
when he was developing his enterprise it
was the patents that protected him from
competition.
Mr.. Ford's statements are at variance
with doctrines maintained by American
public leaders from the foundation of our
government. Hamilton, Washinton and
jefferson were advocates of protective
tariffs as aids in establishment and mainte-
nance of enterprises in the new world. We
have set up standards of living which are
maintained in neither Europe or Asia, and
if we are to maintain those standards there
must be imposed tax on importation of
commodities produced in countries where
standards of living are lower than ours.
Every chamber of commerce in the
United States is urging the people of the
community to patrOnize their local home
industries. Mr. Ford would reply to them
s'the purely industrial or commercial enter
hot &c MI opx,%b.ror NJ oil
stand on its own feet" and he would re-
ject this appeal for the support of local
commercial enterprises He would buy
where he could the cheapest. Every news
paper in the United States, Republican
and Democratic alike, is urging it's readers
to buy commodities produced at home,
even if they must pay little more than
they would pay for Commodities manufac-
tured outside. Their argument is, and it
is sound argument, that by patronizing
the home establishment the money is kept
at nome to pay the wages of the home
people and afford larger patronage for the
home merchant and every industry of the
community This argument applies with
no less force to the upbuilding of national
industries.
Prior to 1890 the United States had
been buying practically all its tinplate in
Europe. Those economists who believed
in the Ford doctrines said that an Gin
dustry that is worth anything at all can
stand on its own feet and they opposed
a protective tariff saying that a protec-
tive tariff would add to the cost of every
canned commodity the public consumes.
Republicans in Congress rejected the Ford
doctrine and established protective tariff
on tinplate with the result that an enorm-
GUS tinplate industry was built up in the
United States and through competition
prices were reduced and the American
people bought tinplate cheaper than they
had ever bought it under free trade.
Mr.. Ford's assertion sounds plausible at
first hearing but it will not stand the test
of reason nor the facts of history.
An octogenarian in Quincy, Ill.,, is re-
-