Ex Libris 
 C. K. OGDEN 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 PAMPHLETS AND ADDRESSES.
 
 PAMPHLETS AND ADDRESSES 
 
 BY 
 
 GEORGE WEBB MEDLEY. 
 
 CASSELL AND COMPANY, Limited 
 
 LONDON, PAR/S, NEW YORK &= MELBOURNE. 
 
 ALL RIGHTS BKSEKVED.
 
 nr 
 1713 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 For more than twenty years the late 
 George Webb Medle}' bore a conspicuous part 
 in the frequent controversies which have raged 
 around the question of Free Trade. An earnest 
 and convinced behever in the doctrines of 
 Richard Cobden, he maintained those principles 
 in times of depression and of prosperity ahke. 
 His writings and his speeches are distinguished 
 for their thorough grasp and clear exposition of 
 the basis of our commercial prosperity. Scattered 
 as they have hitherto been through the columns 
 of newspapers and in many pamphlets, they are 
 here gathered into a single volume. 

 
 CONTE NTS. 
 
 The Reciprocity Craze. 
 
 
 1'.\c;k 
 
 Introduction .... 
 
 
 T 
 
 Imports and Exports 
 
 
 3 
 
 One-sided Free Trade . 
 
 
 12 
 
 " Reciprocity or Retaliation '' . 
 
 
 24 
 
 Two Neo-Protectionists . 
 
 
 . 28 
 
 Conclusion .... 
 
 
 • 38 
 
 England under Free Trade 
 
 
 43 
 
 The House of Commons and its 
 
 Place in the 
 
 State . . . . . 
 
 
 • 85 
 
 The Coming Democracy 
 
 
 • 93 
 
 The Trade Depression. 
 
 
 
 Introduction . . . . 
 
 
 • 115 
 
 The Depression at Home 
 
 
 . 116 
 
 The Depression Abroad. 
 
 
 . 129 
 
 Causes of Depression 
 
 
 . 142 
 
 Remedies . . . . 
 
 
 • 152 
 
 Conclusion . . . . 
 
 
 . 163 
 
 Fair Trade Unmasked. 
 
 
 
 Introduction . . . . 
 
 
 . 167 
 
 The Depression 
 
 
 169 
 
 Remedies . . . , 
 
 
 . 208
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Fair TkAnK Unmasked (continued). 
 
 PACiE 
 
 Lord Dunraven's Reservations and Observa- 
 
 
 tions 
 
 248 
 
 Mr. Nevile Lubbock and Fair Trade 
 
 251 
 
 Mr. Arthur O'Connor's Report 
 
 255 
 
 Conclusion 
 
 263 
 
 Agriculture and Bimetallism .... 
 
 281 
 
 The Triumph of Free Trade .... 
 
 285 
 
 The German Bogey. 
 
 
 " Made in Germany " Epitomised . 
 
 309 
 
 Chapter II 
 
 313 
 
 Chapter III 
 
 327 
 
 Chapter IV. . . . ... 
 
 365 
 
 Chapter V 
 
 391
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 CHAPTER I . 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 For some time past incessant attacks have been made 
 on our Free Trade policy. At first these attacks were 
 made doubtingly, hesitatingly ; but lately, speakers and 
 writers have become emboldened, the banner of "Protec- 
 tion to Native Industry " has once more been unfurled, 
 and the air resounds with cries for " Reciprocity or Re- 
 taliation." This is an astonishing phenomenon to those 
 who understand and appreciate what Free Trade has 
 done, and is doing, for this country. The most striking- 
 feature about the agitation is its extraordinary in- 
 opportuneness ; the time chosen for it being just that 
 moment when the clouds of depression are dispersing, 
 and we seem to be once more floating on the rising 
 wave of prosperity.^ We have now had thirty-five 
 years' experience of Free Trade, with their ups and 
 downs of inflation and depression. In the course of 
 these years we have witnessed all sorts of political and 
 social changes. We have seen the overthrow of 
 dynasties, the uprising of peoples, and wars waged on 
 an unprecedented scale. Railways and telegraphs have 
 obviated to a great extent the inconveniences of distance 
 and time. Great perturbations in the standard of value 
 have occurred, the gold discoveries at first causing 
 a general rise in prices. Of late years, however, an 
 
 * This was written 1881.
 
 2 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 increasing demand for the metal, and a diminishing 
 supply, accompanied by a partial demonetisation of silver, 
 have caused a disturbance of values in the opposite direc- 
 tion of a general fall in prices. During all these years, 
 England alone among the nations has maintained a 
 system of free ports, the only changes in her fiscal 
 policy being in the direction of greater freedom, while 
 other nations, such as the United States, France, and Ger- 
 many, have raised round themselves the barriers of pro- 
 hibitory tariffs. With one exception, every conceivable 
 economical condition that could constitute a test of the 
 principles and practice of Free Trade has occurred, the one 
 condition untried being universal Free Trade. In these 
 circumstances, and with all this varied experience, one 
 would suppose that there was not much room for 
 differences of opinion as to the results achieved, and as 
 to our national condition at the end of the ordeal. Yet, 
 from what is passing around, we cannot but see that 
 extreme divergences exist. "U'hilc, on the one hand, 
 the Free Trader contemplates with satisfaction the 
 position which his country has attained by her com- 
 mercial policy, and appeals with confidence to the facts 
 which abound on every side, and which, to his mind, 
 verify to the fullest the theories he has embraced ; on 
 the other we find a school of Neo-Protectionists lamenting 
 what seems to them to be the decadence of their country, 
 and appealing also to facts which appear to them to bear 
 out their views. But, the most astounding thing is, that 
 some of the very same facts which are appealed to by 
 one party as evidence of our abounding prosperity, are 
 held up by the other as the certain proofs of our decay ! 
 A crucial example of this is to be found in the various 
 conclusions drawn from the figures which appear in our
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 3 
 
 Board of Trade Returns under the head of " Imports and 
 Exports." The views of the writer upon this and other 
 cognate subjects are, of course, those of the Free Trader. 
 They are set forth in the following chapters in a manner 
 which, it is hoped, will be sufficiently clear. They ma}- 
 perhaps aid the candid inquirer in a search for the truth, 
 and tend to dissipate the " craze." 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 IMPORTS AND EXPORTS. 
 
 " Pons Asinoriun." 
 
 The fact that year after year the money value of our im- 
 ports vastly exceeds the money value of our exports, 
 and that this excess tends to increase is, to many minds, 
 not only a puzzle, but a rock of offence, and a cause of 
 alarm. To those, however, who are acquainted with the 
 facts and circumstances which cause this excess, nothing 
 can seem more absurd than the feeling which has been 
 aroused, and the conclusions which have been drawn. 
 The absurdity will be made abundantly clear as we 
 proceed. 
 
 But, I must here warn the reader that he will have 
 to master what I have to say under this head, for it 
 constitutes the " Pons Asinorum " of the P^'ce Trade 
 question. If he passes this " pons," he will find himself 
 among the Free Traders on the other side. If not, he 
 must be numbered among the Neo-Protectionists, who 
 seem to be utterly unable to pass over it. This is what 
 they cannot get over : — They point to the Board of 
 
 B 2
 
 4 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 Trade returns for 1880, which show that we imported 
 ;^4li,000,000 worth of commodities, and exported only 
 ;6^ 2 86,000,000 worth ; and this they call a balance of 
 trade against us of ;^i 25,000,000 ; and from this fact 
 they draw such deductions as these : that this balance 
 is a loss to the country ; that John Bull buys 
 i,'4 1 1 ,000,000 of goods from the foreigner, and sells 
 him only ^^"286,000,000 worth ; that, consequently, the 
 foreigner has the best of the trade ; that he is draining 
 away all John Bull's wealth ; that the latter is getting 
 poorer and poorer ; that if the system goes on it must 
 end in his ruin ; and that this is the outcome of the 
 one-sided Free Trade now existing. And then they 
 give vent in their agony to such cries as " Protection to 
 Native Industry," " Reciprocity or Retaliation." Here 
 are some of their utterances : — 
 
 The Quarterly Revieiv, July, 1881, p. 293. — "In 1846 
 our imports amounted to little more than 74 millions ; 
 in 1820, when Sir Robert Peel died, they reached looi 
 millions. Last year they were valued at 410 millions. 
 Did Sir Robert Peel ever dream of such an import trade 
 as this.'' If he did, it is most probable he saw in his 
 dreams our exports approaching the same standard if 
 not exceeding it, and that such a balance sheet as the 
 following never rose up before his mind's eye : — 
 
 Imports in 1880 ^^409,990,056 
 
 Exports ,, ,, 222,810,526 
 
 Excess of Imports 187,179,530 
 
 This excess, according to the writers we have quoted, 
 represents the sum by which we have grown more 
 wealthy in 1880 than we were in 1879. ^s it possible
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 5 
 
 that any one with a mind capable of comprehending 
 facts and their meaning can really believe it ? " 
 
 lb. p. 288. — " To buy more than wc sell, and to make 
 that not a mere accident of our trade but its permanent 
 condition — the end above all others to be sought for 
 and desired — this, according to the economists, is a most 
 excellent thing for the country. Practical men who 
 look at such matters from a strictly business point of 
 view, come to a different conclusion. They hold that 
 we cannot persevere in this system without plunging 
 the country into disaster. . . . As one authority (Mr. 
 Shaw-Lefevre, M.P., 27th June, 1878) puts it, 'The 
 magnitude of our import trade, so far from being a 
 matter for alarm, is evidence of the greatness of our 
 resources and the stability of our position.' This is one 
 of the most blundering and most mischievous of the 
 delusions which have helped to blind a portion of the 
 people to the true state of their affairs." 
 
 Sir Edward Sullivan, Bart., Nineteenth Cintury, 
 August, 1881, p. 171. — "It [Isolated Free Trade] has 
 enabled foreigners to flood our markets with cheap, and 
 often nasty manufactured goods." "It has increased 
 the balance of trade against us, till it has reached the 
 alarming figure of i^ 136,000,000." P. 176. — " In the 
 face of these facts we are warranted in again asking 
 our economic philosophers how we are to continue to 
 find money to purchase foreign food. The food question 
 is at the bottom of our commercial troubles ; we are 
 buying food from abroad faster than we are making 
 money to pay for it. But of course this cannot last. 
 Until the immense and increasing excess of imports 
 over exports is considerably diminished, there can be 
 no return of general prosperity. We may for a time
 
 6 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 draw upon our capital and our accumulated wealth, but 
 for how long ? If we cannot get as much for our goods 
 as we are compelled to pay for foreign food, the deluge 
 must be at hand." 
 
 Nothing can be more clear and distinct than the 
 issues which these statements raise. I shall at once 
 address myself to them, merely remarking, in passing, 
 that under the head of " Two Neo-Protectionists," I 
 shall have to make further reference to the articles from 
 which I have quoted. 
 
 The first thing that strikes one regarding these 
 utterances is this — that the bare fact of our imports 
 being larger than our exports is held by these writers 
 to constitute in itself a great and growing evil. Accord- 
 ing to them, it is a self-evident proposition, the mere 
 propounding of which ought to carry conviction to every 
 mind. And on this idea their whole argument seems to 
 be based. They leave out of account everything but 
 the bare fact that our imports exceed our exports ! 
 They leave out of account such matters as the 
 following : — Our shipping receipts, insurance, interest, 
 merchants' profits, and, last not least, the income we 
 derive from our foreign investments ! Let us try to 
 make a rough estimate of these " unconsidered trifles." 
 
 As regards shipping, we possessed in 1880 fifty-six 
 per cent, of the world's ocean carrying power ; assuming 
 that the average of freight is about 10 percent, ad valorem, 
 and our combined export and import trade is about 700 
 millions, our receipts under this head may be put down 
 at 40 millions; but to this must be added the receipts 
 for our inter-foreign and inter-colonial trade, and the 
 receipts from passenger traffic. I do not think 45 
 millions a high figure to set down as our total shipping
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 7 
 
 receipts. Mulhall, in his " Balance Sheet of the World," 
 p. 44, puts them down at ;^5 1,920,000. 
 
 Then comes insurance. An average of J per cent, 
 on our total trade gives ^3,500,000. 
 
 Next comes interest. If we take the moderate sum 
 of 100 millions as employed in our foreign trade, 5 per 
 cent, gives us 5 millions. 
 
 Next come merchants' profits. Say 2| per cent, on 
 the 700 millions : this gives us 17^ millions. 
 
 Lastly, take foreign investments. The Economist, of 
 March 5th last, quoting from the Bankers' Magazine, 
 puts these down as yielding over 55 millions per annum. 
 
 What is the total of these items } 
 
 Ocean carrying trade 
 
 Insurance ... 
 
 Interest on capital 
 
 Merchants' profits 
 
 Income from foreign investments 
 
 ;^45,ooo,ooo 
 
 3,500,000 
 
 5,000,000 
 
 17,500,000 
 
 55,000,000 
 
 _^ 1 26, 000, 000 
 
 Which means simply this — that before England has to 
 exchange a pound's worth of her own products for a 
 pound's worth of foreign products, she has to receive 
 annually, in some shape or other, over 100 million 
 pounds from the foreigner ! 
 
 And thus bursts the bubble of our adverse balance 
 of trade ! The balance, if there be such a thing, seems 
 to be the other way ! And it must be the other way. 
 
 It is a matter of common knowledge, or ought to be, 
 that year by year, on the whole, the world grows more 
 and more indebted to us. Year by year we have more 
 and more of the world's obligations in our strong box. 
 
 The fallacy under which our Neo-Protectionists
 
 8 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 labour lies in the terms " buying of the foreigner," 
 " selh'ng to the foreigner." 
 
 They fancy that our imports are what we "buy" 
 and our exports what we " sell " ; and that, as there is 
 an excess of the former there is a balance of trade 
 against us, which, somehow or other, out of our wealth, 
 we have to liquidate, and that this process impoverishes 
 the country. 
 
 But, as I have shown, there is no balance to liquidate, 
 so there can be no impoverishment ; and so their argu- 
 ment is exploded. 
 
 But let us for a moment look at their supposition in 
 another light. Why should the bare fact of our im- 
 porting 411 millions of commodities in exchange for 
 286 millions be held, ipso facto, to involve a loss ? 
 
 To get in more than one gives out SQ&rc\s,pri7na facie, 
 to ordinary minds, the only way of making a profit ! It 
 cannot be pretended that Great Britain stood indebted 
 at the end of 1880 for the excess of imports. There can 
 be no doubt that at that period the world was as much, 
 if not more, indebted to her than at the end of 1879. 
 
 But 1880 does not stand alone in its excess of 
 imports. The same thing has gone on for the last thirty- 
 five years. In 1856 the excess was 43 millions ; in 1880 
 this figure, with interruptions, had risen to 125 millions. 
 Let me ask. Out of what fund have we liquidated all 
 these supposed adverse balances .'' 
 
 Then let me ask. What would our Neo-Protectionists 
 say if the products of our industry were annually 
 exported to the extent of 411 millions, and we received 
 back from the foreigner only 286 millions worth in 
 exchange ^ 
 
 Look at the question in yet another light. How can
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 9 
 
 it be otherwise than that our imports should exceed in 
 value our exports ? If a merchant export i^ioo worth 
 of goods, and in exchange for them imports goods worth 
 only ;{^ioo, he must make a dead loss under the heads 
 of freight, insurance, interest, and profits. 
 
 How can it be otherwise? 
 
 Let us suppose the goods cost him iJ^roo at Liver- 
 pool. He exports them to some foreign country, and, 
 of course, has to pay freight and insurance. Let us say 
 this comes to lo per cent. On arrival at the foreign 
 market the goods must therefore be worth ^i lO. They 
 must be sold, of course, and let us suppose the proceeds 
 re-invested in goods for importation here. Again comes 
 in the charge for freight, another lo per cent., which, 
 added to the ;^iio, makes the goods worth i^i2i on 
 arrival at our ports, independently of interest on the 
 money used, and what the merchant may lay on as 
 profit. 
 
 And so the ^loo of exports comes back as £121 
 at least, of imports, and must do so as long as trade is 
 carried on. 
 
 And, on this showing, what becomes of complaints 
 founded on the bare fact of our imports exceeding our 
 exports, such as — 
 
 That the balance of trade is against us ! 
 
 That we are being ruined ! 
 
 That Free Trade is a complete failure ! 
 
 And now, with reference to this last assertion, let us 
 for a few moments contemplate some of the facts and 
 figures which the records of the last quarter of a century 
 afford us. 
 
 I will first take the figures of the years 1870 to 
 1880, as comprising the latest periods of inflation and
 
 lO THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 depression, then I will take in the whole period from 
 1854 to 1880, 1854 being the earliest year for which I 
 possess the statistics. Now, what have we done between 
 1870 and 1880? 
 
 The Board of Trade returns record our 
 
 Imports for these eleven years as ... .., _^4,oi6,842,8i4 
 And our exports as 3,022,305,973 
 
 Leaving an excess of imports ... ... ,^994,536, 841 
 
 Did we pay away any gold for this excess ? Let 
 us see. 
 
 The returns show that in these years 
 
 We imported of gold and silver ... ... ;^34i,487,i34 
 
 And exported 305,820,304 
 
 Leaving a balance in o'lr hands of ... ;^35,666,830 
 
 A result achieved during an unprecedented demand 
 for gold throughout the world, owing to the currency 
 requirements of the United States, Germany, Holland, 
 and other states. 
 
 This ought to stagger our Neo-Protectionists ; but, 
 if not, I have yet another factor to bring into our calcu- 
 lation, and that is our foreign loan and investment 
 account. 
 
 Having no official records to refer to, I can only 
 make a rough estimate as to the probable balance of 
 our transactions in this respect during the period in 
 question. 
 
 In this time probably 500 millions of foreign loans 
 were floated in London ; and supposing that we took 
 one-half of these, besides purchasing enormous amounts 
 of United States securities, and investing in all sorts of 
 industrial enterprises abroad, I do not think we should
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. II 
 
 be very far from the mark if we put down the figure at 
 which we have made the world our debtor during these 
 eleven years as 350 millions. How will John Bull's 
 external balance sheet for these years then stand ? 
 
 He has imported and appropria'^ed of the 
 
 world's products, ofi balance ... ... ;^994.536,84I 
 
 He has pocketed in bullion, ofi balance ... ... 35,666,830 
 
 He has lent Creation, o« <5a/rt/?f?... ... ... 350,000,000 
 
 1,380,203,671 
 
 And in the face of these facts we are asked to believe 
 that we are plunging yearly into disaster ! 
 
 The figures of the last twenty-seven years are still 
 more startling. 
 
 In 1854 our imports amounted to... ... ... ;6'iS2,389,o53 
 
 In 1880, with interruptions, they had mounted to 411,229,565 
 
 In 1854 our exports amounted to ... ... ... 115,821,092 
 
 In 1880, with interruptions, they had mounted to 286,414,466 
 
 The totals for these twenty-seven years are : — 
 
 Imports ... ... ... ... ;^7,626,5o3,oS2 
 
 Exports 5,883,766,072 
 
 Excess of imports ... ... 1,742,737,010 
 
 The bullion records before me show that from i860 to 
 1880 inclusive \vc imported, on balance, ;6^8 3, 000,000, or 
 at the rate of about four millions a year. I have no 
 figures for previous years, but we may reckon, from com- 
 mon knowledge, that as from 1854 to 1859 gold flowed 
 into this country in greater quantities, and remained here 
 in larger quantities than since ; probably eight millions a 
 year remained here on balance ; so that for the whole 
 twenty-seven years we probably retained i^ 1 3 1 ,000,000 
 of it. 
 
 We will now look at the foreign loan and investment 
 account for this period.
 
 12 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 As before stated, we receive by way of interest an 
 annual sum of 55 millions. 
 
 This capitalised at 4I per cent, makes over 1,200 
 millions. And assuming that during the period in 
 question we acquired only one-half of these bonds, etc , 
 the account will stand thus for John Bull : — 
 
 He has imported and appropri.ated of the 
 
 world's products, on balance .. ... ;^I, 742,737,010 
 
 He has pocketed in bullion, on balance ... 131,000,000 
 
 He has made Creation his debtor, on balance 600,000,000 
 
 2,473737.010 
 
 In the course of these twenty-seven years, therefore, 
 we seem to have got hold of the world's products to the 
 amount stated for less than nothing ; for, besides getting 
 these products, we have actually acquired a vast sum in 
 money, and have also induced every civilised nation on 
 earth to give us I O U's, amounting in the aggregate to 
 at least 600 millions sterling ! And, with these facts in 
 our possession, we cannot but see that all the talk we 
 hear about " buying more than we sell " and '^ our adverse 
 balance of trade " is nothing but arrant nonsense ; and 
 that it is not the Free Traders, but the Neo-Protectionists, 
 who cherish " blundering and mischievous delusions." 
 
 CHAPTER in. 
 
 ONE-SIDED FREE TRADE. 
 
 Having safely passed our " pons," we will now, by the 
 help of what this has taught us, examine what our Neo- 
 Protectionists call One-sided Free Trade. 
 
 I hold it to mean that, while every nation has a free
 
 THE RECIPRCCITY CRAZE. 1 3 
 
 sale for its products in our home markets, we are excluded 
 more or less from some of the great markets of the 
 world by hostile and prohibitory tariffs. This is the 
 truth, but the inferences and conclusions drawn there- 
 from by our Neo-Protectionists are as false and absurd 
 as their notions about our adverse balance of trade. 
 
 They suppose that Great Britain is the principal, if 
 not the only, sufferer from this state of things ; and they 
 assert that, while Protection is advancing the prosperity 
 of other countries. Free Trade is destroying ours. 
 
 Free Traders deny these propositions, and, on the 
 contrary, affirm that Free Trade has been, and is, a source 
 of vast prosperity, and an unmitigated blessing to the 
 country, and that Protection has been, and is, a source of 
 loss to those countries which have estabh'shed it. 
 
 Let us now see what we, as a nation, have done under 
 our one-sided PVee Trade. 
 
 First, let us try and understand the meaning of the 
 complaint that every nation has a free sale for its pro- 
 ducts in our home markets. From the terms used, it 
 must be evident that every nation which produces any- 
 thing, and wishes to sell it to us, has to compete with 
 every other nation wishing to do the same thing. It is 
 therefore impossible for us to get the commodities we 
 want cheaper than we do through this universal com- 
 petition. 
 
 No other nation enjoys the advantages which flow 
 from this state of things. We find constantly that com- 
 modities are cheaper here than in the countries which 
 produce them. The poor among us are thus enabled to 
 fight the battle of life on the most favourable terms 
 possible. Our labourers are thus fed, housed, and 
 clothed as cheaply as possible. They are thus enabled to
 
 14 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 produce cheaply, more cheaply than any other workers ; so 
 cheaply that they have become the dread of every Pro- 
 tectionist nation — so cheaply that ad valorem duties of 
 50 to 200 per cent, on their productions are inadequate 
 to keep them out of Protectionist markets ; so cheaply, 
 that we almost monopolise, as a matter of cheapness, 
 every neutral market ; so cheaply that we have managed 
 to obtain nearly five-eighths of the world's ocean carrying 
 trade, and are daily driving out of employment such of 
 the remaining vessels as belong to Protectionist nations. 
 
 Our one-sided Free Trade has done all this for us, at 
 all events. And no Protectionist nation can divest us of 
 what we have thus got. And of the advantages we 
 enjoy we cannot be deprived, except in one way — by 
 other nations becoming also Free Traders. 
 
 It must be clear, that so far as our one side goes, it is 
 a very good side, and cannot be improved. Ought we 
 not to be extremely careful how we touch it ? I am 
 going to ask presently, Why should we touch it 1 The 
 Neo-Protectionist w^ould probably say, "Because we want 
 to get the other side also." 
 
 Are we quite sure this other side will be as good as 
 that we have ? I doubt it. 
 
 The complaint is that, by hostile tariffs, our produc- 
 tions are excluded from the principal markets of the 
 world. This is true, and on cosmopolitan grounds, and 
 in the interests of humanity, this state of things is to be 
 regretted. But we are not now considering the interest.^- 
 of humanity, we are trying to see how we can advance 
 the particular interests of Great Britain. 
 
 There are good reasons for supposing that the exist- 
 ing state of things is not to be regretted by us from the 
 selfish national point of view.
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. I 5 
 
 I am not sure, as some are, that Great Britain would 
 in the long run be a gainer by universal Free Trade, 
 and I now start this as a question worthy of calm 
 discussion. 
 
 If universal Free Trade existed, its vital and energetic 
 principle, division of labour, would, of course, have full 
 play, and mankind would by its means achieve the 
 maximum of production at the minimum of cost. 
 
 I am not quite certain that, as a nation, we should, 
 under it, be absolutely, or comparatively, as well off as 
 we are now. 
 
 Let us for a moment imagine all hostile tariffs sud- 
 denly abolished. 
 
 Has anyone ever seriousl)- considered the possible 
 effects, immediate and remote, which might arise .'' 
 
 Among them would be : — 
 
 1. A sudden and vast demand for labour at home. 
 
 2. A sudden and great increase in wages. 
 
 3. A rapid increase in the number of our factories, 
 workshops, mills, furnaces, etc. 
 
 4. A rampant speculation in everything connected 
 with trade and manufactures. 
 
 5. A general rise in prices distressful to those with 
 fixed incomes. 
 
 6. A rush of population from home and abroad to 
 our manufacturing centres. 
 
 7. A stimulus given to marriage and population. 
 
 8. A demoralisation of our labouring classes. 
 
 9. Strikes for an increase of wages. 
 
 10. The culmination of the foregoing. 
 
 11. The beginning of a reaction owing to the com- 
 mencement of foreign competition. 
 
 12. The commencement of a fall in prices.
 
 l6 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 13. Labour disputes, and strikes against the fall. 
 
 14. Progress of the fall in prices. 
 
 1 5. Failures of millovvners and manufacturers ; closing 
 of mills and factories, and blowing out of furnaces. 
 
 16. Labourers thrown out of employment, and con- 
 sequent increase of pauperism and crime. 
 
 17. Extreme depression takes place. 
 
 18. The usual healing courses have to be followed. 
 
 19. After some years of suffering things settle down 
 pretty much as they were. 
 
 All this is based on the sudden opening of foreign 
 ports. A gradual opening would, of course, modify the 
 process, but the ultimate result would not be different. 
 One of the results which would most probably happen 
 is, that our population might be increased by two or 
 three millions more than it otherwise would be. But 
 then several questions arise, such as : — " Would the 
 nation then be absolutely or comparatively better 
 off.?" 
 
 Free Trade introduced into Protectionist countries 
 would disorganise their industries — ruin some of them — 
 and cause a general displacement of capital and labour. 
 Effects the converse of those described as happening 
 with us would take place with them. At last a basis 
 would be found. Then would arise everywhere a real 
 and keen competition with us. Is it quite certain we 
 should come out of it victorious ? Take such industries 
 as these : our cotton and wool manufactures, our iron 
 manufactures, our ocean carrying trade. 
 
 The United States grow cotton, and in Alabama this 
 cotton is adjacent to the iron and coal which are pro- 
 duced there and in the neighbouring states. Would our 
 cotton lords and ironmasters view with equanimity the
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 1 7 
 
 contest with our cousins which would commence on the 
 morrow of the opening of their ports ? It might turn 
 out that these cousins might find out some way of 
 making cotton goods and iron as cheap as, or cheaper 
 than, we can. If the competition of foreigners be keen 
 now, notwithstanding the weight they carry in the shape 
 of enhanced cost of production, arising out of Protec- 
 tionist tariffs, what would it be should the weight be 
 removed ? What would become of our shipbuilding and 
 ocean carrying trade ? What would become of our 
 trade with the States ? What would become of us in 
 the neutral markets ? What would become of us in our 
 own markets ? 
 
 At present, as regards cheapness of production, we 
 stand supreme everywhere in all these things. Protection, 
 in this respect, handicaps and kills our competitors ; 
 Free Trade would breathe life into them. I say, there- 
 fore, speaking selfishly as an P^nglishman, we had better 
 remain as we are, and " let sleeping dogs lie." 
 
 But I want to know what it is our Neo-Protectionists 
 have to lay at the door of Free Trade, even one-sided 
 Free Trade. 
 
 Let us do a little more national stock-taking, for 
 there is no other way of seeing how wc get on. 
 
 Under the head " Imports and Exports," I gave 
 figures which show the grand external results of our one- 
 sided Free Trade. Let us now look at our internal 
 condition, and see whether we can recognise any moral 
 and material progress. 
 
 Let us take — i. Population. 2. Pauperism. 3. Crime. 
 4. Education. 5. Thrift. 6. Bankruptcy. 7. Taxa- 
 tion. 8. National Debt. 9. Banking. 10. Railways. 
 II. Agriculture. 
 c
 
 1 8 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 I. — Population. 
 
 In 1850 the United Kingdom numbered 27,523,694 
 
 „ i860 „ ,, „ 28,778,411 
 
 „ 1870 ,, „ ,, 3'>205,444 
 
 „ 1880 „ „ „ 34.468,552 
 
 „ 1881 ,, „ „ 34.788,814 
 
 There is nothing discouraging here, surely. During 
 the last ten years 3,275,000 persons, nearly 900 a day. 
 have been added to our population, notwithstanding 
 emigration, and a protracted agricultural and trade 
 depression. 
 
 What is the economical condition of this popula- 
 tion .-• 
 
 The following tables will indicate this : — 
 
 Years. 
 
 Exports. 
 
 Per head 
 
 of 
 
 Population. 
 
 Imports. 
 
 Per head 
 
 of 
 
 Population. 
 
 Excess of 
 Imports 
 per head. 
 
 1854 
 1S60 
 1870 
 1S80 
 
 115,821,092 
 164,521,351 
 
 244,080,577 
 286,414,466 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 4 3 7 
 
 5 14 4 
 
 7 16 5 
 
 8 6 I 
 
 152,389,053 
 210,530,873 
 303,257,493 
 411,229,565 
 
 £ s. d. 
 5 10 2 
 770 
 9 14 4 
 II 18 7 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 I 6 7 
 I 12 8 
 1 17 II 
 3 12 6 
 
 Bearing in mind what was said under " Imports and 
 ]<',xports," a glance at this table shows that, fast as 
 our population has increased, its command of wealth, 
 and purchasing power in the world's markets has 
 increased still faster ; and that it exercised this 
 power may be seen by the following table, which 
 shows the consumption per head of population of 
 some of those articles which our working classes con- 
 sume most : — •
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 19 
 
 Consumption per Head of Population of Imported and 
 Excisable Articles. 
 
 II 
 
 Bacon 
 Butter 
 Cheese 
 Potatoes 
 V Wheat 
 Rice 
 
 Sugar (raw) 
 Sugar (refined) 
 Tea 
 Spirits imported ) , 
 
 and excisable. ( ° 
 Malt (British) bushels 
 
 Now let US take pauperism. 
 
 2. — Pauperism. 
 
 Ireland. 
 
 Number of Paupers 
 First week in January 
 
 1870. 
 1-98 
 
 4-15 
 3-67 
 2 -So 
 
 I22"90 
 
 674 
 
 41-40 
 
 5-83 
 
 3-8i 
 
 lOI 
 
 1-84 
 
 1875- 
 8-26 
 
 4-92 
 
 5-46 
 
 16-05 
 197-08 
 
 11-68 
 
 53-97 
 8-88 
 
 4 '44 
 1-30 
 
 1-95 
 
 1870 
 
 1873 
 1878 
 
 1879 
 1880 
 1881 
 
 1870 
 
 1873 
 1878 
 
 1879 
 1880 
 
 Year. 
 1850 
 i860 
 1870 
 
 1877 
 1878 
 
 1879 
 1880 
 1881 
 
 Scotland. 
 14th May 
 
 England and Wales. 
 Population. 
 
 17.773.324 
 19,902,713 
 22,457,366 
 24,547,309 
 24,854,397 
 25.165.336 
 25,480,161 
 25,798,922 
 
 15-96 
 7-42 
 566 
 
 31-63 
 
 210-42 
 
 14-14 
 
 54-22 
 9-46 
 4'59 
 I 09 
 
 I -65 (1879) 
 
 73.921 
 
 79.649 
 
 85-530 
 
 91,807 
 
 100,856 
 
 109,655 
 
 126,187 
 111,996 
 
 94.671 
 97,676 
 98,608 
 
 No. OF Paupers 
 January i. 
 
 920.543 
 851,020 
 1,079,391 
 728,350 
 742,703 
 800,426 
 837.940 
 803,126
 
 20 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 These tables also tell their own tale. We see : — 
 (i) That, while agriculture remains depressed, trade 
 is reviving, the figures for 1880 and 1881 for England 
 and Wales bringing the fact into stronger relief; (2) that, 
 while in 1870 this part of the kingdom had a million 
 of paupers to support, in 1881 it has only 800,000, 
 although the population has in the meantime increased 
 3,340,000, a marvellous proof of progress ; (3) that we 
 appear to be once more embarked on the rising wave of 
 prosperity as a trading and manufacturing nation. 
 Let us now turn to our criminal statistics. 
 3. — Crime. 
 
 Unittd Kingdom. 
 
 Year. PopaLATioN. Convictions. 
 
 1840 ... 26,487,026 ... 34,030 
 
 1850 ... 27,523,694 ... 41,008 
 
 i86o ... 28,778,411 ... 17,461 
 
 1870 ... 31,205,4^ ... 18,401 
 
 1879 ... 34,155.126 ... 16,823 
 
 1880 . ... 34,468,552 ... 15,643 
 
 Do these figures require a word of comment .'' 
 Let us now turn to the matter of education. 
 4. — Education. 
 
 United Kingdom. 
 
 1863 ... 7,739 ••• 1,512,782 ... 1,008,925 
 
 1869 ... 10,337 ... 2,076,344 ... 1,332,786 
 
 1874 ... 15,671 ... 3,344,071 ••• 1,985.394 
 
 1879 20,169 ... 4,727,853 ... 2,980,104 
 
 1880 ... 20,670 ... 4,842,807 ... 3,155,534 
 
 We thus see that, while the material condition of our 
 population has steadily improved, their moral and in- 
 tellectual condition has also advanced in a remarkable 
 degree. 
 
 One of the signs of improvement is in the matter of 
 thrift. Take the Savings' Bank figures : —
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 21 
 
 
 
 
 5. — Thrift. 
 
 
 In 1S41 
 
 the d 
 
 ; posit 
 
 s were 
 
 ... ;^24,474,689 
 
 .. 1851 
 
 
 
 
 30,277,654 
 
 „ 1861 
 
 
 
 
 41,546,475 
 
 „ 1871 
 
 
 
 
 55,844.667 
 
 » 1879 
 
 
 
 
 75.809,994 
 
 „ 1880 
 
 
 
 
 77,721,084 
 
 Year. 
 
 Population. 
 
 1865 . 
 
 29,861,908 
 
 1870 . 
 
 31,205,444 
 
 1875 
 
 ■ 32,749,167 
 
 1878 
 
 • 33,799,386 
 
 1880 . 
 
 . 34,468,552 
 
 1881 
 
 . 34,788,814 
 
 Per 
 
 Head. 
 
 • L^ 
 
 7 I 
 
 2 
 
 8 4 
 
 2 
 
 5 9 
 
 2 
 
 7 2 
 
 2 
 
 7 I 
 
 2 
 
 8 4 
 
 6. — Bankruptcy. 
 In 1879 the insolvencies were in number 13,132, and 
 in amount ^^29,678,000. 
 
 In 1880 the insolvencies were in number 10,298, and 
 in amount ^'16,188,000. 
 
 7. — Taxation. 
 
 Amount Raised. 
 • ^(^70,313, 436 
 75,434,252 
 74,921,873 
 79,763,298 
 81,265,055 
 84,041,288 
 INCOME TAX. 
 
 1869 Gross value of property and profits assessed ;^434, 804,000 
 1874 ,, „ „ 543,026,000 
 
 1879 ,, „ ,, 578,046,000 
 
 8. — National Debt. 
 
 In 1870 this was ... ... ... ;^797,943,66o 
 
 „ 1874 ,, 776,107,783 
 
 „ 18S0 „ 774,044,235 
 
 „ 1881 ,, 768,703,692 
 
 Let us now take Banking and the Clearing House 
 returns : — 
 
 9. — Banking. 
 
 June, 1880, Deposits at principal London Banks 
 
 and Discount Companies ... ... ... ;^io5, 000,000 
 
 June, 1881 ,, ,, ,,• 118,500,000 
 
 bankers' clearing house. 
 In 1870-71 the total Clearing was ... ... ;i^4,oi8,464,ooo 
 
 ,, 1878-79 „ „ „ 4,885,091,000 
 
 „ 1879-80 ,, ,, „ 5,265,976,000 
 
 „ 1880-81 ,, „ „ 5.909,989,000
 
 22 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 
 10.— Railways. 
 
 
 Mll.ES 
 
 No. OF Total 
 
 Per 
 
 OPEN. 
 
 Passkngers. Receipts. 
 
 Mile. 
 
 15.537 • 
 
 .. 330,004,398 ... ;^45,o78,i43 
 
 ■• ;^2,794 
 
 16,658 . 
 
 •• 506,975.234 •■• 38,982,753 
 
 •• 3,541 
 
 17,696 . 
 
 .. 562,732,890 ... 59,395,282 
 
 - 3,356 
 
 17,945 • 
 
 .. 603,884,752 ••• 61,958,754 
 
 •• 3,453 
 
 Do any of these figures give one an idea of decay ? 
 Let us now look at our Railway traffics : — 
 
 Ykar. 
 
 1870 
 1875 
 1879 
 1880 
 
 Here again we have to notice the effects of the 
 depression, and the indication of a fresh start, which the 
 figures of 1880 afford. There is one thing, however, to 
 be noted. Considering that since 1875 some 1,300 miles 
 of comparatively unproductive lines have been built, we 
 cannot but see that an enormous advance in the general 
 prosperity has taken place in this department also. 
 
 Let us now take a few figures from our agricultural 
 statistics : — 
 
 1 1. — Agriculture. 
 
 
 Acres under Average Price 
 
 No. OF 
 
 No. OF 
 
 ^'ear. 
 
 Corn Crops. 
 
 OF Wheat. 
 
 Cattle. 
 
 Sheep. 
 
 1870 . 
 
 • 11,755,053 •• 
 
 46s. lod. .. 
 
 9,235,052 . 
 
 . 32,786,783 
 
 1877 . 
 
 . 11,103,196 .. 
 
 56s. 9d. .. 
 
 9,731,537 • 
 
 . 32,220,067 
 
 1878 . 
 
 . 11,030,175 
 
 46s. 5d. .. 
 
 9,761,288 . 
 
 . 32,571,018 
 
 1879 . 
 
 • 10,777,459 .. 
 
 43s. lod. ... 
 
 9,961,536 . 
 
 • 32,237,958 
 
 1880 . 
 
 . 10,672,086 .. 
 
 44s. 4d. .. 
 
 9,871,153 • 
 
 • 30,239,620 
 
 Here is the one bad exhibit in the national balance 
 sheet. Bad as these figures are, however, they do not, 
 at first sight, convey any idea of the disastrous years, 
 1S77, 1878, and 1879. 
 
 To obtain anything like a correct notion of the cir- 
 cumstances, it must be borne in mind that an almost 
 total failureof crops, especially in 1879, was accompanied 
 by very low market prices. The result was disastrous to
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 23 
 
 the agricultural interest, and to every other interest which 
 depended on it. 
 
 Landlords had to forego their rents. Farmers lost a 
 great portion of their capital. Manufacturers lost the 
 home markets. All this constituted our agricultural, 
 and helped to constitute our commercial, depression. 
 
 Our working classes, however, owing to the bountiful 
 harvests of America, were fed more cheaply than ever. 
 And this has been, commercially and economically 
 speaking, the salvation of the country. 
 
 I speak, of course, of the nation as a whole. Certain 
 interests have suffered, and are suffering. The agri- 
 cultural interest, and the manufacturing and commercial 
 interests w^hich depend on it, have suffered, and are still 
 suffering, from the combined influences of bad harvests 
 and low prices. But, large and important as these 
 interests are, they cannot be allowed to outweigh the 
 interests of the whole community. 
 
 As we have seen from all these facts and figures, it 
 is quite possible that important interests may suffer and 
 yet that the community as a whole may be prospering. 
 No Free Trader denies, or wishes to deny, that certain 
 interests have suffered. 
 
 What the Free Trader asserts is, that the nation as a 
 whole is prosperous and thriving, and that the proofs 
 abound on every side. The Neo-Protectionists deny 
 this ; but, in seeking to prove their case, they do not 
 appeal to facts as a whole, but pick and choose those 
 which appear to bear out their contention. 
 
 The facts, however, which they bring forward never 
 do more than show that some particular interest or class 
 is suffering, and this no one is concerned to deny ; their 
 facts never prove that the nation, as a whole, is suffering.
 
 24 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 In truth, every fact proves that the nation, as a whole, is 
 very prosperous. 
 
 As a matter of course, the classes which suffer call 
 out for relief. Agriculturists agitate for " Protection." 
 Manufacturers clamour for " Reciprocity." I will discuss 
 these matters in the following chapter. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 "RECIPROCITY OR RETALIATION." 
 
 This is now the battle-cry of our Neo-Protectionists. 
 They maintain that, if foreigners keep out our products 
 by hostile tariffs, we should threaten to do the same 
 with theirs. 
 
 One of two things must happen : they will either 
 open their ports, and we shall then have Reciprocity, or 
 wc shall close ours, and we shall then have Retaliation. 
 
 I have already discussed what might be the out- 
 come of Reciprocity — that is. Free Trade — to ourselves 
 as a nation. 
 
 As regards the world at large, all are agreed upon 
 the benefits that would ensue from an adoption of Free 
 Trade. But, we might be driven to Retaliation, and that 
 involves many important considerations which our Neo- 
 Protectionists steadily keep out of view. 
 
 Let us look at some of these. 
 
 Let us assume that all the difficulties which might 
 arise from " the most favoured nation " clause in existing 
 treaties are obviated, and Retaliation pure and simple 
 is set up.
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 25 
 
 We should find ourselves in a most absurd and 
 anomalous position. 
 
 Pray observe that when I use the terms " we," " us," 
 " our," I mean the nation, the community, and not any 
 particular class composing it. The distinction is an 
 important one, but our Neo-Protectionists steadily ignore 
 it. In discussing these questions it is found convenient by 
 them, according to the exigencies of their argument, to 
 use ambiguously the terms " we," and " us," and " our." 
 When they use these terms, what is in their minds is 
 some class and its supposed pariiculai' ititerests ; which 
 they would have you identify with t//e nation aiid its 
 general interests — two things which may be diametric- 
 ally opposed. 
 
 For this purpose "we" and "our" are convenient 
 ambiguities. 
 
 The absurd and anomalous position in which we — 
 that is, the nation — should find ourselves is this : — The 
 facts and figures I have adduced prove to demonstration 
 that under the existing system of what our Neo-Protec- 
 tionists are pleased to call one-sided Free Trade, and by 
 means of it, we, as manufacturers and traders, have 
 attained a position in the world which is at once the 
 admiration, the envy, and, commercially speaking, the 
 terror of competing nations ; yet, because some of our 
 interests suffer from time to time in the fierce compe- 
 tition which has been engendered ; and without pausing 
 for a moment to estimate what benefits this same com- 
 petition may in other respects have conferred on these 
 very interests, they call in question our Free Trade 
 policy ; they deny or ignore the results which it has 
 attained for us ; and the nation is counselled to reverse 
 that policy.
 
 26 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 Each sufifering interest has its noisy organs, its irre- 
 sponsible chatterers. The agriculturist organs suggest 
 duties on grain, but never hint at duties on other pro- 
 ducts. The manufacturing organs clamour for protec- 
 tive duties on the foreign products which compete with 
 their own, but scout the notion of taxes on the food 
 of the people, or on the raw material they use. Each 
 one wants his own industry protected, while anxious 
 that freedom shall rule in every other department. 
 
 It never seems to strike them that if Protection 
 be once started, it must be extended to all commodities, 
 and embrace all interests. It never seems to strike them 
 that to protect one interest to the exclusion of the rest 
 is to commit a gross injustice. It never seems to occur 
 to them that the interests, or supposed interests, of a 
 class may be incompatible with, or opposed to, the 
 interests of the community ; and that when this is the 
 case it is just and politic that the latter should prevail. 
 They never seem to truly estimate such an elementary 
 proposition as this : that, however large and numerous a 
 class may be, it forms only a part, and is not the whole, 
 of a nation. 
 
 Tried by these tests, what becomes of the cries which 
 occasionally arise from some interest which may from 
 time to time suffer from the universal competition, while 
 the general progress of the nation is one onward march 
 in the path of wealth and prosperity ? 
 
 The largest, the most important, interest among us is 
 agriculture. If any interest could claim protection as a 
 matter of justice or policy, it is this. But it was seen 
 that to protect agriculture would be injurious to the 
 general interest, and on this ground the Corn Laws 
 were abolished.
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE 2J 
 
 The reasons which hold against Protection to agri- 
 culture apply with tenfold force to other and minor 
 interests. If these interests clash with those of the 
 community, they must give way. There is no other 
 possible method of attaining to the greatest happiness 
 of the greatest number. And on no other ground can a 
 Free Trader argue the question as regards Retaliation, 
 or whatever form Protection may take ; whatever net 
 gain it might bring to a class, the loss to the community 
 would be much larger. 
 
 It must be contrary to the general interest that the 
 price of any commodity should be artificially raised. 
 To raise prices is, on the one hand, injurious to pro- 
 ducers by checking consumption, and thus diminishing 
 the demand for the article produced, and for the labour 
 which produces it ; while, on the other hand, it is in- 
 jurious to the consumer, in forcing him either to pay 
 more for, or to consume less of, the article of which he 
 stands in need. 
 
 To diminish production is to diminish our industry, 
 our trade, and our commerce, and thus to impoverish 
 ourselves and the rest of the world. 
 
 It is the interest of the community that the keenest 
 competition should reign, so that energy, enterprise, and 
 invention shall have full play, and shall work for the 
 benefit of ourselves and the rest of mankind. Protection 
 dulls and stifles these beneficent forces, and its inevitable 
 tendency is to bring about the minimum of production 
 at the maximum of cost. And on this ground it stands 
 utterly condemned.
 
 28 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 TWO NEO-PROTECTIONISTS. 
 
 1. A Quarterly Reviewer, July, 1881. 
 
 2. Sir Edward Sullivan, Bart., Kineteenlh Century, August, l8Sr. 
 
 Under the head of " Imports and Exports " I have 
 given a few extracts from two of the latest Protectionist 
 utterances. I here take the opportunity of making a 
 few comments on some of the facts reHed on, and the 
 conclusions drawn, in these two diatribes against Free 
 Trade, 
 
 Let the reader turn to p. 4, supra ; let him note the 
 fiofures there given in a little calculation of three lines, 
 and let him attentively consider the deductions which 
 the Quarterly Reviewer draws from them, and the idea 
 which he would give us of Sir Robert Peel's possible 
 " dreams." First, as to his figures. What can be the 
 writer's qualifications for discoursing on British trade ? 
 He does not seem to know or comprehend the meaning 
 of "re-exports of foreign and colonial produce." If he 
 did, he would not have made the egregious blunder of 
 leaving out this item, which amounts to 6'i^ millions. 
 He makes out that the excess of our imports last year 
 was 187 millions, but as he has taken no account of 
 commodities merely passing through our ports, he over- 
 states this excess by 6^ millions ! Next, as to what 
 Sir Robert Peel would have thought of a state of affairs 
 which does not exist. If Sir Robert had lived in our 
 day, and were as ignorant as this writer is, he might 
 express alarm, as this writer does, at the magnitude of
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 29 
 
 our import trade. But Sir Robert had some acquaint- 
 ance with the subject, and would not have been ob- 
 Hvious, or regardless, as this writer is, of the fact that 
 Great Britain does more than half the world's ocean 
 carrying trade, and that she has interest to receive on 
 her foreign investments besides other trifles of this 
 sort ; and that before she need do any bargaining as 
 to her exports or imports, she has to receive from 
 creation, by way of interest on loans, etc., and for work 
 and labour done, in money, or in kind, considerably 
 over 100 millions of pounds sterling a year ! No wonder 
 a writer in the Times money article cites this blunder 
 as " a measure of the intelligence of the new reciproci- 
 tarians." 
 
 Now for an instance of " hopeless muddle." In p. 291 
 of his article, the Quarterly Reviewer makes a kind 
 of effort to explain how poor indebted England dis- 
 charges this (according to him and his school) annually 
 increasing adverse balance of trade. He says : — " We 
 have about 2,000 millions invested in American and 
 other foreign bonds, and with this we are paying for a 
 large part of the difference between our imports and 
 our exports. We are constantly told that gold is dis- 
 appearing, and we know that, instead of being an 
 importer of the precious metal, we are now obliged to 
 export it. The theorists who uphold the wonderful 
 dogma just referred to are lost in wonder over the 
 'drain of gold,' and are always asking someone to^ 
 tell them what becomes of it. It goes towards the 
 payment of our debts — that is the heart of the mystery. 
 But this explanation does not satisfy the economists, 
 and we find them, in despite of all evidence and reason, 
 clinging hard and fast to an exploded delusion of an
 
 30 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 effete school, concocted during a period essentially 
 diff"erent in all respects from the present." These are 
 strong words. Let us look at them a little closer. He 
 says we are paying our debts by selling our American 
 and other foreign bonds. Indeed! If so, when did 
 the process commence ? There is not a single year, 
 for the last twenty years, in which our imports have 
 not exceeded our exports by at least 50 millions, the 
 amount of the excess in the aggregate being something 
 like 1,500 millions. And yet, at the end of this period, 
 which comprises more than half the Free Trade epoch, 
 and during which the country is said to have been 
 getting rapidly impoverished, he makes out that we 
 have in our strong box 2,000 millions of the world's 
 obligations ! What can be this writer's idea of " evi- 
 dence and reason " .-' Both flatly contradict him. How 
 did we get these 2,000 millions of bonds .-' We must 
 have got at least half of them during the last twenty 
 years. But during this time we had imported on 
 balance over 100 millions of bullion ! How can we 
 be getting in goods, bonds, and bullion from the rest 
 of the world, owing nobody anything, and at one and 
 the same time be impoverishing ourselves ? But, he 
 makes some obscure reference to a " drain of gold." 
 Coupling this with his idea of our paying away our 
 American and other bonds, I think I can pluck out 
 what he calls "the heart of the mystery." It is matter 
 of common knowledge that from 1877 to 1879 (three 
 years) European harvests were deficient and American 
 harvests plentiful. The harvest of Europe in 1879 
 was about the worst ever known. This state of things 
 was good for the United States, and bad for Europe. 
 The demand for corn was enormous ; and as the United
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 3 I 
 
 States had it to sell, they were enabled to turn it into 
 money, and with the proceeds to do two most im- 
 portant things. They had outstanding a debt on which 
 they were paying 5 and 6 per cent., and they were 
 suffering under an inconvertible currency. During the 
 nine years 187 1-9 they had exported on balance 
 ^76,084,000 in gold. Trade and commerce from 1873 to 
 1877 were extremely depressed, more depressed than with 
 us ; but in a moment all was changed. By means of the 
 vast supplies of grain they exported and sold to Europe, 
 they were enabled to pay off a considerable portion 
 of their debt, to reduce the interest on the remainder, 
 and to establish their currency on a metallic basis. 
 The process adopted was to call in their bonds ; and 
 to buy gold in the markets of the world, as Italy, for 
 a similar object, is now doing. Some of these bonds 
 were held by us, some by other nations ; we paid for 
 them when we bought them years before, and we got 
 money or money's worth when we parted with them. 
 As to the gold, some gold went away — not more than 
 we could easily spare, seeing that with an increased 
 volume of business money remains at from 2 to 2| 
 per cent. In 1 880-1 the United States imported on 
 balance ;^ 18,500,000 in gold ; but while P"ree Trading 
 England exported it to the extent of two to three 
 millions Protectionist France exported six or seven 
 millions. I attach no importance to this fact, however, 
 I only use it as an argiivientum ad Jiomincm ; for gold, 
 like everything else, is a commodity, and tends to go 
 where it is most wanted, and can be paid for. All that 
 happened amounted to this : that America, by the extra- 
 ordinary coincidence of her possessing three abundant 
 harvests, while Europe suffered under three deficient
 
 32 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 ones, was enabled to pay off some of her debt, to reduce 
 the interest on the remainder, and to put her currency 
 on a metalHc basis. All this should have been within 
 the ken of a writer who lays claim to " a mind capable 
 of comprehending facts," and who sets himself up as 
 an instructor on the Free Trade question. But all is 
 ignored, and we are made to carry away a dim sort 
 of idea that, in order to pay our way under our Free 
 Trade system, we are selling our bonds, and are being 
 drained of our gold ; a state of things which only exists 
 in the minds of such writers as this Quarterly Reviewer. 
 
 And now for another passage of his (p. 289): — 
 " Again, if we look at the United States, where Mr. Bright 
 has so often told us to look, we shall find that their 
 exports for the year ending June, 1881, exceeded their 
 imports by ^54,000,000. This ought to mean that the 
 Americans are getting poorer, if they are not actually 
 approaching bankruptcy ; but they by no means regard 
 it in that light. They like Mr. Bright's praises of their 
 country, at the expense of his ov/n, but they will not 
 have his teaching at any price, and consequently they 
 will go on exporting more than they import as long as 
 good fortune enables them to do so. Then there is 
 France ; she also should have been sinking deeper and. 
 deeper in the slough of despond, for in her case also the 
 exports exceed the imports." 
 
 This statement about France is astounding ! It is 
 absolutely contrary to fact. In 1880 France, according 
 to the returns, imported in excess 63 millions; in 1879, 
 57 millions ; and in 1878, 43 millions. France is now, 
 and has been for the last five years, an importer on 
 balance, and her annual excess imports are rapidly 
 mountincf. 
 
 I
 
 THE EECIPROCITY CRAZE. 33 
 
 Very severe things might be said of such a bkinder 
 as this, but I pass on to the Reviewer's notions about the 
 United States excess of exports — which, by the way, was 
 not 54minions but 52 milhons — fortheyearending in June 
 last. His notion that the wealth of the United States, 
 and the virtues of Protection, are proved by this excess 
 of exports is one worthy of the Neo-Protectionist 
 school, and "a measure of their intelligence." Is our 
 Quarterly Reviewer ignorant, or is he oblivious, of the 
 fact that the United States are largely indebted to 
 Europe, and have to pay a large annual tribute to 
 Europe in money or in kind, by way of interest on that 
 debt ; and that they have scarcely any ocean carrying 
 trade? Is he ignorant, or oblivious, of the fact that 
 thousands of absentees, and travellers, who come over 
 here from the States, have to remit to Eiurope, in one 
 shape or other, the expenses which they incur ? Let us 
 endeavour roughly to estimate what these three items 
 amount to. i. Indebtedness. — Let us say the States owe 
 Europe 500 millions ; 5 per cent, on this makes 25 
 millions a year for them to pay annually. 2. Shipping. 
 — Owing to blessed Protection, poor one-sided Free 
 Trading England does most of this business for them. 
 They had not a single ocean grain-ship floating last year, 
 and they carried only 17I per cent, of their foreign 
 commerce. Their export and import trade amounted to 
 309 millions. Let us suppose for a moment that on 82^ 
 per cent, of this they paid 5 per cent, for freight ; this 
 would make I2f millions more to pay. Then there is 
 the item of passenger fares across the Atlantic, to and 
 fro. Let us say half a million for this. 3. What shall 
 we put down for the 10,000 absentees, and travellers, who 
 flock to Europe every year, and some of whom are 
 
 D
 
 34 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 among the richest men in the world ? Shall we say an 
 
 average of ^300 ? This would give us 3 millions more. 
 
 There may be other items for works of art, jewellery, 
 
 etc., but of them I will take no account, so we will now 
 
 sum up. 
 
 United States Annual Foreign Indebtedness, 
 
 interest payable abroad ;^25, 000,000 
 
 Ocean shipping charges ... ... ... 12,750,000 
 
 Absentees and travellers 3,000,000 
 
 40,750,000 
 
 So that before the States can commence to talk about 
 exchanging a dollar's worth of their own products for a 
 dollar's worth of foreign products, they have to pay over 
 to Europe, in money or in kind, no less a sum than 40 
 millions sterling ! 
 
 No wonder their exports exceed their imports ! What 
 ignorance, what folly, does it not betray, therefore, to 
 build up an argument in favour of Protection, and 
 against Free Trade, on the bare figures which appear in 
 trade returns ! In the next chapter the reader will find 
 the true deductions which may be drawn from them. 
 
 Now for Sir Edward Sullivan in the NineteentJi 
 Centtcry, On p. 5, supra, will be found two passages 
 from his article, " Isolated Free Trade," to which I 
 would again refer the reader. They, and some further 
 extracts which I shall make, betray the fatuous igno- 
 rance concerning " imports and exports " which is the 
 characteristic of the whole school of Neo-Protectionists. 
 They all have the same notions about "foreigners 
 flooding our markets with cheap and often nasty manu- 
 factured goods " ; the same idea of " Free Trade increas- 
 ing the balance of trade against us till it has reached the 
 alarming figure of ;^ 1 36,000,000 "; the same notion that
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 35 
 
 we are "drawing upon our capital and our accumulated 
 wealth." 
 
 But there are other choice morsels which I must 
 transcribe verbatim : — " The cloud that threatens the 
 industrial existence of England has been gathering and 
 intensifying for six years. ' Who,' asks Mr. Bright 
 triumphantly, 'dare now propose a return to Protection?' 
 'Who,' it may be asked in return, 'among all the wise 
 and acute and thoughtful men in enlightened Europe 
 and America, dare now propose the adoption of Free 
 Trade ? ' Not one ; absolutely not one. After carefully 
 watching the working of ' isolated ' free trade in England 
 for thirty years, they have unanimously, without a 
 dissentient voice, rejected it as belonging to the puerile 
 doctrines and illusions of mankind." " Practical 
 thoughtful men are beginning to compare the prophecies 
 and theories of Free Trade with the practical results, and 
 they are aghast." " England is the only country in the 
 world that has adopted what is called Free Trade, and 
 England is the only country in the world that is retro- 
 grading in industrial prosperity.'^ " Under Protection 
 America is accumulating annually ;^i 65,000,000. Under 
 Protection France is accumulating annually .^75,000,000. 
 Under Free Trade England is accumulating annually 
 ;^65, 000,000. Many experts maintain that since 1875- 
 1876 she was losing money instead of accumulating. 
 Protective America now exports more than she imports 
 Protective France imports annually ;^4,ooo,ooo more than 
 she exports. (The balance against her is ^^40,000,000 
 in ten years.) Free Trade England imports annually 
 iJ" 1 30,000,000 more than she exports ! " 
 
 Very few remarks are necessary on this farrago of 
 reckless assertion and false inference.
 
 36 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 It is not true that any cloud threatens the industrial 
 existence of England, or that she is retrograding in 
 industrial prosperity; facts abounding on every side 
 point to the very opposite conclusion. 
 
 It is not true that wise, acute, and thoughtful men in 
 Europe and America have unanimously, without a dis- 
 sentient voice, rejected Free Trade. I deny that any 
 sino-le "wise" man has done so, whatever acute or 
 thoughtful men — they are not necessarily wise — may 
 have done. I deny that any but the merest sciolists are 
 aghast at the practical results of Free Trade, for the 
 simple reason that there is nothing in these results at 
 which to be aghast. While, as to the prophecies whi-h 
 have been made as to the general acceptance of Free 
 Trade by the nations within a certain limited time, it 
 may be conceded that the generous forecasts of its 
 advocates have hitherto been unfulfilled. This, however, 
 does not arise from the falsity of their doctrines, as the 
 Protectionists would have it, but because of the pre- 
 judices and ignorance of men — such prejudices and 
 ignorance, for instance, as these writers display — because 
 of the existence of the self-same spirit which placed 
 Galileo in prison for maintaining that the earth went 
 round the sun ; and which consigned Giordano Bruno to 
 the flames for asserting that the world was round. 
 
 And now I have to ask Sir Edward Sullivan for his 
 authority for the figures given by him as to the respec- 
 tive annual " accumulations " of America, France, and 
 England, in which England with 65,000,000 is placed at 
 the bottom of the list with the remark that " many 
 experts maintain that since 1 875-1 876 she was losing 
 money instead of accumulating." 
 
 I ask : Who is his authority for such a statement :
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 37 
 
 Mr. Giffen, in one of his " Essays on Finance," 
 1878, puts down our "accumulations" for 1865-1875 as 
 ;^2,400,000,ooo, or ii" 240,000,000 annually, and there is 
 no reason for supposing that they have decreased since ; 
 the figures given under " One-sided Free Trade " proving 
 the contrary. If there be any " expert " to set against 
 the Chief of the Statistical Department of the Board of 
 Trade, I should like to know who he is, and on what 
 factors he bases his calculation. 
 
 Then I have to ask him who is his authority for the 
 statement that " Protective France " imports annually 
 i^4,000,000 more than she exports ; and that " the 
 balance against her is ^40,000,000 in ten years" .-' 
 
 On taking up Martin's " Statesman's Year Book for 
 1 88 1," I find that, for the ten years ending 1879 — the 
 last year given — the figures stand thus for her imports 
 and exports : — 
 
 Imports for home consumption ... ... ... ;^ 1^494, 7 1 3,400 
 
 Exports of home produce ... ... ... ... 1,387.392,480 
 
 Excess of Imports 107,320,920 
 
 But, there is last year, 1880, and I find that Mulhall in 
 his " Balance Sheet of the World " puts down France's 
 excess of imports for that year as 6^ millions, which 
 brings up the total excess for eleven years to 170 mil- 
 lions! In 1870, however, France exported on balance 
 3 millions, so that the fact is that France for the last ten 
 years has imported on balance, on the average, 17 mil- 
 lions, not 4 millions ! But to stop here would be to give 
 a very inadequate notion of what France is doing in the 
 way of imports and exports, for I find that 
 
 In 1876 her excess imports were ... ... ;^i6,500,ooo 
 
 ,, 1877 ,, ,, 10,800,000
 
 ^S THE RECirROCITV CRAZE. 
 
 In 1 87S her excess imports were ;if43, 600,000 
 
 „ 1S79 „ „ 57,200,000 
 
 ,, 1880 ,, ,, 63,000,000 
 
 So that France, though Protectionist, is actually, accord- 
 ing to our new school of writers, going down hill along 
 with Free Trading England ! 
 
 But does it not seem extraordinary that in the face of 
 these figures we should be given to understand that 
 F"rance imports annually only ^4,000,000 more than she 
 exports ? 
 
 At all events. Sir Edward admits that France imports 
 more than she exports. But this is in direct contradiction 
 to his fellow in the Quarterly, who, as we have seen, asserts 
 that France exports more than she imports ! These two 
 Neo-Protectionists, therefore, are at direct variance with 
 each other on a matter of fact forming the very basis of 
 their argument ! 
 
 '■^Arcades ainho 
 Et caiitare pares et respondere paratiJ" 
 
 The only thing on which they are agreed is praise of 
 Protection and vilification of Free Trade. 
 
 Here I leave them, commending them to Mr. 
 Gladstone's advice to Lord Randolph Churchill, to 
 " avoid facts and logic, and stick to rhetoric and declam- 
 ation." 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 And now let us endeavour to draw a few practical 
 deductions from the foregoing discussion : — 
 
 I. That the fact of a nation's imports exceeding
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 39 
 
 in value the exports indicates, other things being 
 equal, that this nation is a creditor of some other 
 country. 
 
 2. And, conversely, that an excess of exports, other 
 things being equal, indicates that the nation is an 
 indebted nation. 
 
 3. That, among the older States those who are 
 advancing in wealth are gradually increasing their excess 
 of imports, while in those which are economically decay- 
 ing, there exists either an excess of exports or a gradual 
 decrease in excess of imports ; and that in proof of this 
 we have only to examine the following figures, and to 
 apply them to what is within common knowledge con- 
 cerning the countries named : — 
 
 Great Britain, excess of imports, 1S70, 59,000,000 
 France „ „ 1869, 3,000,000 
 
 Holland „ „ 1870, 7,000,000 
 
 Belgium ,, ,, 1870, io,ooo,oco 
 
 Germany „ „ 1S69, 12,000,000 
 
 Russia „ exports, 1S70, 4,000,000 
 
 1880, 125,000,000 
 
 ,, 63,000,000 
 
 „ 20,000,000 
 
 ,, 13,000,000 
 
 ,, 6,000,000 
 
 187S, 3,000,000 
 
 4. That, among the younger nations, the United 
 States stands out, at the present moment, as a great 
 exporter on balance ; but that, as she is a heavily in- 
 debted nation, she cannot avoid exporting on balance 
 until she has redeemed her obligations, and has recovered 
 her share of the ocean carrying trade ; and that, conse- 
 quently, to point, as Protectionists do, to her 52 millions 
 of excess exports as, ipso facto, a proof of the virtues of 
 their system, is to draw an unwarranted and mischievous 
 conclusion. 
 
 5. That the term "Balance of Trade," as commonly 
 used, is a misleading expression, calculated to give rise 
 to the most absurd fallacies.
 
 40 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 
 
 6. That the " Balance of Trade," if there be such 
 a thing, is in favour of, and not adverse to, Great 
 Britain. 
 
 7. That this "Balance" is likely to be more and 
 more in our favour. 
 
 8. That the world is likely to become more and more 
 indebted to us, and to pay us an annually increasing 
 tribute in money, or money's worth. 
 
 9. That this state of thmgs took its rise with the 
 advent of Free Trade, and is distinctly traceable to it as 
 a great efficient cause. 
 
 10. That the secret of our wealth lies in this, that 
 our free imports give us "an unmistakable advantage, as 
 regards the element of cheapness, in the universal com- 
 petition, and that the only way in which we can be de- 
 prived of this advantage is by other nations becoming 
 Free Traders. 
 
 1 1. That it would be a very unwise thing, looking at 
 it from a selfish point of view, to disturb this state of 
 affairs by threatening other nations with hostile tariffs in 
 retaliation for their prohibitory duties. 
 
 12. That if our threats were effective, other nations 
 would immediately be put on the same basis as ourselves 
 as regards cheapness of production, with a result 
 probably anything but pleasant to us as traders, carriers, 
 and manufacturers. 
 
 13. That if our threats were non-effective, we should, 
 in this way, also put ourselves on a level with our com- 
 petitors, with such accompaniments, however, as the 
 following : We should raise prices all round, and so 
 diminish general consumption, and, consequently, pro- 
 duction ; we should diminish our industry, our trade, and 
 our commerce, and thus impoverish ourselves and the
 
 THE RECIPROCITY CRAZE. 4I 
 
 rest of the world, and, in doing so, we should imitate the 
 very policy we condemn in foreigners. 
 
 14. That Free Trade is the best, nay, the only pos- 
 sible policy for us as a nation. 
 
 15. That some time or other, as sure as the day 
 succeeds the night, the nations will discover that in 
 establishing Free Trade they secure the greatest happi- 
 ness of the greatest number, and thus make a practical 
 advance to a realisation of the benevolent motto of the 
 Cobdcn Club — 
 
 " Peace and Goodwill among Nations."
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE 
 TRADE. 
 
 An Address delivered to the Sheffield Junior Liberal AssociatioTty 
 Wi November, 1881. 
 
 I HAVE the honour of appearing before you this evening 
 for the purpose of dehvering to you an address, which I 
 have entitled " England under Free Trade." 
 
 Now these are very wide terms. In their full meaning 
 they cover a vast field of inquiry, and, if I were to 
 attempt to traverse that field throughout, I should have 
 to take in political, social, agricultural, commercial, 
 artistic, literary, and other matters, which I have no 
 intention of doing, for which there is no time, and for 
 which I certainly have not the requisite ability. With 
 your permission, therefore, I propose to confine myself 
 to the one great subject indicated by my title. Free 
 Trade, only touching on some of the others by way of 
 argument or illustration. 
 
 In fact, our inquiry will resolve itself into a chapter 
 of what is termed the Fair Trade Controversy. 
 
 That controversy turns, as you are aware, on the 
 question whether the commercial policy we have adopted 
 for the last thirty-five years has or has not contributed 
 to the public welfare ; and, consequently, whether we 
 ought or ought not to maintain that policy. 
 
 The question may be put shortly thus : Is Free 
 Trade a success or a failure .''
 
 44 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 But, before we proceed farther, let us define what we 
 mean by the term Free Trade as just used. In the 
 abstract, Free Trade may be defined as that state of affairs 
 in which the nations exchange with each other their 
 various products untrammelled by hostile and prohibitory 
 tariffs. Protection, on the other hand, is that state of 
 affairs in which the nations are hindered from this free 
 exchange by tariffs imposed for that special purpose. 
 
 Well, we all know that Free Trade as thus defined 
 does not exist. We are said to be living under Free 
 Trade, but in a strict sense that is not so. We are living 
 under a system in which our imports alone are free ; our 
 exports to some of the principal markets not being free. 
 It is only as regards our imports that we enjoy perfect 
 freedom ; and it is for this reason that the present regime 
 has been called One-sided Free Trade. It will now be 
 our task to inquire whether this has been, as regards our 
 national welfare, a success or a failure. 
 
 Now all parties to the controversy are agreed as to 
 the benefits Universal Free Trade would confer on man- 
 kind. So far as I can make out, no one whose opinion 
 is of any scientific value denies that if Free Trade were 
 universal, it would be of infinite advantage to the human 
 race. There are some among us, however, who maintain 
 that Partial Free Trade — such as that under which wc 
 now live — is prejudicial to the country which opens its 
 ports to foreign productions, and beneficial to the country 
 which, on the other hand, shuts out, as far as it can, by 
 prohibitory duties the commodities of other nations. 
 And this is just the point of the discussion. Let us call 
 to mind why it is that Universal Free Trade is so bene- 
 ficial. It is because a vital and energetic principle which 
 political economists call "Co-operation of Labour" is
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 45 
 
 broir^ht into most efficient play. Free Trade in a 
 natural manner causes each nation to produce tho-c 
 commodities which are most suitable to its soil, and to 
 the circumstances and the genius of the inhabitants of 
 the particular reg-ion ; and to exchange the commodities 
 thus produced for the products of other nations, who, in 
 like manner, have their own peculiar advantages and 
 industries. In such happy circumstances energy, inven- 
 tion, and enterprise are allowed full play, and, as regards 
 wealth, there is a constant tendency, by means of more 
 extended division of labour, and improvement of pro- 
 cesses, towards the maximum of production at the 
 minimum of cost. " But," as Mill says, speaking under 
 the head of " International Trade," " the economical ad- 
 vantages of commerce are surpassed in importance by 
 those of its effects which are intellectual and moral." 
 " Finally," a little farther on he says, " commerce first 
 taught nations to see with goodwill the wealth and 
 prosperity of one another. Before, the patriot — unless 
 sufficiently advanced in culture to feel the world his 
 country — wished all countries weak, poor, and ill-governed 
 but his own ; he now sees in their wealth and progress a 
 direct source of wealth and progress to his own country. 
 It is commerce which is rapidly rendering war obsolete, 
 by strengthening and multiplying the personal interests 
 which are in opposition to it. And it may be said with- 
 out exaggeration that the great extent and rapid increase 
 of international trade, in being the principal guarantee 
 of the peace of the world, is the great permanent 
 security for the uninterrupted progress of the ideas, the 
 institutions, and the character of the human race." 
 
 As I have before remarked, all parties are agreed as 
 to the economic advantages of Universal Free Trade, but
 
 46 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 there are some who, while admitting to the fullest the 
 economical or £ s. d. side of the Free Trade doctrine, 
 maintain that it has also a political side. They admit that 
 Free Trade tends to achieve the maximum of production 
 at the minimum of cost, but they say that there are 
 other things to be considered besides the accumulation 
 of the greatest possible amount of wealth. One of the 
 things to be considered, they say, is the necessity of 
 educating a community in such arts and manufactures as 
 its resources are naturally fitted for, but of which, except 
 for Protection, it would remain ignorant. And another 
 thing to be considered, they say, is this : That so long 
 as human nature is what it is, and nations are liable to 
 go to war, it is not only prudent and statesmanlike but 
 absolutely necessary, in view of such a contingency, to 
 endeavour to render their country as far as possible 
 independent of the foreigner. And thus, according to 
 this school, the doctrine of Protection may be reasonably 
 maintained. 
 
 Now I have two remarks to make concerning this 
 doctrine. As regards the education of a people in an 
 industrial art by means of Protection, it may safely be 
 conceded that if the Protection be withdrawn when the 
 lesson is learnt, no great harm would be done, and a 
 great benefit might be conferred. But we know from 
 experience that this is most unlikely to happen ; and 
 that when once Protection has been admitted into a 
 commercial system it becomes the most difficult thing in 
 the world to get rid of it. Then, with regard to the 
 contingency of war, how different are the views of the 
 school of which I speak from those held by that associa- 
 tion to which I have the honour to belong — the Cobden 
 Club ! While the school referred to seems to be always
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 47 
 
 contemplating and preparing for the contingency of war 
 by means of hostile tariffs, we are striving might and 
 main to render war impossible, by preaching our com- 
 mercial gospel of peace ! 
 
 As you are all aware, Great Britain stands alone 
 among the nations as a Free Trading country. It is 
 natural to inquire how this is the case, how it is that 
 people, acute, thoughtful and intelligent, as, for instance, 
 the French, the Germans, and the Americans, cling to 
 the doctrines of Protection, while we alone adhere to 
 those of Free Trade. A full answer to that question, 
 gentlemen, would occupy more time than we have at 
 command this evening. I must content myself with 
 just indicating the. direction in which I believe the 
 causes of this phenomenon are to be traced. I cannot 
 help thinking that most of the evil is to be laid to the 
 account of wars. Their cost necessitates the imposition 
 of heavy taxation. The persons who impose that taxa- 
 tion are for the most part ignorant of political economy. 
 They take the first impost' that occurs to them, and they 
 lay it on the people they misgovern. They know nothing 
 of the possible consequences, from an economic point 
 of view, of what they do. One of these consequences is 
 the creation of interests which would never have existed 
 but for this cause, which grow up, and which gradually 
 acquire sufficient influence and power to render it 
 extremely difficult to get rid of them. This difficulty 
 I hold to be the great economic problem of the 
 future. 
 
 At the present moment we may sec these causes in 
 operation in France, Germany, and the United States ; 
 what is taking place there affording apt illustrations. 
 We ourselves have suffered in times past from these
 
 48 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 causes ; but thirty-five years ago we embraced Free 
 Trade, and during that period we have been gradually 
 emancipating ourselves from their baneful influence. 
 The countries I have named, however, still cling to Pro- 
 tection, and there seems to be no immediate probability 
 of their changing their creed. If I be asked- — Is this 
 not an astonishing fact? I should answer — Not at all. 
 England has been ahead of the rest of the world in 
 other things before now. We had our revolution, and 
 settled matters with our king, a hundred years before 
 France did ; in the matter of the abolition of slavery we 
 were thirty-five years before the Americans ; while as to 
 Germany, the Caisarism, the militarism, the despotism 
 which reign there, and which impoverish her, place her 
 in some respects a hundred years behind us in the march 
 of civilisation. 
 
 The ground is now sufficiently cleared, I trust, for 
 us to take a survey of our position under what is called 
 our One-sided Free Trade. The first thing to which I 
 shall call your attention is the Board of Trade 
 returns, which, as you know, give the particulars of 
 our trade with the rest of the world under the heads 
 of Imports and Exports. The totals of these, as you 
 are aware, have been growing, with slight interrup- 
 tions, ever larger and larger year by year, until last 
 year the sum total of our foreign trade amounted to 
 the stupendous figure of 697 millions, which figure 
 seems likely to be eclipsed by that of the year which 
 is now drawing to its close. Of this trade our imports 
 amounted to 411 millions, and our exports to 286 
 millions, leaving an excess of imports of 125 millions. 
 Now let me remind you that it is in regard to this 
 excess of imports over exports that the Fair Trade
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 49 
 
 battle most hotly rages. The Fair Traders maintain 
 that this excess of 125 millions is the measure of our 
 national loss for 1880; while the Free Trader ridicules 
 this view, and maintains, on the contrar}', that it may 
 more justly be considered a measure of our national 
 gain. 
 
 In a little pamphlet called "The Reciprocity Craze," 
 which I had the honour of writing for the Cobden Club, 
 I made the assertion that this question of imports and 
 exports constituted the/^//j' asiiioriwi, or " asses' bridge " 
 of the Fair Trade controversy. Gentlemen, I reiterate 
 that assertion, and, with your permission, we will en- 
 deavour to pass over this bridge, hand in hand, as 
 it were. 
 
 The Fair Traders say something like this : John 
 Bull buys of the foreigner 411 million pounds' worth 
 of goods, and sells him only 286 million pounds' worth ; 
 and they deduce from this that there is a balance of 
 trade against him of 125 millions, which is a loss to 
 him, by which he is so much the poorer ; and that he 
 is thus losing his wealth to the benefit of the foreigner, 
 who has the best of the trade. And they maintain 
 further that John Bull is getting poorer and poorer ; 
 that if the system goes on it must end in his ruin ; 
 and that all this is the genuine and unavoidable out- 
 come of One-sided Free Trade. The Free Trader, 
 as I have said, ridicules this view. He asks, in the 
 first place, why the bare fact of our importing more 
 than we export should be held to involve a loss — 
 seeing that to get in more than one gives out appears 
 to ordinary minds the only way of realising a profit. 
 
 And for the following reasons : — 
 
 In my pamphlet I asked this question — If a merchant 
 
 E
 
 50 ENGLAND UNDKR FREE TRADE. 
 
 export lOO pounds' worth of goods, and in exchange for 
 them imports goods worth only ^lOO, how can he 
 do otherwise than make a dead loss under the 
 heads of freight, insurance, interest, and. profits? Let 
 us suppose the goods cost him i^ioo at Liverpool. 
 He exports them to some foreign country, and, of 
 course, has to pay freight and insurance. Let us say 
 this comes to lO per cent. On arrival at the foreign 
 market the goods must theiefore be worth £iiO. They 
 must be sold, of course, and let us suppose the proceeds 
 re-invested in goods for importation here. Again comes 
 in the charge for freight, another lo per cent., which, 
 added to the iJ^iio, makes the goods worth £121 on 
 arrival at our ports, independently of interest on the 
 money used, and what our merchant may lay on as 
 profit. 
 
 And so the ;^iOO of exports comes back as ^^"121, 
 at least, of imports, and must do so as long as trade 
 is carried on. 
 
 In further illustration, let me quote from Mr. J. K. 
 Cross's speech in the House on the 12th of August. 
 He says, "i^i,ooo will buy 2,000 tons of coal free on 
 board at Carditif; the freight of this coal to San Fran- 
 cisco will be ;{^i,5CO; the amount realised for it in 
 San Francisco will be ;^2,5oo, which sum, invested in 
 wheat, will purchase 2,000 quarters. The conveyance 
 of this wheat to Liverpool will cost ^^1,500, and it 
 will require to be sold at iJ^4,ooo in Liverpool to cover 
 cost and expenses. In the import tables there will 
 be an entry of ^^4,000 wheat ; in the export tables 
 there will be an entry of £1,000 coal; the one ex- 
 changes for the other." 
 
 The Fair Trader, however, regardless of all such
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 5 I 
 
 considerations, persists in asserting that every year 
 we biiy of the foreigner more than we sell him. The 
 fallacy under which he labours arises, of course, from 
 the use of the terms buy — sell. The Free Trader, 
 with a more just appreciation of what takes place 
 discards these terms in the sense thus implied, and 
 rightly says : So far as commodities are concerned, 
 we got in 411 millions of them, and gave out only 
 2S6 millions, and if that were all to be considered, 
 it seems to be a mighty fine business. 
 
 But there are a great many things to be considered 
 as we shall soon see. One great thing to be considered 
 is, whether John Bull at the end of each year owes 
 anything to anybody for his excess of imports. Every- 
 thing turns upon this ; so we Mill at once proceed to 
 put the matter to the test. Now, in order to assist 
 us in the investigation, let me lay down this proposition, 
 which I consider an axiom : That in international 
 commerce there are three, and only three, modes of 
 squaring accounts — namely, by commodities, bullion, 
 or securities ; in other words that, between nation and 
 nation, debts can only be settled and liquidated in some 
 one or more of these three modes. Let us appl}' this 
 axiom to the facts of our commerce as recorded in our 
 official returns. I will first take the figures of the 
 last eleven years, because, as they comprise the latest 
 periods of inflation and depression of trade, they are 
 calculated to give us a correct notion as to what has 
 been going on. Now what do these records say as 
 to commodities ? I find that during this period our 
 imports in round numbers were 4,016 millions, and our 
 exports 3,022 millions, leaving an excess of imports 
 of 994 millions. Nine hundred and ninety-four millions ! 
 E 2
 
 52 ENOr.AND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 How in the name of fortune, one is inclined to ask, was 
 this excess settled for ? How much gold and silver went 
 out of the country to pay for these 994 millions of com- 
 modities ? Let us see. Again we turn to the records, and 
 we find that during the period in question our imports of 
 the precious metals were in round numbers 341 millions, 
 and our exports 306 millions, leaving in our hands 
 35 millions. It actually turns out, therefore, that we 
 have not only got these commodities, but have, in 
 addition, pocketed this large sum on balance, not- 
 withstanding the fight for gold which has been going 
 on in the world for currency purposes. But surely, 
 someone will say, it cannot be possible for us to 
 have got in all these goods, and all this cash, without 
 parting with our securities .-• We shall see. We have no 
 Board of Trade returns for our foreign loan and invest- 
 ments account, so we must be content with an approxi- 
 mate estimate. You have all heard of foreign loans, 
 many good, some bad. Well, during these eleven years 
 probably 500 millions of these were floated in London. 
 Let us say we took one-half of them, that is 250 millions 
 Then, for purchases of American and other securities, 
 and for investments in all sorts of foreign industrial 
 enterprises, and for commercial advances, let us put 
 down a balance of 100 millions. These two amounts 
 give us a total of 350 millions, for which John Bull 
 has made the world his debtor during these eleven 
 years. We thus see that, what with the goods, cash, 
 and securities, John Bull, who is supposed all this while to 
 have been going to the dogs, has managed to appropriate 
 on balance no less a sum than 1,380 millions sterling. 
 I think you will admit that this is not a bad result 
 for a nation which is said to have been Cfoinjr to ruin
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 53 
 
 fast during the last few years. The idea of ruin is 
 ridiculous, farcical ! Mark, there is no possible escape 
 from the conclusion. I have shown that as a nation 
 we, in this series of years, have managed to acquire 
 on balance all these three things — commodities^ bullion, 
 and securities ; and that, as there is no other mode 
 of settling international accounts but by means of one 
 or other of these three, the proof I give amounts to 
 mathematical demonstration. 
 
 A similar result is found whether we take ten, or 
 twenty, or any series of years during the Free Trade 
 epoch. I have before me the figures for the last twenty- 
 seven years — that is, going back to 1854 — and from 
 them I find that in those twenty-seven years, our excess 
 of commodities imported was 1,742 millions, our excess of 
 bullion imported was 131 millions, and our excess of 
 securities imported was 600 millions, making a grand 
 total of 2,473 millions as profit on our last twenty-seven 
 years' foreign trade. 
 
 There can be no question, therefore, that as a nation 
 we have become richer and richer. But, while I assert 
 and prove this, I do not mean to assert that there has 
 been at all times, and among all classes, an equal dis- 
 tribution of the wealth acquired. That is another and a 
 totally different question. During the American Civil 
 War, for instance, when there was a cotton famine, our 
 manufacturing interests suffered great losses and priva- 
 tions. Then, during the last few years the agricultural 
 interest, and the interests which depend on it, have 
 suffered most severely. I do not for one moment deny 
 that some of our interests have suffered. With those 
 sufferings I warmly sympathise, but while I acknowledge 
 them, and condole respecting them, I cannot be driven
 
 54 ENGLAND UNDER EREE TRADE. 
 
 from the position I take up — that the nation, as a whole, 
 is prosperous ; the mathematical proof of this being 
 found in the fact that year by year, on the whole, we get 
 in on balance, commodities, bullion, and securities. 
 
 Let me illustrate this by what is said of space, 
 namely, that it has three, and only three, dimensions — 
 length, breadth, and thickness. Now no one has ever 
 seriously propounded the existence of a fourth dimension, 
 and I say that, until the existence of this fourth dimen- 
 sion has been proved, and until the existence of a fourth 
 mode of settling international transactions has been 
 discovered — so long as we get in on balance, in a series 
 of years, the three things I have named — we may depend 
 upon it we are getting richer and not poorer as regards 
 our foreign commerce. 
 
 From what you have heard you will be able easily to 
 understand how mistakes and fallacies are sure to crop 
 up by doing what the Fair Traders do with the bare 
 figures of trade returns, that is to say, by looking at 
 them without taking into account, or consideration, a 
 number of other facts and circumstances without which 
 they are not only useless, but are absolutely misleading 
 and mischievous. No one can get anything like a 
 correct notion of what is going on between nation and 
 nation until he has taken such matters as the following 
 into account : He must not only look at the bare figures 
 of imports and exports, he must know the rules by 
 which they are computed ; and the rules differ in different 
 countries. He must find out whether country A is lend- 
 ing capital to or buying the securities of country B, or 
 whether the contrary is taking place ; or whether A is 
 paying off debt, or paying interest on loans and other 
 securities to B ; or whether B is doing all that to A.
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 55 
 
 And, further, he must take into account the great ocean 
 carrying trade, and allow for freights and insurance ; and 
 he must see who provides the capital for this international 
 trade, and whose merchants and bankers do the business, 
 and thus earn the profits and the commissions ; and he 
 must also take into account such matters as payments 
 for war indemnities, alterations of currency, and the com- 
 plications arising out of fluctuations of prices, and out of 
 changes in the standard of value. I say that, in order to 
 obtain a perfectly accurate knowledge of what a nation 
 is doing, the inquirer must know, and properly work in, 
 all these various factors. But, as besides the figures in 
 the trade returns we have no official figures, we can only 
 roughly estimate other factors from such sources as are 
 available, and arrive as nearly as we can at a correct 
 conclusion. 
 
 Well now, let me ask, did you ever know or hear of 
 a Fair Trader doing anything of that kind ? I venture to 
 say there is not one of them who, until lately, has had 
 the faintest notion of what is required, and that the faint 
 notion, such as it is, which they possess, has been instilled 
 into them by their opponents during this discussion. 
 
 Bearing in mind these considerations, let us now 
 examine some of the facts and arguments relied on by 
 our friends the Fair Traders. 
 
 One of the facts relied on, is that our markets are 
 flooded by foreign goods, to the detriment of the native 
 workman ; and the argument founded on this supposed 
 fact is, that we ought to tax foreign manufactures, so 
 that we may, by this means, either reduce these importa- 
 tions, and so increase our corresponding home productions, 
 or, on the other hand, induce or compel foreign nations to 
 reduce their high tariffs, and thus enable us to export more
 
 56 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 to them. Let us first sec how the fact stands as regards 
 the flooding of our markets. Our exports of manufactured 
 goods amount to between 200 and 220 milHons, and 
 our imports to 45 milhons. For every pound's worth, 
 therefore, that we import, we export nearly 5 pounds' 
 worth, and this is what is called flooding our markets. 
 The truth is, that the flooding is the other way, that 
 Protectionist nations are straining every nerve to keep 
 out our productions, and are utterly unable to do so. So 
 much for the fact relied on. Let us see how their argu- 
 ment works respecting the 45 millions of manufactures 
 which we import — one-ninth only of our whole importa- 
 tion — the other eight-ninths being food and raw materials, 
 which we get from all nations put together. We are told 
 that we ought to tax, and possibly keep out, most of 
 these 45 millions. But the consequences of doing so 
 might be very awkward for us. 
 
 Foreigners might do one of three things, i. They 
 might turn Free Traders in consequence of our action. 
 2. They might retaliate by further taxing our exports to 
 them. 3. They might submit to our imposts, and do the 
 best they could in the circumstances. As to their turning 
 Free Traders, I cannot for a moment believe that at all 
 likely to happen in consequence of our action. Their 
 policy drifts more and more towards Protection, and is 
 intended, apparently, not so much to extend exports as 
 to restrict imports, and they most likely would retaliate 
 on us by a war of tariffs, which would be most damaging 
 to us, seeing that they have a field of taxation of our 
 exports of 200 to 220 millions, while we could tax them 
 on only 45 millions. Surely that is not a pleasant 
 contingency to contemplate ! Then comes the third 
 alternative, of their submitting to our imposts, and
 
 ENGLAND UNDER EREE TRADE. $7 
 
 selling us as much as we should be able to take under 
 the circumstances. And what would be the circumstances ? 
 Prices would of course be raised, and the consumer of 
 these foreign goods would either buy less of them, or he 
 would have to pay more for what he wants of them. In 
 the first case, production on the part of the foreigner is 
 checked, and he either gives up his manufacture, and 
 thus loses his purchasing power in the world's markets, 
 and you lose him as a customer — directly or indirectl\% 
 as I shall show you presently ; or else, being bafiflcd in 
 your market, he turns his attention to neutral markets, 
 competes with and injures you there, and perhaps drives 
 you out of them. Anyhow, you impoverish both yourself 
 and him. In the second case, where our home consumer 
 consents to pay more for the article he wants, it is clear 
 that, whatever the increased price may be, by so much 
 is he directly impoverished — by so much is he less able 
 to buy other commodities. There is less produc- 
 tion ; less demand for goods, and for labour ; less 
 trade ; less shipping ; less everything which contributes 
 to make up the moral and material well-being of man- 
 kind. 
 
 And now let me explain practically what I meant 
 when I spoke just now about our losing a customer 
 directly or indirectly. Let us take French silks and 
 French wines. It is a favourite idea with Fair Traders 
 to tax these productions, because, as they urge, France 
 does not buy of us anything like what she sells to us ; 
 and they arrive at the conclusion from this bare fact, 
 that this is a state of things favourable to French com- 
 merce and detrimental to English commerce — in fine, 
 a One-sided Free Trade extremely hurtful to us. Now, 
 I wish particularly to draw }'our attention to this view of
 
 58 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 theirs, because in it is wrapped up one of the grossest 
 fallacies of our opponents. This is what they over- 
 look : — 
 
 By buying silks and wines of France, we give her so 
 much purchasing power in the world's markets, a power 
 which, as her trade returns show — she is a large importer 
 upon balance — she fully exercises. Well, if she spends 
 the money she receives from you in those products of 
 foreign countries which she requires, as we know ^he 
 does, she thereby, in turn, confers on those countries a 
 corresi:)onding purchasing power, and they, in their turn, 
 lay out the money so received among other nations, and, 
 as we are the principal manufacturers, we get the 
 principal share in the business. 
 
 So that by this indirect and roundabout way, every- 
 thing England buys of France, even in the way of wines 
 and silks, enables England to sell her products to other 
 nations, and thus to pay for those silks and wines ; 
 England all the while, as the great carrying and trading 
 nation, getting a tremendous pull by way of freights, 
 insurance, and commissions, all of which are created by 
 this all-round trade. 
 
 What were the figures of our trade with France last 
 year? 
 
 I see that our imports from her were about 42 millions, 
 while our exports to her were only about 15^ millions ; 
 leaving, apparently, a balance against us of about 26| 
 millions. Did we pay away any cash for this ? Not a 
 bit of it. Instead of paying anything, we received from 
 France last year in gold and silver no less a sum than 
 £3,4^ 1,000. You are now, however, in a position not to 
 be in the least astonished at what appears at first sight 
 an absurd result. It would appear, if we only looked at
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 59 
 
 the Board of Trade returns, and at nothing else, that 
 last year France made this country a present of 26h 
 millions of goods, and 3^ millions of money! But we 
 know that this is impossible, and that France, in some 
 shape or other, has receiv^ed full value, and it affords a 
 good illustration of the necessity which exists for taking 
 other things into account besides the bare figures of 
 trade returns. I do wish our friends the Fair Traders 
 w^ould consider fairly and honestly this crucial example 
 of France, and make their theory of the so-called adverse 
 English balance of trade square with the facts as they 
 stand Whether they recognise the necessity or not, 
 they are bound to show how we settled accounts with 
 France last year, a country from which, in the course of 
 a twelvemonth, we got in money and in goods, and 
 apparently for nothing, no less a sum than 30 millions 
 sterling ! Of course, gentlemen, you and I know now 
 how it was done, and in time perhaps the more intelligent 
 of our Fair Traders will also find out. When they find 
 it out, however, their occupation will be gone. And now 
 I will tell them something which they may perhaps not 
 know, and which may console them from their point of 
 view. It is this : That the balance in favour of France in 
 1880 was not as large as it appears, as Mr. Chamberlain 
 pointed out in his speech on the French treaty. He tells 
 us, " The returns of the Board of Trade must be taken 
 with qualifications, and applied with knowledge. The 
 figures for the French imports must be reduced by what 
 is re-exported to the United States and our Colonies ; 
 and for those textiles of different kinds which come from 
 Switzerland through France, and which are inextricably 
 mixed up with our French imports. With regard to 
 our exports, on the other hand, they have to be increased
 
 6o ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 by the amounts due for yarns intended for French manu- 
 factures in the Vosges, which go by way of Antwerp, and 
 which, therefore, do not appear in the exports to France." 
 The consequence is that the balance against us is not 
 26h milHons, but something considerably less, and this 
 will probably console our Fair Trade friends. We must 
 not, however, reduce this balance too much, for if we do, 
 we shall demolish entirely that grievance of theirs about 
 France ; and from their point of view that would be 
 a great calamity ! 
 
 But I have not done yet by a long way with our 
 friends. I mean to pursue to the bitter end their argu- 
 ment as to taxing foreign manufactures. 
 
 The ruling idea of the Fair Trader is, apparently, to 
 accomplish one of two things. If the foreigner taxes 
 our manufactures, we are to tax his ; if he admits our 
 goods free, we are to admit his goods free. He contends 
 that if we are compelled, in the first case, to keep out 
 foreign goods, our workmen will step into the place thus 
 left vacant, and supply our home market with these or 
 similar goods. But there are goods with which we can- 
 not be supplied at home owing to disabilities of soil and 
 climate, to say nothing of race, but which it is of actual 
 necessity, or prime convenience, for us to obtain. After 
 w'hat I have said, it must be clear that by taxing these, 
 so far from helping the British workman, we should only 
 impoverish him. There are other commodities, however, 
 w^hich the Fair Trader thinks would be supplied by the 
 home workman instead of the foreigner. But, to be of 
 any advantage to the British manufacturer, the British 
 workman, and the British consumer, the following 
 impossible state of things must occur. In addition to 
 the goods which we now make for the foreigner, we must
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 6 1 
 
 be ready to supply our home market with much of what 
 the foreigner now suppHes us, and of which we are in 
 future to cut him out. He is to sit down quietly under this, 
 and buy of you just as much as he did before, although 
 you have taken away so much of his purchasing power 
 by cutting him out ! At present, the foreigner makes 
 certain goods better and cheaper than we can. When 
 he is cut out, our consumers will consent, cheerfully as 
 a matter of course, to pay higher prices for these same 
 goods ! Then, on account of the new home business 
 which is to spring up, there is to be no fresh capital 
 required, no fresh plant, no additional workers ; or if 
 there are, there is to be no increased cost in these 
 respects, there is to be no change in any respect what- 
 ever, except that our manufacturers will have cut out 
 the foreigner and got the home market in addition to the 
 foreign market ! 
 
 But, gentlemen, this is all most absurd, and I am sure 
 I need say nothing more respecting it. I would rather 
 proceed to inquire how it is our own people cannot supply 
 us with certain things which now come to us from 
 abroad ; for instance, French silks and French woollens. 
 The simple fact is, of course, that from a variety of 
 causes our manufacturers and workmen either cannot 
 or will not supply us with these things. Whatever be 
 the cause, I am not here to-night to point out the 
 remedy, but, whatever that may ultimately turn out to 
 be, no Free Trader will allow that it is to be found in 
 taxing the foreign product. If, for instance, foreign 
 silks and foreign woollens were to be driven out of this 
 country by hostile tariffs, it is certain that, over and 
 above the actual loss to us as traders, which, as I have 
 shown, would be involved by these trades being killed.
 
 62 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 our consumers — that is, the bulk of this nation — would 
 be driven to adopt and use fabrics of a kind and quality 
 which they do not want. There is not much fear of 
 such an eventuality, however, for I do not believe the 
 people of this country would put up with such intoler- 
 able tyranny. 
 
 As you know, complaints have been heard of the 
 woollen manufactures of Bradford having passed away 
 to their French rivals. But what are the facts ? As I 
 gather them they stand thus. We find that British alpaca 
 or lustre has been superseded by French merino. Some 
 years ago alpaca was in high favour. Now it is neglected, 
 and the soft woollen worsteds of France have superseded. 
 it. How was this ? As I read it, it was because, when 
 alpaca was formerly made of pure fine lustrous wools 
 only, it was in favour ; but when manufacturers, aiming 
 at cheap production and high profits, mixed the new 
 wool with cotton, they produced nothing but a shoddy, 
 which soon lost favour. Our French competitors, it 
 appears, saw their opportunity ; they bought their wools 
 in our own market in London, they took it to France, 
 adopted for it new machinery and every process which 
 promised improvement, sought for and found new dyes, 
 inventing soft half-tints and subdued shades of colour, 
 and then brought it back to us made up into those 
 fabrics which are now so much in vogue, and which are 
 known by the name of French merinos and cashmeres. 
 Now, I wish to ask whether this is creditable to us as manu- 
 facturers .'' There can be no question that, from some 
 cause or other, our manufacturers have allowed the 
 French to steal a march on them. Let them meet the 
 modern demand by doing as the French have done ; let 
 them adapt their machinery, and study new processes.
 
 ENGLAND UNDER EREE TRADE. 6^ 
 
 and, depend upon it, we shall then hear very little about 
 French competition in this department. 
 
 Now, ha\-ing thus disposed of the Fair Trader's anj^u- 
 mcnt for taxin<^ foreign manufactures, let me say a few 
 words respecting his assertion that our excess of imports 
 is to be considered the measure of our national loss. We 
 now, on the average, import more than wc export — 
 considerably over lOO millions' worth of commodities 
 annually. We Free Traders say that instead of this 
 being a loss to us, it is a profit to us, and that if we did 
 not get in this excess of value we should be doing a very 
 bad business indeed. I want to know, in the first place, 
 why the shipowners of Great Britain, who possess one- 
 half of the world's effective ocean tonnage, are not to 
 receive what is due to them for the freights they carry, 
 and if so, how they are to be paid. I want to know, in 
 the second place, why those among us who hold foreign 
 bonds, shares and investments of every kind, are not to 
 be paid the interest which is due to them, and if so, how 
 they are to be paid. I want to know, in the third place, 
 why our shipbuilders, who last year built 90 iron, and 
 160 wooden ships for the foreigner, are not to receive the 
 price of those ships, and if so, how they arc to be paid. 
 I want to know, in the fourth place, why our merchants 
 and bankers, who advance the capital by which our 700 
 millions of foreign commerce is put in motion, are not to 
 receive the interest on their capital, and if so, how the)- 
 are to be paid. And in the fifth place, I want to know 
 if our merchants and brokers, who carry on this 700 
 millions of foreign trade, are to earn any commission 
 thereon, and if so, how they are to be paid. 
 
 There are other items which might be brought into 
 the account, but these are sufficient for my purpose ;
 
 64 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 let US try and roughly estimate them. I cannot put 
 down the gross receipts of our ocean carrying trade 
 at less than 45 millions. With regard to the interest 
 on our foreign investments, it is variously estimated 
 by the best authorities at from 55 to 60 millions. I 
 will take the smaller figure. Then the price of those 
 250 ships we sold last year cannot, at a moderate 
 computation, be put down at less than i^ millions. 
 Then, as to interest on capital, let us take 100 millions 
 as constantly employed in moving our 700 millions 
 of commerce, and say 5 per cent. This gives us 5 
 millions. And lastly, what are we to put down by 
 way of commissions .-* 2| per cent, on 700 millions 
 give us lyh millions. Let us now add up. 
 
 Shipping receipts 
 Interest on investments 
 250 ships sold 
 Interest on capital 
 Merchants' commissions 
 
 ;^45, 000,000 
 
 55,000,000 
 
 1,500,000 
 
 5,000,000 
 
 17,500,000 
 
 ;,^ I 24,000,000 
 
 From this sum, however, must be deducted what 
 we may have to pay the foreigner on so nmch of our 
 foreign commerce as he carries for us, and for the 
 balance between what we have to pay him, and what 
 we have to receive from him, in respect of supplies, 
 port dues, etc., and if for these items we take off, 
 roughly, 14 millions, there remains no millions to 
 receive from the foreigner annually by way of interest 
 on loans, and for work and labour done for him. In 
 other words, before we have to send away a pound's 
 worth of goods with the view of getting a pound's 
 worth in exchange, we have to receive in some shape
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 6$ 
 
 or Other from the foreigner no less a sum annually 
 than no millions sterling. In the name of political 
 economy and common sense, how can this be a bad 
 thing for this country ? 
 
 Anyhow, and after making all possible deductions, 
 you must see that we can import over lOO millions' 
 worth of commodities without trenching on our capital, 
 and that is the great point. But, it may be asked, 
 why do we take goods and not cash ? 
 
 The answer to that is, that in some years we take 
 part goods, and part cash, some years all goods, never 
 all cash. To be paid entirely in cash is about the 
 last thing we should want, but if we did want it, we 
 could not get it ; lOO millions loose cash in the world 
 does not exist. 
 
 But let us suppose for a moment that we could 
 get cash by some impossible process. What should 
 we do with it? We could not eat it. We should 
 not want to pile it up in vaults. We should have to 
 send it abroad again in exchange for commodities, 
 and, if in the end you have to do that, you may as 
 well take commodities at once, and so save the expense 
 and loss of two voyages of your cash. The fact is, 
 that it is only in commodities that one nation can 
 discharge the bulk of its debts to another nation, 
 and that if the world owes us money, and makes us 
 its carrier and its general merchant, we w;/i"/ take 
 payment in commodities. And thus, you see, at a 
 stroke we get rid of that bugbear to some people, 
 the thing commonly called the Balance of Trade, 
 and which, as commonly understood, is a fallacious 
 and misleading expression. 
 
 There is one country which at the present moment 
 
 F
 
 66 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 stands in marked contrast to us as regards the balance 
 of her imports and exports. I mean the United States. 
 She of late years has been a large exporter on balance, 
 and our Fair Traders have often pointed to this 
 excess of exports as a proof of her prosperity, 
 and of the virtues of her Protective system. When, 
 however, we call to mind the fact that while we are 
 a lending nation, with an excess of capital, and do 
 more than half the ocean carrying trade of the world, 
 and that the United States are a borrowing nation, 
 requiring capital, and ready to pay for the use of it ; 
 and that owing to her Protectionist policy foreigners 
 carry more than 80 per cent, of her foreign commerce ; 
 it is easy to see that, other things being equal, while 
 we have to import on balance, she has to export. 
 Now, it is impossible to estimate with any approach 
 to accuracy what the States have to send abroad each 
 year by way of interest on their indebtedness, and for 
 freight, and for other things. I cannot put it down 
 at less than 20 millions, and it is most likely a great 
 deal more, probably nearer 40 millions. Whatever 
 the amount may be, however, it has to be allowed 
 the foreigner in account, and, therefore, any argument 
 in favour of Protection, and against Free Trade, built 
 up out of the bare figures of her trade returns, 
 and without regard to the considerations to which I 
 have called your attention, must necessarily be most 
 fallacious. 
 
 If we turn to PVance, we shall find in her trade 
 returns a curious exemplification of the truth of the 
 principles on which I am insisting. As you are aware^ 
 the P'ranco-German war broke out in 1870 and closed 
 in 1 871. Well, just before that war — that is, in 1869
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE, 6f 
 
 and 1870 — her imports and exports, accordin^^ to Martin's 
 " Statesman's Year Book," balanced each other almost 
 exactly. You also know that in 1871 France had to 
 pay an indemnity of 200 millions to Germany, and 
 that she appealed abroad for a large loan to aid her 
 to pay that indemnity. Well, in 1871 she imported 
 on balance 21 millions. In 1872, however, and during 
 the three following years, she exported on balance 39 
 millions. How is this to be accounted for .'' By simply 
 recalling to mind what everybody knows, that France 
 was during those four years repaying what she had 
 borrowed abroad ; and that at the end of 1875 she 
 had probably repaid the bulk of it, and had recovered 
 from the terrible losses she had incurred. What are 
 her trade figures since then ? 
 
 In 1876 her excess imports were ... ... ;i^i6, 500,000 
 
 In 1877 >> >i 10,800,000 
 
 In 1878 ,, ,, ... ... 43,600,000 
 
 In 1879 ,, ,, 57,200,000 
 
 In 1880 ,, ,, ... ... 63,000,000 
 
 And I see by a paragraph in the Times of the i6th 
 September that her excess imports for the first eight 
 months of 1881 amount to 1,097 millions of francs, or 
 43 millions sterling, so that Protectionist France, ac- 
 cording to our Fair Trade friends, must be going 
 down-hill rapidly along with Free-Trading England, 
 for she has been rapidly and unprecedentedly increasing 
 her excess of imports ! And now I ask Fair Traders 
 how they reconcile these trade figures of France with 
 their theories ? 
 
 The trade figures of Germany tell the same story. 
 While she was receiving the French indemnity she 
 F 2
 
 68 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 was a large importer on balance. When this operation 
 was completed, this excess of imports began to diminish. 
 If we take 1869 and 1880, I find in "Mulhall" that, 
 while in 1869 that excess was 12 millions, in 1880 it 
 was only 6 millions. This is anything but a reassuring 
 commercial sign for her. Indeed, when we couple this 
 fact with others which crop up — such as, for instance, 
 the falling-off of savings bank deposits in Saxony, 
 the increase of emigration, the increased cost of living, 
 the decreasing earnings per head of her population — 
 we cannot be surprised when we hear that protests 
 against her fiscal system have been made by an over- 
 whelming majority of her Chambers of Commerce, 
 and that in the late elections a majority has been 
 returned pledged to oppose the Protectionist policy 
 of Prince Bismarck. The fact is, that the vaunted 
 system of Protection has utterly broken down in Ger- 
 many, and that, as she is the poorest of our rivals, 
 and consequently, the weakest financially, she is the 
 first to show the disastrous effects of the policy she 
 has so unwisely chosen. That this is so, may be 
 gathered also from this little fact, that our Fair Trading 
 friends no longer allude to Germany. " Oh, no ! we 
 never mention her." 
 
 Now, gentlemen, let us take a comparative survey of 
 ourselves and our great rivals, France, Germany, and the 
 United States. 
 
 Let us first take population. In 1871 the United 
 Kingdom numbered 31,500,000 ; and in 1881, 34,800,000; 
 an increase in ten years of 3,300,000. As to France, the 
 population in 1872, after the cession of Alsace and 
 Lorraine, was 36,100,000, and this year it is probably 
 38,000,000, not more; an increase in nine years of
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 6g 
 
 1,900,000. As regards Germany, 'the population in iS/i 
 was 41,000,000, in 1875 it was 42,700,000, and in 1881 it is 
 probably 45,000,000, an increase in ten years of 4,000,000. 
 As regards the United States, in 1870 their population 
 was 38,550,000, and in 1880 it was 50,150,000, an increase 
 during these ten years of 1 1, 600,000. 
 
 The percentage of increase is thus : — 
 
 For the United King-iom ... ... ... lo'o 
 
 France ... ... ... ... ... 5-3 
 
 Germany ... ... ... ... ... 9-7 
 
 United States .. ... ... ... 30 'o 
 
 You thus see that the United States lead the way in 
 this respect. The conditions which exist there, and 
 which cause this enormous increase, are so well known 
 and understood that I need not refer to them further. 
 And you will notice that France is far behind ourselves 
 and Germany, a fact which gives rise to many consider- 
 ations into which it is impossible to enter now. Great 
 Britain and Germany have progressed very evenly during 
 this period ; whether they will do so during the next ten 
 years, remains to be seen. The consolidation of the 
 Empire drew many into Germany, but the cost of that 
 Empire becomes more and more onerous, and there are 
 signs that the tide of emigration is rising. Anyhow, as 
 regards population, we stand well in comparison with 
 the older States. 
 
 Now let us consider some of the facts bearing on the 
 economic condition of these four great nations. I find 
 on referring to Mulhall's " Balance Sheet of the World, 
 1870-1880," that in a table of the world's industries, 
 under the heads of commerce, manufactures, mining, 
 agriculture, carrying and banking, he gives us the follow- 
 insf totals : —
 
 70 
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 
 1870. 
 
 Per Head. 
 
 1880. 
 
 Per Head. 
 
 Great Britain 
 
 Fvance 
 
 Germany ... 
 
 United States 
 
 Millions. 
 1,687 
 1,181 
 1,002 
 1,479 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 53 13 
 31 
 26 7 
 38 9 
 
 Millions. 
 2,024 
 
 1.325 
 1,269 
 2,004 
 
 £ s. d. 
 58 II 
 35 12 
 
 28 I 
 40 I 
 
 Taking man for man, therefore, we are far ahead of 
 the world in industry, and, instead of going back, are 
 actually improving our position. 
 
 Now let us see what "Mulhall" says of the earnings of 
 the nations free of taxes per head of population : — 
 
 
 1870. 
 
 1880 
 
 
 Great Britain 
 
 France 
 
 Germany 
 
 United States 
 
 £ s. d 
 26 17 I 
 17 12 2 
 
 16 16 6 
 23 17 10 
 
 £ s. 
 29 10 
 18 12 
 16 9 
 25 5 
 
 d. 
 
 7 
 5 
 8 
 
 
 Man for man, we thus, as regards our earnings, not 
 only stand at the head of the list, but have gained on 
 our coinpetitors. 
 
 Let us now look at what is said under the head of 
 manufactures : — 
 
 Manufactures : Textiles, Hardware, Sundries. 
 
 
 1870. 
 
 Per Head. 
 
 1880. 
 
 Per Head. 
 
 Great Britain 
 
 France 
 
 Germany 
 
 United States 
 
 Millions. 
 642 
 439 
 341 
 682 
 
 £ s. d. 
 20 8 
 I ( II 
 900 
 17 14 
 
 Millions. 
 758 
 485 
 427 
 
 888 
 
 £ s. d. 
 22 
 13 2 
 990 
 17 15 
 
 Once more we see that we not only stand at the
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 71 
 
 head of the list, but arc far ahead of Germany and France, 
 the United States making the best show against us. 
 
 Let us now examine the figures concerning ocean 
 shipping. What is shown is the effective tonnage, 
 arrived at by multiplying steam tonnage by 5 in order to 
 get a common denominator : — 
 
 
 1869. 
 
 Tons. 
 9,520,000 
 1,598,000 
 1,310,000 
 2,454,000 
 
 1879. 
 
 Great Britain 
 
 France 
 
 Germany 
 
 United States 
 
 Tens. 
 
 16,630,000 
 
 1,960,000 
 
 1,950,000 
 
 2,315,000 
 
 We thus see that while in these ten years we have 
 increased our effective tonnage by 7 millions, the United 
 States have lost 140,000 tons ! 
 
 Gentlemen, these shipping figures are conclusive. 
 Protectionist nations may, by hocus poc?is, conceal the 
 losses they internally suffer from their system, but they 
 cannot conceal the facts which these figures show. 
 
 And lastly, let us see how it fares with us all as 
 regards foreign commerce. Take the totals : — 
 
 Great Britain 
 France 
 Germany ... 
 
 United States 
 
 1870. 
 
 £, 
 547,338,070 
 249,000,000 
 270,000,000 
 172,000,000 
 
 Per Head. 
 
 1880. 
 
 Per Head. 
 
 697,644,031 
 332,000,000 
 384,000,000 
 301,000,000 
 
 £ s. 
 
 20 4 
 
 8 17 
 
 8 10 
 
 6 o 
 
 The above figures are taken from Mulhall's "Balance 
 Sheet of the World," as I have said, and they speak for 
 themselves.
 
 72 
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 I will now quote from an admirably written article in 
 the October number of the Nineteenth Century, written 
 by Mr. Thomas P. Whittaker :— 
 
 "The following are the amounts of the exports of 
 Great Britain and the United States to the five divisions 
 of the globe for the year 1878, as given by the 
 Americans themselves (excluding the trade between the 
 two countries) : — 
 
 
 Exports from the 
 United States. 
 
 Exports from 
 Great Britain. 
 
 Africa 
 
 Asia 
 
 America (excluding U.S.) ... 
 
 Australasia 
 
 Europe (excluding G.B.) 
 
 4,468,040 
 
 12,519,000 
 
 93,152,000 
 
 6,771,000 
 
 260,927,000 
 
 59,503,000 
 226,590,000 
 140,100,000 
 104,611,000 
 556,554,000 
 
 
 $377,837,040 
 
 Or, ;^75. 567,400 
 
 $1,087,358,000 
 
 
 Or, ;^2 1 7,47 1, 600 
 
 " Where are the United States as an exporting nation 
 in the neutral markets of Africa, Asia, and Australasia } 
 To those three divisions of the globe they send 
 ;^4,75 1,000 worth of goods, while we send ^78,140,800 
 worth ! Even to the peoples of North and South America, 
 at their very doors, our exports are one-half more than 
 theirs, and theirs are mainly food." 
 
 Well, gentlemen, besides being Englishmen, you are 
 Sheffield men ; and having heard what I have had to 
 say concerning our common country and her commercial 
 position, and having, I hope, come to the conclusion that 
 England is prospering, you are probably ready to hear 
 what I have to say about Sheffield, and Sheffield trade 
 in particular.
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. ^ \ 
 
 With your permission we will follow a line of inquiry 
 similar to that taken with regard to the nation at large. 
 We will first take population. I find that in 1871 the 
 population was 239,946, and in 1881, 284,464, an increase 
 of 18 per cent. Well, there is no indication of decay in 
 these figures ; but before we can form a correct idea of 
 the progress of your town, we must look at other factors. 
 Let us take pauperism. In 1871 your paupers num- 
 bered on the 1st of January, 7,560; in 1881, 7,126 — 
 decrease, 434. So that with 44,000 more inhabitants 
 you have 400 less paupers ! If you had kept to the 
 same ratio as in 1871, you would have had 9,000 and 
 not 7,126. 
 
 That, at all events, is a satisfactory indication. Let 
 us now, from the Savings Bank returns, see how Sheffield 
 fares in the matter of thrift. As you are aware, there 
 are two kinds of Savings Banks, the old Trustee Banks 
 And the new Post Office Banks. With regard to the 
 former, I find that in 1870 the number of accounts open 
 was 21,533, and the deposits, ^^493,998 ; while in 1880 
 the number of accounts open was 29,254, and the deposits, 
 ^^759,427 — an increase of ^^265,430. 
 
 As regards the Post Office Banks, I have only the 
 figures from 1873 to 1879. In 1873 the number of 
 depositors was 6,639, and the amount deposited, i^59,oo8. 
 In 1879 the number of depositors was 7,884, and the 
 amount deposited, £']?>,\2^. Now, we know that in 1880 
 there was a great accession of deposits, and we may 
 .safely reckon that on the 31st December, 1880, there 
 was i^8o,ooo in these banks. Taking these last eight 
 years, therefore, of both descriptions of banks, we find 
 that, whereas in 1873 the deposits were ;^688,79i, in 1880 
 they were ;i{^839,427 ; which, considering the times
 
 74 
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE, 
 
 through which you have passed, may be considered a 
 most satisfactory result. 
 
 We will now look at the statistics of crime : — 
 
 Year . 
 
 1870 
 187I 
 
 18S0 
 
 Population. 
 
 235,500 
 239.946 
 280,000 
 
 Convictions and 
 Committals. 
 
 2,162 
 2,102 
 
 2,075 
 
 This again is highly satisfactory. 
 
 We will now take elementary education : — 
 
 Return of the Numbers of Children attending efficient 
 Elementary Schools from the Period at which the Shef- 
 field School Board commenced Operations to October, 
 1880. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Average Yearly 
 
 No. on Roils 
 
 Attendance. 
 
 October. 
 
 1 
 1871 ' 
 
 11,985 
 
 No return. 
 
 1872 
 
 14,052 
 
 ditto. 
 
 1873 i 
 
 18,820 
 
 35,073 
 
 1876 
 
 26,713 
 
 42,736 
 
 1879 
 
 3'. 522 
 
 47.422 
 
 1880 
 
 32,817 
 
 50,319 
 
 Here we see that, while in 1873 there was an average 
 attendance of $yj per cent, of the children on the rolls, 
 in 1 88 1 that average had risen to 65*2 per cent. 
 
 Now, so far as these figures go, they indicate that 
 materially, morally, and intellectually, Sheffield is in a 
 far better position than she occupied ten years ago. 
 
 What these figures teach us is corroborated by 
 what is to be ascertained from our Board of Trade 
 returns. Your town is interested in iron, steel, and all
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 /5 
 
 kinds of hardware. Let us compare the figures of 1870 
 and 1 87 1 with those of 1879 and 1880. 
 
 Let me draw your attention in the first instance to' 
 the following table of our exports of all sorts of 
 ironwork : — ■ 
 
 Year. 
 
 Tons. 
 
 Value. 
 
 1870 
 187I 
 1879 
 
 1880 
 
 2,825,575 
 3,169,219 
 2,883,484 
 3,792,993 
 
 £ 
 24,038,090 
 26,124,134 
 19,417,363 
 28,390,316 
 
 Great Britain, therefore, did much better in her iron 
 and steel in 1880 than in 1879, and, as a matter of 
 course, Sheffield participated largely in the benefit. 
 This is shown in certain figures ^vhich I find in the 
 Sheffield Independent, to which paper I am indebted for 
 them as well as for many other valuable ones on the 
 subject. 
 
 I see that the exports of Sheffield to America in 
 1877 were ;^45o,ooo; in 1879, ;^ 5 60,000 ; in 1880, 
 i^i,o66,ooo; and that the total for the twelve months 
 ending 30th September, 1881, was ;^ 1,223, 830, being 
 ^157,419 over the total for the twelve months ending 
 30th September, 1880. 
 
 The prices of 1880, however, are not equal to those 
 of 1870, and, of course, so far as this goes, there is not 
 so much profit, but, inasmuch as there has been a general 
 fall in prices during this period, the difference is not all 
 loss, and what is gained by the fall in all other products 
 has to be set off against this loss, so that, in the end, I 
 suspect there would not be much to complain of in this
 
 ■/6 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 respect. I have not time now to enter into the questions 
 arising out of the fall in prices. It is, however, a most 
 important and interesting subject. Anyhow, the prices 
 of 1880 are better than the prices of 1879, and the 
 prices of 1881 are, I believe, exceeding those of 1880. 
 
 Let us now see what Sheffield is doing in 1881 in all 
 foreign markets. We have the Board of Trade returns 
 for September. They show that the total value of hard- 
 ware and cutlery exported for that month was i, 340,362, 
 against ;^298,o69 for September, 1880; and that the 
 total for the nine months was ;^2, 776,380, against 
 ;^2,547,267 for the corresponding nine months of 1880. 
 So far all is satisfactory, but, before I have done with 
 statistics, I should like to give you another view of 
 Sheffield trade by instituting a comparison of our iron, 
 steel, and hardware trade with France, Germany, and 
 the United States respectively. The figures I shall 
 quote come direct from the Board of Trade. 
 
 Those referring to the United States are printed in 
 the Appendix to Mr. Chamberlain's speech on the 
 French Treaty in the House on the 12th August, as 
 published by the Cobden Club. Those which refer to 
 France and Germany have been forwarded to me on my 
 application. 
 
 I find that, as regards France, our importations of 
 iron and steel manufactures for 1880 amounted to 
 i^ 1 18,000, while our exports to France for the same 
 period were of partly manufactured articles of iron, 
 wrought and unwrought, ^789,000 ; of manufactured 
 articles — fire-arms, ;^5,ooo ; other kinds, i^3,000 ; hard- 
 ware and cutlery, ^174,000; steam-engines, ^^129,000; 
 other machinery, ;^ 5 67, 000 ; total, i^ 1,667,000. As 
 regards Germany, during 1880, our exports of hardware
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 7/ 
 
 to her were as follows: — Iron, wrought and unwroughl, 
 ;^i, 145,000 ; manufactured goods — hardware and cutler>', 
 ;^i82,ooo; implements and tools.i^i 3,000; steam-engines, 
 ;^228,ooo; other machinery, ;6 843,000; total, ;^2,4i 1,000; 
 while as to our imports of iron and steel, on searching 
 for this item I find literally ;///; there is no entry what- 
 ever under this head in the paper which I hold in my 
 hand, which I have received from the Board of Trade, 
 and which is open to the inspection of anyone ! 
 
 Let us now turn to the United States. Our exports 
 to them in 1880 were — pig-iron and old iron, ;^3, 2 3 3, 000; 
 wrought iron, ;i^6,8 1 4,000 ; machinery, ^439,000; hard- 
 ware and cutlery, ^^494,000; total, i^ 1 0,980,000 ; while 
 our imports from them of iron and steel manufactured 
 goods came to ;^2 13,000. 
 
 So far, therefore, as Sheffield is concerned, we export 
 to these three countries whom we are taught to consider 
 our rivals, and successful rivals — these countries which 
 are said to be flooding us with their goods — we exported, 
 I say, to them in 1880 no less a value in iron and steel, 
 and hardware goods, than ;^i 5,058,000, while we imported 
 from them of the like goods only ;^34 1,000. 
 
 Gentlemen, I think that we may gather from these 
 figures that Sheffield is tolerably safe. Yet, as you know, 
 there have been complaints that American iron, steel, and 
 hardware are flooding our home markets. Well, this 
 flooding, as you have seen, amounts to the stupendous 
 figure of ;^2i3,ooo. It consisted probably of novelties, 
 clever adaptations, ingenious appliances, in the way of 
 scythes, scissors, saws, sewing machines, hay-forks, and 
 such like trifles. Well now, as to hay-forks. I have 
 never seen an American one, but a friend of mine told 
 me the other day that an American hay-fork was
 
 78 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 something quite different from an English one, that it was 
 easy and pleasant to handle, and that with it he could 
 do twice as much work as with an English one. Now 
 this is not creditable to us, I think. I want to know why 
 I am to be compelled to work with an obsolete hay-fork 
 when I can get one so superior? Is there no enterprising 
 Sheffield man here present who will deliver us from this 
 flood of hay-forks ? A year hence such a thing as an 
 American hay-fork ought not to be seen in this country, 
 except as a curiosity. I do wish somebody would seize 
 041 this idea, which I freely offer him, would carry it out, 
 and succeed with it, for then my visit to Sheffield will 
 not have been in vain. 
 
 Well, gentlemen, I trust that by this time you have 
 been able to form a pretty accurate notion of our con- 
 dition as a nation of manufacturers, traders, and carriers, 
 and that you can come to no other conclusion than that 
 our position is an excellent one, and one which is prin- 
 cipally due to Free Trade as its great efficient cause. 
 Yet, as you know, you have been called upon, and are 
 being called upon, to disturb this satisfactory condition 
 of things. Two associations — one of them called the 
 National League, and the other the National Fair Trade 
 League — have organised themselves with the view, among 
 other objects, of procuring an alteration in our commer- 
 cial policy. 
 
 I am happy to say that, as regards Free Trade, these 
 efforts have met with but little success, and that as time 
 rolls on there is every reason to expect they will meet 
 with still less. As, day by day, we get over one by one 
 our commercial troubles, and, little by little, find ourselves 
 emerging from a long-protracted depression, it will be 
 harder and harder for the advocates of Fair Trade, alias
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 79 
 
 Protection, to delude the people into taxing their right 
 hands a shilling, for the slender chance of getting back- 
 sixpence with their left. That little game is just two 
 years too late I Had they begun their agitation two 
 years ago, when depression was at its worst, they would 
 have made more disciples, and have given us Free 
 Traders much more trouble to expose their shallow 
 sophistries. Unfortunately for them now, they hardly 
 ever commit themselves to a statement, or venture on an 
 argument, but the next day some most inconvenient fact 
 turns up in the news of the day to confound them. The 
 time they have chosen for galvanising the mummy of 
 Protection is about the worst they could have selected. 
 It is as if some man, undertaking to prove the extinction 
 of the sun, were to choose as the best time for making 
 his assertions and giving his proofs, not the midnight 
 hour — when darkness reigns and seems to lend con- 
 firmation to his statements — but the dawn, just when the 
 orb of day begins to brighten creation, and every 
 moment brings with it an accession of light and heat, 
 and serves to prove him either a cunning knave or the 
 victim of a craze. 
 
 And now, by way of contrast to our present condition 
 under Free Trade — One-sided Free Trade — let us for a 
 few moments take a glance back to that state of things 
 which existed in the days of Protection, and to which we 
 should most assuredly revert, were we to follow the 
 counsels of our friends the Fair Traders. From what 
 they tell us, one would suppose that such things as agri- 
 cultural and commercial depression were unknown in 
 those happy days, and that they only came into being 
 with the advent of Free Trade in 1846. I will now 
 quote to you, by way of illustration, a few passages from
 
 80 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 the article in the October number of the Nineteenth 
 Century, entitled " The Proposals of the Fair Trade 
 League," from the pen of Mr. T. P. Whittaker, to which 
 I have already referred. 
 
 "In 1816 the poor rates at Hinckley, Leicester, were 
 52s. in the pound. 
 
 "It was stated in the House of Commons in 1817, 
 that at Langdon in Dorsetshire, a parish containing 575 
 inhabitants, 409 were receiving relief. And at Ely three- 
 fourths of the people were in receipt of relief. 
 
 "In 1 8 17 wheat averaged 94s. 9d. a quarter. In 1822 
 wheat fell to 43s. 4d. a quarter. In 18 19, 1820, and 
 1822, agriculture was in a state of universal distress, 
 bordering on bankruptcy, and petitions for relief were 
 presented to Parliament from all parts of the country. 
 In 1822 a Parliamentary Committee was appointed to 
 inquire into the cause of the distress. Farmers were 
 ruined by thousands. One newspaper in Norwich ad- 
 vertised 120 sales of stock in one day. This was when 
 the Corn Laws were in full force, and the price fixed by 
 law for importing corn was 80s. a quarter. 
 
 ^ Again, ten years later, agricultural distress was 
 great. The Marquis of Stafford used to take his rents in 
 the value of corn, and in 1827 he abated 30 per cent., 
 and in 1828, 26 per cent. In 1829 the workhouses in 
 some parts of the country were so crowded that at 
 times four, five, or six people had to sleep in one bed. 
 
 "In 1829 families in Yorkshire were reduced to live 
 on bran, and in Huddersfield 13,226 were reduced to 
 semi-starvation. 
 
 "Sir Richard Phillips, in his ' Facts' (published 1832), 
 says : — ' The dear corn years, from 1809 to 18 18, swelled 
 the list of crimes from 5,350 in 1809 to 14,254 in 1818.
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 8 1 
 
 In 1839 wheat went up to 70s. 8d. a quarter, and averaged 
 67s. from then to 1841, and the distress in the manufac- 
 turing districts was heartrending. 
 
 "In 1839-42 StockiDort was ahnost desolate, one-half 
 of the factories were shut up ; 3,000 dwellings were 
 unoccupied, artisans were breaking stones on the roads, 
 and the poor rate was los. in the pound. 
 
 "In Bolton, in 1842, the Poor Protection Society had 
 6,995 applicants for relief, whose earnings only averaged 
 13d. per head ; 5,305 persons were visited, and they had 
 only 466 blankets amongst them, or about one blanket 
 to every eleven persons. 
 
 " In one district in Manchester it was found that there 
 were 2,000 families without a bed. In Glasgow, in 1842, 
 12,000 people were on the relief funds. 
 
 " In Accrington, out of a population of 9,000 people, 
 only 100 were fully employed. 
 
 "In 1842, the reports of the factory inspectors 
 showed that 10 per cent, of the cotton mills and 12 per 
 cent, of all the woollen mills of Lancashire and York- 
 shire were standing idle, and that of the rest only one- 
 fourth were working full time." 
 
 And, in further illustration, I will quote from a speech 
 made in the House of Commons by Cobden, in answer 
 to Sir Robert Peel, as set out in Morley's " Life " of the 
 great Free Trade Apostle : — 
 
 "Cobden, in answer to Sir Robert Peel, out of the 
 fulness of his knowledge, showed that the stocking 
 frames of Nottingham were as idle as the looms of 
 Stockport, that the glass-cutters of Stourbridge and the 
 glovers of Yeovil were undergoing the same privation as 
 the potters of Stoke and the miners of Staffordshire, 
 where 25,000 men were destitute of emplo}ment. He 
 
 G
 
 82 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 
 
 knew of a place where lOO wedding-rings had been 
 pawned in a single week to provide bread, and of another 
 place where men and women subsisted on boiled nettles, 
 and dug up the decayed carcase of a cow rather than 
 perish of hunger." 
 
 Well, gentlemen, it is only necessary to compare the 
 state of affairs when these horrors took place with that 
 which now exists to see that in wealth, morals, and 
 intelligence, we have made a prodigious advance during 
 the last forty yeaYs. In 1841, under Protection, the 
 United Kingdom numbered 26f millions ; in 1881, under 
 Free Trade, we number 34I millions. In 1 88 1 , under Free 
 Trade, there is not a man, woman, or child of these 34! 
 millions — 8 millions more than existed under Protection 
 — who is not better off than he or she would have been 
 under the old starvation laws. There is no class of 
 labourers that I know of who do not command higher 
 money wages now than they could then ; and who with 
 these wages cannot command more of the necessaries, 
 the conveniences, and the luxuries of life than they 
 could then, and who are thus enabled to get the utmost 
 possible return for their labour. If it be not pre- 
 sumptuous in me to give a word of adxice to our artisans 
 and labourers, I would take the opportunity to say this : 
 Endeavour, if possible, to master some of the first prin- 
 ciples of Political Economy. Acquaint yourselves, for 
 instance, with the meaning of the word Capital. Recog- 
 nise in Capital that portion of wealth which is devoted 
 to reproductive purposes, and that, as one of its chief 
 purposes is the payment of wages, it should be treated 
 as a friend, to be cultivated and encouraged, not as an 
 enemy, to be plundered or destroyed. These things, 
 however, are now, lam happy to say, better understood
 
 ENGLAND UNDER FREE TRADE. 83 
 
 than they were. Trades Unions and Co-operative Com- 
 panies are doing good service in the way of education 
 respecting them, and are, I trust, preparing the way for 
 the aboHtion of those disgraces to civihsation, those 
 trade wars called strikes and lock-outs, which are as 
 barbarous in their way as international war is in its wa}-, 
 and are much more inexcusable. 
 
 And, now, let me in conclusion say this : I hold it to 
 be scientifically provable, mathematically demonstrable, 
 that as a nation — taking the nation as a whole — we 
 are in an excellent commercial position, and that the 
 great efficient cause thereof is Free Trade — that One- 
 sided Free Trade which our Fair Trading friends 
 exclaim against. Under our system of free imports we 
 get here everything that the globe produces on the 
 cheapest possible terms. This advantage no Protectionist 
 nation enjoys. The poor among us are thus enabled to 
 fight the battle of life on the most favourable terms 
 possible. Our labourers are thus fed, housed, and clothed 
 as cheaply as possible, and are thus enabled to produce 
 more cheaply than any other workers. This has given 
 us an unmistakable advantage in the world's competition, 
 and of that advantage we cannot be deprived, except in 
 one way^ — by other nations becoming also Free Traders. 
 This being so, we need not be anxious, from a purely 
 selfish national point of view, that Protectionist nations 
 should throw off the fetters which now cramp their 
 energies, but should calmly await the time when the 
 scales shall fall from their eyes. That time may come 
 sooner than some of us expect. 
 
 G 2
 
 THE HOUSE OF COMMONS 
 
 AND 
 
 ITS PLACE IN THE STATE. 
 
 An Address delivered to the Members of the Devonport and 
 Stonehouse Junior Liberal Association^ on Wednesday^ 
 November 2>th, 1882. 
 
 The subject on which I have the honour to make 
 a brief address to you this evening appears to be very 
 opportune. The House of Commons is now holding an 
 autumn session, in which, under the guidance of its 
 great leader, an effort — and, I trust, a successful effort — 
 is being made to restore to it the efficiency, and the 
 dignity, which it has temporarily lost. Last week Mr. 
 Froude, in a most able and suggestive address, delivered 
 at the Midland Institute, Birmingham, reminded us that 
 the government of England had passed away from 
 kings and from aristocracies, and was now centred in 
 the people — that what the people said should be 
 done would be done, that what the people said 
 should be law would be law ; that, in fact, they were 
 the sovereigns, and that the nation's destinies were 
 in its own hands. It behoves us, therefore, as citizens 
 of this great commonwealth, to ponder over the 
 charge which is committed to us, and to examine
 
 86 THE MOUSE OF COMMONS 
 
 the instruments wherewith we work, to see whether 
 they are fitted for our work. Now, inasmuch as the 
 greatest and most important of our instruments is 
 the House of Commons, it has struck me that a few 
 minutes devoted to a slight historical sketch would serve 
 the purpose we have in view. Without further preface, 
 therefore, except to state, that for much which follows I 
 am indebted to Mr. J. R. Green's excellent " History of 
 the ICnglish People," I will proceed with the few observa- 
 tions I have to make. We first hear of the Commons in 
 1327, under Edward the Third, as an Order formed out 
 of two groups known as the Knights of the Shire and the 
 Burgesses, and distinct from that of the Barons. They 
 were a timid body, unwilling to serve, shirking responsi- 
 bilit}-, and of little account in matters of State, the 
 Burgesses in particular being summoned merely to 
 assess the contributions of the boroughs, their pay being 
 two shillings a day, while the Knights received four. 
 The Barons in those days were the only counterpoise to 
 the power of the Crown, and it was their control over 
 taxation which enabled them to establish the great prin- 
 ciple on which the whole of our Constitutional history 
 really hangs — that redress of grievances should precede 
 the grant of aid to the Crown. For a hundred and fifty 
 years. England was a country where the prince could 
 neither make laws nor impose taxes save by his sub- 
 jects' consent. But at the close of the civil war between 
 the houses of York and Lancaster everything became 
 suddenly changed. After the battle of Towton, in 
 1 46 1, the Baronage lay a wreck at the mercy of the 
 Crown, which thenceforward, and until the Revolution, 
 became paramount — England under the Tudors be- 
 coming little better than a despotic State. The nation,
 
 AND ITS IT.ACE IN TIIK STATi:. 87 
 
 though prostrate for many years, at lencjth awoke to a 
 sense of its power ; and we read that on the accession of 
 the Stuarts, the ParHament of 1604 met in a mood 
 different from that of any Parliament which had met 
 for a hundred years. The Kini;- claimed absohitism in 
 Cliurch and State, and commanded the Commons to 
 abstain from the discussion of State poHcy. Tiie House 
 responded by a resohition asserting and vindicating its 
 rights — a proceeding which was followed b}' a gross 
 outrage on the part of the King, who sent for the 
 journals, and with his own hand tore out the pages 
 which contained the resolution, James passed away, 
 and then came the unfortunate Charles the First. The 
 antagonism between King and Parliament continued 
 and intensified, and in 1628 the famous Petition of 
 Right was drawn up, and presented by the Commons. 
 The Lords desired to conciliate Charles by a reservation 
 of his " Sovereign power." " Our petition," P\'m quietly 
 replied, " is for the laws of England, and this power 
 seems to be another power distinct from the power of 
 the law." John Pym, as you know, was one of the 
 greatest men of the Revolution ; but before I make 
 further reference to him I must speak of another of 
 that illustrious band of patriots, who was at the front 
 before Pym. I mean John Eliot, the ancestor of your 
 neighbour. Lord St. Germans. He did and said 
 many great things. He it was who once stood 
 almost alone in pressing for a recognition of the 
 rights of Parliament as a preliminary to any real recon- 
 ciliation to the Crown ; and his were the words which 
 afterwards bore such terrible significance, " None have 
 gone about to break Parliaments, but in the end Parlia- 
 ments have broken them." I think these words might
 
 88 THE HOUSE of commons 
 
 be remembered with advantage by some persons in the 
 present day. As you all know, the breach between the 
 Crown and the Commons grew wider and wider. In 
 1629 the King dissolved Parliament, and it did not meet 
 till 1640. And now stands forth one of the grandest 
 figures of the Revolution — John Pym — a Somerset- 
 shire gentleman, and member for Tavistock, the 
 first, as well as the greatest, of Parliamentary leaders. 
 He seems to have been the one man who had clearly 
 foreseen, and had as clearly resolved how to meet, the 
 coming difficulties. It was certain there would be a 
 struggle with the Crown, and probable that in that 
 struggle the House of Commons would be hampered, as 
 it had been hampered before, by the House of Lords. 
 The conflict of supposed co-ordinate powers between 
 the two Houses was the difficulty. He was equal to 
 the occasion. He was the first English statesman who 
 discovered, and applied to the political circumstances 
 around him, what may be called the doctrine of consti- 
 tutional proportion. He saw that, as an element of 
 constitutional life, Parliament was of higher value than 
 the Crown ; and that in Parliament itself the one 
 essential part was the House of Commons. On these 
 two facts he based his whole policy in the contest which 
 followed. When Charles refused to act with the Parlia- 
 ment, Pym treated the refusal as a temporary abdication 
 on the part of the Sovereign, which vested the executive 
 power in the two Houses until new arrangements were 
 made. When the Lords obstructed business, he warned 
 them that obstruction would only force the Commons 
 "to save the Kingdom alone." These principles have 
 both been recognised as bases of our Constitution since 
 the days of Pym. The first was established by the
 
 AND ITS PLACE IN THE STATE. 89 
 
 Convention and Parliament which followed on the de- 
 parture of James the Second ; the second, by the ac- 
 knowledgment on all sides, since the Reform Bill of 
 1832, that the government of the country is really in 
 the hands of the House of Commons, and can only be 
 carried on by Ministers who represent the majority of 
 that House. All this, however, brings us face to face 
 with the Revolution, and I need now only remind 
 you of what took place : the execution of Charles, the 
 Commonwealth which followed, and the Restoration 
 which, in its turn, came to an end in the expulsion of 
 James the Second. Then, at last, after a lapse of 400 
 years, the cause of the people triumphed. The timid 
 burgesses of the thirteenth century, whose sole business 
 it was to appraise dues, had, in the seventeenth, de- 
 veloped into a power before which kings were forced to 
 bend. Let us now see how the Commons treated 
 William and Mary, on their accession in 1689. One of 
 their first acts was the presentation of the Declaration 
 of Rights, afterwards turned into the Bill of Rights, 
 which restored to the Monarchy the character which it 
 had lost under the Tudors and the Stuarts. The right 
 of the people, through its representatives, to depose the 
 king, to change the order of succession, and to set on 
 the throne whom they would, was now established, and 
 all claim of Divine right, or hereditary right inde- 
 pendent of the law, was formally put an end to by 
 the election of William and Mary. Since their day 
 no English sovereign has been able to advance any 
 claim to the crown, save a claim which rested on a 
 particular clause in a particular Act of Parliament. 
 William, Mary, and Anne were sovereigns simply 
 by virtue of the Bill of Rights. George the First and
 
 90 THE HOUSE OF COMMONS 
 
 his successors have been sovereigns solel}^ by virtue of 
 the Act of Settlement. An English monarch is now as 
 much the creature of an Act of Parliament as the 
 pettiest tax-gatherer in his realm. But, having thus 
 made the king, how were the Commons to control him .'* 
 Experience showed that the only way was for them 
 to exercise absolute power over taxation. At first 
 they restricted the grant of Royal revenue to four years, 
 instead of for life ; and when William complained, 
 they resolved that, after his death, the vote of 'supply 
 should be an annual one. The control of the army was 
 obtained by rendering it necessary to renew every year 
 the provisions for the requisite pay and discipline, under 
 what is called the Mutiny Act. By these means, and 
 others of less consequence, the House of Commons be- 
 came the supreme power in the State. Passing on now 
 to the times of Queen Anne, we read that in 1712 there 
 was a contest between the House of Lords and the 
 House of Commons, in which the House of Lords was 
 defeated, one of the means used by Harley being the 
 creation of twelve peers. There is nothing till the reign 
 of George the Third to which it is now necessary to 
 advert. The Crown, which had lost its power for 
 coercion, endeavoured now to carry out its objects by 
 corruption, the condition of the representation affording 
 full opportunity. Great towns like Manchester and 
 Birmingham remained without a member, while mem- 
 bers sat for boroughs which, like Old Sarum, had actually 
 vanished from the face of the earth Out of a popti- 
 lation of eight millions, only one hundred and sixty 
 thousand were voters. Boroughs were openly bought 
 and sold, and we read that, among other iniquities, an 
 office was opened at the Treasury for the bribery of
 
 AND ITS PLACE IN TIIK STATK. QI 
 
 members, and that ^25,000 is said to have been thus 
 spent in a single day. Corruption was tlie direct effect 
 of all this, and of the secrecy which shrouded the pro- 
 ceedings of the House, and, to cope with it, tliere was 
 but one remedy — publicity. It is at this juncture that 
 the Press conies on the scene as a political power. 
 Efforts to cripple and destroy it were, of course, 
 made. Prosecutions were launched against the North 
 Briton, a paper written by John Wilkes, against the 
 letters of "Junius," and against the six printers who, 
 in spite of proclamations, dared to print the debates. 
 All was in vain. Parliament soon found that it had to 
 reckon with the people. By means of the Press, and of 
 political agitation, which may be said to have taken its 
 rise in those meetings of Yorkshire freeholders wherein 
 a clamour for reform was made, public opinion began to 
 make itself felt, and to exercise a plastic force in every 
 institution and department of the State. Of the numer- 
 ous reforms accomplished by its influence, two have 
 taken place with reference to the composition of the 
 House of Commons, in the Acts of 1832 and 1867. We 
 are now longing for a third, which, I rejoice to think, 
 cannot be long delayed. Until a new reform takes 
 place, the House of Commons is very far off from being 
 a true reflex of the national will. Classes, and class 
 interests, predominate to the prejudice of the nation 
 at large ; and, until these inequalities are done away 
 with, it will be impossible for us to have the good 
 government to which, as a nation, we are entitled, and 
 which we are determined to obtain. And now, in 
 conclusion, and with reference to the title of this ad- 
 dress, "The House of Commons and its Place in the 
 State," let me try and impress on your minds that
 
 92 THE HOUSE OF COMMONS. 
 
 doctrine of constitutional proportion propounded by 
 Pym, namely, that as component elements of the State 
 and Constitution, Parliament is of higher value than the 
 Crown ; while, in Parliament itself, the one essential 
 part is the House of Commons. Armed with these 
 principles, the people can regard with equanimity 
 any threatened opposition to their will which may 
 arise out of any conflict between the two Houses. 
 All they have to do is to manifest that will, and to 
 make it felt, by sending men to Parliament imbued 
 with their sentiments — men who, in season and out of 
 season, will insist on the evils arising out of the present 
 misrepresentation, and who, when the time comes, will 
 do their best to arrive at that state of affairs when the 
 members of the Commons, as representing the people 
 shall be able to say with truth, and in the proper sense, 
 " The State, we are the State.'
 
 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 
 
 An Adu'ress delivered to the Members of the Plymouth and 
 Western Counties Liberal Club, ok Monday, October 22nd, 
 1883. 
 
 It is probable that before many months have elapsed we 
 shall be in the midst of a great constitutional struggle, 
 in the shape of an effort to pass into law a Reform Bill 
 dealing with the Equalisation of the County and Borough 
 Franchises, and with the Distribution of Seats. This 
 Parliament has held its fourth session, and the time is 
 approaching when the Government, in fulfilment of its 
 pledges, must take up this great question. Moreover, 
 there was held in Leeds last week a great national 
 demonstration^ in the shape of a Parliamentary Reform 
 Conference, under the presidency of Mr. John Morley, 
 at which delegates from 500 Liberal organisations were 
 present, and at which- the following resolutions, among 
 others, were unanimously passed: — (i) "That this Con- 
 ference, believing that the Extension of the Franchise is 
 a matter of paramount and urgent importance, is of 
 opinion that it is the duty of her Majesty's Government 
 to introduce a Bill dealing with the question, in the next 
 session of Parliament." (2) " That, in order to meet the 
 just expectation of the country, and to fulfil the pledges 
 given at the last general election, this Conference is of 
 opinion that a measure for the Extension of the Franchise 
 should confer on householders in the counties the same 
 electoral rights a those enjoyed by householders in
 
 94 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 
 
 Parliamentary boroughs"; — the following rider to this 
 resolution being carried by a very large majority : — " That 
 in the opinion of this meeting, any measure for the Exten- 
 sion of the Suffrage should confer the Franchise upon 
 women who, possessing the qualifications which entitle 
 men to vote, have now the right of voting in all matters 
 of local government." (3) " That a measure for the 
 Extension of the Franchise having been passed, and the 
 register of the new electorate completed, in the opinion 
 of this Conference there should follow a measure for the 
 Redistribution of Seats, such as will give, as near as 
 as possible, an equal value to every vote, and secure a 
 true expression of the will of the nation." 
 
 It is highly probable, therefore, that the year 1884 
 will see the country involved in a vital constitutional 
 struggle ; and it behoves us as Englishmen, and as mem- 
 bers of the great party of progress, to take, betimes, a 
 survey of the ground on which the battle is to be fought, 
 and to pass in review those great principles which we 
 cherish, and which, sooner or later, must bring success to 
 our efforts. My hope and trust is — and I speak as an 
 ardent Liberal — that when the smoke and din of battle 
 have passed away, we shall see emerging out of the 
 conflict the form and substance of a Democracy, true 
 and pure. That we are tending towards a Democracy 
 of some sort, no instructed and reflective mind can 
 doubt. All Governments, even the most arbitrary and 
 despotic, are on the road to it. The pace of some of 
 them is slow, it is true, while others move rapidly. 
 Whether slow or fast, however, they all move in that 
 direction. We in England are not so slow as some, or 
 so fast as others. The reasons for this are, of course, to 
 be found in our national character and temperament,
 
 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 95 
 
 which have, as it were, steadied our course, and helped 
 us to avoid the evils which on the one hand appertain to 
 too great quickness, and on the other to too great slow- 
 ness. The force of events, however, will soon compel us 
 to take a long step in advance, and if that step brings us 
 face to face with a Democracy of some sort, no one can 
 deny that we ought to try and make it one of the right 
 sort. In endeavouring to cure the evils from which we 
 now suffer, we must take care not to raise up others just 
 as bad, or even worse. In trying to avoid the Scylla of 
 Aristocracy, we must not get wrecked against the 
 Charybdis of Mobocracy. We do not want simply to 
 exchange one set of tyrants for another. 
 
 It is on this account that I have ventured to come 
 before you this evening, to speak on a subject which 
 every passing day will bring into greater importance. 
 Let us first ascertain what we mean when we use the 
 term Democracy. John Stuart Mill tells us, that in 
 many minds it is held to mean government of the 
 whole people by a mere majority of the people exclusively 
 represented. This, he points out, is not a true, a pure 
 Democracy, which he defines as being a government of 
 the whole of the people, by the whole people, equally 
 represented. I need hardly say that this is the Democracy 
 which we must all use our energies to obtain. A Democ- 
 racy in which the minority has no voice, on account of 
 its being unrepresented, is a despotism ; and not the less 
 so because it consists of many tyrants instead of only a 
 few, or even of one. It is clear, therefore, that in order to 
 avoid tyranny, we must have Equal Representation as 
 one of the cardinal features in any new electoral scheme. 
 But, it may be asked, how can you get equal representa- 
 tion except on the basis of mere numbers .'' a proceeding
 
 96 • THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 
 
 which frightens timid politicians, who fear that, if once 
 the masses obtain power, we — by which term I presume 
 they mean those who at present possess power — shall 
 never be able to get it back from them if we want to. 
 I share no apprehensions on this score. Let me ask, in 
 the first place, who are the ive who arrogate to ourselves 
 the right of giving and of taking back power? And, in 
 the second place, if the people are not to be the depository 
 of power, who is .■' If they are not to possess it, it must 
 be held by some class, whether that class consists of a 
 few, or only of one. Many, or few, or one, however, a 
 class is but a class, a part and not the whole ; and it is 
 this ruling by a class that we wish to get rid of. But at 
 this point we shall be told, that if we give power to the 
 masses, we give it to those who are unfitted for it, who 
 are poor and ignorant, and so forth, and that they will 
 use it to overturn our institutions, invade the rights of 
 property, and do a hundred disastrous things. The first 
 thing I have to say in reply to this is, that if there be 
 one thing more true than another in politics, it is that 
 much of the poverty and ignorance complained of is the 
 direct result of that class government to which our 
 masses have hitherto been subjected ; and that for the 
 ruling class to cast their poverty and ignorance in their 
 teeth, as a reason for withholding their just rights, is to 
 add insult to injury. It is probable that a change of 
 rule might diminish the poverty, might dissipate the 
 ignorance, who knows? We have had lately among us 
 a writer, Henry George, who, in that most interesting 
 book " Progress and Poverty," reminds us of the sad 
 fact, that although wealth has vastly increased, and the 
 average of comfort, leisure, and refinement has been 
 raised by man s conquest over, and adaptation of, the
 
 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 9/ 
 
 forces of nature, these gains have not been general, and 
 the lowest class has not shared in them at all. A change 
 of rule might, I say, do away with some of this needless 
 poverty ; while as regards the ignorance complained of, 
 we Liberals at all events have tried, and are trying, to 
 remedy that by education through the Press, the Plat- 
 form, and the National School. These engines of 
 enlightenment are at work, and the complaint about 
 ignorance will, I venture to say, be changed one of these 
 days to one of our people being over-educated. 
 
 In the Democracy we are to strive for, we must have, 
 as I have said, Equal Representation, but by what scheme 
 of redistribution this great object is to be obtained, I 
 know not. It is sufficient for me to know that in the 
 hands of a Cabinet in which a Chamberlain sits, and 
 of which a Gladstone is the head, the question is safe. 
 I feel sure we shall obtain an Equal Representation, 
 which will be embodied in our House of Commons, the 
 People's House, which will then be a true reflex of the 
 whole nation,and avery different thing from what itis now 
 But, assuming that we have settled the House of 
 Commons to our satisfaction, the question arises : How 
 are we to deal with our Second Chamber, our House of 
 Lords? Some people might at this point put another 
 question, and an awkward one : What do you want with 
 a House of Lords in your Democracy, with its equal 
 representation } My reply to this is, that while denying 
 the necessity of a Second Chamber, I am constrained to 
 admit that there is much to be said in favour of it. The 
 main reason for the existence of a Second Chamber 
 consists, so far as I can gather, in providing a moderat- 
 ing power, or check, on the Lower House. On this 
 point hear what Lord Salisbury, the great champion of
 
 98 THE COMING DEMOCRACY, 
 
 privilege, said at Liverpool last year: "Bear in mind that 
 the House of Commons which we admire, the House 
 of Commons whose achievements we value, and of 
 whose labours we feel the blessing, was a House freely 
 elected, freely debating, freely checked by a second 
 assembly." He also said : " The existence of a Second 
 Chamber is justified by this fact, that unless you have it, 
 you will be driven to that system full of inconvenience, 
 full of difficulty, which will tend to disgust men with 
 politics, which will tend to drive independent persons 
 from this profession — I mean the system of triennial or 
 of annual Parliaments. A triennial, or annual, Parlia- 
 ment is the only substitute for a Second Chamber which, 
 in the true interest of the people, can be safely adopted. 
 It is the business of the House of Lords to watch over 
 and see that no permanent and irrevocable change is 
 made in the institutions of this ancient country, until the 
 people have had a thorough opportunity of informing 
 themselves of the proposals which it is sought to carry 
 into effect, and of giving a mature and solemn decision 
 upon this subject." 
 
 Such is the main reason for a Second Chamber, 
 as stated by the head of the Tory party. His asser. 
 tion that if we suppress the Second Chamber we shall 
 be driven " in the true interests of the people " to tri- 
 ennial or annual Parliaments, I utterly deny. In the 
 place of his lordship's dictum, and as regards " the true 
 interests of the people," I prefer to follow the teaching 
 of John Stuart Mill, who, in the thirteenth chapter 
 of his " Representative Government," discusses this 
 question, and shows that " the really moderating power 
 in a democratic Constitution must act in and through 
 the democratic House." Gentlemen, I should like to
 
 THE COiMING DEMOCRACY. 99 
 
 quote that chapter to you in full, but time docs not 
 permit. It will be sufficient for us at tJic moment to 
 bear in mind, that the New House of Commons which 
 we have in view will be the true embodiment of the 
 national will, and that to check this House will be to 
 resist the national will, and to set up a tyranny. There 
 is no necessity whatever for placing the moderating 
 or checking power in a Second Chamber. If this 
 Chamber be composed of the same elements as the 
 Commons, like causes operating on them will produce 
 like effects, and there will be nothing to check, and 
 nothing to do, except perhaps to rectify accidental 
 errors in legislation. On the other hand, if the Second 
 Chamber be differently constituted to the Commons, 
 and if its power be based, as that of our House of 
 Lords is, on class privilege, it would be of no practical 
 value whatever as a moderator in a Democracy with 
 equal representation. I take it, therefore, that the 
 existence of a Second Chamber would not be necessary 
 even if advisable ; but assuming that, in deference to 
 considerations arising from tradition and association, 
 it is thought better, on the whole, not to abolish it, 
 but to retain it, let us see in what respects our House 
 of Lords should be remodelled, in order to bring it as 
 closely as possible into line with modern thought and pro- 
 gress, and to make it harmonise with the new institutions. 
 Lord Beaconsfield, you know, made some efforts 
 to restore to the Crown something of the power which 
 it exercised so late even as the reign of George III., 
 but those efforts failed miserably, and they and their 
 author received emphatic condemnation at the last 
 general election. I cannot see how any modification 
 of the House of Lords can become dangerous to the 
 H 2
 
 lOO THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 
 
 liberties of the people. It is composed, as you know, 
 of the Lords spiritual and the Lords temporal. The 
 Lords spiritual are the Archbishops and Bishops, while 
 the Lords temporal are made up of those whose patents 
 have come to them by succession, and of those who, as 
 successful soldiers, lawyers, merchants, manufacturers, 
 or politicians, have been raised to the peerage. This 
 hereditary House of Peers which we have among us 
 constitutes an aristocracy possessing powers and privi- 
 leges which, if a Second Chamber had to be created, 
 no one in his senses, at the present day, would think 
 of conferring on any class. It has come down to us 
 a relic from feudal times, composed of a privileged 
 class, the basis of whose power and influence consists 
 in the possession of vast landed estates, the tenure 
 and devolution of which are fenced round and protected 
 by laws and customs different from those which obtain 
 in other countries ; and in the position of vantage they 
 hold in being a compact body of irresponsible, irre- 
 movable, hereditary law-makers, who occupy and 
 monopolise one entire branch of the legislature. 
 
 How has it managed to exist so long? What I 
 am about to tell you may throw some light on the 
 question. Consider, in the first place, its constitution. 
 According to the Financial Reform Almanack, the House 
 of Lords, including the Princes of the Blood, consists 
 of 505 Peers, of whom 10 are minors ; of the 495 
 remaining Peers, 276 are classed as Conservatives, 
 and 219 as Liberals. The 28 representative Peers 
 of Ireland, who are chosen for life, and the 16 Peers 
 of Scotland, who are chosen for each Parliament, go 
 to make up the 495. The mode of election of these 
 Irish and Scotch Peers is such that the Tory majority
 
 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. lOI 
 
 of the Peers in each country is enabled to send to the 
 Upper House a compact body of Tories ; only one 
 Liberal Peer for Ireland, and one for Scotland, being 
 returned. Some idea of the wealth and influence of 
 the Peers will be formed when I tell you that of the 
 6/1 millions of acres of which the United Kingdom is 
 made up, they are put down as owning 14^ millions, 
 yielding a rent of nearly 12 millions sterling ; that 
 they have under their patronage 4,801 church livings ; 
 while in pay and pensions they receive annually from 
 the State over ^620,000. Then, out of the 639 consti- 
 tuting the actual number of members in the Commons, 
 271 are connected with the Peerage by birth or mar- 
 riage ; and the 639 members are put down as owning 
 6,600,000 acres of land, yielding a rent of 5 millions 
 sterling, and as having the patronage of 273 church 
 livings. 
 
 You are now in a position to form some idea of 
 the power of that Aristocracy with which the new 
 Democracy will have to deal, and can understand the 
 import of this question : How are we to bring such 
 an anomalous institution into harmony with the other 
 parts of the body politic .-' After having limited the 
 power of the Crown, and made its tenure depend on 
 good behaviour, and reduced the wearer to the status 
 of a functionary who reigns but does not govern, ought 
 we to submit ourselves longer than we can help to the rule 
 of a set of irresponsible, irremovable, born law-makers ? 
 
 And what is there to be said in favour of this insti- 
 tution ? I fail utterly to find anything reasonable, except 
 the fact that it exists. That a man, for his learning, 
 his talents, his services to the State, should, as a reward, 
 and for the benefit of the State, be made a member of
 
 102 THE COMING DEMOCRACV. 
 
 the Upper House for a term of years, or for life, I can 
 understand. But that, as a reward to him, and as a 
 benefit to the State, his eldest son, and so on for all 
 succeeding generations, should be privileged to legislate 
 for me and my posterity, without any guarantee for 
 possessing one single qualification therefor, is to my 
 mind a proposition so absurd, that it needs no formal 
 refutation. 
 
 Assuming the necessity for a Second Chamber, we 
 should have to resort, of course, to some mode of nomi- 
 nation or election, founded on correct notions as to what 
 are the requirements of a Second Chamber, in such a 
 polity as we are striving for. To use the words of Mill, 
 it should be " a Chamber of Statesmen, a council com- 
 posed of all living public men who have passed through 
 iinportant political offices or employments. It would 
 not be exclusively a check, but also an impelling force. 
 In its hands, the power of holding the people back 
 would be vested in those most competent, and who 
 would generally be most inclined to lead them forward 
 in any right course. The council to whom the task 
 would be entrusted of rectifying the people's mistakes 
 would not represent a class believed to be opposed to 
 their interest, but would consist of their own natural 
 leaders in the path of progress." 
 
 Now, compare such a chamber as the great philoso- 
 pher has thus sketched with that which we now possess 
 in the House of Lords, the vast majority of whose 
 inmates rule over this land, not because of their fitness 
 or capacity, or because they are the chosen of the people, 
 but simply because they are the sons of their fathers. 
 It may be said, in answer to this : Oh ! that is only the 
 doctrine of Radicals ; most people think otherwise.
 
 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. IO3 
 
 Wait a moment, and I will tell you what two people 
 say who are not Radicals, but Conservatives, and mem- 
 bers of the House of Lords, and who therefore in this 
 matter are unexceptionable witnesses. The first I shall 
 cite is Lord Dunraven. In the Nineteenth Centiiry he 
 contributes a remarkable article, entitled " The Future 
 Constitutional Party," in which he writes as follows : 
 " The anomalous position occupied by the House of 
 Lords in the Constitution is a disadvantage to the 
 members of that House as a body, and, of necessity, 
 to the party that commands a permanent majority in 
 that House. Most men are agreed that the Upper 
 House is the weak point in our Constitution." " Owing 
 to the permanent and overwhelming majority of one 
 party in the Upper House, no constitutional check 
 whatever can be placed upon its power ; and in order 
 to make government by party possible, it is constantly 
 obliged to efface or stultify itself It must agree to 
 legislation it disagrees with, or cause a complete dead- 
 lock in our own system of government. It must dis- 
 credit itself, or disgrace the Constitution. Such a state 
 of things is demoralising to the nation, detracts from the 
 dignity of the House, and diminishes the influence of the 
 individual members of it. The people know that to 
 obtain the sanction of Parliament to measures approved 
 by their elected representatives, they must agitate. 
 Popular agitation is a threat of appeal to physical force, 
 and the knowledge that agitation has become an essential 
 element in our system of government, and that in it, 
 and not in any constitutional check, lies the only check 
 upon the absolute power of the Upper House, and one of 
 the great political parties, is not calculated to form a law- 
 abiding national character, to engender reverence and
 
 104 thp: coming democracy. 
 
 love for our ancient Constitution, or to create respect for 
 our system of government by party. The people govern, 
 but the fact that in the Upper House one form of 
 political opinion is represented by a large and unalterable 
 majority throws an unnecessary obstacle in their way. 
 They are tempted to rule as a despot rules, by the 
 power of appeal to physical force ; and we need not 
 wonder if, under such circumstances, the people become 
 infected with the vices of despotism ; no body of men 
 should be placed in such a position. A popular but 
 erroneous idea prevails that the House of Lords has 
 existed from time immemorial as at present constituted, 
 and has, from its inception, exercised functions similar 
 to those it now discharges. It is supposed that the 
 hereditary principle was always predominant in that 
 assembly, and is involved in its maintenance in its 
 present shape. There cannot be a greater mistake. 
 The House was not originally composed mainly of 
 Peers, having an hereditary right to legislate, and it 
 has assumed various aspects at different times. Were 
 it to become elective, no greater change would be 
 wrought than others which have been made in past 
 times. The adoption of the principle of selection by 
 the Crown, or of election by freeholders of the United 
 Kingdom, would indeed be only reverting somewhat 
 to an earlier type. The Upper House as it now exists 
 is a grievous detriment to the Conservative party. 
 Radicals will not try to reform an institution which 
 they wish to abolish , and yet no doubt, if the question 
 were even hinted at, the Conservative party in Parlia- 
 ment, and out of Parliament, with all its organs, great 
 and small, would raise a roar that the Constitution 
 was in danger, and the revolution at hand."
 
 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. I05 
 
 Such are the thoughtful utterances of one of our 
 most enlightened Conservative peers. I doubt if any- 
 thing more severe as regards the hereditary principle has 
 ever been uttered by the most vehement Radical. The 
 second witness I shall call is no less a person than Lord 
 Salisbury. Fifteen years ago, at least, the anomaly 
 was perceived by his lordship. In his speech on the 
 Irish Church Suspension Bill of 1868 he spoke thus: 
 " I have heard many prophecies as to the conduct of this 
 House, I am not blind to the difficulties of its position 
 in this particular age. I am not blind to the peculiar 
 obligations which lie on the members of this House in 
 consequence of the fixed and unalterable constitution of 
 this House. I quite admit, everybody must admit, that 
 when the opinion of your countrymen has declared 
 itself, it is your duty to yield. It may not be a pleasant 
 process, it may even make some of you wish that some 
 other arrangement were existing ; but it is quite clear 
 that whereas a member of a Government, when asked to 
 do that which is contrary to his convictions, may resign, 
 and a member of the Commons, when asked to support 
 any measure contrary to his convictions, may abandon 
 his seat, no such course as this is open to your lordships." 
 But, " be your term of existence long or short, you will 
 never consent to act except as a free, independent House 
 of the Legislature." 
 
 The hereditary principle stands condemned, therefore, 
 by men of both parties as essentially faulty in theory. 
 But, in order to complete the picture, it is essential for 
 me to show you how it has worked in practice. Let us 
 take the records of the last half-century. I am now 
 about to quote from certain articles which appeared in 
 the Pall Mall Gazette a year or two ago, under the
 
 I06 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 
 
 heading, " Fifty Years of the House of Lords," and 
 which, as they have been reprinted in a separate form, 
 every young man taking an interest in poHtics should 
 obtain and read. Let us take the record, I say, and call 
 to memory some of the great questions which were 
 agitated during the period in connection with civil and 
 religious liberty ; parliamentary, municipal, educational, 
 social, fiscal, and industrial reforms ; and with the 
 government of Ireland. There is hardly one of these 
 questions in which the energies of the majority of 
 our hereditary legislators have not been enlisted on the 
 side of monopoly, intolerance, corruption, inhumanity, 
 and injustice ; hardly one in which this majority has 
 yielded to arguments based on justice, equity, or common 
 sense, every concession which has been wrung from 
 them being reluctantly granted from the sentiment of 
 fear — the fear, as Lord Dunraven puts it, of an appeal 
 to physical force. 
 
 Take Parliamentary Reform. Here was a House 
 which, in 1831, rejected a Bill as subversive of the Crown 
 and Constitution, passing it six months afterwards, 
 because in the meanwhile the country was on the verge 
 of insurrection ; because there were riots at Bristol, 
 quelled only by force of arms ; because Nottingham 
 Castle had been burnt ; because the men of Birmingham 
 were preparing to march on London. Their ignoble 
 fright and their precipitate action amounted to nothing 
 less than a premium on violence, a reward for revolution. 
 And ever since 1832 their action, with regard to the 
 representation of the people, has been consistently in 
 favour of restriction and corruption, Bill after Bill having 
 in view the purifying of elections being thrown out or 
 mutilated. It has taken fifty years to pass such a Corrupt
 
 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 10/ 
 
 Practices Act as Sir Henry James has just piloted 
 through ParHament. 
 
 Next take religious liberty. Their action with regard 
 to Catholic Emancipation, in 1829, was of a piece with 
 what they did with Reform. They had to admit four- 
 fifths of the population of Ireland within the pale of the 
 Constitution ; but they did it reluctantly, ungraciously, 
 and under duress from the mere dread of civil war ; 
 while other shameful laws against the Catholics were not 
 repealed till 1844. Call to mind, also, their treatment of 
 Nonconformists, their persistent denial to them of the 
 commonest civil rights ; their, with one solitary excep- 
 tion, unvarying determination to brand them from the 
 cradle to the grave with the marks of inferiority to 
 the Churchman ; the one solitary exception being 
 their vote of 1877 in favour of the Burials Bill, a 
 proceeding on their part which has been described as a 
 momentary aberration ! In 1834 they rejected a Bill for 
 repealing a law which forbade the holding of religious 
 meetings attended by more than twenty persons in a 
 private house, the Bishop of Exeter of that day main- 
 taining that " it was opposed to the twenty-third Article 
 of the Church of England, and that the whole Thirty- 
 nine formed part of the unalterable Constitution of the 
 realm." And it was in this year the Duke of Wellington 
 laid down the law, that the King's coronation oath 
 compelled him to reject every proposal to allow Non- 
 conformists to be educated at Oxford and Cambridge. 
 It was not till nearly twenty years afterwards that Dis- 
 senters were enabled to take degrees at the Universities, 
 and it was not until 1871 that our National Universities 
 were thrown open freely to our youth of all sects. 
 By the Dissenters' Marriage Act of 1836, they only
 
 I08 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 
 
 permitted marriage to those who swore they held con- 
 scientious objections to the service of the Church ; and 
 imposed on all those who dispensed with the services of 
 the clergy the ignominy of having their banns read 
 before the Board of Guardians. The Poor Law of 1834 
 they amended so as to deprive Nonconformist ministers 
 of access to workhouses. At the Courts of Justice per- 
 mission to substitute an affirmation for the oath was 
 resisted, session after session. By an amendment of the 
 Municipal Bill they attempted to reimpose the Test Act, 
 in order to exclude Nonconformists from any share in the 
 administration of charitable trusts ; and it is only twelve 
 years since they rejected scheme after scheme of the 
 Endowed Schools Commissioners, in order to preserve to 
 the dominant sect a practical monopoly of intermediate 
 education. You all know their action with regard to the 
 Burials Bill, so I need not further refer to the shameful 
 recollections connected with the subject. Then take 
 Jewish Emancipation, the contest over which commenced 
 in 1833 and did not end until 1858 in the defeat of the 
 Peers, a period of a quarter of a century ; and so on, and 
 so on, I could proceed for an hour. 
 
 In legal matters they have been the foes of improve- 
 ment in every variety of way. They resisted, session 
 after session, the abolition of imprisonment for debt ; 
 they opposed the abolition of capital punishment for 
 minor offences, and were reluctantly driven to confine 
 the death penalty to murder ; and they reluctantly as- 
 sented that prisoners should have the benefit of counsel, 
 and be provided with copies of the depositions on 
 which they have been committed. They have obstructed 
 the reform of Chancery, and have rejected measures for 
 simplifying procedure in the Common Law Courts,
 
 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. lOp 
 
 For thirteen years they stood between the poor and 
 justice in the shape of County Courts. 
 
 They were the determined opponents of National 
 Education. They refused Post Office Reform. They 
 were for maintaining the paper duties. They vetoed 
 the introduction of competition into the Scientific Corps 
 of the Indian Army. They opposed the aboHtion of 
 purchase m the army in 1871. They opposed the 
 Limited LiabiHty Acts, and much of the commercial 
 legislation of the last 50 years. They opposed the in- 
 troduction of railways ; Lord Darlington riding post to 
 London to secure the rejection of the first Railway Bill, 
 because the Stockton and Darlington line was to run 
 near his fox covers. 
 
 As regards industrial legislation, they mutilated the 
 Mines Regulation Bill of 1842, in the interest of the 
 colliery owners, by weakening the safeguards provided 
 against the excessive toil of children and women in 
 mines ; and it was thirty years before the mining popu- 
 lation was able fully to secure that protection for life and 
 limb which the Commons had insisted on in 1842. In 
 i860 they struck out of Lord Palmerston's Regulation 
 Bill the clause extending to the children of the mine 
 the educational facilities enjoyed by the children of the 
 factory; and it was not till 1872 that they could be 
 induced to pass an adequate measure for the education 
 of the pit boys. 
 
 These are some of the items I have extracted from a 
 catalogue which would take me an hour simply to read 
 through without comment ; but I cannot complete this 
 part of my subject without drawing your attention to 
 the part which our landed aristocracy, acting through the 
 House of Lords, has taken with regard to Ireland. If
 
 no THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 
 
 ever there was a country blighted by aristocratic rule, 
 that country is Ireland. There has never been a single 
 measure brought forward in order to obtain for Irishmen 
 the rights and privileges "enjoyed by Englishmen and 
 Scotchmen, which has not been either rejected, postponed, 
 or mutilated by the Peers, from the time of Catholic 
 Emancipation in 1829 down to the Land Acts of 188 1 and 
 1882. Think of the injustice suffered when you call to 
 mind, that, although it was in 1845 that the Devon Com- 
 mission — a Commission established under a Tory Govern- 
 ment — reported that,with regard to tenants' improvements 
 and some contemplated Bill for securing compensation, no 
 single measure could be better calculated to allay dis- 
 content and to promote substantial improvement through- 
 out the country, the inhabitants of which, under the 
 land system, had undergone greater sufferings than the 
 people of any other country in Europe had to sustain, 
 it was not until 1870 that a very imperfect measure was 
 made law; and not until 1881 that the question was, to 
 any great extent, grappled with, and some approach 
 made to considerations of the barest justice. Their con- 
 duct with regard to the Irish Church was of a piece with 
 all this. Half a century ago Ireland was brought to the 
 verge of anarchy by the tithe war. In 1834 the Com- 
 mons passed a Tithe Abatement Bill by 360 to 99. It 
 was thrown out by the Lords, and it was not till 1838 
 that a Bill was passed, in which the alien Church was 
 allowed to keep all its endowments, not a penny being 
 devoted to the education of the people. In 1869, how- 
 ever, the Establishment which, in 1838, they had refused 
 to adapt to the wants of the nation, was, with their 
 assent, swept away. It was the same with the franchise 
 and municipal reform. Their action was one consistent
 
 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. I I I 
 
 tissue of opposition to everything in the shape of free- 
 dom and justice ; everything that was unjust, anomalous, 
 and barbarous being persistently maintained, a curious 
 instance of barbarity being shown in the fact that in 
 1839 they rejected a Bill imposing a fine of ;^5 on a man 
 in whose possession the flesh or fleece of a sheep was 
 found without his being able to explain how he came by 
 it ; their lordships deciding that such a criminal in Ireland 
 must continue liable to be hanged or transported. Can 
 we wonder, then, that a nation subjected to misrule and 
 wrong as the Irish have been, should be discontented, 
 lawless, and turbulent ; that a people who, under its land 
 system, had, confessedly, undergone greater sufferings 
 than the people of any other country in Europe, should, 
 from time to time, try to obtain, by outrage and terrorism, 
 what was denied to reason and justice ; that they should, 
 in fact, profit by the fatal lesson taught them in 1829 by 
 the Salisburys and Lowthers of that generation — a time, 
 recollect, when Gladstone was in his teens, before 
 Chamberlain was born — that the Irishman, as Macaulay 
 said, " was taught that from England nothing is to be 
 got by reason, by entreaty, by patient endurance, but 
 everything by intimidation." No wonder, as O'Connell 
 declared in his place in Parliament, that " the Lords 
 treated everything of conciliation or justice with con- 
 tumely and contempt, and that the Irish were discon- 
 tented, because for 700 years England had governed 
 them by a faction, and for a faction ; that, though a 
 majority of the Commons might be disposed to do for 
 them something like justice, all their efforts would be 
 frustrated by the other branch of the Legislature." No 
 wonder that in 1837, Mr. Roebuck, addressing the 
 Ministerial majority representing the English people
 
 112 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 
 
 should break out into those eloquent words : " You have 
 tried on your knees to obtain justice for Ireland, and 
 what has been your reward ? Contempt and scorn ! 
 Your enemies have trampled upon your measures ; they 
 have contemptuously delayed, changed, or rejected them, 
 as the humour of their insolence suggested. What 
 ought you to have done ? What you did not dare to do. 
 You should have boldly told the people of both countries 
 that justice could not be gained by either while an 
 irresponsible body of hereditary legislators could, at will, 
 dispose of the fortunes and the happiness of the people. 
 We have laboured in order to relieve the miseries of 
 Ireland, and, if possible, to heal the wounds inflicted 
 by many centuries of misrule. We have not advanced 
 one single step. Every year sees our labours rendered 
 abortive by the headstrong proceedings of the House of 
 Lords. If we wish for peace with Ireland, we must 
 change this faulty system." 
 
 We have certainly advanced some steps since these 
 words were uttered. The alien Church has been swept 
 away, the Land Laws have been remodelled, and some 
 other things have been done ; but at what a cost of time 
 and trouble, of heartburning, of widespread ruin, of 
 national disgrace ! But, bear in mind, the same faulty 
 system which Roebuck denounced still exists. We 
 have among us that irresponsible body of hereditary 
 legislators, and every year sees our labours rendered 
 abortive by the headstrong proceedings of this House. 
 Look at what they have done in this last session with 
 regard to three measures — the Deceased Wife's Sister 
 Bill, the Irish Registration Bill, and the Pigeon Shooting 
 Bill. With regard to the Irish Bill, they threw that out 
 in 1880 also, and have thus for the second time rejected
 
 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. II3 
 
 a measure twice passed by the Commons ; while their 
 rejection of the other two Bills gives me an opportunity 
 of making one remark concerning the non-hereditary 
 element in their House — the Lords spiritual, whom I 
 havehither to only incidentally mentioned. In the case of 
 the Deceased Wife's Sister, we read that one Archbishop 
 and sixteen Bishops flocked to Westminster in order to 
 vote against a measure called for by the great majority 
 of the nation, seeing that 400 members of the House of 
 Commons are considered to be pledged to vote for it ; 
 while as regards the Pigeon Shooting Bill, which had 
 already passed the Commons, only one single occupant of 
 the right reverend bench was present, and he, apparently, 
 according to Mr. George Anderson, who was in the 
 House, actually walked away, rather than record his vote 
 in favour of a measure which his sacred mission should 
 have commended to him as inspired alike by humanity 
 and mercy. Their conduct on these occasions, however, 
 is in strict accordance with the traditional character of 
 the right reverend bench. A glance back at their votes 
 for the last sixty years shows them on all crucial questions 
 on the side of bigotry, intolerance, and privilege ; while 
 a crowning proof of their barbarity is shown in the 
 case of the Bill for the abolition of death for shop-lifting 
 above the value of five shillings, when not a single 
 Bishop voted for the removal of the bloody statute, while 
 seven voted for its retention. 
 
 If, in the coming Democracy, we are to give power 
 to numbers, and at the same time are to maintain a 
 Second Chamber, we must take care to provide therein 
 the two requisites : an impelling force, and a checking 
 and moderating force. It will then be a chamber which 
 the people can at all times regard with respect and con-
 
 I 14 THE COMING DEMOCRACY. 
 
 fidence, instead of distrust and fear ; these latter feelings 
 being those which, at constantly recurring crises, are en- 
 tertained towards our present House of Lords. Respect 
 and confidence will be felt by the people, because it will 
 be then composed of a conceiving power of selected 
 brains and intellects, coupled with brave hearts and 
 hands, emanating from themselves and their will, and 
 competent to think and act for them. It will then be 
 an assembly which, instead of being a drag and an 
 encumbrance on progress, would be an impelling force, 
 and which, from its free will and nature, would originate ; 
 not an assembly which, from its nature and constitution, 
 trembles at every passing breeze of thought, lest some- 
 thing of the privileges and monopolies of the class which 
 composes it should be blown away like the leaves which 
 fall in autumn. But, gentlemen, to follow up the meta- 
 phor, we know that, though the leaves fall in autumn, 
 the tree does not die. The winter of the people's dis- 
 content may strip the tree of our Constitution of its 
 useless and dead leaves, but there' will come a spring- 
 time — the springtime of a Democracy such as I have en- 
 deavoured to sketch — which will reclothe its branches 
 with a new and living foliage. I look forward to that De- 
 mocracy. When we possess a House of Commons based 
 on an Extended Franchise and on Equal Representation, 
 and a Senate from which we shall have banished the 
 hereditary principle and the sacerdotal element, we 
 shall have made some steps towards that perfection 
 which, as an ideal, exists in the minds of some of our 
 profoundest thinkers, and which, although we may 
 never completely attain to it, reason and experience 
 lead us to conclude that our race is ever approaching.
 
 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Depression in trade exists at the present moment* 
 in every civilised country, and as the space at my 
 disposal does not permit an inquiry which shall embrace 
 them all, I propose to confine my examination to Great 
 Britain, as being the country whose interests are specially 
 in view ; referring only to other countries by way of 
 enforcing and illustrating the lessons which the subject 
 affords. 
 
 In trade and commerce depression may be likened 
 to what in nature is the ebb tide, while expansion 
 corresponds to the flow. They are inter-acting agents 
 and relative terms. 
 
 While expansion goes on the seeds of depression 
 are being sown, and while depression exists seeds of 
 expansion are in like manner being sown. When trade 
 is brisk and profitable a rush in takes place ; mills are 
 set up, furnaces blown in, mines opened, ships built, 
 and labour is in great demand. For a time " all goes 
 merry as a marriage bell," and warnings are unheeded. 
 Presently the reaction comes, depression sets in, and 
 
 * Written in 1885. 
 I 2
 
 Il6 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 the reverse of these processes takes place ; capital 
 becomes profitless, labour unemployed, general suffering 
 supervenes, until at length the wheel turns, and the 
 upward movement once more commences. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 tup: depression at home. 
 
 Description— Economic Sketch, 1870-1884 — Statistical Table : Popula- 
 tion, Exports Home Produce, Total Imports and Exports, Savings 
 Banks, Crime, Pauperism — The Fall in Prices, its Causes — Com- 
 parison of Trade, 1873 and 1884— Scarcity of Gold — The World's 
 Indebtedness to Great Britain — Agriculture — Railway Traffic. 
 
 It is in one of these ebbs that we now find ourselves. 
 Let us see in what respect it differs from, and in what 
 it corresponds with, former depressions, and so ascertain 
 its peculiar causes, and prescribe the proper remedies. 
 
 When we come to look for points of resemblance, 
 the difficulty is to find them, while, on the other hand, 
 the points of difference are important and numerous. 
 Beyond the fact that depression exists there is scarcely 
 any similarity. On other occasions this nation has 
 suffered from protracted and expensive wars ; from rash 
 home enterprises, and speculative foreign loans ending 
 in panic and disaster ; from dearness and deficiency of 
 food, arising either from legislation or from bad harvests. 
 
 Not one of these causes has been in force on the 
 present occasion. For many years we have had no 
 great war consuming and destroying our capital ; our 
 transactions, vast as they are, have been conducted, for 
 the most part, on a cash basis, and not on credit, as 
 formerly ; there have been no great home enterprises
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. II7 
 
 such as were once entered into in the shape of railways ; 
 for a dozen years we have had no reckless foreign loans ; 
 the volume of our foreign trade keeps up at a high level ; 
 while, lastly, bread and other necessaries of life were 
 never so plentiful and cheap. * 
 
 Nevertheless, our agriculturists say they are half- 
 ruined ; our manufacturers, merchants, and shipowners 
 complain of vanishing profits ; while many of our 
 artisans and labourers are out of work and clamour 
 for employment. 
 
 In order to produce results apparently so anomalous, 
 it seems clear that some novel and active agencies must 
 have been at work. We must inquire what these are. 1 
 propose, therefore, to take a rapid glance at the history 
 of the last fifteen years, with particular regard to those 
 facts which have an important economic bearing, and, by 
 means of such statistical information as is available, I 
 will endeavour to measure these facts, and show how they 
 have combined to produce the results we see. The 
 period in question, which commences with 1870, when 
 the Franco-Prussian war broke out, comprises the expan- 
 sion which followed the close of that war in 1871 ; the 
 depression which began in 1874, and closed in 1878-79 ; 
 the expansion which then commenced, and which con- 
 tinued till 1881-82 ; and the depression which has reigned 
 ever since. 
 
 We shall thus have for comparison two periods of 
 expansion and two of depression ; and for reference, the 
 accompanying table (page 1 19), which shows the progress 
 of the nation during this time in the important particu- 
 lars of Population, Exports of Home Produce, Total 
 Imports and Exports, Marriage, Thrift, Crime, Pauperism. 
 
 * See note, page 124.
 
 Il8 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 It is hardly necessary to remark that the figures 
 shown in the table, however interesting in themselves, 
 lose much of their significance unless read by the light 
 of the facts and circumstances which underlie them. 
 The tabic commences with 1870, in the summer of which 
 year the Franco-Prussian war broke out. The war 
 ceased in 1 871, and the effect on trade was magical, our 
 exports rising from 199^ millions in 1870 to 256 millions 
 in 1872, and 255 millions in 1873. 
 
 The destruction of capital had to be made good. An 
 indemnity of 5,000 millions of francs had to be paid by 
 I'rance to Germany. An era of peace seemed to set in- 
 Confidence in all directions sprang up, and enterprise in 
 consequence flourished. There was a mania for foreign 
 loans, good, bad, and indifferent, France heading the list 
 of borrowers for 200 millions, Russia taking 27 millions, 
 while such bankrupt and subsequently defaulting states 
 as Bolivia, Costa Rica, Paraguay, and Turkey came in 
 for 20 millions among them. United States railroad 
 bonds and shares were also imported in vast amounts, 
 and large investments were made in other parts of the 
 world. The total of all this could not have been less 
 than 400 millions sterling, and, assuming that we furnished 
 only one quarter of it, we had to provide 100 millions in 
 commodities. 
 
 Prices went up with a bound, manufacturers and 
 traders went mad, so did the wage-earning classes ; it 
 was a time of general intoxication, bearing within it the 
 seeds of the inevitable collapse. This came in the 
 autumn of 1873, the special feature being the smash in 
 the United States. During the succeeding five years we 
 suffered from the conjoined influences of falling prices, 
 foreign loan defaults, and bad harvests; our exports
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 
 
 119 
 
 fl 
 
 = S 
 
 
 „ 
 
 NO 
 
 ■* 
 
 N 
 
 ^ 
 
 t>. 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 
 
 NO 
 
 Tl- 
 
 NO 
 
 
 
 rt t^ 
 
 
 ON 
 
 N 
 
 NO 
 
 r^ 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 On 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 P) 
 
 Tj- 
 
 PI 
 
 
 ON 
 
 
 Ir, "O 
 
 a,~^ 
 
 
 r^ 
 
 On 
 
 NO 
 
 ro 
 
 N 
 
 10 
 
 "^ 
 
 ro 
 
 r^ 
 
 TJ- 
 
 On 
 
 NN 
 
 NO 
 
 CM 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a.5 
 
 I/l M 
 
 
 ON 
 
 ■^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 l/^ 
 
 On 
 
 00 
 
 (>l 
 
 d 
 
 1^ 
 
 ro 
 
 t^ 
 
 ON 
 
 Tl- 
 
 3^ 
 
 V „ 
 
 
 r^ 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 M 
 
 
 Tj- 
 
 CM 
 
 Tj- 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 ON 
 
 t^ 
 
 a on 
 
 "rt ^ 
 
 
 q_ 
 
 q 
 
 q 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 r^ 
 
 r-. 
 
 t^ 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 r^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 
 ^i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 t-^ 
 
 NO 
 
 
 r-» 
 
 ro 
 
 On 
 
 
 ON 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 CO 
 
 t^ 
 
 
 
 s'S 
 
 v° 
 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 '^ 
 
 00 
 
 vi-l 
 
 CO 
 
 CN« 
 
 •<*■ 
 
 00 
 
 ON 
 
 
 
 ^-^ 
 
 — ~ 
 
 
 •<i- 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 t^ 
 
 
 NO 
 
 10 
 
 ri 
 
 q_ 
 
 00 
 
 NO_ 
 
 00_ 
 
 00 
 
 (J 
 
 n-. 
 
 51 
 
 C M 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 D-S 
 
 
 0«D 
 
 no' 
 
 10 
 
 uS 
 
 NO 
 
 li-i 
 
 no' 
 
 NO 
 
 t^ 
 
 no' 
 
 yr, 
 
 in 
 
 w^ 
 
 "-i 
 
 
 d 
 
 t=<5 
 
 
 
 " 
 
 r-i 
 
 " 
 
 " 
 
 
 " 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 r'l 
 
 t^ 
 
 N 
 
 ■<*- 
 
 00 
 
 Tt 
 
 00 
 
 ro 
 
 00 
 
 •>«■ 
 
 Tf 
 
 PI 
 
 PI 
 
 ^ 
 
 00 
 
 c 
 
 ^i 
 
 
 10 
 
 NO 
 
 
 00 
 
 NO 
 
 t>. 
 
 
 
 TT 
 
 •<i- 
 
 ON 
 
 00 
 
 fi 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 
 »-7 
 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 N 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 •* 
 
 On 
 
 ON 
 
 
 
 NO 
 
 Tl- 
 
 ON 
 
 ro 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 rr d 
 
 *^-T3 
 
 s? 
 
 t^ 
 
 Tf 
 
 00 
 
 r^ 
 
 rn 
 
 T 
 
 0" 
 
 ON 
 
 Tf 
 
 ON 
 
 M 
 
 ■<1- 
 
 
 
 »/-5 
 
 C/3 
 
 Siu.£ « 
 
 10 
 
 ■>S- 
 
 ON 
 
 NO 
 
 N 
 
 r^ 
 
 00 
 
 t^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 P) 
 
 ro 
 
 u-i 
 
 LO 
 
 "-1 
 
 cA 
 
 ^i5 
 
 
 q^ 
 
 00 
 
 ON 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 "^ 
 
 CNl 
 
 O; 
 
 t^ 
 
 0C3_ 
 
 t-^ 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 1^ 
 
 r^ 
 
 'i,'^ 
 
 
 ro 
 
 »o 
 
 00 
 
 
 ■<f 
 
 rC 
 
 0' 
 
 pT 
 
 tF 
 
 10 
 
 tC 
 
 0" 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 d 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 u^ 
 
 iri 
 
 10 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 r^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 r^ 
 
 r^ 
 
 t>» 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 ON 
 
 «- 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 00 
 
 t^ 
 
 \r^ 
 
 t-~ 
 
 ro 
 
 r^ 
 
 CM 
 
 t^ 
 
 '^ 
 
 •* 
 
 00 
 
 ON 
 
 ON 
 
 NO 
 
 Mti = 
 
 
 Tj- 
 
 J-^ 
 
 rt- 
 
 •* 
 
 "1 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ■^ 
 
 00 
 
 Tl- 
 
 10 
 
 ro 
 
 r^ 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 .2 u ™ 
 
 
 •<f 
 
 q 
 
 00 
 
 ro 
 
 M 
 
 t.N 
 
 "d- 
 
 
 ro 
 
 10 
 
 Ti- 
 
 PI 
 
 On 
 
 NO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 J- ^ 
 
 .M 
 
 
 >o 
 
 •^ 
 
 no' 
 
 N 
 
 00 
 
 t^ 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 ■<f 
 
 10 
 
 NO 
 
 ro 
 
 0' 
 
 pT 
 
 0" 
 
 rtt-'rS 
 
 
 
 
 
 p) 
 
 ro 
 
 N 
 
 M 
 
 N 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 PI 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 S 
 
 
 
 f) 
 
 (s 
 
 N 
 
 M 
 
 M 
 
 CS 
 
 N 
 
 CM 
 
 N 
 
 pj 
 
 PI 
 
 PI 
 
 CM 
 
 PI 
 
 PI 
 
 
 
 
 "«' 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 NO 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 Ti- 
 
 ^ 
 
 ON 
 
 NO 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 vo 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 CM 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •" 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 id 
 
 
 
 <A 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^l- 
 
 n 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
 NO 
 
 CO 
 
 00 
 
 ■* 
 
 t-~ 
 
 t^ 
 
 « 
 
 PI 
 
 
 
 
 
 -" 
 
 
 
 '" 
 
 
 
 
 
 "-• 
 
 
 "" 
 
 
 ■" 
 
 
 Q. 
 
 
 
 s? 
 
 r>. 
 
 ON 
 
 „ 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 ON 
 
 ON 
 
 00 
 
 r^ 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 
 
 ON 
 
 •0 
 
 c 
 
 
 •^ 
 
 *^ 
 
 N 
 
 t>< 
 
 N 
 
 M 
 
 " 
 
 ■* 
 
 " 
 
 " 
 
 PI 
 
 *~' 
 
 PI 
 
 PI 
 
 ,^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 r^ 
 
 vr> 
 
 
 
 "-> 
 
 N 
 
 
 
 ON 
 
 „ 
 
 ■t 
 
 PI 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 r^ 
 
 00 
 
 LT) 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 PI 
 
 Tf 
 
 g 
 
 '- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 rf 
 
 1.^ 
 
 
 On 
 
 ro 
 
 r^ 
 
 nO_^ 
 
 PI 
 
 q^ 
 
 PI 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "rt 
 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 N 
 
 ro 
 
 N^ 
 
 M 
 
 m 
 
 ■^ 
 
 vo 
 
 T? 
 
 "-) 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 8" 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 S? 
 
 -o 
 
 On 
 
 00 
 
 ON 
 
 r^ 
 
 v'l 
 
 rO 
 
 NO 
 
 u-> 
 
 r^ 
 
 "i- 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 n 
 
 E 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 ro 
 
 LO 
 
 N 
 
 M 
 
 t-^ 
 
 u~i 
 
 On 
 
 t^ 
 
 CM 
 
 r>. 
 
 NO 
 
 
 NO 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *^ 
 
 
 
 rC 
 
 rl- 
 
 On 
 
 N 
 
 t^ 
 
 iy~i 
 
 Nrt 
 
 NO 
 
 '^ 
 
 NH 
 
 1^ 
 
 '^ 
 
 On 
 
 CM 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 
 •"S- 
 
 
 NO 
 
 00 
 
 NO 
 
 "-I 
 
 ro 
 
 "* 
 
 
 ■-I 
 
 On 
 
 On 
 
 *^ 
 
 ro 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 
 VT) 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 r^ 
 
 r^ 
 
 NO 
 
 1 
 
 •0 
 
 ■y' 
 
 ^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 NO 
 
 ro 
 
 „ 
 
 „ 
 
 PI 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 <« 
 
 '-' 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■-' 
 
 
 
 
 
 -^ 
 
 
 
 3 1 
 
 B 
 
 
 1^ 
 
 „ 
 
 w 
 
 00 
 
 t-~ 
 
 NO 
 
 M 
 
 00 
 
 •^ 
 
 P» 
 
 On 
 
 •<j- 
 
 NO 
 
 ■<1- 
 
 ON 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 *^ 
 
 
 
 
 '-' 
 
 
 •" 
 
 
 ■" 
 
 "" 
 
 "" 
 
 
 " 
 
 "" 
 
 •" 
 
 
 V 
 
 E 
 
 X 
 
 
 &! 
 
 S:^ 
 
 NO 
 
 r^ 
 
 00 
 
 t^ 
 
 r^ 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 10 
 
 u-1 
 
 »/-) 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 N 
 
 r-^ 
 
 ro 
 
 ^ 
 
 rO 
 
 ■* 
 
 lA) 
 
 ■<^ 
 
 00 
 
 NO 
 
 00 
 
 PI 
 
 ro 
 
 v/^ 
 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 NO 
 
 Ti- 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 NO 
 
 
 
 NO 
 
 
 to 
 
 Tt- 
 
 tv. 
 
 NO 
 
 r^ 
 
 r-. 
 
 
 
 
 (» 
 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 i-i 
 
 ON 
 
 N 
 
 o_ 
 
 On 
 
 r^ 
 
 "il- 
 
 NO 
 
 
 Tt 
 
 U-, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 wT 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 no" 
 
 NO 
 
 r^ 
 
 T? 
 
 00 
 
 "^ 
 
 ON 
 
 ro 
 
 00 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 PI 
 
 r^ 
 
 On 
 
 r^ 
 
 4-t 
 
 
 
 S5 
 
 X) 
 
 NO 
 
 u~, 
 
 NO 
 
 u-t 
 
 NO 
 
 rO 
 
 ON 
 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 PI 
 
 NO 
 
 On 
 
 PI 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 vn 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 
 "^ 
 
 ■* 
 
 NO 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 10 
 
 
 
 
 
 rf 
 
 1-^ 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c> 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 10 
 
 On 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 <N| 
 
 *-H 
 
 ro 
 
 Ti- 
 
 *-« 
 
 ON 
 
 n" 
 
 1^ 
 
 
 
 
 ON 
 
 (N) 
 
 LO 
 
 ii-> 
 
 fO 
 
 N 
 
 
 
 ON 
 
 ON 
 
 ON 
 
 CM 
 
 ro 
 
 Tl- 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 
 
 N 
 
 M 
 
 N 
 
 N 
 
 N 
 
 N 
 
 
 
 
 PI 
 
 M 
 
 Pl 
 
 PI 
 
 PI 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■* 
 
 N 
 
 1^ 
 
 00 
 
 ON 
 
 r>. 
 
 ON 
 
 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 PI 
 
 ON 
 
 
 
 NO 
 
 u-i 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 Tf 
 
 Tj- 
 
 10 
 
 ON 
 
 NO 
 
 NO 
 
 ro 
 
 CO 
 
 00 
 
 PI 
 
 >o 
 
 t^ 
 
 trt 
 
 
 NO 
 
 .2-0 t 
 
 
 ■^ 
 
 •<*■ 
 
 t^ 
 
 10 
 
 ro 
 
 
 Tj- 
 
 ON 
 
 CO 
 
 •-^ 
 
 10 
 
 NO 
 
 ON 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 *■> at 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 S.^ 
 
 ■a 
 
 
 W-i 
 
 ro 
 
 li-l 
 
 rl- 
 
 NO 
 
 On 
 
 ro 
 
 NO 
 
 ON 
 
 IT) 
 
 00 
 
 ON 
 
 ON 
 
 
 
 s £ 
 
 tc 
 
 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 CM 
 
 N 
 
 n- 
 
 ON 
 
 rr 
 
 ON 
 
 10 
 
 NO 
 
 PI 
 
 00 
 
 »N 
 
 to 
 
 o.>-i.= 
 
 
 ts 
 
 "^ 
 
 00 
 
 
 •* 
 
 r^ 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 «^ 
 
 •— 
 
 •<1- 
 
 ON 
 
 M 
 
 NO 
 
 o> 
 
 ^^ 
 
 Ui 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Tf 
 
 
 
 
 
 ,.4 
 
 b^ 
 
 t-i 
 
 N 
 
 N 
 
 N 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ■* 
 
 •* 
 
 >ri 
 
 u-i 
 
 to 
 
 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 fO 
 
 fO 
 
 to 
 
 CO 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 ro 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 N 
 
 ro 
 
 Tl- 
 
 10 
 
 NO 
 
 r-» 
 
 00 
 
 On 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 PI 
 
 CO 
 
 Tf 
 
 n 
 
 
 
 t^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 r^ 
 
 r^ 
 
 t-^ 
 
 t^ 
 
 r^ 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 C/1 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 >0 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 •^ 
 
 "" 
 
 
 *^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 

 
 I20 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 sinking in 1879 to ^9^-i miU'ons, a lower figure than that 
 of 1870. 
 
 There were circumstances, however, which were 
 working to redress these evils. In the United States 
 many of the railroads which were commenced in the 
 time of inflation were completed, and by their means 
 the vast and fertile regions of the Far West were brought 
 into play, and made to supply the needs of Europe. A 
 new era of prosperity was opened for the States, which 
 were enabled to pass easily through the process of the 
 resumption of specie payments ; to call in and pay off a 
 large portion of their debt ; and also greatly to extend 
 their trade with the rest of the world. Matters soon 
 changed, however : Europe was blest with better crops, 
 while, in 1881, the States had a bad harvest, and found 
 themselves committed to excessive railroad construction. 
 From that time until now the depression in the States 
 has gone on from bad to worse, and they find themselves 
 in a position from which it seems impossible to emerge, 
 unless they adopt a fiscal policy utterly at variance with 
 that under which their industries are at present con- 
 ducted. 
 
 In addition to these various circumstances I have now 
 to refer to a very potent factor which has been at work 
 for a dozen years at least, I mean the fall in the prices of 
 commodities. This has been a disturbing element, an 
 object of perplexity, and a source of loss to almost 
 everyone engaged in commerce. 
 
 The fall in prices may be traced to three concurrent 
 causes 
 
 1. The opening of new fields of production. 
 
 2. The improvement and cheapening of processes. 
 
 3. The scarcity of gold.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 121 
 
 In agriculture we have had opened up since 1870 the 
 wheat and corn fields of the West and North-West of 
 America ; and the wheat fields of India, and of Australia. 
 
 In mining, rich veins of copper, tin, and lead have 
 been laid bare in Spain, California, and Australia. 
 
 In manufactures, there is hardly a process in which 
 invention and economy have not been at work to effect 
 a saving of material or of labour. To give only one 
 instance, I may mention the Gilchrist-Thomas process, 
 by which four men now make a bar of steel in the same 
 time, and with less cost of material, than it took ten men 
 a few years ago. 
 
 As regards the scarcity of gold, it is only necessary 
 to consider the facts to understand what is meant by the 
 term, and how the result has been caused. From the 
 time of the discoveries in California and Australia 
 (1848-52), the annual production, which had been about 
 thirteen millions, increased until it reached its highest 
 point about 1856. 
 
 According to statistics collected by Mr. Burchard, 
 Director of the United States Mint, as given in his last 
 annual report : — 
 
 In 1857 the total of the world's production ... ^^29, 145,000 
 
 1862 „ „ ,, ;,^26,263,ooo 
 
 i»66 „ ,, ,, ;i^29, 126,000 
 
 1873 .. ,, ,. ^25,510,000 
 
 1879 .. ,. ,. ;^20,8i7,si9 
 
 1883 „ ,, „ ;^i8,392,ooo 
 
 1884 „ „ „ ;^I 7,932,000 
 
 So that we have a rapidly decreasing supply. Let us 
 now inquire into the demand. 
 
 This has been two-fold, firstly for currencies, secondly 
 for the arts. For currency purposes there have been
 
 122 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 lar<,^e demands on the stock for Germany, the United 
 States, Holland, Italy, and other countries, which have 
 absorbed something like 200 millions sterling ; the pro- 
 cess, in the case of Germany, being accompanied by the 
 demonetisation of silver, the price of which has fallen 
 from 6od. per ounce in 1872 to 49|d. in 1884.-* 
 
 As regards the arts, Mr. Eurchard reports that from 
 many inquiries he learned that at least three millions 
 sterling is now annually used for this purpose in the 
 United States, and the conclusion is that three-fourths of 
 the whole annual supply are consumed in this manner. 
 
 In addition to these drains, moreover, it has to be 
 noted that since 1870 India has been a steady importer 
 of gold, and that in 1883, according to a Parliamentary 
 return issued at the end of last year, she imported on 
 balance no less than nine millions worth. 
 
 But there is another sign of the increasing scarcity to 
 be mentioned, and that is, the fact that in 1884 Great 
 Britain, instead of receiving some five or six millions of 
 gold from Australia, as she did annually a few years ago, 
 actually had to remit to that quarter about one million 
 sterling as part of some large loans made to the Colonies, 
 who for the first time in their history called for payment 
 ])artly in gold, instead of wholly in commodities. Now, 
 inasmuch as the demand for gold during the last few 
 years has far outrun the supply, it is impossible that this 
 circumstance should not have had some influence in pro- 
 ducing the fall in prices which has taken place. There 
 are, however, three other factors which have had an 
 influence on prices which have to be taken into account. 
 
 * The price has since fallen to 48^(1. in anticipation, apparently, of the 
 repeal of the Bland Silver Act of the United States, under which a mini- 
 mum coinage of 2 million dollars a month has to be made.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 123 
 
 Two of these have tended to retard the fall. They are 
 increased banking faciUties, and improved means of 
 transmission, and communication by steam and electri- 
 city, all which have permitted economies in the use of 
 the metal. The third, which has tended to accelerate 
 the fall, is the increased production of commodities 
 which has arisen out of the new fields opened up, and 
 the improvement of manufacturing processes. 
 
 It is impossible to apportion with any accuracy the 
 share which each of these factors has had in producing 
 the effect we see, but the fall in prices has steadily pro- 
 gressed since 1873, and has been productive of wide- 
 spread effects in every department of trade, and on 
 every class of society. 
 
 Keeping all this in mind, let us now turn to the table, 
 and take note of the lessons which it affords. 
 
 In the first place, we see the rise of the trade figures 
 which mark the inflation of 1871-3 ; and their decline 
 from that date until 1879, under the influence of natural 
 reaction, intensified by contracting currencies, and falling 
 prices. We can see also that the prosperity of 1872-3 
 was to a great extent hollow and unreal, and that it is 
 absurd to make the inflated prices of those years the 
 normal standard of comparison. It was shown b)' 
 Mr. Giffen in various reports to the Secretary of the 
 Board of Trade, that in order to institute just comparisons, 
 we must take into account, not only prices, but quantities. 
 He pointed out, in 1881, that the differences in the prices 
 of 1873 and 1879 would, in order properly to compare 
 the trade of these two years, necessitate an addition in 
 the case of the latter year, for certain enumerated articles 
 on the export side, of ;^ 60,694,000 ; and on the import 
 side, of ^63,844,000 ; which sums added to the total im-
 
 124 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 ports and exports for 1879, and supposing no change in 
 the other articles, would raise the total of our foreign 
 trade in 1879 to ;^737,ooo,ooo, which is 55 millions above 
 the figures reached in 1873. 
 
 Once more casting our eyes on the column of exports, 
 we notice that the figures rise from 19 1 1 millions in 1879 
 to 241 i millions in 1882; 239! millions in 1883; and 
 233 millions in 1884. 
 
 Then, if we look at the figures of our total trade, we 
 see that they have risen from 61 if millions in 1879 to 
 732^ millions in 1883 ; the estimate for 1884 being 
 688 millions.''^ 
 
 If, now, we adopt the process of Mr. Giffen and cal- 
 culate the value of the quantities of 1884, according to 
 the prices of 1873, we should find that the figures of the 
 latter year would be largely exceeded. The total for 
 1884 is estimated at 688 millions, but as this includes 
 the re-export of certain of our imports, we must, in 
 order to arrive at the actual figures of our sales and pur- 
 chases, deduct their value from each side of the account, 
 say 64 millions, which would leave 560 millions as the 
 total of our sales and purchases. Then, assuming that 
 the prices of 1873 are on the average 30 per cent, above 
 those of 1884, 168 millions would fall to be added to the 
 
 * The actual figures of our total foreign trade for 1884 have just been 
 puhlished. Instead of being 68S nnillions, as estimated, they are 685,986,152, 
 which slightly modifies the calculation in the text. These figures might be 
 taken to signify at first sight ^a vast and sudden drop in our foreign trade, 
 inasmuch as they are 46 millions less than those of 1883, and 25 millions 
 less than the average of the four preceding years. Of this deficiency of 
 46 millions, however, 36^- millions were in our imports and gh millions 
 in our exports; while of the 36J- millions in the imports, 193 millions arose 
 from a decreased importation of wheat, oats, and other cereals. This fact- 
 is intimately bound up with the question of the world's indebtedness to 
 Great Britain, to which reference is made in pages 126 and 142.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 
 
 125 
 
 688 milions, the actual estimate for 1884, and the com- 
 parison would stand thus : — 
 
 Year. 
 
 Population. 
 
 Impo-ts and Exports at 
 Prices of 1873. 
 
 Per head. 
 
 1873 
 1884 
 
 32,124,598 
 35.951.865 
 
 £ 
 682,292,137 
 856,000,000 
 
 £ S. d. 
 21 4 9 
 23 IS 6 
 
 showing that, measured in money, on the basis of the 
 prices of 1873 we did a larger business in 1884 by 
 ;^i los. 9d. per head of our population. 
 
 This will be made more apparent by an inspection 
 of the following tables, which give the quantities, the 
 values, and the average prices, of some of the principal 
 articles of import and export for the years in question : — 
 
 Imports. 
 
 Cotton cwts. 
 
 Sugar, raw ,, 
 
 Do, refd. „ 
 Tea lbs. 
 
 Wheat cwts. 
 
 Do. Flour , , 
 
 Quantities. 
 
 1873 1884 
 
 13.639,2521 15,505.851 
 
 14,241,328: 19,652,364 
 
 2,273,490 4 266,689 
 
 163,765,269 215,212,114 
 
 43,863,098: 47,113 
 
 Average 
 Prices. 
 
 1873 1884 
 
 ^4 -Oil ^2-84 
 5.23-96' 5.15-51 
 s.33'84 s.20'88 
 d. 16.67 d. 1 1 -07 
 S.13-01 3.8-41 
 
 Valt 
 
 6,214,479 15-103,5181 5.18-83 5.13-39 
 
 1873 
 
 £ 
 
 54,704,847 
 
 17,066,026 
 
 3,847,271 
 
 11,372,595 
 
 £ 
 44.113528 
 15,252,249 
 
 4.454.759 
 10,567,352 
 
 28,538,746119,825 021 
 5,849,852 10, 166.010 
 
 
 
 EXPORT.S. 
 
 
 
 ues. 
 
 
 Quantities. 
 
 Average 
 Prices. 
 
 Val 
 
 
 1873 
 
 1884 
 
 1873 
 
 1884 
 
 1873 
 
 1884 
 
 Cotton, yarn lbs. 
 
 214,778,827 
 
 271,077,900 
 
 d. 17-76 
 
 d-I2-02 
 
 15,895,440 
 
 13,811,767 
 
 Do. piece yds. 
 
 2,384,174,306 
 
 3,095,963,800 
 
 <l-3'45 
 
 d.2-47 
 
 34,273,471 
 
 3i,8s6,889 
 
 Do. printed ,, 
 
 1,083,306,079 
 
 1,321,236,400 
 
 d.4-78 
 
 d-3-59 
 
 21,580,770 
 
 •9,795,713 
 
 Iron, Pig, &c. tons. 
 
 1,142,065 
 
 1,269,677 
 
 .-=.124-65 
 
 s.46'4o 
 
 7,118,037 
 
 2,945,667 
 
 Steel, unwrt. ,, 
 
 39.418 
 
 56,614 
 
 ;^37'i: 
 
 ;Ci9-87 
 
 1,462,857 
 
 1,125,204 
 
 Coals ,, 
 
 12,617,566 
 
 23.343 755 
 
 s. 20*90 
 
 s.9-29 13,188,511 
 
 10,851,760
 
 126 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 As to the comparative profitableness of these two years, 
 I do not propose to enter thereon for two reasons, the 
 first of which is, that they are years of extreme inflation 
 and extreme depression ; and the second is, that it would 
 require a long calculation based on the variations in the 
 price of every item on each side of the account, with a 
 full knowledge and considerat'on of the difference in 
 cost which improved processes bring out, and of the 
 difference for which allowances would have to be made 
 in the cost of raw materials imported, and re-exported 
 in the shape of manufactures. It will be sufficient to 
 remark that, as our imports are to our exports in the 
 ratio of about three to two, anything like an equal fall 
 in prices must be a great gain to us ; and that a fall 
 of 20 per cent, in the price of our imports would be 
 an equal set-off against a fall of 30 per cent, in the 
 price of our exports. 
 
 In this connection it is difficult to over-estimate 
 the value to us of the relation in which we stand to 
 the rest of the world, as the great creditor nation. It 
 is a subject which has not received due attention. The 
 world's indebtedness to Great Britain is probably, at 
 a moderate computation, 1,500 millions, producing an 
 annual income of something like 75 millions ; our 
 Colonies and India standing for 600 millions. We thus 
 have 75 millions per annum, payable in London in gold 
 — that is, in a commodity which, unless fresh discoveries 
 of the metal are made, must indefinitely increase in 
 value, and thus, as time goes on, be a source of in- 
 creasing wealth to the country which holds this unique 
 and enviable position. 
 
 Resuming our examination of the table, we 
 see that, as regards population, there is a steady
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 127 
 
 increase from 31,205,444 in 1870, to 35,951,865 in 
 1884. 
 
 Turning to the column relating to marriage, we find 
 that for the first cycle of inflation and depression, the 
 figures follow pretty closely the fluctuations in the trade 
 columns, rising from 205,443 i" 1870 to 232,345 in 1873, 
 and falling to 205,544 i" 1879; while, for the second 
 cycle, commencing in 1879, there is a rise to 230,979 
 in 1882, and to 232,669 in 1S83, and a fall to 230,066 in 
 1884, showing a check. It appears, moreover, that the 
 number of marriages in 1883 was almost the same as 
 in 1873, although in the meantime there had been an 
 increase in the population of 3^ millions. 
 
 In the column relating to thrift we have to note a 
 steady rise during the whole period of 15 years. Calcu- 
 lating the amounts lodged in the Savings Banks, per 
 head of population, we find that in 1870 they were 
 ;^i 14s.; in 1873, £\ i8s. 5d. ; in 1879, £2 4s. 52d. ; 
 and in 1883, £2 8s. 9d. I find, moreover, that at the 
 end of January, 1885, the total sum lodged amounted 
 to ^^91,414,634, as against ^87,651,517 at the end of 
 January, 1884, which would give something like 
 £2 los. 8d. per head. 
 
 As regards crime, the figures show a steady dimi- 
 nution. In 1870, with a population of 31 millions, 
 there were 18,401 convictions, whereas in 1883, with 
 a population of 36 millions, the convictions have dropped 
 to 15,001. The decrease has been so marked as to 
 attract the attention of judges like the Lord Chief 
 Justice Coleridge and Mr. Justice Denman, who have 
 commented in suitable terms on this favourable feature. 
 The same remarks are applicable to the column in which 
 the number of paupers is recorded, the figures for
 
 128 
 
 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 England and Wales being in 1870, 1,079,391, and in 
 1884, 774,310. 
 
 This completes our examination of the table, but 
 in order to obtain a correct notion of our internal 
 condition, it will be necessary briefly to consider two 
 subjects of importance, viz., agriculture and railway 
 traffic. We find agriculture suffering from the effects 
 of inclement seasons, and from a severe fall in the 
 price of wheat, brought about by the opening up of 
 new fields of production, to which allusion has been 
 made. The consequences have been far-reaching: 
 During the last ten years, although one million 
 additional acres in the United Kingdom have been 
 brought into cultivation, there has been a decrease 
 of 1,200,000 of corn crops, one million of them being 
 wheat, while there has been an increase of 2| millions 
 of acres devoted to grass and other crops. This change 
 in cultivation has been accompanied by a decrease in 
 the rural population of 275,000 persons, many of whom 
 have migrated to the towns, and helped to swell the 
 ranks of the unemployed. 
 
 With regard to railway traffics, as forming an index 
 to the condition of our internal trade, and to the pro- 
 gress made during the last fifteen years, the following 
 table speaks for itself: — 
 
 
 Passengers. 
 
 Miles Open. 
 
 Total Receipts. 
 
 1870 
 
 336,545.397 
 
 15.537 
 
 45,078,143 
 
 1873 
 
 455,320,188 
 
 16,082 
 
 57,442,000 
 
 1879 
 
 562,732,890 
 
 17,696 
 
 61,776,703 
 
 1880 
 
 603,885,025 
 
 17,933 
 
 65,491,625 
 
 1881 
 
 623,047,787 
 
 18,175 
 
 66,557,442 
 
 1882 
 
 654,838,295 
 
 18,457 
 
 69,377,124 
 
 1883 
 
 683,718,137 
 
 18,681 
 
 71,062,270
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 1 29 
 
 With regard to this table it will be useful to note 
 that in 1883 the number of third-class passengers was 
 581,233,476, which was 29^ millions in excess of the 
 number carried in 1882 ; and that these numbers are 
 in addition to those of season ticket holders. 
 
 The figures for 1884 have not yet appeared in a 
 collected form, but the total receipts may be set down 
 at about ^70,000,000, or ih per cent, less than those 
 of 1883.^ 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE DEPRESSION ABROAD. 
 
 France, Germany and Austria, Belgium, Italy, Russia, Holland, 
 Switzerland, the United States. 
 
 Having completed our survey of British internal and 
 external trade, let us now take a glance at the condition 
 of things in other countries. 
 
 There is in many minds a hazy conviction that the 
 depression from which we are suffering is, in some way, 
 attributable to our fiscal system, the principles of which 
 are in direct conflict with those adopted by most other 
 civilised countries, the system which goes by the name 
 of Free Trade, but which is one of Free Imports against 
 Protective Tariffs. 
 
 If it can be shown that in countries where Protection 
 rules, trade depression exists in an equal or greater 
 degree than here, it must be clear that the evils com- 
 plained of do not owe their existence to our peculiar 
 
 * The figures have since been published. They arc £70,^22,64^, or 
 076 per cent, less than those ©f 1883. 
 
 J
 
 13b • THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 system, but to other causes, and this will at once get rid 
 of much error and misconception, and materially aid us 
 towards the end we have in view. 
 
 Let us look at the condition of things in such coun- 
 tries as France, Germany and Austria, Belgium, Italy, 
 Russia, and the United States, which are Protectionist ; 
 and in Holland and Switzerland, which are Free Trading. 
 
 I. France. — Here we have a people possessing the 
 most fertile soil in Europe, industrious, frugal, practically 
 stationary in numbers, which nevertheless is suffering 
 from depression in trade, in manufactures, and in agri- 
 culture ; with annual deficits arising from expenditure at 
 home for public works, in order to find employment for 
 her citizens, and abroad for wars undertaken in order to 
 found colonies for a people which will not emigrate, and 
 to discover outlets for a trade which never follows, and 
 with a national debt of i,ooo millions sterling, the 
 largest in the world, which is being swollen year by year. 
 
 If we look at her industries, we find every one, 
 although protected, clamouring for increased duties. 
 With regard to sugar, they have passed 26 Bills in 50 
 years, and yet the growers of beetroot are in despair. 
 The graziers are crying out for increased rates on the 
 importation of foreign cattle ; the timber merchants for 
 heavy duties on the foreign article ; while the corn- 
 growers demand, and are getting, increased duties on 
 foreign grain. How all this increase in the cost of living 
 is to benefit the distressed millions is past ordinary com- 
 prehension, and must be left to time to disclose, especially- 
 w hen we bear in mind that three-fourths of one of these 
 millions live in 219,270 houses without any windows 
 whatever.* From the reports of the Economic Investi- 
 
 * M. Nadaud, in the Chamber, May, 18S3.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. I3I 
 
 gation Committee we learn that at Lille and in the north 
 the greatest distress prevailed throughoutthe cotton indus- 
 tries, and that its principal cause was the agricultural 
 crisis. Farms were standing empty and no tenants were 
 to be found. Landed property had decreased in value 
 by two-thirds, and the agriculturist who used to be the 
 great consumer had no money to buy anything. On the 
 Public Relief Fund Register of Lille the names of 
 28,000 persons were stated to be inscribed, and it was 
 affirmed that the distress would at once assume dangerous 
 dimensions but for the fact that a considerable number 
 of manufacturers were keeping works open at a loss.* 
 We further read that at the conclusion of their inquiry 
 the Committee received a deputation of workmen, who 
 presented a petition, bearing some 2,400 signatures, 
 praying the Chamber of Deputies to oppose the tempo- 
 rary free importation of cotton yarns from England. f 
 As to Paris, M. Tony Revillon, in the Chamber, in 
 November last, drew a doleful picture of its state. Out 
 of every 15 artisans only 10 had employment, and their 
 average wages had fallen from 6(. to 5f per day. Of 
 100,000 masons in Paris in 1882, 30,000 had left, and 
 only one-half of the remaining 70,000 had work. 
 M. Mun, Legitimist, argued that the distress existed 
 over all France. M. Spuller, Chairman of the Economic 
 Committee of Inquiry, agreed with M. Revillon in appre- 
 hending an aggravation in 1885 ; and M. Waldeck 
 Rousseau, Minister of the Interior, remarked that the 
 distress had not so much increased as it had attracted 
 greater attention. J 
 
 * The Stafiifard, 31st Dec, 18S4. 
 t The Standard, ist Jan., 18S5. 
 X The Times, 21st Nov., 1884. 
 J 2
 
 132 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 We read also that the mining industries compare un- 
 favourably with ours, and that even the shipbuilding 
 trade, nurtured by the State, was as depressed as here, 
 and was permanently in disfavour, excepting when 
 English shipbuilders were too busy to take orders. 
 
 With regard to labour, it was the rule in French fac- 
 tories to work 72 hours per week, against 56! in England. 
 In one of the largest cotton factories visited by the 
 Technical Commissioners, they ascertained that the 
 machinery was running 14 hours a day, with ten minutes 
 for oiling. In the worsted districts the usual hours per 
 day were 12.* According to the Revue Iiidustrielle, a 
 commissioner has lately been appointed by the Socicte 
 Industrielle de France, with the object of inquiring into 
 the feasibility of shortening the daily hours of labour in 
 the textile and collateral industries. At present the 
 hours throughout France are rarely, if ever, under 12 per 
 day, while in Germany they are still longer, being 13 at 
 Dlisseldorf, 13 to 15 at Treves and Aix-la-Chapelle, and 
 even 16 in Franconia — this, too, without deductions for 
 Sundays and holidays. After mature consideration, 
 however, the committee have come to the determination 
 that it is impossible to recommend the reduction in the 
 face of the great competition from England and Ger- 
 many. Moreover, if the hours were shortened, the 
 already moderate daily wage would have to be reduced, 
 much against the workpeople's wish ; and it is also con- 
 sidered that the latter would suffer considerably, both 
 morally and pecuniarily, from the extra idle time, a great 
 portion of which would be passed in the debit de 
 hoisson.\ 
 
 * Swire Smith lecture at Bradford, Braiford Observer, 23rd Dec , 1S84. 
 t The Ti>n:s. 21st Feb., 1885.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 1 33 
 
 As to wages, English workers receive 58 per cent 
 higher wages,* while as to leisure we should have to go 
 back 40 years to parallel the present state of things in 
 France.! 
 
 The condition of affairs is further shown by what 
 took place in the Chamber on the 5th February, when 
 M. Revillon made a motion for a credit of 25 million of 
 francs for the unemployed. This, he said, would allow a 
 franc a day to 246,000 persons who had for the last two 
 months been starving. In opposition, M. Waldeck 
 Rousseau urged that the rural was as much entitled to 
 help as the urban population ; and we learn that 
 the motion was negatived, but that M. Revillon's 
 second resolution, calling on the Government to begin 
 the year's public works, was agreed to without a divi- 
 sion. J 
 
 2. Germany and Austria. — Like the French, the Ger- 
 mans are under the Protective system, yet poverty and 
 discontent prevail, and the cry of both agriculturists 
 and manufacturers is for more and more protection. It 
 is difficult to measure the depression, in consequence of 
 the meagreness of the statistics at command, and of the 
 censorship which is exercised over the press, and which 
 has been extended to the reports of the Chambers of 
 Commerce. Enough leaks out from time to time, how- 
 ever, to show the economic state of the country. One of 
 the most protected industries in Germany, as also in 
 Austria, is that of sugar, and it is precisely this industry 
 which, during the last twelve months, was overtaken by 
 such signal disasters, involving ruin in all direction.s, and 
 
 * J. S. Jeans, at Statistical Society, 16th Dec, 18S4- 
 + Swire Smith, at Bradford, supra. 
 X The Times, 6ih Feb., 1SS5.
 
 134 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 which is clamouring for a further extension of the insane 
 bounty system ; while the cotton and wool manufacturers 
 are petitioning the Minister of Commerce to' again raise 
 the import duties on cotton and cloth, although the 
 Government has twice done so, once in 1878 and again 
 in 1882.'^ We read that duties on imports are met by 
 manufacturers by a reduction of wages, and that out of 
 a population of 45 millions in Germany, in 1882, the 
 Prussian officials discovered that there were more than 
 7 million heads of families who must be exempted from 
 direct taxation, because their earnings were less than 
 £2^ a year — 9s. 7id. per week.f 
 
 With regard to the general rate of wages, we read 
 wages are 42 per cent, higher in England ; J while as to 
 the hours of labour, according to the report of the com- 
 missioner appointed by the Societe Industrielle de France 
 already quoted, they are 13 per day at Dijsseldorf, 13 to 
 15 at Treves and Aix-la-Chapelle, and even 16 in 
 Franconia ; and this without deductions for Sundays 
 and holidays. 
 
 With regard to agriculture, we learn that increased 
 duties have just been imposed on the importation of 
 wheat and rye, in deference to the views of Prince Bis- 
 marck, and in spite of the report lately issued by the 
 Prussian Minister of Agriculture, which declares that the 
 country cannot in future rely on the growth of corn, but 
 should try to widen the scope of production by intro- 
 ducing the rearing of cattle, etc., and which records the 
 fact of the existence of much land which is still in a 
 primitive condition, especially in the eastern provinces, 
 
 * Economist, 13th Sept., 1884. 
 t Swire Smith, at Bradford. 
 X J. S. Jeans, i6th Dec, 1884.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 1 35 
 
 where more than 10 per cent, of all the land is in this 
 state, and might be made profitable * 
 
 We learn also that emigration is now five times more 
 than it was before 1879, when Protection was established ; 
 but, according to a speech of Prince Bismarck in the 
 Reichstag, on the 8th January, this was simply a con- 
 vincing proof that the material prosperity of the nation 
 had increased in proportion. f 
 
 The Report of the Trade Inspector of Moravia and 
 Silesia states that at Brunn the working time in the 
 weaving and spinning mills, which were fixed at 12 hours 
 before the new Act was issued, was sometimes prolonged 
 to 16 and even 18 hours. It states also that in many 
 manufactories workmen remain the whole week in the 
 factory, sleeping on woolsacks, and working 96 hours, 
 from Monday morning until Sunday morning. The 
 weekly wages fluctuate between 4fl, and 8fl. for men, and 
 i,2ofl. and 4fl. for women, etc. These low wages barely 
 keep the workpeople in lodgings and dry bread. 
 
 3. Belgium. — In protected Belgium we find the 
 labourers working longer hours and for lower wages than 
 in Great Britain. There are no factory acts ; children of 
 tender years are employed 66 and 72 hours per week, 
 and take their share of nightwork ; while women and 
 children work in the coal mines.:[ 
 
 4. Italy. — Here, as elsewhere, the people arc pro- 
 tected in everything in which the foreigner might com- 
 pete with them, and yet they are wearing out their lives, 
 from childhood to a premature old age, in a perpetual 
 struggle for existence. Old men in England tell of being 
 
 * Economist, 14th Feb., 1885. 
 t The Times, 9th Jan., 1885. 
 t Swire Smilh at Bradford.
 
 136 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 carried to the factory on the backs of their fathers sixty 
 or seventy years ago, when they were but seven or eight 
 years of age, to begin work at five o'clock in the dark 
 winter mornings, and working till seven or eight at night, 
 for a few pence a day."^ Such are the conditions at 
 present existing in Italy. 
 
 5. Russia. — With regard to Russia, we read in the 
 Times of the 5th February, that the industrial depres- 
 sion and disturbances are beginning to attract very 
 serious attention, and that on all hands are heard sounds 
 of alarm at the growing discontent and agitation among 
 the factory hands, and the working population generally. 
 In the agricultural districts there are disturbances, and 
 outrages, rick-burnings, and crop destruction ; while in 
 the cotton and iron industries there are many large mills 
 working at a loss for fear of the consequences of 
 dismissing large numbers of workmen ; attempts at re- 
 duction having in several instances resulted in combined 
 or isolated attacks upon the masters. 
 
 6. Holland and Switzerland. — Before we leave Europe 
 we must take a glance at these two countries. They form 
 quite a contrast to those which we have just been regard- 
 ing. The tariff of Holland is now one of the lowest in 
 the world. She has no material advantages except her 
 sea-board. She is thriving and prosperous, and her 
 industries, reckoned per head of population, are larger 
 than those of any other Continental state. As to 
 Switzerland, a country without a single mine, canal, or 
 navigable river, and hemmed in from the sea by great 
 military and Protectionist nations, she imports, and 
 exports, and holds her own in the general competition. 
 She spends lavishly in the education of all classes, her 
 
 * Swire Smith at Bradford.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 
 
 137 
 
 system standing almost unrivalled, while her factory acts 
 regarding the education and employment of children are 
 stricter than in any other country in the vvorld.^ 
 
 7. United States. — Turning from the Old World to 
 the New, let us see whether there is anything to justify 
 Protection in its chosen home. There we find that the 
 diary of the year lately closed is nothing but a chronicle 
 of disaster in every department of trade and industry. 
 Mercantile failures have not been so numerous, or for so 
 large an aggregate, since 1878,88 the following table will 
 show : — 
 
 Year. 
 
 No. of Failures. 1 Amount. 
 
 1884 
 1883 
 1882 
 1881 
 1880 
 1878 
 
 10,968 
 9,184 
 6,738 
 5,582 
 
 4,735 
 10,478 
 
 $ 
 226,343,427 
 172,874,172 
 101,547,564 
 81,155,932 
 65,752,000 
 234,383,132 
 
 In manufacturing and mining we see nothing but the 
 closing of mills, workshops, factories, and foundries, the 
 blowing out of furnaces, the discharge of workmen, and 
 a reduction of wages of from lO to 30 per cent. An 
 inquiry into the industrial situation, instituted by the 
 well-known trade journal, Bradstreet's, in December last, 
 brought out the fact that in the twenty-two States, con- 
 taining 90 per cent, of the industrial population of the 
 Union, there were at least 316,249 less people employed 
 in manufacturing in 1884 than in 1882, that is, a 
 decrease of 13 per cent. ; while wages in most lines had 
 fallen 20 to 25 per cent., and in some instances 30 per 
 * Swire Smith at Bradford.
 
 138 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 cent. ; all this being accompanied by disastrous strikes. 
 In a subsequent number of the paper it is stated that in 
 all probability a more careful count of the employes 
 would show a decrease at the end of 1884 of 350,000. 
 
 We read also that a stream of emigration is setting 
 out for Europe, chiefly of Germans, Italians, Poles, and 
 Hungarians, who complain that they can no longer get 
 work, a large exodus taking place from the Pennsylvania 
 anthracite coal region. This is not to be wondered at, 
 when we learn from the evidence laid before the Senate 
 Committee on Labour and Education last year, that 
 there were miners of iron ore working in Pennsylvania 
 for 75 cents a day (3s. lid.), that their abodes were ex- 
 tremely miserable, and that they suffered from a truck 
 system, under which they paid 100 per cent, more than 
 the iron and steel workers did."^ 
 
 " The testimony of working men presented for the 
 first time in the history of this or any other country in 
 methodical order, and representing every branch of 
 business in this country, was absolutely unanimous : first 
 that the wages and earnings of working men in this 
 country are not sufficient to give them comforts or even 
 a decent support for their families, and was equally con- 
 clusive as to there having been a steady degradation in 
 the condition of the labouring classes during the last 
 twenty years, and that it was a decreasing deterioration 
 to be measured year by year."t 
 
 We learn also from Secretary Howard, of the Fall 
 River Cotton Spinners' Association, Massachusetts, that 
 a threatened reduction of 10 per cent, in the wages of 
 
 * Speech of the Hon. Abram S. Hewitt, House of Representatives, 
 30th April, 1884. 
 
 t Speech of the Hon. Abram S. Hewitt, supra.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 1 39 
 
 the Fall River operatives would make a reduction, since 
 February, 1884, of 20 per cent., and since 1874 of 50 
 per cent., of what they then earned ; also, that under the 
 coming reduction a spinner with three children, after 
 paying rent or fuel, would have less wherewith to clothe 
 his family than the sum which it costs to keep the 
 convicts in the state prisons.^ We learn also that the 
 cigar makers carry on their trade in filthy tenements, at 
 such low rates that the families of the workmen have 
 neither fresh air nor sufficient food and clothing ; f that 
 at Darby, in Pennsylvania, under a system of tariffs 
 which was to guard them against the pauper labour of 
 Europe, and in the works of a corporation owned by 
 prominent citizens of New York and Philadelphia, 
 children of nine years old and upwards were employed, 
 and were worked from 6.45 a.m. to 8 p.m. ; the Phila- 
 delphia Ledger, in March, 1883, recording the fact that 
 one thousand of these mill children, between ten and 
 fourteen years of age, were taken in a steamer to 
 Rocky Point, where they had a shore dinner, and that 
 next day they had to return to their daily drudgery.j 
 We read also of " the roof-sleepers of New York," people 
 who, in the intensely hot weather of last year, were 
 driven to sleeping on the roofs of their habitations.§ 
 Speaking of the third and most wretched class of people, 
 who occupy the lowest grade of tenement houses, the 
 writer describes these as: — "Whose every room accommo- 
 dates from one to three families, where men and women 
 
 * The Times, 4th February, 1885. Letter from Correspondent, Lowell, 
 Massachusetts. 
 
 f Senate Committee, evidence. 
 
 X Pall Mall Gazette, 22nd March, 1883. 
 
 § Pall Mall Gazette, nth September, 1884.
 
 140 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 die, and children are born ; where beds are huddled, 
 meals are cooked, clothes are washed, dried, and ironed. 
 These places are bad enough in the winter. In the 
 summer, leaving aside all questions of health, decency 
 and morals, the utter wretchedness (physical) is some- 
 thing utterly and absolutely beyond description, or 
 conception, to those who ha/e not been eye-witnesses 
 to it." 
 
 In the Titms of 4th February, 1885, is a letter from 
 a correspondent writing from Lowell, Massachusetts, 
 already quoted, in which he says that " New York is 
 estimated to have at least 50,000 workless people ; 
 Boston has 20,000 at least ; and, out West, Chicago is 
 said to have from 20,000 to 30,000; St. Louis, 15,000; 
 while the iron districts of Pennsylvania, Indiana, etc., 
 have their thousands ; and so it is all over the old 
 settled districts of the country." He also says, " And in 
 cultured, enterprising, busy Boston, the capital of Massa- 
 chusetts, and the ' hub of the universe,' I know many 
 fine, steady, willing, worthy fellows, who . . . are 
 in the greatest poverty. Some of these — lawyers, 
 journalists, etc., have carried off honours at Oxford or 
 Cambridge, and here in this boasted land of liberty and 
 plenty have offered to do any kind of work, even that of 
 shovelling snow or dirt, or driving horses and wagons, 
 just for a mere pittance, but their services have not been 
 required." 
 
 And we are not surprised after this when we read in 
 the same letter that crime is being committed for the 
 sake of obtaining food, and that in this same Boston, 
 Judge McCafferty, of the Municipal Police Court, should 
 state from the bench that strong, rugged men, capable 
 of working and of supporting others, pleaded guilty, and
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. I4I 
 
 were sent away criminals, for the sake of being clothed 
 and fed ; one of these criminals exclaiming as he was 
 sent to prison, "Thank God! I shall get something to 
 eat." And this takes place in a country where, accord- 
 ing to Mr. J. S. Jeans, in a paper read at the Statistical 
 Society on the i6th of December last, money wages 
 were 84 per cent, higher than in England. 
 
 But this is not all. In the Report of the Secretary of 
 the Treasury, dated the 1st December, 1884, Mr. McCul- 
 loch writes: — "The time has now come when the manu- 
 facturing industry of the United States is in dire distress 
 from plethora of manufactured goods. Some manu- 
 facturing companies have been forced into bankruptcy ; 
 others have closed their mills to escape it ; few mills are 
 running full time ; and as a consequence a very large 
 number of operatives are either deprived of employment 
 or are working for wages hardly sufficient to enable 
 them to live comfortably or even decently." Also, 
 " The all-important question, therefore, that presses 
 itself upon the public attention is, How shall the country 
 be relieved from the plethora of manufactured goods, 
 and how shall plethora hereafter be prevented ? . . . 
 Unless markets now practically closed against us are 
 opened, unless we can share in the trade which is 
 monopolised by European nations, the depression now 
 so severely felt will continue, and may become more dis- 
 astrous." Also, " How, then, shall the information re- 
 quired for a full understanding of what stands in the 
 way of an increased exportation of our manufactured 
 goods be obtained ? . . . I see no better means than 
 by the appointment of a commission composed of men 
 not wedded to the doctrines of Free Trade or Pro- 
 tection — fair-minded men who would prosecute the
 
 142 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 inquiry thoroughly, comprehensibly, and impartially." 
 " The great and profitable carrying trade between the 
 United States and Europe has been permitted to pass 
 into the hands of the shipowners of other nations. . . . 
 There is, in my opinion, no pro.spect whatever that the 
 United States will ever share to a considerable extent 
 in the foreign carrying trade without Government aid. 
 The let-alone policy has been tried for many years, 
 during which our ships have been swept from the ocean, 
 and we pay every year many millions of dollars to 
 foreign shipowners for freights and fares." 
 
 Such is the commercial picture presented by a 
 country which, as Mr. Abram S. Hewitt, in his speech 
 in Congress on the 30th April last, already quoted, 
 states, " has had twenty-five years of uninterrupted Pro- 
 tection, under a higher tariff than ever existed in any 
 civilised country on the globe." 
 
 . . CHAPTER IV. 
 
 CAUSES OF DEPRESSION. 
 
 Not our Fiscal System — Production greater than ever, Distribution 
 different — Producers and Capitalists the Sufferers — Consumers and 
 Labourers the Gainers— An Economic Revolution arising from a 
 Diffusion, and more equal Distribution, of Wealth — Among Wage 
 Earners the Causes of Distress are Intemperance, Improvidence, and 
 Bad Land Laws. 
 
 The question now arises : What is there in all this 
 showing to make us envious of the economic condition 
 of our Protectionist neighbours on either side of the 
 Atlantic? There is nothing; on the contrary, there
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 
 
 14^ 
 
 is everything to show that such evils as we suffer from 
 arise, not from our P'ree Trade system, but from other 
 causes. What these causes are, and what the remedies, 
 will form the burden of the remaining pages of this 
 essay. We have arrived at the kernel of the problem, 
 and we will discuss it by the light of what has been 
 already advanced. 
 
 Let us first ascertain in what sense the present state 
 of things can be called Depression. There is no sign 
 of national impoverishment. There has been no falling 
 off in the production of wealth. Our foreign trade^ 
 measured by quantities, was never so great as within 
 the last two years. By way of interest on loans made 
 to the rest of the world, which interest is due to us in 
 gold, but paid to us in commodities, we now get, in 
 consequence of the fall in prices, something like 50 per 
 cent, more than we did some years ago for the same 
 money. 
 
 Here is a table which shows the consumption per 
 head of certain imported articles for the years 1873, 
 1879, and 1883 : — 
 
 
 1873 
 
 1879 
 
 1883 
 
 11 (U 
 
 ■ Bacon and Hams lbs. 
 
 9-07 
 
 14-84 
 
 10*96 
 
 .>_> 
 
 Butter ,, 
 
 4*39 
 
 6-57 
 
 7-i8 ^ 
 
 
 Cheese ,, 
 
 4-69 
 
 574 
 
 5 5' 
 
 Eggs No. 
 
 20-56 
 
 22-44 
 
 26-40 
 
 <^b 
 
 Wheat and Plour lbs. 
 
 17079 
 
 22S-73 
 
 250-77 
 
 Sugar, raw ,, 
 
 43-96 
 
 56-83 
 
 61-87 
 
 Ditto refined ... ,, 
 
 763 
 
 9-41 
 
 9-87 
 
 Tea „ 
 
 411 
 
 4-70 
 
 4-80 
 
 There is no sign of decadence or of decay in such- 
 figures as these. What is shown is an accession and 
 diffusion of wealth. Of this we have many proofs. One
 
 144 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 great cause has been the general fall in prices. As has 
 already been observed, three factors have combined to 
 bring about this fall. As regards two of these — namely, 
 the opening up of new fields of production, and the 
 improvement of industrial processes — however classes or 
 individuals may have suffered thereby, the community 
 has benefited. As regards the third — the scarcity of 
 gold — that has been a misfortune to the world, but a 
 benefit to Great Britain. Owing to her unique position 
 as the great creditor nation, she profits largely by this 
 scarcity, while other countries indebted to her find a 
 constantly increasing difficulty in satisfying her claims. 
 
 To manufacturers, merchants, wholesale traders, and 
 producers generally, the increasing scarcity of gold, so 
 far as it has contributed to the fall in prices, has been 
 a source of loss. Owing to this and the other causes 
 named, the fall, during the last few years, has been very 
 rapid. Changes have taken place in two or three years 
 which, formerly, it took a generation to effect, and the 
 classes just named have not been able to keep pace with 
 them. Capital has also suffered. It does not obtain 
 the returns it formerly did. The high price of all first- 
 class investments shows this ; while, as regards capital 
 employed in manufactures, there is a general complaint 
 of insufficient returns. 
 
 Mr. B. Whitworth, M.P., at a meeting of the Statis- 
 tical Society on i6th December last, stated that he is 
 himself engaged in the cotton trade, and is in a 
 position to say that for the last five or six years there 
 has not been 2 per cent, made on the whole capital 
 engaged in the cotton trade of this country. 
 
 Now, seeing that there has been a greater production 
 of wealth than ever, and that certain classes have not
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. I45 
 
 been able to obtain as great a proportion as formerly, 
 it is clear that other classes must have gained. The 
 sufferers have been capitalists and producers ; the 
 gainers have been labourers and consumers. 
 
 The grand result, therefore, has been a diffusion 
 and a more equal distribution of wealth, and this is 
 shown in the cheapness and plenty which prevail. 
 Articles of prime and secondary necessity are brought 
 within the reach of the lower grades of labour, for whom 
 life has been made more easy. For the labouring class 
 generally, the attainment of a higher standard of com- 
 fort and of morals is made possible ; thrift is made 
 practicable ; there is less inducement to crime ; and 
 pauperism tends to diminish. 
 
 This is anything but a depressing picture. It is of 
 the highest importance that the ever-increasing stream 
 of wealth which is created by our labour at home, and 
 which pours in from abroad as interest on our invest- 
 ments, and as profit on our great carrying trade, in the 
 shape of the world's products, should be diffused among 
 the many, and not concentrated in the hands of the few. 
 What has taken place is a beneficent revolution calcu- 
 lated to produce far-reaching social and political con- 
 sequences. It is a filling up of the gulf which divides 
 the very rich from the very poor ; an equalising of 
 conditions by an elevation of the masses ; a gradual 
 binding together and fusion of classes ; and a preventive 
 of that dire poverty, and deep discontent, in which 
 Socialism and Communism find their source. 
 
 But while the community has thus benefited, it 
 cannot be denied that certain classes have suffered 
 distress and privation. In some cases the suffering 
 has been merited, in others unmerited. 
 
 K
 
 146 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 In agriculture deep depression reigns. The lately- 
 developed wheat-growing regions of America, Austral- 
 asia, and Asia, have caused one million acres in the 
 United Kingdom to go out of wheat cultivation, and 
 a quarter of a million of our rural population has been 
 driven into the towns. 
 
 This migration is producmg many bad consequences. 
 It is a great national evil. It increases the competition 
 in the labour market of the towns, and drives down 
 ■wages, and while it decreases the demand for goods, 
 it increases the numbers of those who make them. It 
 crowds our cities and raises rents. It takes men, women, 
 and children away from the field and the moor, and all 
 their health-giving influences, and deteriorates the race 
 by planting them amid the noisome haunts of poverty 
 and disease. 
 
 That wheat cultivation should, for a time at least, 
 owing to economic causes, cease to pay, is not of itself 
 a calamity, but it is made into a calamity when, owing 
 to our iron-bound land system, there is no alternative 
 for the farmer but to throw up his farm, for the land- 
 lord but to forego his rent, and for the labourer but 
 to migrate. 
 
 As regards manufactures, we find the capitalist com- 
 plainnig of restricted markets, excessive competition, 
 falling prices, and curtailed profits. To this class no 
 great consolation can be held out. Owing to a con- 
 currence of favouring circumstances, the law of com- 
 petition — the tendency of profits to a minimum — has 
 been brought into full play, and the community reaps 
 the benefit. Capital will never again be able to obtain 
 as large a share of the profits of production as it once 
 did. The old style of business has quite passed away.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. I47 
 
 Differences of price between producing and consuming 
 countries no longer exist, except as regards cost of 
 carriage. Steam and electricity have abolished them, 
 and have created a revolution. Allowing for cost of 
 transport, wheat is, nowadays, sometimes cheaper in 
 London than in Chicago. All this means, of course, 
 loss of profits to the trader, but it also means a corre- 
 sponding gain to the rest of the community. 
 
 The only trading class which at present has nothing 
 to complain of is the small retail trader. He alone has 
 benefited from the fall in prices, for he has not been 
 particularly prompt in adapting his charges to the fall 
 in the wholesale markets. From inquiries made of 
 stockbrokers it is ascertained that of late the only 
 investor has been the retail trader. Coming to the 
 domain of finance, we find among the bankers a falling 
 off of profits, while in Stock Exchange business there 
 is deep depression. Unless profits be made in trade, 
 there can be no investment on balance, no fresh enter- 
 prises, and business in securities languishes as a matter 
 of course. This affords another proof of the different 
 distribution of wealth. What capitalists and producers 
 have had to forego, labourers and consumers have 
 received. The few have lost, the many have gained. 
 Until lately the kw, after the satisfaction of their wants, 
 had large sums to invest, which came into the market. 
 This is no longer the case, these large sums are now 
 distributed among the many, and much thereof is now 
 spent in increased comfort and enjoyment by them. 
 
 We now come to the great army of workers and 
 wage-earners. With regard to this class, all testimony 
 agrees as to the fact that, during the last forty years, 
 their condition has materially improved : the average of 
 
 K 2
 
 148 
 
 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 their money wages having increased, while the cost of 
 living has decreased. 
 
 The British workman has not only claimed, and 
 obtained, a larger share of the profits of production, but 
 he has at the same time benefited from the cheapness 
 and plenty which are the natural concomitants of the 
 fiscal system under which he lives. Professor Leone 
 Levi, in his Report on the wages and earnings of the 
 working classes prepared for Sir Arthur Bass, gives in 
 Section III. the following tables, which, he states, are 
 based on the census of population, with a complete 
 analysis of the occupations of the people, and the rate 
 of wages actually prevalent, and paid, in the various 
 industries. 
 
 Occupations. 
 
 Number of 
 Earners. 
 
 Amount of 
 Faniings. 
 
 Average 
 Earnings. 
 
 Profcisional 
 
 Domebtic 
 
 Commercial 
 
 Agricultural 
 Industrial 
 
 1884 
 
 400,000 
 2,400,000 
 
 900,000 
 1,900,000 
 6,600,000 
 
 1867 
 
 300,000 
 1,700,000 
 
 700,000 
 2,700 000 
 5,600,000 
 
 1884 
 
 16 000,000 
 96,000,000 
 45,000,000 
 57,000,000 
 307,000,000 
 
 1867 
 A» 
 10,000,000 
 59,000,000 
 39,000,000 
 84,000,000 
 226,000,000 
 
 1884 
 
 £ 
 40 ■ 
 
 6o- 
 
 34'i4 
 
 46*10 
 
 1867 
 
 33' 
 35" 
 55T4 
 
 31-2 
 
 40- 
 
 Total 
 
 12,200,000 
 
 11,000,000 
 
 521,000,000 
 
 418,000,000 
 
 42-14 
 
 38- 
 
 On this table Professor Leone Levi makes the 
 following remarks : " Thus with an increase of less than 
 1 1 per cent, in the number of earners, there has been an 
 increase of 2464 per cent, in the amount of earnings, the 
 average earning per head having increased from £2,?) in 
 1867, to £42'i4 in 1884; or in the proportion of 12-37 
 per cent." 
 
 Dividing the earners and earnings by age and sex, 
 the results are as follows : —
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 
 
 149 
 
 Occupations. 
 
 Number of 
 Earners. 
 
 Amount of 
 Earnings. 
 
 Average 
 Earnings. 
 
 Males under 20 
 
 Males 20 and under 65 
 
 Females under 20 
 
 Females 20 and under 65 
 
 1884 
 
 1,650,000 
 6,530,000 
 1,300,000 
 2,720,000 
 
 1867 
 
 1,200,000 
 5,900,000 
 1,300,000 
 2,600,000 
 
 29,000 000 
 363,000,000 
 39,000,000 
 99,000,000 
 
 i£67 
 
 23 000 000 
 
 297,000,000 
 
 27,000,000 
 
 75,oor,-x:o 
 
 1884 
 
 At 
 iS'o 
 57-2 
 
 22'I7 
 
 33 'o 
 
 1867 
 
 At 
 
 i9'o 
 5J'7 
 
 20'IS 
 28-17 
 
 Total 
 
 12,200,000 
 
 11,000,000 
 
 521,000,000 
 
 418,000,000 
 
 43-10 
 
 38 "o 
 
 On which he says : — " The total earnings thus calculated 
 include the value of board and lodging wherever given. 
 Deducting this item, the amount of money earnings may 
 be estimated at ^^47 0,000,000." In Section VI. — Rela- 
 tion of Wages to Production, Professor Leone Levi 
 quotes Mr. Ellison's statistics respecting the cotton 
 industry, in which valuable data exist for arriving at 
 what may be considered the fair remuneration of labour, 
 and gives the following table, which shows " The Details 
 of the Cost of Production in 1859-61 and 1880-82." 
 
 Average of three yeart 
 
 , 1859-61. 
 
 Average of three years. 
 
 1880-82. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 
 £ 
 
 Cotton consumed, 
 
 
 Cotton consumed. 
 
 
 1,022,500,000 lbs. 
 
 
 1,426,690,000 lbs. 
 
 
 at6|(l 
 
 29,290,000 
 
 at6TVcl 
 
 38,211,000 
 
 Wages, 646,000 ope- 
 
 
 Wages, 686,000 ope- 
 
 
 ratives, at ^32 los. 
 
 
 ratives, at ;^42 per 
 
 
 per annum... 
 
 20,995,000 
 
 annum 
 
 28,812,000 
 
 Other expenses than 
 
 
 Other expenses than 
 
 
 wages in connection 
 
 
 wages in connection 
 
 
 with spinning and 
 
 
 with spinning and 
 
 
 weaving 
 
 7,800,000 
 
 weaving 
 
 10,700,000 
 
 Other expenses than 
 
 
 Other expenses than 
 
 
 wages m connection 
 
 
 wages in connection 
 
 
 with bleaching, dye- 
 
 
 with bleaching, dye- 
 
 
 ing, and printing ... 
 
 10,000,000 
 
 ing, and printing... 
 
 17,000,000 
 
 Rent, interest, depre- 
 
 
 Rent, interest, depre- 
 
 
 ciation, profits, etc. 
 
 8,915,000 
 
 ciation, profits, etc. 
 
 12,277,000 
 
 
 77,000,000 
 
 107,000,000
 
 150 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 And he remarks thereon: — "Economies may be practised 
 in the other expenses, but in any case such gross results 
 account for the complaints of cotton spinners and others 
 connected with this large industry." 
 
 In Section IX. he takes the number of families be- 
 longing to the working classes at 5,600,000, and the total 
 income as i," 5 2 1,000,000, or, exclusive of food, etc, 
 ;^470,ooo,ooo, being an average of about 32s. per week, 
 per family, a fair amount, if equally distributed.^ 
 
 It is clear, therefore, that the workman's share of the 
 profits of production was never so great as it is now, and 
 that what he now earns may be laid out to greater 
 advantage than ever. 
 
 One of the effects of this prosperity is seen in the 
 statistics relating to life, which show that during the 
 Free Trade era the average duration among men had 
 increased 2 years, and among women, 3^ years. 
 
 If, then, it be a fact, as undoubtedly it is, that the 
 wage-earning class has received a great accession of 
 wealth, and if we find a considerable portion of that 
 class, as we do, always on the brink of poverty, it follows 
 that either there must be inequality in distribution or 
 waste in application. So long as inequality of powers 
 exists among men, so long will there be inequality of 
 earnings ; but whatever men may earn, the earners can 
 always be divided into sections, one of which is careful 
 and thrifty, and the other careless and improvident. 
 
 * In March, Professor Levi issued some supplementary notes to his 
 Report, in which he states that since the publication of the main results of 
 his inquiry in December, a reduction of fully 15 per cent, on the rate of 
 wages had taken place in the principal branches of industry since the 
 receipt of the returns ; and that, taking the total amount of income from 
 such industries at ;((;200,ooo,ooo, 15 per cent, reduction would amount to 
 ;^ 30,000, 000.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 151 
 
 Among the causes which operate to produce a state of 
 things in which cheapness and plenty prevail side by 
 side with idleness and starvation, are intemperance, im- 
 providence, and faulty laws. 
 
 With regard to intemperance, it is a melancholy fact 
 that something like ^126,000,000 are annually spent in 
 intoxicating drinks ; and that many a workman spends 
 on a Saturday night five shillings out of his weekly wage 
 of twenty shillings. That it is a source of crime and 
 pauperism no one can deny. At a conference of reliev- 
 ing officers of the metropolis, held on the 27th February, 
 those who spoke testified with one voice as to the 
 distinct connection between drink and pauperism, and 
 drink and lunacy, and testimony was given that very few 
 of the applicants for relief were abstainers. 
 
 As regards improvidence, in nothing is want of pru- 
 dence so much shown as in the matter of marriage. 
 How can anything but poverty and misery be the lot of 
 multitudes if they be brought into the world by parents 
 who themselves are on the verge of pauperism .'' How 
 can there be anything else but a crowding and a jostling 
 in the labour market when we, here in Great Britain, 
 increase at the rate of one thousand a day — when, every 
 morning, there are a thousand additional mouths to be 
 fed .-• How can such a constant increase as this take place 
 without recurring periods of distress .■' 
 
 The marvel is, not that distress exists, but that it is 
 not tenfold what it is, considering the faultiness of certain 
 laws under which we live — the laws which govern the 
 ownership and occupation of land. 
 
 As has been observed, we have of late years wit- 
 nessed a partial depopulation of our rural districts, and 
 a crowding into the towns — a disastrous result, which
 
 152 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 can be traced to a system which has proved unfitted to 
 adapt itself to the altered circumstances in which agri- 
 culture is placed. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 REMEDIES. 
 
 Agriculture — Landlords, Farmers, Labourers — Manufactures — Capitalists, 
 
 Workmen. 
 
 Having stated what may be considered the most im- 
 portant of the causes which have contributed to the 
 existing depression, I now pass to the remedies. 
 
 So far as the present state of affairs is the result of 
 over-production, and of a natural reaction from inflation, 
 there is no remedy but time and patience. Depression 
 is felt in other countries besides our own, and we must 
 await an improvement in the general situation. Foreign 
 nations are our customers, and until they prosper we 
 cannot fully benefit. 
 
 There are evils, however, which spring from faultiness 
 in our laws, our modes of life, our methods, and from 
 ignorance or disregard of new economic conditions, such 
 as progress of invention, facilitation of transport and of 
 communication, opening of new fields of production, and 
 alterations in the standard of value. Of such evils we 
 can take account, and, to a great extent, can apply 
 remedies. 
 
 First, as regards agriculture. What is wanted in land 
 is Free Trade. The laws and customs which govern the 
 tenure, devolution, and occupation of land in Great 
 Britain have favoured and stimulated its accumulation in
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 153 
 
 few hands, have conferred on ownership privileges, and 
 exemptions, and powers by way of entail and settlement, 
 which are inimical to good cultivation, and opposed to 
 the public interest. The existing modes of transfer are 
 cumbrous, dilatory and expensive, and in their stead 
 there should be established a system which should, as far 
 as practicable, make land as marketable and as transfer- 
 able as consols or railway stocks. 
 
 A radical change in the direction of freedom is 
 necessary in the interest of all parties. The community 
 is interested in having the land cultivated so as to give 
 the largest possible return to the capital and labour 
 bestowed on it ; and one of the first steps to be taken is 
 the passing of a measure which shall facilitate the break- 
 ing up of encumbered estates, and thus promote 
 the establishment of cultivating ownership. The need 
 for such an Act is obvious when we remember that 
 the indebtedness of our landowners is estimated at 
 ;^40O, 000,000, or six times the rental. Another interest 
 which the community has in allowing the forces of 
 accumulation and of dispersion to have free play is the 
 getting rid of the inordinate political power which has 
 hitherto attached to the possession of land. A practical 
 step towards this was taken in the passing of the Repre- 
 sentation of the People's Act of 1884, by which two 
 millions of voters were added to the electorate, and a 
 transfer of power effected from the aristocracy to the 
 democracy. This will act as a powerful lever in the 
 splitting up of large estates, by doing away with one of 
 the great inducements to accumulation. Those who are 
 landowners in name, but not in fact, ought to welcome 
 such a change. They are now in a position which is 
 awkward and embarrassing, and which is likely to become
 
 154 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 more so, especially if they resist, in which case they may 
 draw, not only on themselves, but on the whole class of 
 landlords, legislation of a drastic nature, involving per- 
 chance judicial rents or compulsory sale. 
 
 It is vital to the public interest that there should be 
 good agriculture, and for this purpose, that capital should 
 be attracted to the soil, not, however, to be swallowed up 
 by the impoverished or grasping landlord, as it too often 
 is, under the present system, but to be secured to, and to 
 fructify for, the farmer who brings that capital, and the 
 workman who brings his labour. 
 
 According to Sir James Caird {Thnes, 2nd Feb., 
 1885): — "There is no such fall in the value of agri- 
 cultural produce as should make the farming of good 
 land in this country unprofitable. And in regard to 
 foreign competition, we must always have in our favour 
 the cost of transport from distant regions, which on any 
 kind of produce is an advantage not yet less than the 
 average rent of our agricultural land." If this be so, 
 there is no reason why the farmer should not succeed. 
 But, to this end, he must keep abreast of the times, and 
 take determined action on several lines. As regards his 
 landlord, he must in future discard worn-out feudal ideas 
 and principles; he must pluck up a spirit of independence, 
 and treat with owners of the soil on a purely commercial 
 basis. He will find them in future more amenable to 
 reason and common sense than formerly. In the minds 
 of many landowners, until very lately, the only agricul- 
 tural interest worth considering was rent. In treating 
 with this class, farmers should recollect that rent is that 
 portion of the produce of the land which remains over 
 after rewarding the labourer for his toil, and the farmer 
 for his outlay and his work ; that just what remains over
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 155 
 
 is what he can afford for rent ; and that, if nothing 
 remains over, the land can bear no rent. 
 
 He must demand stabiHty of tenure ; security for his 
 capital ; compensation for his improvements, and no 
 raising of rent thereon ; and liberty in cultivation. 
 Having agreed on these points, he should go in for 
 variety in cultivation, remembering that we annually 
 import twenty-three million pounds worth of butter, 
 eggs, cheese, game, fruit, and vegetables. He must 
 agitate for fair rates of railway carriage, and demand 
 that a stop be put to the present discriminating charges 
 between British and foreign produce, which are nothing 
 else than protective duties in favour of the foreigner. 
 He will recollect that American meat and cheese are 
 carried at 25s. a ton from Liverpool to London, while 
 English meat is charged 503. ; that fruit from Holland 
 to London pays 25s. a ton, while from Sittingbourne in 
 Kent, through which station it passes, the charge for 
 English fruit is also 25s. ; and that the difference in the 
 rates on English wheat and barley, and foreign wheat 
 and barley amounts to a rent of 5s. an acre. Then he 
 should give his attention to middlemen's profits, and 
 see if by union and combination he cannot narrow the 
 enormous margin which at present exists between what 
 he gets for his produce and what the consumer pays, 
 and thus benefit both parties. He will bear in mind 
 that the sheep which he sells for iJ^3, costs the consumer 
 £4. los. ; that the milk which he sells for id. or i|d., 
 costs the consumer 4d. or 5d., and that the total value of 
 this one product amounts to thirty millions sterling, far 
 more than the value of the wheat crop of the United 
 Kingdom ; and that if farmers could have managed to 
 get one halfpenny per pound on the 230,000 tons of
 
 156 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 meat which were sold in Smithfield Market alone last 
 year, they would have pocketed no less a sum than one 
 million sterling. 
 
 Lastly, they must discard all idea of profiting by 
 the imposition of duties on corn — what is called Pro- 
 tection — for two reasons, the first of which is, that 
 experience has shown that it is not the cultivator who 
 profits thereby, but the owner of the soil ; and the 
 second, which is that there is no probability whatever 
 of this nation ever again consenting to raise artificially, 
 by protective duties, the price of any product, whether 
 of agriculture, or of manufacture, above what it fetches 
 in the general market of the world. 
 
 The agricultural labourer must recollect that for the 
 first time in history he will very soon have a voice in 
 the making of the laws. The great object which he 
 should steadily and determinedly keep in view is his 
 reinstallation on the land ; in his once more being able 
 to obtain that interest in the soil of which he has been 
 despoiled. He wants Free Trade in land. He must 
 work for reform, for the getting rid of all the artificial 
 barriers which bad laws and customs have raised against 
 the natural dispersion of land. These barriers must be 
 broken down, and these laws and customs abolished, 
 before he can undo that state of things which ousts his 
 class from the country, and drives them into the towns. 
 He wants legislation which will give him fixity of tenure 
 in his cottage, and a few acres attached thereto, at a fair 
 rent ; legislation, which shall, to some extent, atone for 
 the mighty wrong to which his class have been subjected 
 in being deprived of millions of acres — more than a 
 third of the cultivated surface of England and Wales — 
 and in being thus left helpless and hopeless, with
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 
 
 157 
 
 nothing to look forward to, after a life of toil, but the 
 grave or the workhouse. By thus striving, he will help 
 to elevate himself, and to benefit the community, by 
 drawing population back from the town, stopping the 
 degeneration now going on, and thus helping to restore 
 that strong and stalwart race of men which were the 
 strength and the pride of our nation. 
 
 In view of the competition to which manufacturers 
 are subjected on all sides, they must study how to re- 
 duce cost of production. For instance, coal and iron 
 are the foundation of all our other industries, and note 
 should be taken of the differences which exist between 
 royalties and cost of carriage at home and abroad, to 
 the detriment of British trade. As regards royalties, 
 Sir I. Lowthian Bell, F.R.S., in his work on Iron and 
 Steel, states that the charge upon one ton of pig-iron 
 for royalty on ore and coal is roughly as follows : — 
 
 Great Britain. 
 Cleveland. Scotland. Cumberland. 
 3s. 3d. 6s. 6s. 3d. 
 
 Continent. 
 Germany. France. Belgium. 
 6d. 8d. Is. 3d. to 4s. 
 
 While as regards railway carriage, the Iron Trade Asso- 
 ciation states that the average rate in England for pig- 
 iron from the works to inland markets is 0'94d. per mile, 
 whilst in Germany the charge is 0*5 od., and in France, 
 o*6od. ; that on manufactured iron the charge per mile 
 from works to shipping ports in England is ro6d., 
 whilst in France it is 0"59d., and in Germany, 0"54d., 
 and that on the average it may be taken that the 
 mileage rates on the Continent are about one-half of 
 those in England. 
 
 As has been already observed, capital will not in 
 future be able to secure the profits it has hitherto done, 
 and must be content to allow a greater share to labour.
 
 158 THE TRADE DEPRESSION: 
 
 The employer of labour must in future, under pain 
 of loss, be better educated than he has hitherto been in 
 science, in art, in political economy. He must keep 
 abreast of the age in his methods, his machinery, in 
 knowledge of the requirements of markets, and, above 
 all, he must study to do good and honest work. The 
 day will certainly come when a competition fiercer 
 than that which now exists will take place, and woe be 
 to him who is behind in the race. That day will come 
 ■when our competitors will shake off the fetters which, 
 under the guise of Protection, cramp their energies, and 
 hinder them from disputing with us our present indus- 
 trial supremacy. When that day comes, some of us 
 will have to rue the making of textile fabrics which are 
 the commonest and least artistic in the world, and 
 . which, when the dishonest sizing is washed out of them, 
 make excellent sieves ; or which are not adapted to the 
 wants of the markets to which they are consigned. 
 Lastly, the employer must do all in his power to promote 
 education among his workpeople, as the principal, if not 
 the sole means by which our country can in future hope 
 to hold its own in the general competition. 
 
 To the workman every piece of advice which can be 
 given may be summed up in one word — Providence. 
 This virtue involves almost everything which affects the 
 welfare of man, and carries in its train almost every 
 blessing which can be enjoyed on earth. 
 
 For a man to be able to elevate himself and his 
 belongings, materially and morally, it is absolutely ne- 
 cessary that he should save something out of his 
 earnings ; that he should exercise self-restraint, and 
 make some sacrifice, some little sacrifice to-day, in 
 order to obtain some great benefit to-morrow.
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 159 
 
 The provident man ever bears in mind that good 
 times are only one-half of life ; that, taking the world 
 over, the sun shines but twelve hours out of the twenty- 
 four ; and that it is in these good times, these twelve 
 hours of light, that he must work and save up for the 
 hours of darkness. 
 
 To be provident, a man must be industrious, he must 
 be temperate, he must be prudent in the matter of 
 marriage. As regards sobriety, all that need be said 
 here is, that intemperance carries in its train almost 
 every curse which afflicts humanity. It is with regard 
 to marriage that some advice is necessary. 
 
 The artisan and the labourer should study prudence 
 in this respect, and not recklessly bring into the world 
 human beings whom he does not clearly see his way to 
 support without an eternal fight to keep the wolf from 
 the door. He should think of the struggle for existence 
 involved in the simple fact that here, in Great Britain, 
 one thousand fresh mouths have to be fed every morning 
 — a fact which of itself is enough to account for much of 
 the shameful crowding of our cities, the starvation wages 
 of our lowest grades of labour, for the health-destroying, 
 death-dealing, sweating system, and for most of the 
 horrors which spring from the cruel competition of 
 •excessive numbers. 
 
 It is in the lower ranks that imprudence in this 
 respect principally reigns. So long as trade and com- 
 merce are brisk, the constant increase of our population 
 is met and provided for ; but the moment the tide turns, 
 . and there arc, say, five men looking for four places, either 
 one of them has to go to the wall, or the five have to 
 divide between them, and in unequal proportions, the 
 wages which the four were getting.
 
 l60 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 All this is bad enough, but when the evil is aggra- 
 vated by bad laws and customs, as is the case when, 
 owing to the breakdown of our land system, the popu- 
 lation of the country comes to swell the ranks of the 
 unemployed in the towns, it is time for the workman to 
 inquire into a matter in which he is so vitally interested. 
 And when he does look into it he will find that an im- 
 mediate land reform is necessary in order to restore the 
 balance of society, and that nothing will so much con- 
 duce to the well-being of the community as a rectification 
 of the evils which flow from our present system. Provi- 
 dence, moreover, when translated into action by saving, 
 raises the workman at once into the rank of the capit- 
 alist, and gives him a force and a power which he can use 
 at will. According to his circumstances and his tastes, 
 he may improve his mind, or his surroundings, and thus 
 raise himself in the social scale. By being a capitalist 
 he can always command his market, and will no longer 
 be compelled, by the thraldom of debt, to pay the often 
 exorbitant profits of the middleman. 
 
 He can go into the co-operation of distribution, and 
 make a second saving by getting much out of what, 
 under the wasteful and expensive system by which the 
 poor are served, is diverted from him. His food, his 
 clothing, and everything he consumes will not only be 
 cheaper, but of better quality. 
 
 All these additional means will now be available for 
 the co-operation of production, in which the workman 
 should steadily aim to take part. When he has accom- 
 plished this, he will, in his own person, have done much 
 to reconcile the conflicting claims of capital and labour. 
 He will represent both classes, will help to bring them 
 together, will enable them to see the difficulties to which
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. l6l 
 
 each is peculiarly liable, and thus make them understand 
 each other, and more disposed to apportion fairly the 
 profits which are the result of their combined action. 
 By all this he will have done something towards solving 
 the great problem which now nearly drives to despair 
 many of those who in their different ways, and by their 
 various lights, but with small success, are striving to 
 better the lot of the great mass of mankind. 
 
 Having arrived at this stage, the capitalist workman 
 will see the paramount necessity of education in its 
 broadest sense, of education which shall comprise tech- 
 nical and artistic instruction, in which, until very lately, 
 we Englishmen were behind all the leading European 
 nations ; and some teaching with respect to political 
 economy, or the science which treats of the production 
 and distribution of wealth. By no other means will he 
 be able to hold his own against the highly trained heads 
 and hands of other nations. 
 
 With artistic training he will not fall behind in the 
 universal competition ; while political economy will 
 teach him many things of which he is now ignorant, 
 and give him a safe defence against the clap-trap of the 
 economic quack. It will give him some knowledge, not 
 only of the condition of his own country, but of that of 
 others ; he will know their rates of wages, their working 
 hours, and many other things which will inform his 
 judgment and enable him to make just compari- 
 sons. 
 
 It will enable him, on the one hand, to check the 
 action of his Trade Union when it appears to him 
 that that action is contrary to sound principle ; and, 
 on the other, will help him to guide his less instructed 
 brethren on trying occasions, as when, for instance the 
 
 L
 
 l62 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 introduction of labour-saving machinery or the sale of 
 articles of foreign make interferes with their particular 
 trade. 
 
 Lastly, he will see the vital interest which he, in 
 common with the whole nation, has in turning out 
 honest and good work, and will strive might and main 
 to impress on others its necessity in order to avert the 
 disaster which, sooner or later, is sure to attend dishonest 
 and short-sighted practices. 
 
 For there is an eventuality which will have some day 
 to be faced, and that is the casting off of the shackles 
 which, under the name of Protection, cripple the indus- 
 trial energies of other nations. When that day comes, 
 as assuredly it will, the advantage which we now possess 
 by reason of our system of free imports will cease, and 
 we shall be brought face to face with rivals who run 
 their machines and work their bodies twelve, fourteen, 
 and even sixteen hours a day against our nine and a half 
 or ten. 
 
 Owing to our free importation, our products are 
 manufactured at a minimum money cost which is, of 
 course, below that of the tax-burdened products of our 
 Protected rivals. By this means, and by the increased 
 efficiency which our shorter hours confer on us, we hold 
 our own against their longer hours. 
 
 When they shake off their trammels, however, a 
 competition will begin such as the world has not yet 
 seen, and it behoves all who have their own and their 
 country's interest at heart to prepare for it. 
 
 Let us hope that if foreign nations have the wit to 
 see the evils of Protection, they will also be enlightened 
 enough to shorten their hours of labour, and thus not 
 only rescue their populations from the degrading toil
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. 1 63 
 
 they now undergo, but elevate generally the conditions 
 of labour. 
 
 If, adopting Free Trade, they do not shorten their 
 hours, it is possible that we might then be compelled, in 
 order to live, to repeal so much of our factory laws as 
 affects adult labour. 
 
 But, whatever happens, we must not lose our trade 
 through dishonest work ; and in the meantime we may 
 congratulate ourselves on the soundness of the system 
 on which our industrial fabric has been built up. 
 
 CHAPTER Vr. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 We have now to ask, What are the conclusions to which 
 we are led by the preceding investigation ? 
 
 In the first place we cannot but see that the de- 
 pression is not confined to any particular country, but 
 is universal ; and that in many respects it is a novel 
 state of things which is the result of agencies that have 
 been brought into active operation during the last few 
 years. 
 
 These agencies are the invention and enterprise 
 which, stimulated by man's increasing mastery over the 
 forces of nature, have resulted in increased powers of 
 production and distribution, and in the improvement 
 and cheapening of processes, and a consequent fall in 
 prices, the fall being aggravated by an increasing scarcity 
 of gold, the standard and measure of value. 
 
 The grand result is nothing less than an industrial, 
 
 L 2
 
 164 THE TRADE DEPRESSION : 
 
 social, and economic revolution, which, although highly- 
 beneficial to the community, has not been effected with- 
 out loss and suffering to certain classes. 
 
 The profits of the producer, whether agricultural or 
 manufacturing, have been reduced to a minimum. The 
 trade of the merchant has been rendered precarious and 
 unprofitable. In a word, capital has been the chief 
 sufferer, labour the chief gainer ; and there has been a 
 diffusion and a more equal distribution of wealth. 
 
 Yet, notwithstanding all this, notwithstanding the 
 unprecedented cheapness and plenty which reign, we see 
 among us, in many quarters, want and distress. 
 
 When we inquire closely how this is, we see in the 
 first place that it is not owing to our Free Trade system, 
 for we find these evils existing in greater intensity in 
 countries where Protection reigns, not only in the old 
 countries of Europe where ages of misrule have left 
 their mark, and where the nations are groaning under 
 the crushing burden of armaments, but in the New 
 World, in the United States, where an all-bountiful 
 nature spreads her riches in boundless fertile regions, 
 and the people are free from the curse of these arma- 
 ments ; it is in the United States, of all places in the 
 world, that we find pauperism increasing while it is 
 diminishing with us. 
 
 But we do see that such want and distress as exist 
 among us are traceable, firstly, to the depression in 
 other countries, which has reacted on us, and which 
 must pass away before we can again gain ground ; 
 secondly, to our national characteristics of intemperance 
 and improvidence ; and thirdly, to our bad land laws. 
 
 For the privation which comes from the existence of 
 depression abroad there is, of course, no remedy but
 
 ITS CAUSES AND ITS REMEDIES. l6$ 
 
 time and patience. As to intemperance and improvi- 
 dence, if they cannot be eradicated, they can at all 
 events be lessened by an endeavour on all hands to raise 
 the masses by education, by precept, by example, by the 
 enactment of just laws. 
 
 Beyond these efforts society cannot go ; everything 
 else depends on the individual. As Herbert Spencer 
 says, " What is the quality in which the improvident 
 classes are so deficient? Self-restraint; the ability to 
 sacrifice a small present gratification for a prospective 
 great one. A labourer endowed with due self-restraint 
 would never spend his Saturday night's wages at a 
 public-house. Had he enough self-restraint, the artisan 
 would not live up to his income during the prosperous 
 times and leave the future unprovided for. Were there 
 no drunkenness, no extravagance, no reckless multiplica- 
 tion, social miseries would be trivial." 
 
 But a great amount of the existing destitution must be 
 set down to the operation of our land laws. These have 
 favoured the accumulation of land in few hands, have 
 allowed the despoiling of our peasantry to the extent of 
 millions of acres, have crippled our agriculture, have de- 
 populated the country and crowded the towns, and have 
 allowed the baneful leasehold system to grow up and to 
 become one of the most fruitful sources of misery, 
 disease, oppression, and wrong. To this evil we can at 
 all events apply the remedy of a radical change, and it 
 will be the business of those to whom the reins of 
 power will soon be handed over to devise the mode and 
 the method of the change. 
 
 Finally, let us learn and take to heart the lessons of 
 experience. The depression which weighs upon us will 
 pass away, as others have done, and prosperity, but
 
 l66 THE TRADE DEPRESSION. " 
 
 probably of a chastened nature, once more dawn upon 
 us. Let us not, now in the dark time, be too much cast 
 down, and when prosperity comes let us not be too 
 elated. The saying, as old as Horace, tells us in 
 prosperous gales to draw in the flowing sail, and in 
 narrow straits to preserve an equal mind. Whether in 
 prosperity or in adversity, let us ever bear in mind 
 that — 
 
 "THERE IS A TIDE IN THE AFFAIRS OF MEN."
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED; 
 
 Or, notes on the MINORITY REPORT of the 
 
 ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE DEPRESSION 
 OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Appointment of Commission — Anticipations — Tlie Three Reports. 
 
 It will be remembered that shortly after the accession of 
 a Conservative Government to office in the summer of 
 1885, a Royal Commission was appointed to inquire into 
 the depression of trade and industry. 
 
 No one having any but the slightest acquaintance 
 with the subject looked forward to such an inquiry as 
 likely to lead to anything but a negative result. The 
 prevailing feeling was well expressed by a writer in The 
 Economist of the i ith July, as follows : — 
 
 "A Royal Commission to inquire into the causes of 
 the depression of trade may be a good electioneering 
 device, but for all other purposes it can be little better 
 than a farce. Such a Commission can only go for its 
 information to sources open to all. It may call before it 
 commercial witnesses and economists by the score, but 
 it cannot elicit from them anything which is not notorious
 
 1 68 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 to all men of business, and which economists and prac- 
 tical men alike have been writing and talking about for 
 years past. This old information, diluted with a larger 
 or smaller amount of more or less pertinent comment, it 
 will solemnly embody in a big Blue Book, which will be 
 published at some expense to the country, and forgotten 
 as soon as it is issued ; and thus the matter will end." 
 
 The affair has turned out pretty nearly as predicted. 
 The farce has been played. Instead of one, we have five 
 Blue Books. Comments pertinent and non-pertinent 
 have been solemnly embodied in them, and the Final 
 Report, which appeared in January last, fell flat, and 
 received nothing but the most perfunctory notice from 
 the Press. 
 
 This Final Report, however, comprises not one report, 
 but several reports. There is, first, the Report of the 
 Majority of the Commission, signed by eighteen mem- 
 bers, with reservations on various points by eleven out of 
 the eighteen ; secondly, the Report of the Minority, 
 signed by four members, with reservations by one of 
 them ; and thirdly, the Report of Mr. Arthur O'Connor. 
 
 The Majority Report is outside the scope of this 
 inquiry, and I shall not refer to it except for any light it 
 may throw on the Report under review ; but with regard 
 to Mr. O'Connor's Report I have to make a few observa- 
 tions. 
 
 As before stated, the minority consisted of four com- 
 missioners. They were Lord Dunraven, Mr. W. Farrer 
 Fcroyd, Mr. P. Albert Muntz, and Mr. Nevile Lubbock. 
 They commence by regretting their inability to sign the 
 Report of the majority of their colleagues, though con- 
 curring in their description of the evidence received ; 
 and they go on to say that the extent and severity of
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 169 
 
 the depression, and the consequent insufficiency of 
 employment, were not, in their opinion, adequately 
 recognised and set forth ; and that no recommendations 
 of remedial measures were made. 
 
 They then proceed to state their view of the situation 
 in a report extending over twenty-six folio pages — a 
 length which precludes me from doing much more than 
 taking some of its more salient points. 
 
 The points to which I shall confine my remarks are 
 the statements made as to the nature and causes of the 
 depression so far as these are affected by the Protective 
 policy of other nations, and the remedies which are pro- 
 posed. I shall, however, in conclusion, offer some 
 observations on the situation as it presents itself to me. 
 
 I therefore do not propose to discuss other matters 
 connected with the depression, such as the Fall in Prices, 
 the Hours of Labour, Railway Rates, Technical P^duca- 
 tion, and the like. On these Free Traders and Protec- 
 tionists are much of one mind. What I propose is to 
 discuss those points in which the two parties are directly 
 at issue, as they are presented in the Minority Report. 
 
 CHAPTER n. 
 
 T PI E DEPRESSION. 
 
 Nature and Causes — Slatistics— A.rg\.\mQn{% — False Deductions — Internal 
 Statistics — Occupations of the People — Pauperism — Bankruptcy — 
 Crime — Income Tax — Railways— Alcoholic and Non-Alcoholic Drinks. 
 
 Tariffs and Bounties — Do they Restrict our Trade? — Universal Free 
 Trade — Tariff Wars — Bounties Direct and Indirect — Some we Our- 
 selves Create — Protective Tariffs give us the Lion's Share of the 
 World's Trade.
 
 I70 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 Foreign Competition — Increase — Hours of Labour — Cost of Carriage — 
 Royalties — Education — Diligence — Competition in Home Market — In 
 Neutral Markets — Professor Huxley. 
 
 Foreign Investments — Said to Limit Employment of Labour — Absurdity 
 of Argument — Colonial and other Investments — Figures— Income Tax 
 Collections, 1877-84 — Mankind's Indebtedness to us increasing — 
 Fallacies — Every Farthing Interest from Abroad is Spent in Wages. 
 
 NATURE AND CAUSES. 
 
 After the preliminary remarks to which I have referred 
 in the Introduction, the " Four" proceed to describe the 
 situation of affairs as regards the decline in Agriculture, 
 and in some of our principal manufactures, as shown by- 
 statistics given in paragraphs 27 to 55 ; and they go on 
 to say (56) : — 
 
 " We think the insufficiency of employment is the most serious feature 
 of the existing depression ; and it is an important, indeed an anxious ques- 
 tion, whether, in the face of the ever-increasing restrictions placed upon 
 our industry by foreign tariffs, and the ever-increasing invasion of our home 
 market by foreign productions, admitted duty free, we shall be able to com- 
 mand a sufficiency of employment for our rapidly growing population." 
 
 In (58) they say : — 
 
 "The effect upon this country of foreign tariffs and bounties is to 
 narrow the market for manufactures, and so to cramp the exercise of our 
 industries and to arrest their growth, . . . and thus seriously to limit our 
 total production of exchangeable wealth. It is on many accounts impos- 
 sible for those whose industry is thus checked to turn to the production of 
 'something else' which will be accepted in exchange, but primarily for the 
 simple reason that those tariffs are now applied to almost every exportable 
 product of British industry. . . . We have consequently less to spend, 
 both in the home trade and in the purchase of the raw materials of our 
 industries and other commodities from abroad. For the conditions of inter- 
 national trade are inflexible ; we can only in the long run buy as largely 
 and as freely as we are permitted to sell." 
 
 Also (59) :— 
 
 "An important effect of the combined influence of foreign tariffs and 
 free imports is to discourage and lessen the investment of capital in the
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. I/I 
 
 development of our own agriculture and manufactures, and to stimulate and 
 increase its investment in foreign land and securities, and foreign industrial 
 enterprises ; the inevitable consequence being that a large and increasing 
 amount of food, clothing, and other commodities, is imported in payment of 
 income due to owners of foreign investments here resident, and therefore 
 without a corresponding export of the productions of our own industries. 
 This directly operates to limit the employment of labour in this country. 
 We think this important feature in our economic position has not hitherto 
 received the attention it deserves." 
 
 Such is the burden of a song which runs through the 
 remaining paragraphs of the Report. It is scarcely 
 necessary to say that we have before us, in what I have 
 quoted, abundant material for criticism. 
 
 The point to which I shall first address myself is that 
 presented under the head of 
 
 STATISTICS. 
 
 The figures adduced are intended to show that during 
 the last ten or twelve years there has been a relative 
 decline of some of our greatest national industries in 
 proportion to the population, viz. : — 
 
 (l). A progressive decline in agricultural employment and of the condition 
 and production of the soil. 
 
 {2). A marked cessation of the wonted increase in the proportion of our 
 population employed in textile manufactures. 
 
 (3). A diminishing proportion of the world's production of cotton, wool, 
 flax, and silk, which is manufactured in this country. 
 
 (4), The increased value of our imports of finished manufactures during a 
 period in which (a) prices have fallen very greatly ; {!>) the value of 
 our exports of the like articles has seriously declined ; (^r) a large 
 amount of labour and machinery in this country suited to their pro- 
 duction has remained unemployed or only partially employed. 
 
 (5). The increasing proportion of our exports, which consists of coal, steam- 
 engines, and machinery, and the diminishing proportion, which 
 consists of finished manufactures, which not only require coal, 
 steam-engines, and machinery for their production, but much 
 valuable skilled labour besides.
 
 1/2 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 Many persons imagine that if they can show that our 
 chief industries are relatively declining while correspond- 
 ing industries in Protectionist countries are rising, they 
 settle the question between Free Trade and Protection. 
 This is a delusion. The question between the two rival 
 systems is not to be settled by a mere appeal to statistics, 
 whether as regards our foreign trade or our internal con- 
 dition. At best they are but partial exhibits, and a 
 number of other facts and circumstances must be taken 
 into account in forming a judgment. What Protectionists 
 have to show — and the burden of proof lies on them — is 
 that we should do better under Protection than we do 
 under Free Trade. Unless it can be shown that the 
 decline in our industries is the inevitable outcome of our 
 Free Trade system, the prcof fails. The "Four" at- 
 tempt this in their Report, and I shall have presently to 
 criticise what they advance in that endeavour. I must, 
 however, first mention some of those facts and circum- 
 stances of which I just now spoke, which must be taken 
 into consideration along with the figures showing a 
 relative decline in our industries. 
 
 We have only to turn to the Report itself to see 
 what some of these are. We read (88) of the effect of 
 the restrictions on labour which exist here, but not in 
 other countries ; that in France, for instance (90), the 
 hours of factory labour are 72 as against 56I here, and, 
 night work being permitted, their factories are in many 
 cases worked 132 hours or more per week. Then as 
 regards the transport of goods, we find (99) that the cost 
 here is excessive as compared with the charges made 
 for similar services in other countries ; also (105) that 
 the extension of railway transport throughout Europe 
 has given producers in France, Germany, Austria,
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. I73 
 
 Switzerland, and Belgium cheaper and readier access 
 to many consuming markets than is enjoyed by our 
 own. Then we find (103, 104) that excessive royalties 
 are exacted by our mineral owners ; that, for instance, 
 the average amount of royalty on the constituent ele- 
 ments of a ton of pig-iron in this country varies from 
 3s. to 6s. 3d., while in France and Germany it is only 
 from 6d. to is. Then we are told ([12) that in certain 
 respects, as regards elementary, scientific, and technical 
 education, some of our competitors appear to be in 
 advance of us ; and we learn (S6) that in some depart- 
 ments the reputation of our workmanship does not stand 
 so high as it formerly did. Lastly, we find that our 
 competitors, the Germans (52, 84), possess in ample 
 measure the population and other resources required for 
 manufacturing enterprise ; that we have now few, if 
 any, advantages over them : while in knowledge of the 
 markets of the world and readiness to accommodate 
 themselves to local tastes, or idiosyncrasies, they have 
 evidently gained ground upon us. 
 
 That is what the "Four" themselves tell us. But 
 there are other things that they do not mention, which 
 have also to be taken into account in any economic 
 comparison between ourselves and other nations. There 
 are the differences which exist as regards frugalit}', tem- 
 perance, improvidence, especially as regards marriage, 
 and its effects on population in the "over-production" 
 of human beings; in all which we show to great dis- 
 advantage. If we take population, for instance, we find 
 that in the United Kingdom we have to maintain 300 
 inhabitants to the square mile, while Germany has to 
 maintain 225, France 187, and the United States less 
 than 20. In spite of emigration, the rate of increase of
 
 174 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 our population is as high as that of any other European 
 State, and every morning we have to solve the daily 
 recurring problem of how to feed 1,000 additional 
 mouths. 
 
 These are heavy odds against us in the struggle 
 for existence. What have we to set off against them ? 
 We have nothing except our accessible coal and iron, our 
 insular position, the indomitable energy of our race, and 
 our system of free imports. That the last is an ad- 
 vantage will, of course, be stoutly denied by Pro- 
 tectionists ; but until the following proposition is upset 
 — and no one has yet attempted it — our free import 
 system must be held to be an advantage. It is this : 
 That, other things being equal, so long as our rivals are 
 Protectionist and we are Free Trading, we have a distinct 
 advantage in the general competition as regards cheap- 
 ness of production. But, as we have seen, other things 
 are not equal, and we may see our commercial supremacy 
 still further trenched upon than it is at present. The 
 "Four" themselves say (109): "We cannot, perhaps, 
 hope to maintain, to the same extent, the lead which we 
 formerly held among the manufacturing nations of the 
 world." Any arguments, therefore, drawn from the mere 
 figures of statistics showing a relative decline in our in- 
 dustries are futile, and 7iiJul ad rem. 
 
 Turning to the statistics which show our internal 
 progress and condition, I find among the Tables given 
 in the Report two (E and F) which indicate " a marked 
 cessation of the wonted increase in the proportion of our 
 population employed in textile manufactures." Why the 
 fact that the percentage of our population now em- 
 ployed in textiles, 2731, is less than it was in 1874, viz. 
 3-015, and only what it was in 1868, viz. 2706, should
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. I/S 
 
 be made matter of complaint passes ordinary compre- 
 hension. Is the community going to the dogs because 
 in 1885 only 11 persons out of 400 worked in factories, 
 while in 1874 there were 12 ? Are we to conclude that 
 the missing one has gone into the workhouse? The 
 returns as to pauperism, however, dispose of that sup- 
 position, so that we must further ask. Are there no other 
 industries in which the missing one has found employ- 
 ment ? or is the mill to be considered the goal of the 
 working man's ambition, and that all other industries 
 are to be held inferior to, and of less importance than, 
 that of textile manufacture ? 
 
 A paper on the occupations of the people, read by 
 Mr. Charles Booth before the Statistical Society on the 
 1 8th May, 1886, shows that, according to the Census 
 returns of England and Wales in 1S81, there were em- 
 ployed in textiles and dyeing 962,600 persons, as against 
 966,200 in 1861 ; that the numbers of those engiged in 
 all other manufactures had risen in the same interval 
 from 2,150,600 to 2,636,400 persons, while in other in- 
 dustries, such as Transport, including Navigation, Docks, 
 Railways, and Roads, the figures were respectively 
 436,000 and 653,900 ; that in General Dealing the 
 figures were respectively 673,500 and 924,200 ; that in 
 Commercial and General Labour, the figures were re- 
 spectively 377,500 and 785,000; the total persons 
 engaged in industry in England and Wales having risen 
 from 7,295,200 in 1861, to 8,690,800 in 1881, out of a 
 population which was 20,000,000 in 1861 and 26,000,000 
 in 1881. The truth is that the proportionate falling off 
 in textiles, so far from being an evil, is matter for con- 
 gratulation, for it shows that our industrial system is on 
 a broader basis, and that it is more varied than it was,
 
 1/6 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 and that it is consequently more secure, and less liable 
 to sudden vicissitudes, such as that of the cotton 
 famine. 
 
 Passing from this mare's-nest as to our textile in- 
 dustries, I come to paragraph 41, in which is an attempt 
 to decry certain figures relating to our internal condi- 
 tion, which were put before the Commission. The 
 " Four " say : — 
 
 " Any more favourable view of the position of our chief industries, 
 founded upon tlie statistics of pauperism, bankruptcy, and crime, or on the 
 accounts of savings banks and the returns of income tax, will not bear the 
 test of close examination and inquiry." 
 
 And they proceed to give their reasons. Before I 
 criticise these, let us first see how the figures stand. As 
 regards pauperism, I find that, according to the tables 
 exhibited by the Board of Trade for England and 
 Wales — which give the figures from 1854 to 1884 in- 
 clusive, year by year, and in quinquennial periods — 
 there were in the period 1855-9 894.822 paupers, or 47 
 per cent, of the population ; that in 1860-4 the number 
 was 948,01 1, or 47 per cent. ; that in 1865-9 the number 
 was 962,075, or 4'5 per cent. ; that in 1870-4 it was 
 951,699, or 4-2 per cent.; that in 1875-9 the number 
 was 752,976, or 3'i per cent; and that in 1880-4 the 
 number was 787,135. or 3"o per cent. 
 
 For Scotland the figures show that in 1855-9 there 
 were 122,558 paupers, or 4*2 per cent, of the population ; 
 while in 1880-4 there were 100,317 paupers, or 27 
 per cent. 
 
 For Ireland the figures show that in 1855-9 there 
 were 62,700 paupers, or 10 per cent, of the population ; 
 while in 1 880-4 there were 108,372 paupers, or 21 
 per cent.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. I77 
 
 . As regards these figures, the " Four" say : — 
 
 " The stricter enforcenient of tests in the administration of the poor 
 law, and the aid now so widely given by friendly and trade societies, limit 
 or defer the pauperisation of the unemployed or partially employed, even 
 in periods of long depressian." 
 
 We are not told, however, when the stricter enforce- 
 ment of the law took place ; no evidence concerning it 
 is referred to ; nor arc we given any c|uantitative state- 
 ment illustrating it — a defect which renders it exceed- 
 ingly difficult, if not impossible, to deal with the alleged 
 fact, except to say that no allowance of this sort is 
 capable of accounting for so marked a diminution of 
 pauperism as is shown in the figures. 
 
 As to the aid given by friendly and trade societies, 
 the mere fact that these societies are thus able to act 
 shows powers of earning, which of themselves go far 
 to demonstrate that general improvement in the con- 
 dition of the industrial classes which has taken place 
 during the last fifty years. Time was when wages were 
 at starvation point, with no possibility of saving, whereas 
 now the rewards of labour are such that savings can be 
 made. This attempt of the " Four " to decry and 
 disprove the conclusion to which the figures point is, 
 moreover, utterly at variance with what they say (91) : — 
 
 "There is no feature in the situation which we have been called upon 
 to examine more satisfactory than the improvement which has taken place 
 in the condition of our labouring population during the last thirty or forty 
 years." 
 
 As also in (93) : — 
 
 " It is, however, right to point out that the share of the total reward of 
 production which now falls to labour is larger, and the share which falls to 
 capital much less than in times past." 
 
 As regards Crime, the "Four" say : — • 
 
 M
 
 178 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 " The j^eneral spread of education, mil the improved administration of 
 criminil law, have done much to diminish crime." 
 
 Just SO ; but a decrease in crime proves improvement 
 in the social condition, and that is what the " Four " 
 are decrying. Education, no doubt, tends to diminish 
 crime, but how can improved administration of criminal 
 law do that ? and when did this improved administration 
 commence? It may bring more criminals to justice, 
 but that would raise the figures in the returns, not 
 lower them. Anyhow, the record shows that in 1870 
 the number of criminal convictions in the United King- 
 dom was 18,401 in a population of 3 1,205,444, while in 
 1885 it was 14,029 in a population of 36,331,1 19. Now, 
 when it is considered that want is the fruitful parent of 
 crime, it is hardly possible to bring forward a more 
 convincing pi"oof of the improvement which has taken 
 place in the condition of the people, notwithstanding the 
 trying times through which the nation is passing, than 
 that which such figures afford. 
 
 With regard to our industrial position, as shown in 
 the figures relating to savings bank deposits, the " Four" 
 say : — 
 
 "The increased deposits in savings banks are, to no small extent, a 
 proof that the widespread depression of trade is limiting enterprise, and 
 contracting the openings for the more profitable employment of small 
 amounts ol capital." 
 
 Not a tittle of evidence is adduced to support this 
 statement. The "Four" refer, indeed, for corroboration 
 to answers by Mr. J. Mawdsley, who appeared on the 
 nth February, 1886, as the representative of the Amal- 
 gamated Association of Operative Cotton-spinners. 
 He was asked (q. 5136) how the operatives generally
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 1/9 
 
 invested their money, and lie replied, " A good many 
 of them put their money into savings banks, and 
 another considerable portion of them put it into cottage 
 property and building clubs." He was then asked 
 (q. 5137), "The savings banks only yield 2h per cent. ; 
 are they not, therefore, tempted by these limited 
 liability concerns .-' " and he replies, " Previous to 
 the recent collapse of the building societies in Lanca- 
 shire, investment in building societies was their favourite 
 mode of investment." Asked (q. 5138), " What rate of 
 interest would they get in building societies .'' " he replies 
 " About 5 per cent." 
 
 Now, what is there in this little conversation to bear 
 out the sweeping assertion of the "Four" that the 
 openings for the more profitable employment of small 
 amounts of capital are being contracted. The basis is 
 much too small on which to build up such a conclusion. 
 Curiously enough, however, there appeared in T/ie Times 
 of the 9th April last a copy of " The Official Annual 
 Statement of the Secretary of the Amalgamated Associ- 
 ations of Operative Cotton-spinners of the Northern 
 Counties of England" for the year 1886, in which he 
 speaks of "the insane willingness of small capitalists to 
 place their savings at the disposal of professional pro- 
 moters of spinning companies." Now I presume that 
 this was the same society which was represented before 
 the Commission by Mr. Mawdsley, and possibly that 
 gentleman may be the secretary. The evidence, there- 
 tore, so far as it goes, shows that instead of cotton 
 operatives putting their savings into the banks, they 
 arc crowding into limited liability spinning companies, 
 and themselves aiding to create and perpetuate a state 
 of depression. The " Four " must have been very hard 
 M 2
 
 l8o FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 pressed for argument to be obliged to bring into court 
 .such irrelevant matter as I have commented on. 
 
 The truth is that no sophistries can get rid of the 
 significance of the fact that while in 1870 the deposits 
 in the savings banks were -^53,057,653, or £i 14s. per 
 head of the population, in 1885 they had risen to 
 ^94.053.747. or £2 us. 6d. per head. 
 
 With regard to the Income Tax returns the " Four " 
 say that 
 
 " The assessments under Schedules A and B very inadequately reflect 
 the enormous loss of income which has been undergone by the owners and 
 occupiers of land, to say nothing of the shrinkage of capital " ; 
 
 and they make out, from calculations given in evidence 
 by Sir James Caird (q. J^y^), that during ten years the 
 annual loss to the owners and occupiers of agricultural 
 land was ^^40,000,000 and the capital loss ;^' 740,000,000 ; 
 and 
 
 " Consequ'ntly, that their assumed gains, a?;sessed for income tax during 
 the whole of that period, have never, upon any sound principle of stock- 
 taking, been realised." 
 
 Under Schedule D they say 
 
 " Are included incomes derived from foreign investments, from trans- 
 actions in fore-gn stocks, and from the international buying, selling, and 
 carrying trade of which we have already spoken." 
 
 They then assert that many returns are larger than 
 they ought to be, owing to dread of the trouble and 
 loss of time incurred in appealing, and to various reasons 
 for concealment of losses ; and that the growth of the 
 assessment is largely attributable to the increased effi- 
 ciency of collection in late years, etc. 
 
 Now there can be no question that the losses 
 incurred during the last ten or twelve years by the
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKKD. 
 
 i8i 
 
 agricultural interest — that is, by owners and occupiers 
 of agricultural land — have been enormous. But, large 
 as they are, they are counterbalanced, and more than 
 counterbalanced, by the profits derived (i) from the 
 increased rents and capital values derived from urban 
 lands ; (2) from the industries created by the importa- 
 tion of the additional quantity of food rendered 
 necessary by our increasing population ; (3) from 
 the foreign enterprises and the vast international 
 trade which arise from these causes, in all which we 
 take the lion's share. 
 
 So far from there having been in all this any 
 national loss, the very contrary is the truth. There 
 has been, doubtless, sectional loss, but what a section 
 or a class may have lost by a fall in prices has been 
 a gain to the rest of the community, and is in no sense 
 a national loss. 
 
 In proof of this, I cannot do better than adduce the 
 following figures of Income Tax Returns, taken from 
 the Statistical Abstract : — 
 
 Income Tax. 
 
 
 1871. 
 
 1885. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 Land ... 
 
 
 65,380,966 
 
 65,039,166 
 
 Houses... 
 
 
 86,296,494 
 
 128,458,507 
 
 Mines ... 
 
 
 5,891,961 
 
 7,603,144 
 
 Iron Works 
 
 
 2,701,234 
 
 2,265,259 
 
 Railways 
 
 
 21,95(^,451 
 
 37,078,633 
 
 Canals ... 
 
 
 774,670 
 
 3.545,850 
 
 Gas Works 
 
 
 2,605,494 
 
 5,025,722 
 
 Quarries 
 
 
 718,929 
 
 932,692 
 
 Other Profits . 
 
 
 2,773,887 
 
 5.346,167 
 
 Total Assessment; ... 
 
 Population ... 
 
 Per Head of Population 
 
 ^465,478,688 
 31,555.69 + 
 
 £h 15^- • 
 
 ^631,467,132 
 36,331,119 
 
 ;^I7 7^. 6r/.
 
 1 82 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 As also cc-rtain figures relating to railways : 
 
 Railways. 
 
 1871 
 
 1875 
 1 88 1 
 1885 
 
 Miles Open. 
 
 16,658 
 
 18,175 
 19,169 
 
 Gross Receipts. 
 
 £ 
 48,892,780 
 61,237,000 
 67, 155,000 
 69,555.774 
 
 Per Mile. 
 
 £ 
 3,092 
 3.563 
 3.572 
 3.505 
 
 To which I add some figures extracted from a memo- 
 randum on the consumption of alcoholic and non- 
 alcoholic drinks, presented by Sir Algernon West. 
 
 Spirits. 
 
 Beer. 
 
 Gals. 
 35 940,512 
 34 544,573 
 
 Ga's. 
 
 16,765.444 
 13,848,748 
 
 Gals. 
 
 28,173,661 
 27,101,238 
 
 Tea. 
 
 Lb. 
 127,661,360 
 
 182,43s 952 
 
 Coffee. 
 
 Cocoa. 
 
 Lb. 
 
 31,173.55s 
 33,410,272 
 
 Lb. 
 
 7,791.763 
 14,595,165 
 
 Population. 
 
 1872 
 1885 
 
 31.835.757 
 36,325.115 
 
 Now, what do all these figures prove } They prove 
 that what the " Four " seek to establish as to our 
 economic condition is absolutely contradicted by facts. 
 They show that in every department of industry, with 
 the exception of agriculture and iron-making, there is 
 vast solid improvement ; and when it is remembered 
 that the principal portion of our railway passenger traffic 
 is contributed by third-class passengers, that among 
 the people temperance is winning its way, and that 
 the duration of life is increasing, we are presented with 
 a mass of evidence as to the moral, material, and 
 social advancement of the nation, which it would seem
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 1S3 
 
 impossible for reasonable men to ignore, but which, never- 
 theless, has been ignored by men Hke the " Four," who 
 are determined at any cost to maintain a foregone 
 conchision. 
 
 Tariffs and Bounties. 
 
 Among the principal causes of depression, the "Four" 
 name (28) 
 
 "(i). The effect of foreign bounties and tariffs, ami of the restrictive 
 commercial policy of foreign countries in limiting our markets. (2) Foreign 
 competition, which is increasing in extent and in severity both in our own 
 and in neutral markets." 
 
 They say (58) :— 
 
 "The effect upon this country of foreign tariffs and bounties is to 
 narrow the market for our manufactures, and so to cramp the exercise of 
 pur industries, and to arrest their growth, to render the employment of 
 those engaged in them partial and irregular, and thus seriously to limit our 
 total production of exchangeable wealth." 
 
 " Foreign tariffs (72) have restricted the export, whilst foreign competi- 
 tion has interfered with the sale in the home market of the productions of 
 our manufactories and mines." " In neutral markets {83), such as our own 
 Colonies and dependencies, and especially in the East, we are beginning to 
 feel the effects of foreign competition in quarters where our trade formerly 
 enjoyed a practical monopoly." " High Protective duties (128), as described 
 in previous paragraphs, levied by foreign nations whose industries are 
 almost or quite on a par with our own as regards cheapness of production, 
 constitute in effect a bounty upon their exports of the Protected articles." 
 
 The first remark I have to make is that no evidence 
 was brought before the Commission to show that, in the 
 aggregate, foreign tariff's and bounties restrict our trade, 
 Hmit our markets, and decrease our production of ex- 
 changeable wealth. The evidence which was brought 
 forward showed, indeed, that certain industries had 
 suffered, but it at the same time showed that certain 
 other industries had prospered, and that our production
 
 1 84 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 of exchangeable wealth, instead of decreasing, is increas- 
 ing ; and that it is only when it is measured in terms of 
 gold that there appears any decrease at all. 
 
 So far from production having decreased, it is in 
 evidence 
 
 " That in recent years, and more particularly in the years during which 
 the depression of trade has prevailed, the production of commodities 
 generally, and the accumulation of capital in this country, has been pro- 
 ceeding at a rate more rapid than the increase of population ; * while, as 
 regards our foreign trade, the apparent falling off of late years is almost 
 entirely due to the fall in prices which has been in progress since 1873, and 
 more particularly to the fall in the prices of raw materials."! 
 
 The only possible reason for the statements of the 
 "Four" must be that they have in contemplation a 
 different state of things, where no Protective tariffs or 
 bounties exist: a state of universal Free Trade, in fact ; 
 and that it is in comparison with that that our production 
 of wealth is now restricted. They say indeed (143) : — 
 
 "Under universal Free Trade our great manufactures of metals and 
 textiles would at once, in the face of all rivalry, expand to the utmost limits 
 of the available labour," etc. 
 
 Now, if so, and if it be meant that under universal 
 PVee Trade we should be doing a larger foreign trade, 
 and should be producing more exchangeable wealth than 
 we do now, I have to state, as an individual opinion, that 
 such a proposition is a most questionable one. No man 
 has the means of pronouncing decisively on the question, 
 and there may be balances and compensations which I 
 have not considered ; but it seems to me that very 
 powerful arguments can be adduced in favour of the 
 view I hold, which is that, considering where we stand 
 now, universal Free Trade, though it would incalculably 
 
 * Majority Report, par. 34. | Id., par. 36.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. iS<,- 
 
 benefit the world at large, mi'oht not be that unmixed 
 national blessing to us which it is presumed by many it 
 would be. 
 
 Under universal Free Trade we should lose the one 
 enormous adxantage we now possess : that none of our 
 products are loaded with duties on the raw material 
 thereof, as those of our competitors now are ; and that, 
 consequently, they must be — other things being equal — 
 cheaper than those others into the cost of which such 
 duties enter. We have only to read the complaints 
 made in Germany and France as to tlie taxation of the 
 cotton yarns which enter into the composition of woollen 
 goods, and those made in the United States as to the 
 taxation of foreign wool, to show how these duties pre- 
 vent competition with us in neutral markets. 
 
 Our people now carry on this competition, working 
 shorter hours and receivin'g higher wages than our rivals 
 do ; and it is not too much to say that it is by means of 
 these untaxed raw materials that we are able to compete, 
 and that if this advantage failed us, the blessings which 
 we now enjoy under our factory system would vanish, 
 for we should have to come down to their working hours. 
 
 Then we have to consider that we should lose the 
 unique advantage we now enjoy in receiving " the most 
 favoured nation " treatment from every other country — 
 an advantage which accrues to us as the direct result of 
 our Non-Protective system, which, in offering the greatest 
 possible facilities to the importation of foreign products, 
 leaves no reason or excuse for treating us on any but the 
 most favoured footing. 
 
 Then we have to remember that whatever restrictions 
 hamper our trade with Protectionist nations equall)' ham- 
 per our rivals, and that over and above these restrictions
 
 I 86 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 there are others which specially hamper inter-Pro- 
 tectionist trade, and which involve Protectionist nations 
 in wars among themselves, from all which we go scot 
 free. These tariff wars, while they restrict and injure 
 the trade of our competitors, tend directly to increase 
 ours. The latest instance is that which has just broken 
 out between Russia and Germany, and in which Russia 
 shows her hostility to Germany by raising to prohibition 
 point the duties on iron and steel coming overland, while 
 that which comes sea-borne, such as ours, is subjected to 
 the same duties as before. At this moment tariff wars 
 are raging between Germany, on the one hand, against 
 Russia, Austria-Hungary, and the United States ; be- 
 tween Austria- Hungary and Roumania ; between France 
 and Roumania; between France and Italy ; and between 
 the United States and Spain. As an instance of the 
 working of these wars, I quote a recent newspaper para- 
 graph :— 
 
 "In Vienna they are paying from is. 8d. to 2s. for a pound of beef, 
 while over the Roumanian border an ox can be bought for £i. Indeed, 
 the Roumanian farmers must be satisfied if they can get the value of their 
 skins and bones for their cattle. It is all because of the failure to agree 
 about a commercial treaty between Austria-Hungary and Roumania. 
 There may be something in the need for stringent veterinary inspection ; 
 but the chief reason for it is the determination of the Magyar farmers to 
 keep up the price of their own cattle by preventing the importation of 
 others. So the proposed Roumanian remedy is to get English capital to 
 enable them to set up factories for tinning meats and boiling fat." * 
 
 Lastly — and this is the most serious consideration of 
 all — if universal Free Trade prevailed it is certain that 
 articles would be manufactured where production could be 
 most cheaply carried on. If so, we have to ask ourselves^ 
 Is Great Britain the cheapest place for the production 
 
 * T/ie Echo, 7th April, 1887.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 1 87 
 
 of iron and steel, or of sln'ps, or of cotton goods, or 
 of woollen goods, or of machinery? Upon the answer 
 to these questions hang issues of the most momentous 
 kind. At the present moment Germany runs us hard in 
 many things ; would she be less able to do so if she took 
 off her Protective duties ? For every square mile of coal 
 and iron we possess the United States possess a hun- 
 dred, equal in quality and more accessible. If the 
 monstrous duties which now maintain their iron industries 
 in localities where they would not exist but for the duties, 
 and if they were transferred to others in which produc- 
 tion can be carried on as cheaply as with us, how long, I 
 ask, would our supremacy in shipbuilding and ship- 
 owning, and machinery making, and cotton spinning 
 last ? At present, owing to the duties, no American 
 ship can be built to compete with a British ship as 
 regards cheapness. The consequence is that the com- 
 mercial flag of the States is no longer seen in foreign 
 ports, while Britain possesses more than half the effective 
 ocean tonnage of the world, and is mistress of the seas. 
 When ships were made of wood, and the States was the 
 cheapest place for building them, the Stars and Stripes 
 was driving the Union Jack off the ocean, until the 
 Civil War came on, and Protection was adopted. To-day 
 ships can be built of steel at about one-half of what they 
 cost fifteen years ago, of greater power, and swiftness, and 
 capacity. How long would our old models last in com- 
 petition with those of modern type, which, if the States 
 discarded Protection, they could at once set to work to 
 build .? 
 
 The same line of argument applies to the cotton in- 
 dustry. In Alabama there are five thousand square 
 miles of coal and iron lands, while close by lies the
 
 1 88 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 whole cotton belt of the United States. If the duties 
 which now fetter industry there were struck off, how 
 long, I ask, would our supremacy in textiles last ^ 
 
 These considerations are quite sufificient to cast a 
 doubt on the assumption that Protective tariffs prevent 
 us from doing a larger trade than we otherwise should 
 do, and to make us think that universal Free Trade 
 might not maintain us in the commanding position we 
 now hold. But whatever may be the views of the 
 "Four" respecting all this, they have made certain utter- 
 ances, and to these I must now attend. 
 
 They speak of foreign bounties and tariffs restricting 
 our trade, and limiting our total production of exchange- 
 able wealth. Let us inquire what are these bounties of 
 which complaint is made. There are (i) direct bounties 
 such as those given by France and Italy to shipping, 
 (2) indirect bounties such as those which are given on 
 sugar by means of drawbacks, and (3) the indirect 
 bounties on the export of Protected articles which, 
 according to the " Four," high Protective duties create. 
 They say (yd) : — 
 
 "The high prices which Protection secures to the producer within the 
 Protected area naturally stimulate competition in foreign markets. As 
 already explained, the surplus production which cannot find a market at 
 home is sent abroad, and in foreign markets undersells the commodities 
 made under less artificial conditions." 
 
 Let us now inquire how these various bounties oper- 
 ate on our trade. As regards shipping, the " Four " 
 confess (126) that 
 
 " The bounties and subsidies now given by several foreign countries, 
 on the building and working of ships of their respective nationalities, have 
 probably not yet produced their full effect on the interests of our ship- 
 builders and shipowners. It is clear, however, that they cannot. but suffer 
 by being exposed to subsidised foreign competition " ;
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 1 89 
 
 which phrase simply means that the "Four" were 
 unable to discover that any bad effect on our interest 
 had taken place. The evidence of Mr. J. A. Crow, 
 commercial attache to the British embassies and lega- 
 tions in Europe, given in the First Report of the 
 Commission, shows that as to France the shipping 
 bounties had proved an utter failure ; while as to Italy, 
 we have the evidence of Mr. Kenney, secretary to our 
 Embassy at Rome, given in The Board of Trade JouruaL 
 of February last, in which we are told that Italian 
 shipping bounties have been but a qualified success, 
 and that : — 
 
 " It may be doubted whether any Italian sliipbuild'ng yai'd will 
 venture to compete with British shipyards, as regards merchant ^hipj." 
 
 Now let us see whether the sugar bounties ha\e 
 restricted our trade. On turning to the " Statistical 
 Abstract," I find that in 1871 we imported of raw and 
 refined sugar 13I million cwts. at a cost of iJ" 18,186,297 ; 
 while in 1885 we imported 24I millions at a cost of 
 i^i 8,322,382. We find, therefore, that in the latter year 
 we obtained from the foreigner 1 1 million cwts. more 
 sugar than we did in 1871, and paid him only a trifle 
 more for this enormous additional quantity. In what . 
 possible way could that have restricted our trade 1 The 
 additional quantity required for its distribution so much 
 more shipping to bring it here, so much more warehouse 
 room, so much more railway carriage, and the cheapness 
 has caused its diffusion among the poorest of our 
 population, and has caused its use in a number of 
 manufactures into which it would not otherwise have 
 entered. To talk of the sugar bounties having restricted 
 our trade is simple nonsense. I shall liave to deal with
 
 IQO FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 the subject later on under the head of " Remedies," so I 
 will say no more about it at present. 
 
 I now come to those indirect bounties on exports 
 which the " Four " say are caused by high Protective 
 duties. There can be no question that the abnormal 
 state of affairs which Protection creates leads to over- 
 production in the Protected countries, and that the 
 surplus is sent abroad, and sacrificed, causing incon- 
 venience and loss to those industries in other countries 
 which are so interfered with. But these incursions into 
 our market, for instance, of importations at slaughter- 
 house prices are in no sense a national loss to us. If 
 they interfere with some industries, they stimulate 
 others. They certainly do not restrict our trade. The 
 " Four" themselves say (58) : — 
 
 "The conditions of international trade are inflexible ; we can only, in 
 the loni^ run, buy as largely and as freely as we are permitted to sell " ; 
 
 and if, as they also assert, (60) the Protected country 
 
 " pours its surplus upon the markets it finds most freely open," 
 
 it is clear that, as we are the freest market of all, we 
 must get the most of that surplus, and, of course, must 
 ultimately export something to pay for that surplus, 
 which something must take the form of goods of some 
 sort or other. 
 
 So far, then, as these tariff-created bounties act on 
 our home market, there is no loss of our aggregate 
 trade ; but it will be said that their action is different 
 in neutral markets, from which our products are driven 
 by this unnatural competition. This is true, and this is 
 the only respect in which these bounties may be said to 
 injure us. But even here we have our compensations.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. IQI 
 
 We have first to consider the benefits which I have 
 already described as arising out of the system ; secondly, 
 the three-cornered business which always springs up for 
 us out of these international exchanges; and, thirdly, 
 the shipping business which is thereby created, and of 
 which we get the principal share ; so that, on the whole, 
 the bounties which arise out of Protection act in a pre- 
 cisely opposite direction to that which the " Four " say 
 they do. 
 
 I have not done, however, with indirect bounties. 
 France, which is now thoroughly saturated with the 
 Protective spirit, has spent in military expeditions many 
 millions in endeavouring, but with scant success, to open 
 up new markets for her products. Strange to say, it is 
 always the Free Trading English who step in and do the 
 lion's share. It Vv'as only in December last that M. 
 Clemenceau, with regard to Tonquin, remarked in the 
 Chamber " that France was now paying 50,000,000 
 francs a year to keep that country open as a market 
 for Manchester cottons." So that here again we find 
 some compensation. 
 
 Then there are the indirect bounties which arise from 
 the action of foreign Governments, and of colonial 
 Governments, in making land grants in aid of railroads, 
 as instances of which there are the United States and 
 Canada, which latter makes, in addition, subventions in 
 money. These act, of course, as indirect bounties on 
 the production of wheat, grain, cattle, etc., all of which 
 come into our markets and compete with our own pro- 
 ductions. Jiut in the building of these railroads our 
 own capital, and our own labour, take an active part, to 
 the great profit of the industries which are involved. 
 The United States and Canada, however, are not our
 
 192 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 only field of operations. In South America, in Africa. 
 in Australia, in New Zealand and in India, similar 
 outlays of our capital are going on to the extent of 
 hundreds of millions sterling, and are acting as bounties 
 in opening up new fields of production in agriculture, 
 mining, and manufactures, and therefore in raising up a 
 competition of the severest kind with similar home in- 
 dustries. All this, however, far from restricting our 
 trade, or limiting our production of exchangeable 
 wealth, does precisely the contrary. 
 
 Lastly, as to the action of Protectionist tariffs in 
 giving us the lion's share of the world's trade through 
 the operations of our one enormous advantage of un- 
 ta.xed raw materials, to which I have referred, it will be 
 useful to show hew in this respect Protection works, and 
 to adduce some figures which illustrate that working. 
 
 Let us take, for instance, the tariff of the United 
 States. It is a tariff which, on an average, imposes 
 duties of 46 per cent, ad valorem on imports. It is, I 
 believe, the highest in the world, if that of Russia does 
 not now hold that bad pre-eminence. How does that 
 tariff act on the competition between us and the States ? 
 If we take shipping, or woollen or cotton fabrics, or any 
 of the industries the products of which are charged with 
 duties on the raw material, we find that while their duties 
 on our products interfere with the trade with our cousins 
 on their own soil, the increase of cost which arises from 
 their taxed raw materials prevents them from competing 
 with us in any market but their own, and the consequence 
 is that while they kv.ep their domestic market of 
 58,000,000 to themselves, but only partially, they hand 
 over to us the other 1,400 millions of the human race. 
 Now, what is true of the United States is true of every
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 193 
 
 Other Protectionist country, and this goes far to show 
 how we have won the world's markets. 
 
 I give in illustration the following figures : — 
 
 I. A Statement of the Annual Average of the Exports of 
 Domestic Produce of the UNDERMENTiONEn Countrif.s 
 
 DURING THE FiVE YEARS 1880-4, AND THE AMOUNT OF THE 
 SAME FOR THE YeAR 1885. 
 
 
 Total Exports. 
 
 Per Head of Popu- 
 lation. 
 
 
 1880-4. 
 
 1885. 
 
 1880-4. 
 
 18S5. 
 
 United Kingdom 
 
 France 
 
 Germany ... 
 
 United States 
 
 £ 
 234,000,000 
 138,305,000 
 155,400,000 
 165,429,000 
 
 £' 
 213,044,000 
 123,524,000 
 143,015,000 
 151,392,000 
 
 £ S. d. 
 6 12 9 
 3 13 5 
 3 8 8 
 3 5 II 
 
 ;^S. d. 
 
 5 17 3 
 3 5 5 
 3 I I 
 2 14 I 
 
 From which table we see that in the commercial race 
 there is not even a good second to us. 
 
 2. A Statement of the Goods sold by the United Kingdom 
 and her rivals respectively, in 1885, in the markets of 
 France, Germany, and the United States. 
 
 /« t/ie Market of France. £ 
 
 The United Kingdom sold goods to the value of 21,484,000 
 Germany ditto ditto 15,560,000 
 
 United States ditto ditto 10,876,000 
 
 In the Market of Germany. 
 The United Kingdom sold goods to the value of 22,620,900 
 France ditto ditto 10,890,550 
 
 United States ditto ditto 6,088,150 
 
 In the Market of the United States. 
 The United Kingdom sold goods to the value of 27,340,400 
 France ditto ditto 11,387,000 
 
 Germany ditto ditto 12,648,000 
 
 Which shows that in these homes of Protection we obtain 
 the lion's share of the trade, and proves that foreign
 
 194 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 tariffs and bounties, instead of limiting our trade, foster 
 and protect it. 
 
 Foreign Competition. 
 
 Another of the principal causes of depression, accord- 
 ing to the " Four," is (28) : — 
 
 "Foreign competition, which is increasing in extent and in severity both 
 in our own and in neutral markets." 
 
 In calling attention to the instances where this 
 competition is severely felt, they say (52) : — 
 
 " In the case of countries like Germany, possessing in ample measure 
 the population and other resources required for successful manufacturing 
 enterprise, the adoption of a system of import duties on manufactures, and 
 even on primary articles of food, has not disqualitied them from successful 
 and growing competition with us in the home and colonial, as well as in 
 neutral markets." 
 
 While in (83) they say : — 
 
 " Fur;her, in neutral markets, such as our own Colonies and depen- 
 dencies, and especially in the East, we are beginning to feel the effects of 
 foreign competition in quarters where our trade formerly enjoyed a practical 
 monopoly." 
 
 Here we see some confusion of thought as to what 
 constitutes a "neutral" market. In (52) Colonial 
 markets are made out to be something different from 
 neutral ones, while in (83) they are stated to be the 
 same thing ; the truth being that a neutral market is 
 simply some third market competed in by two rivals. 
 
 But, passing by this inconsistency, what is it that the 
 " Four " wish to inculcate when they state that import 
 duties on manufactures, and even on primary articles of 
 food, have not disqualified the Germans from successful 
 and growing competition with us ? Are we to understand 
 that duties on manufactures disqualify for competition 
 abroad .? The natural inference is that they do but if
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 195 
 
 that is what is meant, here it is in flagrant contradiction 
 to what they say in other parts of their Report (60, 62, 
 64, ^6, 128 to 133) as to the effect of Protective duties 
 strengthening the " producer " for foreign competition. 
 The reader will find paragraphs 128 to 133 quoted at 
 length under "Remedies," 2, p. 215, where they are fully 
 discussed, and I will not refer to them further here. 
 The truth is, as I have shown under " Tariffs and 
 Bounties," that Protective duties hamper and restrict 
 the foreign trade of Protected countries, and that, there- 
 fore, if such a country as Germany competes with us 
 successfully it is not in consequence of such duties but 
 in spite of them, and in consequence of the existence of 
 other factors in production as regards cost. Among 
 these factors are the restrictions which exist here, but 
 not in other countries, as to the hours of labour and the 
 time during which machinery may be continuously 
 worked ; the greater cost of transport here than abroad ; 
 the readier and cheaper access to certain markets on the 
 Continent enjoyed by our rivals ; the excessive royalties 
 exacted by our mineral owners ; the superior education 
 and diligence shown by foreigners, and their greater 
 readiness to adapt their wares to men's wants and wishes 
 the " Four " themselves saying (84) : — 
 
 "A reference to the reports from abroad will show that in every 
 quarter of the world the perseverance and enterprise of the Germans is 
 making itself felt. In tiie actual production of commodities we have now- 
 few, if any, advantages over them ; and in knowledge of the markets of 
 the world, and readiness to accommodate themselves to local tastes or 
 idiosyncrasies, they have evidently gained ground upon us." 
 
 Against all which we have only our one great 
 advantage — that of untaxed raw materials ! 
 
 Here I would just interject a few observations as to 
 the difference between foreign competition in our home 
 
 N 2
 
 196 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 market and in neutral markets. If it could be confined 
 to our home market it would not restrict our aggregate 
 trade, because every import here would, directly or 
 indirectly, generate a corresponding export, whereas 
 successful competition in a neutral market would 
 destroy our exports to, and our imports from, that 
 market. The lesson which successful competition in 
 our home market teaches us is, therefore, that there is 
 something wrong somewhere, in our machinery or our 
 methods, or in one or other of those points of difference 
 between ourselves and our rivals to which I have re- 
 ferred. When our markets are invaded, not in an 
 occasional way by forced sales arising from distress, but 
 in the ordinary course of trade, we have to take to heart 
 this fact, that if foreigners can undersell us here where 
 our wares have not to incur the cost of sea carriage, 
 while theirs have to incur that cost, they can still more 
 easily do so in neutral markets to which that cost has to 
 be paid by both parties. 
 
 One thing is certain, and that is that whatever we do 
 we shall not, and cannot, avoid foreign competition, and 
 that unless we meet it with knowledge as well as deter- 
 mination, we shall inevitably fail. Professor Huxley, in 
 a letter to The Times of January 20th, respecting 
 the proposed Imperial Institute, expresses a desire to 
 see it so constituted that it may " supply a foundation 
 for that organisation of our industries which the changed 
 conditions of the times render indispensable to their pros- 
 perity," and he goes on to say : — " I do not think I am far 
 wrong in assuming that we are entering, indeed have al- 
 ready entered, upon the most serious struggle for exist- 
 ence to which this country has ever been committed." 
 
 The way in which this struggle for existence should,
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 197 
 
 in the opinion of the " Four," be met, is discussed in the 
 
 chapter headed " Remedies." 
 
 FoREKiN Investments. 
 
 In paragraph 59 the " Four" say: — 
 
 "An important effect of the combined influence of foreign tariffs anti 
 free imports is to discourage and lessen the investment of capital in the de-' 
 velopment of our own agriculture and manufactures, and to stimulate and 
 increase its investment in foreign land and securities, and foreign industrial 
 enterprises; the inevitable consequence being that a large and increasing 
 amount of food, clothing, and other commodities, is imported in payment of 
 income due to owners of foreign investments here resident, and therefore 
 without a corresponding ex|jort of the productions of our own industries. 
 This directly operates to limit the employment of labour in this country. 
 We think this important feature in our economic position has not hitherto 
 received the attention it deserves." 
 
 I think so too, but not in the sense of the " Four." 
 When we recollect what is involved in an investment of 
 British capital abroad, it is difficult to comprehend the 
 state of mind which could give utterance to such a mass 
 of fallacies and absurdities as are contained in this 
 paragraph. An investment of British capital abroad 
 means, in the first instance, an export of the material 
 products of our home industries, or of labour or services 
 not embodied in material products. If the investment 
 takes the form of a loan to a government, or to a cor- 
 poration, or consists in the making of railways, etc., as 
 is the case with the bulk of our foreign investments, no 
 return of the capital is made until the loan is repaid, or 
 the railways, etc., are sold to some foreign person. In 
 the meantime, however, those among us who own these 
 investments, receive their annual interest, which comes 
 here in the shape of goods, which the " Four " describe 
 as " a large and increasing amount of food, clothing, and 
 other commodities." 
 
 Before I make any further remark on the extra-
 
 I9S 
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 ordinary views which the " Four " hold as to the nature 
 of our foreign investments, and of the part they play in 
 our commercial life, I append three sets of figures : — 
 I. An Estimate of British Investments in Colonial Se- 
 curities ; 2. An Estimate of Interest paid Annually by 
 each Colony to Home Investors : which two tables 
 appear in the Economist of the nth June, with editorial 
 remarks. 3. A Table laid before the Commission by 
 Sir Algernon West, C.B., Chairman of the Board of 
 Inland Revenue, showing the Income Tax Collections 
 on our foreign holdings, 1873 to 1884. 
 I. Estimate of British Investments in Colonial Securities, 
 
 
 I.I) 
 
 121 
 OnRailways. 
 
 13) 
 
 U) 
 
 (5) 
 
 
 On Govern- 
 
 Provincial, 
 City. 
 
 Harbour, 
 
 On B.inking, 
 
 Mortg;tge, 
 and Agency. 
 
 On Other 
 
 On Total 
 
 
 .nent Loans. 
 
 Investments. 
 
 Securities. 
 
 
 
 Gas, &c. 
 
 
 
 
 Australasia : — 
 
 £ 
 
 £> 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 New South Wales 
 
 40,000,000 
 
 1,200 coo 
 
 
 
 77,000,000 
 
 New Zealand 
 
 32,000,000 
 
 5,500,000 
 
 
 
 58.500,000 
 
 Queensland 
 
 22,000,000 
 
 200,000 
 
 
 
 36,cxx>,ooo 
 
 South Australia 
 
 19,000,000 
 
 
 - 60.000,00c 
 
 6o,cxx>,ooo - 
 
 30,000 000 
 
 Tasmania ... 
 
 4,003,000 
 
 1,100,000 
 
 
 
 9,500,000 
 
 Victoria 
 
 31,500,000 
 
 3,000,000 
 
 
 
 67,000, cxx> 
 
 Western Australia 
 
 1,250,000 
 
 
 
 
 2,700,000 
 
 Fiji 
 
 250,000 
 
 
 
 
 300,000 
 
 Total Australasia 
 
 1 50,000,000 
 
 11,000,000 
 
 60,000,001; 
 
 60,000,000 
 
 281,000, CX)0 
 
 India* 
 
 1 1 5,000,-- 00 
 
 100,000,000 
 
 ) 
 
 
 272,000,000 
 
 Ceylon 
 
 2,300,000 
 
 100,000 
 
 > io,ooo,ooc 
 
 50 000,000 
 
 5,000,000 
 
 Straits, North Borneo, &c 
 
 100,000 
 
 500,000 
 
 
 i,oco,ooo 
 
 Cape of Good Hope 
 
 22 000,000 
 
 1,500,000 
 
 r 4,000,000 
 
 j 6 000,000 
 
 32,500,000 
 
 Natal 
 
 3.700,000 
 
 
 ( 1,000,000 
 
 5,700,000 
 
 Canadian Dominion 
 
 35,000,000 
 
 65,000,000 
 
 10,000 000 
 
 25,000,000 
 
 i35,cxx),coo 
 
 Newfoundland 
 
 
 400,000 
 
 
 100,000 
 
 500000 
 
 West Indies and Guiana 
 
 2 000,000 
 
 1,000,000 
 
 2,000,00; 
 
 3,000,000 
 
 8,000,000 
 
 W. African Possessions 
 
 
 
 
 600, oco 
 
 600,000 
 
 Mauritius 
 
 700,000 
 
 200,000 
 
 1,500,00c 
 
 
 2,400,000 
 
 Other Possessions 
 
 (?) 
 
 100,000 
 
 
 2CO,000 
 
 300,000 
 
 Grand total 
 
 330,800,000 
 
 179,800,000 
 
 87,500,00c 
 
 145,900,000 
 
 744,000,000 
 
 As compared with our estimate of ;/|620,ooo,ooG, at the close of 1883, 
 the above shows an increase of from ;[^ 120, 000, 000 10^130,000,000, nearly 
 two-thirds of which has gone to Australasia. We have divided the 
 two Australasian estimates of ;i^6o,ooo,ooo in columns 3 and 4 between the 
 respective colonies in proportion to the population, with a bias in the case 
 • On the basis of ;C30,ooo,ooo in rupee paper being held here.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 199 
 
 of certain colonies in respect to the quantity of land taken up for settle- 
 ment, and their known productions. 
 
 The grand total, however, is enormous, and we believe that at this 
 date it exceeds the country's foreign investments. It, at the same time, must 
 be borne in mind that these figures do not attempt to show the entire amount 
 of joint stock capital (if that expression is sufficiently comprehensive) 
 embarked in colonial enterprise, for purely colonial holdings must, in the 
 aggregate, reach to hundreds of millions more. If it were ascertained that 
 in this way the aggregate of such securities raised in, or for, the colonies 
 reached, or even exceeded, ;{^ 1,000, 000, 000, there need not be surprise. 
 But, at the same time, it is this ;[f744,ooo,ooo, or thereabouts, which 
 constitutes the main external liability of these colonies. There are in 
 addition large amounts of home, mercantile and business capital sunk in 
 the colonies, private investments in land, and so on, of which we shall 
 attempt no estimates ; but it must be admitted that these are comparatively 
 small beside the above remarkable figures. Up )n them the colonies are at 
 the present time paying annually to the mother country in interest nearly 
 ;^35,oco,ooo; and with the growth of those securities, this interest also 
 steadily grows. 
 2. Estimate of Interest Paid Annually by each Colony to 
 Home Investors. 
 
 
 
 ,,i 
 
 
 (I) 
 
 (3) 
 
 14) 
 
 (5) 
 
 
 On Govern- 
 ment 
 
 On 
 Pr 
 
 Railways, 
 City. 
 
 On Banking, 
 Mortgage, 
 and Agency 
 
 On 
 Other Invest- 
 
 On 
 
 Total 
 
 
 Securities. 
 
 Harbour. Gas. 
 
 ments. 
 
 Securities. 
 
 
 
 
 
 &c. 
 
 Companies. 
 
 
 
 
 at 
 
 £ 
 
 at 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 at 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 New South Wales ... 
 
 4 
 
 i,6oo,coo 
 
 4i 
 
 54 000 
 
 
 
 
 3 704 000 
 
 New Zealand ... 
 
 4J 
 
 1,400.000 
 
 5» 
 
 302,000 
 
 
 
 
 2,952,000 
 
 Queensland 
 
 4i 
 
 930,000 
 
 5 
 
 IO,OOJ 
 
 
 
 
 1,790,000 
 
 South Australia 
 
 4i 
 
 810,000 
 
 
 
 , (at 7%) 
 
 
 (at 4? %) 
 
 1,460,000 
 
 Tasmania 
 
 4i 
 
 170,000 
 
 4^ 
 
 50,000 
 
 4,2co,ooo 
 
 
 2,850,000 
 
 485,000 
 
 Victoria 
 
 4-i 
 
 1,340 000 
 
 5 
 
 150,000 
 
 
 
 
 3,410,000 
 
 Western Australia .. 
 
 4 
 
 50,000 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 112 000 
 
 Fiji 
 
 4I 
 
 11,000 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 14,000 
 
 Total Australasia ... 
 
 6,311,000 
 
 
 566,000 
 
 at 
 
 4,200,000 
 
 
 2,850,000 
 
 13,927,000 
 
 India 
 
 3l 
 
 4,300,000 
 
 6 
 
 6,000,000 
 
 ) 
 
 
 
 ( 
 
 13,080,000 
 
 Ceyl in 
 
 4i 
 
 98,000 
 
 
 2,000 
 
 [4 
 
 400,000 
 
 5 
 
 2,5oo,o.o-( 
 
 200 000 
 
 Straits and N. Borneo 
 
 
 4,000 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 ( 
 
 24,000 
 
 Cape of Good Hope . . 
 
 Natal _ ... ... _ ... 
 
 4^ 
 4i 
 
 990.000 
 166,000 
 
 5^ 
 
 82,000 
 
 ) 
 
 160,000 
 
 3J 
 
 240,C00 j 
 
 1,378,000 
 260,000 
 
 Canadian Dominion ... 
 
 4 
 
 1,400,000 
 
 ■3^ 
 
 2,275,000 
 
 6 
 
 600,000 
 
 4 
 
 1,000,000 
 
 5,275,000 
 
 Newfoundland 
 
 
 
 nil 
 
 
 
 
 nil 
 
 
 
 West Indies, &c. 
 
 43 
 
 87,00c 
 
 5 
 
 50,000 
 
 6 
 
 120,000 
 
 5 
 
 150,000 
 
 407,000 
 
 West African Pos 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 sessions 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2i 
 
 15.000 
 
 15,000 
 
 Mauritius 
 
 4i 
 
 33.000 
 
 5 
 
 10,000 
 
 6 
 
 9o,coo 
 
 
 
 133,0 
 
 Other Possessions 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 
 8 000 
 
 10.000 
 
 Grand Total 
 
 13,389,000 
 
 5 
 
 8,985,000 
 
 6 
 
 5 572,000 
 
 4I 
 
 6,863.000 
 
 34,709,000
 
 200 
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 It remains to be shown how these burdens affect the people of the 
 various colonies. In India the annual payment by way of interest to home 
 investors is only about 6d. per head ; in Canada we calculate it to be 
 ^i 2s. 6d. per head ; in New South Wales it is about ^^3 14s. ; and New 
 Zealand has to remit about £s P^^ head annually to the mother country as 
 interest on her borrowings and securities. 
 
 3. Table showing Income-Tax Collections on our Foreign 
 Holdings, 1873 to 1884. 
 
 AiDiiial Interest in Millions sterling. 
 
 
 Government 
 
 Other 
 
 Railways out 
 
 of tie 
 
 Uiiited Kin^cfofTi. 
 
 
 Total 
 
 
 Securities. 
 
 Securities. 
 
 A 
 
 inual Interest. 
 
 
 Million £,. 
 
 Million ;£. 
 
 f 
 
 Million I. 
 Cannot \x. dis- 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 Million i,. 
 
 1873 
 
 19-2 
 
 4-5 { 
 
 tinguished. 
 
 ~ 
 
 1877 
 
 19-1 
 
 7*4 
 
 17 
 
 
 28-2 
 
 1879 
 
 189 
 
 7-2 
 
 2-4 
 
 
 28-5 
 
 1880 
 
 193 
 
 7-2 
 
 2-1 
 
 
 28-6 
 
 1881 
 
 i9"3 
 
 80 
 
 26 
 
 
 299 
 
 1882 
 
 19-5 
 
 8-4 
 
 27 
 
 
 30-6 
 
 1883 
 
 19-9 
 
 8-8 
 
 3"3 
 
 
 32-0 
 
 1S84 
 
 20 "4 
 
 97 
 
 3-8 
 
 
 33-9* 
 
 An examination of the foregoing figures discloses 
 these, among other facts: — i. that our investments 
 abroad must be approaching the enormous sum of 2,000 
 millions sterling ; 2. that only a portion of the accruing 
 annual interest is remitted home, the remainder being 
 left to accumulate ; 3. that mankind is becoming more 
 and more indebted to us. 
 
 And yet, in the face of the facts which underlie this 
 stupendous exhibit — an exhibit which no nation on earth 
 can match — we are led to believe by the " Four " that in 
 some inscrutable way all this is a national misfortune ! 
 
 If so, however, the sooner we retrace our steps, and 
 cease to make foreign investments, the better it will be 
 for us ; but in that case let us see what would happen. 
 
 * The sum now receiv ible cannot be less than 36 millions.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 201 
 
 To cease our foreign investments is to cease exporting 
 our material products, and our labour, and so to decrease 
 the employment of our artisans, and our engineers, and 
 our bankers, and brokers, and at one blow to cut off our 
 carrying trade by sea and land. The enormous trade we 
 did in 1871-73, to which Fair Traders are fond of 
 referring as the climax of our prosperity, was the direct 
 outcome of the gigantic foreign loans and immense 
 foreign undertakings which were entered into on the 
 close of the Franco-German war. Are we to understand 
 that it was all a mistake, and that we ought never to 
 have made these foreign investments, and that the 
 annual interest which comes here in the shape of goods 
 is a national loss ? The idea is nonsensical, yet it is 
 what the " Four " imply when they talk of the large and 
 increasing amount of food, clothing, and other commodi- 
 ties which are imported in payment of the income due 
 to us directly operating to limit the employment of 
 labour in this country — the reason given being that these 
 imports come " without a corresponding export of the 
 productions of our own industries." 
 
 Of all the economic nonsense ever enunciated I think 
 this is the most extraordinary. To come from the 
 abstract to the concrete, we are told, almost in so many 
 words, that when a man has lent another, say £1,000 at 
 5 per cent, interest, he suffers a loss every half-year when 
 the interest becomes due, unless he takes something or 
 other in his hand of the value of ^25, and transfers it to 
 his debtor for the £2^ which the debtor has to pay him. 
 If such a transaction took place between two English- 
 men, the creditor would justly be considered a lunatic, 
 the nation, however, being neither richer nor poorer for it. 
 But if the creditor be British and the debtor be a
 
 202 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 foreigner, the £2^ worth of British goods exported 
 would be so much loss to the nation. 
 
 Not so, think the "Four"; they evidently consider 
 that an export is a profitable thing, not for what it brings 
 back in exchange, but for the employnnent of labour 
 which it involves. But the employment of labour is not 
 the reward of labour. An export is an expense of 
 capital and labour on our part which is incurred for the 
 sake of obtaining something else which is wanted. This 
 something else — this import — is the reward of that ex- 
 pense. If this something could be obtained without the 
 expense of the export the nation would be richer to that 
 extent. This is exactly the case as regards those imports 
 which come to us in payment of interest due to us from 
 abroad. We have no need to go to further expense in 
 order to get them. Our expense was incurred when we 
 made the loan, or the investment, and sent the capital 
 abroad in the shape of goods. 
 
 What we are getting in return is only a part payment 
 for those goods, and we shall not get full payment until 
 either the loan is redeemed or the investment is sold. 
 In what possible way, therefore, can a foreign investment 
 limit the employment of labour? As I have stated, in 
 order to constitute a foreign investment an export of 
 British goods must have been made ; and as foreign 
 countries are developed by this outlay of capital on our 
 part, they require from time to time more and more 
 capital, which goes out likewise in the shape of goods, etc. 
 This process, which has made us the great creditor 
 nation, will go on indefinitely, and the world will go on 
 increasing its indebtedness to us until something occurs 
 to put an end to it. 
 
 But what the "Four" object to is not what is exported
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 203 
 
 in this way, but what is imported in this way — what is 
 imported in the shape of annual interest. But what an 
 absurdity! An export of goods, say for i^ioo, is made 
 in the ordinary course of business, and, of course, brings 
 back ^100 of food, clothes, and other commodities. To 
 this the "Four" make no objection. If, however, only 
 £S worth of these articles comes back in a year's time 
 for interest, to that they have a great objection. It is an 
 injury to us, they say ; it limits employment. But i( £s 
 worth of imports limits employment, ^lOO worth will 
 still more limit it. The latter sum, if there be a particle 
 of force in their contention, would limit employment 
 just twenty times as much as the other. 
 
 Their contention, in truth, is simple nonsense. So 
 far from limiting employment, the imports of which they 
 complain, like every other import, stimulate and reward 
 labour from the time they leave the foreign shore to that 
 in which they are finally distributed and consumed 
 among us. Thirty-six million pounds' worth of these 
 imports now come to us in this way in addition to what 
 is necessary to be sent by foreigners to defray the 
 charges in bringing the goods here. 
 
 The first thing that happens to this ;i^36,ooo,ooo 
 worth of imports is that the State steps in and takes, at 
 the present rate of income-tax, no less a sum than 
 ;^ 1, 000,000, which is only a foretaste of the benefits they 
 confer on the community. Like the rest of our imports, 
 from which they cannot be distinguished, 80 or 90 
 per cent, of them consist of food and raw materials. 
 Like the rest also, they require shipping to bring them 
 to us, and this means freight to owners and employment 
 to shipbuilders. On arrival at our shores, these imports 
 have to be dealt with at our docks and warehouses, and
 
 204 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 they thus give profits to those who own them, and 
 employment and wages to all who do the work connected 
 with them. 
 
 Then they have to pass through the mart and the 
 sale room, and do something to enrich our merchants, 
 and brokers, and bankers, and all who work under them. 
 Then they have to be carted, and carried by railways, 
 and canals, to their various destinations, every operation 
 connected with the distribution involving employment, 
 and wages, and profits, and contributing to rents, taxes, 
 and rates, until the food is consumed, and the raw 
 materials are worked up in some new circle of industry. 
 
 But that is only half the story. The ;^6 millions 
 which these imports realise in our markets is paid 
 over to what the " Four " call " owners of foreign 
 investments here resident," as if they were a class by 
 themselves with interests different from, if not opposed 
 to, those of the rest of the community. These 
 '' owners," however, consist of every rank and class 
 of society, from the millionaire with his ;^5o,ooo a 
 year, down to the shopkeeper, the servant, and the 
 widow, with their £^ or their £io a year. These 
 " owners " distribute this money among the community 
 in providing house-room, food, and clothing for them- 
 selves, their families, and their dependents. There is 
 not a home trade, profession, or employment which is 
 not thereby enriched, every operation connected with 
 their expenditure contributing to profits, rents, wages, 
 taxes, and rates, benefiting alike the community and the 
 State. The simple truth is that if we follow out the 
 course of this expenditure everj/ farthing of this i6 
 imllions is eventually spent in wages. 
 
 Surely such facts as these ought to be patent to men
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 205 
 
 like the " Four," who put themselves forward to instruct 
 the nation in fiscal matters. Yet it is clear that they are 
 in profound ignorance in regard to them, or they would 
 not have penned the following nonsense (io6) : — 
 
 " We have shown that, whether the total wealth of the country has or 
 has not increased, its distribution has been undergoing great changes ; that 
 the result of these changes has been a relative increase of the wealth and 
 prosperity of owners of foreign investments, and importers of foreign 
 produce and manufactures, who, along with retail distributors and con- 
 sumers, have all profited at the expense of producers " 
 
 Fancy the exchanges of wealth and the consequent 
 employment of our people brought about by these im- 
 ports being at the expense of " producers," who are, in 
 truth, ninety-nine out of every hundred in the popula- 
 tion ! But, as I treat the subject fully at p. 217, under 
 the head of " Duties on Foreign Manufactures," I will 
 not pursue it here. 
 
 The blunder of the "Four" consists, of course, in 
 supposing that employment of labour is not going on 
 because we do not export the products, but consume 
 these at home. Let us imagine for a moment the state 
 of things which would be presented by the non-receipt of 
 the annual intei"est on our investments. Our shipping 
 would lose freights, our docks and warehouses would 
 stand empty, our railways and canals would lose traffic. 
 Mincing Lane, Mark Lane, and Lombard Street would 
 languish, our looms and factories would be silent, houses 
 and shops would stand unlet, horse breeding would 
 cease, every trade, profession, and industry would be 
 depressed, the State would lose revenue, and every in- 
 terest in the country would suffer. If the holders of 
 foreign investments are not to receive their due, of 
 course, foreign investments will cease to be made.
 
 2o6 FAIR TRADK UNMASKED. 
 
 London will no longer be the central mart and ex- 
 change of the world. There will be no more foreign 
 loans or investments of any kind. As things go on now 
 these loans are measured in money, but they actually 
 consist of exports of labour embodied in material ob- 
 jects, and of services of various kinds not so embodied. 
 To put a stop to them is to put a stop to the employ- 
 ment of our artisans, to shut up our mills and furnaces, 
 and to extinguish industry. 
 
 It also means putting a check on the development of 
 foreign countries, and of our colonies, which is taking 
 place by means of our capital, and to the raising up of 
 populations who become our customers and tributaries ; 
 and, consequently, to put a stop to the production of the 
 wealth which these populations will have to exchange 
 with us. 
 
 These considerations suffice to demonstrate that the 
 complaint of the " Four " as to our capital being em- 
 ployed abroad to the detriment of our home industries 
 is absurd. The truth is that we have no means so 
 effective for stimulating home industries as in fostering 
 foreign enterprise. But there are other considerations. 
 So long as human motive endures, capital and labour, 
 like every other commodity, will be taken and applied 
 wherever they find the best market, wherever they meet 
 with the largest return. There is no philanthropy about 
 either. To suppose that owners of capital will employ 
 it in enterprises which bring little or no profit, or entail 
 certain loss, and that labourers will not seek the more 
 remunerative employment, is ridiculous. Men must be 
 very differently constituted before such things can come 
 to pass. Of all countries in the world ours is that in 
 which capital is most redundant, in which of all others
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 207 
 
 it is most seeking outlets for employment. If the outlet 
 be abroad, that is only a proof that there is no equal 
 opening for it at home. When the capitalist, for 
 instance, leaves off growing wheat or cattle at home at a 
 loss, and turns his capital to where they can be grown 
 at a profit, he goes to work in one of these two ways, or 
 possibly in both ways. He sets to work by means of 
 the mine and the factory, and makes something which, 
 for a given quantity of capital and labour, will exchange 
 abroad for a larger quantity of wheat and cattle, than 
 the same quantity of capital and labour expended at 
 home in agriculture would procure ; or, he sends his 
 capital abroad to buy land, to make railwa}^s, docks, or 
 what not, and thus raise the wheat and the cattle which 
 are to be exchanged for our home productions. 
 
 In what way, I ask, is the community injured by 
 such a process .-' A class may be injured, it is true, but 
 the community is enriched. Displacement of capital 
 and labour takes place, but that is going on always the 
 world over, and is the inevitable concomitant of human 
 progress. Our agriculturists, so far as wheat-growing 
 and cattle-rearing are concerned, suffer, but as before 
 stated, the community as a whole, is richer for the 
 process. As regards wheat in particular, we now 
 obtain with certainty, by means of free imports, four 
 loaves of bread from wheat grown abroad where we 
 should otherwise obtain only three with uncertainty, and 
 we do so by means of those foreign investments of which 
 the " Four " complain. As regards our manufactures, so 
 far from the investment of capital in them being dis- 
 couraged by all this, the very contrary is the truth, 
 investment is stimulated, labour is drawn from agricul- 
 ture where it is not wanted into other occupations where
 
 2o8 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 it is wanted, and thus obtains a higher reward than it 
 otherwise would, while employment is found, not only 
 for the migrating agriculturist, but for the greater part of 
 that increasing population which is more and more 
 pressing on us, and which is one of the greatest 
 difficulties with which we have to deal. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 REMEDIES. 
 
 Cotintetvailim^ Ditty on Sui^ar. — Fallacies — Colonial Growers and Home 
 Refiners would Gain — The Community would Suffer — Figures— In- 
 significance of Home-refining Interest. 
 
 Duties on Foreign Manufactures. — Keeping out Foreign Goods giving 
 Increased Employment to Labour — Fallacies — Producers and Con- 
 sumers — True Definition — Competition in Home Market— Protective 
 Duties cause Decreased Production — Return Trade created by Imports 
 overlooked — Mr. Ecroyd and Mr. W. J. Harris ; ;^24O,O0O worth of 
 Foreign Carpentry — Benefits of Foreign Trade — Competition in 
 Neutral Markets — If we cannot Compete at Home we cannot 
 Compete Abroad — Do Duties keep out Foreign Goods? — Last Annual 
 Report of United States Secretary to the Treasury— No Advantage in 
 keeping out Foreign Goods — Natural and Artificial Advantages — 
 Fallacies — Inconsistencies — The " Four's " Pet " Producer" in Pos- 
 session of Home Market through Protection Selling under Cost Price 
 Abroad — Prices — Profits — Wages — Only the Monopoly Owners Gain 
 — Sole Way to Protect Labour — If One Industry Protected all should 
 be — Cannot Protect Manufactures without Protecting Agriculture — 
 Many Industries cannot be Protected — Buying in the Cheapest and 
 Selling in the Dearest Market. 
 
 Discriminating Duties against Foreign Food Products. — Our Trade with 
 the United States and Australia — The United States Tariff offering a 
 Bribe to Capital and Labour — Fallacies — Australia Buying of us more 
 per Head than the States — Proposed Policy Disastrous — Our Food 
 Supply — Destroying a Trade of 114 millions for one of 27 millions — 
 Colonial Trade not more Profitable than Foreign Trade — Cultivation 
 Diverted from Fertile to less Fertile Soils — Distressful State of Things
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASK FIX 209 
 
 at Home — Uetaliition provoked — Sliould lose Benefit of Most 
 KavoLiied Naliuii Treatment — Protectionist Nations might Eventually 
 offer to Trade on Free Trade Basis— What Then ?— Fiscal Federation 
 a Dream, 
 
 We have seen in the prcceduig chapter the views which 
 the " Four " take of our industrial position, and of the 
 nature and causes of the depression. We have now to 
 take into consideration the remedies which they propose 
 in order to cure the evils which, in their opinion, exist. 
 After making certain recommendations, they proceed 
 to say (122) : — 
 
 " The above recommendations, though referring lo matters in them- 
 selves important, leave untouched the greatest and most permanent causes 
 of the depression, which are undoubtedly, as before stated (paragraphs 28, 
 58-64, 76, 81, 82 ), the action of foreign bounties and tariffs and the grow 
 ing effect of directly or indirectly subsidised foreign competition." 
 
 After stating the difficulties with which, in their 
 opinion, our producers have to contend (122, 123) in 
 consequence of these causes, they go on to say (124) : — 
 
 "The depression, then, so far as it arises from the permanent and 
 growing causes just named, cannot fail to recur, after each brief interval of 
 relief, with equal or increasing force; and this must be endured unless ihe 
 nation shall determine to counterwork by active measures the disturbing 
 influences which are artificially produced by foreign legislation." 
 
 They accordingly propose three remedies : — 
 
 " I. A countervailing duty (125) of one farthing per lb., or 2s. 4d. 
 
 per cwt., on all foreign refined sugar and raw beetroot 
 
 sugar. 
 "2. The imposition of duties (129) equal to 10 or 15 per cent., 
 
 ad valorem, upon all manufactures imported from foreign 
 
 countries. 
 "3. Specitic duties (139), equal to about 10 per cent, on a low range 
 
 of values, imposed upon the import from foreign countries of 
 
 those articles of food which India and the colonies are well 
 
 able to produce." 
 
 I will now proceed to examine these proposals, 
 o
 
 2IO FAIR TRADE UNiMASKED. 
 
 I.— A Countervailing Duty on Foreign Sugar. 
 
 The " Four " introduce the subject as follows (125) : — 
 
 "The most conspicuous — we do not say the most important — case is 
 that of the sugar bounties. The abolition of these bounties is admitted to 
 be desirable, for it has been the object of repeated efforts on the part of 
 the Foreign Office. So long as the bounties are maintained, therefore, it 
 is evident that the imposition of a countervailing import duty must be 
 desirable. Its effect would be to restore to the producers of sugar in our 
 colonies and in India, and to the refiners in this country, the just right of 
 competition on practically equal terms, and to transfer to our own Ex- 
 chequer the export bounties given by foreign nations. The position of the 
 British consumer would be the same as if we had by negotiation obtained 
 an equivalent reduction of the bounties, whilst in his quality of tax- payer 
 he would be a gainer by the diversion of foreign money into our Exchequer, 
 so long as the bounty-receiving importations continued. 
 
 " A countervailing duty of one farthing per lb., or 2s. 4d. per cwt., on 
 all foreign refined sugar and raw beetroot sugar would substantially effect 
 the purpose." 
 
 This is one of the most remarkable paragraphs in 
 the Report. It equals, if it does not excel, No. 59, 
 quoted in the preceding chapter, which deals with the 
 effects supposed to flow from our foreign investments. 
 
 The first remark I have to make is that if, as is 
 stated, our Foreign Office has made any serious efforts 
 to obtain the abolition of these bounties, it has done an 
 unwise thing, and has shown how little it understands 
 their nature and working, and how impossible it is for 
 foreign Governments to meddle with them so long as a 
 Protective policy is pursued. The)- have done an unwise 
 thing, for, if Government interference were justifiable, or 
 called for, in this case, it should have been exercised to 
 beseech the foreigner not only to persevere in his 
 bounties, but, if possible, to increase them, so as to 
 provide us with sugar for nothing ! How any sane 
 man can persuade himself, and try to persuade others,
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 211 
 
 that to raise the price of anything which this nation buys 
 and imports can be a benefit to the community passes 
 ordinary comprehension. Yet this is exactly what the 
 " Four " have done, and they give the reasons on which 
 their recommendations are founded, and which show 
 that what they propose is an unjust thing. 
 
 We are told that countervailing duties would restore 
 to the sugar producers in the colonies, and in India, and 
 to the refiners in this country, their just right of com- 
 petition on practically equal terms. Whether any just 
 right of this sort exists I will not now inquire. It is 
 sufficient to say, in answer to this claim, that colonial 
 sugar-growers and home refiners have no more just 
 right of competition on practically equal terms than our 
 agricultural and mining producers have. These latter, 
 as I have shown, work under competition fed by 
 direct and indirect bounties, to many of which we our- 
 selves contribute by the expenditure of our capital 
 abroad, while the colonies and India themselves benefit 
 largely from this outlay on our part. Then, as to our 
 home refiners, why are they to be considered in prefer- 
 ence to other home industries of infinitely greater 
 importance, which are also subject to foreign com- 
 petition ? The " Four," it is true, endeavour to draw a 
 distinction between the competition arising from natural 
 advantages and that which comes from artificial aid. 
 But nothing can be more futile. Our agriculture, as 
 regards the growing of cereals, for instance, suffers from 
 both kinds. They have to fight against natural fertility 
 and steam communication. Who shall say how much 
 is to be put down to each of these .'' In such a case as 
 that, and in a score of others that could be mentioned, 
 who is to follow out into their remote effects the 
 o 2
 
 212 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 influences of what may be considered indirect bounties on 
 cultivation, or manufactures, and legislate so that every 
 industry shall be properly weighted and balanced ? The 
 thing is obviously impossible. The interests of the 
 community as a whole are paramount in all cases, and 
 when the interest of any class comes in conflict with 
 them, the class interest must yield. 
 
 Now, the interests of the community are in direct 
 conflict with those of colonial growers and home re- 
 finers of sugar. These desire that the price of sugar 
 shall be raised. The community, for many reasons, 
 desire that it shall be cheap. The "Four" say that so 
 long as the bounties are maintained it is evident that 
 the imposition of a countervailing import duty must be 
 desirable. Desirable by whom .-' Not on the part of 
 the community. Their interest for many reasons is to 
 get their sugar as cheaply as possible. The parties by 
 whom it is desired are the colonial growers and the 
 home refiners. What the public would lose they would 
 pocket. 
 
 The " Four," however, tell us that the position of the 
 British consumer would be the same as if we had by ne- 
 gotiation obtained an equivalent reduction of the bounties, 
 whilst in his quality of tax-payer he would be a gainer by 
 the diversion of foreign money into our Exchequer. Both 
 these assertions are false. The position of the British 
 consumer would not be the same. The British consumer 
 not only eats or drinks sugar in simple forms, but uses it 
 as a component material in a variety of industries which, 
 if the present supply were stopped, or the present price 
 were raised, would cease to be carried on. Of the 
 industries which are benefited by cheap and plentiful 
 sugar may be mentioned biscuit-baking, confectionery.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASK F.D. 213 
 
 brewing, jam-making, and even cattle-feeding, all of 
 which would be interfered with if the sugar trade as 
 it exists now were interfered with. It is false, therefore, 
 to say that the position of the British consumer would 
 be the same under a countervailing duty. But assuming 
 it to be true, why should he want to go back to dearer 
 sugar ? He would only have to pay more for the article 
 than he does now, and what possible benefit could that 
 be to him ? But, say the " Four," he would gain in his 
 quality of tax-payer, by the diversion of foreign money 
 into our Exchequer. The "Four" must have credited 
 the British consumer with an enormous amount of 
 ignorance and credulity when they penned such a state- 
 ment as that. 
 
 Let us see how the 2s. 4d. per cwt. duty as proposed 
 by them would work. On their own showing, the price 
 of sugar would be raised, for they speak of the British 
 consumer recouping as a tax-payer what he loses as a 
 consumer. But, if the price be raised, and it cannot be 
 raised less than the amount of the tax, how can it be 
 said that the foreigner would pay the tax ? He would 
 recover in increased price what he had paid at the Custom 
 House. The argument is a tissue of absurdities, and the 
 truth is that the 2s. 4.6. per cwt. would come out of the 
 pockets of the British public. 
 
 During the last two years we have imported on the 
 average about 23I million cwt., of which about 20 mil- 
 lions were foreign, and about 3I millions colonial sugar. 
 Under the stimulus of the proposed duty these propor- 
 tions would of course be altered ; more sugar would come 
 from our dependencies and less would come from abroad. 
 If we assume that the proportions would become 7 mil- 
 lion cwt. of colonial to i6l of foreign sugar, it is clear
 
 214 ^AIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 that out of the ^^2,741,000 which the British consumer 
 would have to pay in the increase of price, only 
 ;{^i,925,ooo would go into the Exchequer, while the 
 remaining ;^8 16,000 would go into the pockets of 
 colonial growers and home refiners. The British con- 
 sumer, therefore, would not gain as a tax-payer as 
 much as he would lose as consumer, to say nothing 
 of the incidence of the tax on the various classes 
 of the community, which, as in all indirect taxation, 
 would be sure to be unjust, to the detriment of the 
 poor. The argument of the "Four" is at the best a 
 hollow and deceptive one. 
 
 No section of the community has of late years been 
 more clamorous for Protection than our sugar refiners. 
 From the noise they have made some people have been 
 led to believe that they constitute a great interest, 
 coming, in importance, next after agriculture, mining, 
 and manufactures, and that if foreign competition were 
 allowed to supplant it, national interests would grievously 
 suffer. The following facts may tend to dispel the 
 delusion they have so perseveringly laboured to create. 
 In the first place, there are in the United Kingdom 
 less than 30 firms engaged in sugar refining; the 
 value of their plant does not exceed ^^2,500,000 ; and 
 the number of persons in their employ all told is under 
 5,000. The demand of this insignificant section, there- 
 fore, is no less than this, that the British nation shall in 
 its favour reverse the settled fiscal policy of the last forty 
 years, and take up the discarded doctrines of Protection. 
 They ask that British consumers shall be saddled with 
 2h millions sterling annual extra cost on their sugar — a 
 sum equal to the capital value of their whole plant — 
 regardless of the risk the nation would run of reprisals
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 215 
 
 from other countries in the shape of tariff wars, and of 
 the fact that we should forfeit in many cases the right 
 we now enjoy from the most favoured nation clause in 
 our commercial treaties ; and regardless also of the dis- 
 organisation which would take place in those various 
 industries I have named, one of which alone employs 
 T 2,000 hands, which depend on a plentiful and a cheap 
 supply of sugar. 
 
 I have spoken of 2h millions as the annual loss 
 which would accrue to the British consumer if the duty 
 proposed were levied. There is another aspect of the 
 question, however, which has to be considered which is 
 still more serious. It is certain that if the system of 
 bounties came to an end through the break-up of 
 Protection, we should lose more than this sum. It is 
 highly probable that we now obtain our sugar under 
 these bounties at ^d. per lb. less than we should other- 
 wise do, and that if the bounties were abolished, we 
 should have to pay the foreigner a sum of from 5 to 
 6 millions per annum more than we do now. For us 
 to try and alter the present state of things, therefore, 
 would be an act of insanity. 
 
 So much for remedy No. i as propounded by the 
 Four Evangelists of the Gospel of Scarcity. 
 
 2. — Duties on Foreign Manufactures. 
 The " Four" say (128) : — 
 
 " We have already described (paragraphs 60, 62, 64, 76) the way in 
 which tlie high Protective duties levied by foreign nations, whose industries 
 are almost or quite on a par with our own as regards cheapness of produc- 
 tion, constitute in effect a bounty upon their exports of the Protected 
 articles. So far as this affects their competition with our producers in 
 neutral markets we have, of course, no direct remedy in our liands. Of 
 the possibility of applying an effectual, though indirect, remedy, we shall 
 have hereafter to speak."
 
 2l6 FAIR TRADK UNMASKED. 
 
 (129). "But as regards their practically subsidised competition in our 
 Imme market, which is doing so much to destroy the fair profits of pro- 
 ducers and to diminish the employment of labour, we have at command an 
 effectual remedy. The imposition of duties eqnal to lo or 15 per cent., 
 at valorem, upon all manufactures imported from foreign countries, would- 
 we believe, sufficiently countervail both the bounty-creating effect of their 
 I'rotective tariffs and the unenviable economy of production obtained 
 through longer hours of labour and less effective inspection and regulation 
 of its conditions. For our aim ought not to be to countervail any natural 
 and legitimate advantage which foreign manufactures may possess, but 
 simply to prevent our own industries being placed at an artificial disad- 
 vantage by the interference of either home or foreign legislation, and to 
 replace them, as nearly as may be, in the position in which they would 
 have found themselves but for such interference." 
 
 (130). "Such duties would undoubtedly, to a considerable extent, 
 keep foreign manufactures out of our home market, and thereby give 
 increased employment to our home industries. But in this country so 
 insufficient is the p'-esent employment of the available labour and agencies 
 of production, and so great is the pressure of capital seeking investment 
 and labour seeking employ, that in our opinion neither prices, profits, nor 
 wages could possibly be raised by the operation of such duties above the 
 lowest remunerative level." 
 
 (131). " It by no means follows, however, that great advantage would 
 not accrue to the producer and to those employed by him. On the 
 contrary, the fuller and more regular output— upon a given basis of invest- 
 ments and fixed expenses — secured by the exclusion of that surplus produc- 
 tion of Protected foreign industries which periodically floods this, the only 
 duty-free market, would reduce the cost of our manufactures in the most 
 liealthful manner by the distribution of fixed charges over a lar^e annual 
 production. Our producers would thus be strengthened for competition 
 in neutral markets, not by a reduction of the wages and comforts of their 
 workpeople — which must inevitably further depress the home trade— but 
 by the sound economical method of full and steady production, which 
 is beneficial alike to employers and employed." 
 
 (132). "For it must be remembered that the adoption of the system of 
 Protection by all foreign countries has not merely left our producers, alone 
 amongst all others, destiiute of an artificial stimulus, that they might well 
 have endured without complaint, but it has at last brought upon them an 
 unnatural and practically subsidised competition. From this they have 
 none the less right to be defended, because, in the presence of general, or 
 even partially-prevailing Free Trade, they would be the last to desire Pro- 
 tection of any kind." 
 
 (133)- "The measures we have indicated would counterwork the effect? 
 ol Protection, and strengthen the position of our producers, directly in the
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 21/ 
 
 home market, and indirectly, though substantially, in neutral markets. It 
 is, of course, out of our power to obtain more free access to the Protected 
 markets of countries like the United States, France, and Germany them- 
 selves. In past years we had little occasion to regret this, or to trouble 
 ourselves about it. Their course of action did not harm us so long as we 
 were able, in spite of it, to obtain full employment for all our available 
 libour. To buy everything in the cheapest market— though not permitted 
 to sell in the dearest — may be the best policy, so long as we can find other 
 full and equally remunerative employment for the home enterprise and 
 industry which we displace in so doing, but no longer, for, from the 
 moment in which the combined effect of Protective tariffs abroad and 
 foreign competition at home limits our market so as to cramp the free and 
 full exercise of our industries, it begins to choke the living fountain of our 
 wealth, our social well-being, and our national strength. We think the 
 evidence is conclusive that during the past ten or twelve years this point 
 has been reached, and that the adoption of a national policy suited to the 
 changed conditions is imperatively demanded." 
 
 Before I attempt to do justice to these six para- 
 graphs, which I cannot but think, as an enunciation 
 of economic doctrine, transcend in absurdity No 59 
 which I have quoted under " Foreign Investments," 
 p. 197, and No. 125, under " A CountervaiHng Duty on 
 Foreign Sugar," p. 210, I must endeavour to fix in the 
 reader's mind the meaning which the " Four " attach 
 to the term "producer," which occurs so often, not only 
 in these paragraphs, but all through the Report. 
 
 I will first, however, recall the exact economic 
 meaning of the terms : — 
 
 Production and Consumption — Producers and Con- 
 sumers. — Production is the bringing of anything into 
 the market and offering it for sale. It comprises what 
 is known as Distribution, and includes every act of those 
 who transport, or trade, as well as of those who mine, 
 or farm, or manufacture, and every exertion, whether 
 of body or mind, which adds to the aggregate of enjoy- 
 able wealth, or increases the sum of human knowledge or
 
 2l8 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 happiness. Everyone is a Producer, therefore, who is 
 not a purely idle person. 
 
 Consumption is the correlative of Production, and 
 everyone is a Consumer. 
 
 Production and Consumption taken together consti- 
 tute Exchange. 
 
 To speak of producers and consumers, therefore, as 
 if they constituted two sharply-defined classes, whose 
 interests are antagonistic, is a fatal error. This error the 
 "Four" commit. In an endeavour to show that low 
 prices are prejudicial to the interests of the community 
 they say {^'j) : — 
 
 " The production of almost all classes of coinmodiiies has continued to 
 increase, and there can be no doubt that the price obtainable for them has 
 tended to diminish. This tendency, however advantageous it may at first 
 sight appear to the consumer, lessens the reward of those engaged in 
 produciion ; and, considered in its effect upon agriculture, as well as upon 
 manufacturing and mining industries, in diminishing the value of com- 
 modities, whether for home consumption or export, must have imposed a 
 serious check on the general prosperity of the country." 
 
 This paragraph is also a gem in its way. How in- 
 creased production and low prices, which in this con- 
 nection are only other names for plenty and cheapness, 
 can. lessen the reward of those engaged in production, 
 that is, of ninety-nine persons out of every htmdred 
 in the community, and impose a serious check on the 
 general prosperity of the country, is beyond ordinary 
 comprehension. The fallacy consists in confusing the 
 terms " price " and "value." "Price" is an expression 
 of the relation which any economic quantity possesses 
 with regard to money — it is the " value " in terms of 
 money of that economic quantity. There may be a 
 general fall in prices, but there cannot possibly be a 
 general fall in values.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKF.D. 219 
 
 But, to return to the meaning which the "Four" 
 attach to the term " Producer." It is clear from the six 
 paragraphs under review that in their purview the pro- 
 ducer is the capitahst, or employer of labour. In (129) 
 we read of " the fair profits of producers " and the " em- 
 ployment of labour." In (131) we see "the producer 
 and those employed by him." If we go back to (38) 
 we are told that — 
 
 " Thus far, however, those who conduct and superintend productive 
 industries, and those who own the property and capital employed in 
 connection with them, have borne the chief burdea of difficulty and loss. 
 . . The position of the employers of labour is, therefore, of the 
 deepest interest, since upon it depends, in the long run, both that of ihe 
 owners of property and that of the artisans and labourers." 
 
 And in (132) we are told that : 
 
 "Our producers are left alone amongst all others destitute of an arti- 
 ficial stimulus." 
 
 It is clear, therefore, that the class whose interests they 
 have at heart when they speak of " producers " is that of 
 capitalists and employers of labour, and not that of 
 99 per cent, of our population, who are also producers, 
 and who deserve equal consideration. 
 
 I now go on to comment on the doctrines contained 
 in the six paragraphs. The " Four " speak of two sorts 
 of foreign competition to which their " producers " are 
 subjected — that which takes place in neutral markets, 
 and that which meets them at home. As regards the 
 former, they see no way of applying what they call a 
 direct remedy, but they see their way of applying an 
 indirect one, which, of course, is that differential treat- 
 ment of the food products of our colonies and depen- 
 dencies, which forms No. 3 of their remedies, and which 
 is dealt with in the followine section.
 
 220 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 With regard to competition in the home market 
 which, according to them, is doing so much to destroy 
 the fair profits of their " producers " and to diminish the 
 employment of labour, they propose the imposition of 
 lO or 15 per cent, ad valorem duties on all foreign 
 imported manufactures. But this is neither more nor 
 less than the re-establishment of Protection, and it will 
 now be my business to deal with the arguments brought 
 forward to induce us to revert to this discarded policy. 
 
 The first of these with which I shall deal is that 
 in (130):— 
 
 "Such duties would, to a considerable extent, undoubtedly keep 
 manufactures out of our home market, and thereby give increased employ- 
 ment to our home industries.'' 
 
 How so } How can a cessation of these imports, or 
 of foreign trade of any kind, increase our home indus- 
 tries? If foreign manufactures are excluded, which is 
 the aim and object of the " Four," similar articles will 
 liave to be made at home, it is true, but then other 
 industries which the foreign importations would have 
 set going would cease. Our artisans might possibly be 
 equally employed, but the reward of their labour would 
 be less, for the aggregate production of wealth would be 
 less, there would be less to be divided, and the community 
 would be injured. The largest aggregate production of 
 wealth can only be attained by the freest possible inter- 
 course between man and man, between nation and 
 nation, and anything which interferes with this intercourse 
 must necessarily lessen production. Protective duties 
 thus interfere. They divert Capital and Labour from 
 those industries which they would naturally take as being 
 the more profitable to others which are less profitable, 
 and, therefore, the proposals of the " Four," if carried
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 221 
 
 out, would not only decrease the sum of divisible wealth, 
 but would cause that lessened production to be more 
 unequally divided than it is now, by taking away from 
 the capital-owner a portion of his profits from the 
 labour-owner a portion of his earnings ; while the land- 
 owner or the monopoly-owner, as 1 shall show presently, 
 would be the only one who would profit. 
 
 Throughout the whole argument in these six para- 
 graphs, the " Four" ignore what they say in (58) — 
 
 " The conditions of international exchange aie inflexible ; we can 
 only, in the lon^^ run, buy as largely and as freely ::s we are [jermitted to 
 sell," 
 
 which is just as true of other nations as it is true of us, 
 and which tells us that foreigners can only buy of us if 
 they are allowed to sell to us, and that as their goods 
 constitute their purchasing power, for us to shut out 
 their goods, of whatever kind, is only to deprive our- 
 selves of a profitable exchange. 
 
 The wonderful manner in which the return trade 
 which follows from foreign imports which come here in 
 the ordinary course of business is steadily ignored by all 
 Fair Trade writers and speakers is remarkable. .\ 
 notable example is given in the little comedy which took 
 place between Mr. Ecroyd and Mr. W. J. Harris, when 
 the latter came before the Commission as a witness on 
 the 24th of March, 1886. 
 
 Mr. Harris, examined by Mr. Ecroyd (page 93) : — 
 
 "9773' ^ou look with apprehension, you have told us, upon the great 
 displacement of labour from employment in agriculture in this country? — 
 Yes, I do. 
 
 "9774' Are you aware that a similar displacement is going on with 
 regard to many other industries? — I see there are a great number of men 
 out of work in different parts of the country.
 
 222 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 "9775. Do -you happen to he aware of the fact that \vc import 
 carpentry to the amount of ^240,000 a year? — Yes. 
 
 "9776. And that half the value of that, at least, must be taken to be 
 labour? — I should think a considerable part of it. 
 
 "9777. Supposing that we take it as half, we are not believed to gain 
 an advantage in price by that import over what the like could be purchased 
 for at home, of more than 10 per cent.?— I have seen calculations confirm- 
 ing that view. 
 
 " 9778. That would give, would it not, a saving of ;!^24,ooo upon the 
 purchase ? — Yes ; I think that would be so. 
 
 "9779 It would, however, take away ;:^i20,ooo worth of wages from 
 the English labourer? — Yes. 
 
 "9780. Is not the fact that in that, as in many other cases which 
 might be mentioned, a far larger amount of skilled English labour is now 
 either totally unemployed or only partially employed, than would produce 
 the whole of what we import from abroad ? — I should think so. 
 
 "9781. Then the loss of wages would be ^^120,000 a year, to set 
 against a saving of ;f 24,000 a year? — Yes. 
 
 "9782. In that case we are losing five times as much as we save? — 
 Yes ; I think we have laid ourselves out, as a manufacturing nation, to 
 supply the wants of other countries as well as ourselves, and we must have 
 some defensive duty that will assist us to protect our own markets for our- 
 selves. 
 
 " 9783- I would put this one question of principle, applying to the dis- 
 placement of English labour and manufactures — is it not the fact that the 
 axiom of the advantage of buying in the cheapest market must be limited 
 by this one condition, that the labour which you displace in this country 
 shall be able to find a sufficient and equally remunerative employment ? — 
 Yes. I think it is most important for the working-classes of this country 
 that it should be so. 
 
 " 9784. And that condition has been totally left out of sight ? — I think 
 it has. 
 
 "9785. Do you apprehend any serious consequences from the growing 
 displacement of English labour ? — I do. 
 
 "9786. Do you recognise the economic difficulty which would arise 
 from the effect of this policy in displacing in so many directions English 
 labour which cannot find other steady or profitable employment ? — I do. 
 
 I shall have something to say presently with regard 
 to " the axiom of the advantage of buying in the 
 cheapest market " to which Mr. Ecroyd refers in question 
 9783, In the meantime, I will examine the doctrine
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 22 3 
 
 which both gentlemen hold with regard to the effect of 
 foreign imports on our labour market. 
 
 They are both agreed that if foreign carpentry is im- 
 ported which would cost us ^^240,000 to make here, but 
 which the foreigner sells to us for ;^2 16,000, or 10 
 per cent, less, we should gain this 10 per cent, or 
 .^24,000 ; but that, on the other hand, the English 
 labourer would lose iJ" 120,000 in wages, or five times as 
 much as the nation gained ; their argument being that 
 we have labour unemployed here which would have pro- 
 duced this carpentry, and that we need not have gone 
 abroad for it. 
 
 It is difficult to imagine any man possessing a grain 
 of economic knowledge holding such a view. Messrs. 
 Ecroyd and Harris say, in effect, that the foreigner 
 "dumps" down his carpentry here, and takes nothing for 
 it in exchange. But in that case the nation gains, not 
 ^,"24,000, but i^240,ooo, for it would get the -carpentry for 
 nothing! If the foreigner has not done so previously, 
 he will, sooner or later, directly or indirectly, take from 
 us goods to the value of what he sells us ; and, as these 
 goods must be the product of labour, our labourers will 
 not lose a sixpence in wages, while the nation gains 
 sometliing of the value of ;^24,ooo. 
 
 It will be said, of course, that our carpenters would 
 lose the iJ" 120,000 in wages. Granted, but some other 
 trade or trades would benefit to that extent, and neither 
 the aggregate amount of employment, nor the aggregate 
 amount of wages spent among our labourers, would be 
 decreased. 
 
 But carpentry is only one of many industries which 
 may be interfered with by foreign competition, as Messrs. 
 Ecroyd and Harris themselves admit, and this serves to
 
 224 f'^II^ TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 show that carpenters and all other artisans and labourers, 
 in their turn, are benefited by this universal competition, 
 and that the result is an increase of divisible wealth, and 
 therefore an increase of general prosperity. 
 
 Another thing that may be said is that this ;^2i6,ooo 
 worth of foreign carpentry may have come in payment 
 for interest on those foreign investments of ours, that bete 
 noire of Fair Traders, the mysteries of which are to theiTi 
 so impenetrable. As nothing would go abroad in pa)'- 
 ment for it, how in that case are the ;^ 120,000 of wages 
 made up to our labourers ? I will, in the first place, 
 remark on this that nothing is imported here which can 
 be identified as coming in payment of interest due to us. 
 About 10 percent, of our imports come in this way, so that 
 of any specified import we can only in a general way say 
 that this proportion of it comes in payment of interest. 
 
 I will, however, assume that the whole of it so comes. 
 What then? Simply this, that instead of ^^2 16,000 
 worth of materials and labour being exported, tJie zvJioIe 
 of this sum zviU eventiLally be spent at home i7i wages. 
 How this comes about may be seen by turning to 
 Chapter II., "Foreign Investments," p. 197. 
 
 In the supposed case, however, as I have intimated, 
 the nation gains something of the value of ;^24,ooo. 
 Messrs. Ecroyd and Harris admit this gain : let us see 
 what it is. It may be realised in several ways — (i) in get- 
 ting so much more carpentry, or so much more of some- 
 thing else ; or (2) in obtaining so much respite from 
 labour ; or (3) partly in one shape and partly in another. 
 The same quantity of labour will obtain a greater return, 
 or a less quantity thereof will obtain the same return, the 
 community in any case effecting a gain which, measured 
 in money, amounts to ^^^24,000.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 225 
 
 The benefits of foreign exchanges such as these 
 cannot be better exemplified than in what takes place in 
 the case of wheat. Let us suppose that we can buy a 
 quarter of wheat from abroad for 30s. by making and 
 exporting 30s.' worth of iron or anything else, and that 
 if we grew the wheat at home the cost would be 40s, 
 It is clear that if this be the case, it is cheaper for the 
 nation to make and export iron or something else, and 
 thus to get its wheat, than for it to grow it, for it would 
 get four quarters instead of three for the same expendi- 
 ture of labour and capital. 
 
 But this is not all. The profits of such an exchange as 
 this are not confined to the difference between 30s. and 
 40s. per quarter of wheat. Besides that, there is another 
 profit in the carriage between the wheat-producing coun- 
 try and our own. Of that carrying business we have the 
 lion's share. It involves ship-building and ship-owning, 
 and, consequently, employment, and wages, and profits, 
 to all who are engaged in this industry. But what 
 applies to carpentry, or wheat, applies to all other indus- 
 tries. If we shut out foreign manufactures, our own 
 manufactures will be shut out from foreign markets, and 
 we should be the greatest sufferers. Mr. Harris is of a 
 different opinion. lie says, in answer to Question 
 9782 :— 
 
 " We have laid ourselves out as a manufacturing nation, to supply the 
 wants of other countries as well as ourselves, and we must have some 
 defensive duty that will assist us to protect our own markets for ourselves." 
 
 How a defensive duty which shall protect our markets 
 for ourselves — that is, prevent foreign manufactures from 
 being imported — will help us to supply the wants, not 
 only of ourselves, but of other countries, is past compre- 
 hension, except on the supposition that under Protection
 
 226 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 Great Britain will become a Utopia : that human motive 
 will be revolutionised, and that we shall not only be 
 able, but shall be willing, to supply the wants of other 
 countries without looking for anything in return. 
 
 We have now to consider the second sort of competi- 
 tion referred to by the " Four " — that which meets us in 
 neutral markets. Let us suppose that the duties pro- 
 posed have driven foreign manufactures out of our home 
 market, how would that, let me ask, aid us against the 
 competition of the foreigner in neutral markets? Will 
 he be prevented thereby from making goods and sending 
 them to those neutral markets in a competition all the 
 more fierce from his exclusion from our home market ? 
 If we cannot compete with him here, where our goods 
 have no sea-carriage to pay, how can we compete with 
 him in neutral markets to which cost of sea-carriage has 
 to be added ? There can be but one answer to such 
 questions as these, and it is clear that to levy duties on 
 foreign manufactures with the view of enabling our 
 "producers" to compete successfully in neutral markets, 
 and of giving increased employment to labour — that is, 
 in the sense of increased reward to labour — would be 
 about as absurd and futile a proceeding as could be 
 imagined. 
 
 But, the discussion hitherto has been carried on under 
 the supposition that foreign manufactures could be kept 
 out of our markets by the imposition of lo or 15 per 
 cent, ad valorem duties. No duties except absolutely 
 prohibitive ones can do that. In no country in the 
 world do duties twice or three times as great as these 
 keep them out. The tariff of the United States, which 
 is the highest in the world, one -almost prohibitive, is tlie 
 least successful in this way. If we take the year 1885, a
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 2'27 
 
 year of great depression, and look at the figures of our 
 trade with the States, we find that we sold them twcnt);- 
 seven milHon pounds' worth of goods, five milhons less 
 than we sold them in 1884 — three-fourths of what we 
 sold them being goods which it was the special object of 
 their tariff to exclude. The truth is, that if the object at 
 which we should aim be the ej'clusion of foreign manu- 
 factures from our markets — v ^ich it is not — the best 
 means of attaining that object 1., not by the imposition 
 of duties on them, but in the maintenance of that 
 system of free imports under which, for reasons which 
 have been given, and as a matter of fact, 80 to 90 per 
 cent, of our imports are composed of food, and wiiat 
 are called raw materials, while on the other hand 80 to 
 90 per cent, of our exports consist of manufactures-— a 
 position which no Protectionist nation has attained. 
 
 Here I cannot do better than extract a few sentences 
 from the last Annual Report of the United States Sec-- 
 retary to the Treasury, which bear upon this subject.- 
 Mr. Manning, under the head, " Our Suicidal Taxes on 
 Raw Materials," writes : — .. 
 
 " Prolonging without necessity our war-tariff taxes on raw materials, 
 we have been undersold and excluded from foreign markets by nations not 
 taxing raw materials. Despite their low-priced, inferior labour, and the, •■ 
 high percentage of labour cost included in their product, our taxed raw- 
 materials have protected the so-called ' pauper labour ' of Europe against 
 Am.erican competition. Our increasing capacity to produce an industrial 
 surplusage has been accompanied by war-taxation, exactly suited to prevent^ 
 the sale of that surplusage in foreign markets. Out of our actual abund-. 
 ance, this war taxation has forged the instrument of our commercial and 
 industrial mutilation. Defeating our manufacturers in their endeavours to', 
 compete abroad with the manufacturers of untaxed raw materials, it ha* 
 set them on a ferocious competition at cut-throat prices in our own home 
 market, to which they are shut up, and for which their producing powers 
 are increasingly superabundant. Long periods of glut, and so-called civer-' 
 production, have alternated with brief periods of renewed activity, and 
 P 2
 
 228 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 Iransient prosperity like the present. These prolonged war-tariff taxes, 
 incompetent and brutal as a scheme of revenue, fatal to the extension of 
 our foreign markets, and disorderly to our domestic trade, have in the last 
 resort acted and reacted with most ruinous injury upon our wage earners. 
 As the more numerous part of our population, our wage earners are of 
 course the first, the last, and the most to be affected by injurious laws. 
 Every government by true statesmen will watchfully regard their condition 
 and interests. If these are satisfactory, nothing else can be of very 
 momentous importance ; but our so-cilled protective statesmanship has 
 disfavoured them altogether. Encumbering with clumsy help a few thou- 
 sand employers, it has trodden down the millions of wage earners. It has 
 for twenty-one years denied them even the peaceable fruits of liberty. 
 . . . The taxes to be first remitted are those which prevent or hinder 
 the sale of our surplus products in foreign markets. . . . These taxes 
 are the duties on raw materials, and the most widely injurious of them is 
 the tax upon raw wool. ' 
 
 The Secretary's denunciation of taxes of raw material, 
 liowever, apply equally well to taxes on manufactures of 
 all kinds. Strictly speaking, nothing can be considered 
 raw material but what has lain on the surface, or in the 
 bosom, of Mother Earth, untouched for productive pur- 
 pcses by the hand of man. Only to that can the term 
 be properly applied. It is only a relative term. The raw 
 material of one trade is often the finished product of 
 another, this becoming in turn the raw material of a third. 
 Wool, for instance, to which Mr. Manning refers as being 
 a raw material to the American manufacturer, is to the 
 foreigner who exports it to the States a finished product, 
 requiring for its production in that market a variety of 
 operations connected with agriculture, ship-building, and 
 other industries, which render it far more deserving the 
 term "finished product" than others v/hich pass under 
 that name. 
 
 Here another question suggests itself. It is this : If 
 it would be such an advantageous thing for us to exclude 
 foreign manufactures which come here owing to what
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 229 
 
 the "Four" call the subsidised competition of protected 
 countries, why should we not also keep out what come 
 here owing to the superior natural advantages ? They 
 
 say (129) :— 
 
 "Our aim ought not to be to countervail any natural and legitimate 
 advantage which foreign manufacturers may possess, but simply to prevent 
 our own industries from being placed at an artificial disadvantage by the 
 interference of either home or foreign legislation." 
 
 But, on the reasoning of the " Four" as to the effect 
 of these foreign imports, why should not this be our 
 aim ? According to them, the mischief is done by the 
 goods coming here. What difference, therefore, can it 
 make to the producer whose profits are minimised, and 
 to the labourer whose employment is interfered with, 
 whether the hated competition arises from what they 
 call in the one case natural, and in the other, artificial 
 advantages .-' If benefit is to be obtained by excluding 
 the goods which come here from the latter cause, equal 
 benefit is to be obtained by excluding those which come 
 here from the former. They go too far, or not far 
 enough. If these foreign importations hurt us, they 
 ought not to be taxed, but prohibited. If, on the other 
 hand, they are beneficial, they ought to be encouraged. 
 The course proposed by the "Four" neither encourages 
 nor prohibits, and their arguments fall between these two 
 stools. They hate " Free Imports " for the mischief they 
 are supposed to do, yet they will not propose prohibitory 
 duties which will prevent this mischief. They even go 
 to the length of saying (137) that : — 
 
 " It would be an act of suicidal folly on our part to attempt to counter- 
 work these influences by a like system of enormous import duties designed 
 to raise the price of commodities for the advantage of home producers,''
 
 230 FAIR TRADE LTNMASKED. 
 
 the logic of which is not apparent when we read in (136), 
 the paragraph immediately preceding, that : — 
 
 "The more extreme Protectionist policy of the United States, so far 
 from repelling immigrant*, has operated as an effectual bribe to both 
 capital and labour, by holding out the inducement of higher prices and 
 higher wages." 
 
 So that it would be suicidal for us to do that which is 
 productive of such rewards — bribes, they are termed — to 
 our capitalists and our labourers ! 
 
 We also get bewildered when we compare what the 
 "Four" say in (136) with what they say in other places. 
 They tell us (60) : — 
 
 " Over-production of the commodities to which they apply is again an 
 inevitable result of high protective tariffs. They artificially create, in the 
 protected country, a duplicate production. . . . The effect is a universal 
 glut. ... I. In the natural seats of production. . . . 2. In the neutral 
 markets. ... 3. In the protected market itself. . . . ." 
 
 (61) "The protected country no doubt participates in the depres- 
 sion " 
 
 Yet, strange to say, in (62) we learn that : — 
 
 "The producer in the protected country, placed in secure possession 
 of a great and steady home trade, enters with confidence and spirit upon 
 an enlarged scale of operations " 
 
 In {76) that: — 
 
 "The high prices which Protection secures to the producer within the 
 protected area naturally stimulate competition in foreiga markets." 
 
 And we get still more bewildered when we learn that, 
 notwithstanding the high prices which Protection creates 
 in the protected country (130), 
 
 " Neither prices, profits, nor wage=, could possibly be raised by the 
 operation of such duties above the lowest remunerative level." 
 
 These contradictory and mutually destructive utter-
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKF.D. 2}\ 
 
 ances olTer a wide field for criticism. Space forbids my 
 doing more than glancing at them. 
 
 When the " Four " say that " Neither prices, 
 profits, nor wages, could possibly be raised by the 
 operation of such duties above the lowest remunerative 
 level," they seem to imagine that such a picture offers 
 some attraction which will induce us to take to Pro- 
 tection. The proposition in the abstract is true, for 
 no fiscal system can raise prices, profits, and wages 
 above the lowest remunerative level. The law of com- 
 petition settles that. There is only one thing that is 
 over remunerated by Protection, and that is a monopoly. 
 As to prices, although they may be barely remunerative 
 to the producers of certain articles, they may be never- 
 theless high and burdensome to the consumers thereof, 
 manj'' of whom would be paying more than they ought 
 for them, while their own products are left to open 
 competition. All our interests which cannot be pro- 
 tected by import duties would thus suffer, most of all 
 labour. Such a prospect, therefore, offers no attraction 
 whatever to anyone — except the monopoly-owner — 
 not even to their favourite " producer," although he is 
 to be secured, as the " Four " think, a remunerative level 
 of profits by the exclusion of that surplus production of 
 protected foreign industries which periodically floods 
 this the only duty-free market. 
 
 Let us see how the thing is to work. 
 
 The advantages supposed to follow are (131) : — 
 
 "A fuller and more regular output upon a given basis of investments 
 and fixed expenses, which would reduce the cost of our manufactures in the 
 most healthful manner by the distribution of fixed charges over a larger 
 annual production." 
 
 To this it is simply necessary to say that for the
 
 232 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 reasons already stated, production would be smaller, 
 not larger, and so the very basis of their argument is cut 
 away. And when they say in continuation that 
 
 " Our producers would be strengthened for competition in neutral 
 markets," 
 
 the reply is, that the very opposite would be the case, 
 and they would meet there an opposition all the fiercer 
 and stronger from the exclusion of their competitors 
 from our home market. But this is not all. When we 
 inquire how "our producers" are to be strengthened for 
 this competition, we read (62) that 
 
 " The producer in the protected country, placed in the secure possession 
 of a great and steady home trade, enters with confidence and spirit upon 
 an enlarged scale of operations," 
 
 and {76), that 
 
 " The high prices which Protection secures to the producer within the 
 protected area naturally stimulate competition in foreign markets." 
 
 So that what this nation is asked to do is to establish 
 Protection, that is, to protect certain industries, in order 
 that the capitalist producers who carry them on may 
 exact high prices for their wares from the people at 
 home, and be enabled to supply foreigners at low prices — 
 in other words, that the community should be taxed for 
 the purpose of providing foreigners with goods under 
 cost price. If we did that, we should commit the 
 identical folly of which Protectionist nations are guilty 
 as regards sugar — a folly from which they would gladly 
 escape if Protection did not bind them to it. 
 
 Then, another thing which is clear is that, according 
 to the " Four," these high prices in the protected in- 
 dustries — that is, higher than they would otherwise be —
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 233 
 
 will only be at the lowest remunerative level, and that 
 profits and wages will fare no better. It will be interest- 
 ing to inquire who would benefit by that. There are 
 only two interests which would benefit — first, the 
 foreigner, who, in consequence of the duties acting as 
 a stimulus to production, gets his goods so much the 
 cheaper ; secondly, the land-owner or other monopoly- 
 owner at home. 
 
 To understand how the monopoly-owner benefits it 
 is necessary to remember that the two primary factors 
 in the production of material wealth are land and labour, 
 which, when production has passed beyond its primary 
 stage, are supplemented by capital, and that the pro- 
 ceeds of production have to be divided between the 
 land-owner, the capital-owner, and the labour-owner. 
 Of these three factors only one can be benefited by 
 protective duties — the one which possesses the monopoly, 
 whether of land cr of anything else. The other two 
 factors being open to competition cannot, in the long 
 run, obtain from the raising of prices through protective 
 duties one farthing more than the average reward of 
 capital or labour. Every farthing beyond that will go 
 to the monopoly-owner, the man who, of all others, de- 
 serves the least consideration, but who alone of all 
 classes in the community gains by such duties. If 
 capital in agriculture, or mining, or manufacture, is 
 found to gain more than it does in other departments 
 of industry, it will be introduced into them until the 
 general level of profits is attained. As to labour-owners, 
 for whom the "Four" profess such constant anxiety, 
 they will be in the worst plight of all. They are buyers 
 of house-room, food, and clothing, and sellers of labour. 
 What they have to buy would be artificially raised in
 
 234 I'AIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 price ; what they have to sell would be left to the free 
 competition of the world. 
 
 If Protection is to be sought for labour, the way to 
 attain it is to raise its price by diminishing the supply, 
 that is, by checking the influx of foreign labour by 
 means of taxation or prohibition, the truth of which has 
 been perceived by French workmen, at all events, if not 
 by our own. This course, however, is never advocated 
 by the so-called friends of labour, nor by the " Four" in 
 their Report. Their efforts, as we have seen, are con- 
 centrated on the supposed interests of their favourite 
 capitalist producers. 
 
 According to them, only manufactures are to be pro- 
 tected. But why are some industries to be protected, 
 and not all ? To protect one and not another is to 
 commit flagrant injustice. If mining and manufacturing 
 are to be protected, why not farming .-^ Under their 
 scheme agriculture is to be left out in the cold. The 
 agriculturist is to be compelled to pay the protective 
 high price for everything he consumes, while for what 
 he produces he has to take a price settled by free com- 
 petition. 
 
 We have industries, however, which cannot be pro- 
 tected at all by import dtities. They are various in 
 character, vast in number. What is to compensate the 
 workers in them for the burdens they would have to 
 bear under Protection ? The truth is, that no scheme of 
 Protection can be anything else but monstrously unjust 
 to the vast majority of any people. 
 
 I now come to " the axiom of the advantage of buy- 
 ing in the cheapest market," which was referred to by 
 Mr. Ecroyd in his question to Mr. Harris. With regard 
 to this, the " Four" say (133) : —
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 235 
 
 " To buy everything in the cheapest market — though not permitted to 
 sell in the dearest — may be the best policy, so long as we can find other 
 full and equally remunerative employment for the home enterprise and 
 industry which we displace in so doing. But no longer. . . ." 
 
 I do not think I am far wrong in attributing this 
 paragraph to Mr. Ecroyd's pen. In any case, let me ask, 
 What can be the economic attainments or equipment 
 of any man who supposes that buying in the cheapest 
 market and selHng in the dearest are two different 
 things, and that it is possible to do the one Avithout 
 doing the other ? Why, they are one a?id the same act. 
 Whoever does the one does the other. A nation cannot 
 buy without selling, or sell without buying. To buy in 
 the cheapest market is to sell in the dearest, and there 
 can be no more remunerative employment than in so 
 doing ; while as to the notion that thereby we displace 
 home industry — that is, in the sense of decreasing aggre- 
 gate production — there is one phrase by which it and 
 the other Protectionist notions of the "Four" may be 
 properly characterised, and that is — incoherent non- 
 sense. 
 
 3. — Discriminating Duties on Food Products 
 IN Favour of the Colonies and India. 
 
 The third of the remedies proposed runs as follows 
 
 (139) :— 
 
 " Specific duties, equal to about 10 per cent., on a low range of values 
 imposed upon the import from foreign countries of those articles of food 
 which India and the Colonies are well able to produce." 
 
 The proposal is introduced in the two preceding 
 paragraphs. No. 137 runs thus : — 
 
 " It would be an act of suicidal folly on our part to attempt to counter- 
 work these influences [the extreme Protectionist policy of the United States,
 
 236 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 which draws immigrants by the eiifectual bribe to capital and labour of 
 higher prices and higher wages] by a like system of enormous import 
 duties, designed to raise the price of commodities for the advantage of 
 home producers. We have a far better and more effectual remedy at 
 command. A slightly preferential treatment of the food products of India 
 and the Colonies over those of foreign nations would, if adopted as a 
 permanent system, gradually but certainly direct the flow of food-growing 
 capital and labour towards our own dependencies, and less towards the 
 United States, than heretofore." 
 
 No. 138 runs thus : — 
 
 "When it is noted that in the year 1884 the Australian Colonies, with 
 only 3,100,000 inhabitants, purchased, ;^23, 895, 858 worth of our manu- 
 factures, whilst the United States, with about 55,000,000 inhabitants, 
 purchased only ^^24,424,636 worth, it will be apparent how great would 
 be the effect of a policy which would lead to the more rapid peopling of 
 the Australian Colonies in giving fuller employment to our working classes 
 at home, and thus increasing the healthful activity of the home trade, as 
 well as the import of raw materials for our various industries to operate 
 upon. On the other hand, it must be pointed out that the growth of our 
 colonies in population, wealth, and the other requisites of successful 
 manufacturing enterprise, and the necessity felt by them of counter-bidding 
 to some extent the bribe which the high tariff of the United States offers to 
 capital and labour, must operate to convert gradually the revenue duties of 
 the Colonies, which now permit so large an import of British manufactures, 
 into protective duties, which will seriously restrict that import. 
 
 " This has already happened in the case of the Dominion of Canada, 
 and it is an influence which may act with increasing and disastrous force 
 upon the most valuable portion of our export trade, unless a fiscal policy 
 be adopted which will enable the various portions of the Empire to co- 
 operate more effectually for mutual aid and defence in commercial matters." 
 
 Let us now examine this argument, and the facts 
 which are supposed to lend it cogency. We are told, 
 first, that it would be an act of suicidal folly on our part 
 to counterwork the high tariff of the United States by a 
 similar high tariff here. Why it would be so foolish we 
 are not told. If the United States tariff offers an effec- 
 tual bribe to both capital and labour in the shape of 
 high prices and high wages, why should we not follow
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 237 
 
 the example? If, on the other hand, such a hi^h tariff 
 raises prices for the advantage of home producers here, 
 does not the tariff in the States do just that thing ? 
 Does the effect vary according to the side of the 
 Atlantic on which action is taken ? The argument, 
 however absurd, is founded on the assumption that high 
 prices and high wages are bribes which high tariffs 
 secure for capital and labour. But, as regards capital, 
 high prices do not necessarily mean large profits. 
 Monopoly-owners will gain from high prices, not capi- 
 talists who are not also monopolists. Capitalists will 
 only be able to obtain the current rate of profit, what- 
 ever that may be, and that is settled by the law of 
 supply and demand. As to labour, what possible bribe 
 can high prices offer to the labour-owner? Commodities 
 are what he has to buy, and high prices are so much loss 
 to him. What he has to sell is his labour ; how does the 
 high tariff protect that .'* Nothing but the prohibition of 
 foreign labour can do that ; and that no English Pro- 
 tectionist has as yet come forward to advocate. Then 
 as to wages, a high tariff cannot secure high wages 
 to labour. Wages, like every other economic quantity, 
 are subject to the law of supply and demand. Wages 
 are high in the United States because there work 
 abounds and the labourers are few, not because of a 
 high tariff. So far as protective tariffs affect wages, 
 they tend to lower them. Production is lessened, and 
 of that lessened production the labourer gets a smaller 
 share, the monopoly-owner getting a larger share. In 
 Europe wages are lower than in the States, and much 
 lower on the Continent, where Protection flourishes, 
 than in Great Britain, where Free Trade reigns. If 
 Protection be a force to raise wages, it should have
 
 238 FAIR TRADE UiNMASKED. 
 
 raised them in France, Germany, and the other nations, 
 to a higher point than in England, where this force does 
 not exist ; whereas we know that in those countries they 
 are only two-thirds what they are here. 
 
 The truth is, that capital and labour are drawn to 
 the States, not by Protection, but by the field which 
 is offered for their exercise in every department of 
 industry. A country which possesses three and a half 
 million square miles of every variety of climate, and 
 of soil, capable of producing almost everything that man 
 can desire, and which at the present moment is peopled 
 to the extent of only twenty to the square mile, must 
 necessarily present attractions to Europeans, who, hud- 
 dled together as they are, 200 and 300 to the square 
 mile, and groaning under the military tyranny which 
 grinds them desire to escape therefrom to where their 
 energies may have full play. 
 
 I now pass on to consider what the " Four " deem to 
 be their great weapon against the United States, and 
 the reasons they give for using it. They would impose 
 duties on foreign imported food products with the view 
 of diverting the labour and capital which now flow 
 towards the States, to our own dependencies ; and they 
 rely on the fact of Australians purchasing, per head, 
 many times more of our goods than the Americans do, 
 they having in 1884, for instance, bought nearly £8 
 worth per head, while the latter bought less than los. 
 worth. 
 
 But if the Australians buy of us, as they term it, 
 sixteen times as much per head as the Americans do, 
 why should we try and alter the position ? In one and 
 the same paragraph we are persuaded to stimulate the 
 development of the Colonies— Australia in particular—
 
 FAIR TRADK UNMASKED. 239 
 
 and yet we are told that the moment they attain to a 
 point of population, wealth, and other requisites of suc- 
 cessful manufacturing enterprise, they will turn round 
 upon us and shut us out of their markets as Canada has 
 done. If this be so, if undeveloped Australia now buys 
 ;^8 worth of goods per head of us while the States buy 
 only los. worth, and Canada less than 35s. worth, it 
 would seem to ordinary minds that we had better leave 
 Australia to work her own way towards wealth and 
 population, and continue to do as we are now doing. 
 
 The argument of the " Four " is absurd. It is based 
 on a misapprehension of facts. There are several 
 reasons why Australia, with only three millions of inhabi- 
 tants, bought of us in 1884 nearly 24 millions' worth of 
 domestic produce, while the United States with 55 mil- 
 lions of people bought of us onl)' 24^- millions' worth. In 
 the first place, while the almost prohibitive tariff of the 
 United States reduces to a minimum our exports to her, 
 it at the same time gives us, as regards her, all the other 
 markets of the world, that of Australia among them, 
 and, as our other Protectionist rivals are in the same' 
 predicament, we get the lion's share of trade in Austra- 
 lia as everywhere else. If we turn to the statistical 
 abstract, under the head of United States, we find that, 
 while in 1884 the States imported from us 12s. per head, 
 they imported from France only 5s. 3d. worth, and from 
 Germany only 4s. gd. worth. We have nothing to com- 
 plain of, therefore, as to the action of the United States 
 in this matter. 
 
 On the other hand, tariffs in Australia are low, some 
 of them almost Free Trading, and, on that account alone 
 we should do more business per head with them than 
 with the States ; but when, in addition to this, we
 
 240 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 recollect that in 1884 the greatest depression reigned in 
 the States, and that for the time our lendings of capital 
 there had ceased, while, on the contrary, our public loans 
 to the Australian Colonies amounted to 10 millions ster- 
 ling, and other investments of capital were made, it is 
 easy to see why our exports to that quarter were com- 
 paratively so large, and that, instead of our selling them 
 ;^8 worth of goods per head, it would be more correct to 
 say that we were lending them a great portion of it. 
 
 I have referred to the depressed condition of the 
 United States in 1884. In that year there was an utter 
 prostration in every department of trade and industry, 
 and a condition of affairs so serious as to demand, in the 
 opinion of Mr. McCuUoch, the Secretary of the Treasury, 
 as expressed in his Report, December, 1884, the appoint- 
 ment of a Commission to obtain :" 
 
 "The information required for a full understanding of what stands in 
 the way of an increased exportation of our manufactured goods," the ail- 
 important question being, " How shall the country be relieved from the 
 plethora of manufactured goods, and how shall plethora hereafter be pre- 
 vented ? . . . . Unless markets now practically closed against us are 
 opened, unless we can share in the trade which is monopolised by Euro- 
 pean nations, the depression now so severely felt will continue, and may 
 become more disastrous." 
 
 If Mr. McCulloch's countrymen had mastered the 
 Free Trade doctrine so unwittingly laid down by the 
 "Four" in par. 58, that "the conditions of international 
 trade are inflexible ; we can only in the long run buy as 
 largely and as freely as we are permitted to sell," they 
 would have no difficulty in finding out why their 
 manufactures hang on hand. The reason is simply that, 
 as they will not buy, they cannot sell. They cannot 
 have their cake and eat it too. If they retain to them- 
 selves their own market of 58 millions, they by that act
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 24 1 
 
 hand over to other nations the trade with the other 1,400 
 millions of the human race ; and as we are the one Free 
 Trading nation, we carry off the lion's share. 
 
 It passes ordinary comprehension to discover how 
 such facts as the foregoing can furnish any argument in 
 favour of setting up a system of Protection which, under 
 the most favourable cirrumstances, would land us in the 
 plight in which the States found themselves in 1884. 
 
 I say under the most favourable circumstances, for 
 the truth is, that if we were to change our policy accord- 
 ing to the proposals of the " Four," we should land our- 
 selves in difficulties and embarrassments which it is 
 appalling to contemplate. 
 
 In order properly to estimate their gravity, let us 
 first ascertain the sources whence we derive our foreign 
 food supply, the total of that supply, and also our total 
 consumption of food. 
 
 In 1884 we received from abroad 141 millions' worth, 
 of which 1 14 millions, or 807 per cent, came from 
 foreign countries, and 27 millions, or I9"3 per cent., came 
 from our own possessions. The United States sent us 
 26"9 per cent. ; France, y4 per cent. ; Germany, 9'3 per 
 cent.; Russia, 5*5 per cent. ; China, 4'6 per cent. Turn- 
 ing to the supply from our own possessions, British 
 North America sent us 3*9 per cent. ; India, 7*4 per 
 cent. ; and Australasia 25 per cent.* 
 
 The above figures include tea, tobacco, coffee, wines, 
 and spirits. Excluding these, and confining ourselves to 
 non-stimulants, we find similar results. Of wheat, 
 foreign countries send us 694 per cent. ; of flour, 942 
 per cent. ; while our own possessions send us 306 and 
 
 * For facts and figures I am indebted to Sir Thomas II. Farrer's " Free 
 
 Trade versus Fair Trade," third edition, pp. 72 et seq. 
 
 Q
 
 242 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 58 per cent, respectively. Of meat, foreign countries 
 send us 798 per cent. ; British possessions, 20*2 per cent. 
 Of animals for the butcher, foreign countries send us 
 '^35 pe^ cent. ; British possessions, 16-5 per cent. Of 
 butter, France sends us 23-1 per cent ; Holland, 39-8 
 per cent.; British North America, 21 per cent. Of bacon 
 and hams, the United States send us 69-5 per cent. ; 
 of cheese, 496 per cent. ; while British North America, the 
 only Colony sending any of these worth mentioning, 
 sends, of bacon, 68 per cent. ; and of cheese, 30 per 
 cent. Other articles which might be mentioned come in 
 similar proportions. Our total consumption may be 
 assumed to be now 400 millions' worth, of which two- 
 thirds are produced at home, and one-third abroad ; and 
 it follows, therefore, that a rise in price of 10 per cent, 
 caused by the proposed duties would compel our popula- 
 tion to pay 40 millions sterling more for their food than 
 they do now, 26 millions of which would go to our 
 landed interest — that is, eventually, into the pockets 
 of the landlords ; while of the remaining 14 millions, 
 part would go to Colonial growers, and what remains to 
 the Exchequer. 
 
 We should thus be at once landed in a serious state 
 of affairs, the gravity of which it would be hard to over- 
 state. In the first place, it would involve the grossest in- 
 justice to the vast mass of our population, without one 
 single gain to set off against the injury they would sus- 
 tain. A bread tax is a poll-tax, the most unjust of all 
 imposts, as it falls heaviest on the shoulders least able 
 to bear it. The community would be plundered for the 
 benefit of one class, the landowners, as they were 
 plundered in the Corn Law times. Our workmen would 
 greatly suffer. Their wages would not go so far as they
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 243 
 
 do now, even if employment and money wages remained 
 as great in quantity as they are now, which they would 
 not. Having to spend more for their food, they would 
 have less to spend on rent, clothing, and everything else, 
 and this would cause a general falling off in the demand 
 for manufactures, which would in turn react on the com- 
 munity in every direction, and so cause a general 
 deterioration in the condition of the people. Yet, in the 
 face of such obvious considerations as these, we are told 
 that this policy " would increase the healthful activity of 
 the home trade, as well as the import of raw materials 
 for our industries." The truth is, that it is difficult to 
 conceive a state of affairs more disastrous than that 
 which would arise if such a policy were carried out. As 
 we have seen, out of the 141 millions' worth of food 
 which we import, four-fifths come from foreign countries, 
 while only one-fifth comes from our own possessions. 
 We are asked to discourage and restrict, perhaps destroy, 
 a trade of 1 14 millions for the sake of fostering one 
 of 27 millions ; and, in order to do this absurd thing, we 
 are to tax the great mass of our people, and call on 
 them to undergo all sorts of privations. 
 
 I ask, in the name of common sense, Why? It is 
 certainly not in the interest of our masses that such a 
 thing should take place. In whose interest then ? It is 
 to be done in the interest of the land-owners here, and 
 in the Colonies, at the expense of our own people, and 
 all to satisfy the craving which is felt for retaliation on 
 the United States in particular, whose policy is supposed 
 to injure those whom the " Four" term our "producers" 
 but who, after all, as we have seen, are not the 99 out of 
 every 100 of our population who are producers in the 
 proper sense of the term, but those who are capital- 
 
 Q2
 
 244 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 owners and employers of labour. There is no possible 
 advantage, present or remote, to be reaped which would 
 compensate us for such a revolution in our policy. 
 Would our Colonies or India give us more corn, or 
 meat, or anything else, in return for any given quantity 
 of our manufactures than foreign countries do now for 
 the same quantity? Has not the free competition of 
 the world driven down the prices of these imports 
 to the lowest possible level, and do we not get the full 
 benefit of it all .'* Is it not absolutely certain that so 
 far from our obtaining the same quantity of food for the 
 same cost as we incur now, we should get a smaller 
 quantity, so that we should have either to give more 
 for the same quantity of food, or get less for the same 
 quantity of work .'' At present our imported food is 
 grown where it can be grown in the cheapest manner. 
 We are asked to divert its cultivation from favourable 
 climates and fertile soils to climates and soils less 
 favourable, and less fertile, and so by our own action 
 impoverish ourselves. 
 
 Again I ask, in the name of common sense. Why ? 
 What can be in the minds of men who counsel us to 
 such an insane policy ? There must be something which 
 ordinary comprehensions are unable to grasp. When 
 we endeavour to discover from the Report what reasons 
 are actuating the " Four " in their proposals, we are 
 simply astonished. In paragraph 140, for instance, we 
 are told : — 
 
 " There would be no exclusion of food products ; they would come in 
 on payment of the duty named ; and we are convinced that if any etfect 
 were produced upon the prices of the articles in question, it would be very 
 slight indeed, and limited in duration to the time required, under the 
 stimulus of preferential treatment, to increase the production of them in 
 India and the Colonies."
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 245 
 
 No exclusion of food products ! The duty is pro- 
 posed for the express purpose of excluding them, and of 
 raising their prices, and it would exclude them. Have 
 those who propose this preferential treatment of the 
 Colonies ever seriously considered the consequences 
 which in other and supremely important respects it 
 might entail, not only on the Mother Country, but on 
 the Colonies themselves ? Let us regard some of them. 
 Consider, in the first place, that three-fourths of our 
 commerce is done with foreign nations, and only one- 
 fourth with our Colonies, and that we are asked to 
 sacrifice the three-fourths for the one-fourth. Then, in 
 the second place, let me again ask, What national benefit 
 are we to obtain by so doing ? There can only be one 
 answer to such a question, and that is — None whatever. 
 Under the most favourable circumstances, we could only 
 hope to substitute Colonial markets for foreign ones, and 
 this would be only after a long lapse of years, involving 
 us in enormous losses and privations, and we should be 
 no better off at the end of the time than at the beginning. 
 But, suppose foreign nations in the meanwhile take um- 
 brage at our proceedings, and embrace the opportunity 
 to strike a blow at our supremacy — an opportunity 
 which they would only be too glad to get, if we were so 
 foolish as to give them one. Are we, to whom freedom 
 of commercial intercourse, and the most extended 
 markets, are matters of vital necessity, ready to give 
 up that freedom which we possess } Are we ready to 
 restrict our operations, and to enter into tariff wars with 
 one and all of our competitors, should they choose to 
 commence them "i The United States, for instance, if 
 her food products were detrimentally treated by us, 
 might retaliate on any or all of our productions. The
 
 246 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 " most-favoured nation " treatment, which we now uni- 
 versally enjoy in consequence of our Free Trade system, 
 would at once be in jeopardy. She might treat our 
 productions to our detriment as we treat hers, or she 
 might prohibit them altogether. Are we prepared to 
 give up our trade with the United States .'' Or, the 
 States might submit to the loss of our market for her 
 food products by ceasing to grow them for us — might 
 take to manufactures and shipping, and so invade us in 
 our vital interests. Years ago we taxed Saxon wheat. 
 Saxony turned to manufactures, and is now one of our 
 formidable competitors. Do we wish the lesson re- 
 peated ? 
 
 Then, again, suppose that after a while the United 
 States were to see the error of their ways, and were to 
 offer to trade with us on the basis of Free Trade, in 
 what a position would we find ourselves ! — in what a 
 position would a Colony like Canada find itself! How 
 should we act in such case .'' Should we throw the 
 Colonies over under the temptation of a vastly increased 
 trade with the States? — break our plighted faith, and 
 send the deluded Colonists back into the cold ? These 
 aie questions which Free Traders are not capable of 
 answering, but they nevertheless call for an answer from 
 those who, like the " Four," counsel a preferential treat- 
 ment of our Colonies, of which it may truly be said that 
 no more wildly absurd project ever entered the mind of 
 man, and which, even on the showing of the " Four,'' 
 would ultimately end in our commercial exclusion from 
 their markets. 
 
 In paragraph 38 the " Four" hint at the advisability, 
 although they do not actually recommend the estab- 
 lishment of: —
 
 FAIR TRADE UN MASKED. 247 
 
 "A fiscal policy which will enable the various portions of the Empire 
 to co-operate more effectually for mutual aid and defence in commercial 
 matters." 
 
 This is a policy which has from time to time been 
 brought forward under the title of " The Fiscal Federa- 
 tion of the Empire." It seems to possess a great fasci- 
 nation for many people. There is a cloudiness and 
 dreaminess about it which captures the imagination. 
 When, however, we take the terms to pieces and look 
 beneath the surface, we find that it is only a dream, 
 that the proposals amount to nothing more or less than 
 the establishment of Protection on absurd principles, and 
 on an impossible basis. There is no more reason for 
 ourselves and the Colonies to enter into fiscal federation 
 than for England, Scotland, and Ireland to do so among 
 themselves. The United Kingdom would gain nothing 
 by it. The Colonies and India would gain nothing by 
 it It means restriction of production, and of trade, in 
 every department of industry. If it were possible for it 
 to be carried out, both the Mother Country and the de- 
 pendencies vv^ould sufifer. In the preferential treatment of 
 these latter, which the " Four " advocate, the Mother 
 Country would be bled for their benefit. In fiscal federa- 
 tion both would be bled. Is it likely the Colonies would 
 agree? But if for some reason, good or bad, they 
 wished for fiscal federation, on what basis could it be 
 established ? Our Colonies and dependencies vary from 
 each other in geographical position, in climate, in gov- 
 ernment, in political opinion, in thought, in action, in 
 interests. Who will reconcile all these discordant 
 elements? Who will arrange a scheme that shall 
 satisfy every conflicting claim .-' But even if that could 
 be done for a time, how long would the compact last ?
 
 248 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 How arc the changing necessities of the various mem- 
 bers of the confederation to be met and provided for as 
 regatds the imposition of duties ? If a change is wanted 
 in the Mother Country or ih any one Colony, either in 
 the raising or the lowering of duties, is the action to be 
 the same in all ? These and a hundred other questions 
 of similar purport might be asked, and the mere asking 
 ought to be sufficient to show that a fiscal federation of 
 the Empire can never be anything but a dream. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 LORD DUNRAVEN'S RESERVATIONS AND OBSERVATIONS. 
 
 Inconsistencies — Disavows being a Protectionist, yet Agrees with all the 
 Arguments and Recommendations of the "Four" as to Checking 
 Subsidising Effects of Foreign Tariffs. 
 
 Lord Dunraven commences (i) by saying that in 
 accepting the Majority Report up to paragraph 26, 
 inclusive, he would remark that the statement of Sir 
 Lowthian Bell, that in the neutral markets of the world 
 we are able to hold our own against foreign competition, 
 is directly opposed to much of the detailed evidence, 
 especially to the actual tenders referred to in the Report 
 on Egyptian trade, prepared by Mr. F. Elliot, Cairo, in 
 which he says that, in 1885, tenders for the requirements 
 of the railway administration were made by English 
 and Continental houses on seven different occasions, 
 and that in one case only was the offer of a British firm 
 accepted.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 249 
 
 Lord Dunraven then gives (2) an analysis of the 
 replies made by 59 Chambers of Commerce, and 26 
 other commercial associations, to the questions referred 
 to in paragraph 3 of the Majority Report, and to the 
 questions set out in paragraph 6 of the same Report, as 
 regards which latter, all the possible causes of depression 
 there suggested find more or less support among the 
 answers given. He also calls attention to the infor- 
 mation obtained from questions addressed to a large 
 number of Trades Unions and similar associations. The 
 answers, he says, fairly concur in representing that, from 
 a workman's point of view, a widespread depression of 
 trade is at present most seriously affecting their in- 
 terests, mainly in the increasing difficulty of obtaining 
 employment, or in the prevalence of short time, but 
 partly also in an actual reduction of the rate of wages. 
 
 Lord Dunraven then refers (3) to the displacement 
 of labour consequent upon the depression of agriculture, 
 and the action of foreign competition, as shown by 
 tables extracted from a paper read before the Statistical 
 Society on the i8th May, 1886, by Mr. Charles Booth, 
 which is quoted in the Minority Report, and adds three 
 other tables taken from the same paper, showing further 
 that but little absorption can have taken place into the 
 iron and steel, or the coal, or the shipping trades. 
 
 Commenting on the Minority Report, he says (4) : — 
 
 " In the statement in paragraph 42, that imports of the articles men- 
 tioned therein can only be advantageous on the condition that all the 
 labour which could have produced them at home is fully employed in some 
 equally profitable work, I cannot fully concur, though undoubtedly any 
 increase in the imports from foreign countries of articles which can he 
 grown or produced at home must be balanced against labour displaced and 
 capital rendered unprofitable in our own industries in consequence of such 
 increase."
 
 250 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 " (5) I dissent from those portions of the Report which appear to nit 
 to point to the influence of improved machinery as contracting the demand 
 for labour, and to advocate legislation to check such eflfect, or which infer 
 that it is the duty of the State to find employment for a rapidly increasing 
 population, being of opinion that if employment fails through natural 
 causes any apparent remedy must tend eventually to aggravate the evil." 
 
 "(6) I object to Protection, by which I understand the imposition of 
 import duties for the purpose of assisting native industries against similar 
 foreign industries with which they are in fair and natural competition, and 
 to retaliation as remedies for the evils inflicted by foreign tariff's ; and, 
 although the above-mentioned theories are nowhere specifically put for- 
 ward, and, presumably, are not intended to be advocated, it appears to me, 
 as I think it may to others, that they are clearly indicated in, or may be 
 inferred from, certain portions of the Report, especially from passages in 
 paragraphs 72, 73, 74, 75, 82, 124, and 144." 
 
 " (7) I am strongly of opinion that it is absolutely necessary to check 
 or neutralise the subsidising effects of preferential railway rates on foreign 
 produce, of bounties, and of the protective tariffs of foreign countries, in 
 order to obtain fair competition for our industries ; and with all the 
 arguments and recommendations on these points I entirely agree." 
 
 "(8) While unable to approve entirely of paragraph 138, I consider 
 that a trading union with the Colonies securing preferential treatment for 
 British and Colonial manufactures and food products, without interfering 
 with perfect freedom as to the internal fiscal arrangements of the Colonies 
 or the United Kingdom, is, for the reasons mentioned in the Report, most 
 desirable. But we should, I think, be going beyond our power in making 
 any distinct recommendation on a matter affecting the policy of self- 
 governing Colonies." 
 
 Lord Dunraven's reservations call for little remark. 
 Free Traders will concur in many of them, such as 
 those which refer (5) to the disposition shown in the 
 Minority Report to legislate with a view to check, or 
 neutralise, the effects of the displacement of labour 
 caused by improvements in machinery ; as well as to 
 the inference which may be drawn that it is the duty of 
 the State to find employment for our rapidly increasing 
 population. The other portions, however, call for some 
 observations. 
 
 In paragraphs 6 and 7 we are presented with an
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 25 I 
 
 entanglement of arguments, and a labyrinth of contra- 
 dictions, which defy criticism, except at a length which 
 space precludes, so I leave them to the judgment of the 
 reader with this one comment, that it is hardly possible 
 to have a finer specimen of the "inextricable muddle" 
 which is the characteristic of the Fair Trade mind. 
 
 With regard to (8), which deals with the proposed 
 preferential treatment of our possessions as regards 
 food products, and with the suggestion thrown out as 
 to a fiscal federation of the Empire, I have already 
 dealt with these subjects, and I need not further refer to 
 them here. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 MR. NEVILE LUBBOCK AND FAIR TRADE. 
 
 Letter to President of the Board of Trade Coniplalning of being Designated 
 a Fair Trader — Repudiates the Epithet, and the Fair Trade League — 
 Thinks the Minority Report in Accordance with the highest Economical 
 Authorities on Free Trade. 
 
 In the Board of Trade Journal for February there 
 appeared a review of the final Report of the Royal 
 Commission, in which it is stated that : — 
 
 " A Minority Report drawn up by the Fair Trade members of the Com- 
 mission, viz.. Lord Dunraven, Mr. Ecroyd, Mr. Lubbock, and Mr. Muniz, 
 is also appended. It lays stress on some points which are more lightly 
 passed over in the Majority Report, and advocates import duties to counter- 
 act, as far as possible, the effect of foreign bounties and tariffs." 
 
 Mr. Lubbock took exception to the epithet " Fair 
 Trade," as applied to himself and the other three 
 members who signed the Minority Report, and he wrote
 
 252 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 the following letter, which appeared in the March 
 number of ihQ Joio'nal : — 
 
 "My attention has been called to the recent issue of the Board of Tiaiie 
 fournal, dated February, 1887. In that journal appears a description of 
 the recent Reports of the Royal Commission on the Depression of Trade. 
 On the last page (170) is made the following statement : — 'A Minority 
 Report, drawn up by the Fair Trade members of the Commission, viz., 
 Lord Dunraven, iVlr. Ecroyd, Mr. Lubbock, and Mr. Muntz, is also ap- 
 pended.' I beg respectfully to point out that it is, I believe, unusual for 
 Departments of State, when alluding to members of Royal Commissions, 
 to classify them by epithets descriptive of the opinions they are supposed 
 to hold. Moreover, I hold that the views put forward in the Minority 
 Report are in strict accordance with the doctrines of our highest economical 
 authorities on Free Trade. I do not belong to, and never have been asso- 
 ciated with, the Fair Trade League, and I am not even aware, except in a 
 very general way, what principles they advocate. I object, therefore, to a 
 statement being put forth in the Boaid of Trade Journal which implies 
 that I served on ihe Royal Commission as a recognised advocate of par- 
 ticular views, and which is therefore calculated to mislead its readers. I 
 respectfully request that your lordship will be good enough to cause this 
 letter to be published in the ne.xt number of the Board of Trade Journal.''^ 
 
 To the letter is appended a foot-note by the editor, 
 saying, " The words ' Fair Trade,' of which Mr. Lubbock 
 complains, were an oversight." 
 
 Two things are clear from the above correspondence : 
 the first is that Mr. Lubbock repudiates the idea that he 
 is a Fair Trader. He says he does not belong to the 
 Fair Trade League, has never been associated with it, 
 and is not even aware, " except in a very general way," 
 what principles it advocates. The second thing is that 
 he is under the impression that the views put forward by 
 himself and his three fellow-commissioners are in strict 
 accordance with the doctrines of our highest economical 
 authorities on Free Trade. 
 
 These are very extraordinary statements. For the 
 last six years the Fair Trade League has advocated in
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 253 
 
 the press, and on the platform, the identical fiscal policy 
 which is recommended by himself and his three brethren ; 
 yet, he tells us, that, " except in a very general way," he 
 is quite ignorant of the principles the League holds. 
 Strange as it may appear, the League and he have 
 arrived at the same conclusions quite independently of 
 each other ; he being utterly ignorant that he and they, 
 so far as these conclusions are in question, were of the 
 the same mind. 
 
 What a light this little incident throws on the innate 
 vice of Protection, which causes men to consider no 
 interest but their own, and to sacrifice every other to 
 it! 
 
 Mr. Lubbock is startled at the bare idea of being- 
 
 o 
 
 considered a Fair Trader. He is one nevertheless. 
 Like M. Jourdain in the play, who had been talking 
 prose all his life without knowing it, Mr. Lubbock, for 
 the last few years, in his advocacy of countervailing 
 duties on foreign sugar, has been not only talking, but 
 writing, Fair Trade, and henceforward, whether he likes 
 it or not, he must be reckoned as one of the prophets of 
 that faith. 
 
 Mr. Lubbock, it appears, is a prominent member of 
 bodies known as the West Indian, and the Anti-Sugar 
 Bounties, Societies, whose object it is to obtain the 
 imposition of duties to countervail the bounties which 
 Protectionist nations, by the operations of their fiscal 
 laws, give on the exportation of sugar. The interests he 
 has taken in charge are those of the Colonial growers of 
 cane-sugar, and those of our home refiners, and I am not 
 aware that, up to the date of the Report of the Trade 
 Commission, he has ever advocated the protection of any 
 interests but these.
 
 254 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 As to the interests I have named, he has been in- 
 stant, in season and out of season, in pressing what he 
 considers their claims, and, minute as these interests are 
 in comparison with those of the rest of the community, 
 it is clear that he would sacrifice these latter without a 
 moment's hesitation if he could thereby promote that of 
 his clients. 
 
 As to the views put forward in the Minority Report 
 being " in strict accordance with the doctrines of our 
 highest economical authorities on Free Trade," that is a 
 delusion on his part. Those views preach Protection, 
 and nothing else but Protection. 
 
 1. What is a countervailing duty on all foreign refined 
 sugar, and raw beetroot sugar, in favour of home 
 refiners and Colonial growers, but Protection ? 
 
 2. What are lo or 15 per cent, ad valorem duties on 
 all manufactures imported from foreign countries but 
 Protection ? 
 
 3. What are discriminating duties of 10 per cent, ad 
 valorem on food products, in favour of India and the 
 Colonies and against foreign countries, but Protec- 
 tion } 
 
 What can be the state of mind of any man who can 
 suppose that such views as these are not only held by 
 Free Traders, but are in "accordance" with the doctrines 
 of the " highest economical authorities on Free Trade " ? 
 The question arises, who are these latter to whom reference 
 is made, and what utterances on the subject have they 
 made ? I am not aware of any authority on Free Trade 
 who has not deprecated the imposition on any pretence 
 of countervailing duties. In Free Trade the only duties 
 which are tolerated are those which are imposed for the 
 sake of revenue only, and which have no taint of Pro-
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 255 
 
 tection in them. Such is not the case with the proposed 
 sugar duties. I have, however, so fully dealt with the 
 subject in previous chapters that I need not discuss it 
 further here. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR'S REPORT. 
 
 Synopsis — Our Land System the Cause, General, Direct, and Permanent, 
 producing Depression in Agriculture, Mining, and Manufactures. 
 
 Mr. Arthur O'Connor found himself unable to sign 
 either of the Reports. He differs from the majority as 
 to the suitability and sufficiency of the evidence adduced, 
 and considers that they have not adequately recognised 
 and set forth the extent and severity of the depression ; 
 while neither the Majority Report nor the Minority 
 Report, in his opinion, contains a sufficient exposition of 
 the gravity and permanent character of the causes 
 which are now operating to prevent the growth of our 
 chief industries from keeping pace with that of the 
 population, an undue importance being attributed to 
 causes of a minor, transient, or doubtful character, while 
 causes, general, direct, and obvious, are passed over 
 altogether, or referred to as of secondary importance. 
 
 After some comments on the statistics (4) as to In- 
 come Tax returns, Poor Law relief, Savings Bank 
 deposits, and Bankruptcy — the value of which he thinks 
 is too doubtful to admit of any safe deductions regarding 
 the real condition of the industrial community — Mr. 
 O'Connor proceeds to say, after giving them the utmost 
 weight (5), that two great facts still remain, viz : —
 
 256 FAIR tradp: unmasked. 
 
 "That the aggregate of commodities produced by the capita! and 
 labour of the United Kingdom continues to increase, and at the same time 
 the classes most directly concerned with the production of those commodi- 
 ties, whether as capitalists or workmen, are suffering from reduction of 
 profit and diminution or cessation of employment. The output of industry 
 is greater, the reward of industry is less. The amount of wealth created is 
 on the increase, but the creators of that wealth obtain a smaller share of it. 
 It is clear that of the proceeds of labour in these countries of late years a 
 smaller proportion has fallen to the share of the producing classes than for- 
 merly, the reward of capital and management being less, and the employ- 
 ment of labour not so full and continuous." 
 
 He then expresses himself dissatisfied with various 
 reasons given by different witnesses to account for their 
 experiences, and unable to accept as an adequate explana- 
 tion the minor and transient influences which appear to 
 some of them sufficient to explain the phenomenon. 
 Among these he counts the change which has taken place 
 in the method of distribution owing to more direct and 
 rapid communication, the consequent elimination of some 
 classes of middlemen, and the absence of necessity for 
 keeping large stocks on hand. He then discusses "over- 
 production," declares general over-production to be 
 impossible ; that partial over-production must soon cor- 
 rect itself; and that such an explanation is unsatisfactory, 
 owing to the fact that those who put it forward are 
 driven to bring in aid of it another influence, to which, 
 indeed, some ascribe over-production itself, viz., the Pro- 
 tectionist policy of certain foreign countries, and the 
 successful foreign competition thence resulting. 
 
 As to foreign competition (6c) and, as connected 
 with it, foreign tariffs and bounties, which are said to 
 form the third cause, to which in part the depression is 
 attributed, he says that : — 
 
 " Those who object to the increasing introduction of foreign productions 
 as displacing home labour, appear to forget that the foreigners who send
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 257 
 
 goods over here do not fiirnisli them for gratuitous distribution, but only in 
 consideration of other commodities which are either dirtctly or indirectly 
 the produce of home industry." 
 
 "That Protective larifls check imports is true. . . . They are a barrier 
 in the way of commercial intercourse, and, like every other impediment of 
 the kind, may be recognised as aggravating depression of trade. If there 
 were similar barriers on this side also, the impediment to commerce would 
 be doubled ; foreign goods, now imported in exchange for home produc- 
 tions, would be kept out, and exports also would, in consequence, be 
 checked. There are those who say that Protective duties here would 
 benefit trade and industry ; but thtir speculations are more curious than 
 convincing." 
 
 Moreover, that 
 
 "The effect of these foreign tariffs and bounties has been very 
 much exaggerated. Mr. J. A. Crowe, commercial attache to the British 
 embassies and legations in Europe, a gentleman of conspicuous ability 
 and the widest information, testified that while the French shipping 
 bounties had benefited the owners of ships, it had not greaily increased 
 French shipping, nor enabled it to cut out the ships of other countries ; that 
 it had not increased French shipbuilding at all, nor transferred any of the 
 iron shipbuilding from this country to France; and that, in his opinion, 
 the money had been simply wasted. Again, the evidence showed that the 
 heavy duty imposed upon cotton yarns imported into Germany is a serious 
 burden to the German manufacture of cotton velvet, so that whatever 
 the spinners gain the weavers lose ; and that, so far I'rom benefiting Ger- 
 many, the Protective duty is actually injurious to German industry. It may 
 be fairly said to result from the evidence that every one of these protective 
 duties saddles the community imposing it with unnecessary expenditure for 
 the benefit of a particular interest. The effect of the Continental sugar 
 duties and bounties is to burden the Continental communities for the 
 benefit of the foreign manufacturer, and to furnish the consume s in these 
 countries with sugar cheaper than the British manufacturer can supply." 
 
 These minor causes, however, he says (/a), 
 
 "Affect only particular interests; there is another of a different and 
 more general character which affects them all, viz. the fall in prices as 
 measured in terms of gold." 
 
 Another, and from a commercial standpoint, much 
 more important effect, he proceeds to say (7B), 
 
 R
 
 258 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 •' Is the appearance of a falling market, which naturally tends to check 
 speculation, and imposes caution on producers." 
 
 Regarding, therefore (8), the matters above-mentioned 
 as only minor, transient, or doubtful causes of the 
 admitted depression, Mr. O'Connor proceeds 
 
 y To inquire whether the evidence divulged any other cause, general, 
 direct and permanent, and of such a nature as to account sufficiently for 
 the ascertained state of things." 
 
 He thinks 
 
 " .'^uch a cause is to be found manifesting itself more or less throughout 
 the evidence, that its effect may be traced through the whole industrial 
 S)stem, but that its operation is more clearly recognisable where it is 
 .•■trongest, and that it is strongest where it i-; most direct. It is more 
 direct in the industries of production than in the industries of distribution, 
 and among the industries of production it is more obvious in those which 
 are primaiy or fundamental than in those which are less so." 
 
 P^irst, agriculture (8a) : — 
 
 "The loss in the value of the crops alone is estimated by Sir J. Caird 
 at nearly ;[^io,ooo,ooo a year for the last ten years. The percentage of the 
 population employed in agriculture has diminished during the last thirty 
 years by more than 7 per cent, in Ireland, more than 8 per cent, in Scot- 
 land, and more than 9 per cent, in England. There is also a diminution in 
 the productive capacity of the land itself. This has caused a decrease in 
 the purchasing power of the agricultural classes. This contraction in 
 quantity and exchangeable value is ascribable ' in part to bad seasons 
 through a number of years,' but much more to 'the competition of the 
 produce of other soils, which can be cultivated under more favourable con- 
 ditions than those which affect our own.' " 
 
 After speaking of the losses which British farmers 
 have had, in consequence, to submit to in paying rent 
 out of capital, he goes on to state that it plainly 
 appeared that 
 
 " The charge which is levied upon agricultural industry in Great Britain 
 is so heavy that farming cannot any longer be carried on at a profit, and 
 that the capital of the farmer is being eaten up in rent."
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 259 
 
 In Ireland the state of things, he says, " is even 
 worse." There 
 
 "Agriculture is the only great industry, and the whole community 
 being, in fact, dependent upon it, the depression is especially severe." 
 
 The majority of the small farmers farm, not for profit, 
 but only for bare subsistence, 
 
 " And the deprer sion, therefore, is far more keenly felt among them than 
 in the corresponding class in Great Britain, the depression being more 
 disastrous there than in this country, because the rents in Ireland, being 
 higher than here, that is, they represent a larger proportion of the produce 
 of the farms." 
 
 After calling attention to the evidence of Mr. Mur- 
 rough on the subject of the agricultural depression in 
 Ireland, he says that 
 
 "It was apparent that in both portions of the United Kingdom so heavy 
 a burden is placed upon the agricultural industry in the shape of the charge 
 for the use of land, that the profits of industry are rapidly di.-apj earing, 
 and the capital of the farmers is being absorbed in rent." 
 
 Secondly, mining (8b). Here, he says, from the 
 same cause, we find a similar efiect. As the rents of 
 farms have absorbed the profits of industry, so in mining 
 the dead rents, the way-leave rents, royalties, and 
 similar charges to land-owners, place upon industry an 
 undue and increasing burden. The evidence from 
 Durham showed that with a reduced output the price of 
 coal was lower, and that while the workman obtained 
 lower wages, and the employer little or no profit, the 
 burden of royalties was greater, the lessee, who has sunk 
 a large capital in meeting such charges, being practically 
 compelled to continue his unfortunate undertaking. 
 K 2
 
 26o FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 After calling attention to a draft of observations by him 
 on the evidence respecting these points, to be found at 
 p. 91 of the Report, Mr. O'Connor proceeds to give in 
 one or two particulars, the effect of high royalties here 
 on iron ore, and coal, as compared with those abroad, 
 and mentions the fact, as shown in the evidence, that 
 out of 32s., the price in January, 1886, of a ton of 
 pig-iron in the Cleveland district, after payment of 7s. 
 to the railway companies for conveyance of minerals, 
 20s. for labour, and 2s. for stores, local taxation, etc., the 
 whole of the 3s. remaining went to the land-owner as 
 royalty. 
 
 Thirdly, manufactures (8c). After calling attention 
 to one aspect of the foreign trade which he thinks 
 deserves close attention, viz. the great increase of the 
 imports of manufactured goods as compared with the 
 import of raw materials — more than 100 per cent, against 
 8 or 9 per cent. — Mr. O'Connor proceeds to instance, 
 from the evidence, how in London, Birmingham, Shef- 
 field, and Jarrow, ground-rents are constantly being 
 increased out of proportion to the profits earned, the 
 amounts having to be paid for the use of land constitut- 
 ing a burden upon industry which is constantly becoming 
 heavier, both absolutely and relatively, the more so on 
 account of the appreciation of gold, in terms of which 
 the payments have to be made. 
 
 He then sums up as follows : — 
 
 " It thus appears that over the entire country there is a cause at work, 
 general, permanent, and far-reaching, affecting every branch of industry, 
 in mine, and farm, and factory, the effects of which are traceable in the 
 languishing condition of the agricultural, and the mining, and the manu- 
 facturing interests. The cause is the fact that under the existing land 
 System the owners of the soil are able to obtain, and do exact, so large a
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 26l 
 
 proportion of the proceeds of the industry of the United Kingdom, that 
 the remainder is insufficient to secure adequate remuneration to the in- 
 dustrial classes, either in the shape of wages to operatives, -or reasonable 
 profit to the organisers of labour, the employers, or capitalists." 
 
 Mr. O'Connor's Report is in some respects the most 
 valuable utterance on the depression which the Commis- 
 sion has brought forth ; and there is little in it to which, 
 in my opinion, e.xception can be taken. The way in 
 which he exposes the flimsy sophistries of the Protec- 
 tionist on either side of the table at which he sat as 
 Commissioner is specially to be commended. He tells 
 these gentlemen that those who object to the increasing 
 introduction of foreign productions, as displacing home 
 labour, appear to forget that the foreigners who send 
 goods over here do not furnish them for gratuitous dis- 
 tribution, but only in consideration of other commodities 
 which are cither directly or indirectly the produce of home 
 industry. He tells them also, what none of them seem 
 to apprehend, that Protective tariffs check imports, that 
 they are barriers in the way of commercial intercourse, 
 and that if there were similar barriers on this side also 
 the impediment to commerce would be doubled ; foreign 
 goods now imported in exchange for home productions 
 would be kept out, and exports also would in conse- 
 quence be checked. While of those who say that 
 Protective duties here would benefit trade, he adds: 
 " Their speculations are more curious than convinc- 
 ing. 
 
 His remarks concerning the abortive nature of foreign 
 shipping bounties are also to be commended, as well as 
 those which refer to sugar, in which he points out the 
 effect of the bounties thereon in burdening Continental 
 communities for the benefit of their manufacturers, by
 
 262 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 which British consumers are furnished with sugar 
 cheaper than our manufacturers can supply it. 
 
 The only paragraphs to which I should demur are 
 No. 4, in which he deals with statistics, and No. 5, in 
 which he says : — 
 
 "That of the proceeds of labour in this country of late years a smaller 
 proportion has fallen to the share of the producing classes than formerly, 
 the reward of capital and management being less, and the employment of 
 labour not so full and continuous." 
 
 Much depends, of course, on the sense in which the term 
 " producing classes " is used. It is certain that capital 
 has not received so large a share as formerly, and, as all 
 the statistics we have show, it is equally certain that 
 labour has received a larger share than formerly for the 
 services rendered. But I have treated these subjects in 
 previous chapters, and I need not further refer to them 
 here. The part of his Report which deserves special 
 commendation is that in which he succinctly traces out 
 what he considers to be the cause — general, direct, and 
 permanent — which is at the bottom of the present state 
 of things. He shows how in agriculture, in mining, and 
 in manufacturing, that monopolist the landowner is en- 
 abled to appropriate to himself an undue and ever- 
 increasing proportion of the material wealth created by 
 capital and labour. This, the concluding portion of his 
 Report, I think, is specially valuable, and I commend it 
 to the attention of all who take an interest in a question 
 which is every day acquiring increased importance, and 
 is every day calling louder and louder for solution.
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 263 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 No Evidence that Tariffs and Bounties have restricted our Trade or 
 Lessened our Total Production of Exchangeable Wealth — Capital 
 Accumulating Faster than Population — The Percentage Fallacy — 
 Absurd and Contradictory Arguments — Duties Drive Competition 
 into Neutral Markets — Economic F^quipment of the " Four " — Fal- 
 lacies — Sugar and Agr'culture — Universal Free Trade to bring on a 
 Manufacturer's Millennium, but Agriculture to be left out in the Cold — 
 No Notice of Effects of Land Monopoly — No adequate Conception of 
 Economic I'orces at Work — Their General Incompetence. 
 
 The Situation Reviewed — Protection the Outcome of War — The United 
 States and the Continent of Europe — Contrast — The Coming Struggle 
 in the United States between Free Trade and Protection fraught with 
 Momentous Consequences. 
 
 The preceding pages w'll have enabled the reader to 
 form some idea of the views which the four Commis- 
 sioners who formed the minority entertain as to the 
 nature of some of the principal causes of the depression 
 and as to the remedies called for. 
 
 As stated in the Introduction, I have confined the 
 discussion to those causes which, in their opinion, arise 
 out of the action of foreign Protectionist nations as 
 manifested by hostile tariffs, and to the proposals for 
 changes in our fiscal system which they consider will 
 countervail the action of those tariffs. 
 
 As regards these causes, their leading idea is that 
 foreign Protectionist tariffs, and foreign bounties, direct 
 and indirect, cramp the exercise of our industries, and 
 seriously limit our total production of exchangeable 
 wealth ; while, as to the remedies therefor we are told 
 that they are three — that we must (i) impose duties to
 
 264 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 countervail these bounties, that (2) we must levy duties 
 on all foreign manufactures, and that (3) we must set up 
 a preferential treatment of our Colonies and dependencies 
 as regards food products. 
 
 When, however, we come to examine their premises, 
 and the arguments by which they support their con- 
 clusions, we find that the former have no basis of fact, 
 and are for the most part pure assumptions ; while the 
 latter are not only what Mr. O'Connor mildly calls 
 " speculations more curious than convincing," but are 
 absurd in themselves, mutually destructive, and lead to 
 deductions the very opposite to what the "Four" wish 
 to draw. 
 
 In the first place, there is no evidence whatever that 
 these tariffs and bounties restrict our trade, limit our 
 markets, and decrease our total production of exchange- 
 able wealth. The "Four" themselves admit (34) "that 
 a large accumulation of capital has been in progress, 
 even during the depression"; while, as. to the distri- 
 bution of the wealth created, they also admit (91) "that 
 there is no feature in the situation . . . more satis- 
 factory than the improvement which has taken place in 
 the condition of our labouring population during the last 
 thirty or forty years " ; and they also point out (93) 
 " that the share of the total reward of production which 
 now falls to labour is larger, and the share which falls to 
 capital much less, than in times past." 
 
 The Majority Report on this subject says (33) : — 
 
 " If the aggregate quantity of commodities produced is on the increase, 
 and is growing at a more rapid rate than the population, we cannot regard 
 the depression in particular industries, or among particular classes of pro- 
 ducers, as an indication of a corresponding national loss " ; 
 
 and in (34) :—
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 265 
 
 "That in recent years, and more particularly in the yeirs during which 
 the depression of trade has prevailed, the production of commodities gener- 
 ally and the accumulation of capital in this country has been proceeding at 
 a rate more rapid than the increase of population " ; 
 
 while, as regards our foreign trade, they say (36) : — 
 
 " That the statistics show an apparent falling off in some respects, but 
 this is almost entirely due to the continuous fall in prices which has 
 been in progress since 1873, and more particularly to the fall in the prices 
 of raw materials." 
 
 It is clear, therefore, that so far from there having 
 been any decrease in production, there has been a vast 
 increase, with a distribution thereof more favourable to 
 the masses than was the case formerly. The " Four " bring 
 forward some statistics to prove their case, and their 
 figures show that in some of our important industries 
 there is some actual or relative decline ; but, inasmuch 
 as our total production has increased, it is clear that 
 other industries must have increased, or have come into 
 being. To these they make no reference whatever. 
 They simply ignore their existence. Their method 
 of treating statistics, moreover, is characteristic. They 
 fall headlong into the percentage, or proportion, fallacy, 
 which it would seem no Fair Trader can avoid, although 
 it has been exposed times without number. They re- 
 mind one of somebody who was endeavouring to prove 
 that total abstinence was not good for the Japanese, at 
 all events, because during the preceding year 50 per 
 cent, of the total abstainers in Yokohama had died. 
 When the facts came to be examined, however, it was 
 found that there had been only two total abstainers in 
 that city, and that one of them had died of small- 
 pox.
 
 266 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 There is no ground whatever for the assertion that 
 foreign tariffs and bounties have lessened our aggregate 
 production of exchangeable wealth. 
 
 The " Four," however, assume this to be the case. 
 They, therefore, desire above all things to destroy the 
 hated foreign competition at home and abroad, and be- 
 lieving, with one of the witnesses already quoted, that 
 " we have laid ourselves out as a manufacturing nation 
 to supply the wants of other countries as well as our- 
 selves, and we must have some defensive duty that will 
 assist us to protect our own markets for ourselves," they 
 set to work to see how this is to be effected. 
 
 Their plan is, as we have seen, the imposition of 
 import duties on all foreign manufactures, and a 
 preferential treatment of our Colonies as regards food 
 products. 
 
 When we examine the arguments by which these 
 proposals for returning to the long-ago tried, and dis- 
 carded, system of Protection are supported, we find 
 them to be absurd, mutually destructive, and leading to 
 conclusions the very opposite to those which are intended 
 to be drawn. 
 
 When they tell us (129) that foreign competition in 
 our home market destroys the fair profits of producers, 
 and diminishes the employment of labour, we have to 
 remember that the " producers " they have in their mind 
 are not the 99 out of every 100 of our population to 
 whom the term properly belongs, but capital-owners 
 and employers of labour, whose interests are not 
 identical, as regards " fair profits," with those of the 
 99 ; and we have also to bear in mind that foreign 
 importations, far from diminishing the employment of 
 labour, increase not only the employment but the
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 267 
 
 reward for it — their statement being directly in the 
 teeth of their own axiom (58) : — 
 
 "The conditions of international trade are inflexible ; we can only in 
 the long run buy as largely and as freely as we are permitted to sell. 
 
 Having regard to the end they have in view, nothing 
 can be more absurd than their proposals. By the im- 
 position of duties they would drive foreign wares out of 
 our home market. But that would drive them into 
 neutral markets. Foreign imports give rise to profitable 
 exchanges between us and foreign nations. They arc 
 so profitable that cost of sea-transport can be incurred 
 with a benefit to both parties, while our *' producers " 
 enjoy a natural Protection arising from the cost of this 
 sea-transport. If we destroy these imports, we destroy 
 an internal and an external trade, the former being the 
 exchanges which take place at home, the latter being 
 our lion's share of the shipping business. 
 
 Foreign competition, being killed in our home 
 market, will, however, flourish in neutral markets, to 
 which we shall have driven it, and our " producers " will 
 have to meet it there in increased intensity and fierce- 
 ness. Not being able to secure what they would call 
 " fair profits " here, where their goods have no sea- 
 carriage to pay, they would have to compete in markets 
 to which cost of carriage has to be added. And this is 
 what they call (129) the "effectual remedy we have at 
 command " for securing these fair profits, and main- 
 taining the employment of labour. 
 
 They would, moreover, attack the foreigner abroad 
 by setting up (137) " a slightly preferential treatment of 
 the food products of India and the Colonies over those
 
 268 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 of foreign nations." Having dealt with this subject in a 
 previous chapter, I will only say here that if it were to 
 be carried out it would at once lessen production all 
 round : our home trade, our foreign trade, our shipping, 
 would at once fall off; there would be less employment 
 for our labourers, who would have to pay higher prices 
 for the necessaries of life, while they would be receiving 
 lower wages ; and thus want and suffering would be 
 brought into the homes of the masses. 
 
 When we ask why all this suffering is to be incurred, 
 we learn that it is in order to wreak our spite on the 
 United States, whose " more extreme Protectionist 
 policy" is supposed by the "Four" to injure us. We 
 are told that we shall thereby divert to our Colonies 
 the capital and labour which now flow to the States. 
 But what good that will do us is past finding out, since 
 the " Four " themselves tell us that as our Colonies grow 
 in population and wealth they will adopt the very policy 
 of which we now complain. 
 
 And for such an absurd object as this they would 
 have us declare commercial war against every foreign 
 nation ; would have us run the risk — nay, incur the cer- 
 tainty — of reprisals from our rivals, and at one blow 
 surrender the unique position we hold — that of receiving 
 the " most favoured nation " treatment from every people 
 on earth. 
 
 It is impossible to imagine a course more calculated 
 to bring about national commercial disaster than the 
 policy which the " Four " advocate. 
 
 Nothing but an incapacity to apprehend economic 
 truths could have led them to weave the tangled web of 
 absurdities and inconsistencies which their Report pre- 
 sents. Two of them, as we have seen, are philosophes
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 269 
 
 sans savoir — Protectionists without knowing it ; they arc 
 under the impression that the arguments and proposals 
 of the "Four" are in accordance with the doctrines of 
 Free Trade ! 
 
 Let us review some of them. They complain (56) 
 of the ever-increasing invasions of our home market by 
 foreign productions which is to render difficult a suffi- 
 ciency of employment for our rapidly growing popu- 
 lation, forgetful of their own dictum (58) as to the 
 impossibility of anything being sold here without some- 
 thing being bought by the foreigner in return. 
 
 They complain (82) of the unprofitableness of foreign 
 trade which, if the phrase has any meaning, implies that 
 we are selling our wares to the foreigner at too low a 
 price, while they would do all in their power to prevent 
 the foreigner doing that to us — notably in the case of 
 sugar — nay, they would render our foreign trade still 
 more unprofitable, for they would, by their proposed 
 duties, secure our " producers " high prices for their 
 goods at home, in order to enable them to sell them to 
 the foreigner at low prices. 
 
 They descant (iii) on the necessity of opening out 
 new markets for our trade, and yet decry (59, ic6) the 
 one great instrument we have for opening them, that is 
 by our foreign investments. 
 
 They show (59) a total incapacity to apprehend the 
 effects of importations of commodities in payment of 
 interest on these foreign investments — being of opinion 
 even that 
 
 " The large and increasing amount of food, clothing, and other com- 
 modiiies imported in pa) mtnt . . . without a corresponding export of the 
 productions of our own industiics directly operates to limit the employment 
 of labour in this country."
 
 2/0 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 They therefore suppose that employment is lessened 
 because the products are consumed and enjoyed at 
 home instead of being sent abroad embodied in material 
 objects. 
 
 They tell us {Gy) that increased production and low 
 prices have lessened the reward of those engaged in 
 production, and must have imposed a serious check on 
 our general prosperity, which dictum, considering that 
 those engaged in production form 99 per cent, of our 
 population, is simple nonsense, to say nothing of its 
 being in direct contradiction to what they admit (91-93) 
 as to the general improvement of the community. 
 
 They tell us (133) 
 
 "That to buy everything in the cheapest market — though not permitted 
 to sell in the dearest — may be the best policy so long as we can find other 
 full and equally remunerative employment for the home enterprise and in- 
 dustry which we displace in so doing " ; 
 
 In blissful ignorance that buying in the cheapest market 
 and selling in the dearest constitute one indivisible act, 
 and are not two distinct operations. 
 
 They think (130) that duties of 10 or 15 per cent. 
 ad valorem will keep out foreign manufactures, regard- 
 less of experience on all sides which shows that duties 
 treble these do not keep them out, and that nothing short 
 of actual prohibition will build up an impassable wall 
 against the natural craving of nations to trade. 
 
 They think that it is possible for us to keep to these 
 10 or 15 per cent, duties, regardless of what has oc- 
 curred, and is occurring, in Germany, the United States, 
 France, Italy, Belgium, and Russia. 
 
 The above are some of the absurdities which crop up 
 in every page of the Report. We cannot be surprised
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 27I 
 
 at them, hov\ever, when we consider the sort of economic 
 equipment which the " Four " bring to their task. What 
 can we expect from men who suppose that the proposed 
 three remedies are in accordance with the doctrines of 
 Free Trade ; who propose duties against all manu- 
 factures, although they profess to work not against 
 natural advantages but against artificial ones, as if these 
 two could be separated, and as if their effects were not 
 identical ; who insinuate that it would be politic to pro- 
 hibit the export of machinery ; who imagine that uni- 
 versal Free Trade would lessen competition ; who have 
 a lurking idea, as one of their number, Lord Dunraven, 
 says, of some obligation on the part of Governments to 
 provide work for their populations, and to legislate 
 against the effect of machinery in displacing labour ; 
 who propose Protection for manufactures, but not for 
 agriculture, as if that could be justly done, or as if it 
 were possible to protect one without protecting the 
 other; who are ignorant of the fact that only landlords 
 and other monopoly-owners gain by import duties, while 
 all other classes lose ; who think that we, of all the 
 nations of the earth to whom the utmost freedom of 
 exchange is of vital necessity, should voluntarily raise 
 up barriers to free interchange ; who fancy that we tax 
 the foreigner and not ourselves by levying import duties .-' 
 Their inconsistency is conspicuously shown in their 
 treatment of the sugar refining interest on the one hand, 
 and of agriculture on the other, the former being one of 
 the most insignificant, while the latter is the largest 
 single interest we have. Wiiile sugar refining is to be 
 protected by duties, agriculture is to be left to struggle 
 on as best it may. The following passage (143) will be 
 strangely interesting to those of our agriculturists who
 
 2/0 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 They therefore suppose that employment is lessened 
 because the products are consumed and enjoyed at 
 home instead of being sent abroad embodied in material 
 objects. 
 
 They tell us {6"/) that increased production and low 
 prices have lessened the reward of those engaged in 
 production, and must have imposed a serious check on 
 our general prosperity, which dictum, considering that 
 those engaged in production form 99 per cent, of our 
 population, is simple nonsense, to say nothing of its 
 being in direct contradiction to what they admit (91-93) 
 as to the general improvement of the community. 
 
 They tell us (133) 
 
 "Tliat to buy everything in the cheapest market — though not permitted 
 to sell in the dearest — may be the best policy so long as we can find other 
 full and equally remunerative employment for the home enterprise and in- 
 dustry which we displace in so doing " ; 
 
 In blissful ignorance that buying in the cheapest market 
 and selling in the dearest constitute one indivisible act, 
 and are not two distinct operations. 
 
 They think (130) that duties of 10 or 15 per cent. 
 ad valorem will keep out foreign manufactures, regard- 
 less of experience on all sides which shows that duties 
 treble these do not keep them out, and that nothing short 
 of actual prohibition will build up an impassable wall 
 against the natural craving of nations to trade. 
 
 They think that it is possible for us to keep to these 
 10 or 15 per cent, duties, regardless of what has oc- 
 curred, and is occurring, in Germany, the United States, 
 France, Italy, Belgium, and Russia. 
 
 The above are some of the absurdities which crop up 
 in every page of the Report. We cannot be surprised
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 2/1 
 
 at. them, hov\ever, when we consider the sort of economic 
 equipment which the " Four" bring to their task. What 
 can we expect from men who suppose that the proposed 
 three remedies are in accordance with the doctrines of 
 Free Trade ; who propose duties against all manu- 
 factures, although they profess to work not against 
 natural advantages but against artificial ones, as if these 
 two could be separated, and as if their effects were not 
 identical ; who insinuate that it would be politic to pro- 
 hibit the export of machinery ; who imagine that uni- 
 versal Free Trade would lessen competition ; who have 
 a lurking idea, as one of their number, Lord Dunraven, 
 says, of some obligation on the part of Governments to 
 provide work for their populations, and to legislate 
 against the effect of machinery in displacing labour ; 
 who propose Protection for manufactures, but not for 
 agriculture, as if that could be justly done, or as if it 
 were possible to protect one without protecting the 
 other; who are ignorant of the fact that only landlords 
 and other monopoly-owners gain by import duties, while 
 all other classes lose ; who think that we, of all the 
 nations of the earth to whom the utmost freedom of 
 exchange is of vital necessity, should voluntarily raise 
 up barriers to free interchange ; who fancy that we tax 
 the foreigner and not ourselves by levying import duties ? 
 Their inconsistency is conspicuously shown in their 
 treatment of the sugar refining interest on the one hand, 
 and of agriculture on the other, the former being one of 
 the most insignificant, while the latter is the largest 
 single interest we have. While sugar refining is to be 
 protected by duties, agriculture is to be left to struggle 
 on as best it may. The following passage (143) will be 
 strangely interesting to those of our agriculturists who
 
 272 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 are looking to Fair Trade to help them in their 
 distress : — 
 
 " We fear that neither these nor any otiier measures which could be 
 proposed would effectually relieve the very serious depression of agriculture, 
 the position of which is, under existing circumstances, inherently weaker 
 than that of other leading industries. Under universal Free Trade our great 
 manufactures of metals and textiles would at once, in the face of all 
 rivalry, expand to the utmost limits of the available labour, whilst our 
 agriculture would still have to meet foreign competition based on superior 
 natural advantages. Again, under a system of Free Trade within the Empire 
 and moderate duties on the import of foreign food and manufactures, our 
 manufacturers would have little to fear from Indian or colonial competition, 
 which to our agriculturists would be real and formidable." 
 
 We learn from this that agriculture, being an industry 
 inherently weaker than other leading ones, is to be 
 left to languish, which is an extraordinary doctrine for 
 Protectionists to preach. 
 
 Then we are presented with two pictures, one of 
 universal Free Trade, and another of Free Trade 
 within the Empire. Under both of these we are to have 
 a sort of manufacturers' millennium, while under the 
 former, our poor agriculturists would still have to face 
 foreign competition based on superior natural advan- 
 tages ; and under the latter they would have from India 
 and the Colonies a real and formidable competition, the 
 proposed duties, however, operating to check the decline 
 of arable cultivation, etc. 
 
 All this is curious enough, but it becomes still more 
 curious when we read in the very next paragraph 
 (144):— 
 
 "We cannot pass from this subject without expressing our conviction 
 that the continuous decline of agricultural production and employment, 
 considered in regard to its present and future effect on the physical health 
 and moral and social condition of the people, and on the wealth and
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 273 
 
 strength of the nation, constitutes a danger so grave as to demand the 
 anxious consideration of the country and the legislature." 
 
 Could there be a more lame and impotent con- 
 clusion ? 
 
 Then there is their omission to take any adequate 
 notice of the effects of land monopoly on the distri- 
 bution of wealth. Nothing was more clearly brought 
 out in evidence than the fact of rents and royalties 
 eating up profits, and so discouraging industry. This 
 reproach, however, they have to share with the majority. 
 Only one member of the Commission, Mr. Arthur 
 O'Connor, has had the perspicacity to see, and the 
 courage to attack, the monster which eats out the very 
 heart of industry. 
 
 The evils which arise out of our system of the tenure 
 and devolution of land are notorious. Great, however, 
 as are the evils which spring out of the laws which 
 govern the occupation of agricultural lands, they are 
 as naught when compared with what takes place in our 
 cities. The rural landowner is for the most part a perse n 
 known to his tenants, with whom he is often in sympathy, 
 he is accessible, and somewhat amenable to public 
 opinion, and he is ready at times to remit rents rendered 
 onerous by circumstances. 
 
 On the other hand, in cities where men, from the 
 necessities of existence, are forced to congregate, and to 
 carry on industrial occupations, the landlord is for the 
 most part an invisible being, as mysterious, and as diffi- 
 cult of access, as the Tycoon of Japan. He confiscates 
 every improvement ; he laughs at public opinion ; all he 
 does is to screw up and receive his rents. There is no 
 class, rich or poor, which does not contribute something 
 s
 
 2/6 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 
 
 Gospel of Scarcity, but before I lay down my pen it may 
 be useful to take a glance at the situation with regard to 
 the great question of Free Trade versus Protection, 
 which, in various ways, is agitating almost every civilised 
 community. 
 
 First, let us take the Continent of Europe. These 
 several facts confront us : (ij The vast armaments which 
 every great nation feels it necessary for its existence, or 
 for its safety, to keep up ; (2) the constant increase of 
 national indebtedness involving ever increasing national 
 burdens ; (3) the constant increase of taxation in order 
 to meet these burdens, principally by increased Customs 
 duties, which, as levied, constitute increase of Protection. 
 
 Then if we cross the Atlantic, we see the United 
 States in possession of an annual surplus of ^25,000,000, 
 raised by high Protective duties, which surplus arises 
 from the absence of those armaments which are the 
 curse and disgrace of Europe. 
 
 If, next, we look at our own position, we find that it 
 is one between these two extremes. We have our arma- 
 ments and our Customs duties, but the expense of the 
 former are well within our means, while in the latter there 
 is not a single Protective duty ; we manage to pay off 
 some 5 or 6 millions of debt annually, and should 
 manage to do much more if we, like our Transatlantic 
 cousins, were freed from this curse of armaments. 
 
 Surely there is some moral in all this. On one side 
 of us we see nations plus large armaments, plus high 
 Protective duties, sinking year by year into the quagmire 
 of bankruptcy. On the other side we see a nation plus 
 high Protective duties, but minus armaments, accumulat- 
 ing an enormous surplus. The inference is clear. It is 
 war — war expenditure — which makes the whole difference
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 2'J^ 
 
 here, between deficit and surplus, between bankruptcy 
 and solvency. War is the mother of Protection. If 
 there were no wars, or preparations for war, there would 
 be no Protection. 
 
 Before these gigantic armaments became the mad- 
 ness of nations Protection was dying out. There was no 
 excuse for it ; there was no temptation for statesmen 
 hard pressed for means, nor occasion for designing mono- 
 polists to pretend that Protection stimulates industry, 
 and so increases the production of wealth. Our own 
 Protective system, now a thing of the past, arose out of 
 the wars which closed in 1815. The Protective system 
 of the United States arose out of their gigantic Civil 
 War. The Protective tariffs which are devouring the 
 vitals of the Continental peoples are nothing but the 
 outcome of the wars which have taken place during the 
 last thirty or forty years. Some of our self-governed 
 Colonies, it is true, have followed the evil example from 
 mere imitativeness, while others have not done so. In 
 Australia we can see the rival systems at work side by 
 side in New South Wales and Victoria, and there can be 
 no doubt as to which side the victory will incline; while 
 India, under the stimulus of PVee Trade, has astonished 
 the world by a vast increase in her foreign trade, while 
 other nations have seriously retrogressed. 
 
 So long as these Continental armaments last, there 
 can be only increasing debt, increasing taxation, and con- 
 sequently increasing Protection ; and this will go on 
 until something happens which will cause the nations to 
 cast aside the bandages which now obstruct their sight, 
 and exorcise the demon of war. Unless that happens 
 they must sink lower and lower into universal bank- 
 ruptcy.
 
 278 FAIR tradp: unmask?:d. 
 
 In the United States, on the other hand, we are pre- 
 sented with a problem in which the conditions are 
 reversed. They have no war expenditure to speak of, yet 
 their war taxation is kept up, the result being an annual 
 surplus of 25 millions sterling. What will they do with 
 it ? Up to this moment their surplus has been spent in the 
 redemption of debt, and so the money collected has gone 
 back into circulation ; but now they are on the point of 
 paying off the last bond which can be called in for three 
 years to come, and the question arises. What will they 
 do in the meantime ? for if some remedy be not quickly 
 found, and applied, a currency crisis must arise. The 
 Protectionists, however, have not been idle. They have 
 used every endeavour to get internal taxation reduced, so 
 as to keep alive their enormous tariff; they have gravely 
 pretended that their shores are undefended, and they have 
 voted as much money as they could for the fortification 
 of their harbours, and for an ironclad fleet ; and they 
 have discovered that, twenty-two years after the cessation 
 of the Civil War, there are more persons entitled to com- 
 pensation for losses, or services, in that war than there 
 were on the morrow of Lee's surrender. They have done 
 everything they could to cause the dissipation of this 
 surplus, but, in spite of all their efforts, it continues to 
 increase with the increase of population ; and it is becom- 
 ing clearer and clearer every day that a death struggle 
 between Free Trade and Protection must soon commence 
 in the States. 
 
 The result of that struggle is fraught with momentous 
 consequences, not only to the Americans but to the 
 world at large. It involves the destinies of nations. 
 The example of the United States as regards Protection 
 has been pointed to as an instance of the prosperity
 
 FAIR TRADE UNMASKED. 279 
 
 which attends the adoption of that poh'cy. Those who 
 reason thus, however, confound the cuvi hoc with the 
 propter hoc, the example being worthless because, if we 
 look at the condition of other nations which adopt Pro- 
 tection, such as France or Russia, we find a different 
 result, which shows that the conclusion does not follow 
 from the premiss. 
 
 The coming struggle is one which will be watched 
 with intense interest by the civilised world. Should the 
 States adopt a Free Trade policy, as far as that may 
 consist in some moderate reduction of duties, it docs not 
 follow that that would result in getting rid of the sur- 
 plus, and they may be driven perforce to still further 
 lower their tariff until practically it protects but little. 
 Should such a policy be adopted — and it is difficult to 
 see how the struggle can end in any other way — it would 
 be productive of far-reaching consequences. The effect 
 on the nations would be electric. The militarism which 
 now weighs them down would burst as by a shell. It 
 would disappear, and with it would vanish the demon of 
 Protection. A new era for mankind would be inaugurated, 
 and at last Cobden's dream of Free Trade, Peace, 
 Goodwill among nations might become a reality.
 
 AGRICULTURE AND 
 BLMETALLISM. 
 
 "A NEW WAY TO PAY OLD DEBTS." 
 
 BiMETALLlSTS are persons who wish to remonetise 
 silver — that is, to make silver as well as gold legal tender 
 to any amount in the payment of debts. 
 
 They think that this can be effected by an agreement 
 among the principal commercial nations of the world for 
 the free and unlimited coinage of silver at some fixed 
 ratio with regard to gold. 
 
 Varying in their notions as to what this ratio should 
 be, some bimetallists wish to see silver restored to the 
 place it occupied in the currencies of the world pre- 
 viously to 1874, and advocate a return to the ratio of 
 15^ of silver to i of gold, which then existed in what 
 was called the Latin Union, which comprised France, 
 Belgium, Italy, Switzerland, and Greece. 
 
 The gold price of silver was then, roughly speaking, 
 6od. per ounce ; and the ratio in which it was coined, 
 15I to I. Its price now^ is about 42^d., which would 
 make the ratio 22 to i. Its fall in value with relation 
 to gold is therefore about 30 per cent. 
 
 Other bimetallists, recognising this fall, advocate the 
 fixing of a ratio of 20 of silver to i of gold. 
 
 The first section of bimetallists wishes to establish a 
 
 * March, 1899.
 
 282 AGRICULTURE AND BIMETALLISM. 
 
 rise in prices by reverting to the old ratio. The second 
 section is content to establish the ratio at or about the 
 present price of silver. The adoption of this course, 
 it is said, would steady prices, increase production, 
 facilitate commercial intercourse among the nations, and 
 be a general blessing to mankind. 
 
 It is not my purpose to discuss any of the questions 
 which arise out of all this, except its bearing upon 
 British agriculture, which, we are told, has been an 
 especial sufferer, among other industries, from the fall 
 in the gold price of silver. 
 
 Mr. Chaplin, who until very lately was a staunch 
 advocate of Protection, has cast that creed to the winds 
 and is now the great apostle of Bimetallism. He has 
 ranged himself among those who desire the free coinage 
 of silver at the ratio of I5| to l, and who, consequently, 
 wish to see a rise in prices. 
 
 He tells us that the fall in silver has specially affected 
 the English wheat-grower by driving down the price of 
 wheat, and forcing him to take only 30s. per quarter, 
 where he used to get 40s. 
 
 He says that this has come about in the following 
 manner. He points to India, which has a silver currency, 
 and which is a great competitor in wheat-growing. He 
 says, truly, that some fifteen years ago the pound sterling 
 could buy 10 silver rupees only, which were, conse- 
 quently, worth 2s. each ; whereas now it can buy 14^- 
 rupees, which are, consequently, worth now only about 
 IS. 4|d. 
 
 He says further, also truly, that prices in India, in 
 silver, being about the same as at the former period, it 
 follows that a pound sterling laid out there in wheat 
 now buys 45 per cent, more thereof than it did. He
 
 AGRICULTURE AND BIMETALLISM. 283 
 
 concludes from this that the Indian producer has been 
 enabled to undersell the English grower in the home 
 market, and to bring about the fall in wheat from 40s. 
 to 30s. 
 
 This difference of los. per quarter constitutes, he 
 says, a bounty on the export of Indian wheat to this 
 country. There never was a greater delusion. The 
 fallacy lies in reckoning the pound sterling in 1873 and 
 in 1889 as the same thing. 
 
 Physically speaking, this is true, for the coin is of the 
 same weight and fineness in gold. Economically speak- 
 ing, it is not the same thing, for a pound sterling in 1889 
 represents a greater quantity of human effort than it did 
 in 1873. 
 
 To obtain a pound sterling in 1873 a quantity in 
 other commodities had to be given for it, which may be 
 represented by the figure 100. In 1889, owing to the 
 fall in prices, the quantity to be given in exchange is, 
 say, 145. 
 
 If the holder of the pound sterling can now get 45 
 per cent, more wheat for it than he did in 1873, ^^ ^^ 
 the same time has to give 45 per cent, more of other 
 commodities in order to get it ; the same quantity of 
 Indian wheat exchanging for the same quantity of 
 English commodities whatever year be taken. 
 
 There is no more bounty or bonus on the export of 
 Indian wheat to England than there is on the export 
 of English commodities to India. 
 
 But there is another question. How can a rise in 
 prices owing to a remonetising of silver benefit the 
 Encflish farmer or labourer.-' If wheat should rise in 
 consequence, everything else would rise also, including 
 rents, wages, and cost of living generally.
 
 284 AGRICULTURE AND BIMETALLISM. 
 
 As regards the labourer wages would rise, but every- 
 thing he had to buy would rise also, and no benefit 
 would accrue to him. As regards the farmer he may 
 have a lease running, and so long as that lasts he would 
 benefit to some extent, but when the lease runs out, the 
 rent will be raised in full proportion to the rise in prices. 
 
 The English farmer has gone through all this sort of 
 thing in former times, and knows how it all works ; he is 
 not likely to be taken in again in this way. 
 
 The truth is that the only agricultural interest which 
 would gain by a rise in prices brought about by bi- 
 metallism consists of landlords who have mortgaged 
 their estates, or are in other ways bound to make fixed 
 payments in gold. 
 
 A rise in prices thus brought about would enable 
 them to screw up their rents, and thus more easily 
 discharge their liabilities. 
 
 This "NEW WAY TO PAY OLD DEBTS" Specially 
 commends itself to them.
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE 
 TRADE. 
 
 An Address delivered at the Annual General Meeting of the 
 Cobdcn Club, i8go. 
 
 I HAVE much pleasure in moving the adoption of 
 the report. I do so with the greater interest on this 
 occasion, because there are certain paragraphs therein 
 for which I am specially responsible, namely those 
 which touch on the state of commerce at home and 
 abroad. Two years ago, when I had the honour of 
 seconding the adoption of the report, I took the oppor- 
 tunity of making an address, in which I endeavoured to 
 gather into one focus the various facts presenting them- 
 selves to us on all sides, and to put before the Club 
 certain conclusions as to the probable course of affairs 
 between Free Trade on the one hand and Protection on 
 the other. With your permission I propose to pursue 
 the subject, taking the paragraphs I have referred to as 
 my text. On the former occasion I ventured to state 
 that we were then making a new departure, that we had 
 reached the end of great economic disturbances, and 
 had found a new basis ; and I predicted that Free Trade 
 as practised in this country was about to have a speedy
 
 286 
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 and remarkable triumph. The disturbing causes to 
 which I refer were five in number, and may be shortly- 
 described as (i) the opening up of new fields of pro- 
 duction in agriculture and mining, (2) the discovery of new 
 and cheaper processes of manufacture, (3) economies in 
 transport by land and sea, (4) the world-wide changes 
 wrought by electricity in all matters of commerce, (5) the 
 fall in prices owing to currency changes. I ventured to 
 say that these disturbing causes had spent their force, 
 and I argued from that that the obscuration which they 
 had raised during the fifteen years of their continuance 
 was about to pass away, and that we were about to wit- 
 ness beyond dispute the superiority of our fiscal system 
 and the triumph of Free Trade. The events of the two 
 years which have elapsed have justified this prediction, 
 as I think you will agree with me in saying when you 
 learn the facts and figures, which I will now, without 
 further preface, bring to your notice. 
 
 First, as to our Production and our Trade, 
 
 external and internal. The following are the figures of 
 our foreign trade for the last four years : — 
 
 
 Imports and Exports. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Total valu". 
 
 Per head of 
 population. 
 
 1886 
 1887 
 1888 
 1889 
 
 618,530,489 
 642,990,725 
 
 685,520,979 
 743,230,274 
 
 £. s. d. 
 
 16 17 
 
 17 6 10 
 
 18 6 2 
 
 19 12 7 
 
 As regards the precious metals we imported on balance 
 during the last two years iJ^ 1,192,000. It will be noticed
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 287 
 
 that the figures for 1889 are 124^ miUions in excess of 
 those of 1886. They are close on 11 millions over 
 those of 1883, which had hitherto been the highest. 
 The volume of our trade was 8 per cent, greater than 
 that of 1888, and, which is a satisfactory feature, the 
 rise in prices was greater in what we sold than in what 
 we bought, being 
 
 In imports I'I4 per cent. 
 
 In exports ... ... 2'3?. ,, 
 
 But vast as was our trade last year, it is being exceeded 
 in 1890. The Board of Trade returns for the first six 
 months show 367 1 millions sterling, being an increase 
 of 7 millions. 
 
 Let me now draw your attention to some figures 
 relating to 
 
 Britlsh Capital and Foreign Enterprise. 
 
 The aggregate amount of the issues of new loans and 
 new companies was much larger than in any recent 
 year. 
 
 In 1889 these amounted to /,' 189,000,000 
 In 1888 ,, ;,^ 1 60, 000, GOD 
 
 In 1887 ,, ;{^98, 000,000 
 
 There is, however, some slackening in this respect in the 
 current year, the issues of new loans and companies up 
 to date being 
 
 For 1890 ;^96,744,ooo 
 
 For 1S89 ;^i 15,688,000 
 
 For 1888 ;^i 16,398,000 
 
 But there are other figures which show to some extent the 
 part which Great Britain is playing in different quarters
 
 288 THE TRIUMl'H OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 of the globe by way of enterprise and loans of capital. 
 The figures are a continuation to the year 1888 of those 
 laid before the late Trade Commission by Sir Algernon 
 West, C.B , in the form of a " table showing income tax 
 collections on our foreign holdings, 1873 to 1884." The 
 first complete figures are those for 1877, when income 
 tax was paid on iJ"2 8,000,000. In 1884 the amount 
 assessed was ^^"3 3,900,000. 
 
 In 1885 the tax collection was on ;^34, 800,000 
 
 In 1886 „ ,, /35, 700,000 
 
 In 1887 ,, ,, ;,^38, 700,000 
 
 In 1888 ,, ,, ;^40,2oo,ooo 
 
 Vast as these sums are, they do not show the full extent 
 of the world's indebtedness to us. The tax is collected 
 only on what is remitted to this country, and there is 
 every reason to suppose that the annual interest on our 
 foreign investments is nearer 120 than 100 millions 
 sterling. 
 
 This is an exhibit which no other nation can match, 
 and is sufficient in itself to scatter to the winds the non- 
 sense we sometimes hear about our paying for our excess 
 of imports by selling our foreign securities. 
 
 I now come to the figures of our 
 
 Railway Traffic. 
 
 In 1888 the total receipts were about ;({^64, 11 1,000 
 In 1889 ,, ,, ;,{^67, 588.000 
 
 an increase of ^^3, 477,000 
 
 which enormous sum was paid by the public in excess of 
 what was paid in the previous year for the carriage of 
 passengers, merchandise, and minerals. 
 
 I am not in possession of the figures for the first six
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 289 
 
 months of the current year, but they are largely in 
 excess of those for last year. 
 I now come to the returns of 
 
 The London Bankers' Clearing House. 
 
 The total for 1888 was ;if 6, 942, 172,000 
 
 „ 1SS9 „ ;i^7, 618,766,000 
 
 an increase of ;[^676,594,ooo 
 
 There is also a Manchester clearing house, the figures for 
 which would doubtless show an increase, but these I do 
 not possess, nor do I possess the figures of the first six 
 months of 1890, I will next take the figures of the 
 estimated 
 
 Deposits in the Banks 
 
 in January, 18S9 and 1890, excluding the Bank of 
 England : — 
 
 January, 1889, they were from ;(^57o,ooo,ooo to ;i{^5 80,000, coo 
 „ 1890, „ ;i^6co,ooo,ooo „ ^610,000,000 
 
 an increase of ;,f30,ooo,ooo 
 
 I take next the figures relating to our 
 Savings Banks. 
 
 On 1st Jan., 1888, the total deposits were ;,^ioi, 060,258 
 
 1889, „ ;^I04,574,456 
 
 1890, ,, ;^io7,882,373 
 an increase in 1889 of over 3^ millions. 
 
 Then those for 
 
 Emigration. 
 
 For the first six months of i8S'9, 185,500 
 1890, 158,961 
 
 a decrease of 26,536
 
 290 THE TRIUiMPH OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 following a material reduction in 1889 from the figures 
 for 1888. I give you next figures relating to 
 
 Pauperism. 
 The total number of paupers in England and Wales 
 
 On 1st Jan., 1888, was 825,509 
 
 ,, 1S89, ,, 810,132 
 
 1890, „ 793,465 
 
 — a decrease of 17,000 compared with the preceding year, 
 and of 32,000 with the year before that. Our estimated 
 population in the middle of 1889 was 29,015,613, and 
 the paupers relieved were i in 37, or 27 per cent, of the 
 population, which is the lowest percentage of any year 
 since 1858, when the proportion was 4'88. There has 
 also been a remarkable diminution in the number of 
 paupers in London, whither the unemployed flock in 
 times of distress. In the third week of February in 
 1890 there were 101,136, as against 106,284 in 1889, and 
 110,458 in 1888; and for the first time for years there 
 has been in the winter no expression of organised dis- 
 tress in London, and no threatening demonstrations of 
 the unemployed. The latest return I have seen is that 
 for the third week in June, when there were 88,005 
 paupers, as against 89,479 in 1889, and 91,527 in 1888. 
 The figures relating to 
 
 Crime 
 
 show very remarkable results during the last twenty 
 yeans. In England and Wales 
 
 Indictable crimes reported in 1868-9 were 58,441 
 >t „ 1887-8 were 43.336 
 
 although our population had increased in the meantime 
 from 22 to 29 millions. With regard to
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 291 
 
 National Revenue and Taxation 
 you are ail aware that the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 has had to deal with a realised surplus of 3^ millions 
 sterling, and has been enabled, among other substantial 
 remissions, to reduce the tea duties from sixpence to four- 
 pence per pound. But since then three months of 
 another fiscal year have passed, and it is announced that 
 the first quarter shows an improvement of .;^ 1,146,000 
 over the corresponding period last year. 
 As the report tells us. 
 
 Agriculture 
 shows signs of revival. The returns for 1889, issued in 
 November, show that there was an increase in the num- 
 ber of holdings occupied by tenants in Great Britain of 
 5,786, while there was a decrease of 994 in occupiers 
 who hold the holdings for which they make returns, and 
 a decrease of 158 in those who own and hire, the infer- 
 ence from these figures being that fewer farms were in 
 the owners' hands in 1889 than in 1888. This statement 
 is supplemented by the returns of certain collectors who 
 aver that owners of land had less difficulty in getting 
 tenants than they had, that prospects were considered to 
 be improved, and that a more hopeful tone prevailcil 
 among farmers generally. The returns state also that 
 the area cultivated by tenants was 106,809 acres more 
 than it was in 1888. As regards live stock, here are the 
 figures for the United Kingdom : — 
 
 Horses .. 
 Cattle .. 
 Sheep .. 
 Pigs .. 
 
 1,936,702 
 10,268,600 
 28,938,716 
 
 i8S>> 
 
 1,945,386 
 
 10,272,765 
 
 29,484,774 
 
 3.905.^65 
 
 8.684 
 
 4,165 
 
 546,058 
 
 90,222 
 
 T 2
 
 292 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 But, in order to appreciate the full significance of these 
 figures, it must be noted that there has been a rise in 
 the price of farm produce of all sorts. I see it stated by 
 way of extract from the Journal of the Newcastle Far- 
 mers' Club that there has been in cattle a rise of 207 
 per cent, in sheep of 32'2 per cent, and in horses of 28 
 per cent., the live stock of the country being calculated 
 as worth 228 millions, as against 184 millions in 1887. 
 All these facts and figures, and others that I could 
 adduce, lead to but one conclusion, and that is, that the 
 country is enjoying an abounding prosperity, a prosperity 
 which, in sober truth, it has never hitherto experienced. 
 As the report states, it is a prosperity which has been 
 shared in by all classes, not by our capitalists and busi- 
 ness men alone, but by our artisans and labourers, who 
 form the great mass of our population. The increased 
 employment to which the report refers is to be measured 
 by the figures I have quoted which relate to our produc- 
 tion and our trade. As to the rise in wages I am not 
 able to give you any exact figures. They will no doubt 
 come before us at no distant date. In the meantime we 
 have the labour reports of the Board of Trade to refer 
 to, as well as the paragraphs in the newspapers, which 
 for the last year or two have chronicled the struggles 
 between labour and capital, the vast majority of which 
 have terminated in the obtaining of higher wages. 
 
 That trade has experienced a great revival is ad- 
 mitted by our opponents. So long ago as 25th July, 
 1889, the Protectionist Morning Post, speaking of these 
 labour reports, says : " Nothing can be more suggestive 
 of the great revival of trade that has taken place in the 
 last year or so, and the substantial improvement in our 
 leading industries."
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 293 
 
 But, as I have said, we have 
 
 The Labour Reports to the Board of Trade 
 
 themselves to which we can refer as to the condition of 
 the skilled labour market. Mr. Burnett, as you are 
 aware, makes monthly reports. For the iJist twelve 
 months and more these have presented an excellent 
 state of affairs, which state would have been still more 
 satisfactory were it not for the strikes which prevailed, 
 and which kept large numbers out of employment and, 
 consequently, out of wages. There is one of these 
 reports which I must bring to your particular notice, 
 that for March last. In it the writer calls attention to 
 the disturbed conditions between labour and capital, and 
 notes that there were 83 actual strikes among the opera- 
 tives in the textile, iron, engineering, shipbuilding, and 
 other trades, besides those among dock and coal 
 labourers. But, notwithstanding these unfortunate 
 features, he says : — 
 
 "It may indeed be assumed that further improvement is almost impos- 
 sible, and that those reported out of work represent merely a floating 
 proportion of unemployed out of work for merely a few days at a time, an 
 element which can never entirely disappear in any possible state of the 
 labour market. The smallness of this proportion is best seen when it is 
 put into percentage. Last monih the proportion out of work was but 
 1-44, this month it is but 1-40, and a year ago it was 2-8. It should also 
 be borne in mind that these figures include a considerable number of men 
 who are on strike, and are not therefore unemployed in the ordinary sense 
 of the term." 
 
 His latest report is that for June, in which he says that 
 the list of strikes is very heavy, 106 having been re- 
 corded during the month, notwithstanding which he 
 states that, with few exceptions, the reports issued during 
 the month by the leading trade societies indicate a still
 
 294 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 highly prosperous condition of trade, and that, despite 
 the more than usually disturbed relations between labour 
 and capital, there is no alteration of the percentage figures 
 of the preceding month. 
 
 What Foreigners Think. 
 
 Such is the industrial spectacle presented by this 
 Free Trading country of ours which, according to our 
 Protectionists, should long ere this have succumbed to 
 her rivals, while we members of the Cobden Club would 
 be covered with confusion. The extraordinary prosperity 
 which we now enjoy has attracted the attention of ob- 
 servers on both sides of the Atlantic. Hear what the 
 German Frankfurter Zeihing said, in the autumn of 1889, 
 respecting the decline of their export trade in the first 
 half of the year. It is quoted by the British Consul- 
 General at Frankfort in a report to this side. After 
 bewailing the general decline in external trade, and 
 comparing it with the contrary state of affairs over here, 
 the writer says : — 
 
 "It is to Free Trade, and to the faithful adherence to the same, that 
 Great Britain owes her great recovery, which enables her to enter all raw 
 material and half manufactured goods without any additional costs of 
 duty. . . . Only a gradual return to the commercial system which 
 was the powerful basis of our industry till 1879 can remove the disadvantage 
 of our present commercial situation." 
 
 That, gentlemen, is a pretty comment on what has been 
 dinned into our ears by our Protectionists as to German 
 competition. Now hear what is said of us on the other 
 side of the Atlantic. I will read you an extract from 
 the New York Commercial and Financial Chronicle, a 
 weekly paper of the highest standing. In discussing the
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 295 
 
 proposed silver legislation, the writer says, respecting the 
 supposed want of currency in the States : — 
 
 " Explain how it happens that Great Britain can decrease its currency 
 materially — as we have several times shown it has during past years — and 
 yet grow rich and enjoy, as it is now doing, as active and as prosperous a 
 cycle of trade as any nation ever had." 
 
 So that here again we find a comparison of the two 
 methods in finance, currency, and trade, adopted on the 
 one hand by the solitary Free Trading nation, and on 
 the other by another of the Protectionist nations, entirely 
 to the advantage of the former. 
 
 I now turn to the picture presented to us by Pro- 
 tectionist nations. First I will take 
 
 France. 
 
 France, as the report describes her, is a country with a 
 stagnant population, a languishing trade, and an in- 
 creasing National Debt. The stagnation of the popu- 
 lation is causing uneasiness to her economists and her 
 statesmen. It has been a topic of discussion this spring 
 in the Paris Political Society, and a year ago the Govern- 
 ment passed a law exempting from certain taxes the 
 heads of families of seven living children, legitimate or 
 illegitimate, but legally recognised. During the last ten 
 years the population increased by about a million, but 
 two-thirds of these came from abroad, and immigration 
 is increasing faster than the birth rate. In 185 i only one 
 out of every 100 was a foreigner ; now there are three 
 out of every 100. If this tendency be not checked, the 
 race must of course disappear. Alien-baiting in vari- 
 ous forms has arisen by way of registration, supervision.
 
 296 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE, 
 
 taxation, and compulsory naturalisation, those en- 
 gaged in trade being specially singled out for perse- 
 cution. An instance of this furious jealousy is to be 
 found in Havre, where the Municipal Council lately 
 passed a resolution calling on the Mayor to induce the 
 manager of a theatre to dismiss two foreigners in the 
 orchestra and to replace them b)^ natives. 
 
 Her trade in 1889 is described by Mr. Rowe, our 
 commercial attache in Paris, as exceptionally favourable, 
 but, although it was the year of the Exhibition, her 
 foreign commerce increased over that of 1888 by only 
 16 millions sterling, while ours increased by 57 millions. 
 The value of her exports during the last 12 years de- 
 clined no less than ;^7,500,ooo, arising principally from 
 a loss of ^18,000,000 to certain European countries 
 against a gain of ;^9,000,000 in other directions, the 
 special features being a falling off of ;^7,50O,ooo to 
 Great Britain, ;^3, 000,000 to Germany, and ^2,600,000 
 to Italy. What a contrast this is to our trade during the 
 same period, during which our domestic exports were 
 ;^2 1,000,000 higher in 1888 than in 1877. The truth is 
 that France has been completely beaten in the struggle. 
 As regards her National Debt, that continues to in- 
 crease. No one seems to know to 100 millions sterling 
 or so what is its amount. It is variously estimated as 
 from 1,280 to 1,440 millions sterling. In the ten years 
 1878 to 1887 it increased 5,083 millions of francs, over 
 203 millions sterling, and more than the amount of the 
 war indemnity to Germany. Again, what a contrast is 
 afforded by all this to what has taken place here, where, in 
 the corresponding period, our debt was reduced by nearly 
 34 millions sterling. 
 
 I have now to say a few words respecting
 
 THE TRIUMni OF FREE TRADE. 297 
 
 Germany, 
 
 whose export trade is declining. The latest report is to 
 be found in the Economist Trade Supplement of 14th 
 June, which says : — 
 
 '* The Imperial Statistical Office has published the report on the foreign 
 trade between January and the 30th April. It illustrates the unsatisfactory 
 position of the export trade, and in comparing the figures with those for 
 1889 it must be borne in mind that the decline in the exports was also 
 visible in the figures for that year. Besides, Mr. McKinley's Bill has 
 induced many exporters to hasten their shipments to the United States." 
 
 Figures are then given, but as they refer to quantities 
 onl}', reckoned in kilogrammes, and do not contain 
 money values, no common denominator can be arrived 
 at, and until these are worked out it is impossible to 
 obtain an exact notion of the extent of the decline. 
 That the decline is serious may be gathered from the 
 extract from the Frankfurter Zeitnng, which I have 
 read. 
 
 Much has been said of the progress which, until 
 lately, Germany has made in her external trade, and 
 fears have been expressed that she might wrest from us 
 our commercial supremacy. These fears may be dis- 
 carded. In the Economist of July 27th, 1889, there 
 is a comparative statement of the figures of the British 
 and German domestic exports for the years 1879 to 1887. 
 It shows that while German export trade increased from 
 138I millions to 156I millions sterling, an increase of 18 
 millions, or 13 per cent., British export trade rose from 
 191^- millions to 221 J, millions sterling, an increase of 
 30 millions, or 15 per cent. It must be remembered, 
 moreover, that if the figures for 1S89 could be given, 
 a much more favourable comparison for l^ritish trade 
 would be shown.
 
 298 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 I cannot help calling your attention here before I 
 pass from Germany to one of those amusing incidents 
 which constantly crop up in Protectionist countries. 
 This time it is the spectacle of Satan reproving sin in 
 the shape of a lecture from Protectionist Germany to 
 the United States on the wickedness of the threatened 
 McKinley Tariff Bill. The Bill proposes to put a stop 
 to the practice of making false declarations of value, and, 
 as KuJiloiv's German Trade Review points out, Germany 
 is the country which will be most seriously affected ; 
 and then it proceeds to say that " The United States 
 themselves would, for many years at any rate, severely 
 suffer in many branches of trade and industry," and 
 other truths of the same sort, which read more like a 
 Cobden Club leaflet than the effusion of a Protectionist 
 writer. 
 
 I now come to 
 
 The United States, 
 
 which, at this moment, presents a condition of affairs 
 of the highest interest to economists. On the present 
 occasion I can only advert to two or three of the salient 
 features. Take first the condition of agriculture. It is 
 in a state of deep depression, and has been for months 
 past a constant topic for discussion in the United States 
 press. When we read about it in extracts which find 
 their way here, we are tempted to believe that there 
 must be some mistake, that we are reading of British 
 farmers under Free Trade, not of American farmers 
 under Protection. Our Protectionists have so dinned 
 into our ears for a long time past that we had ruined 
 our agriculture by Free Trade, while the Americans had 
 caused theirs to flourish by Protection, that many of us
 
 THE TRIUMPH OV IRKK TRADE. 
 
 ?99 
 
 believed it was true. But now a change comes over the 
 scene — it is British agriculture which is looking up, and 
 it is American agriculture which is in desolation. The 
 truth is, that the Transatlantic farmers arc beginning to 
 find out that the most gigantic confidence trick recorded 
 in history has been played upon them by the manufac- 
 turers. We are told concerning this depression that 
 there has been a great fall in the prices of grain, cattle, 
 and other produce; that since 1883 the average farm 
 value of the wheat crop, as estimated by the Department 
 of Agriculture, has only once been as high as 10 dollars, 
 or £2 per acre, and has been between 8 and 9 dollars in 
 four years; whereas before 1883 the gross return had 
 never been as low as 10 dollars, but had frequently been 
 from 12 to 14 dollars, and sometimes more. Wheat- 
 growing is generally carried on at a loss. As to 
 cattle, prices have been ruinous to breeders and feeders 
 for several years, and have only just begun to show 
 signs of improvement. 
 
 Here is the March report of the Department of 
 Agriculture : — 
 
 
 1839 
 
 1890 
 
 Incrc.ise. 
 
 Horses 
 
 13,663,294 
 
 14,213,837 
 
 550,543 
 
 Mules 
 
 2,257,574 
 
 2,381,027 
 
 73.453 
 
 Milch Cows 
 
 15,298,625 
 
 15,952,883 
 
 654.258 
 
 Oxen and other Cattle 
 
 35.032,417 
 
 36,849,024 
 
 1,816,607 
 
 Sheep 
 
 42,599.079 
 
 44,336,072 
 
 J,73fJ.993 
 
 bwine ... 
 
 50,301,592 
 
 51,602,780 
 
 1,301,188 
 
 We are told that, in spite of this increase in numbers, 
 there is a decrease in the total value of ;6^ 17,656,800, 
 the average value per head of all classes of stock, except
 
 300 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 sheep, having gone down as compared with 1889. The 
 desertion of farms in some of the Eastern States has 
 been so common that it has been made the subject of 
 Congressional inquiry. Mortgaging of farms and crops 
 has largely extended, and in some of the States fore- 
 closures have become common. The President of the 
 Farmers' Alliance of Kansas not long ago addressed an 
 open letter to the members of Congress from that State, 
 in which he calls to their minds that they are occupied 
 in Congress with the consideration of almost all classes 
 of questions except those bearing on the condition of 
 the agricultural population. He draws attention to the 
 fact that " a single law firm in one city in Southern 
 Kansas has a contract for the foreclosure of 1,800 mort- 
 gages." The farms are said to be so heavily mortgaged 
 that there is slight hope of the people keeping their 
 homes, and the profits of farming are said to be nil in 
 consequence of the cost of getting the produce to 
 market. The foreclosure of these 1,800 mortgages is 
 said to mean 1,800 homesteads transferred from the 
 hands of so many industrious families to the hands of 
 native or foreign capitalists. Evictions are taking 
 place in every part of Kansas, and, says the President, 
 they need not go all the way to Europe to witness 
 scenes of cruelty in matters of this kind. And this state 
 of affairs is not confined to Kansas. 
 
 Now, mark what Mr, L. L. Polk, President of the 
 National Farmers' Alliance, said on 22nd April, 1890, 
 before the Senate Committee on Agriculture : — 
 
 "Mr. Chairman, — Retrogression in American agriculture means national 
 decline. The power. and grandeur of this great country cannot survive the 
 degradation of the American farmer. Struggle, toil, and suffer as he may, 
 each recurring year has brought to him smaller reward for his labours,
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 3OI 
 
 until to-day, surrounded by tlie most wonderful progress and development 
 the world has ever witnessed, he is confronted and appalled with impending 
 bankruptcy and ruin. We protest, and with all reverence, that it is not 
 God's fault. We protest that it is not the farmers' fault. We believe, and 
 so charge, solemnly and deliberately, that it is the fault of the financial 
 system of the Government — a system that has placed on agriculture an 
 undue, unjust, and intolerable proportion of the burdens of fixation." 
 
 No words of mine can add to the eloquence of this 
 complaint. I now pass on to the second feature which 
 I have to notice, and that is the condition of labour. As 
 you are aware, a census is now being taken in the States, 
 and, so far as it has gone, the conclusion is that the num- 
 bers are something under 65 millions. Now, as the area 
 which they inhabit is 3^ million square miles, they are 
 just 20 to the square mile. I need not say that with 
 such a sparse population in a country of such va^t 
 extent, with every variety of soil and climate, teeming 
 with every sort of natural wealth, and enjoying perfect 
 Free Trade among its 44 States, it is impossible for an 
 energetic race, aided by foreign capital, mostly British, 
 to be otherwise than prosperous. Their foreign trade, 
 for instance, increased 36 millions sterling last year. 
 But the question arises whether the people prosper as 
 much as they ought to do — whether the masses are 
 as well off as they ought to be — whether material wealth 
 is as evenly distributed as it might be. The answer 
 must be in the negative. It is generally supposed, fcjr 
 instance, that, of all countries in the world. Great Britain 
 presents the most marked contrasts as to wealth and 
 poverty. There is every reason to believe that the 
 States now possess that characteristic. As to the con- 
 dition of the masses, there are indications in various 
 directions that it is suffering deterioration. Jealousy 
 of labour immigrants is shown in the law under which
 
 302 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 many industrious persons are sent back to Europe 
 because they are supposed to have made contracts to 
 work for employers. Think of that in a population 
 of but 20 to the square mile, while we have 315, and 
 everybody may come freely who likes. Only in May 
 last there was a meeting of the committees of a number 
 of trade organisations in New York to prepare a petition 
 to Congress demanding a head tax on all labourers 
 arriving from Europe. That does not look as if the 
 American artisan felt assured of his position. But there 
 are other indications. Pauperism, as shown in the 
 number of tramps, has increased. With regard to crime, 
 while that is satisfactorily diminishing in England, it is 
 rapidly increasing in the States. During the past few 
 years it has increased by not less than one-third, and 
 the growth of the prison population has been steadily 
 progressive since the year 1850. At the close of the 
 first half of this century the proportion of prisoners 
 to the million in the States was 290, being one to every 
 3,448 persons ; but by 1880 the proportion had risen to 
 1,169, O"" one to 855 ; the calculation not including 
 juveniles, who would have raised the proportion to 
 one in 715. 
 
 Hear now the report respecting the condition of 
 labour in the Eastern States given by a Commissioner 
 sent out by our National Fruit Growers' League. 
 Labour is described as being in a very congested 
 condition, the agricultural districts being especially 
 bad. The labourers there are said to be positively 
 worse oft" than they are in Europe, that hundreds ot 
 thousands of able-bodied men were in 1889 in the height 
 of the season working from four in the morning till eight 
 at night for los. a week and their board, that for six
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 303 
 
 months of the year even these terms could not be 
 secured, and that it was positively useless for men to 
 go to the Eastern States of America if they could get 
 bread and cheese at home. 
 
 Again, there was a paragraph in the EcJio of 5 th 
 April last which stated that in America a Committee 
 of Inquiry in Labour Problems had drawn up a report 
 upon the very subjects which the German Emperor 
 invited the European delegates to discuss. Their 
 report is said to be, in great part, mournful reading. 
 The American inquirers, however, are hopeful, their 
 ground being that America is young and Europe is 
 old. " The distress of Rome under the late Emperors 
 was the agony of expiring life." Old Rome is the t}-pe 
 of decay, America of youth ; yet the condition of the 
 children of the poor in America is, according to tliis 
 impartial testimony, far worse than it is in the worst 
 places in England or the Continent. The whole report 
 shows that in social progress Monarchical England is, on 
 the whole, a long way ahead of Republican America. 
 " Child labour," the report says, " is constantly increasing 
 in the United States," and our children, " put into the 
 mill at an early age, become useless at the age of twenty. 
 . . . Our children are wronged, because not protected 
 at a period when self-protection is an absolute impossi- 
 bility." As for the dwellings of the poor, they are said to 
 be worse than those in London; "nowhere is the situation 
 more serious than in great American cities, and nowhere 
 has so little been done to remedy it." A bad account is 
 given of Sunday work, which, like child work, " is a 
 rapidly growing evil in all our cities. . . . In some 
 trades in New York Sunday work is all but universal." 
 In Chicago " from thirty to forty thousand employes arc
 
 304 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 compelled to work seven days in each week." And now, 
 to complete the picture drawn by the Americans them- 
 selves, I will just quote a few extracts from the Minority 
 Report of the Senate Committee on the new Tariff Bill. 
 It says that 
 
 " The minority contends for the principle of just and equal taxation upon 
 all according to their ability to bear the burden, while the majority has 
 in this Bill thoroughly committed itself to the policy of unjust and unequal 
 taxation of the many for the benefit of the few. According to the state- 
 ments made before the Committee the, protected industries of the country 
 have, never been at any time in our history in such a depressed and dis- 
 couraging condition as they are now. A great many of the parties engaged 
 in these industries have declared, in the course of our investigations, that 
 the slightest reduction in the rates of duty now imposed on competing 
 foreign products would compel them to close their works and discharge 
 iheir employes, and others have even gone so far as to assert that they will 
 be forced to go out of business if the rates of taxation are not increased. 
 At the same time the labourers in these industries are complaining of 
 insufficient wages, repeated su'spension of work, and a general condition of 
 uncertainty in their relations to those who give them employment. When 
 capital and labour unite in declaring that our protected industries are not 
 ])rosperous under that system, although it was designed and has been main- 
 tained for their special benefit, the conclusion is inevitable that there is a 
 vice in it somewhere that ought to be removed." 
 
 These, gentlemen, are not extracts from a Cobden 
 Club pamphlet, but the sad and sober utterances of 
 American senators. • I need not add a single comment. 
 
 And now for just a glimpse of what is going on in 
 our Colony of 
 
 Canada, 
 
 who is following, but without a tenth of the excuse, the 
 bad example set by the United States. Her external 
 trade languishes, while her agriculture seems to be in 
 some respects in a similar condition to that over the bor- 
 der. In the course of the recent Budget debate, and in
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 505 
 
 a recent review article, Sir Richard Cartwrit^iit drew a 
 very gloomy picture of the agricultural community. He 
 had instituted inquiries into the amount of mortgages on 
 farms in Ontario, and these had led him to the conclu- 
 sion that this was well over 200 millions of dollars, and 
 might possibly reach 300 millions. As the total ratable 
 value of the province was 429 millions, he went on to 
 say that " a very large proportion of the farmers of 
 Ontario have sunk below the level of tenants-at-will, 
 and they arc in a worse position to-day in Canada 
 than if they held their property at a landlord's caprice. 
 . . . One thing is certain, that, were a considerable 
 number of farms to be placed on the market to-da)', it 
 would be impossible to find purchasers at any price." 
 Now, Ontario, which contains 180,000 square miles — that 
 is, an area nearly half as large again as the United King- 
 dom — is by far the wealthiest and most populous province 
 of the whole Dominion, containing very nearly one-half 
 the entire population, and contributing at least three- 
 fifths of the entire revenue. Up to the time Canada 
 adopted Protection the number of persons engaged in 
 agriculture kept steadily growing year by year. During 
 the last decade the rural population has been all but 
 absolutely stationary. After eleven years of Protection 
 it is found that one or two large towns have grown and 
 thriven, but the condition of the vast majority of the 
 once-thriving small towns and villages is that of utter 
 stagnation, and an almost complete stop has been put 
 to the settlement of the province. 
 
 Sir Richard Cartwright sums up the results of Pro- 
 tection in Canada under five heads, as remoxingall check 
 on the expenditure of the Government whicii has en- 
 couraged a reckless extravagance, as systematising and 
 u
 
 306 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 
 
 intensifying the tendency to use corrupt means for 
 influencing the press and electorate, as aggravating and 
 accelerating the tendency to accumulate large fortunes 
 in few hands, and at the same time to increase the in- 
 debtedness and depreciate the value of property owned 
 by the mass of the community, more especially in the 
 case of the agricultural class, and as favouring the 
 growth of a few large towns at the expense of the 
 smaller ones, and of the rural population. 
 
 Conclusion, 
 
 Such is the picture presented to our view in the 
 chosen homes of Protection, We have every reason to 
 be satisfied with our position when we contrast it with 
 the doubt and insecurity which pervade all Protectionist 
 communities. We experience the feeling described by 
 the Roman poet when one stands on the rocks by the 
 seashore and gazes on the storm-tossed waves raging at 
 his feet. As time goes on, the wisdom of the course we 
 have chosen will be more and more evident. We shall 
 feel that our supremacy in manufactures, in trade, in 
 navigation, is secure so long as we maintain our Free 
 Trade policy, and no longer, and that our destiny in these 
 respects is in our own hands. We alone among the 
 nations have recognised the existence of economic law, 
 have bent to its prescriptions, and have understood that 
 that law cannot be infringed without the incurring of a 
 penalty. Other nations have either ignored or have 
 fought against economic law, and have tried to escape 
 the penalties of infringement. All in vain. They might 
 as well ignore or fight against the law of gravitation. 
 Now that the great disturbing economic causes which,
 
 THE TRIUMPH OF FREE TRADE. 307 
 
 as I have before remarked, have displaced and disorga- 
 nised industry throughout the world have spent their 
 force, and the general obscuration which they wrought 
 has passed away, we are beginning to see that these 
 nations are undergoing their punishment, while we are 
 reaping our reward. It is the veritable triumph of Free 
 Trade. 
 
 u 2
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 "MADE IN GERMANY': 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 "MADE IN GERMANY" EPITOMISED. 
 
 The above is the title of a book the preliminary chapter 
 of which commences thus: — "The Industrial Supremacy 
 of Great Britain has been long an axiomatic common- 
 place, and it is fast turning into a myth, as inappropriate 
 to fact as the Chinese Emperor's computation of his own 
 status. This is a strong statement, but it is neither wide 
 nor short of the truth. The industrial glory of England 
 is departing, and England does not know it." 
 
 In proof of this statement the author adduces certain 
 facts and figures, with running comments thereon which, 
 in his opinion, serve to demonstrate that general havoc 
 has been wrought in our manufactures and commerce 
 by German industrialism. 
 
 The facts and figures relate to our trade at home, 
 and our commerce with foreign nations, and our Colonics. 
 Many of our industries are taken in detail, such as Iron 
 and Steel, Shipping, Ship-building, Cutlery, Hardware, 
 Machines, Tools, Iron Wire, Cotton, Linen, Jute, Silk, 
 Wool, Chemicals, Manures, Salt, Photographic and
 
 3IO THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Analysts' Chemicals, Anilines, Perfumes, Soap, Toys, 
 Glass, Pottery, Cement, Leather Goods, Paper and 
 Pasteboard, Musical Instruments, Printing, Lithography, 
 Bookbinding, and others. Everywhere and in everything 
 we are said to be beaten by the Germans. 
 
 German success is attributed by our author to a 
 variety of causes : superior perseverance, more push, 
 more watchfulness for new markets, better work, greater 
 technical knowledge and training, superiority in artistic 
 taste and design, superior education, superior machinery, 
 a better Consular service, more employment of travellers 
 and agents, greater suppleness of adaptation in studying 
 customers' ways and wishes as regards measurements 
 and prices in the currency of the countries where trade 
 is sought, " the great cause being an alert progressiveness 
 contrasting brilliantly with the conservative stupor of 
 ourselves." 
 
 German success is also attributed to artfulness, and 
 imitativeness. Their youth crowd into English houses 
 and worm out information. In their workshops they 
 have been following the English, step by step, importing 
 their machinery and tools, engaging, when they could, 
 the best men from the best shops, copying their methods 
 of work, and the organisation of their industries, and 
 showing skill in Commercial Diplomacy and Treaty- 
 making. 
 
 As contributing causes, attention is drawn also to 
 German fraud and evasion. Our author speaks of their 
 " presents from Shrimpton," from " Margate," and from 
 " Edinborough." He tells of pianos which bear an 
 English name and address, which are English in little 
 besides. He speaks of sewing machines labelled 
 " Singer's," and " North British Sewing," the " Made
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 3II 
 
 in Germany " stamp on which is placed in small letters 
 under the treadle, where it cannot readily be seen. As 
 regards cutlery, he tells us of the counterfeit Sheffield 
 blades which, with all the outward appearance of the real 
 article, have nothing of its " unseen work," and of the 
 forgeries committed on the celebrated firm of Joseph 
 Rodgers and Son, these " trade-mark thieves " having a 
 special brand for India — a pair of crossed dumb-bells 
 and a wheel — like the cross and star of the Sheffield 
 house; and how the ware they make is met with bearing 
 the legends " Rudgens," " Rottgens," and the like, 
 designed, the author fears, to deceive unwary customers 
 in Oriental and other lands. 
 
 But, he further says, whatever may be the other 
 causes of German success, Protection is one of them, 
 and a potent one. He argues that the German tariff 
 system enables German manufacturers to flood England 
 with German goods. With a protected home market, 
 they can charge their customers such prices as will make 
 them a profit ; the overplus can then conveniently be 
 sent abroad and sold at a lower rate — at the cost of 
 production, if necessary. Indeed, he says, German goods 
 are often sold outside Germany at a price beneath the 
 cost of production, for the purpose of forcing a way into 
 the market. In like manner they rival England, in 
 neutral markets. Protection enables them to raise their 
 prices to their compatriots, and screw such a profit from 
 them that they can afford a big reduction on their export 
 prices ; and they thus cut at their English rivals in two 
 directions. 
 
 Then, State aid is rendered in various wa)'s. Bounties 
 on exports are given, such as that on sugar. The State, 
 on those railways which it owns, cheapens transport by
 
 312 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 charging special low rates on goods intended for export; 
 one-half what is charged in England. German manu- 
 factures going to the Chicago Exhibition were carried 
 free, and were charged a reduced freight on the ocean 
 steam lines. Subsidies are granted to steamship lines in 
 addition to what is paid for the carriage of mails. In 
 fine, everything is done that can be done by State aid to 
 encourage and stimulate an export trade. 
 
 These are the reasons, our author says, why Germany 
 beats us. 
 
 The concluding chapter is taken up in telling us 
 " WHAT WE MUST DO TO BE SAVED." 
 
 It must be the opposite to what we are doing now. 
 We must take up Fair Trade. We must insist on 
 reciprocity. To the extent to which a foreign country 
 shuts out our goods from her markets, to that extent 
 should we penalise her goods in our markets. The 
 Empire must be federated, the Colonies admitting 
 English products on more favourable terms than those 
 of other nations. Transport must be subsidised. Com- 
 mercial attaches must be increased in number. The 
 Consular bureau must become a commercial barometer 
 for the use of English manufacturers and merchants. 
 Technical education must be extended and improved. 
 Individual enterprise must be more spirited. Our 
 merchants and manufacturers must be more studious 
 of the tastes and wishes of their customers ; they 
 must pay more heed to the merits of careful packing 
 and other details. They must adopt the metric system 
 of weights and measures for their export trade, as also 
 the system of money and measures in vogue in countries 
 where they purpose to trade. They must be more 
 artistic, and more imitative. They must advertise more
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 313 
 
 boldly. Labour troubles must be avoided. LastI)', 
 Englishmen must be more progressive. 
 
 The author concludes in these words : " Arc these 
 counsels of perfection } They are counsels, nevertheless, 
 which are, every one of them, necessary to salvation. 
 Every one of them is followed in Germany, and I decline 
 to believe that England's industrial character has so 
 deteriorated that she is unable, an she will, to pull 
 herself up to the German .standard of conduct. I/rr 
 unique position as unchallenged mistress of the Industrial 
 world is gone, and is not likely to be regained. But some 
 of the departed glory may yet be restored to her. At 
 least, let us see to it that she fares no worse." 
 
 So runs, throughout some 175 pages, a screed which is 
 intended to fright the isle from her propriety. 
 
 I purpose now to pass in detailed review some of the 
 facts and figures brought forward, the conclusions 
 drawn from them, and the remedies proposed. Our 
 author tells us that his "object is to proceed on scientific 
 lines — to collect and arrange the facts so that they may 
 clearly show forth the causes and point with inevitable- 
 ness to the remedies, if and where there be any." We 
 shall see as we proceed how this most excellent intention 
 has been fulfilled. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The Attack on Sir R. Giffen — Facts and F"igures— The "Simple Test " — 
 "Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics" — Cierman Trade with other 
 Countries — Desultory Figures as to Russia — The United States — 
 The " Hanse Towns" Blunder — Canada — Brazil — Japan — The Per- 
 centage Fallacy — Egypt — Bulgaria — Australasia — The Transvaal — No 
 Comprehensive Figures Given — Omission Rectified — Table of 
 Domestic Expoits of Great Britain and Ciermany, 1887-1896. 
 
 The first set of figures to which I will refer are those
 
 314 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 by means of which and the accompanying comments he 
 endeavours to exhibit Sir Robert Giffen as an " econo- 
 mist at sea," and as an ignoramus. Sir Robert, says, 
 the author, maintains that if we lose ground in one in- 
 dustry, we make up for it by increased production in 
 another. This is a comfortable theory, he says, but it is 
 knocked to pieces by " a very simple test." " Those 
 very statistics with which Sir Robert is so well acquainted 
 prove that this assumption of a correlative gain is a 
 figment." 
 
 This is his "simple test": He takes the total 
 declared value of British and Irish produce exported 
 from the United Kingdom in 1872, which was 256:^ 
 million pounds, and compares it with that of 1895, which 
 was 226 millions ; the population having grown in the 
 meantime from 31I millions to 39^ millions ; and shows 
 that the proportion per head of population had fallen 
 from ^8 IS. in 1872 to £$ us. 3d. in 1894, This, he 
 says, accounts for "the gaunt skeleton in our industrial 
 cupboard which is called the unemployed." Prices have 
 fallen each year, " the output has to be greater, the strain 
 more intense, to achieve the same return ; no wonder the 
 nation is falling more and more a prey to neurotic 
 disease. Our population is still waxing, and our means 
 for providing it with an income are dwindling." 
 
 Let us examine this " simple test." Why docs our 
 author select for comparison the years 1872 and 1895 ? 
 In order that a comparison should be "scientific," it 
 should be made not between unlikes, but between like 
 and like. Our export trade in 1872, measured in money, 
 was, up to that time and until 1890, the largest on 
 record. It was the result of the sudden demand 
 on our industrial resources from all parts of the world
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 315 
 
 which arose on the conclusion of the Franco-Prussian 
 war. On the other hand, the year 1895, for one-half of 
 it, was a year of depression. To be " scientific," he 
 should have taken some year before or after 1872, 
 corresponding in circumstances with 1895. If, for in- 
 stance, he had taken 1869, the year immediately preced- 
 ing the war, he would have had to take for his starting 
 point 189 millions instead of 256 millions. If he had 
 taken some subsequent year when the industrial outburst 
 had spent itself — say, for instance, 1876 — his starting 
 point would have been 200| millions. Once more, if he 
 had taken a year similarly circumstanced to 1895, such as 
 1879, he would have had to start with 191 i millions. 
 But, if he had taken these years, or any such, what 
 would have become of his " simple test " ? 
 
 I will, however, take his figures as they stand. Our 
 author himself tells us of the fall in prices from 1865 to 
 1894 in cotton, linen, and iron goods. He says that in 
 the former year cotton piece goods fetched over 5d. per 
 yard, in 1894 only 2d. ; that in 1865 printed linens 
 fetched 9*2id. per yard, and in 1894 only 5*37d. ; and 
 that in 1865 galvanised iron fetched ^^25*04 per ton, and 
 in 1894 only i^ir49. In face of such facts, which he 
 would have us believe are calamitous, he attributes the 
 cheerfulness of some people more to " their buoyancy of 
 temperament than to their common-sense." As to this, 
 one can only wonder whether the author had ever given 
 a thought to the fact that a fall in prices has not been 
 confined to British exports, but has extended to British 
 imports ; and that as our imports, in money value, arc 
 in proportion to our exports as 3 to 2, the fall in prices 
 has been, not a loss, but a source of enormous gain to 
 this country.
 
 3l6 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Take, for instance, raw cotton. In 1872 the average 
 price was £4:2/^ per cwt., at which we imported 1 2,578,906 
 cwts., at a total cost of ^53,380,670. In 1895 the aver- 
 age price was only i^ 1*94, at which we imported 15,687,881 
 cwts., at a total cost of ^30,429,428. In 1895, therefore, 
 we obtained 3 million more cwts. of cotton, and paid 23 
 millions sterling less for it, than we did in 1872. 
 
 But I have not yet done. We will now apply the 
 genuine test of like with like to our author's own chosen 
 figures. We will compare 1872 and 1895. The fall in 
 prices must, of course, be taken into account. The in- 
 stances quoted by our author to point his moral show a 
 fall of more than 50 per cent. ; but, as there are other 
 commodities than those mentioned to be taken into 
 account, I will adopt the more moderate figure of 30 per 
 cent. On this basis, let us first see how the trade of 
 1872 would work out at the prices of 1895. It is clear 
 that 30 per cent, must be deducted from 2565 millions, 
 our trade in 1872, leaving 179I millions, which would 
 have been the total of our domestic exports had prices 
 in 1872 been at the same level as in 1895. The propor- 
 tion per head of population, instead of being £^ is., as 
 recorded, would have been £^ 12s. 7d., which, compared 
 with the actual figure for 1895, £$ 15s. 6d., shows that 
 we were doing a larger volume of trade in 1895 than 
 in 1872. 
 
 Let us now calculate in the same way the trade of 
 1895 at the prices of 1872. It is clear also that every 
 £yo of trade in 1895 would have to be reckoned as ;^ioo, 
 and that the total of our domestic exports would have 
 been, not 226 millions, but 323 millions, an increase over 
 1872 of 66| millions, the proportion per head of popu- 
 lation being ;i^8 3s. 6d. against the actual figure of
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 31/ 
 
 £S IS. in 1872. Whichever way we calculate, we find 
 that we were doing a larger trade in 1895 than in 1872. 
 
 The foregoing specimen of our author's " scientific " 
 method of dealing with facts and figures is a sample of 
 what pervades his work, and furnishes a practical and 
 striking comment on what he sa}-s in the 39th page : 
 " There are those who say that figures never lie; there 
 are those also who prefer the cynical division of ' lies, 
 damned lies, and statistics': the truth being that the value 
 of statistics (given their accuracy) depends upon(i) their 
 completeness, and (2) the breadth of view with which 
 they are handled." 
 
 Our author's facts and figures do not conform to this 
 standard. As will be seen, they are for the most part a 
 jumble of comparisons strung together without much 
 regard to it. They are often incorrect, they do not ex- 
 hibit the whole case, but only disjointed bits. They may 
 be useful as pointing out where, here and there, the Ger- 
 mans have made inroads into our trade, but in order to 
 obtain correct notions as to the nature and extent of the 
 German impact, we should have been furnishcel with 
 comprehensive figures exhibiting the totals of the trade of 
 the two countries over a series of yeans. We should then 
 be able, to some extent, to judge whether Germany, in 
 her competition with us — a competition which, as the 
 author says, is sustained by superiority in various ways, 
 as also by artfulness, fraud, and Protection — has, as he 
 strives to prove, succeeded in destroying our industries, 
 our commerce, and our prosperity, and in wrenching from 
 us the industrial sceptre of the world. 
 
 Instead of proceeding in the manner indicated, the 
 author presents us with desultory figures and observa- 
 tions under various headings. Under that of '• German
 
 3l8 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Trade with other Countries " we are told with re- 
 spect to Russia that " In iron, iron goods and machinery, 
 German exports thither amounted in 1893 to 505,881 met. 
 centners, and in 1894 to 1,568,002 met. centners. The 
 figures for 1895 will show a yet more startling growth. 
 In contrast is England's lapse from 161,413 tons in 1893 
 to 138,318 tons in 1894. Again, in 1894 Germany ex- 
 ported to Russia fine leather to almost double the 
 amount she sent in 1893, and paper goods to more than 
 double." This is all the author says at this point. 
 Naught is mentioned except iron, leather, and paper 
 goods, and only two contiguous years are compared. 
 
 This is a specimen of the statistical scraps which we 
 get throughout. There are other articles besides iron, 
 leather and paper. Let us see how the total trade stands. 
 Turning first to the Abstract for Germany, and — in order 
 to avoid the " Hanse Towns " disturbing element 
 described in the following paragraph — taking 1889, I 
 find that in that year German domestic exports to 
 Russia amounted to 8/0 millions; in 1893 to 6f mil- 
 lions; and in 1894 to 8^ millions sterling. Turning to 
 our own Abstract, I find that British domestic exports 
 to Russia amounted in 1889 to 4/0 millions ; in 1893 to 
 6| millions ; and in 1894 to 6| millions sterling. I find, 
 moreover, that in 1895 our exports exceeded 7 millions 
 sterling. This in the face of what our author would 
 have us believe is a remarkable state of affairs. Let us 
 check it by turning to the Abstract for Russia, whose 
 figures, however, reach to 1893 only. I find there that 
 in 1889 German exports amounted to 124 million 
 roubles, and in 1893 to loi million roubles. As regards 
 British exports, I find that in 1889 they are put down 
 at 95| million and in 1893 at iii| million roubles.
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 319 
 
 That is how the invincible German beats us in 
 Russia. 
 
 The author then passes to the United States. Ger- 
 man trade there, we are told, is a growing trade. " From 
 175,171,000 marks in 1884 the value of their exports 
 increased to 288,669,000 in 1894, and, as this was with 
 falling prices, the actual quantities of goods would show 
 a yet greater difiference." True as to the last statement, 
 no doubt, but was it not correspondingly true when the 
 author was discussing British exports in 1872 and 1895 ? 
 Again, the author's figures for the 1894 exports do not 
 agree with those given in our " Foreign Abstract," where 
 they are set down as 271,093,000 marks. Lastly, I have 
 to point out a gross error in the figures given. The 
 comparison he institutes is in ignorance of the fact that 
 in 1889 Germany made a great change in recording the 
 destination of a large portion of her exports. It was not 
 till that year that the Hanse Towns were included in 
 the ZoUverein or German Customs Union. Up till then 
 many millions' worth of goods, although intended for 
 various foreign countries, were set down as exported to 
 the Hanse Towns, which, however, were only their place 
 of shipment. In 1888 the Hanse Towns were credited 
 with receiving imports to the value of 790,839,000 
 marks, but in 1889 only 104,914,000 marks ; whilst in 
 1893 the figures had sunk to 31,788,000, and in 1894 to 
 37,454,000. It is obvious, therefore, that any comparison 
 made without reference to these facts must be a blunder- 
 ing one. The truth is that German trade with the 
 United States has improved little, if at all, between 1884 
 and 1894. In the Abstract, the exports to the States in 
 1888 are put down at 236,292,000 marks, and in 1889 as 
 395,036,000 marks, showing a sudden and apparently
 
 320 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 unaccountable increase of 158 million n:iarks. Of course 
 this was not the fact. If, in order to allow for the Hanse 
 Towns element, we add, say, 150 million marks to 
 the recorded figures for 1884, we find that German 
 exports to the States, instead of showing a great in- 
 crease, as our author would have us believe, show a 
 decline. 
 
 We are then told that Canada is transferring her 
 shopping to Germany, and that her imports thence had 
 increased tenfold in the last few years, but no figures or 
 dates are given. On turning to the Abstract, we find 
 that in 1880 the imports from Germany amounted to 
 ^93,706, and in 1894 to ;£"i, 200,317. During the same 
 period the imports from Britain were respectively 
 ;^7,i79,42i and iJ^7,95 5,603, and from the United States, 
 i^6,r 13,947 and ;^io,897,4i8. Any change of shop, there- 
 fore, was much more in favour of the States than of 
 Germany. 
 
 Brazil comes next. We have the " Hanse Towns " 
 blunder, of course, to the extent probably of 20 million 
 marks. We are told that German exports there were, 
 in 1884, valued at 16,223,000 marks, and in 1894 at 
 63,577,000 marks. Nothing more is said. On looking 
 at the Abstract, we find the figures therein for 1894 as 
 only 57,000,000. British exports for the dates given are 
 respectively ^^6,47 1,564 and ;^ 7,322,986. 
 
 Then we are told that German trade with Japan has 
 made such gigantic strides that the English Consul- 
 General at Frankfort devotes some pages of his annual 
 report to it. An extract is given: — "In the year 1869 
 the value of Germany's direct exports to Japan did not 
 amount to 1,000,000 marks ; in 1888, however, it rose 
 from 5,000,000 to 18,000,000 marks; in 1891 it again
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 321 
 
 sank to 14,300,000 marks, to rise again in 1892 to 
 17,100,000 marks, and in 1893 to 18,500,000 marks." 
 The author then adds: "In 1895 it was over 26^ 
 million marks, an increase of 55 per cent, over 1894; 
 England's increase in the same period being less than 
 10 per cent." 
 
 Here again comes in the " Hansc Towns " blunder. 
 Our Consul-General at Frankfort appears to be as unin- 
 structed in this matter as is our author. Germany's 
 direct exports to Japan rose, he says, from 5 to 18 
 million marks in 1888. He means, of course, that the 
 rise took place in 1889, as compared with 1888 ; but these 
 are the years when, as before explained, Germany made 
 the change in her trade returns. There is, however, 
 something more than this joint blunder to be noted. 
 Our author, in order to clinch what the Consul-General 
 states, institutes an economic comparison which is a gem 
 in its way. First, he gives us the amount of Germany's 
 exports to Japan in 1895, then says they are 55 per cent. 
 more than in 1894 ; while England's increase was less 
 than 10 per cent. In order to be " scientific," he should 
 have also stated the actual amount of English exports. 
 What he says, and what he omits to say, create the im- 
 pression that in 1895 German trade was ousting British 
 trade, which is at utter variance with fact. The device 
 adopted is that known as the percentage fallacy, the last 
 refuge of disputants in distress for facts to bear out a 
 foregone conclusion. In this case, as intimated, the 
 omission is that of the actual amount of English exports. 
 Then it is to be noted that the author takes the two 
 years 1894 and 1895 for comparison. Why was this? 
 Why 1894 and 1895 in preference to 1893 and 1895 > 
 Was it because a percentage comparison would thus 
 
 V
 
 \22 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 work out more favourably for Germany ? Here are the 
 figures for the three years in question. 
 
 Exports to Japan (Domestic Produce,). 
 
 
 Germany. 
 
 Great Britain. 
 
 1893 
 1894 
 1895 
 
 Marks. 
 18,578,000 
 17,076,000 
 26,500,000 
 
 3.485,770 
 
 3.719.475 
 4,638,207 
 
 
 62,154,000 
 
 
 
 Equal to ;f3, 107,700 
 
 ;^I 1,843,452 
 
 With the figures before him, what does our author 
 mean by saying that the British increase in 1895 over 
 1894 was less than 10 per cent.? The increase was at 
 least 24^ per cent. If we now compare 1895 with 1893, 
 we find that British trade increased 33 per cent., while 
 German trade increased 44 per cent. But, as before 
 remarked, comparisons by percentages alone are apt to 
 be very fallacious. Let us compare these percentages 
 with the actual increases. As between 1895 and 1894, 
 Germany's 55 per cent, amounted to an actual gain of 
 ^"471,200 ; Britain's 24I per cent, to ^^918,732 ! Then, 
 as between 1895 and 1S93, Germany's 44 per cent, 
 amounted to ^■396, 100, while Britain's 33 per cent, 
 totalled up to no less than ^1,152,437! So much for 
 this specimen of the percentage fallacy, which plays so 
 conspicuous a part in such discussions as these. 
 
 Egypt is the country next mentioned. Here, we are 
 told, " the Germans are encroaching formidably." Their 
 exports to Egypt in 1880 are put down at 2,266,000
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 323 
 
 marks, and in 1S94 at 7,i43,ocx) marks; which kittcr 
 figure, however, does not agree with the " Abstract," 
 where it is stated as 6,948,000 marks. The British 
 figures are not given ; for the respective years tlicy 
 were ^3,060,640 and ;^3,995,390. Our author does not 
 in this instance trot out the percentage fallacy, bat only 
 the " Hanse Towns" blunder. But even a comparison 
 of the years and figures chosen by him shows that 
 during the years 1880 to 1894, inclusive, German trade 
 with Egypt increased ^^"243, 850, while British trade in- 
 creased ;i^934,36o. 
 
 But, as the British figures quoted include exports 
 from British possessions in the Mediterranean, it will be 
 useful to give those which appear in the Abstract for 
 Egypt. The Egyptian L, it must be noted, is equal to 
 £1 OS. 6\d. It appears from this Abstract that the 
 United Kingdom stands first on the list as exporter to 
 Egypt for ;^3, 296,589 ; and that Germany stands ninth 
 for ;^230,942, Turkey, France, Austria-Hungary, India- 
 China-Japan, Belgium, Russia, and Italy coming before 
 her, the total import trade in 1894 being L9,266,ooo. 
 Of this trade, 35 per cent, was done by the United 
 Kingdom, and only 2h per cent, by Germany ; and this is 
 what our author would fain make out to be a formidable 
 encroachment. 
 
 Next comes Bulgaria. Here, says our author, " Ger- 
 many has already given us a handsome beating ; for 
 whereas in 1885 Bulgaria took German goods to the 
 value of 2,082,000 lew, in 1893 she took them to the 
 value of 12,060,000 lew." As in some preceding cases, 
 no British figures are given. For 1885 our exports to 
 Bulgaria were 11,257,000 lew, and for 1893 they 
 amounted to 20,121,000 lew. The German gain was 
 V 2
 
 324 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 9,978,000 lew, the British 8,864,000 lew — a difference 
 which, taking the lew at 25 to the pound sterling, totals 
 up to ;^44,56o. This is what our author calls a hand- 
 some beating. But, if that be so, by what adjective 
 would he qualify the beating which was inflicted on both 
 Britain and Germany by Austria-Hungary, whose trade 
 with Bulgaria increased in the same period from 
 10,913,000 lew to 35,106,000 lew, or ^^967,720 ! 
 
 Next comes Australasia. Here, we are informed, " in 
 1884 German exports were valued at 6,315,000 marks; 
 in 1893 they amounted to 17,963,000 marks. To give a 
 simple detail, four-fifths of the musical instruments im- 
 ported to these Colonies are ' made in Germany.' " It 
 is to be noted that once more the " Hanse Towns" 
 blunder is served up, and that if we allow something 
 like 9 million marks for this, we find that in the years 
 mentioned Germany had increased her exports to 
 Australasia, including the musical instruments, not by 
 ;^5 82,400, as stated, but by only iJ" 132,500. 
 
 The Transvaal is cited as a final instance. " Some 
 people just now are evincing a disposition to minimise 
 German influence in that Republic ; let them digest this. 
 During the years 1891 and 1892 the exportation of the 
 German Customs Union to the South African Republic 
 had reached an average value of no more than ;^7 2,000. 
 In 1893 it rose to ^192,000; in 1894 to ;^288,ooo ; and 
 in 1895 to, about ^^^336,000." Our author is evidently in 
 possession of very recent figures in connection with 
 German trade with the Transvaal, but as even the name 
 of the Republic does not appear in our Abstract, 1 have 
 no available data for making any comparison with British 
 trade. There is one obvious reflection, however, and 
 that is that, in recent years, as late and current events
 
 THE GERMAN IJOCEV. 325 
 
 amply demonstrate, political motives have had much to 
 do with the course of trade with the Transvaal. 
 
 But to resume the thread of our author's discourse. 
 Under the heading " The Significance of these Facts " he 
 writes : " These are the sober — to believers in our eternal 
 rule — the sobering facts. They are picked out almost 
 at random from a mass of others of like import, and I 
 think they are sufficient to prove that my general state- 
 ments are neither untrue nor unduly emphatic. And 
 yet the data needed for the purpose of showing the 
 parlous condition into which our trade is drifting are 
 still largely to seek." 
 
 I have already remarked on the absence in '* Made in 
 Germany" of any comprehensive comparison of liritish 
 and German trade in their totality. Such " sobering 
 facts " and figures as are given are only sensational 
 scraps. If, as we are told, our trade is drifting into a 
 parlous condition, if there is scarcely an industry in 
 which havoc and destruction have not been wrought by 
 German industrialism, we ought to see some evidence of 
 the cataclysm in the trade returns of the two countries 
 during the last few years. 
 
 It will be useful, therefore, to supply what our author 
 has omitted. His chosen field is that of "domestic ex- 
 ports," and into that I will now follow him. In order to 
 make a fair comparison up to date, we must now go 
 back a sufficient number of years to find one which, 
 in its general features, corresponds with the latest year 
 of which we have the complete figures, namely 1895. 
 Now 1887 is a year which, in circumstances, corresponds 
 with 1895. The year 1886 was a year of great depres- 
 sion for both British and German trade. Their doinestic 
 exports were on a scale smaller than for several years
 
 126 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 before. In 1887, as in 1895, matters began to mend, 
 and thus we are furnished with data for correct 
 judgment. 
 
 The following tables are compiled from the Abstracts 
 published by our Board of Trade, supplemented as 
 regards 1896 by figures which have appeared in the 
 Economist and the T ivies. 
 
 Exports of Domestic rRODUCF. 
 
 
 Great Britain. 
 
 Germany. 
 
 1887 
 
 £ 
 221,913,910 
 
 £ 
 156,765,000 
 
 i8b8 
 1889 
 1890 
 1891 
 
 234,534,912 
 248,935,195 
 
 263.530,585 
 247,235,150 
 
 160,295,000 
 158,335,000 
 166,405,000 
 158,805,000 
 
 1892 
 
 1893 
 1894 
 
 1895 
 
 227,077,053 
 218,094,865 
 215,824,333 
 225,890,016 
 
 147,745,000 
 154,650,000 
 148,130,000 
 165,905,000 
 
 rOMPARISON BY FIaLF-YeARS 1895 AND 1896. 
 
 Grea Britain. 
 
 German 
 
 1895 
 1895 
 1896 
 
 Fiist half 106,117,506 
 Second,, 119,772,494 
 First half 119,002,722 
 
 £ 
 First half 76,765 coo 
 Second ,, 89,140,000 
 First half 82,120,000 
 
 Now, let me ask, what is there in the above figures, 
 which appertain to the last ten years, to justify the state- 
 ments of our author? What do we find ? Down to the 
 end of 1894, while British trade decreased ;^6,o89,577, 
 German trade decreased ^^8,635,000. In 1895, however, 
 the tables were turned, the British increase over 1894 
 was ;^ 10,065,667, while that of Germany was ;^i7,775,ooo.
 
 THE GERMAN ROGEY. 327 
 
 But we have the figures for the first six months of 1896 
 as above. These show that British trade during this 
 half-year increased ^^12,885, 216 ; while German trade 
 improved to the extent of only iJ^S, 355,000. We have, 
 however, still later figures. The Berlin correspondent of 
 the Economist, in its issue of November 7th, quoting 
 from German trade returns for September, states that 
 the value of the nine months' exports had increased 
 130,000,000 marks, which is equal to /"6,50O,000. 
 British returns for the same period show an increase of 
 ;i6^i3,8i5,7i6 ; so that our foreign trade, far from being 
 in the derelict condition described by our author, ex- 
 hibits signs of vigorous vitality. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Statements as to British Trades — Iron and Steel — Tables, Our Iron Trade 
 with Germany, etc. — The Times— "W^e. Economist — Our Enormous 
 Output — Shipbuilding — Tables — Shippir.g — Cutlery — Hardware — 
 Textiles — Cotton, Ten Years' Exports — Linen and Jute — The Per- 
 centage Fallacy again — Ten Years' Linen and Jute Exports — .Silk, 
 Ten Years' Exports— Wool and Worsted — "The Strange and Terri- 
 fying Case of the United Stales" — The " Hanse Towns" Blunder 
 again — Our Woollen Imports — Ten Years' Woollen Exports — German 
 Woollens — Chemicals— Our Lack of Scientific and Technical Training 
 — German Liberality — British Parsimony — Alkali, Ten Years' Exports 
 — Chemical Manures, Ten Years' Exports — Dye Stuffs, Ten Years' 
 Exports — Salt, Indian Imports, Ten Years' British Exports— Soap, 
 Ten Years' Exports — Toys — Glass — Ulster and the Glass Tr.ide— Earth 
 and China Wares— Cement — Leather Goods — Paper and Pasteboard- 
 Musical Instruments — Printing and Allied Trades. 
 
 After giving us the foregoing disjointed scraps of in- 
 formation as to German trade with other countries, our 
 author goes " into detail respecting the position of those
 
 328 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 trades which are feeh'ng worst the impact of the German 
 wedge." 
 
 Five chapters are devoted to this purpose. After the 
 figures we have just seen, which give us the totals of 
 British and German domestic export trade during the 
 last ten years, and the proof they afford that, notwith- 
 standing the supreme efforts of our rivals, we still main- 
 tain our position, we can view with equanimity much 
 that he says. We must now, however, follow him into 
 his '■ details." 
 
 Iron and steel are first treated. Our trade in these 
 is said to be wrecked. " Ichabod ! " Sixteen pages, 
 crammed with figures, are taken up in showing how our 
 production has diminished while that of Germany has 
 increased; how prices have fallen; and how the "dry 
 rot " has spread to what are known as the " allied " or 
 " daughter " trades. Many of the figures and statements 
 afford further specimens of our author's " scientific " 
 method. To show how our production has decreased, 
 he chooses for comparison the year 1882, when it was 
 8,493,287 tons, the highest on record, with 1894, when, 
 as he terms it, it " had hustled down " to 7,364,745 tons. 
 He says nothing about 1892, when the hustling had 
 brought us down to 6,709,255 tons, nor of 1895, when 
 we had hustled up to 7,703,459 tons. He was probably 
 unaware of the 1895 figures; but the 1892 figures were 
 before him. To mention them, however, would show 
 that in iron production we were on the upward grade, 
 and that would have destroyed his argument. 
 
 Under the heading " Our Neighbour the German" we 
 are given a sketch of German progress in iron making. 
 We are told that in 1886 the production of pig iron was 
 3,529,000 tons, rising in 1894 to 5,380,000 tons, and in
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 329 
 
 1895 to 5,788,000 tons; the figures for iron and steel 
 manufactures being 3,496,000 tons in 1886 and 5,825,000 
 tons in 1894. 
 
 No doubt some inroads on our iron production have 
 been made by Germany, and also by Belgium. Inde- 
 pendently of the peculiar German methods practised for 
 forcing exports, to which our author adverts in the 
 course of his work, and on which, as he allows, Nemesis 
 waits, and to which reference is made in the following 
 pages, causes have been at work, purely economical, 
 which fully account for the inroads which have been 
 made. Our author himself tells us that " England could 
 not hope for an eternal monopoly of the world's manu- 
 factures ; and that industrial growths abroad do not of 
 necessity sound the knell of her greatness." This is 
 perfectly true, and is peculiarly applicable to iron 
 making. Discussing the various factors at work which 
 favoured German production, he says : " About this time 
 [1879] there were introduced those dephosphorising pro- 
 cesses which enabled the German to make use of the 
 low-grade and cheap phosphoric ores of the Moselle, 
 Lorraine, and Luxembourg (up to this date useless for 
 the production of Bessemer pig iron), and relieved him 
 of his dependence on the dearer ores of Bilbao and else- 
 where. The fields thus opened were large and were easy 
 of access ; and the introduction of the basic process had 
 such a stimulating effect on the German steel manufac- 
 ture that the total production rose from 489,000 tons in 
 1878 to 1,074,000 tons in 1882." All which .serves to 
 prove that if our author had borne in mind his own 
 dictum we should have been spared much of the ultra- 
 exaggeration in which he revels. 
 
 But I must notice some more specimens of his
 
 330 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 "scientific" method. Under the heading " Odious Com- 
 parisons" we are told that "having considered amounts 
 of production, let us complete our survey and get the 
 picture into perspective by comparing amounts of trade. 
 And, first, as between England and Germany." We are 
 then given some scrappy comparisons of an "odious" 
 kind. One of these runs : " Under the general heading 
 of iron, wrought and unwrought, the returns of our 
 German exports exhibit a fall of from 374,234 tons in 
 1S90 to 297,510 in 1895." Another is: "Again, our 
 exports to Germany of telegraphic wires and apparatus 
 were valued at £72,yog in 1890, £1^6,026 in 1891, and 
 i^2 1,638 in 1895. And the figures of our imports from 
 Germany for these years are in inverse ratio. Of un- 
 enumerated iron manufactures, Germany supplied us 
 with 219,841 cwt. in 1890, and with 311,904 cwt. in 
 
 1895." 
 
 There are other comparisons, but our author omits 
 to give us the promised " complete survey of amounts 
 of trade as between England and Germany " in regard 
 to iron and steel goods. I will endeavour to supply 
 what is lacking by the following figures, which are 
 extracted from the Daily GrapJiic of September 17th, 
 1896. 
 
 Our Iron Trade with Gbrmany. 
 
 IN THOUSANDS OF TONS. 
 
 
 .886 
 
 1887 
 
 1888 
 
 1889 
 
 890 
 
 374 
 12 
 
 .891 
 
 18^2 
 
 233 
 12 
 
 '893 
 
 1894 
 
 1895 
 
 Exports to Germany : " Iron, \ 
 WrojghtandU.iwroug it." ) 
 
 Imrorts ironi Germany:') 
 " Iron, Bar, and Manu- .- 
 facturcs Uncnumerated." ) 
 
 196 
 7 
 
 189 
 9 
 
 267 
 17 
 
 370 
 12 
 
 256 
 II 
 
 267 
 14 
 
 294 
 18 
 
 298 
 16 
 
 In commenting on this Table the writer in the Daily
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 331 
 
 Graphic says that for 1895 he had taken out of the 
 Custom House returns every item on either side that 
 appears to properly belong to the iron and steel and 
 "daughter trades"; our imports from Germany amount- 
 ing in value to iJ's 11,000, and our exports to Germany 
 amounting to ^^2,968,000. And he winds up by saying 
 that the time had hardly yet arrived for us to sit in 
 sackcloth and ashes, groaning Ichabod ! 
 
 No, indeed. The same writer had previously pointed 
 out, in the Daily Graphic of September lOth, that Ger- 
 many, although one of our keenest competitors, was also 
 one of our best customers. He gives in the following 
 Table* 
 
 Our Totai, Trade with G^RMANY. 
 
 IN MILLIONS STERLING. 
 
 
 1886 
 
 i8i7 
 
 1888 
 
 1889 
 
 1890 
 
 i8,i 
 
 1892 
 
 1893 
 
 1894 1895 
 
 Imports from Ger- ) 
 many i 
 
 Export 4 to Ger- ) 
 many ) 
 
 21-4 
 26 "4 
 
 24-6 
 27-2 
 
 26"7 
 
 27'. 
 
 
 26 
 
 3 '"5 
 
 27*0 
 299 
 
 25-7 
 29 6 
 
 26-4 
 280 
 
 26*9 
 
 2/S 
 
 270 
 32 7 
 
 In another Tabic he gives an 
 
 Analysis of our Tradk with Germany. 
 
 IN MILLIONS STERLING. 
 
 British Goods ex^orted to') 
 Germany } 
 
 Foreign and C lonial Gjcd»"J 
 exported from British Ports >• 
 to Gerniany ' 
 
 iS'7 
 
 1887 
 
 >5"7 
 ti-5 
 
 «S-8 
 II-6 
 
 18-5 193 
 
 1891 j 1892 1893 189111895 
 17*7 I i7'8 I 2o'6 
 
 i7'6 
 
 1.3 114 122 
 
 * For these as well as for other tabulated figures which follow I am 
 indebted to a writer in the Daily Grafhic, who, in a series of articles 
 headed "Are we ruined by the Germans?" has exposed many of the 
 fallacies propounded by our author.
 
 332 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 With reference to these Tables, the writer in the 
 Daily Grapliic remarks that the figures may not be 
 absolutely correct owing to disturbances caused by 
 some exports to and from both countries being shipped 
 at Dutch or Belgian ports and credited to Holland and 
 Belgium respectively. However this may be, these 
 figures, on comparing them with those relating to our 
 trade with other nations, bring to light the curious fact 
 that Germany is one of the iz'^ countries where our 
 exports as a whole exceed in value our imports, although 
 these are swelled by millions of pounds' worth of sugar 
 supplied to us under cost price. If anything could still 
 the clatter of our Protectionists about Germany and the 
 so-called " balance of trade," it would be this circum- 
 stance. 
 
 I conclude my remarks on iron and steel with the 
 following extracts from the Times of October 5th and 
 the Economist of October 24th. 
 
 The Times, in an article headed " The British Steel 
 Industry — Remarkable Advance," informs us that 
 "during the last week the British Iron Trade Asso- 
 ciation has collected and published the statistics of 
 the production of steel for the first half of the present 
 year. The figures show an almost unprecedented 
 increase of output, which is a specially interesting fact 
 in view of the discussion that has been going on for the 
 last year or more as to the alleged superiority of German 
 methods, and the success of Continental competition. 
 It appears that the total production of steel for the first 
 six months of the current year was as much as 1,969,320 
 tons, or at the rate of 3,938,640 tons a year, which is 
 by far the largest output of steel hitherto arrived at by 
 any European country. . . . The largest increase
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 333 
 
 of output appears to have taken place in the open- 
 hearth steel industry, which, although not much over 
 twenty-five years old, and scarcely worked on a com- 
 mercial scale twenty years ago, now yields over 2,100,000 
 tons of material per annum. This is an advance which is 
 without parallel in the history of any other branch of 
 British iron making, and is perhaps unique in the history 
 of British industry. . . . There is every probability 
 and expectation that the demand for steel will continue 
 on a large scale. . . . The growth of the steel trade 
 has been so rapid that the plant now in operation in this 
 country is of the most modern kind, and if our manu- 
 facturers can only keep free from strikes, and get fair 
 terms from railway and shipping companies, they may 
 take heart of grace for the immediate future." 
 
 The Economist says : — " According to returns which 
 have been prepared by the British Iron Trade Asso- 
 ciation, the output of pig iron during the first half of the 
 present year has been larger than that of any previous 
 half-year in the history of the trade. The total make of 
 pig iron in Great Britain for the first half of 1896 
 amounted to 4,328,444 tons, which is at the rate of 
 8,656,888 tons a year. This shows an advance of over 
 607,000 tons on the pig iron output of the first half 
 of last year, which amounted to 3,721,000 tons, and 
 the increase appears to be pretty fairly distributed 
 over all the leading pig-iron-producing districts, in- 
 cluding especially Cleveland and Scotland. . . . The 
 recent outcry as to foreign competition invests with a 
 special interest the fact that up to the present time the 
 United Kingdom has made a greater advance in pro- 
 duction than any other country has done in the current 
 year. Our increase of output for the first half of the
 
 334 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 year was at the rate of over twelve hundred thousand 
 tons a year, which is beHcved to be more than the 
 increase of output likely to be shown by all other 
 European countries put together." 
 
 So much for " Ichabod ! " 
 
 Ships come next. Our author is pleased to admit 
 that in shipbuilding " England is actually at the head 
 of the list." But " even here a national craft is on the 
 black Hst too." Then we are given some scrappy com- 
 parisons : "In 1883 the total tonnage built in the 
 United Kingdom was 892,216 tons; in 1893 it reached 
 only to 584,674; in 1894, it is true, it rose to 669,492, 
 but this is much below the total of 1892, which was 
 801,548." . . . "The year in which we built most 
 vessels for other nations was 1889, when we supplied 
 them with 183,224 tons. The four following years 
 showed a progressive decrease, getting down as low 
 as 89,386 tons in 1893, and though 1894 showed an 
 increase to 94,876 tons, the upward movement was 
 trifling compared with the successive decreases of the 
 previous years." 
 
 Then we are told how, in contrast to our decline, 
 Germany is increasing her output of ships, how in 1894 
 " the mercantile navy was increased by seventy-one 
 bottoms, only fifteen of which were built in the United 
 Kingdom, but fifty-four were built at home," and how 
 " England, once the shipbuilder of the world, is glad and 
 thankful to get the German's leavings ! " — and much 
 more to the same effect. 
 
 Our author's " scientific " method is to be traced in 
 these comparisons. As regards our total output, in order 
 to find our biggest recorded figures he goes back to 
 18S3, and he finds there 892,216 tons against 669,492
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 335 
 
 tons in 1894. As regards ships built for foreigners, he 
 selects in like manner 1889, when we built 183,224 tons 
 against 94,876 tons in 1894. He goes back twelve years 
 in one case and six in the other. If for our total output 
 he had selected 1886, he would have found that it was 
 then only 331,000 tons. If for ships built for foreigners 
 he had selected 1885, he would have found that it was 
 then only 36,000 tons. But this would not have suited 
 our author. The impression he seeks to convey is that 
 ruin stares us in the face. 
 
 In order to correct this impression of impending ruin 
 which our author seeks to convey I append the following 
 table, which appeared in the Daily Graphic of Sep- 
 tember 17th, compiled by the writer to whom I have 
 referred. 
 
 FIFTEEN YEARS OF BRITISH SHIPBUILDING. 
 
 TOTAL OUTPUT OF BRITISH AND IRISH YARDS. 
 
 In thousands of tons. 
 
 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 
 609 783 892 588 441 331 377 574 855 813 809 801 584 669 648 
 
 BUILT FOR FOREIGNERS ONLY. 
 108 116 124 91 36 39 70 91 183 161 139 109 89 95 12S 
 
 These figures show that shipbuilding is a very fluc- 
 tuating trade. Our total output in 1881 was 609,000 
 tons, rising to 892,000 tons in 1883, and falling to 
 331,000 tons in 1886. It then rose to 855,000 tons in 
 1889, and fell to 584,000 tons in 1893, the last two years 
 showing respectively 669,000 and 648,000 tons. 
 
 As to German shipbuilding, it is to be noted that our 
 author makes no mention of the actual amount of ton- 
 nage built in 1894. He tells us that seventy-one
 
 336 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 "bottoms" were built, of which fifteen fell to British 
 yards; but the pertinent query arises, What is a "bot- 
 tom " ? If we knew that quantitatively, we might be 
 able to institute some useful comparisons. He tells us, 
 however, that in shipbuilding, as in other industries, 
 State aid has been invoked. Doubtless the peculiar 
 " forcing the market " policy of Germany has been at 
 work there. 
 
 As to shipping, " the ubiquitous German is also start- 
 ing into rivalry." He is a long way behind, but "he is 
 already second in steam tonnage to ourselves alone." 
 His "effective tonnage in 1893 was 4,214,385, in 1894 it 
 was 4,473,526, an increase of 8 to 9 per cent., while 
 England's ratio in the same period was only about 3| 
 per cent." Here we have the percentage fallacy once 
 more dished up. To show this we must make a com- 
 parison with the British figures. England's effective 
 tonnage in 1893 was 25,999,232 tons; in 1894 it was 
 26,863,241 tons, showing an increase of 864,009 tons, 
 equal to 3^ per cent. Now, according to our author, the 
 German increase was only 359,141 tons, and we see at a 
 glance that England's 3^ percentage beat Germany's by 
 504,868 tons. 
 
 Cutlery is next on the list. Under this head, in five 
 pages, our author descants much on German artfulness 
 and fraud, into which it is not necessary to follow him, 
 as all are prepared to admit what he very properly 
 states. 
 
 Next comes Hardware, which, for statistical purposes, 
 our author takes in the lump. We are told that in 1882 
 we exported hardware and cutlery to the value of 
 £4,107,125; and that since then there has been an 
 almost steady declension, till in 1895 the total reached
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 337 
 
 is but ;^i, 856,532. The figures for the years 1892-3-4 
 are given, being respectively for German trade ;^3,795,2C)0, 
 7^3,756,000, and ^^3,704,000; and for EngHsh trade 
 ^^2,194,726, ^^2,046,606, and ^1,834,481. Many other 
 figures are given as regards machines, implements, and 
 tools of all sorts. From these it would appear that our 
 exports of machines, etc., which in 1890 amounted to 
 17I million pounds sterling, had declined in 1895 to i6i 
 millions; while Germany's exports, which in 1890 
 amounted to 3^ millions sterling, had risen to 4^ mil- 
 lions. Needless to say, 1890 was a "record" year in 
 our export trade, and it is probable that some other year 
 might put a more favourable complexion on matters. 
 As our author, however, does not adduce the German 
 official figures for any year prior to 1 890, 1 am unable to 
 make any comparison. However that may be, there can 
 be no doubt that the Germans, by means which are 
 legitimate, and by practices which our author charac- 
 terises as insidious and deadly, such as fraud and evasion, 
 subsidised transport, and sweating the home consumer, 
 have forced a market for their wares abroad, and have 
 made an inroad into the trade of all rivals. 
 
 Textiles are next treated. Here we are told : 
 " Germany is not our sole rival. The East herself is 
 menacing our cotton trade ; Belgium has entered into 
 competition with us on the ground of linen and lace ; 
 France is fighting us hard for the silk market ; the 
 world at large contends against us for pre-eminence in this 
 or the other field." Our author's purview, however, is 
 restricted to Germany : " German antagonism is systema- 
 tic, universal, deadly, and may be considered a thing of 
 evil, and a thing apart." 
 
 As to Cotton: "The Manchester man's commercial 
 w
 
 338 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 outlook is as gloomy as his native city." Figures are 
 given, such as: "In i88i England exported piece- 
 goods (white and plain) to the value of ;^37, 169,5 17 5 ^^ 
 1895 her total was only ;i^27,3 5 3,695. As far back as 
 1872 her exports of cotton piece-goods, printed, checked, 
 or dyed, reached ^^23, 360,694 ; last year it was only 
 ^^19,424,928. She sent away ^^62 1,9 13 worth of stockings 
 and socks in 1882, and only ^219,381 worth in 1895. 
 The prosperity of her sewing thread industry is of later 
 date; yet in 1891 it was worth ;^3,254,i93, but in 1895 
 no more than £1,162,161. ... In bleached and dyed 
 cotton yarn and twist there was a quantitative rise be- 
 tween 1893 and 1895 from 36,105, i(X) lbs. to 40,425,600 
 lbs., with a fall in the value from ;^i, 862,880 to 
 i," 1,832,477. Between 1865 and 1895 the average price 
 per pound of cotton yarn declined from 23"98d. to less 
 than 8'85d." We are told that Germany is in no wise 
 chiefly responsible for all this. *' Home competition 
 with over production are badly to blame ; even worse to 
 blame is India ; Belgium is anything but guiltless ; dis- 
 aster is preparing in industrial China and Japan. . . . 
 It is evident that Lancashire is quickly nearing the limit 
 of her load." 
 
 Our author's "scientific" method shines brilliantly in 
 the foregoing passage. His object is to convey the im- 
 pression that our cotton trade is on the eve of a final 
 catastrophe, and in order to do this he turns to our 
 Trade Returns and serves up the jumble of disjointed 
 comparisons just quoted. He does not compare the 
 unfortunate year 1895 with any one preceding year as 
 regards our total trade, but he cuts up that trade into its 
 component parts, and compares the figures appertaining to 
 each component part with the highest figures he can
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 339 
 
 find for any one year during the last quarter of a 
 century. 
 
 For one comparison with 1895 he goes back to 1881 ; 
 for another he quotes the figures of 1872; for another 
 those of 1882; for another those of 1891 ; for another 
 those of 1893, which last he illustrates by quoting the 
 price of cotton yarn for 1865 ! 
 
 Considerations as to space forbid much comment on 
 such misleading comparisons. Two or three things, 
 however, may be noted. In order to obtain correct 
 notions as to the actual progress of our cotton trade, we 
 have to take into consideration not only the figures in 
 our trade returns relating to quantities and values, but 
 on the one hand, the prices of the manufactured products, 
 and on the other, of the raw material. Other circumstances 
 must also be taken into account, and in the present case 
 there are circumstances which have affected the figures 
 themselves of our Trade Returns. Our author does not 
 come up to this standard. He tells us how our export — 
 cotton yarn — has declined in price since 1865, but he 
 omits to tell us that our import — raw cotton — has also 
 fallen ; that in 1865 it was £ys^ per cwt. and in 1895 
 only £i'g4.. He also says nothing about circumstances 
 of which he is aware, and which he mentions in another 
 place. He knows perfectly well that some years ago 
 our imports to, and exports from, Germany were swollen 
 by cotton piece-goods being sent from here to be dyed 
 in Germany, where the secrets of dyeing were better 
 known. This is no longer the case, so that poor 1895 
 has to bear the sins of former years. Lastly, it must 
 be remembered that other nations progress as well as 
 ourselves, and that we cannot reasonably expect to 
 monopolise for ever the manufacture of cotton goods, 
 w 2
 
 340 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Our author teils us that " Germany has not yet suc- 
 ceeded in foisting her cotton goods upon the world's 
 market to a degree at all correspondent with her ambi- 
 tion in this particular line, or with her achievement in 
 others. For the present, it would seem that her successes 
 and her energies are for the most part centred in the 
 home market, which she is carefully fostering by means 
 of heavy duties on foreign goods." We are next pre- 
 sented with more figures, showing her progress in various 
 directions, our author closing this section by calling at- 
 tention to the formidable nature of the Belgian peril, a 
 table being given showing how Belgian cotton goods 
 have been imported into England during the first seven 
 months of the years 1893-4-5. There must be some 
 mistake in the table, for instead of a progressive 
 increase, it shows a progressive decrease. 
 
 As our author does not give anything like a compre- 
 hensive view of this branch of our trade, I append the 
 followihg figures extracted from the Daily Graphic of 
 September 17th, which to some extent will supply the 
 omission. 
 
 COTTON YARNS. 
 
 Ten years' exports in millions of pounds. 
 
 iS86 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 
 
 254 251 256 252 258 245 233 207 236 252 
 
 COTTON PIECE-GOODS, ETC. 
 
 Ten years' exports in millions of yards. 
 
 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 
 
 4850 4904 5038 5001 5125 4912 4873 4652 5312 5033 
 
 Linen and Jute come next. " Linen is in far worse 
 straits than cotton ; for whereas in 1864 (if we went 
 back farther, the case would grow darker still) our
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 341 
 
 export of homespun linen yarn was valued at ;^2,99 1,969, 
 thirty years later it was worth no more than ;6939.202. 
 In 1864 the export of white or plain fabrics was declared 
 at ;^6,6 1 4,2 84 ; in i894at ^^2,895,100." Other figures are 
 given showing the falling off in the linen trade. The 
 debacle, we are told, " is not wholly the effect of foreign 
 competition. The craze for cheapness has a great deal 
 to do with it. Unless there come a great revulsion in 
 the general taste, the cheaper wares must triumph all 
 along the line." Jute has displaced linen. " In 1864 
 our export of homemade linens brought in i^8, 172,8 13, 
 and our export of manufactured jute ;^3 56,764. In 1895 
 our export of homemade linens was worth no more 
 than ;^ 4,082, 5 59, while our export of manufactured jute 
 was ;^2,233,427. That is to say, on our combined exports 
 of linen and jute yarns we are ;i^ 1,784,887 the worse for 
 the last thirty years, and on our export for the manufac- 
 tured articles £2,21^,^(^1. Promising, isn't it .^ " 
 
 Here again we find the " scientific " hand at work. 
 Linen must be shown to be in dire straits, so we are 
 harked back to the figures of 1864, the time of the 
 American civil war and the cotton famine. Ever since 
 that time the linen trade has been a declining one all 
 over the world. Cotton and woollen fabrics have taken 
 the place of linen ones. Shirts are made of cotton, not 
 of linen, and in many warm countries where once linen 
 was the only wear light woollen textures have taken its 
 place. 
 
 We are then treated to another " scientific " com- 
 parison, which, as an exhibition of the percentage fallac\', 
 is a gem more luminous and more perfect than an}' yet 
 noticed. "Between 1885 and 1895 the value of the Ger- 
 man export ran up from 20QiOOO to 3,337,000 marks. In
 
 342 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 other terms, the German jute trade multiplied more than 
 elevenfold in eleven years. Our export, it is needless to 
 say, shows no such increase ; for in 1885 the total (yarns 
 and manufactures both) was worth ;^2, 176,387 ; and in 
 1895 it was worth but ^^2,588,545. With a lift of over 
 1,100 per cent, on the one hand, and a lift of less than 
 19 per cent, on the other, it is not surprising that the 
 Union of German Jute Producers report that in some 
 textile factories the dressing works have had so much to 
 do tliat they are unable, for all their capacity, to supply 
 the demand. . . . Comment may seem impertinent 
 after such figures as these." 
 
 What, let me ask, does our author expect from 
 British enterprise.' Is anyone crazy enough to suppose 
 that if the Germans increase their trade 1,100 per cent, 
 from j{^ 1 0,000, the insignificant figure from which they 
 started, that the British should increase their trade of 
 over two million pounds by i,ioo per cent, also — that is, 
 by twenty-three millions — and that in default of this 
 they suffer defeat .'' The simple truth is that in eleven 
 years, while the Germans added ^^106,850 to their jute 
 exports, the British added ^^412,158 to theirs. 
 
 The following figures, extracted from the Daily 
 Graphic of September 17th, give a connected view of our 
 linen and jute industry for the last ten years : — 
 
 LINEN AND JUTE YARNS. 
 
 Ten years' exports in millions of pounds. 
 
 1886 1887 1888 1889 1893 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 
 
 Linen i6 i6 15 14 15 15 15 16 16 17 
 
 Jute 31 24 27 34 34 33 26 29 35 35 
 
 LINEN AND JUTE PIECE-GOODS, ETC. 
 Ten years' exports in millions of yards. 
 
 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 
 Linen 164 164 177 181 184 159 171 158 156 204 
 Jute 216 244 232 265 274 284 266 265 233 255
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 343 
 
 Silk is next discussed. The trade, we are told, 
 reports a certain activity in the making of silken fabrics, 
 but our author distrusts the prophets of good tidings, 
 and gives figures showing how our export of thrown, 
 twist, and yarn silk has declined from ;^5i6,5i9 in 1891 
 to ^^"296,788 in 1895, and of silk manufactures from 
 £i,y44,64S in 1891 to ;^i,432,oo2 in 1895; while our 
 imports of all kinds of silk during the same period rose 
 from i^ 1 1,179,588 to i," 1 5,090,707. 
 
 France, we are told, is the premier maker in this 
 department, her most formidable rivals being Holland 
 for broad stuffs, and Belgium for ribbons. As to Ger- , 
 many : " The comparative smallness of the German 
 export trade in silk is not to be accepted as a criterion 
 of future developments. Thus far the operations of 
 Germany in the silk market have been characterised by 
 a tendency to fluctuation which contrasts with her 
 steadiness in other lines, and makes the work of forecast 
 a little difficult. But a broad survey will justify the 
 conclusion that the note of the German silk trade is 
 expansion. . . . Suffice to say that in 1894, a year in 
 some ways specially hard on certain branches of the 
 industry, Germany exported silk to the value of 
 102,500,000 marks, and that sum represents a trade near 
 four times greater than our own." 
 
 It is certainly true that our silk trade has declined, 
 and the causes may be many and various. Some of these 
 are adverted to by our author : "It is just now the fashion 
 for the maker to complain that he cannot get a sufificient 
 supply of English-woven brocades and the like, and that 
 he has to put ofif his customers with foreign goods. 
 On the other hand, the maker insists (by the medium 
 of his trade journals) that Englishwomen will buy only
 
 344 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Continental silks, and that in England, therefore (to quote 
 the Textile Manufacturer for November 15th. 1895), ' no 
 attempt has ever been made ' to produce fabrics worthy 
 to compete with 'the very superfine goods turned out by 
 the Continental designers.' " 
 
 However this may be, the German silk trade has 
 declined as well as our own. On examination of the 
 Abstract, we find that the following figures constitute 
 what our author calls " a tendency to fluctuation " with a 
 "note of expansion": In 1884 German silk exports 
 amounted to ^8,547,200 ; in 1 886 they fell to ;^3.958,750 ; 
 rising in 1887-90 to an average of ^^9,532,750 ; falling in 
 1892 to iJ"7, 100,650 ; rising in 1893 to ;^7,628,ooo ; and 
 falling in 1894 to ;^5, 192,650, 
 
 Our author winds up this sect'on by calling attention 
 to "the wonderful advance of Belgium" in silk as in 
 other textiles. "For example, her export to Engl?nd 
 alone of ' Bonneterie, Passementerie, et Rubanderie ' was 
 three times greater in the first seven months of 1895 
 than in the first seven months of 1893 ; while that of 
 * Tulles, Dentelles, et Blondes de Sole ' had risen from 
 3,700 to 28,424 francs." An alarming picture truly ; 
 but we arc not told what "three times greater " amounts 
 to ; and on examining the Abstract for Belgium there is 
 no mention whatever of silks 
 
 The following figures, extracted from the Daily 
 Graphic of September 17th, show the course of our silk 
 trade in recent years : — 
 
 SILK. 
 Yarns. Ten years' exports in millions of pounds. 
 
 i38s 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 
 •5 -6 -5 -8 -S I- 7 -8 -8 7 
 
 PiECE-GoODS, etc., ia millions of yards. 
 778 10 966657
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 345 
 
 Wool and Worsted come next. We are told that 
 " here is another industry e.xposed to special peril by 
 reason of late improvements in trade." In 1894 all was 
 gloom in Bradford ; traders were anxiously waiting the 
 passing of the United States Tariff Bill. " In 1895 the 
 expansion came, and manufacturers have abounded in 
 happiness and orders ever since. Here it is that the 
 danger comes in." " The trade with the United States 
 is no monopoly for Bradford. Germany also has shared, 
 and those who know the Germans' genius for perma- 
 nently improving an opportunity will see in this good 
 reason for disquietude." " The German grapples the 
 new chance with hooks of steel." " This is shown by 
 the strange and terrifying case of the United States. 
 In the fourteen years between 1880 and 1893 our 
 exports to the States of woollen dress goods have fallen 
 from 40,620,256 square yards, valued at 8,719,721 dollars, 
 to 27,503,999 square yards, valued at 4,588,009 dollars; 
 while Germany's have risen from 3,024,879 square yards, 
 valued at 759,900 dollars, to 20,246,819 square yards, 
 valued at 4,464,688 dollars. Our proportion of the 
 total trade was 56*5 per cent, in 1880, and 2y per cent, 
 in 1893." 
 
 The above is one of our author's artfully concocted 
 comparisons. It is a jumble, unique in its way, made up 
 of the " Hanse Towns" blunder combined with carefully 
 chosen dates and partial statistical exhibits. Why docs 
 he confine it to the United States market only, and to 
 dress goods only, and to the years 1880 and 1893, when 
 he has before him the figures for the total trades of the 
 two countries and for the years 1894 and 1895 } It can 
 only be to startle and terrify us. Let us examine the 
 latest home and foreign Abstracts. The year first
 
 346 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 mentioned in the foreign Abstract is 1884. In that 
 year Germany's total export of woollen manufactures 
 amounted to ;^9,255,ioo, and in 1894 to ^^6,495, 300. 
 Britain's export in 1884 amounted to ^^"20, 136,561, and 
 in 1894 to i, 14,010,741. I am not in possession of Ger- 
 many's figures for 1895, but the British export for 1895 
 amounted to ^19,737,944, ^md, as the monthly trade 
 returns tell us, for the iirst nine months of 1896 amount 
 to ^^"14,736,179 against ;^I5, 180,718 for the same period 
 in 1895. With these broad facts before us what, let me 
 ask, becomes of " the strange and terrifying case of the 
 United States " ? 
 
 The author then deals with our import of woollens, 
 beginning, in his desultory fashion, with 1861 and ending 
 with 1895. " Our bill for rags has risen from ^336,107 to 
 ;^730,023 ; for Berlin wools and fancy yarns (practically 
 all German) from ^^"5 8,9 10 to ;^2i6,435 ; for yarns for 
 weaving from ^^306,648 to ^^"1,825,590 ; for all other 
 manufactures from ;^i,4i9,336 to ;^ 10,976,828." He 
 derides the notion that the yarns are raw material. 
 " They are partly manufactured articles, and the pro- 
 cesses they have already undergone are processes which 
 form an integral part of English industry." This is a 
 strange pronouncement, and very strange when com- 
 pared with what our author says under" Iron and Steel." 
 Respecting pig iron he writes : " We send large quan- 
 tities of this product to Germany. That satisfaction is 
 horribly discounted when we regard pig iron — as we 
 must regard it — as really raw material for the use and 
 profit of German manufacturers." These are the con- 
 tradictory utterances of an " Economist at Sea." 
 
 But let us pass on. Whether yarns are raw material 
 or not, it will be useful to examine the British and
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 347 
 
 German figures relating to them. In 1884 German 
 imports were valued at ^£4,66^,6^0, and in 1894 at 
 i^5,03 1,650. In 1884 German exports amounted to 
 ^1,606,500, and in 1894 to ^T 2. 139,000, On the other 
 hand, British imports in 1884 were valued at iJ" 1,675,019, 
 and in 1894 at ^^ 1,51 1,924. On the exports side we find 
 that in 1884 they amounted to ^^3, 225,696, and in 1894 
 to ;^4,7i8,205. I am not in possession of any German 
 figures later than 1894, but our Abstract and our 
 monthly trade returns tell us that in 1895 our export of 
 yarns rose to ^^5,372.3 13, and for the first nine months 
 of 1896 to ^^4,288,683 against ^^3,934,294 for the same 
 period in 1895. 
 
 The following figures, extracted from the Daily 
 Graphic of September 17th, show the course of our 
 woollen trade in recent years. 
 
 WOOLLENS. 
 
 Yarns. Ten years' exports in millions of pounds. 
 
 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 
 46 40 43 45 41 41 45 50 53 61 
 
 "Tissues"; "Coatings and Stuffs"; " Damasks, Tapestry, and 
 
 Mohair Plushes"; " F"lannels'' ; and "Carpets and 
 
 Druggets." 
 
 Ten years' exports in millions of yards. 
 
 273 281 264. 268 253 223 213 194 168 242 
 
 Our author next takes a " dip into the history of 
 German woollens." "In the 'sixties," he says, "there 
 was no German Empire, so it will serve our purpose well 
 enough to start from 1885." In 1885 the export of 
 " Gekammte Wolle " was valued at ^^245,000, in 1895 at 
 ;^96i,8So; in felt it was in 1885 ^130,000, and in 1895
 
 348 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 ^^267,000. A table is appended showing that the 
 export of German woollens of all sorts to England 
 alone were in 1890 of the value of ^906,251, and in 
 1894 of iJ^i, 216,542. He then states that "our spinners 
 confess themselves unable to compete with the Germans, 
 the French, and the Belgians in the spinning of Botany 
 yarns of certain counts ; but as English Botany yarns 
 have the best reputation, it seems a pity that the 
 English spinners should not follow the advice of the 
 Bradford Observer, and give the matter earnest attention. 
 , . . With individual exceptions, our people are the 
 victims of a chronic indisposition to keep abreast of the 
 times." Our author then compares this torpor with the 
 energy and intelligence with which the Germans seize 
 the opportunities for bold advertisement which are 
 afforded by foreign exhibitions. Our author then calls 
 attention to the inventive powers of the Germans, which, 
 he says, are ominous for us, instancing " a variety of 
 worsted having a high lustre and feeling like silk,^' and 
 their " patented process for manufacturing velvet 
 leather," and then winds up the section by suggesting 
 that a Committee of Investigation should be appointed 
 to examine into the whole matter of Continental 
 methods, successes, and prospects, which might do 
 much to re-establish our supremacy, indicating two 
 points for inquiry : " The foreigner's superiority in 
 design, and his suppleness in adapting himself to the 
 needs of whatever public he may take it on him to 
 supply." 
 
 Our author turns next to Chemicals. "The 
 Chemical Trade is the barometer of a nation's pros- 
 perity." Twenty pages are devoted to chemicals of all 
 sorts. The subject is divided into five chief divisions :
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 349 
 
 (i) Crude Drugs and Medicinal Preparations; (2) 
 Heavy Chemicals ; (3) Fine Chemicals ; (4) Anilines 
 and their derivatives ; and (5) Essential Oils. 
 
 Much that the author says with reference to the 
 superiority of the Germans in their knowledge of 
 chemistry and its application to industrial pursuits may 
 be admitted. They found a neglected field, and they 
 have occupied it with conspicuous success. But this 
 does not excuse exaggerated statements and misleading 
 statistics. We are told that "the wreck in some 
 branches of our export of imported merchandise is 
 more startling than anything in the annals of British 
 commerce." He instances Peruvian Bark, all of which 
 formerly came to England from South America, then 
 from Ceylon, then from Java, which now dominates the 
 market ; and all goes to Amsterdam. Then : " The 
 English drug trade cannot endure the high dock charges 
 of the Port of London. . . . The charges are greatly 
 in excess of those exacted at the Continental ports (in 
 some cases they are twice as much)." " Hamburg is 
 a standing peril to English trade." " The dock system 
 there, and at Antwerp and Rotterdam, makes traffic 
 much cheaper than traffic at London ; and the charges 
 of the shipping companies trading thither favour the 
 Continental merchant." In this and in German "push" 
 and English "sloth" "consists the explanation of much 
 that has befallen the English drug trade." 
 
 Respecting Alkali, our author says : " Down to late 
 years alkali was a peculiarly English industry. In 1873 
 our alkali export was worth near three millions sterling. 
 How we have fared is told by the following table." 
 The table shows that in 1873 our export was worth 
 £2,g2g,oo6, and in 1895 only _,{; 1,560,140. " Here," says
 
 350 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 he, " we are confronted with the damning fact that, 
 whereas fresh uses and (owing to the growth of manu- 
 factures abroad) fresh markets for alkali products are 
 continually being found, the export of the greatest 
 alkali trader in the world was last year a little more 
 than half its value in the early 'seventies." The fore- 
 going is another instance of our author's "scientific" 
 method of dealing with facts and figures. To point his 
 moral he selects two years, one of them when our 
 alkali export was highest in value, the other when it was 
 lowest, and he refrains from telling us that in 1873 the 
 price per cwt. was i^i2'32, and in 1895 only £4'gg, the 
 comparison being thus doubly unfair. A little calcula- 
 tion would show that if the prices of 1873 had obtained 
 in 1895, our exports in value would have been 3I mil- 
 lions instead of the i^ millions recorded. 
 
 The following figures, extracted from the Daily 
 Graphic, September 14th, show the course of our alkali 
 trade in recent years. 
 
 Exports of Alkali. 
 
 
 i886 
 
 1887 
 
 1888 
 
 1889 
 
 1890 
 
 1 891 
 
 1892 
 
 1893 
 
 1894 
 
 1895 
 
 Quantities — 
 
 Thousands 
 cwts. ... 
 
 Value- 
 Thousands 
 £.-s. ... 
 
 ?1 
 
 6,242 
 1,788 
 
 6,162 
 1.743 
 
 6,343 
 1,639 
 
 6,032 
 1.573 
 
 6,332 
 2,089 
 
 6,227 
 2>335 
 
 5,886 
 2,119 
 
 5,833 
 I 858 
 
 5,082 
 1,631 
 
 6,249 
 1.557 
 
 Our author is properly severe on our lack of scien- 
 tific knowledge and technical training with regard to 
 chemistry in its practical application to commerce, as 
 compared with the Germans. He instances anilines and 
 their derivatives. " It was the discovery of anilines that
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 351 
 
 wrought the biggest revolution in modern chemistry. 
 These dyes are extracted from coal-tar products." 
 Instead of using " such cheap stuff", we suffer the German 
 chemist to ship it from our ports, that in mighty German 
 factories he may extract the colours wherein the world 
 and his wife are bedizened, and coin himself such profits 
 as must make some Englishmen sick with envy, and some 
 others sick with shame." " Yet anilines are an English 
 discovery. Forty years ago Mr. Perkin found out how 
 to extract a mauve dye from coal-tar, and for a time 
 such trade as there was in anilines was in English 
 hands." " There is a special reason for our failure in 
 anilines. One knows not whether the label should be 
 ' Parsimony ' or ' Purblindness ' — it is probably a blend 
 of both." " The British manufacturer rarely employs 
 more than six chemists," while " there is one factory at 
 Elberfeld where not less than sixty trained chemists 
 form a part of the permanent establishment/' and 
 another, " The Badische Anilin und Sodafabrik at Mann- 
 heim, which employs an even greater number." " In 
 England, on the contrary, technical education, despite 
 its noisiness, is wretchedly backward. The workers lack 
 knowledge, the professors disdain its practical applica- 
 tion, and the Dewsbury and District Technical School 
 is found advertising for an assistant science master, 
 'qualified to teach chemistry and physics,' at sixty 
 pounds a year. That is how the Germans have con- 
 quered the world in the application of chemistry to 
 practical needs." 
 
 Interspersed with these remarks are the usual 
 scrappy comparisons and exaggerations in which our 
 author indulges. It is not necessary to advert to these 
 at length. The following tables, extracted from the
 
 i52 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Daily Graphic, September 14th, relating to chemical 
 manures and dye stuffs, show that we are not yet quite 
 wiped out of the tield : — 
 
 CHEMICAL MANURES EXPORTED. 
 Value in thousands of ;^'s. 
 
 1SS6 1887 iS 
 1,615 1. 641 1,5 
 
 1886 
 483 
 
 9 2,050 2,073 2,111 2,138 2,309 2,329 1,949 
 
 DYE STUFFS EXPORTED. 
 Value in thousands of ;i^'s. 
 
 1887 
 499 
 
 469 
 
 492 
 
 1890 
 531 
 
 1 891 
 524 
 
 443 452 415 
 
 1895 
 473 
 
 As to salt, our author tells us that " the Germans 
 have encroached upon us." He descants on the " Salt 
 Union, Limited, '' and says they reckoned without 
 Germany. " India needs much foreign salt, and the 
 Indian ryot needs it cheap. . . . The natural result 
 followed : German salt to a large extent ousted English 
 from the Indian market." Then figures in the usual 
 style are given. 
 
 That there is exaggeration here as elsewhere may 
 be seen by an inspection of the following tables, ex- 
 tracted from the Daily Graphic, September 14th : — 
 
 Indian Imports of Salt. 
 Thousands of tons. 
 
 Year ending 
 
 From Unit id 
 
 From 
 
 March 31st. 
 
 Kingdom. 
 
 Germany. 
 
 1891 
 
 273 
 
 61 
 
 1892 
 
 222 
 
 103 
 
 1893 
 
 241 
 
 47 
 
 1894 
 
 269 
 
 48 
 
 1895 
 
 315 
 
 82
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 E.xroRTs OK British Salt. 
 
 353 
 
 
 1886 
 
 1887. 
 
 1888. 
 
 1889. 
 
 1890. 
 
 1891. 
 
 1892. 
 
 1893. 
 
 1894. 
 
 1895. 
 
 Quantities — 
 rhousands 
 tons ... 
 
 Value 
 
 Thousands 
 ^'s. ... 
 
 .1 
 
 805 
 
 588 
 
 819 
 
 525 
 
 890 
 
 486 
 
 667 
 
 538 
 
 726 
 653 
 
 67. 
 
 596 
 
 654 
 539 
 
 636 
 
 504 
 
 769 
 604 
 
 740 
 546 
 
 Our author winds up this section with some remarks 
 on soap. He asks, " Why should this manufacture be 
 so largely in foreign hands? They twit us with our 
 debased fondness for the tub, and they do but add 
 injury to insult when they send us the soap for use 
 therein. The Germans — a non-tubbing race — have not 
 as yet invaded the English soap market so victoriously 
 as is their wont ; though even here the Teuton hand 
 may be discerned by the expert in forged trade-marks. 
 At present their chief success — complete in its way — in 
 the soap trade consists in routing the English export by 
 means of protective duties, and this they have effectually 
 accomplished. One very big English firm has tried to 
 break the barrier down. But that English firm has 
 failed, for the German genius loves not reciprocity." 
 
 The foregoing paragraph is another delicious instance 
 of our author's method. Facts and statistics being ad- 
 verse to his foregone conclusion as to the ruin of this 
 British industry, he omits all reference to them, and 
 attempts to ride off in remarks on English tubbing and 
 German non-tubbing, which are intended to be funny. 
 The truth is that the figures of our soap trade defy his 
 " scientific " manipulation. Even if he goes back thirty 
 years, as he has done occasionally, there are no moun- 
 tain-top figures to help him, like those of 1872 and 
 
 X
 
 354 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 1873 in Other cases, which he has so misleadingly 
 quoted. If we begin with 1866, when our soap export 
 was of the value of ;^24i,i09, with the price 27 •48s. per 
 cwt, and cast our glance through the intervening years 
 down to 1895, when our export amounted to ^756,704, 
 the price being 2078s. per cwt., there is not a single 
 year in which there was any near approach to our last 
 year's trade. 
 
 The course of our soap trade during the last ten 
 years can be seen from the following Table, compiled by 
 a writer in the Daily Graphic, September 14th : — 
 
 E.KPORTS OF Soap from the United Kingdom. 
 
 
 1886' 
 
 1887 
 
 1888 
 
 1889 
 
 1890 
 
 1891 
 
 1892 
 
 1893 
 
 1894 
 
 1895 
 
 Quantities^ 
 Thousands 
 cwts. ... 
 
 Value — 
 
 Thousands 
 £s. ... 
 
 
 427 
 447 
 
 453 
 452 
 
 500 
 
 482 
 
 493 
 
 503 
 
 497 
 534 
 
 524 
 571 
 
 541 
 
 586 
 
 605 
 644 
 
 576 
 621 
 
 728 
 757 
 
 Our author then takes up the " Lesser Trades," 
 which he defines as those which are on a lower level 
 than the gigantic industries hitherto dealt with. 
 
 Toys come first. Figures are given as to our imports 
 from foreign countries in 1895. The total value was 
 ;^99i,647, of which Germany, which will include Hol- 
 land, sent us £796,72"/ worth. " You may search the 
 Board of Trade export returns in vain for any mention 
 of any export of British toys anywhere." Our author 
 then descants at length on the inferiority of these to 
 foreign ones, contrasting the roughness and lack of 
 finish of English toys with the realism and finish of the 
 foreign article, winding up by asking why the English
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 355 
 
 toyman should not avail himself of the advantage which 
 cost of carriage gives him over the foreign imports, this 
 cost averaging from 8 to I2^ per cent. 
 
 All this may be very true, and serves to point out a 
 department of industry which we might cultivate with 
 profit. 
 
 Glass comes next under review. After some dis- 
 paraging remarks concerning English medicine-bottle 
 manufacture as compared with German, our author gives 
 figures to show how our exports of glassware have 
 declined. "In 1889 we sent forth common bottles to 
 the tune of £464,^42, in 1895 to the tune of ^^"323,8 14. 
 As far back as 1873 we exported plate glass to the 
 value of ^^328,699, but in 1895 the export only amounted 
 to £yg,goi — about a fourth that is, of what the industry 
 was worth to us twenty years since." Once more we 
 are treated to our author's " scientific " method. Our 
 exports in 1889, in one case, and in 1873, '" the other, 
 are the highest on record. They are selected with set 
 purpose, while the fact that the price of plate glass per 
 square foot in 1873 was 3"Ois., and in 1895 only rios., is 
 not mentioned. 
 
 Our importations are then referred to, and a table is 
 given which shows that of "glass manufactures (not 
 window glass) imported from Germany and Holland," 
 we imported in 1890^1^621,605 worth ; in 1 894 ;i^i, 01 2,727 
 worth ; and in 1895 ;!^892,405 worth ; and we are further 
 told that the total German export of glass and glass- 
 ware has shot up from 38,059,000 marks in 1883 to 
 46,767,000 marks in 1895. 
 
 With regard to all this, I will simply quote the 
 following extract from an article in the Daily Nezvs^ 
 September 22nd, which may be read in connection with
 
 356 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 (i) the remarks on the linen and jute trade on pages 340- 
 42, and (2) with those on page 370, respecting our author's 
 ridicule of what he terms Sir Robert Gififen's " com- 
 fortable theory " that " if we lose ground in one industry 
 we make up for it by increased production in another." 
 
 " Ulster has learned what appears to be the true 
 lesson of competition, whether home or foreign. It 
 abounds with examples of manufacturing and com- 
 mercial energy diverted from less prosperous to more 
 encouraging channels. Mr. McBride, a Belfast journalist, 
 who is recognised by his fellow-citizens as a high 
 authority upon the history, ancient and modern, of this 
 city which fills him with such pride, traces its prosperity 
 to the increasing diversity of its industries, and gives 
 another and even an amusing side to the very tales 
 upon which the pessimists would seize. For example, 
 he will tell you of a great bottle-making industry which 
 flourished in Belfast. It has succumbed and might be 
 made the subject of pages of wailing in such books as 
 ' Made in Germany.' It has not only failed, but attempts 
 to revive it have failed, and is there any town which, for 
 its size, is more in need of bottles than Belfast, which 
 fills bottles for teetotallers and whisky drinkers with 
 equal pleasure and diligence .'' For the three months 
 ending June last Belfast imported — likely enough from 
 Germany — it matters not, for the point to be illustrated 
 — 2,179 tons of empty bottles, and only exported 46 
 tons. Do you say to a Belfast man that it is a pity ; 
 he will laugh and explain that it pays the Belfast people 
 better to make the spirit or the famous aerated waters 
 that fills the bottles, and get cheaper bottles from 
 abroad. It may be wondered that the Belfast people 
 don't make the bottles as well as the wherewithal to fill
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 357 
 
 them, since the bottle-making trade was once their own. 
 But surely they know best ; it is certain that the ruined 
 bottle industry has not meant ruined Belfast ; it might 
 be made one of the chapters of these gruesome tales of 
 ' industrial shame,' but as a fact it has not at all con- 
 tributed to the 'industrial shame' of Belfast. On one 
 of the sites of the ruined bottle trade stands one of the 
 most prosperous ropeworks of the kingdom. On ground 
 reclaimed from the river stand flourishing shipbuilding 
 works, the pride and glory of a province that has neither 
 iron nor coal at its hand. Every man is doing the best 
 for himself, and may be trusted to find some channel for 
 his industry whatever trade may fail. When Germany 
 takes to cheap bottles, he will fill them for her, and 
 all the world's bottles besides. It is proved by Belfast 
 that it is in the spirit and the energy and the enterprise 
 of the people that the cure for foreign competition is 
 to be found." 
 
 Earth and China wares, including Clay manufactures, 
 are next considered. We are told that "our export has 
 dwindled from ^2,562,088 in 1883 to ^"2,170,322 in 
 1895 ; while our import is nearly half as much again 
 as at the beginning of the 'eighties. Of course, Ger- 
 many is responsible for part of this increase. Her 
 export of porcelain goods, worth ;^365,ooo in 1885, was 
 worth ^^737,500 ten years later." 
 
 Here, again, we see our author's " scientific " method 
 at work. Of course, as to our export of chinaware, 
 1883, the year he selects for comparison, has affixed 
 to it the largest figures on record. If he had selected 
 1884 in the Abstract, which was before his eyes, he 
 would have seen that our export was i^2, 166,030; and 
 if he had chosen 1885, only ^^2,005,278. Not having
 
 358 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 the German figures before me, I cannot ascertain 
 whether the " scientific " method has been appHed to 
 them also. Then as to our imports having increased 
 nearly 50 per cent, since the beginning of the 'eighties, 
 I find that the average of the three years 1880-2 
 amounted to ;^5 39,859, and of the three years 1893-5 
 tO;^643,893, which is an increase of less than 20 per cent. 
 
 Cement is next on the list. " Read the export 
 returns of English cement for the last six years," says 
 he ; and we are furnished with a table showing that 
 in 1890 we exported 628,441 tons, valued at .2^1,281,963 ; 
 and in 1895 395,401 tons, valued at ^^641,918 ; and he 
 asks, " Could anything be more melancholy ? Up to 
 1890 English cement makers had been steadily building 
 up their trade. Thirty years ago our total export was 
 represented by a sum of ^280,916, but the steady drain 
 of the last six years tells an unmistakable tale. Do 
 you ask where the trade has gone ? According to our 
 Consul-General's Report on Trade of Hamburg for 
 1893, it has gone to Germany. It is to the rise of 
 the industry in Germany, and to her improvement of the 
 product (which aforetime was of very inferior quality), 
 that Kent owes the decline in her one important manu- 
 facture." All which needs no comment. 
 
 Leather Goods are next handled. We are told that 
 " the chief advance of Germany is in the matter of 
 gloves. The English glove trade is not deemed worthy 
 of mention in the Board of Trade Returns, so far as the 
 export is concerned ; but in respect of the import, you 
 may learn therefrom that the value of the German gloves 
 brought in had risen from ^^4.45 3 in 1890 to ;^27,934 in 
 1895." " Glove-making itself, however, is but a part of 
 the industry. There is also the preparation of the
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 359 
 
 Leather. Now, English leather ranks high ; yet our 
 principal glovers get their material from the Continent. 
 . . . We imported from Germany in 1895 Hand- 
 schiiJdeder to the value of 14,133,000 marks (from 
 11,732,000 in 1894): our export thither of the same 
 material figuring at 1,389,000 marks. . . . German 
 glove leathers are advancing, and by big strides too- 
 In 1885 the export was worth 24,800,000 marks; in 
 1895,47,599,000." "Even more reasonable is the Ger- 
 man advance in matter of waxed cloth. In 1885 the 
 export was worth no more than 600,000 marks ; in 1895 
 it had risen to 1,1 14,000." 
 
 All this is in our author's finest " scientific " style. 
 We are told that the chief advance of Germany is in 
 the matter of gloves, and that in six years ending 1895 
 she had increased her export by some ^^24,500. We 
 may well believe this, for on turning to the foreign 
 Abstract we find that German advance in leather has 
 been a backward one. The Abstract tells us that the 
 total leather goods export of Germany was in 1884 
 worth ;^7,503,450 ; in 1885 ;^6,98i,95o; and in 1894 
 ^5,623,900, a decrease since 1884 of no less than 
 i^l, 829,5 50. On the other hand, if we examine the 
 British figures for the same period, we find that in 1884 
 our total export was valued at iJ^3. 977,424, in 1885 at 
 ;^4,oo9,i29, and in 1894 at ii^3, 546,778, showing a 
 decrease since 1884 of only £\^o,6\6. If we take the 
 figures for 1895, we find that our total exports amounted 
 to ;^3,833,98o. It would be instructive to learn what 
 the corresponding German figures were. 
 
 Our author says nothing about all this, but goes into 
 some involved remarks as to the cross-trading in leather 
 goods between England, France, and Germany.
 
 360 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Paper and Pasteboard are next treated. Our author 
 tells us that in the matter of paper our old Abstracts 
 denote the import of none save printing or writing paper, 
 and that it is startling, therefore, to fall, in later 
 Abstracts, on the notes of such gigantic amounts as 
 are credited . . . under the head of '* Other Paper 
 except Hangings." For these " the last issue sets forth 
 for 1880 the sum of ^^"709,294. Ten years later that 
 amount was more than doubled, and it has been 
 mounting steadily ever since, as thus: 1890, ;^i, 528,932 ; 
 . . . 1894, ^2,122,041." In 1895, we are told, Eng- 
 land bought foreign unprinted paper to the value of 
 }C2,046,io6 ; foreign printed to the value of ^^254,042 ; 
 and foreign straw-board, mill-board, and wood pulp- 
 board to the value of ^^545,254. Also that for 1893, 
 1894, and 1895 these three items ran up from ;^2, 347,204 
 to ^2,845,402, "So much for German export and 
 English import," he exclaims. The English export 
 trade is then referred to, and figures are given which 
 show that in 1888 the total value of English-made paper, 
 other than hangings, exported was ;!^ i ,674,908, sinking 
 in 1894 to ;^i,274,74i, and in 1895 to ;^i,288,763. 
 Here again the " scientific " hand is at work. Our paper 
 export in 1888 was the highest on record, and so our 
 author selects it for comparison; in 1880 it amounted 
 to i^ 1, 106,996. 
 
 We are then told how the exports of certain descrip- 
 tions of paper from Germany have increased ; that in 
 the eleven years since 1885 the export of writing and 
 blotting paper has risen from 23,609 tons to 42,794 tons ; 
 yet in 1885 it was worth 20,100,000 marks, and in 1895 
 only 14,122,000 marks. These facts do not indicate any 
 very lively and profitable state of things in the German
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 36 1 
 
 paper trade, and some natural reflections are suggested 
 by them. We are saved, however, from any trouble in 
 this respect by what our author himself says: "This is 
 significant of the general havoc wrought by German 
 industrialism. Not only is English trade being ruined, 
 and the English worker being turned out into the street 
 to look for work which has gone to Germany; but also 
 the German workers and capitalists, under the stress of 
 that competition they have themselves created, must 
 put up with an ever-diminishing revenue from their pro- 
 duct. At present, thanks to the increased productive- 
 ness of their factories (a matter of new machinery and 
 better organisation), to protective freights and other 
 industrial aids, they are not feeling the full effect of the 
 new conditions as they will do later. Beset by dwindling 
 profits and falling wages, and a deepening labour-strain, 
 they will have time and occasion to reflect that the 
 counsels of the Agrarian Party were, after all, worth 
 listening to ; at the same time that we on our side of 
 the water shall be puzzling miserably at accentuated un- 
 employed and low-wages problems. Meanwhile, they 
 have begun to feel the pinch, as have those other nations 
 which have brought up their home manufactures on a 
 diet of Protection and Export Bounties. ' 
 
 There is more in the same vein about the parlous 
 state of the foreign paper trade which need not be 
 quoted ; and it will be sufficient to note here that what 
 our author says about Nemesis eventually overtaking 
 the nations whose exports are nurtured by Protection, 
 and fed by bounties, is about as complete a vindication 
 of our Free Trade policy as could be desired. 
 
 Musical Instruments are next touched upon. Of 
 these, we are told that in 1895 England imported to the
 
 362 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 value of -^996,193, of which sum ^^"563,01 8 went to the 
 credit of Germany, and i^ 146,9 13 to that of Holland and 
 Belgium. Our author then descants on the tricks prac- 
 tised by the Germans in what he calls their " depredation 
 on our national music trade." He tells us of pianos 
 bearing an English name and address, perhaps Messrs. 
 Smith & Jones, in the Ola Kent Road, but which, the 
 Merchandise Marks Act notwithstanding, may be Eng- 
 lish in nothing besides. They come over in bits, which 
 are put together by " Messrs. Smith & Jones, who, in 
 effect, are German agents in disguise." 
 
 "As for the English export, in 1884 it was worth 
 £26SA^4> ^nd by 1895 it had got down to i^i 59,293, of 
 which the German proportion was ;^9,8i3." Of course, 
 more siio, our author selects 1884, where our highest 
 figures are to be found. He then proceeds to contrast 
 them with those of the German export. We are told 
 that "in 1886 the export of pianos alone had a value of 
 ;^740,ooo, ten years later ;^ 1,054,000; and for last year 
 ;^733,ooo must be added [to what?] for musical toys, and 
 ;^98o,050 for divers kinds of musical instruments," 
 including musical chairs, tables, bedsteads, and the like 
 queer devices. " It matters not what country we take 
 as test, the result is always the same. Germany com- 
 mands the market, and extends her dominion with each 
 year." The market in Chili is in her hands. " Her 
 export to Finland more than doubled in four years." 
 The Australasian trade is " scooped." " New Zealand in 
 1892 imported 534 pianos, 446 of which came from 
 Germany, Great Britain sharing the remaining 88 with 
 other countries." "Europe tells the same tale. Nearly 
 all the musical instruments bought in Roumania come 
 from Germany ; England hasn't a look in. Austria and
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 363 
 
 France once held the market there, but even they have 
 given way before the invincible German. France, in- 
 deed, seems as little able to resist him as ourselves ; and 
 the Swiss trade, once her monopoly, has passed into his 
 hands." "The Swiss Chamber of Commerce ascribed 
 this to the adaptability of the German maker." The 
 United States also, " notwithstanding severe native com- 
 petition and heavy i)rotective duties, is all a-tinkle with 
 German pianos." " The German Government allowed 
 all exhibits intended for the Chicago Exposition to 
 travel on the State Lines free of cost while the Shipping 
 Companies followed suit by materially reducing their 
 ocean freights." Then we are told that there is ,a sub- 
 vention paid by the Saxon Government for the purcha.se 
 of models, etc., to the Trade Museum of Markneukirchen, 
 an institution for furthering the Musical Instrument 
 Trade there. 
 
 As to the foregoing account of the German Musical 
 Instrument trade, it is only necessary to note (i) that 
 there must be some other factor at work besides the 
 usual German methods to give them the command of 
 the market ; and (2) that neither in Free Trade England 
 nor in Ultra-Protectionist America has their competition 
 been successfully met. 
 
 Printing is our author's final instance. We are told 
 that the Printing and Allied Trades are also under the 
 blight, and that our part is shrinking. In 1891 the 
 value of our export of Printed Books was i^ 1,388,669, 
 in 1895 ;^i,232,946. Once more we behold our author's 
 "scientific" method. The figures for 1891 are the 
 highest on record. A contrast is then drawn between 
 these figures and those of the German export. Under 
 the head of " Blicher, Karten, Musikalien," the value in
 
 364 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 1885 was 30,100,000 marks, and in 1895, 52,478,000 
 marks. " Of Farbendruckbilder, Kupferstiche," etc., 
 the export in 1885 was 21,800,000, and in 1895 
 46,143,000. "What is the moral of these figures?" he 
 asks. " The facts they disclose are that our export is 
 gradually dwindling while German export is going up by 
 leaps and bounds. There is but too much reason, and 
 it may be stated in the two words — ' inferior workman- 
 ship'; for this, so far as I am able to gather, is the 
 chief cause of England's inability to hold her own. So 
 far as printing in general is concerned, a member of 
 Parliament, who is largely interested in the trade, gave 
 me four reasons more: (i) superior education, (2) the 
 stupid conservatism of the English Trade Unionist, (3) 
 the ditto ditto of the English master printer, and (4) the 
 suicidal jealousy of the English typefounder." Our 
 author states also that a gentleman connected with the 
 London trade assured him that good work (bookbinding 
 and lithography in particular) cannot be got outside the 
 Continent. The English work is scamped, clumsily 
 finished, late in delivery, and expensive. The German, 
 Dutch, and Flemish workers take pride in their work, 
 and bestow great pains upon its details ; and obviously, 
 in such industries as these, attention to detail is of the 
 very essence of good work. It follows that so long as 
 national characteristics exist as they are, England must 
 remain in the background. 
 
 Our author then, after a few more remarks, concludes 
 this section of his work in these words : " Here ends the 
 tale of England's industrial shame."
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEV. 365 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Statements further discussed— "Why Germany beats us" — "What we 
 must do to be Saved " — Bounties and Subsidies — Sugar — (jermany 
 and British Commerce — Ten Years' British and German Domestic 
 Exports compared — A Neo- Protectionist — Mental Struggles — Decision 
 for Fair Trade and Commercial Federation of the Empire — Incon- 
 sistency — Economic Qualitications — Pons Asinorum — Sir R. GifTen's 
 "Assumption"' — Our Excess of Imports — Notions — A Blunder of 60 
 Millions — "Spending all our Income" — -"Living on our Capital " — 
 How Excess of Imports is Paid for — "An Economist at Sea" — Pro- 
 tection — Commercial Federation — Arguments against — Second Con- 
 gress Chambers of Commerce, 1S92 — Third Congress, 1896 — Proteciion 
 and Federation an Impossible Remedy for a Non-Existent Disease — 
 Direction of our Foreign Trade first half of 1896 — Trade with the 
 Colonies — Trade with Foreign Countries — Decrease in German Ex- 
 ports to Great Britain — Increase in British Exports to Germany — • 
 German Competition a BOGEY. 
 
 We are now in a position to discuss the last two 
 chapters of the book, which contain our author's notions 
 as to " Why Germany beats us," and " What we must do 
 to be saved." 
 
 The former reiterates many of his previous state- 
 ments, and his references to wages and hours of labour, 
 strikes, cheap and nasty goods, the Merchandise Marks 
 Act, and other matters, call for no particular remark. 
 What is said, however, under the heading " Bounties and 
 Subsidies " with regard to sugar deserves a brief notice. 
 We are told that in sugar " the Germans have hit us 
 with appalling force." As to whether it is ourselves or 
 the Germans who have been " hit " by the insane bounty 
 system may perhaps be gathered from a consideration of 
 the following figures, which are extracted from the last 
 Abstract : — 
 
 In 1 88 1 our import of sugar, raw and refined, was
 
 3^6 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 2 If million cvvts., at a cost to us of 24^ millions sterling. 
 In 1895 the quantity imported was 41-^ million cwts., 
 at a cost of only i/f millions sterling. So that, taking 
 these two years only, and leaving out all previous and 
 intervening years, we find that in 1895 we obtained 19! 
 million cwts. more sugar for 6A millions sterling less 
 money. Owing to this unnatural state of things the 
 British consumer, which term comprises not only our 
 housewives but those who carry on a variety of indus- 
 tries, obtains his sugar at 2d. per lb., while the German 
 consumer pays 3d. to 4d. 
 
 But, notwithstanding the exaggerations in which our 
 author seems to revel, there is much with which every 
 intelligent Englishman can agree. What has occurred is 
 easily accounted for. It is only a quarter of a century 
 ago that the German Empire was founded, and that 
 Germany commenced her commercial career as one 
 compact nation. She found Great Britain with a trade 
 which ramified into every corner of this planet, and 
 reigning supreme in manufactures, commerce and navi- 
 gation. The Germans, our author himself tells us, are 
 keen, enterprising, well educated, industrious, ambitious, 
 artful, and, in some respects, unscrupulous. The spec- 
 tacle of British commerce, and the wealth accruing from 
 it, naturally roused admiring envy, as also a determina- 
 tion to participate at any cost. 
 
 There was plenty of scope. British machinery and 
 methods which, in other circumstances, were good 
 enough, are not good enough in these days of quick and 
 constant movement and change, when whatever is not 
 " up to date " must of necessity fail in the general com- 
 petition. The Germans began the fight for the world's 
 markets with several advantages as regards these
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 367 
 
 matters. A German manufacturer can start a factory 
 containing every modern improvement in machinery, 
 and can adopt every new process at one initial cost. 
 The Englishman, if he wishes to keep his place, has to 
 sell his obsolete plant for little more than old iron, and 
 to buy a new one. There is scarcely a branch of manu- 
 facture in which displacements of this kind have not 
 taken place. And the same may be said as regards 
 ships and shipping. 
 
 The Germans found one department in which this 
 was conspicuously the case — that of chemistry applied 
 to commercial production. This is a field of industry 
 which was only partially occupied by us, and it is one 
 which is specially adapted for German genius and appli- 
 cation, and here their success has been conspicuous. 
 
 All this and much more of a similar kind may be 
 urged, not omitting what may be said respecting the 
 inertness of the British trader, arising naturally out of a 
 long uninterrupted and unchallenged success, a defect of 
 which full advantage has been taken by the hungry 
 Teuton. 
 
 But the proof of the pudding is in the eating. After 
 all, what does this German success amount to ? What 
 does it quantify .'' I have given the figures relating 
 to British and German Domestic Exports for the last 
 ten years, a period during which we have felt the 
 full brunt of German competition, and we find that 
 at the end of the time for which we have the statistics 
 of both countries — that is, the first nine months of the 
 current year — German trade increased 6\ millions on 
 120 millions; while British trade increased 13! millions 
 on i66| millions. Now, whatever may lie in the future, 
 this is the latest development, and, so far as it goes, it
 
 368 THE GERMAN BOGEY, 
 
 serves to show that in whatever way we compare the 
 figures, whether by actual amount, percentage of gain, 
 or per head of population, instead of the Germans beat- 
 ing us, we are beating the Germans ! 
 
 After the reductio ad absurdu7n which, the quantitative 
 exhibits I have given inflicts on our author's contentions, 
 one is tempted to dismiss " Made in Germany " with the 
 exclamation, " If this be German success and British 
 defeat, long may the process continue ! " That, how- 
 ever, is a course which I will not pursue. The book 
 contains so many statements and arguments bristling 
 with Protectionist fallacies, that it will be useful and 
 diverting to dissect and expose them. 
 
 The first topic to which I will advert is our author's 
 inconsistency. He is one of our Neo-Protectionists. 
 He tells us so himself. Concerning Fair Trade he says : 
 " A consideration of the facts forces the conviction that 
 England's Free Trade policy, existing side by side with 
 Protection in Germany, has been responsible in no small 
 degree for the strides which Germany has made at Eng- 
 land's expense. What then .'' Our fiscal policy requires 
 to be reviewed, if not recast. The conclusion is inevit- 
 able. . . . It is a view, too, which, with an Englishman's 
 hereditary Free Trade instinct, I have struggled against. 
 But the struggle has availed me nothing. . . . Are we 
 then to adopt an autonomous Protective Tariff? By no 
 means. The time has gone by for that. ... A middle 
 course is possible. . . . Germany herself, under the 
 Caprivi Administration, is a good illustration of it in 
 practice. The motto is simply quid pro quo. To the 
 extent to which a foreign country shuts out our goods 
 from her markets, to that extent should we penalise her 
 goods in our markets. Then we must federate the
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 369 
 
 Empire in the most practical way — the way of commerce. 
 . . . Our Colonies must learn to be filial. We protect 
 them. . . . VVe pay all the cost. . . . They must 
 discriminate in their tariffs, and admit English products 
 on more favourable terms than those of other nations. 
 We might in turn discriminate between their produce 
 and foreign produce entering England. . . .A year or 
 two ago such a suggestion would have been classed with 
 Utopian dreams. Fair Traders were commonly laughed 
 at ; to-day Fair Trade is within the range of practical 
 politics." 
 
 We are therefore counselled in the above passages to 
 adopt in our own interest, and as necessary for our 
 salvation, the Protectionist regime which Germany has 
 established — the very regime which he declares in 
 another place is bringing on her workers and capitalists 
 diminishing returns, dwindling profits, falling wages, and 
 a deepening labour-strain ; declaring also that they have 
 already begun to feel the pinch, as have other nations 
 which have brought up their home manufactures on a 
 diet of Protection and Export Bounties, 
 
 So much for our author's consistency. There is 
 much more, however, in the passages just quoted which 
 invites criticism, but I must defer that for the present. 
 
 In the meantime it will be useful to inquire into the 
 nature and extent of our author's qualifications for dis- 
 cussing these questions. A teacher who endeavours to 
 instruct his hearers should at least be acquainted with 
 the rudiments of the science he professes to expound. 
 What should we think of a mathematician who has not 
 yet mastered the potis asinorum of Euclid ? What are we 
 to think of an economist who, as I shall presently show, 
 has not yet traversed the corresponding bridge-way 
 
 Y
 
 J/' 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 in the Free Trade question, our Import and Export 
 returns ? We should think, of course, that they should 
 both go to school again and try to pick up some elemen- 
 tary knowledge. 
 
 Our author is in 'the predicament. I have shown 
 how, in applying what he calls the "simple test" of 
 figures for the purpose of " knocking to pieces " Sir 
 Robert Giffen's " assumption that if we lose ground in 
 one industry we make up for it by increased production 
 in another," he has egregiously blundered. 
 
 What I stated was amply sufficient to bear out Sir 
 Robert Giffen's so-called " assumption," but it will be 
 convenient here to clench the matter by specifying and 
 quantifying some of the new industries which have been 
 developed during the last quarter of a century. In our 
 export tables there is a heading, " Other Articles," which 
 comprises all those which are not considered worthy of 
 separate mention. In 1870 their value was g'i million 
 pounds, and in 1880, i8f miUion pounds. In 1881 the 
 system was altered ; some separate headings were raised 
 with their values attached, and " Other Articles" sank to 
 8J millions. The following is a list of the articles which 
 were formerly lumped under " Other Articles," but which 
 now have separate headings : — Biscuit and bread, bleach- 
 ing materials, caoutchouc, clay, clocks and watches, coal 
 products not dyes, cycles, electric apparatus not steam 
 engines, haberdashery, instruments various, manure, 
 medicines, oil and floor cloth, plate and plate ware, 
 potatoes, rags, etc., for paper, seeds, sewing machines, 
 skins and furs British, skins and furs foreign British 
 dressed, stones and slates, grindstones, umbrellas, wood 
 manufactured, alpaca and mohair, parcel post. The 
 total value of these in 1895 was over 2i:| millions, while
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 3/1 
 
 "Other Articles" figure at 6^ millions. It is clear, 
 therefore, that since 1870 our export trade in miscella- 
 neous articles, some of which are new industries, has 
 sprung from 9f million to 28^ million pounds. There 
 are many other directions in which our energies have 
 found vent which are not recorded in our trade returns ; 
 but there is a notable one which is recorded, and that is 
 the case of Coventry, which, after languishing for some 
 years under a decaying ribbon trade, at length gave up 
 that manufacture, turned to cycle-making, and now does 
 a roaring trade at home and abroad. Then there is the 
 case of Belfast and the bottle trade, which, as depicted 
 on page 356, furnishes an excellent instance of the sub- 
 stitution of an industry which is more profitable for one 
 which is less so. The " Other Articles " item alone, 
 however, is sufficient evidence that what Sir Robert 
 Giffen has said is actually and historically true, and that 
 it is not he, but our author, who is " knocked to pieces." 
 
 Now for our author's notions as to our foreign com- 
 merce as portrayed in our Board of Trade Returns relat- 
 ing to Imports and Exports. After stating that " it is 
 impossible as yet to estimate the perils to which our 
 commerce is exposed ... in spite of diligent efforts, 
 the data necessary to a knowledge of the extent of the 
 damage have eluded those who have sought for them," 
 he goes on to say, " Similarly illusive are calculations as 
 to the exact bearings of the excess of imports over ex- 
 ports. The disparity has now existed for a number of 
 years, and, instead of showing a disposition to right 
 itself, the returns are still worse reading than of old — in 
 1895 the difference amounted to more than ;^ 190,000,000.'' 
 
 Here our author makes an astounding blunder. He 
 overstates our excess of imports for 1895 by about 60 
 Y 2
 
 3/2 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 millions sterling by neglecting to take into account our 
 re-export of foreign and Colonial produce, the figures for 
 which appear in the Returns side by side with those 
 from which he makes his " illusive calculations." The 
 Board of Trade Returns — which are simply the " Priced 
 Catalogue" of the articles imported and exported of 
 which our Custom House takes cognisance — are, and 
 have always been, a veritable /^/w asinorum for our Pro- 
 tectionists, which not one of them, so far as I can make 
 out, has ever been able to get over. Our author is not 
 the first who has blundered in the way pointed out, and 
 I suppose he will not be the last. The truth is, that ou r 
 excess of imports last year was 130I millions, not 190I 
 millions. Like every Protectionist, he is in evident 
 dread of this excess ; he looks upon it as a very bad 
 state of things, which does not tend to right itself, and 
 of which he cannot get the " exact bearings." 
 
 The disparity, he says, is worse reading than of old. 
 But " one may, of course, make too much of the fact ; 
 our immense shipping business may yield something ; 
 but our carrying and commission trades do not bring 
 in sufficient income to balance the disparity." He hints 
 that "the existence of a deficit implies that we are living 
 on our capital." He notes that " Sir Robert denies 
 this"; and that, "in one point of view, no doubt he is 
 right. We are still a lending rather than a borrowing 
 nation, and he contends that we are only expending 
 our interest from foreign investments." He then goes 
 on to say : " Granting that this is so (it is practically 
 impossible to get figures on the point), the question 
 must be asked, Can we afford thus to spend all our 
 income in foreign shops ? Ought we not to be adding 
 a good portion of it to our capital, in order to retain our
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 373 
 
 position as the wealthiest nation ? . . . Now, other 
 industrial states (notably Germany) are adding year 
 by year to their capital. No ; this excess of our imports 
 is not a healthy sign." 
 
 All this, to say the least, is very nebulous and hazy, 
 and calculated to leave the uncomfortable feeling that 
 John Bull is spending all his income, if not also wasting 
 his capital, in foreign shops. But John Bull has been at 
 this sort of business for at least half a century, and 
 instead of being a poor man at the end of the period, 
 he is, as our author himself says, the richest man in the 
 world ! It was in 1854 that he began taking stock in 
 the modern way as shown in the Statistical Abstracts 
 published yearly. Has our author ever worked out the 
 amount of his excess imports for the forty-two years 
 down to 1895 ? If he has, he will have seen that they 
 sum up to more than 3,470 million pounds sterling ! 
 " We are still a lending rather than a borrowing nation," 
 we are told. Now, if a hundredth part of our author's 
 hazy suggestions were at all near the truth, every 
 sovereign, every bit of plate, every watch and chain, 
 every jewel, every bit of precious metal, everything 
 valuable and movable possessed by John Bull, would 
 have left the country long ago. Not only would he 
 have had to empty his strong box and part with such 
 foreign shares, bonds, and other obligations as he might 
 have acquired, but his Consols and railways would be 
 owned by foreigners, and he would be living in the 
 workhouse a drivelling pauper. 
 
 But, far from having to part with cash, bonds, and 
 other valuables, in payment for this excess of imports, 
 John Bull has managed to draw cash and bonds from 
 abroad. During the last thirty years he has imported
 
 374 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 a net balance of gold and silver to the value of more 
 than 149 millions sterling ; while as to shares, bonds, 
 obligations, and investments of all kinds, he has, since 
 he commenced business, managed to make creation 
 his debtor to an amount which can only be roughly 
 estimated, but which cannot be far off some 2,000 
 millions sterling. 
 
 After this simple statement of fact, what are we 
 to think of our author's notions about "spending all 
 our income" and "living on our capital"? They prove 
 to be nothing but Protectionist bugbears. But it behoves 
 us now to endeavour to get at some of the " exact 
 bearings " of this question. As to our being " a lending 
 rather than a borrowing nation," the truth is, that Great 
 Britain is, and has been for a number of years past, 
 creditor-in-chief of the human race. This fact alone 
 ought to shed a flood of light on the investigation. 
 It is perfectly clear that a creditor nation must in some 
 way be paid the annual interest on its foreign loans, 
 either in merchandise, or bullion, or securities. And 
 whatever may be its other transactions with foreigners, 
 the interest due to it must be taken into account in 
 the general settlement. Great Britain is estimated to 
 be the world's creditor for some 2,000 millions, and if 
 we take 4 per cent, on this, the annual sum due to her 
 is 80 millions, which sum must be accounted for to her, 
 and, in the absence of fresh transactions, must be re- 
 mitted to her annually in some sort of shape. The 
 Revenue Returns show the world's growing indebtedness 
 to us. Under the heads of Foreign and Colonial Govern- 
 ment Securities, Other Foreign and Colonial Securities 
 and Possessions, and Railways out of the United King- 
 dom, income tax was paid in 1877 on 28-2 millions; in
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 375 
 
 1882 on 30"5 millions ; in 1887 on 44-5 millions ; in 1894 
 on 55T millions; and in 1895 on 53*5 million pounds 
 sterling. Besides these sources of revenue, there is a 
 vast amount of capital which escapes taxation, as the 
 interest is not remitted home but reinvested abroad ; 
 and there is much evasion of the tax by coupons being 
 sent through other countries for collection. 
 
 Here at once we have a big hole of 80 millions made 
 in last year's 131 millions excess imports. 
 
 The next item I will take into account is that con- 
 nected with ships and shipping. We sell ships to 
 foreigners, and we build ships for them, but their value 
 does not appear in our Board of Trade Returns. As 
 regards ships sold, no figures are to be found there ; 
 but as regards those built, we find that in 1895 we 
 constructed 60 sailing ships, of a total tonnage of 
 10,562 ; and 179 steamers, of a total tonnage of 1 17,450, 
 the latter class including warships — a very high-priced 
 commodity. Some millions on these items have also 
 to be reckoned. As regards shipping, we own more 
 than one-half of the world's effective ocean tonnage. 
 It is engaged in transporting our over-sea commerce 
 of 700 million pounds sterling annual value, and in 
 carrying on an international and intercolonial trade. 
 Ships are perishable articles, and the freights received 
 by their owners must not only cover cost of working, 
 profit, and interest on capital, but also the gradual 
 return of the capital itself spent on their construction. 
 Every ship launched, and every ship repaired and sent 
 to sea, involves an expenditure of material and of 
 labour, constituting in every sense an export, which 
 can be measured in money ; but no mention of this 
 money value is made in our Returns. These *' invisible
 
 376 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 exports," as they are called, amount to scores of millions 
 of pounds, and serve to knock another big hole in our 
 131 millions excess imports. 
 
 Then we have to reckon up the profits which our 
 merchants receive on our vast international trade ; as 
 also the commissions which they and our bankers get 
 for realising the commodities which are sent here for 
 sale in order to provide for the interest on loans payable 
 in London, and for distributing the proceeds among the 
 bondholders. 
 
 Then we have to take into account another big item, 
 the Indian Home Charges, which approach to some- 
 thing near 20 millions per annum, and which are also 
 an " export " of materials and of labour and personal 
 services which are paid for by India, but which, so far at 
 least as the labour, etc., is concerned, is not entered 
 in our Trade Returns. 
 
 There are, doubtless, many other items which have to 
 be taken into account in order to get " exact bearings," 
 but I will mention only two more. During the last few 
 years a new and interesting state of things has come 
 into notice, and that is the immigration into the old 
 country of wealthy Americans and the marriage into 
 English families of many American heiresses. This 
 means that, in addition to the vast sums spent here 
 annually by rich and fugitive travellers from the States, 
 we have now a colony from that country who are per- 
 manently located among us, and who draw large sums 
 annually from the other side of the water for their 
 necessary expenses. The Astors, the Vanderbilts, the 
 Carnegies, and other millionaires, and the rest, cannot 
 travel or live permanently here for nothing, and the 
 drain on the States which such a state of things involves
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 377 
 
 has to be taken into account as a serious economic 
 factor. 
 
 Lastly, it must be remembered that three years ago 
 there were commercial and financial crises in Australia 
 and the United States involving a general depression of 
 trade, and that from the States we have been withdraw- 
 ing capital on a large scale. The resulting effect of 
 these factors has been necessarily a decrease in exports 
 and an increase in imports, which are shown in our 
 Returns, both as to bullion and commodities. In 1893, 
 1894, and 1895 we imported on balance of the precious 
 metals to the value of nearly 30 millions sterling, one- 
 half of which came in 1895. 
 
 The question now naturally arises : What values are 
 we to attach to the various items which I have named ? 
 We have to take into account interests on loans and 
 other investments, ships sold, shipping freights, mer- 
 chants' and bankers' profits and commissions, Indian 
 home charges, the new American element, and capital 
 called home. I will not attempt, further than I have 
 done, to mention any particular figure ; I will only say 
 generally that, whatever these items may come to 
 • separately, their aggregate cannot be less than 150 
 millions, and are most likely something approaching 
 200 million pounds sterling, leaving an ample margin for 
 fresh foreign investment, and that the idea that John 
 Bull is spending all his income and trenching on his 
 capital is only a figm.ent of the Protectionist imagination. 
 
 It is abundantly clear that, as regards the " exact 
 bearings " of these and other kindred matters, our 
 author is "an economist at sea." Like all Protectionists, 
 he fancies that the country is going to ruin, when all the 
 while it is enjoying a prosperity which is the envy and
 
 378 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 admiration of every other nation. Distracted by the 
 contemplation of the fancied evils, and anxious for their 
 cure, he gives several counsels, every one of which, we 
 are told, it is necessary for our salvation to follow. 
 
 One of the courses proposed is that we should take 
 to Protection in some shape or other. The particular 
 form advocated is Partial Protection, consisting of an 
 insistence on our part with other countries of reciprocity 
 in trade, with penalties on non-compliance, combined 
 with a sort of one-sided Commercial Federation of the 
 Empire. 
 
 We are told that England must "pull herself up to 
 the German standard of conduct." But the German 
 standard is a varied system. As regards the attainment 
 of scientific and technical skill, and other legitimate aids 
 to commercial success, it is to be commended and fol- 
 lowed. As regards the fraud and evasion practised, it is 
 to be condemned and avoided. But the standard 
 comprises also a Protective System which our author 
 himself tells us spells eventual financial ruin on those 
 who practise it, and which therefore, we are bound to 
 conclude, should be also condemned and avoided, but 
 which, he tells us, it is absolutely necessary for us to 
 take up. 
 
 It is unnecessary to make any comment on the in- 
 consistency which our author displays in these pro- 
 nouncements. It will be more useful to consider his 
 proposals taken by themselves. As to our demanding 
 from foreign nations reciprocity in trade under threats, 
 there is not the slightest reason for supposing that such 
 demands would be listened to by a single nation. The 
 interests which would be affected by the proposed 
 change would be too powerful to allow any foreign
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 379 
 
 Government to accede to them, while the proposals 
 themselves would be regarded as a confession of defeat 
 on our part, and an encouragement for our rivals to per- 
 severe in their Protectionist policy. We should have 
 therefore, to penalise, as our author terms it, the products 
 of every nation ; that is, we should have to recur to 
 Protection all round. 
 
 As regards Commercial Federation with our Colonies, 
 we are told that they " must learn to be filial. We pro- 
 tect them with our flag ; our gigantic navy is largely for 
 the purpose of safeguarding them. But we pay all the 
 cost ; they in return think they have done their duty by 
 the Mother Country when they have sung the National 
 Anthem at their banquets. They must discriminate in 
 their tariffs and admit English products on more favour- 
 able terms than those of other nations. We might in 
 return discriminate between their produce and foreign 
 produce entering England : Canadian and Australian 
 wheat, for example, might come free ; wheat from the 
 United States and Germany and Russia being penalised 
 with a ten per cent, tariff. So we might become a great 
 Industrial Empire." 
 
 We are advised as necessary to our salvation to at 
 once discard our fiscal system, which has been in exist- 
 ence for half a century, and under which we have pre- 
 eminently flourished, in order to recur to a policy which 
 was in force for the preceding half-century, which was 
 tried, which failed, and which was abandoned. 
 
 This discarded policy was that respecting which in 
 May, 1840, the House of Commons appointed a Select 
 Committee under these terms : — " Ordered, that a Select 
 Committee be appointed to inquire into the several 
 duties levied on imports into the United Kingdom and
 
 38o THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 how far those duties are for Protection to similar articles, 
 the produce or manufacture of this country, or of the 
 British possessions abroad, or whether the duties are for 
 the purpose of revenue alone." 
 
 That Committee was presided over by the well-known 
 Joseph Hume, and all its members save one, the vener- 
 able Charles Pelham Viliiers, have passed away."^ It 
 made an exhaustive inquiry. Its report, among other 
 things, spoke of the raising of prices to consumers ; of 
 the sacrifices of the community, accompanied by in- 
 jurious effects on wages and capital ; of great diminution 
 in the productive powers of the country ; of the limita- 
 tion of our active trading relations ; and of the effects of 
 the Protective system on manufacture and labour. 
 
 Among the recommendations was this : — 
 
 "Your Committee further recommend that, as speedily 
 as possible, the whole system of differential duties, and 
 of all restrictions, should be reconsidered, and that a 
 change therein be effected in such a manner that exist- 
 ing interests may suffer as little as possible in the tran- 
 sition to a more liberal and equitable state of things 
 Your Committee is persuaded that the difficulties of 
 modifying the discriminating duties which favour the 
 introduction of British Colonial articles would be much 
 abated if the Colonies were themselves allowed the 
 benefits of Free Trade with all the world." 
 
 The report of the Committee sounded the death- 
 knell of Protection, and Sir Robert Peel's reforms com- 
 menced soon afterwards ; but some years elapsed before 
 the whole system was swept away and Free Trade 
 established — the Non-Protective system which has been 
 the distinguishing characteristic of this nation, and the 
 * The Right Hon. C. P. Viliiers died 1898.
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 38 1 
 
 principal factor in making Great Britain Queen of 
 commerce, Mistress of the seas, and the Creditor-in-chief 
 of the human race. 
 
 A recurrence to the discarded system would be full 
 of difficulties, dangers, and almost certain disaster. 
 Who is to frame the scheme which shall reconcile the 
 conflicting claims of the various parts of our widely 
 spread Empire .'' France, Germany, and the United 
 States are geographically compact countries. Yet there 
 the various interests are never satisfied, but are engacred 
 in eternal quarrels. That is one difficulty. The second 
 difficulty is connected with those two treaties — one with 
 Belgium in 1862, and one with the Zollverein in 1865. 
 The objectionable clauses in those treaties cannot be got 
 rid of without a surrender of the numerous privileges 
 conferred on all British subjects by the other parts of 
 those treaties. 
 
 But supposing those difficulties are overcome, and 
 that some sort of compact has been made, look at the 
 consequences to the Mother Country. To be effective 
 we must tax, and tax heavily, not only manufactures, 
 but food and raw materials. We have been told, how- 
 ever, by Lord Salisbury that it is impossible to tax these 
 two latter, and that this constitutes to his mind an 
 absolute guarantee that we shall never return to the 
 ways of Protection. 
 
 But let us suppose the impossible thing done. We 
 should be involved immediately in an industrial war 
 with the rest of the world, and we should be subjected to 
 a competition in comparison with which that we now 
 undergo would be mere child's play. Our rivals are on 
 the watch for any breach of our free import system. 
 They might take advantage ol us in many ways. They
 
 382 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 might refuse us the " most-favoured nation treatment," 
 which we alone among all the nations have enjoyed in 
 consequence of that policy. They might discriminate 
 against us and even proscribe our products. The 
 President of the United States has power conferred on 
 him by Congress to prohibit by proclamation the import 
 of the products of any country which taxes unfavourably 
 those of the States. 
 
 But even if such reprisals were not made, one and 
 all Protectionist nations would welcome the opening for 
 competing with us on something like equal terms. Some 
 of them would be forced into a struggle with us in 
 various ways. They now supply us with food and raw 
 materials on the cheapest terms. They would be forced 
 to take up other industries — notably, manufactures. 
 Take for an illustration the case of Saxony. Years ago 
 we taxed Saxon wheat. Saxony gave up growing 
 wheat and took to manufactures, and from that time to 
 this has been one of our most formidable competitors. 
 We should have to carry on the industrial warfare 
 crippled in every way. For our workers, taxed raw 
 materials would involve lower wages, and taxed food 
 increased cost of living. Our imports last year amounted 
 to 416 millions sterling. Every pound of this would 
 have to be taxed. A 10 per cent, tax on these imports 
 amounts to 41 millions. Importers would have to 
 recover this sum from our consumers who buy them. 
 This means that the cost of living would be increased 
 for everything eaten and worn — for all the necessaries of 
 life, in short. Take the item of food alone. We import, 
 say, 160 millions' worth. This is about one-half of our 
 home production. Our total consumption of food, 
 therefore, amounts to 480 millions, and a 10 per cent.
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 383 
 
 tax means an increased cost of 48 millions, which 
 would fall on the masses of our population, on those who 
 are least able to bear the burden. 
 
 All this would be happening while our foreign trade 
 would be crippled, and perhaps ruined, by the fresh com- 
 petition which we ourselves will have called into exist- 
 ence. This is what we are to go through in order to set 
 up what our author calls an " Industrial Empire " ! At 
 the present moment three-fourths of our foreign trade is 
 done with foreign countries, and only one-fourth with 
 the Colonies. We are called on to sacrifice the three- 
 fourths for the one-fourth. Under the most favourable 
 circumstances, many years must elapse before we could 
 substitute Colonial markets for foreign ones, and in the 
 meantime we should be suffering enormous losses and 
 privations, and should be no better off at the end of the 
 time than at the beginning. The condition of our 
 population under such a regime would be simply awful. 
 It would engender grave discontent, and might possibly 
 lead to revolution. 
 
 There are other aspects of the question. First, as to 
 war. Our trade relations with other great countries form 
 a bond which affords some sort of guarantee for peace. 
 A rupture with us would involve vast losses on a large 
 portion of their populations. The proposed fiscal union 
 of the Empire would destroy this guarantee. Secondly, 
 some country — the United States, for instance — might 
 relax its tariff and offer to trade freely with the new 
 combination, and then the "Industrial Empire" might 
 find itself in a nice predicament. The Mother Country 
 might wish to admit the States ; one or more of the 
 Colonies might object to this as meaning ruin to them. 
 There would be danger of disruption.
 
 384 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Or it might turn out that, while at home we were 
 groaning under the intolerable burden cast upon us, we 
 should see in the Colonies an industrial system being 
 reared on an unstable basis, and, the first effects of Pro- 
 tection having spent their force, we should find the 
 Colonies yearning for other markets besides those of the 
 Mother Country, which would be by that time half 
 destroyed. The consequence would be general dis- 
 appointment and discontent throughout the Empire. 
 
 At the present moment the Mother Country bears 
 nearly all the burden of Empire in the shape of army, 
 navy, and diplomatic service — a burden which as time 
 goes on bears more and more heavily on a population 
 the wages of whose artisans are only about two-thirds of 
 what they are in the great Colonies. Our people want, 
 if possible, to get this burden relieved, not to make 
 fresh and unavailing sacrifices from which no benefit 
 could be derived. The more the policy of federating 
 the Empire on a Protectionist basis coupled with 
 retaliation on our rivals is considered, the more we 
 must become convinced that such proposals are little 
 else than an impossible remedy for a non-existent 
 disease. 
 
 The foregoing considerations were urged by me be- 
 fore the Second Congress of Chambers of Commerce of 
 the Empire, which met in London, 28th June, 1892. I 
 had the honour to appear as one of the delegates of 
 the London Chamber, and to move the following 
 resolution : — 
 
 "That in the opinion of this Congress any fiscal union between the 
 Mother Country and her Colonies and dependencies, by means of 
 preferential duties being based on Protection, would be politically 
 dangerous and economically disastrous ; and that the arrangement which, 
 more than any other, would conduce to an intimate commercial union
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 385 
 
 would be by our self-governing Colonies adopting, as closely as cir- 
 cumstances will permit, the non-protective policy of the Mother 
 Country." 
 
 An amendment to this was moved by Sir Charles 
 Tupper, Bart, High Commissioner for Canada, as 
 follows : — 
 
 " Whereas the British Empire, covering one-eighth of the habitable 
 globe, with a population of 350 millions, can amply supply the home 
 market with the productions of every clime at the lowest possible cost ; 
 and Whereas a national sentiment of mutual interest and brotherhood 
 should promote more extended commercial relations between the Mother 
 Country and its many Colonies and possessions — Resolved : That in order 
 to extend the exchange and consumption of the home staple products in 
 every part of the British Empire, a slight differential duty, not exceeding 
 S per cent., should be adopted by the Imperial and Colonial Governments 
 in favour of certain home productions against the imported foreign 
 articles." 
 
 After a two days' debate Sir Charles Tupper's 
 amendment was rejected by 58 Chambers to 33 ; and the 
 original resolution carried by 47 Chambers to 34. 
 
 The Third Congress of the Chambers of Commerce 
 of the Empire met in London on June 9th, 1896, and 
 again took this important subject into consideration. 
 The Rt. Hon. Joseph Chamberlain, Secretary of State 
 for the Colonies, attended, and gave the opening address 
 as Honorary President, At its conclusion, Sir Albert 
 Rollit, M.P., of the London Chamber, took the chair. 
 After a two days' debate, in which the difficulties of the 
 subject were fully recognised, and several resolutions 
 and amendments discussed and withdrawn, the follow- 
 ing resolution, moved from the Chair, was unanimously 
 carried : — 
 
 "That this Congress of Chambers of Commerce of the Empire is of 
 opinion that the establishment of closer commercial relations between 
 the United Kingdom and the Colonies and Dependencies is an object 
 Z
 
 ^86 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 which deserves and demands prompt and careful consideration. The 
 Congress therefore respectfully represents to Her Majesty's Government 
 that, if the suggestion should be made on behalf of the Colonies, or some 
 of them, it would be right and expedient to promote such consideration 
 and the formulation of some practicable plan by summoning an Imperial 
 Conference thoroughly representative of the interests involved, or by such 
 other means as Her Majesty may be advised to adopt. That copies of this 
 Resolution be forwarded to the President, to the Prime Minister, the First 
 Lord of the Treasury, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, the leaders 
 of the Opposition in both Houses, the High Commissioner for Canada, and 
 the Agents-General of the other Colonies." 
 
 So stands this question. Space forbids further refer- 
 ence to it. 
 
 I have said that our author's proposals for Protection, 
 coupled with Commercial Federation of the Empire, are 
 little else than an impossible remedy for a non-existent 
 disease. 
 
 That the disease is non-existent I will now proceed 
 to give further proof Our author says that havoc and 
 ruin have been wrought in our manufactures and our 
 commerce by German Industrialism. But there is no 
 havoc, no ruin. The Germans have made inroads in 
 some particular directions, and that is all. Much of the 
 damage done is owing to our supineness, and can be 
 remedied, and, if we can trust certain indications, is in 
 course of remedy ; while as to the damage done by 
 means of German Protectionism, our author himself 
 tells us that this system is already recoiling on its 
 authors. 
 
 That there is some truth in this may be deduced 
 from the Trade Returns of the two countries for the 
 first nine months of the year 1896, which, as I have 
 already stated (page 327), show that while German Do- 
 mestic Exports increased ^^6,500,000, British Domestic
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 387 
 
 Exports increased iJ" 13,8 15,7 16. Instead of dying of 
 disease, as we are told they are, these figures show that 
 our industries are in a state of vigorous vitality. 
 
 It will be both useful and instructive to trace the 
 directions in which this expansion of our trade has 
 taken place. This has been done by a writer in the 
 Economist of August 22nd, 1896. Therein is to be found 
 an article headed "The Direction of our Foreign Trade," 
 in which the writer divides the subject into " British 
 Trade with Colonies, Possessions, etc.," and " British 
 Trade with Foreign Countries." He commences his 
 analysis by giving the following summary figures of our 
 half-year's trade : — 
 
 First Six Months in 
 
 1896 1895 1894 
 
 Imports fkom — i £ £, 
 
 British Possessions ... 47,818,000 48,634,000 50,512.000 
 
 Foreign Countries ... 168,703,000 155,025.000 160,558,000 
 
 Total ... 216,521,000 203,659,000 211,070,000 
 
 1896 1895 1894 
 
 Exports to — £, £ Z 
 
 British Possessions ... 40,801.000 32,571,000 36,837,000 
 
 Foreign Countries ... 78,202,000 73,546,000 70,046,005 
 
 Total ... 119,003,000 106,117,000 106,883,000 
 
 The writer of the article points out that the falling- 
 off in the value of imports from the Colonies must be 
 ascribed almost entirely to the great drought which 
 affected our Australian Colonics, and greatly reduced 
 the surplus of agricultural and pastoral products avail- 
 able for export, the principal decline being in Wool, to 
 the value of about i^ 1,000,000. 
 
 We are then given the following table : — 
 z 2
 
 t;S8 the GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 British Trade with Colonies, Possessions, etc. 
 
 
 Imports from. 
 
 Exports to. 
 
 
 Six Months ended June 30th. 
 
 Six Months ended June 30th. 
 
 
 1896 189s 
 
 1894 
 
 1896 
 
 1895 
 
 1894 
 
 
 £ £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 Ease Indies ... 
 
 17,077,000 16,832,000 
 
 18,554,000 
 
 16,521,000 
 
 13,564,000 
 
 17,023,000 
 
 .\ustralasta ... 
 
 19,695.000 22,192,000 
 
 if ,390,000 
 
 10,414,000 
 
 7,782,000 
 
 7,689,000 
 
 Canafl i 
 
 3,658,000 ' 2,618,000 
 
 2,gi6,ooo 
 
 2,674,000 
 
 2,475,000 
 
 3,077,0004 
 
 South Africa 
 
 2,927,000 1 2,667,000 
 
 2,945,000 
 
 6,407 000 
 
 4,418,005 
 
 3,995,000 
 
 We-it Indies 
 
 1,140,000 1,306,000 
 
 1,397,000 
 
 1,03 ^roo 
 
 984,ox) 
 
 1,064,000.1 
 
 Hong K ng 
 
 379,000 288,000 
 
 280,000 
 
 924,000 
 
 929,000 
 
 985,000 
 
 West Africa 
 
 1,103,000 955,000 
 
 1,001,000 
 
 895,0x3 
 
 737,ooD 
 
 878,000 
 
 East .\frica 
 
 209,000 1 294,000 
 
 380,000 
 
 353,000 
 
 270,000 
 
 318,000 
 
 Other Possessions ... 
 
 1,630,000 1,482,000 
 
 I 649,000 
 
 1, 583, COO 
 
 1,412,000 
 
 1,808,0:0 
 
 Total 
 
 47,818,000 ^48, 634, 000 50,512,000 
 
 40,801,000 '32,571,000 
 
 36,837,000 
 
 Commenting on these figures, the Economist writer 
 proceeds : " The large expansion in our exports to 
 British possessions was mainly confined to India, 
 Australia, and South Africa. India took ;^i,8(X),ooo more 
 than last year in cotton piece-goods, ;:^400,ooo more in 
 railroad iron, nearly ^,'300,000 more in textile machinery, 
 and also increased her consumption of tin-plates and 
 various other manufactures of iron and steel. The 
 increases of ;^2,6oo,ooo in our shipments to the Austra- 
 lian Colonies, and of nearly iJ"2,ooo,ooo to South Africa, 
 were very evenly distributed throughout all classes of 
 our textile, iron and steel, and other manufactures." 
 
 Next follows an analysis of our trade with foreign 
 countries, in the course of which appears the table on 
 the following page. 
 
 As regards the increase of ;^l 3,700,000 in the value 
 of our imports, shown in the table, the Econotnist writer 
 states that fully one-half of it appears in the trade with 
 Continental Europe, that we received more from all 
 these countries, except Russia, and that the chief 
 features of these imports from Europe were large
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 British Trade \vith Foreign Countries- 
 
 3<^9 
 
 
 Imjorts from. 
 
 Exports to. 
 
 Countries. 
 
 Six Months ended June 30th. 
 
 Six Months ended J 
 
 une 30th. 
 
 
 1896 
 
 1895 
 
 1894 
 
 1896 
 
 1895 
 
 1894 
 
 
 I 
 
 £. 
 
 / 
 
 £ 
 
 I 
 
 £. 
 
 Russia 
 
 9,102,000 
 
 9,962,000 
 
 9,865,000 
 
 3.256,000 
 
 2,911,000 
 
 3,i34,roo 
 
 Sweden 
 
 4,018 000 
 
 3,081,000 
 
 3,409,00 
 
 1,402,000 
 
 1,334.900 
 
 1,388,000 
 
 Norway 
 
 2,131,000 
 
 1,804,000 
 
 1,843,000 
 
 943,000 
 
 864.000 
 
 951,000 
 
 Denmark 
 
 5,2i4,coo 
 
 4 459.000 
 
 4,812,000 
 
 1.327,000 
 
 I,244,0( 
 
 1,222, CO 
 
 (lermany 
 
 13,275,000 
 
 12,496,000 
 
 13,652,000 
 
 11,119,000 
 
 8,998,000 
 
 8,382,000 
 
 Holland 
 
 14,001,000 
 
 12,954,000 
 
 13,318,000 
 
 4,215,000 
 
 3,632,000 
 
 4.861,000 
 
 Belgium 
 
 9,227,000 
 
 8,316,000 
 
 8,432,000 
 
 3,990,000 
 
 3,690,000 
 
 4,096,000 
 
 France 
 
 26,052,000 
 
 23,353,000 
 
 21,275,000 
 
 7.503 000 
 
 7,009,000 
 
 7,215,000 
 
 Portugal 
 
 1,259,000 
 
 1,142,000 
 
 1, 22 1, coo 
 
 825,000 
 
 743,000 
 
 798,(00 
 
 Spain 
 
 6,108,000 
 
 5,395,000 
 
 5,310,000 
 
 1,838,000 
 
 2,079,000 
 
 2,132,000 
 
 Italy 
 
 1,701,000 
 
 1,600,000 
 
 1,744,000 
 
 2 664,000 
 
 2,868,. 00 
 
 2,912,010 
 
 An trian Territrs. 
 
 629,000 
 
 619, OOX) 
 
 624,010 
 
 797,000 
 
 877,00)0 
 
 581, coo 
 
 Greece 
 
 328,000 
 
 306,000 
 
 346,000 
 
 363,000 
 
 353,oco 
 
 361,000 
 
 Turkey 
 
 2,115,000 
 
 2,225,000 
 
 2,103,000 
 
 2,042,000 
 
 2,825,0 
 
 3,185,000 
 
 Egypt 
 
 5,i-7,coo 
 
 4,760,000 
 
 5,656,000 
 
 1,760,000 
 
 1,672,000 
 
 2,H4,roO 
 
 Indi (foreign) .. 
 
 1,165,000 
 
 812,000 
 
 1,106,000 
 
 1, 400, r 00 
 
 1,277,000 
 
 1,329,000 
 
 China 
 
 928,000 
 
 1,040,000 
 
 1,348,000 
 
 3.333,000 
 
 2,225.000 
 
 2,595,000 
 
 United States .. 
 
 51,873,000 
 
 47, 90,000 
 
 49,989,000 
 
 11,253,000 
 
 13,504,000 
 
 8,i77,oc« 
 
 Mexico 
 
 352,000 
 
 348,^00 
 
 255.00 -■ 
 
 774.000 
 
 687,000 
 
 579,000 
 
 Cent. America ... 
 
 885,000 
 
 862,000 
 
 827,000 
 
 569,000 
 
 588,000 
 
 384,. 00 
 
 Chili 
 
 1,874,000 
 
 1,837,000 
 
 2,167,000 
 
 1,399.000 
 
 1,526,000 
 
 1,C»2,C>00 
 
 Brazil 
 
 2,033,000 
 
 1,939,000 
 
 2,612,000 
 
 3,331,000 
 
 3,287 coo 
 
 3,403,'- 00 
 
 Uruguay 
 
 18 ,000 
 
 189,000 
 
 115,000 
 
 660,000 
 
 598,000 
 
 691,1 C» 
 
 Argentina 
 
 4,948,000 
 
 4 276,00x5 
 
 2,974,000 
 
 3,146 000 
 
 2 043,000 
 
 1,997,000 
 
 Other Countries .. 
 
 4,198,000 
 
 4,160,000 
 
 5,555,000 
 
 8,293,000 
 
 6,682,000 
 
 5,567 000 
 
 Total 
 
 168,703,000 
 
 155,025,000 
 
 160,558,000 
 
 '78,202,000 
 
 73,546,000 
 
 70,o46,o(x> 
 
 increases of timber from Sweden and Norway, raw 
 sugar from Germany, and silk manufactures from 
 France. 
 
 With regard to our exports to European countries, 
 we are told that they " were generally on a larger scale 
 than in the first half of 1895, the expansion of trade 
 being shared, in by most of our industries, though the 
 increase was, perhaps, most conspicuous in iron and 
 steel goods and machinery." After some other remarks 
 the writer concludes thus : " The chief feature in the 
 trade with the South American Republics was an in- 
 crease of ,;^i, 100,000 in the value of our exports to 
 Argentina. The increase was largely in railroad
 
 390 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 and other iron and steel manufactures, and in cotton 
 piece-goods. Brazil took more of some descriptions of 
 iron products, but less hardware and cutlery, cotton 
 piece-goods, and linen manufactures. The falling-ofif in 
 the exports to Chili was chiefly in cotton piece-goods." 
 
 Now if the reader will call to mind the statements 
 of our author, quoted by me, in which he asserts that 
 owing to the onslaughts of the ubiquitous and invincible 
 German our industries are in wreck and ruin, our foreign 
 trade in a state of decay, and our commercial supremacy 
 a thing of the past, and will compare his lucubrations 
 with the facts disclosed in the Economist article, he can 
 come to only one conclusion. 
 
 And he will be confirmed in that conclusion if he 
 will once more inspect the table referring to our trade 
 with foreign countries, and pay particular attention to 
 what is stated therein under the head " Germany " — 
 the country which is said to be the fountain and origin 
 of all our woes. He will find there something which 
 may not only startle, but amuse him. Our author tells 
 us that the astute Germans, by means of their Protection, 
 keep our products out of their country, while owing to 
 our Free Trade they flood our market with their goods. 
 What will he find as to that ? This, that, comparing 
 half-years, German exports to us in 1896, which include 
 4^ million pounds' worth of bounty-fed sugar, were less 
 by ;^377,ooo than they were in 1894, while British 
 exports to Germany in the same period increased 
 i^2,737,ooo ! 
 
 And so this German Competition, as delineated by 
 our author, and of which some of us are so mightily 
 afraid, turns out, after all, to be nothing else than 
 A BOGEY.
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 39I 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Status of the United Kingdom, i8y6 — Population — Immigration — Emi- 
 gration — National Debt — Price of Consols — Imperial Revenue — 
 Income Tax — -Agriculture — Railways — Coal and Iron Production — 
 Post-Office — Letters — Post-Cards — Newspapers and Books, etc. — 
 Telegraph Mes^ages^Joint Stock Companies — Banking — Bankers' 
 Clearings — Thrift — Bankruptcy — Education — Crime — Pauperism — 
 Shipping — Foreign Trade — Bullion and Specie — Foreign and Colonial 
 Investments — Average of Prices of Imports and Exports — Quantities 
 of Principal Imported and Excisable Articles retained for Home Con- 
 sumption — Conclusion. 
 
 Sufficient has been said in the preceding chapters to 
 show the groundlessness of the alarm felt in certain 
 quarters as to our national industries. It is now fifty 
 years since the Corn Laws were repealed and those 
 reforms commenced which gave us Free Trade. At 
 this juncture it will be useful to take stock and to 
 endeavour to estimate to some extent the condition 
 in which the nation now finds itself, as compared with 
 the state of things which existed half a century ago, 
 when one out of every eleven of our population was 
 a pauper. 
 
 With this end in view, I have prepared the following 
 Tables, and have appended to each one such remarks as 
 they suggest. The tables relate to Population, Immi- 
 gration and Emigration, National Debt, Price of Consols, 
 Imperial Revenue, Income Tax, Agriculture, Railways, 
 Coal and Iron Production, Post Office, Letters, News- 
 papers, etc.. Post Cards, Telegraph Messages, Joint Stock 
 Companies, Banking, Bankers' Clearings, Thrift, Bank- 
 ruptcy, Education, Crime, Pauperism, Shipping, Foreign
 
 392 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Trade, Bullion and Specie, Foreign and Colonial Invest- 
 ments, Average Prices, Imported and Excisable Articles 
 retained for Home Consumption. 
 
 
 POrULATION. 
 
 
 Years. 
 
 Years. 
 
 
 184I . 
 
 . 26,730,929 1886 . 
 
 • 36,313.582 
 
 1871 . 
 
 . 31,835-757 '891 . 
 
 . 37,797,013 
 
 1876 . 
 
 . 33,093'439 '895 . 
 
 • 39.124,496 
 
 1881 . 
 
 • 34,934.476 1896 • 
 
 . 39,465,720 
 
 It will be seen from the above table that our popula- 
 tion has been, and is, a rapidly growing one. Between 
 1841 and 1 87 1, an interval of thirty years, the increase 
 was five millions. Between 1871 and 1896, an interval 
 of twenty-five years, the increase was 7| millions. The 
 feeding, clothing, and housing of our growing numbers 
 is a problem of increasing importance and difficulty. 
 
 IMMIGRATION. 
 
 Number of immigrants that entered the United 
 Kingdom from countries out of Europe : — 
 
 Years. 
 
 British and 
 Ir.th. 
 
 Foreigners. 
 
 Not 
 Distinguished. 
 
 Total. 
 
 1 881 
 
 1884 
 1888 
 1890 
 
 1893 
 1894 
 
 1895 
 
 52,707 
 91,356 
 94,133 
 109,470 
 102,119 
 118,309 
 109,418 
 
 24,398 
 32,007 
 
 33,895 
 44,663 
 
 37,634 
 66,129 
 64803 
 
 103 
 
 851 
 
 1,777 
 1,301 
 1,361 
 1,453 
 
 77,105 
 123.466 
 128,879 
 155,910 
 141,054 
 185,799 
 175.674 
 
 EMIGRATION. 
 
 Number of British, Irish, and foreign emigrants that 
 left the United Kingdom for countries out of Europe : —
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 393 
 
 Years. 
 
 British and 
 Irish. 
 
 Foreigners. 
 
 Not 
 Distinguished. 
 
 Total. 
 
 1881 
 1884 
 1888 
 1890 
 
 1893 
 1894 
 
 1895 
 
 243,002 
 242,179 
 279,928 
 218,116 
 208,814 
 156,030 
 185,181 
 
 144,381 
 
 57,733 
 113,230 
 94,5«5 
 95,J23 
 67,032 
 82,818 
 
 5,131 
 
 3-9S9 
 5,336 
 3,349 
 3,696 
 3,765 
 3,773 
 
 302,514 
 303,901 
 398,494 
 
 3'5,98o 
 
 307,633 
 226,827 ■ 
 271,772 
 
 By comparison we find from these tables that in 
 1881 emigration exceeded immigration by 225,409; in 
 1888 by 269,615; and in 1895 by only 96,098. This 
 does not look as if there were anything radically wrong 
 in our economic condition at a time when it is supposed 
 by some people to be in rapid deterioration. 
 
 NATIONAL DEBT. 
 
 CAPITAL VALUE. 
 
 Ye.irs. £ 
 
 1871 Dec. 31st 789,184,466 
 
 1876 ,, 770,906,683 
 
 I88I ,, 766,144,461 
 
 Years. £ 
 
 1886 March 31st 742,282,411 
 
 1891 „ 684,070,959 
 
 1896 „ 648,474,143 
 
 PRICE OF CONSOLS. 
 
 years. 
 
 Dividend. 
 
 1871 
 
 3 per cent 
 
 1876 
 
 ,, 
 
 1881 
 
 M 
 
 1886 
 
 )> 
 
 1891 
 
 23 
 
 Werage 
 Price. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Dividend. 
 
 Average 
 Price. 
 
 92I 
 
 1893 
 
 2| per cent. 
 
 98I 
 
 95 
 
 1894 
 
 >> 
 
 ioItV 
 
 100 
 
 1895 
 
 »» 
 
 io6xV 
 
 loot 
 
 1896 Jan. 
 
 2 „ 
 
 io5 
 
 951 
 
 ,. July 
 
 I ,, 
 
 114 
 
 It will be seen that during the last twenty-five years 
 the Debt has been reduced by 140 million pounds ; and 
 that Consols, which in 1871 were 3 per cents,, stood at 
 92f, and that after their reduction to 2f per cents., with 
 a further reduction in 1903 to 2| per cents., they stood
 
 394 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 in 1891 at 95I ; in 1895 at 106; and on July ist, 1896, 
 at 114! All which does not look like impending ruin. 
 
 IMPERIAL REVENUE. 
 
 GROSS RECEIPTS. 
 
 Years. £, Years. £ 
 
 1881 ... 81,872,354 189I ... 89,489,112 
 
 1886 ... 89,581,301 1896 ... 101,973,829 
 
 The Imperial Revenue arises from Customs, and 
 from Excise, and other Internal Duties. Our tariff is 
 the simplest in the world, comprising only cocoa, coffee, 
 chicory, tea, tobacco, and alcohol in all forms ; it is con- 
 structed for Revenue purposes only. Protection being 
 strictly eliminated by Excise duties on those Home 
 Products which are similar to those imported on which 
 Customs duties are charged. The Revenue is further 
 derived from Estate Duties, Stamps, Land Tax, House 
 Duty, Property and Income Tax, Post-Ofifice, Tele- 
 graphs, Crown Lands, Interest on Local Loans, Suez 
 Canal Shares, Patents, Civil Departments. 
 
 The vast total to which the Revenue has now 
 attained, over 160 millions, is not a subject for con- 
 gratulation. It arises from the necessity of safeguarding 
 the national existence. While contemplating it, we 
 cannot but wish that the militarism of Europe could 
 be abolished, and that something like universal Free 
 Trade could be established, and the terrible drain on 
 national resources stopped. 
 
 INCOME TAX. 
 
 ANNUAL VALUE OF PROPERTY AND PROFITS ASSESSED. 
 
 Years. 
 
 I 
 
 Years. 
 
 £ 
 
 1870 . 
 
 . 444,914,228 
 
 189I 
 
 .. 698,407,549 
 
 187I . 
 
 • 465.594.366 
 
 1892 
 
 .. 710,752,684 
 
 1876 . 
 
 • 579.297.347 
 
 1893 
 
 .. 712,277,117 
 
 1881 . 
 
 . 585,223,890 
 
 1894 
 
 .. 706,130,87 s 
 
 1886 . 
 
 ■ 629,855,622 
 
 1895 
 
 .. 690,251,675
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY, 
 
 395 
 
 Up to the year 1893, during the last twenty-five 
 years, there was an ahnost unbroken rise in the annual 
 value of the assessments. In that year, however, there 
 were financial and commercial crises in Australia and 
 the United States, the full effects of which have not yet 
 passed away. 
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Years. 
 
 1871 
 
 1876 
 1881 
 1886 
 189I 
 IS96 
 
 Acres 
 
 Under Corn 
 
 Crops. 
 
 11,833,243 
 
 I 1,074,846 
 
 10,654,697 
 
 9,878.787 
 
 9.443.509 
 8,865,33s 
 
 Averat; 
 
 e Price 
 
 of Wheat 1 
 
 Per 
 
 Qr. 
 
 56s. 
 
 8d. 
 
 46s. 
 
 2d. 
 
 4SS. 
 
 4d. 
 
 3IS. 
 
 Od. 
 
 .37s. 
 
 od. 
 
 23s. 
 
 Id. 
 
 No. of 
 Cattle. 
 
 9,346,216 
 9,997,189 
 
 9.905,013 
 10,872,811 
 
 11,343,686 
 •0,753,314 
 
 No. of 
 Sh::ep. 
 
 31,403,500 
 
 32.252,579 
 27,896,273 
 28955,240 
 33.533.988 
 29.774,853 
 
 No. of 
 Pigs. 
 
 4,136,616 
 
 3.734,429 
 
 3,«49.'73 
 3.497,561 
 4,272,764 
 4,238,870 
 
 This is the one bad exhibit in the national stock- 
 taking. Our agriculturists, however, are not the only 
 ones who have suffered. For instance, those of Russia, 
 Germany, and the United States — all Protectionist 
 countries — are as loud in their complaints as ours are 
 of the fall in the prices of agricultural products — a result 
 which, as in other things, is owing to the opening-up of 
 new fields of production and the cheapening of transport 
 by land and sea. 
 
 RAILWAY.S. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Miles 
 
 
 open. 
 
 1871 
 
 15.370 
 
 1876 
 
 16,872 
 
 1881 
 
 18,175 
 
 1886 
 
 19,332 
 
 1891 
 
 20,191 
 
 1895 
 
 21,174 
 
 Paid-up 
 Capital. 
 
 £ 
 
 552,680,107 
 658,214,776 
 745,528,162 
 828,344,254 
 919425,121 
 1,001,110,221 
 
 Gross 
 Receipts. 
 
 £ 
 
 48,892,780 
 62,215,775 
 67,155,000 
 69.591-953 
 81,860,607 
 85 922,702 
 
 Receipts 
 per Mile Passengers, 
 open. 
 
 £ 
 
 3,092 
 3,574 
 3.572 
 3.446 
 3.881 
 3.844 
 
 No. 
 375.220,754 
 534.494.<^6g 
 626,030,000 
 725.584.390 
 845,4631668 
 929,770,909 
 
 Goodi and 
 Minerals. 
 
 Tons. ■ 
 
 169,364,698 
 205,965,064 
 247,045,000 
 254,626,643 
 310,324,6.7 
 334.230,991 
 
 Net 
 Receipts! 
 
 £ 
 
 25.739.920 
 28,680,266 
 32,255,1.00 
 33,073,706 
 36,731,624 
 38,046,065
 
 396 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Here we see a marvellous development. In twenty- 
 five years the paid-up capital has sprung from 552^ 
 millions to 1,001 millions, and 6,204 additional miles 
 have been constructed, yet the receipts per mile of road 
 have risen from ^^3,092 to ;^3,844. We find, also, that 
 the number of passengers has increased from 375^ to 
 929I millions, 84 1| millions of whom were third class — 
 an increase on the year of 19! millions ; that the goods 
 and minerals traffic has risen from 169I million to 334^ 
 million tons ; that the gross receipts have risen from 48I 
 millions to 85|- millions, while the net receipts have risen 
 from 25! to 38 millions. 
 
 COAL AND IRON PRODUCTION. 
 
 
 Coal. 
 
 Pig 
 
 IRON. 
 
 Years 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 No. of Tons. 
 
 Value. 
 
 No. of Tons. 
 
 Value. 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 
 £ 
 
 1871 
 
 110,431,192 
 
 35,205,608 
 
 6,627,179 
 
 14,908,787 
 
 1876 
 
 133,344,826 
 
 46,670,668 
 
 6,555.997 
 
 16,062,192 
 
 1881 
 
 154,184.300 
 
 65,528,327 
 
 8,141,449 
 
 20,361,122 
 
 1882* 
 
 156,499,977 
 
 44,118,409 
 
 8,586,680 
 
 24,042,704 
 
 1886 
 
 157,518,482 
 
 38,145,930 
 
 7,009,754 
 
 15.888,775 
 
 1891 
 
 185,479,126 
 
 74,090,816 
 
 7,406,064 
 
 19,440,918 
 
 1895 
 
 189 661,362 
 
 57.231,213 
 
 7,703.459 
 
 18,456,203' 
 
 * The plan adopted for obtaining the value of the coil produced was changed in the 
 year 1882. 
 
 Here we find increasing production and decreasing 
 value of the product, the effect, as regards iron, of the 
 invention of new processes, the cheapening of transport, 
 and competition.
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEV. 
 
 397 
 
 POST-OFFICE. 
 Letters Delivered. 
 
 Years ended 
 December 31st. 
 
 187I 
 
 1876 
 
 Years ended 
 March 31st. 
 
 1881 
 
 1886 
 189I 
 1896 
 
 No. (stated in 
 mill ins). 
 
 867 
 
 1,019 
 
 Per 100 of Population. 
 United K ngdom. 
 
 2,751 
 3.079 
 
 Per too of Popu'at'on. 
 England and Wales. 
 
 3.168 
 
 3.520 
 
 1,165 
 
 1,403 
 
 1,7055 
 
 1.834^ 
 
 Post Cards. 
 
 Ye rs. 
 December 31st. 
 
 187I 
 
 1872 
 
 1876 
 
 March 31st. 
 
 i88i 
 
 t 
 
 76 
 
 93 
 
 123 
 
 1886 ... 172 
 
 189I ... 229f 
 
 1896 ... 314^ 
 
 ♦ H .Ifpinny po.-ta^e introduced October, 1871 
 
 3,369 ... 3,828 
 
 Per head. Pe head. 
 
 39 - 43 
 
 45 ••• 51 
 
 46 ... 51 
 
 Newspapers, Book Packets, 
 
 Circulars, etc. 
 (Stated in millions.) 
 
 Years. 
 December 31st. 
 
 1871 ... 202 
 
 1872 ... 223 
 
 1876 ... 299 
 
 March 31st. 
 
 1S81 ... 374 
 
 1886 ... 490 
 
 189I ... 637J 
 
 1896 ... 821^^ 
 
 TELEGRAPH MESSAGES. 
 
 TOTAL NUMBFR FORWARDED FROM TELEGRAPH STATIONS IN THE 
 .UNITED KINGDOM, YEARS ENDED MARCH 3IST. 
 
 No. No. 
 
 1871 ... 9,850,177 1886* ... 39,146,283 
 
 1876 ... 20,973,535 1891 ... 66,409,211 
 
 1881 ... 29,966,965 1896 ... 78,839,610 
 
 * Minimum charge reduced October i, 1885, from is. to 6d. 
 
 Here, again, we see a vast development. In a quarter 
 of a century the letters delivered have risen from 867 to 
 1,834 millions; post-cards from "jG to 314 millions; 
 newspapers, book-packets, circulars, etc., from 202 to 821 
 millions; and telegraph messages from 9I to 39I millions.
 
 398 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 In 1 87 1 the letters per head of population were 27"5i ; 
 in 1896 they were 46. All this speaks volumes for the 
 commercial activity and the intellectual development of 
 the people. 
 
 JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES. 
 Number and amount of Paid-up Capiial of all Registered Companies 
 having a Share Capital and believed to be carrying on business at 
 dates: — 
 
 April, 1884 
 1886 
 1 888 
 1890 
 1892 
 1894 
 1895 
 
 Number. 
 
 8,692 
 
 9,471 
 11,001 
 
 13323 
 10,173 
 17,155 
 19,430 
 
 Paid-up Capital. 
 
 £ 
 475,551.294 
 529,637,684 
 611,430,371 
 
 775,139,5^3 
 
 989,283,634 
 
 1,013,119,359 
 
 1,062,733,821 
 
 Again we have to notice a great development. In 
 
 1884 the number of companies carrying on business was 
 
 8,692; in 1895 it was 19,430. In 1884 the paid-up capital 
 
 was 4751 millions ; in 1895 it was i,o62f millions. 
 
 BANKING. 
 Estimated Total of Deposits and Current Accounts held in the United 
 Kingdom in the middle of the following years— Bank of England 
 stated separately. 
 
 
 Exclusive of 
 
 Bank of 
 
 
 
 Bank of England. 
 
 England. 
 
 Total, say, 
 
 
 .,^ £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ £ 
 
 1886 
 
 540 Millions to 550 Millions. 
 
 31 Millions. 
 
 560 Millions to S70 Mill 
 
 ions 
 
 1887 
 
 550 „ 560 
 
 33 ,, 
 
 580 , 
 
 590 
 
 
 1888 
 
 560 „ 570 
 
 32 
 
 
 590 , 
 
 , 600 , 
 
 
 1889 
 
 590 „ 600 „ 
 
 35 
 
 
 620 , 
 
 , 630 , 
 
 
 1890 
 
 600 ,, 620 ,, 
 
 34 
 
 
 630 
 
 , 650 , 
 
 
 I89I 
 
 620 „ 640 „ 
 
 42 
 
 
 660 
 
 680 , 
 
 
 1892 
 
 650 „ 660 „ 
 
 39 
 
 
 690 , 
 
 , 700 , 
 
 
 ^"93 
 
 630 „ 640 „ 
 
 39 
 
 
 670 , 
 
 6S0 
 
 
 1894 
 
 640 ,, 6ro „ 
 
 43 
 
 
 680 
 
 , 690 , 
 
 
 189s 
 
 680 ,, 700 
 
 46 
 
 
 730 
 
 740 
 
 
 1896 720 „ 730 „ 
 
 65 
 
 
 780 
 
 790 , 

 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 399 
 
 - These figures show a steady expansion unchequered 
 except by the trade depression arising out of the crises 
 in 1893. 
 
 BANKERS' CLEARINGS. 
 
 LONDON bankers' CLEARING-HOUSE, TOFAL CLEARINGS. 
 
 Yeirs. 
 
 MiUioT £,. 
 
 Ye irs. 
 
 Million £, 
 
 187 1 
 
 .. 4,826 
 
 1890 
 
 .. 7,801 
 
 1876 
 
 •• 4-963 
 
 1891 
 
 .. 6,848 
 
 1881 
 
 .. 6,357 
 
 1894 
 
 6,337 
 
 1886 
 
 .. 5,902 
 
 1895 
 
 •• 7,593 
 
 Once more a great development — a development 
 reckoned by thousands of millions. The table shows 
 that 1890 was a record year, when 7,801 millions was 
 reached; that in 1894 the clearings sank to 6,337 
 millions; and that in 1895 they rose to 7,593 millions. 
 Here, also, we find the mark left by the recent trade 
 depression. 
 
 THRIFT. 
 
 COMPUTED CAPITAL OF THE SAVINGS BANKS. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Post-Office Banks. 
 
 Trustee Banks. 
 
 Toial. 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 187I 
 
 17,025,004 
 
 38,819,663 
 
 55,844,667 
 
 1876 
 
 26,996,550 
 
 43,283,458 
 
 70,280,008 
 
 1881 
 
 36,194,496 
 
 44, 140,1 16 
 
 80,334,612 
 
 r886 
 
 50,874,337 
 
 4-1,843,995 
 
 97,718,332 
 
 1891 
 
 71,608,002 
 
 42,875,565 
 
 114,483,507 
 
 1895 
 
 97,86 >,ooo 
 
 45.31 •.6S1 
 
 143,181.656 
 
 We see from this table that the deposits in both 
 kinds of savings banks increased from 55^ millions in 
 1871 to 1435 millions in 1895. There can be no doubt
 
 400 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 that the masses are saving money ; but the great in- 
 crease of 28f millions between 1891 and 1895 could not 
 have been accomplished by them alone, but was owing 
 to the Government having raised the maximum allowed 
 deposit to ^^200. From a national point of view this is 
 not satisfactory. The compulsory investment of the 
 deposits in Government Securities forces up their price 
 unnaturally, to the national loss in the redemption of 
 Debt, while an enormous liability is incurred which 
 might some day turn out to be disastrous. In July last 
 Consols touched 1 14. 
 
 BANKRUPTCY. 
 
 ENGLAND AND WALES. 
 
 Years. 
 
 No. of Insolvents. 
 
 Liabilities. 
 
 Assets. 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 I 
 
 1870 
 
 5,002 
 
 17,456,429 
 
 5,381,533 
 
 1879 
 
 I3,'32 
 
 29,678,194 
 
 10,193,617 
 
 1880 
 
 10,298 
 
 16,188.637 
 
 4,701,506 
 
 1890 
 
 4,044 
 
 6,184,146 
 
 2,238,584 
 
 189I 
 
 4,242 
 
 8,600,726 
 
 3,164,966 
 
 1892 
 
 4,657 
 
 8,892,162 
 
 3,089,791 
 
 1893 
 
 4,901 
 
 7,547,794 
 
 2,834,553 
 
 1894 
 
 4,794 
 
 7,oi;<,i68 
 
 2,373,884 
 
 1895 
 
 4,414 
 
 6,547,700 
 
 6,046,627 
 
 Here we see that the number of insolvents in 1870 
 was 5,002, that in 1879 the number rose to 13,132, and 
 that in 1895 it sank to 4,414, the liabilities being respec- 
 tively 171, 29f , and 6\ millions. This is a good showing, 
 and our satisfaction therewith is further deepened when 
 we call to mind that in 1870 our population was 31 
 millions, and in 1895 39 millions.
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 EDUCATION, 
 
 Tkimary ScnOOLS.— Great Britain. 
 
 401 
 
 Year 
 
 Schools Inspected. 
 
 Accommodation for 
 Children. 
 
 Average Attenda. ce. 
 
 1870 
 
 10,949 
 
 2,215,235 
 
 i,453,53» 
 
 187 1 
 
 11,465 
 
 2,357.025 
 
 1,547,195 
 
 1876 
 
 17.877 
 
 3.946,775 
 
 2,340,277 
 
 1881 
 
 21,136 
 
 5,002,116 
 
 3,273.501 
 
 1886 
 
 22,114 
 
 5.836,697 
 
 3.915.315 
 
 1891 
 
 22,613 
 
 6,360,936 
 
 4,288,321 
 
 1895 
 
 22,773 
 
 6,726,414 
 
 4.900335 
 
 Ireland. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Schools in Operation. 
 
 Pupils on the Rolls. 
 
 Average Atter.dance. 
 
 1870 
 
 6,806 
 
 998,999 
 
 359.199 
 
 1871 
 
 6,914 
 
 1,021,700 
 
 363.850 
 
 1876 
 
 7.334 
 
 1,032,215 
 
 416,5X6 
 
 1881 
 
 7,648 
 
 i,ot6,259 
 
 453,567 
 
 1886 
 
 8,024 
 
 1,071,791 
 
 490,484 
 
 189I 
 
 8,346 
 
 1,022,361 
 
 506,336 
 
 1895 
 
 8,557 
 
 1,018,408 
 
 519515 
 
 These tables speak for themselves. They form a 
 gratifying exhibit of the progress made in Primary 
 Education during the last quarter of a century. It is 
 specially gratifying as regards Ireland when we call to 
 mind that in 1870 her population amounted to 5,412,660, 
 and in 1895 to only 4,574,764. 
 
 These figures show on their face a gratifying decrease 
 in crime. We see that in 1840, out of a population of 
 26^ millions, there were 34,030 criminal convictions ; and 
 that in 1850, out of a population of 27^ millions, the 
 convictions rose to 41,008. We see also that in i860 a 
 better state of things had supervened, the population 
 numbering 28f millions, and the convictions sinking to 
 
 A A
 
 402 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 CRIME. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Population. 
 
 No. of Convictions. 
 
 1840 
 
 26,487,026 
 
 34,030 
 
 1850 
 
 27,523,694 
 
 41,008 
 
 i860 
 
 28,778,411 
 
 17,461 
 
 1870 
 
 31,205,444 
 
 18,401 
 
 1880 
 
 34,468,552 
 
 15,643 
 
 1890 
 
 37,484,764 
 
 12,260 
 
 1891 
 
 37,797,013 
 
 12,133 
 
 1892 
 
 38,106,675 
 
 12,581 
 
 1893 
 
 38,440,371 
 
 13,078 
 
 1894 
 
 38,786,053 
 
 13,040 
 
 1895 
 
 39,124,496 
 
 11,918 
 
 17,461. Casting our eyes down the list, we find that 
 since i860 criminal convictions have steadily decreased, 
 while the population has steadily increased, until in 
 1895, while our population numbered 39^ millions, con- 
 victions had sunk to 1 1,918. All this bespeaks a material 
 improvement ; but we cannot, however, deduce from the 
 figures that crime has diminished in the proportions 
 shown. Much must be attributed to the working of 
 juster and more humane laws. 
 
 
 PAUPERISM 
 
 
 
 ENGLAND AND WALES. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Population. 
 
 No. of Paupers, 
 Jan. I St. 
 
 1850 
 
 17,773,324 
 
 920,543 
 
 i860 
 
 19,902,713 
 
 851,020 
 
 1870 
 
 22,457,366 
 
 1,079,391 
 
 1880 
 
 25,480,161 
 
 837,940 
 
 1890 
 
 28,763,673 
 
 787,545 
 
 1891 
 
 29,082,585 
 
 774,905 
 
 1892 
 
 29,405,054 
 
 754,485 
 
 1893 
 
 29,731,100 
 
 776,458 
 
 1894 
 
 30,060,763 
 
 812,441 
 
 1895 
 
 30,394,078 
 
 817,431 
 
 1896 
 
 30,731,092 
 
 827,217
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 SCOTLAND. 
 
 403 
 
 Years. 
 
 Population. 
 
 No. of Paupers, 
 V irious D^tes. 
 
 1866 
 
 3,214,426 
 
 119,608 
 
 1870 
 
 3-335.418 
 
 126,187 
 
 1880 
 
 3,661,292 
 
 98,608 
 
 1890 
 
 4,003,132 
 
 94,894 
 
 1891 
 
 4.033,180 
 
 93,289 
 
 1892 
 
 4,063,452 
 
 93,051 
 
 1893 
 
 4,093.959 
 
 93,285 
 
 1894 
 
 4,124,691 
 
 94,078 
 
 1895 
 
 4.155.654 
 
 96,671 
 
 1896 
 
 4,186,849 
 
 99,261 
 
 Years. 
 
 Population. 
 
 No. of Paupers, 
 1st January. 
 
 1866 
 
 5.519,522 
 
 65,057 
 
 1870 
 
 5,412,660 
 
 73,921 
 
 1880 
 
 5.327,099 
 
 100,856 
 
 1890 
 
 4,717,959 
 
 107,774 
 
 189I 
 
 4,681,248 
 
 107,119 
 
 1892 
 
 4,638,169 
 
 103,839 
 
 1893 
 
 4,615.312 
 
 102,865 
 
 1894 
 
 4,600,599 
 
 104,211 
 
 1895 
 
 4,574,764 
 
 101,071 
 
 1896 
 
 4,547,779 
 
 98,627 
 
 As regards England and Wales, there has been a 
 gratifying decrease of pauperism since 1850. In that 
 year the population numbered lyf millions, and the 
 paupers 920,543. In 1896 the population is 30J mil- 
 lions, and the paupers 827,217. It has been stated that 
 in the time of the Corn Laws one out of every eleven 
 among us was a pauper. In 1896 we have about one in 
 thirty-eight. We see also in the later returns another 
 mark of the late trade depression. 
 
 As regards Scotland, we find that in 1870 the 
 
 A A 2
 
 404 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 population was 3I millions, with 126,187 paupers; and 
 that in 1896, with a population of 4^ millions, the paupers 
 were only 99,261. In these later returns we also see the 
 mark of the recent trade depression. 
 
 As regards Ireland, we find a different state of things 
 arising out of different economic circumstances. Ireland 
 is almost entirely agricultural, and not having manufac- 
 turing industries such as Great Britain possesses, her 
 people have accordingly suffered and diminished. Since 
 1891, however, things have mended, the country has 
 been fairly prosperous, and there has been a gratifying 
 decrease of pauperism. 
 
 SHIPPING. 
 
 TOTAL NUMBER OF VESSELS BELONGING TO THE UNITED KINGDOM. 
 
 
 Sailing. 
 
 Steam. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Years. 
 
 vessels. 
 
 26,140 
 21,144 
 16,179 
 13.823 
 13,239 
 
 Tjns. 
 
 Vessels. 
 
 To IS. 
 
 Vessels. 
 
 Tons. 
 
 1866 
 1876 
 1886 
 1891 
 1893 
 
 4,903,652 
 4,257,986 
 
 3.397,197 
 2,972,093 
 3,038,260 
 
 2,831 
 4,335 
 6,653 
 7,720 
 8,088 
 
 875,685 
 2,005,347 
 3,965,302 
 5,307,204 
 5,470,243 
 
 28,971 
 
 25,479 
 22,832 
 
 21,543 
 21,327 
 
 5,779.337 
 6,263,333 
 7,362,499 
 8,279,297 
 8,778.503 
 
 Toinige (f British and F.r^ign V<;.-se's 
 E itercd and Clear.id, wIl i Cargoes only, 
 at Pjrta in the U i ted Kiugdum from 
 and to FcrJg.i C^un.ries and B.itish 
 P^J^S;.ss:ons. 
 
 Years British. 
 
 1866 
 1876 
 1886 
 1891 
 1893 
 
 19.169,967 
 28,873,724 
 
 40,286,63(. 
 
 45,534,353 
 45,457,810 
 
 1895,49,925,555 
 
 Fjreign. 
 
 8,117,3'/ 
 13,663.660 
 13,504,239 
 
 16,779,871 
 16,290,377 
 •7.705,104 
 
 Total. 
 
 27,287,284 
 42,537,384 
 53,790,869 
 62,314,224 
 61,748,187 
 67,630,659 
 
 Totil Tonnag; of Br tiA and Foreigi 
 Vessels E.uerid and Cleartd, wi.h 
 Cargoes and in Ballast, cX Ports in 
 the Uni ed Ki igdom from and 'O 
 Foreign Countries and Bri iih Posies 
 sions. 
 
 British. 
 
 21,255,726 
 33,441.979 
 45,078,299 
 
 53.957.435 
 54,148,664 
 58,691,926 
 
 Foreign. 
 
 Total. 
 
 10,006,724 31,262,450 
 
 17,342,923 50,784,902 
 
 16,762,778 62,841,077 
 
 20,855,185 74,812,620 
 
 20,484,183 74,632,847 
 
 21,847,248 80,539,174
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY 
 
 405 
 
 Statement showing the Proportion of British to 
 Foreign Tonnage entered and cleared, and the number 
 of tons per head of the population of the United 
 Kingdom. 
 
 
 Entries. 
 
 Clearances. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Proportion of 
 British to Total. 
 
 No. of Tons per 
 
 Head of 
 
 PopulatiuD. 
 
 Pro,iortion of 
 Br.tish CO 1 ota . 
 
 No. of Tons per 
 
 Heail of 
 
 Populatiiyn. 
 
 1854 
 Aveiage. 
 
 1855-59 
 1860-64 
 1865-69 
 1870-74 
 
 1875-79 
 1880-84 
 1885-89 
 1890-94 
 
 587 
 
 59 3 
 
 61-2 
 
 68- 
 67-2 
 68- 
 717 
 
 72-4 
 
 0-33 
 
 0-38 
 0-45 
 0-53 
 0-65 
 075 
 
 0-86 
 090 
 099 
 
 56-5 
 
 58-3 
 6i- 
 
 67-3 
 679 
 71-6 
 73-2 
 72-3 
 
 0-34 
 
 o-;,9 
 0*46 
 
 054 
 0-67 
 077 
 0-89 
 092 
 I 01 
 
 The growth of our mercantile marine during the last 
 half-century requires for adequate treatment more space 
 than can now be spared. It is sufficient to state here 
 that in measuring the expansion which has taken place, 
 we must take into account the increased efficiency which 
 has arisen from the change from sail to steam which the 
 tables disclose. In estimating their relative efficiency, 
 it is usual to reckon that steam stands to sail in the 
 ratio of 3 to i. Calculating in this manner, we see that, 
 while between 1866 and 1895 we lost 2,036,757 sailing 
 tonnage, we gained 5,245,870 steam tonnage, which, at 
 the ratio of 3 to I, is equal to a net gain of over 13 mil- 
 lion sailing tons. 
 
 We own one-half of the effective ocean tonnage of 
 the world. The second and third tables under this head
 
 4o6 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 show practically how we have, as regards the ports of 
 the United Kingdom, gradually gained upon our rivals. 
 In 1854 the British proportion of the total tonnage was 
 587 ; in 1890-94 it was 72'4. In 1854 our tonnage per 
 head of population was one-third of a ton ; in 1890-94 
 it was one ton. 
 
 FOREIGN TRADE. 
 1854-1896. 
 
 
 Imports. 
 
 Exports. 
 
 r-npurts a' d 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Per Head 
 
 Years. 
 
 
 British 
 Pr dace. 
 
 I oreign 
 
 a~d Coljnjal 
 
 Produce. 
 
 Total Vilue 
 
 of British, 
 
 Foreign, 
 
 an 1 Cjlonial 
 
 
 of 
 Population. 
 
 
 Total Val le. 
 
 Va'ue. 
 
 Value. 
 
 Produce. 
 
 Total Value. 
 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 1854 
 
 152,389,053 
 
 97,184,726 18,636,366 
 
 115,821,092 
 
 268,210,145 
 
 9 14 
 
 i860 
 
 210,530,873 
 
 135,891,227 28,630,124 
 
 164,521,351 
 
 375-052,224 
 
 13 7 
 
 1866 
 
 295,290,274 
 
 188,917,536 49,988,146 
 
 238,905,682 
 
 534,195,956 
 
 17 IS 2 
 
 1870 
 
 303,257,493 
 
 199,586,322 44,493,755 
 
 244,080,577 
 
 547,338,070 
 
 17 10 10 
 
 1872 
 
 354,693,624 
 
 256,257,347' 58,331,487 
 
 314,588,834 
 
 669,282,458 
 
 21 6 
 
 1873 
 
 371,287,372 
 
 255,164,603. 55,840,162 
 
 311,004,765 
 
 682,292,137 
 
 21 4 9 
 
 1880 
 
 411,229,565 
 
 223,060,446 63,354,020 286,414,466 
 
 697,644,031 
 
 20 4 10 
 
 1886 
 
 349,863,472 
 
 212,725,200 56,234,263 268,959,463 
 
 618,822,935 
 
 17 10 
 
 1890 
 
 420,691,9971263,530,585 64,721,533 328,252,118 
 
 748,944,115 
 
 19 19 7 
 
 1894 408,344,810215,824,333: 57,961,534 273,785,867 
 
 682,130,677 
 
 17 11 9 
 
 1895 416,689,658225,890,016 59,942,391 285,832,407 
 
 702,522,065 
 
 17 19 I 
 
 
 Nine Montis, 
 1896. 
 
 N ne Months, 
 1895. 
 
 Increase or Decrease 
 in 1896. 
 
 Imports 
 Home Exports 
 Foreign, etc., Exports 
 
 £ 
 
 316,368,471 
 
 180,436,153 
 
 41,714,276 
 
 £ 
 
 303.935,714 
 
 166,620,437 
 
 45,118,843 
 
 £ 
 
 4-12,432,757 = 4-1 p.c. 
 + 13,815,716 = 8-3 p.c. 
 - 3,404,567 = 7'5 P-c- 
 
 Total Trade 
 
 538,518,900 
 
 515,674,994 
 
 + 22,843,906 = 4-4 p.c.
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 40/ 
 
 The year 1854 was the first in which the actual values 
 of our imports and exports were recorded in our Board 
 of Trade Returns. It will be seen from the above table 
 that in that year the grand total of our foreign trade 
 was 268|- millions, and that in 1895 it was 702.^ millions. 
 These figures, however, taken alone and without reference 
 to other factors which should also be taken into calcula- 
 tion, such as the prices at which the exchanges were made, 
 and the number of our population, are of little use as a 
 measure of what the nation is doing. 
 
 To see how the factor of a price works, it is only 
 necessary to take the figures of 1872 and 1873, when 
 prices were at their highest, and to compare them with 
 those of some recent year — let us say 1895. Now, 
 since 1872 and 1873 prices have fallen all round at least 
 30 per cent., which means that every £yo of trade done 
 in 1895 is equal to every ;^ioo done in 1872-3. The 
 average of the trade done in these two years is 676 mil- 
 lions, the trade done in 1895 was 702 millions, and the 
 calculation shows that, reckoning each £'/0 as £100, our 
 trade in 1895 at the prices of 1872-73 would amount to 
 1,000 millions, the truth being that in volume we are 
 doing now a vastly larger business than we did in those 
 record years. 
 
 BULLION AND SPECIE. 
 
 Declared value of the Registered Imports and Exports of Gold and 
 Silver Bullion and i^pecie. 
 
 Years. 
 
 Imports. Exports. 
 
 1866-70 incl 132,917,440 51,826,617 
 
 1871-80 ,, 312031,466 295,806,783 
 
 1881-90 „ 221,347,687 214,678,311
 
 408 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEV 
 
 Years. 
 
 Imports, 
 
 
 Exports. 
 
 1S9I 
 
 39,591,218 
 
 
 37,228,791 
 
 1892 
 
 32,329,614 
 
 
 28,910,690 
 
 1893 
 
 36,748,122 
 
 
 33,092,018 
 
 1894 
 
 38.577-764 
 
 
 27,812,600 
 
 189s 
 
 46,675,720 
 
 
 31,636,759 
 
 
 Total 860,219,031 
 
 Total 
 
 720,992,569 
 
 Excess of Imports ;^I49,226,462 
 
 This is an exhibit that appeals to the dullest 
 apprehension. For the last thirty years the stream of 
 Pactolus has been turned on our country and, in addition 
 to all the wealth which in other forms we have acquired 
 has enriched us to the extent of close on 150 millions 
 sterline. 
 
 FOREIGN AND COLONIAL INVESTMENTS. 
 
 Statement showing the amount of profits received upon Foreign and 
 Colonial Investments on which Income Tax has been paid. 
 
 Year ending 
 5th April. 
 
 Government 
 Securities. 
 
 Other Securitiej 
 and Possessions. 
 
 Railways out 
 
 of the United 
 
 Kingdom. 
 
 Total. 
 
 
 Million 
 
 Million 
 
 Million 
 
 Million 
 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 £ 
 
 1877 
 
 19-1 
 
 7-4 
 
 17 
 
 28-2 
 
 1879 
 
 189 
 
 7-2 
 
 2 '4 
 
 28-5 
 
 1880 
 
 i8-3 
 
 7-2 
 
 2-1 
 
 286 
 
 1881 
 
 19-3 
 
 80 
 
 26 
 
 29-9 
 
 1882 
 
 19-5 
 
 8-4 
 
 27 
 
 30-5 
 
 1883 
 
 19-9 
 
 8-8 
 
 3*3 
 
 320 
 
 1884 
 
 20-4 
 
 97 
 
 3-8 
 
 33*9 
 
 1885 
 
 2I-I 
 
 9 9 
 
 3-8 
 
 34-8 
 
 1886 
 
 223 
 
 12-6 
 
 4-0 
 
 38-9 
 
 1887 
 
 24-0 
 
 166 
 
 3-9 
 
 44-5 
 
 1888 
 
 24 '5 
 
 i8-o 
 
 4-2 
 
 467 
 
 1889 
 
 25-4 
 
 19-8 
 
 4-8 
 
 50-0 
 
 1890 
 
 25*3 
 
 2I-0 
 
 5 9 
 
 52-2 
 
 1891 
 
 24-6 
 
 23-5 
 
 7-4 
 
 55-2 
 
 1892 
 
 227 
 
 24 
 
 8-0 
 
 547 
 
 1893 
 
 231 
 
 24-5 
 
 7-6 
 
 55-2 
 
 1894 
 
 23-8 
 
 17-2 
 
 141 
 
 55-1 
 
 1895 
 
 24-0 
 
 16-5 
 
 130 
 
 53-5
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 409 
 
 The foregoing Table shows clearly the course which 
 our Foreign Investments have taken during the last 
 twenty years in avoiding Government Loans in favour 
 of Railway and other Industrial Undertakings. It serves 
 also to dissipate the Protectionist notion that, in order 
 to pay for our excess of imports over exports, we hav^e 
 of late years been parting with our foreign holdings. 
 It is true that the figures for 1895 show a diminution 
 under the heads of "Other Securities" and "Railways," but 
 this has arisen principally from sales of United States 
 Railway Bonds and Shares, and withdrawals of capital 
 thence, caused by distrust. The " Bullion and Specie " 
 Table immediately preceding this one shows that during 
 the years 1894 and 1895 we imported a net balance of 
 Gold and Silver of more than 25 millions sterling. 
 
 AVERAGE PRICES. 
 
 
 
 IMPORTS. 
 
 
 
 
 Average price 
 
 of the under 
 
 mentioned 
 
 articles imported into the United 
 
 Kingdom, deduced from the declared quantities and values. 
 
 
 Articles, 
 
 
 1870 
 
 ,872 
 
 1873 
 
 1F95 
 
 Bacon 
 
 cwt. 
 
 s. 62-14 
 
 ... 41-00 ... 
 
 40-88 . 
 
 . 39-01 
 
 Hams 
 
 ,, 
 
 s. 6672 
 
 ... 51-91 ... 
 
 54-68 . 
 
 . 44-95 
 
 Beef 
 
 ,, 
 
 s. 4278 
 
 ... 36-72 ... 
 
 39-90 . 
 
 • 39-03 
 
 Butter 
 Margarine 
 
 ;; 1 - 
 
 £ 5-86 
 
 ... 5-30 ... 
 
 5*44 . 
 
 5-04 
 
 Cheese 
 
 „ 
 
 / 3"I4 
 
 ... 2-87 ... 
 
 2-99 . 
 
 219 
 
 Eggs 
 
 doz. 
 
 ^- 7-37 
 
 -.. 9-55 ... 
 
 10-29 • 
 
 • 7-55 
 
 Wheat 
 
 cwt. 
 
 f. 1073 
 
 ... 12-42 ... 
 
 13-01 . 
 
 • 5-51 
 
 Barley 
 
 >» 
 
 s. 7-85 
 
 .. 8-23 ... 
 
 8-69 . 
 
 . 4-69 
 
 Oats 
 
 ,, 
 
 s. 8 -09 
 
 ... 7-28 .. 
 
 8-06 . 
 
 . 4-80 
 
 Maize 
 
 ,, 
 
 s. 6-91 
 
 ... 7*09 ... 
 
 7-06 . 
 
 4 60 
 
 Wheat Flour 
 
 ,, 
 
 s. 1 4 "09 
 
 ... 18-63 .. 
 
 18-83 • 
 
 • 8-36 
 
 Cotton, Raw 
 
 ,, 
 
 £ 4-47 
 
 ... 4*24 .-• 
 
 4-01 . 
 
 1-94 
 
 Fish, Fresh 
 
 ,, 
 
 s. 19-99 
 
 ... 25-60 ... 
 
 27-94 . 
 
 . 1115 
 
 Flax, Hemp 
 
 ,, 
 
 s. 51-85 
 
 ... 52-28 ... 
 
 49 95 • 
 
 . 34-14 
 
 Currants 
 
 1) 
 
 S. 22 63 
 
 ... 27-82 ... 
 
 2573 . 
 
 • I4"i4
 
 410 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 Articles. 
 
 
 1370 
 
 1872 
 
 1873 
 
 1895 
 
 Glass, Window 
 
 cwt. 
 
 .. J. i4"oo . 
 
 • 17-27 
 
 .. 18-76 . 
 
 . 10-29 
 
 Lard 
 
 ,, 
 
 .. s. 66-8i . 
 
 . 45-21 
 
 -. 44-37 • 
 
 • 33-76 
 
 Leather 
 
 lbs. 
 
 .. a'. I9"ii . 
 
 . 18-06 
 
 . 17-58 . 
 
 . 13-61 
 
 Copper, Ore 
 
 ton 
 
 .. ;^ 11-89 • 
 
 • 17-23 
 
 .. 16-54 . 
 
 . 5-76 
 
 ,, Regulus 
 
 „ 
 
 .. ;i: 28-67 ■ 
 
 . 41-12 
 
 .. 40-80 . 
 
 • 24-47 
 
 ,, Unwrought „ 
 
 •• £(>7S^ ■ 
 
 . 92-00 
 
 .. 88-C9 . 
 
 • 43-06 
 
 Iron, Ore 
 
 >) 
 
 .. s. 23-98 . 
 
 . 25-32 
 
 .. 26-42 . 
 
 • 13-38 
 
 ,, Bars 
 
 )> 
 
 .. £ 9-cJO . 
 
 . 11-19 
 
 .. 13-24 . 
 
 . 8-II 
 
 Lead 
 
 „ 
 
 .. £17^3 . 
 
 . 21-89 
 
 .. 24-55 • 
 
 • 10-15 
 
 Tin, Blocks 
 
 „ 
 
 .. £ 6-37 . 
 
 6-92 
 
 6-70 . 
 
 . 3-16 
 
 Oil, Fish 
 
 tun 
 
 •• ;^47'40 . 
 
 • 45-71 
 
 .. 42-88 . 
 
 • 16-52 
 
 „ Palm 
 
 cwt. 
 
 . s. 36-48 . 
 
 • 35-87 
 
 •■ 3367 . 
 
 . 20 91 
 
 „ Olive 
 
 tun 
 
 •• £ s^'ii ■ 
 
 . 49-66 
 
 •■ 44-39 • 
 
 • 35-24 
 
 ,, Seed 
 
 )> 
 
 ■■ £4^30 ■ 
 
 • 39-53 
 
 .. 38-27 . 
 
 . 20-03 
 
 ,, Turps 
 
 cwt. 
 
 s. 36-06 . 
 
 . 42-68 
 
 ■■ 35-87 . 
 
 . 20-65 
 
 ,, Seed Cake 
 
 ton 
 
 •■ £ 8-94 . 
 
 • 9-33 
 
 9-61 . 
 
 • 5-11 
 
 Petroleum 
 
 gall. 
 
 .. tf'. 13 02 . 
 
 . 11 61 
 
 .. 13-66 . 
 
 ■ 4-56 
 
 Pork 
 
 cwt. 
 
 s. 62-22 . 
 
 . 40-90 
 
 .. 44-46 . 
 
 • 36-77 
 
 Pyrites 
 
 ton 
 
 ■■ s. 53-23 . 
 
 . 52-21 
 
 .. 50-02 . 
 
 • 33-90 
 
 Silk, Knubs, etc. 
 
 cwt. 
 
 .. ;^ 15-68 . 
 
 • 17-98 
 
 .. 14-46 . 
 
 . 898 
 
 ,. Raw 
 
 lb. 
 
 .. s. 26-02 . 
 
 ■ 21-43 
 
 .. 20-97 ■ 
 
 . 1 2 -64 
 
 ,, Thrown 
 
 „ 
 
 .. £ 2-II . 
 
 • 1-50 
 
 .. 1-79 . 
 
 o-8i 
 
 Sugar 
 
 cwt. 
 
 .. S. 22-57 . 
 
 . 26-20 
 
 Beet 9-42 
 •• ^3 97c,nectc 10-09 
 
 ,, Refined 
 
 „ 
 
 ... s. 32-09 . 
 
 • 36-35 
 
 •• 33-84 • 
 
 • 14-45 
 
 Tallow, etc. 
 
 „ 
 
 •• s. 43-35 . 
 
 . 42-88 
 
 .. 41-28 . 
 
 • 23-67 
 
 Tea 
 
 lb. 
 
 .. d. 17-18 . 
 
 . 1678 
 
 ... 16-67 • 
 
 ■• 9-63 
 
 Tobacco 
 
 >» 
 
 . d. 8-85 . 
 
 . 8-24 
 
 ... 7-72 . 
 
 6-91 
 
 Wool, Sheep's 
 
 )• 
 
 .. d. 14-42 
 
 • 14-51 
 
 •■ 14-75 • 
 
 . 8-10 
 
 Woollen Rags 
 
 ton 
 
 .. ;^ 23-26 . 
 
 . 1824 
 
 .. 18-87 • 
 
 ■ 19-43 
 
 , , Yarns 
 
 lb. 
 
 .. d. 37-45 . 
 
 • 28-34 
 
 •• 27-27 . 
 
 .. 23-00 
 
 ,, ,, Fancy ,, 
 
 .. d. 48-70 . 
 
 • 47-04 
 
 .. 43-68 . 
 
 ■ 42-54 
 
 
 A 
 
 VERAGE PR 
 
 ICES. 
 
 
 
 
 
 EXPORTS. 
 
 
 
 
 Average price of the under-mentioned articles of British and Irish 
 produce exported from the United Kingdom, deduced from the declared 
 quantities and values. 
 
 Articles. 
 
 Alkali 
 
 Cement 
 
 Cheese 
 
 cwt. 
 
 1870 
 
 1872 
 
 1873 
 
 1895 
 
 7-71 . 
 
 . II-I7 . 
 
 12-32 . 
 
 • 4-99 
 
 2-43 • 
 
 ■ 2-45 . 
 
 • 3-04 • 
 
 1-62 
 
 87-52 , 
 
 . 84-76 . 
 
 . 86-30 . 
 
 • 73-10
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 411 
 
 Articles. 
 
 
 1870 
 
 J872 
 
 1873 
 
 189s 
 
 Coals, Fuel 
 
 ton 
 
 .. s. 9-64 .. 
 
 1583 . 
 
 . 20-90 .. 
 
 9-33 
 
 Cordage 
 
 cwt. 
 
 .. s. 55-91 .. 
 
 • 57-97 • 
 
 .. 59-70 .. 
 
 37-«5 
 
 Cotton Yarn 
 
 lb. 
 
 . a'. 18-92 .. 
 
 . 18-87 • 
 
 ,_.-6 grey »-4t> 
 •■ ' 'dyed 10 -88 
 
 ,, Printed 
 
 yd. . 
 
 . cf. 4-75 .. 
 
 4-92 . 
 
 .. 478 .. 
 
 2-86 
 
 ,, Thread 
 
 lb. 
 
 . d. 3982 .. 
 
 41-78 . 
 
 ■ 42-47 •• 
 
 31-87 
 
 Glass, Plate 
 
 sq. ft. . 
 
 . s. 2-14 .. 
 
 2-29 . 
 
 • 3-01 .. 
 
 i-io 
 
 „ Flint 
 
 cwt. 
 
 . s. 53-76 .. 
 
 53-18 . 
 
 • 57-88 .. 
 
 45-50 
 
 Leather, Tanned 
 
 »> 
 
 . £ 820 .. 
 
 8-78 . 
 
 9-00 .. 
 
 8-95 
 
 ,, Boots, etc 
 
 . doz. pr. . 
 
 s. 61-64 .. 
 
 58-54 • 
 
 • 64-73 •• 
 
 46-88 
 
 Linen Yarn 
 
 lb. 
 
 d. 14-42 
 
 16-40 . 
 
 16-51 
 
 13-60 
 
 „ White 
 
 yd. . 
 
 . d. 7-15 .. 
 
 7-43 • 
 
 .. 7-62 .. 
 
 4-68 
 
 ,, Printed 
 
 » 
 
 . d 8-15 .. 
 
 7-58 . 
 
 • 7-63 •• 
 
 4-74 
 
 Jute Yarn 
 
 lb. 
 
 • «'• 372 .. 
 
 4 93 • 
 
 4-04 .. 
 
 2-46 
 
 ,, Manuf. 
 
 yd. . 
 
 . «'. 3-65 •• 
 
 4-22 . 
 
 • 3-98 •• 
 
 2 04 
 
 Iron, Old 
 
 ton 
 
 • £ 470 .. 
 
 6-10 . 
 
 . 6-82 .. 
 
 2-60 
 
 „ Pig 
 
 » 
 
 . s. 59-18 .. 
 
 100-85 . 
 
 • 12465 .. 
 
 47-94 
 
 „ Bar 
 
 >> 
 
 . £ 8-14 .. 
 
 11-58 . 
 
 13-09 .. 
 
 5-93 
 
 „ Rails 
 
 )> 
 
 . £ 8-27 .. 
 
 10-82 . 
 
 . 13-27 .. 
 
 3-83 
 
 ,, Wire, not teleg. ,, 
 
 . ;^ 18-75 •• 
 
 20-06 . 
 
 • 23-52 .. 
 
 16-84 
 
 „ Tinned Plate 
 
 )> 
 
 . ;^23-66 .. 
 
 32-24 . 
 
 • 32-77 •• 
 
 11-58 
 
 .Steel, Cast, etc. 
 
 >) 
 
 • £ 14-27 •• 
 
 17-70 . 
 
 ■ 19-43 •• 
 
 13-68 
 
 Lead, Pig, etc. 
 
 )) 
 
 . ;^i9 8o .. 
 
 20-45 . 
 
 • 23-75 .. 
 
 11-83 
 
 Copper 
 
 cwt. 
 
 • £ 373 •• 
 
 4-81 . 
 
 . 4-68 .. 
 
 2-28 
 
 Tin 
 
 » 
 
 £ 6-23 .. 
 
 7-47 • 
 
 . 683 .. 
 
 3-38 
 
 Zinc 
 
 » 
 
 . s. 1923 .. 
 
 20-19 . 
 
 . 24-92 .. 
 
 13-20 
 
 .Salt 
 
 ton 
 
 • ^. 9-99 •• 
 
 14-15 . 
 
 . 18-77 •■ 
 
 14-75 
 
 Silk Manufs. 
 
 yd. . 
 
 . s. 3-84 .. 
 
 3-15 ■ 
 
 • 3 54 .. 
 
 1-99 
 
 Soap 
 
 cwt. 
 
 . s. 27-79 .. 
 
 26-04 • 
 
 . 26-45 •• 
 
 20-78 
 
 Sugar, Refined 
 
 ,, 
 
 . s. 32-25 .. 
 
 32-08 . 
 
 . 30-02 .. 
 
 11-88 
 
 Wool, Sheep's 
 
 lb. 
 
 . d 15-31 .. 
 
 19-86 . 
 
 . 21-18 .. 
 
 9-51 
 
 Woollen Yarn 
 
 » 
 
 ■ ■</■ 3373 ■• 
 
 36-91 . 
 
 . 37-26 .. 
 
 2i-ir 
 
 Worsted Stuffs 
 
 yd. . 
 
 . d. 14-03 .. 
 
 14-54 • 
 
 12-11 
 
 11-80 
 
 ,, Flannels 
 
 » 
 
 . d. 17-28 .. 
 
 17-65 • 
 
 . 18-10 .. 
 
 7-73 
 
 ,, Carpets 
 
 >> 
 
 • '/. 35-07 ■•■ 
 
 38-93 • 
 
 . 3^-64 .. 
 
 2473 
 
 Attention is called to these two tables. There is no 
 more fertile source of error than endeavouring to 
 measure our transactions with the rest of the world by 
 the bare money figures stated in our Trade Returns. The 
 author of " Made in Germany," as many others have
 
 412 
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEY. 
 
 clone, has fallen into this error, as I have shown on page 
 315. He supposes us to be half-ruined because what we 
 sell abroad has fallen materially in price, ignoring the 
 fact that there is an import side of the account as well 
 as an export side, and that imports have also fallen in 
 price, as these tables show. 
 
 Quantities of the Under-mentioned Articles retained for 
 Home Consumption per Head of the Total Population of 
 the United Kingdom. 
 
 A. tides Imported. 
 
 
 1866 
 
 1070 
 
 I 80 
 
 1890 
 
 1895 
 
 Bacon and Hams 
 
 lbs. 
 
 213 
 
 1-98 
 
 15-96 
 
 1881 
 
 1355 
 
 1463 
 
 lieef 
 
 »> 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 yi7 
 
 6-04 
 
 6-72 
 
 Butter and Butterine 
 
 >» 
 
 4-36 
 
 4-15 
 
 7-42 
 
 J 5-83 
 I316 
 
 57-92 
 I2-63 
 
 Cheese 
 
 5» 
 
 4-32 
 
 367 
 
 5-66 
 
 6-23 
 
 5 93 
 
 Currants and Raisins 
 
 ,, 
 
 3-96 
 
 4-03 
 
 394 
 
 4-70 
 
 4-97 
 
 Eggs 
 
 No. 
 
 I4-66 
 
 13-90 
 
 21-68 
 
 32-91 
 
 38-97 
 
 Potatoes 
 
 lbs. 
 
 276 
 
 2-8o 
 
 31 63 
 
 573 
 
 10-73 
 
 Rice 
 
 >> 
 
 2*40 
 
 674 
 
 14-14 
 
 933 
 
 800 
 
 Cocoa 
 
 »> 
 
 o'i4 
 
 0-20 
 
 0-31 
 
 054 
 
 063 
 
 Coffee 
 
 »> 
 
 I 02 
 
 098 
 
 0-92 
 
 075 
 
 0-70 
 
 Tea 
 
 ,, 
 
 3-42 
 
 3-8i 
 
 459 
 
 5-17 
 
 5-67 
 
 Wheat and Flour 
 
 »» 
 
 104-50 
 
 122-90 
 
 210-42 
 
 179-70 
 
 233-20 
 
 Sugar 
 
 ,, 
 
 3834 
 
 41-40 
 
 54-22 
 
 44'99 
 
 48-04 
 
 ,, Refined 
 
 ,, 
 
 2-87 
 
 5-83 
 
 9-46 
 
 28-22 
 
 4009 
 
 Tobacco 
 
 j» 
 
 1-35 
 
 1-34 
 
 143 
 
 1-55 
 
 1-67 
 
 Wine 
 
 galls. 
 
 0-44 
 
 0-49 
 
 0-46 
 
 0-40 
 
 0-37 
 
 Spirits 
 
 )> 
 
 0-26 
 
 0-27 
 
 025 
 
 0-24 
 
 0-2I 
 
 Excisable : — 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Spirits, Brit. 
 
 >> 
 
 075 
 
 074 
 
 0-84 
 
 1881 
 27-79 
 
 0-78 
 
 0-79 
 
 Beer 
 
 M 
 
 — 
 
 — 
 
 30-00 
 
 29-65 
 
 The above Table, which is the last I present, is a 
 most important and suggestive one. We see from it 
 that John Bull's appetite has been for the last thirty 
 years a growing one, and that for its satisfaction, and in 
 addition to what of a similar kind he produces at home
 
 THE GERMAN BOGEV. 413 
 
 and consumes, he has imported from abroad constantly- 
 increasing quantities of meat, bread, butter, sugar, eggs, 
 tea, and what not ; all of which he has received in 
 exchange for the exported products of his ever-widening 
 industry. 
 
 Let us note some of the items in the list. It must be 
 remembered that the quantities of the imported articles 
 are in addition to similar ones produced at home. In 
 1866 the consumption of bacon and hams per head of 
 population was 2-13 lbs. ; in 1895, I4"63 lbs. In 1866, of 
 cheese 4-32 lbs.; and in 1895, 5-93 lbs. In 1866 the 
 number of eggs was under 15 ; in 1895, close on 39. In 
 1866, of potatoes, less than 3 lbs. ; in 1895, lof lbs. In 
 1866, of wheat and wheat flour, less than 105 lbs. ; in 
 1895, more than 233 lbs. In 1866, of sugar, raw and 
 refined, 41^ lbs. ; in 1895, more than 88 lbs. In 1866, of 
 tea, less than 3^ lbs. ; in 1895, 5| lbs. 
 
 Enough. To portray with any approach to complete- 
 ness the changes which have been wrought in our 
 economic condition by a variety of causes would require 
 volumes. Suffice it to say that one of the factors which 
 haSs^played a conspicuous part in bringing about these 
 changes has been our system of Free Imports ; and that 
 as time goes on our people will become more and more 
 convinced of its beneficence, and more and more deter- 
 mined to maintain it in its integrity. 
 
 THE END. 
 
 (/
 
 Printed by 
 
 Cassell & Company, Limited, La Belle Sauvage, 
 
 London, E.G.
 
 ^<a^^
 
 Ill :'•"'•".'■•• Jiifi'l
 
 A