diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-02-07 15:24:01 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-02-07 15:24:01 -0800 |
| commit | 75172f711245fb4b9ace97142af5f56f2c57b1ec (patch) | |
| tree | 95ef748529112be8deb65157cc333088e4310c30 /old/55493-0.txt | |
| parent | 7c8c8e88afe6271d0add45992cd0bb0a5fd8e188 (diff) | |
Diffstat (limited to 'old/55493-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/55493-0.txt | 4926 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 4926 deletions
diff --git a/old/55493-0.txt b/old/55493-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 07d761a..0000000 --- a/old/55493-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,4926 +0,0 @@ -Project Gutenberg's The British Jugernath, by Guildford L. Molesworth - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: The British Jugernath - Free trade! Fair trade!! Reciprocity!!! Retaliation!!!! - -Author: Guildford L. Molesworth - -Release Date: September 6, 2017 [EBook #55493] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BRITISH JUGERNATH *** - - - - -Produced by Chris Curnow, John Campbell and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive) - - - - - - - - - - TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE - - Italic text is denoted by _underscores_. - - Many Footnotes have two or more anchors. - - Some minor changes are noted at the end of the book. - - - - - THE BRITISH JUGERNATH. - - FREE TRADE! FAIR TRADE!! RECIPROCITY!!! - RETALIATION!!!! - - A gruesome huge misshapen monster void of sight.--_Virgil._ - - BY - - G. L. M. - - - LONDON: - E. & F. N. SPON, 125, STRAND. - 1885. - - _Price Sixpence._ - - - - - LONDON: - PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, - STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS. - - - - - Dedicated - - TO - - SIR EDWARD SULLIVAN, BART., - - IN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF - THE MANY VALUABLE HINTS THE AUTHOR HAS DERIVED - FROM HIS - - “BUBBLES.” - - - - -PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. - - -The following squib was written in 1883, with the intention of -drawing attention to the serious danger into which we are rapidly -drifting, through the suicidal policy of our rulers. - -Since it was written the evils indicated therein have greatly -increased in intensity. - -The interests of the producers having been completely sacrificed to -those of the consumers; the results of such a policy are becoming -painfully apparent, in the increasing number of the unemployed, -consequent on _unlimited foreign competition_. - -Working men who are unable to obtain employment can no longer be -persuaded, either by the plausible statistics of Mr. Giffen, or -by the peevish denunciations of Mr. Bright, that, thanks to Free -Trade, they are better off than they were ever before. - -Cheap food is of little avail if the means of purchasing it be not -forthcoming. - -The cry for _fair_ trade is waxing stronger and stronger. - -I have endeavoured to show that a light tax on foreign wheat, -would, without any appreciable increase in the cost of food, -probably enrich England and its dependencies to the extent of about -£60,000,000 annually; whilst at present a large portion of this is -employed in furnishing the sinews of war which will probably be -used against us. - - G. L. M. - - _March 30th, 1885._ - - - - -INDEX. - - - PAGE - CHAP. I.--To the Votaries of Jugernāth 1 - II.--The Blasphemer 2 - III.--What is Jugernāth? 4 - IV.--A few ugly Facts 6 - V.--Axioms for Jugernāthians 9 - VI.--Political Economy 12 - VII.--Political Extravagance 17 - VIII.--False Prophets of Jugernāth 21 - IX.--Isolation of Jugernāth 24 - X.--Treachery in the Camp 29 - XI.--Quem Jupiter vult perdere prius dementat 33 - XII.--The wages of Jugernāth 35 - XIII.--Pauperism, Crime, and Intemperance 37 - XIV.--Jugernāth afloat 41 - XV.--Adverse Prosperity 43 - XVI.--Sacred Rights of Property 47 - XVII.--Selections from Jugernāth’s Sacred Writings 51 - XVIII.--The Vampire 54 - XIX.--Odimus quos læsimus 59 - XX.--Prosperous Adversity 63 - XXI.--Ireland under the wheels 64 - XXII.--The Finishing Stroke 68 - XXIII.--Little Greatness 71 - XXIV.--Blunder and Plunder 73 - XXV.--Dear Cheap Food 77 - XXVI.--The Pagoda tree 81 - XXVII.--I know a Maiden fair to see 85 - - APPENDIX I.--Discourtesy _versus_ Argument 89 - ” II.--Unheeded Warning 96 - - - - -THE BRITISH JUGERNATH. - - - - -CHAPTER I. - -TO THE VOTARIES OF JUGERNATH. - - -My Idolatrous Compatriot! Were it not for the gravity of the -situation, it would be amusing to watch the self-complacent smile -of conscious superiority which you assume, when descanting on -the paternal character of our rule in suppressing such abuses as -those of Suttee and Jugernāth; unconscious at the same time that -the Jugernāth of the wretched Hindoo is dwarfed into complete -insignificance when compared with that huge idol which you yourself -have set up for worship. - -My dear fellow! for goodness’ sake put away the microscope with -which you are so patiently investigating the mote in the eye of -your Aryan brother, and bear with me, whilst I attempt to extract -the huge log which obscures your own visual organs. And should -I (contrary to my expectation), succeed in removing so large a -mass, you will find that, whilst you have been depriving your -Aryan brethren of their comparatively innocent little plaything, -which at the most might have crushed some half dozen fanatics, -in the course of a year, you have reared up a horrible fantastic -creation which you worship, which in its progress is crushing its -thousands and even millions every year; which is stamping out the -lifeblood of England and its dependencies; whilst all the time -you are applauding it, sounding your political tom-toms, blowing -your trumpets to shouts of wah! wah! complacently misapplying glib -quotations from your sacred Vedas (Adam Smith and Mill), flaunting -your banners of political economy while violating every principle -of that useful but misused science. - - - - -CHAPTER II. - -THE BLASPHEMER. - - -Now, my Friend, I am not sanguine enough to expect a patient -hearing from you whilst I revile that idol which you have set up -with sound of sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and other kinds of -(un)musical instruments. - -I am perfectly aware that I shall be cast, by you, into the fiery -furnace of criticism; I can imagine, in anticipation, the vials of -your wrath poured out on my unlucky head; and I don’t expect to -escape like our friends Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. - -I am not composed of those materials of which martyrs are made. - -I know full well that I shall writhe horribly under the taunt of -“ungrammatical twaddle,” for how can I hope to escape an occasional -slip of the pen, of which even the heaven-born “Covenanted -Civilian” is not always innocent. - -I shall wriggle under the analysis of my “illogical reasoning,” my -“exploded theories,” my “faulty statistics.” - -I shall squirm under the exposure of my “ignorance of facts,” my -“want of knowledge of political economy,” my “antiquated notions.” - -That I shall suffer severely for my blasphemy I know right well; -but I cannot help it. Strike!! but hear me. - -I am weary to death of the claptrap and imposition with which your -votaries applaud their idol, and attribute the evils caused by it -to anything but the right cause. I am disgusted with the blind -obstinacy with which you close your eyes to the light of facts; -besides, I have the selfish feeling that, sooner or later, I may be -jostled by admiring votaries under the wheels of your car, whilst -I shall not have even the consolation of deluding myself that I am -a martyr ascending to the heaven of your Jugernāthian mythology, -but, on the contrary, a victim of your confounded stupidity and -obstinacy, and of the incompetence or dishonesty of your leaders. - -If I could only stand on the platform of any other audience and -address Americans, Dutch, Belgians, Germans, or say Frenchmen, I -might secure a sympathetic hearing. - -The Frenchman would probably shrug his shoulders and say:-- - - “I quite agree with, you, mon ami! mais que voulez vous? It - amuses these other English, and does not hurt us; on the - contrary, we profit by it. We furnish the gilt and gingerbread, - the paint and the unmusical instruments; and we are paid for - them, vive Jugernāth!! only don’t ask us to be fools enough to - put ourselves under its wheels.” - -You, on the other hand, my friend, will naturally say: - - “Bah! these Americans, Dutch, Belgians, Germans, and French are - brutally stupid, and beyond the reach of argument; blind to their - own interests. We alone stand on the pinnacle of intelligence in - our worship of Jugernāth. Has not our High Priest, the G. O. M., - swept away all your argument like chaff?” - -Pardon me, my friend. The exuberant verbosity of the G. O. M., -combined with his misleading and incorrect statistics, may easily -silence an opponent in debate, but they cannot alter stern facts; -and facts are against your idol. Your prophets prophesy falsely, -and your people love to have it so. - - - - -CHAPTER III. - -WHAT IS JUGERNATH? - - -Well! well!! I have put off the evil day as long as possible; but -sooner or later it must come out, even if you have not already -guessed it. - -Stoop low while I whisper in your ear the name by which this -destructive fiend Jugernāth is known in England. It is:-- - - -FREE TRADE!!! - -Yes! it is _Free trade_ that has utterly ruined Ireland; that is -rapidly dragging England down under its wheels; that drains the -lifeblood of India and England’s dependencies. - -Free trade is that idol which England worships, but which brings -in its train disaster, bankruptcy, pauperism, drunkenness, and -crime. It is Free trade that is destroying England’s industries, -and is driving her capital to protectionist countries. It is Free -trade that, if not soon abandoned, will soon bring about a national -bankruptcy in England. - -My dear fellow! I know your stale arguments by heart. I have looked -into your dishonest and fictitious statistics and discovered their -imposture. I know you can make glib quotations from Adam Smith -and Mill, and misapply them. It is easy for you to prate about -Political _Economy_, and at the same time to practise Political -_Extravagance_, of the most ruinous description; but I ask you -to leave theory for a short time and look ugly facts straight -in the face, divesting your mind, if you can, of all prejudice. -These facts I will give you in the next chapter. But now don’t -misunderstand me. I am not a _rabid_ protectionist. I am not an -advocate of Fair trade, Reciprocity, or Retaliation. I hold that -Protection, if carried beyond its legitimate limits, is nearly -as mischievous in its action as Free trade. And that although -“Fair trade,” “Reciprocity” and “Retaliation” are cries that have -been evoked by the evils that Free trade has brought upon us, yet -they are wrong in practice, as an attempt at a compromise with -an utterly false principle; and I am glad that the movement has -collapsed. - -I hold that Free trade is entirely wrong in principle and -disastrous in results. Every argument of the free-trader is based -on the _misuse_, not upon the _proper use_, of Protection. - -Every so-called triumphant exposure of the evils caused by -Protection has simply been an exposure of the evils of Protection -carried _beyond its legitimate limits_. - -The Corn Laws, to which Free trade owes its existence, were an -instance of undue protection; they urgently required _alteration_, -not _repeal_. Free trade advocates are unable to distinguish the -difference between the use and the misuse of a principle. In their -abhorrence of its misuse, they would sweep it away altogether. They -are about as reasonable as the man who discovers that too much food -will cause indigestion, and therefore proposes, as an infallible -law of political economy, the dogma that no food whatever is to be -taken. And they stigmatize as “simpletons without memory or logic,” -as men “beyond the reach of argument”[1] those who decline to -accept the Free trade gospel of starvation. - -FOOTNOTE: - -[1] Mr. Bright’s letter to A. Sharp, Bradford, 1879. - - - - -CHAPTER IV. - -A FEW UGLY FACTS. - - -I have said that facts are against your idol, let me advance a few -of them:-- - - (1.) The prophecies made by the originators of free trade have - proved to be false. - - (2.) England stands alone as a free-trader. Free trade, at the - present time, is either an English, or a barbarous custom. - - (3.) France made a partial trial of free trade, but has drawn - back and refused to continue the commercial treaty. - - (4.) Increased wealth,--due to improvements in science, steam, - and electricity, although dishonestly claimed the work of free - trade,--has been shared by all civilized nations. - - (5.) Protectionist countries have made _greater relative advance_ - in prosperity than England. - - (6.) The exceptional prosperity of the years 1871-73 was due to a - partial _suspension of free trade_ caused by the Franco-Prussian - war. - - (7.) The rise of wages in England,--dishonestly claimed as the - work of free trade,--has been shared by Protectionist countries. - - (8.) The statistics of decrease of crime and pauperism--claimed - as the work of free trade--are fictitious and misleading. - - (9.) Protectionist America is passing Free Trade England by “in a - canter.” - - (10.) Protectionist America contrasts favourably with Free Trade - Canada. - - (11.) Canada having lately departed from free trade principles, - is satisfied with the result, and clamours for more protection. - - (12.) The Colony of Victoria, which has departed farthest from - the principles of free trade, is the most prosperous of the - Australian Colonies. - - (13.) Free Trade Ireland contrasts unfavourably with - Protectionist Holland, which has every natural disadvantage. - - (14.) The agricultural industry of Ireland has been destroyed, - and Ireland ruined by free trade. - - (15.) The manufacturing industries of Ireland, which flourished - under protection, have become extinct under free trade. - - (16.) English agricultural industries are rapidly being ruined by - free trade. - - (17.) In the last eleven years, about 1,200,000, acres have gone - out of tillage in the United Kingdom, and about 7,400,000 acres - are lying fallow. - - (18.) Numerous farms are untenanted, or let at nominal rates. - - (19.) The loss to the agricultural classes within the last few - years has been estimated at £150,000,000.[2] - - (20.) Many English landowners are realizing what they can from - the wreck, and investing the capital in Protectionist America. - - (21.) English manufacturing industries are, for the most part, on - the high road to ruin. - - (22.) Silk industry is nearly extinct in England. - - (23.) Cotton and woollen industries are struggling hard for - existence. - - (24.) Iron industries are said to have lost £160,000,000 in four - years. - - (25.) Protectionist countries have outstripped England in - relative increase of commerce. - - (26.) The accumulation of wealth is increasing more rapidly in - Protectionist France than in England, in spite of a disastrous - war, a heavy war indemnity, a civil war, and an unsettled form of - Government. - - (27.) Land cultivation is increasing in Protectionist France and - decreasing in Free Trade England. - - (28.) The relative increase in the production of iron is greater - in Protectionist countries than in England. - - (29.) The relative increase in general manufacture is Greater in - Protectionist countries than in England. - - (30.) The working classes, by whom free trade was carried, though - nominally free-traders, are practically extreme protectionists. - - (31.) The working classes, whenever they have obtained - predominant influence, have become protectionists. - - (32.) “The revenue returns continue to exhibit a stagnant - tendency _under all the heads which are considered tests of - national prosperity_.” (Telegraphic Summary of News, _Civil and - Military Gazette_, December 7th, 1883.) - - (33.) “It is predicted that, unless Freight rates to India - speedily improve, a considerable number of steamers now engaged - in the trade will be laid up.” (_Civil and Military Gazette_, - December 7th, 1883.) - - (34.) “Gloomy predictions are uttered about the immediate future - of our iron-trade. Few fresh orders are coming in, and stocks - are consequently increasing in an alarming manner.” (_Civil and - Military Gazette_, December 7th, 1883.) - - (35.) “Again it is alleged that the principles of free trade, - which have been adopted in this country, have tended, in a great - degree, to produce the disastrous results which we have at - present to contend against, and which present a gloomy look-out - for the cotton operatives of this country.” (_The Mail_, December - 19th, 1883.) - - (36.) “It is the intention of the leading men among the cotton - operatives to move next session for a Royal Commission to enquire - as to what extent, if any, we suffer from foreign competition, - and _what bearing our system of free trade_ may have on the - question.” (_The Mail_, December 19th, 1883.) - -Before I proceed to substantiate the facts above given, I wish to -clear the ground by a few axioms which I think few will venture to -dispute. - -FOOTNOTE: - -[2] By Mr. John Bright. - - - - -CHAPTER V. - -AXIOMS FOR JUGERNATHIANS. - - - _Axiom._ _Action of Free-Trade._ - - (1.) The object of political Free trade attaches more - economy is to increase importance to consumption than - the wealth and power to productive industries. - of a country.[3] - - (2.) The riches or power of - a country is in proportion - to its produce.[3] - - (3.) _Industries_, or the produce Free trade destroys the sources - of the land and labour, of employing productive - are the REAL WEALTH labour. - of the country.[3] - - (4.) The requisites of production - are Labour, - Capital and Land.[4] - - (5.) Parsimony, not industry, Free trade promotes consumption - is the immediate source rather than parsimony. - of increase of capital.[3] - - (6.) Capital is wealth appropriated Free trade is rapidly driving - to reproductive capital to Protectionist - employment.[4] countries. - - (7.) Industries are limited by - capital, and cannot be - created without capital.[5] - - (8.) Increase of capital gives - employment to labour - without assignable - limits.[5] - - (9.) Productive labour is Free trade makes labour - labour employed to produce unproductive - a profit.[6] - - (10.) Emigration of productive Free trade encourages the - labour is loss of capital. immigration of productive - The Minister of War labour to Protectionist - in France asserts that countries. - every individual transported - to Algeria costs - the State 8,000 francs. - - (11.) Industries carried on - without profit, cause loss - of capital and credit. - - (12.) It is demand only that Free trade prefers consumption - causes labour and its to demand. - produce to be wealth.[6] - - (13.) To purchase produce is Free trade purchases produce - not to employ labour.[5] instead of employing labour. - - (14.) Capital employed on - Foreign trade is less - advantageously employed - for society than on - Home trade.[7] - - (In extreme cases Adam Smith Free trade encourages Foreign - shows that capital might be and Carrying trade, rather - twenty-four times more than Home trade. - advantageously employed on - _Home_ than on _Foreign_ - trade.) - - (15.) Carrying trade is less - advantageous than either - Foreign or Home trade.[7] - - (16.) Interest on capital is - natural, lawful, and - consistent with the - general good.[8] - - (17.) A struggle between Free trade leaders encourage a - capital and labour is the struggle between Labour and - greatest evil that can be Capital, between Landlord and - inflicted on society.[8] Tenant. - - (18.) Land let out for profit - is the capital of the - landlord.[9] - - (19.) The capital of the employers Free trade destroys the capital - forms the revenue of the employer. - of the labourer.[10] - - (20.) Nothing can be more Free trade leaders raise this - fatal than the cry cry against the capitalist - against capital, so often landlord. - unthinkingly uttered.[9] - - (21.) Rent does not affect the - price of agricultural - produce.[9] - - (22.) It is to the interest of Mr. Bright says, that rich - the labourer that there landlord capitalists are the - should be as many rich squanderers of national - men as possible to compete wealth. - for his labour.[9] - - (23.) Agriculture is the most Free trade has destroyed - advantageous employment agriculture in England and - of capital.[11] Ireland. - - (24.) No equal capital puts in - motion a greater quantity - of productive labour - than that of the - farmer.[11] - - (25.) Cultivated land is more Free trade leaders urge the - advantageous than pasture.[11] substitution of pasture for - (It has been computed wheat cultivation in England. - that wheat cultivation - per acre, compared - with pasture land, - produces eight times the - quantity of human food, - and employs three times - the amount of labour.) - - (26.) The interests of the agricultural - and manufacturing - classes are inseparably - connected with - those of the whole community. - - (27.) Credit when sound is Free trade is destroying credit - capital.[12] by causing industries to work - at a loss. - (28.) Credit, when it exceeds - the present value of future - profits, is unsound. - - (29.) Credit is the anticipation - of future profit.[12] - - (30.) Money is the accumulation - of past profits. - - (31.) Activity of commerce is Free trade causes the commerce - not necessarily an indication of Great Britain to be one of - of prosperity. consumption rather than - production, and consequently - unhealthy. - - (32.) The true Economist pursues Free trade, to avoid a small - a great future good present evil, risks a national - at the risk of a small disaster. - present evil.[13] - -FOOTNOTES: - -[3] Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith. - -[4] Political Economy, by J. S. Mill. - -[5] Political Economy, by J. S. Mill. - -[6] Political Economy, by H. D. Macleod. - -[7] Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith. - -[8] Political Economy, by F. Bastiat. - -[9] Political Economy, by H. D. Macleod. - -[10] Political Economy, by J. S. Mill. - -[11] Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith. - -[12] Political Economy, by H. D. Macleod. - -[13] Political Economy, by F. Bastiat. - - - - -CHAPTER VI. - -POLITICAL ECONOMY. - - -Do not suppose, my Friend, that I am opposed to _political -economy_; I am simply opposed to _your application of its -principles_. - -Let me illustrate my meaning by a comparison between Mathematics -and Political Economy:-- - -Mathematics may be divided into two classes--“pure” and “applied.” - -Political economy may be divided into two similar classes--“pure” -and “applied.” - -_Pure_ Mathematics, being an exact science, is infallible. - -_Pure_ Political economy, being a matter of opinion, is not -infallible; but let us for the moment suppose it to be so.[14] - -_Applied_ mathematics are not always sound; for example, in -applying mathematics to Engineering problems, it is by no means -uncommon to find that they appear to err most egregiously; so -much so, as to give rise to the saying, that “theory and practice -contradict one another.” The fact, in reality, being that theory -has not been correctly applied; that innumerable small factors, -which can only be ascertained by practice and experience, have been -neglected in the application of theory; and even practice often -fails to supply these factors. - -_Applied_ Political Economy is under similar conditions, but with -this difference: _1st_, that _pure_ Political Economy is not -infallible; _2nd_, that the application of Political Economy is -affected by a greater number of intricate factors than any ordinary -problem in Engineering; _3rd_, that the observation of results in a -complex question of Applied Political Economy is far more difficult -than in the case of those simple materials which are dealt with in -Engineering problems. - -The eminent Italian Political Economist, Luigi Cossa, warns the -student of this difficulty; but free-trading “fools rush in where -angels fear to tread.” - -He says:-- - - “It is needful to hold ourselves aloof equally from the so-called - Doctrinaires who refuse the assistance of practice, and from the - Empiricists who obstinately close their eyes to the light of - theory. - - _The Pure science_ explains phenomena and determines laws; the - _Applied_ science gives guiding principles, which practice brings - into conformity with the innumerable varieties of individual - cases.”[15] - -Mill also says:-- - - “One of the peculiarities of modern times,--the separation - of theory from practice,--of the studies of the closet from - the outward business of the world,--has given a wrong bias to - the ideas and feelings both of the student and of the man of - business.[16] ... There is almost always room for a modest doubt - as to our practical conclusions.” - -Let us take an example of pure and applied science. - -You, my Friend, quote an axiom of Pure Political Economy when you -say:-- - -“It is unjust to tax all for the benefit of _one class_” So far I -quite agree with you;--it is to your _application_ of the _axiom_ -that I object, when you go on to say--“therefore protection in any -shape is wrong.” Your application of pure science to the complex -question of free trade is quite incorrect. - -I say “_it is just and expedient to tax all for the benefit of -all_.” I hold that the employment of home and colonial labour, and -the development of home and colonial produce and industries, is for -the benefit of the community as a whole; and that, consequently, -protection, if _carried only to the extent necessary to secure -this, and no further_, is just and expedient. - -The Corn Laws, as existing in 1846, went beyond this: and their -_alteration_, not their _abolition_, was needed. Your free-trader’s -argument is like that of a man who has discovered that too much -water will drown, and proceeds at once to the other extreme of -killing by thirst. - -_All extremes are bad._ Free trade is an _extreme_. Want of -competition is bad. Extreme competition is bad. _Healthy_ -competition is that which is wanted. - -Unlimited competition defeats its own purpose by crushing out -weaker industries, diminishing the supply, and enabling the -successful competitors to raise their prices as soon as the rival -industry has been extinguished. - -Even Mill admits that protection may - - “be defensible when imposed temporarily ... in hopes of - naturalizing a foreign industry.”[17] - -And Cossa allows that-- - - “At certain times, and under certain conditions, protection - has given notable advantages to industrial organization and - progress.... Colbert’s system and Cromwell’s Navigation Act, - contributed not a little to the economic greatness of France and - England.”[18] - -There seems to be but little doubt that the political economist -of the future will hold up England as an awful warning, but -an instructive example, of a country ruined by the persistent -misapplication of the principles of political economy. - -Alexr. Hamilton, the greatest statesman America ever produced, -says:-- - - Though it were true that the immediate and certain effect of - regulations controlling the competition of foreign and domestic - fabrics was an increase of price, it is universally true that - the contrary is the ultimate effect with every successful - manufacture. When a domestic manufacture has been brought to - perfection and has engaged in the prosecution of it a competent - number of persons it invariably becomes cheaper. * * * The - internal competition which takes place soon does away with - anything like monopoly, and by degrees reduces the price of the - article to the minimum of reasonable profit on the capital. - (Treasury Report Dec. 1791.)--_Fortnightly Review_, 1873. - -It is not merely your misapplication of the principles of political -economy to which I object; I also object to the over-bearing way in -which you thrust down the throat of your opponent the opinions of -your favourite political economists, as if they were infallible and -settled the question beyond all possibility of further argument. -This is especially the case when you quote Mill. Now Mill is no -doubt an eminently able and powerful writer; but he is deplorably -subject to mistakes. He constantly contradicts himself, and is -contradicted by political economists equally able and more reliable -than himself. For example, Professor Bonamy Price[19] accuses Mill -of introducing _utter confusion_ into the topic of Wages. - -Cossa speaks of Mill’s “ardent concessions to socialism more -apparent than real;” of his “_narrow philosophic utilitarianism_.” - -Also, speaking of Thornton, Cossa says:[20]-- - - “His book on labour is an excellent one; it made a great - impression on Mill, and caused him to _abandon his theory of - wages fund_; which has also been opposed by Lange, by the - American Economist Walker, and by Bretano.” - -Many of the inaccuracies of Mill have been exposed by Professor -Cairnes.[21] - -Mr. Cook says:-- - - “Mill, however, is said to have _abandoned the seesaw theory_ in - his latest and yet unpublished essays.”[22] - -Macleod also, in writing on the question of rent says:-- - - “This does not exhaust the _absurdity_ of the Ricardo-Mill theory - of rent ... but in fact _Mill himself has completely overthrown_ - this theory of rent.”[23] - -Anyone who has carefully studied the writings of Mill cannot fail -to be struck with the manner in which he allows that which Herbert -Spencer terms “Political Bias,” and which Cossa terms Mill’s -“narrow philosophic utilitarianism,” to affect his opinion, and -warp his better judgment; and when this is the case, he is guilty -of absurdities, inconsistencies, and illogical reasoning that would -disgrace a school-boy.[24] - -FOOTNOTES: - -[14] I venture to maintain that political economy is not a body -of natural laws in the true sense, or of universal and immutable -truths, but an assemblage of speculations and doctrines which are -the result of a particular history coloured even by the history and -character of the chief writers.--T. Cliffe Leslie, _Fortnightly -Review_, Oct. 1870. - -[15] Guida Allo Studio dell’Economio Politico.--L. Cossa. - -[16] Some Unsettled Questions of Political Economy, J. S. Mill, p. 156. - -[17] Mill’s Political Economy, Bk. V. Chap. X. - -[18] Cossa’s Political Economy, Bk. II. Chap. III. - -[19] Practical Political Economy, by Profr. Bonamy Price. - -[20] Cossa’s Political Economy, Bk. II. Chap. III. - -[21] Some Leading Principles of Political Economy newly expounded -by Professor Cairnes. 1874. - -[22] Labour. Joseph Cook, p. 179. - -[23] Macleod’s Economics, p. 116. - -[24] An illustration of this is given in Chap. XV. - - - - -CHAPTER VII. - -POLITICAL EXTRAVAGANCE. - - -You are very fond, my Friend, of talking about political economy. -Suppose, for a change, we discuss a certain political extravagance, -of which you are guilty. - - “Look!” you say, “at the visible signs of prosperity caused by - free trade, our annual imports are in excess of our exports by - £100,000,000. This represents the annual accumulation of our - national wealth.” - -Now, my friend, I want you to try and take a common-sense view of -things:-- - -Mill says, that “_saving_ enriches, and spending impoverishes, -the community along with the individual.”[25] Now let us apply -England’s action in this respect to the assumed case of an -individual. Suppose a farmer should allow his land to go out of -cultivation and purchase farm produce, for his own consumption, -from the open market; suppose at the same time he has a limited -supply of iron ore on his estate, which he sells at a rate that -does not quite cover the cost of its production; would you argue -that the more food such a one purchased and consumed, and the more -iron ore he sold, the greater was his prosperity; and especially so -because he _consumed_ more than he _sold_? - -In my ignorance of political economy I should have said that such a -man was on the highroad to bankruptcy. Now this is precisely what -England is doing. - -She is allowing her land to go out of cultivation. She is -purchasing from foreign countries food which she might produce -herself, and which, when consumed, leaves nothing to show for the -expenditure. Her manufacturing industries are losing concerns; her -shipping is carrying at nominal rates; her iron industry has been -losing at the rate of £40,000,000 a year; and she is parting with -her _limited capital_ of iron at a loss. The excess of Imports over -Exports does not represent wealth capable of accumulation, but -consists of consumable articles of food. - -The annual imports of the principal staples of food in 1881 were:-- - - Capable of being produced { Corn and flour £ 60,856,768[26] - in England. { Live animals 8,525,256[27] - { Meat 35,760,286[27] - ------------- - £ 105,142,310 - ============= - - Capable of being produced { Tea £ 11,208,601[28] - in England’s dependencies { Sugar 24,288,797[28] - ------------ - Total £ 140,639,708 - ============= - -Besides these, there are butter, cheese, eggs, coffee, cocoa, and -other articles of food, which must probably amount to something -between 20 and 30 millions sterling. So that the excess of -£100,000,000 sterling is _entirely due to consumable food, much -of which might be produced in England_. If this be not political -extravagance, I am at a loss for a definition of Extravagance. My -friend, it appears to me that you are burning the candle at both -ends. - -Mr. Leffingwell, an intelligent American, writes:[29]-- - - “Should the day ever arrive when most of her mills are silent, - her ‘Black country’ again green, her furnaces cold, her shops - filled with foreign wares, and her food brought from distant - lands, it will add little to her welfare that all other nations - find a market on her shores for the products of their factories - and fields.” - -Let us now hear what America has to say about free trade:-- - - “If, during the last fifty years, America had permitted a system - of unrestricted trade with all the world, she would never have - reached that development of her manufactures which has rendered - her independent, but would to-day be little more than a huge - agricultural colony exchanging the produce of her fields for the - manufactures and fabrics of Europe. - - “Under a system of protection America has been able to develop - her boundless mineral resources, to encourage the growth of - her manufacturing industries, until to-day she is not only - independent and able to supply her own needs, but she exports to - foreign nations, and has begun to compete with England for the - trade of the world.” - -A few quotations from the utterances of our own countrymen may -serve to show what Protection has done for America:-- - - “The edge tool trade is well sustained, and we have less of - the effects of American competition. That this competition is - severe, however, is a fact that cannot be ignored, and it applies - to many other branches than that of edge tools. Every Canadian - season affords unmistakable evidence that some additional article - in English Hardware is being supplanted by the produce of the - Northern States; and it is notorious how largely American wares - are rivalling those of the mother country in others of our - colonial possessions as well as on the continent. The ascendency - of the protectionist party in the States continues to operate - most favourably for the manufacturing interests there, and it - is no wonder that under such benignant auspices the enterprise - in this direction is swelling to colossal proportions. The - whole subject is one demanding the serious attention of our - manufacturers.” (Rylands’ Trade Circular, Birmingham, March 4th, - 1871.) - - “A leading manufacturer expressed himself startled and alarmed at - what he saw (at the Paris Exhibition) as the proofs of successful - rivalry on the part of the Americans in branches of his own - trade.” (Lectures at the Colonial Institution, November, 1878.) - - “Unless our manufacturers bestir themselves, the Americans will - completely command the markets of Europe.” (Col. Wrottesby’s - Letter to the _Times_, July 6, 1869.) - - “Manufactories have been _created and fostered by a system of - protection_, which, through enhanced prices paid by consumers, - must have been very costly to the nation, but of the result of - which they have reason to be proud, since it has made them to so - great an extent independent of other nations for their supply.” - (Report of Philadelphia Exhibition, Mr. P. Graham, Vice-President - of the Society of Arts.) - - “The worsted manufacture of the United States is comparatively - of recent origin, but it has made very rapid progress during - the past ten or twelve years, the _high tariff having greatly - stimulated its development_.” (Report of Philadelphia Exhibition. - Mr. H. Mitchel, Member of Bradford Chamber of Commerce.) - - “America is not only supplying her own country with goods, but - exporting her manufactures to such an extent that she has become - a powerful rival to England.” (Mr. Mundella, Nov. 21, 1874.) - - “There is no time to be lost if we mean to hold our own in - the hardware trade.” (J. Anderson’s Report on Philadelphia - Exhibition.) - - “For years Sheffield has supplied not only our own country, - but nearly the whole world. The monopoly remains with us no - longer. It would be foolish not to recognize the fact that at - Philadelphia Great Britain was in the face of a powerful rival in - manufactures.” (Report on Philadelphia Exhibition--D. McHardy.) - - Some idea of the increase of American manufacture may be found in - the example of two items--Paper and Carpets. - - Value of paper imported into the United States-- - - In 1870 = £145,000 - 1876 = 4,000 - - Value of exports of paper-- - - 1869 = 750 - 1876 = 162,000 - - Tapestry carpet imported into the United States-- - - 1872 = 2,754,000 yards. - 1879 = 23,900 ” - -FOOTNOTES: - -[25] ‘Political Economy,’ by Mill, Bk. I. Chap. V. - -[26] ‘Statesman’s Yearbook,’ 1883, p. 257. - -[27] ‘Whitaker’s Almanack,’ 1883, p. 254. - -[28] ‘Statesman’s Yearbook,’ 1883. p. 257. - -[29] Albert Leffingwell. - - - - -CHAPTER VIII. - -FALSE PROPHETS OF JUGERNATH. - - -The truth of a religion may perhaps be gauged by the fulfilment of -the utterances of its prophets. Let us analyze some of these. - - _Prophecy._ _Fulfilment_. - - Even the _free_ importation of Total importations of wheat - foreign corn could very little in 1881 = 17,000,000 quarters - affect the interest of the farmers as against 23,728 prophesied by - of Great Britain.... If there Adam Smith. - were no bounty, less corn would - be exported, so it is probable - that, one year with another, _less - corn would be imported than at - present_.... The average quantity - imported one year with another - amounts only to 23,728 quarters. - (Wealth of Nations, by Adam - Smith, Bk. IV, Chap. II.) - - The Americans are a very cautious, After receiving the agricultural - far-seeing people, and every products of America for - one who knows them knows that thirty-eight years, we find the - they would never have tolerated Americans are as strong - their protective tariff if we had protectionists as ever, and the - met their advances by receiving presidential message, 4th - their agricultural products in December 1883, recommends that - exchange for our manufacturing America should retaliate on all - products. (Cobden, 1842.) countries taxing American - produce. - - I speak my unfeigned convictions After thirty-eight years of free - when I say I believe there trade Prophet Bright admits that - is no interest in the country that the agricultural classes, owners - would receive so much benefit and occupiers of land have lost - from the repeal of the Corn Laws more than £150,000,000. Numerous - as the Farm-tenant interest in farm-tenants have emigrated - this country. (Cobden, 1844.) to protectionist America. - - I believe when the future historian The true historian will have - comes to write the history to record:-- - of agriculture, he will have to - state:--In such a year there was a “After the introduction of free - stringent Corn law passed for the trade, although the general - protection of agriculture. From advance of wealth due to - that time agriculture slumbered improvements in science, steam - in England, and it was not until, and electricity gave to England, - by the aid of the Anti-Corn-Law- from time to time, the appearance - League, the Corn Law was of agricultural prosperity, yet - utterly abolished, that agriculture agriculture gradually decayed; and - sprung up into the full in 1884 millions of acres had gone - vigour of existence in England, out of tillage; land had become - to become what it is now, like foul and was badly farmed; - the manufactures, unrivalled in hundreds of farms were absolutely - the world. (Cobden, 1844.) untenanted; farmers had emigrated - to protectionist countries; - landowners had sold their land - at ruinous prices, and invested - the residue in America. Never - was ruin more complete.” - - You have no more right to Not only is no other country - doubt that the sun will rise in the free-trader, but even England - heavens, than to doubt that, in ten is getting rather shaky - years from the time when England in her adhesion. Mr. Forster, - inaugurates the glorious era of at Bradford, entreated his - commercial freedom, every civilized hearers not to “say anything that - country will be free-trader might induce foreigners to - to the backbone. (Cobden, 1844.) _suspect that our faith in free - trade was shaken_” Mr. Bright, - in his letter to Mr. Lord, wrote; - “To return to Protection, under - the name of Reciprocity, is to - confess to Protectionists abroad - that _we have been wrong and - they have been right_.” - - I believe that if you abolish After thirty-eight years not a - the Corn Laws and adopt free single country in Europe has been - trade in its simplicity, there will foolish enough to follow our - not be a tariff in Europe that example. France has drawn back - will not be changed in less than from her commercial treaty with - five years to follow your example. us. Mr. Thiers, in his speech of - (Cobden, 1846.) January 18th, 1880, said: “In - the first country in the world - arrangements are made to protect - the different branches of - native industry.” - - Bastiat prophesied that France France has not adopted free - would adopt free trade in six years trade, and is more strongly - after England had adopted it. protectionist than ever. - - Bastiat prophesied that, without Statistics given in the next - free trade, no country can chapter shows that the relative - prosper. prosperity of protectionist - countries is greater than that - of England. - - Bastiat prophesied that because Belgium is enjoying wonderful - Belgium had rejected free prosperity. - trade her ruin was certain. - -Professor Cairnes says:-- - - “The able men who led the agitation for the repeal of the Corn - Laws promised much more than this. They told us that the Poor - Laws were to follow the Corn Laws; that pauperism would disappear - with the restrictions upon trade, and the workhouses ere long - become obsolete institutions. I fear this part of the programme - has scarcely been fulfilled; those ugly social features, - those violent contrasts of poverty and wealth, that strike so - unpleasantly the eye of every foreign observer in this country, - are still painfully prominent. The signs of the extinction of - pauperism are not very apparent.”[30] - -Disraeli prophesied in 1852:-- - - “The time will come when the working classes in England will - come to you on bended knees, and pray you to undo your present - legislation.” - -And it really seems as if the time was approaching for the -fulfilment of his prophecy, for I read in a recent Paper: - - “It is the intention of the leading men among the Cotton - Operatives to move next session for a Royal Commission to enquire - as to what extent, if any, we suffer from foreign competition, - and _what bearing free trade may have on the question_.” - -Sir Edward Sullivan also stated in a recent speech that: - - “Already a number of Operatives, far more than is necessary to - turn a general election, have, through their delegates, given in - their adherence to _Fair_ trade.”[31] - -Fair trade is one step in the direction of protection. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[30] _Fortnightly Review_, July, 1871. - -[31] _The Mail_, December 19th, 1883. - - - - -CHAPTER IX. - -ISOLATION OF JUGERNATH. - - -Carlyle has said--“There are thirty millions of people in Great -Britain, _mostly fools_.” - -You remind me, my friend, of the Irishman who complained that he -never served on a jury without finding himself associated with -eleven of the most obstinate pig-headed men conceivable. - -Are all other nations, except England, obstinate, and pig-headed? -Is the shrewd American blind to his own interest? Are the -phlegmatic Dutchman, the thrifty Belgian, the clever Frenchman, -the philosophical German, simpletons and idiots, as Mr. Bright is -pleased to call all those who do not implicitly accept the gospel -of free trade. - -Might not Carlyle’s pithy remark teach a little humility? - -No country except England is free-trader. Free trade, at the -present time, after a trial of thirty-eight years, is either an -English, or a barbarous custom. All other civilized nations are -obstinate protectionists; and the worst of it is, that they are -growing more and more obstinate in their adherence to protection, -as they find they are making greater relative advance in prosperity -than England with its free trade. Even Mr. Gladstone himself admits -that “_America is passing us by in a canter_.” - -Is not Mr. Gladstone somewhat ashamed to admit that the country, -in the government of which he has had so large a share during the -present century, should be “passed in a canter” by a country so -terribly handicapped by protection. Does not it suggest the idea -that the country which he has governed may possibly have been -misgoverned. “Passed by at a canter!!” What a damning admission of -failure! - -His excuse is, that America is a young country with abundant room -for its surplus population; but this excuse, like the majority of -his ingenious evasions, is utterly fictitious. - -England, taken as a whole, with its colonies and dependencies, is -two and half times as large as America.[32] She has every advantage -that America possesses.[33] She had a good start, and if she had -only been governed by statesmen of comprehensive grasp, she ought -to have outstripped America in wealth and progress, quite as much -as America has now outstripped us. - -If England had but carefully protected the interests of its -colonies and dependencies, studied their interests as identical -with her own, she would now have been foremost in the race. - -She drove America from the union with her by her selfish policy, -and she is pursuing the same, or rather far more, suicidal policy -now. - -What is the use of the colonies? our Liberal politicians now -cry. What indeed? I echo; so long as free trade neutralizes all -possible benefit to be obtained from them or by them; but, properly -governed, they would have enabled us to do to America that which -Mr. Gladstone admits America is doing to us--“passing us by at a -canter.” - -Unfortunately we are lagging in the race with other protectionist -countries, as the following statement will show. - -Free-traders compare our wealth and commerce with what it was -before the introduction of free trade, and claim the increase as -the result of free trade. If the claim were just, other nations -ought to have stood still, or retrograded under protection; let us -see if they have done so. The only fair comparison is to take the -condition of each country at a given date; assuming its relative -condition at that date as 100, and then comparing it with its -advance at the present time. - - -_Relative Advance of Nations._ - - Commerce generally-- Years 1860 1880 - - Free trade England 100 to 180 - { France ” ” 205 - { Germany ” ” 197 - Protectionist { Holland ” ” 216 - { Belgium ” ” 242 - { America ” ” 201 - - Exports-- 1860 1882 - England 100 to 177 - France ” ” 158 - Germany ” ” 200 - Belgium ” ” 274 - Holland ” ” 295 - America ” ” 197 - - Railway Construction-- 1860 1882 - England 100 to 176 - France ” ” 290 - Germany ” ” 322 - Belgium ” ” 318 - America ” ” 343 - - Railway goods traffic-- 1860 1882 - England 100 to 312 - France ” ” 409 - Germany ” ” 654 - Holland and Belgium ” ” 525 - - Production of Coal-- 1860 1880 - England 100 to 173 - France ” ” 237 - Germany ” ” 421 - Belgium ” ” 170 - America ” ” 467 - - Production of Iron-- 1850 1882 - England 100 to 377 - France ” ” 498 - Germany ” ” 789 - Belgium ” ” 377 - America ” ” 719 - - Production of Copper-- 1850 1880 - England 100 to 29 - France ” ” 212 - Germany ” ” 615 - America ” ” 750 - - Consumption of Raw Cotton-- Years 1860 1880 - England 100 to 123 - France ” ” 158 - Germany ” ” 177 - America ” ” 234 - - General Manufactures-- 1860 1880 - England 100 to 139 - America ” ” 280 - - Woollen Manufacture-- 1860 1880 1881 - England 100 to -- 122 - America 100 to 331 -- - - Number of holders of National Securities-- 1850 1880 - England “consols” 100 to 83 - France “Rentes” 100 ” 547 - - Legacy probate value-- 1860 1880 - England 100 to 162 - France 100 ” 193 - - Amount of Deposits in Savings Banks-- 1850 1882 - England 100 to 267 - France ” ” 1912 - Germany ” ” 1950 - Belgium and Holland ” ” 405[34] - -For many years England did not feel the evils of free trade. -She had a good start in the race, with the commerce and markets -of the world in her hands. She had been foremost in improvement -of machinery, having secured her manufactures by a system of -protection, and she was therefore the first to reap the profits of -such improvements. It would naturally take years for other nations -to overtake her, when she had so good a start; but the capital she -recklessly employed in purchasing commodities which might have -been produced at home, was expended in arming foreign nations for -successful rivalry with us. - -It was not until fifteen or twenty years ago, that this suicidal -process was sufficiently advanced to tell upon our trade; but -it is now pressing on us with alarming strides, and had not our -industries been saved, by partial suspension of free trade, in the -American and Franco-Prussian wars, we should now feel it still -more severely. As it is, we have not seen the worst. Every day -foreign industries are increasing in magnitude and efficiency, -and consequently must increase in cheapness of production. At -present they have done little more than take up a share from the -markets, which were formerly our own. Soon they will invade our own -country in force. In the present cotton strike in Lancashire, the -employers have given us a reason for the terrible depression of -trade, that cloth manufactures from Belgium can now be supplied to -the print-works in Lancashire at lower rates than the Lancashire -manufactured cloth can be purchased.[35] - -You may say the depression of trade is not confined to England, -but exists in America. I admit it, but it is very different from -that which exists in England. With America it is the reaction of -a too rapid increase of new manufacture stimulated by successful -enterprise; in the case of England it is the steady decline of -old-established industries under crushing competition, of which we -have not yet felt the worst. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[32] Area of the United States = 3,602,300 sq. miles. Area of -England and its dependencies = 8,982,200 sq. miles. - -[33] It may be argued that America is a more compact dominion, -but steam and electricity annihilate space, and England’s immense -superiority in area far more than outweighs the advantage of -compactness. - -[34] It must be understood that, in all the statistics above given, -“England” and “America” are intended to mean--the United Kingdom -and the United States respectively. - -[35] _The Mail_, Dec. 19th, 1883. - - - - -CHAPTER X. - -TREACHERY IN THE CAMP. - - -How is it, that the men of the working class, who are nominally -free-traders, are practically protectionists? - -How is it, to use the words of Mr. Wise, an ardent apologist for -free trade, that-- - - “In 1846, the working classes overthrew protectionism in England, - and in 1878 the same classes, _wherever they have obtained - predominant influence_, are carrying into practice the extreme - theories of their old opponents?” - -Mr. Syme also says:-- - - “In Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, the party of progress - has always been identified with a restrictive commercial policy, - while the conservatives are the most uncompromising of free - traders. Indeed, it may be said, that one-half of the entire - English-speaking race are, in one shape or another, in favour of - a restrictionist policy, and of this half the great majority are - advanced liberals.”[36] - -Free trade was an assertion on the part of labourers as consumers; -the protectionist policy of America and Australia is the attempt -of the same class to obtain privileges as producers. The working -men in those countries are possessed by the thorough belief -that, by carrying out their policy, _they benefit all_. Free -trade considered that the interests of _consumers_ suffered by -protection; the Americans and Australians, with their eyes open, -undergo these private inconveniences because they believe the _mass -of the community is better off thereby_. To use the words of an -intelligent American: - - “We all recognize that a protection tariff forces us to pay - for many articles slightly more than they would probably cost - us under a system of free trade. We know too that at first our - manufactured products, whether of metal, cotton or coal, cost us - in general more to make at home than they would have cost us if - imported freely from abroad. We know that we are not buying in - the cheapest market, but we believe, on the whole, it is _best to - impose upon ourselves the voluntary tax[37] for the great ends_, - not of enriching Monopolists, but of _promoting the best interest - of the nation_.” - -The average American is neither a fool, nor a knave. To fanciful -theories, whose value is problematical, he prefers the solid -assurance of experience and fact. - -The cause of this apparently inconsistent action on the part of -the working classes is easily explained. Free trade was a political -job,[38] and the working classes were enlisted, by politicians, -into a crusade against their own interests, to assist in the -overthrow of those classes which supported the political opponents -of the Free-Trading rulers. - -For this purpose the working classes were stirred up to class -antagonism, and the Free-Traders have kept up the delusion by -dishonestly claiming as the work of free trade every advantage -which protectionist countries have shared in common with us. - -History is repeating itself in the delusion against which poor old -Æsop warned us centuries ago by his fable of the “Members and the -Belly.” - -The members (manufacturing hands) hounded on by Bright and Co. -to class antagonism against the belly (the agricultural classes) -who were represented as “squandering national wealth,” have now -brought England to a pretty pass. The reaction is taking place. -Poor old Æsop was, as a political economist, more far-seeing than -Mr. Bright; who now, however, seems to be changing his views in -the most marvellous manner, for he has at last recognised that -the manufacturing interests are affected by the agricultural -depression. For he says:-- - - “Home trade is bad, mainly, or entirely, because harvests have - been bad for several years. The remedy will come with more - sunshine and better yield of land, _without this it cannot - come_.[39] - - “I believe the agricultural owners and occupiers of land - have lost more than £150,000,000 sterling through the great - deficiency of harvest.” - -Bravo, Friend Bright! you are approaching the truth. Without -improvement in agricultural prosperity “the _remedy for bad trade_ -cannot come.” - -But England is not celebrated for sunshine, the _sunshine we -require is that of protection_. - -Taking the nine years ending 1881, I find that, in only one year, -the rainfall of the United Kingdom has been largely (7¼ inches) -above the average of the last seventeen years. In five out of the -nine, the rainfall has been a little below the average; in one -year, ¼ of an inch above, and in another year, not quite 2 inches -above, the average. - -There is no doubt that the average produce of farming in England -has, of late years, been below the average of former years; but the -_Mark Lane Express_ returns show that, in all these years, there -has been a considerable percentage of cases in which the crops have -been equal to or over the average. From this we may assume that the -sun is not wholly to blame, but that want of sufficient capital -to farm properly and to recover the results of bad years has been -a very important factor in the deficiency of crops. This may be -gleaned from the replies to the questions circulated by Mr. Bear as -to the condition of the farmers in 1878. - - _Bedfordshire_:--“Farmers are losing heart, and the land is in - a much worse state than formerly.... There has been a serious - inroad upon capital account during the last few years, and the - land has seriously gone back in cultivation.... The condition of - the land has sunk.” - - _Cumberland_:--“The last season has been a good one; but the - present prices are not satisfactory, and the general depression - in trade is now having its influence on farming.” - - _Essex_:--“Farmers suffering from low prices, general depression - of trade, the rise in wages.... The work all round is carried on - languidly, and year by year the condition of the land is becoming - poorer.... A large quantity of the kind very badly farmed.” - - _Kent_:--“More weeds grown last year than I ever saw before.” - - _Monmouthshire_:--“Land going out of cultivation, stock reduced - in quantity, only necessary work done.” - - _Northamptonshire_:--“The results of the two last seasons will - not supply means for substantial improvements.” - - _Northumberland_:--“An immense deal of land producing nothing, I - may say, simply out of cultivation.” - - _Oxfordshire_:--“The land is very foul and poor, partly from the - continuous rains and the shortness of stock.” - - _Shropshire_:--“Very few farmers, if any, paying their way.... - Hand-to-mouth farming.” - - _Sussex_:--“The land generally is not so clean or so - well-cultivated as it was a few years since.” - -Lord Derby estimates that, with proper farming, we should obtain -twice as much produce as we now get. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[36] _Fortnightly Review_, April, 1873. - -[37] The false economist pursues a small present good which will -be followed by a great evil to come, while the true economist -pursues a great good to come at the risk of a small present evil. -(Political Economy--Bastiat.) - -[38] “I am afraid that most of us entered upon this struggle with -the belief that we had some _distinct class_ interest in the -question.” (Cobden.) - -[39] Mr. Bright is deserting his free-trade comrades, who say--“It -is not only the beneficial _working of free trade that prescribes -the agricultural ruin of England_: it is the great natural law of -the preservation of the fittest that proclaims that, as England is -not the best fitted to grow corn, she must grow corn no longer.” - - - - -CHAPTER XI. - -QUEM JUPITER VULT PERDERE, PRIUS DEMENTAT. - - -I think you will admit, that if a statesman, pretending to govern -by rules of political economy, should make very gross, misleading -statements regarding the results of a particular line of policy -which he had pursued for years, such a man must be convicted of -hopeless incompetency or else of gross dishonesty, either of which -ought to disqualify him as an administrator; and your Free Trade -statesman certainly comes under such an indictment. - -Your Right Hon’ble Ruler rises after a public dinner, and holds -forth with matchless eloquence, pointing out the blessings and -prosperity Free Trade has brought to the country. His statements -are received with thunders of applause, and the Right Hon’ble -Orator and his audience disperse mutually satisfied with each other. - -I wonder whether it ever occurs to the orator, in the quiet -of his chamber, that to use his own words, he “has resorted -to the simple but effectual plan of pure falsification.”[40] -Can he possibly be so ignorant of current events, and of the -subjects with which he ought to be acquainted, as not to know -that other nations--_protectionist nations_--_have made greater -relative advance_ than ourselves; that the increase of wealth is -_universal_; that it is shared by all civilized nations in common -with us; and that it is due to improvements in science, art, -and manufacture--to improved communications by railways, steam -navigation, telegraphs, &c., which have made such enormous strides -since the date at which Free Trade was adopted. Even Mill admits -that-- - - “So rapid had been the extension of improved processes of - agriculture, that the average price of corn had become decidedly - lower even before the repeal of the Corn Laws.”[41] - -There have been short periods of temporary prosperity in -agriculture, and your Right Hon’ble Free Trader has been jubilant -in hailing them as triumphs of Free Trade; but Adam Smith says:-- - - _Improvements in manufacture tend to raise the value of land._[42] - -Dare you, my Friend, after examination of the statistics given in -the foregoing chapter, say, that the general increase of wealth -is due to Free Trade; when protectionist nations have shared it -in common with us? Aye! and taken the lion’s share too! You claim -the temporary prosperity of the years 1871-73 as a victory for -Free Trade, when in reality this prosperity is the most damning -evidence against it. Are you so utterly blinded, as not to perceive -that this prosperity was caused by the Franco-Prussian war, which, -by preventing the unlimited importation of French and German -commodities into England, caused, in fact, partial _suspension of -Free Trade_? Don’t you know that, in those years of prosperity, the -price of wheat rose to 58_s._ 8_d._ per quarter, and that, in the -present depressed condition of England, it is down to 41_s._ 5_d._ -per quarter? Don’t you know that, during that time of prosperity, -the excess of imports beyond our exports was £60,000,000 less than -in the present depressed time? In other words, we were depressing -our industries by 60,000,000 sterling per annum less than at -present. Now, my Friend, give your verdict; is your Right Hon’ble -Free Trader guilty or not guilty, either of hopeless incompetence -or gross dishonesty in attributing the general increase of wealth -in the world to the agency of Free Trade?--Your friend, Bright,[43] -naively admits that “to return to protection under the name of -reciprocity, is to _confess to the protectionists abroad, that we -have been wrong, and they have been right_.” Verily! Friend Bright, -whether you confess it or not, the truth will out. Friend Bright! -you are like the ostrich, burying its head in the sand and thinking -no one can see you. The protectionist nations of Europe can see you -distinctly, and they are all laughing at your folly. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[40] Applied to the Conservative Party by Mr. Gladstone, in 1879. - -[41] Mill’s Political Economy, Bk. I. Chap. XII. - -[42] Wealth of Nations, Bk. I. Chap. XI. - -[43] Mr. Bright, when brought to bay by unanswerable arguments, is -in the habit of pleading that he has “neither time nor inclination” -to enter into discussion, and takes refuge in discourtesy. A choice -specimen is given in Appendix No. I.--correspondence with Mr. Lord. - - - - -CHAPTER XII. - -THE WAGES OF JUGERNATH. - - -I have not yet done with your Right Hon’ble advocate for Free Trade. - -I have another charge, of that which Mr. Gladstone terms the -“simple and effective plan of pure falsification,” in which he -himself appears to be not an unskilful adept. - -Your Right Hon’ble Ruler ascribes the rise of wages and consequent -prosperity to the beneficial action of Free Trade. If this were the -case, wages ought to be depressed, or at all events stationary, in -protectionist countries. - -Let us see if this is the case:-- - - -_Relative rise of Wages._ - - 1840 1850 1880 - { Agricultural labourer -- 100 150 - GT. BRITAIN { Skilled labourer 100 -- 153 - { Cotton operative 100 -- 133 - - FRANCE { Agricultural labourer -- 100 125 - { Skilled labourer -- 100 150 - Belgium and Holland 100 -- 130 - United States, average labourer -- 100 143 - -It will be seen by this that the rise of wages has been general; -due to the general increase of wealth in civilized nations; and -that, in some cases, the relative increase has been nearly as rapid -in thirty years in the protectionist country as it has been in -forty years in England. Mill says:-- - - “The labourer in America enjoys a greater abundance of comforts - than in any other country in the world, except in some of the - newest Colonies.”[44] - -Is it possible to conceive a more impudent claim than that which -your Free-Trader sets up in claiming the rise of wages as the work -of Free Trade? It stands to common sense that Free Trade, or, in -other words, unlimited foreign competition, must have a tendency to -_reduce_ wages. During the agitation preceding the repeal of the -Corn Laws, it was one of the arguments in favour of the movement, -that cheap bread would enable the British operative to _work for -lower wages_, and thus be able to compete with the continental -operative, who enjoyed the advantage of food at lower rates than -those obtaining in England. - -The general rise of wages which has occurred throughout -protectionist countries, as well as in England, has been -_principally_ due to the increase in the wealth of Europe; but -it has also been _partially due to protection_ in the form of -Trade-unionism. For what is Trade-unionism but protection in a -somewhat extreme form? - -The protection of _British labour_ does not differ in principle -from the protection of the _results of British labour_ in the -shape of its industries. Amongst the resolutions adopted at the -International Conference of Trades Unions Delegates, I find the -following:-- - - “There are two ways of attaining the object:-- - - (1) Legislation for the _protection_ of the weak against - competition; - - (2) Organization of workmen who should be united and disciplined - as in certain countries.” - -Protection for the “_weak against competition_.” Is this in accord -with Free Trade? - -FOOTNOTE: - -[44] Mill’s Political Economy, Bk. II. Chap. XV. - - - - -CHAPTER XIII. - -PAUPERISM, CRIME, AND INTEMPERANCE. - - -I have still another serious charge to bring against your Right -Hon’ble Ruler, who pompously lays before you statistics to show -that, since the introduction of Free Trade, pauperism and crime -have decreased; and this your Right Hon’ble Ruler claims as one of -the results of Free Trade. - -The figures produced seem to be all right; but really the -statistics of your Right Hon’ble Ruler have been found so very -untrustworthy, that a careful scrutiny of them is necessary; and -on investigation I find in them unmistakable evidence of either -ignorance or dishonesty. - -These statistics show that the number of paupers under relief in -England was-- - - In 1862 890,000 - In 1880 799,000 - ------- - Apparent decrease 91,000 - -In considering these figures, however, it must be remembered -that England has of late years greatly increased the rate per -pauper;[45] or, in other words, the relief now given will either -relieve worse cases of pauperism than before, or else extend relief -to other members of the family of the actual recipient. The present -rates of relief in England are now four-and-half times as much -as those in France, and seven-and-half times as much as those in -Belgium and Holland.[46] - -In the next place, your Right Hon’ble Free-Trader omits to -mention that the private charities of _London alone_ (orphanages, -homes, asylums, hospitals, &c.) have increased, since 1859, by -£1,159,000,[47] a sum sufficient to relieve 526,000 paupers at the -French rate, or nearly 900,000 by the Belgian rate. - -It is probable that private charities of the rest of England, -including the large provincial towns, have increased in the same -ratio as those of London; representing an enormous amount of relief. - -Then, again, no mention is made of the relief afforded by Trades -Unions and Benefit Societies,[48] which now expend about £4,000,000 -annually in relief. This, at French rate, represents the relief of -1,800,000 paupers, or at Belgian rate of about 3,000,000 paupers. - -Now, my Friend, what is your fictitious saving of 91,000 in -comparison with the enormous figures given above? - -Mr. Fawcett says:-- - - “Mr. Torrens, the Member for Finsbury, sought to prove that - pauperism was increasing, that vast numbers of able-bodied - labourers were unemployed, and that the normal condition of a - considerable proportion of our population was one of abject - misery and deplorable destitution. - - “Mr. Goschen met these statements by a positive and indignant - denial. He quoted a number of statistics to prove that the iron - trade, the cotton trade, and other important branches of industry - were reviving; he was jubilant over the fact that the number of - paupers had only increased by 10,000 in a twelvemonth, and he - became quite elated when recounting that the working classes were - using more tea and sugar, and that their average consumption of - beer and spirits was augmenting. The speech was loudly applauded, - especially by the commercial members. There are many who still - think that the well-doing of a country can be measured by its - exports and imports.... It is not our intention to dispute the - accuracy of Mr. Goschen’s statistics. There is, however, too much - reason to fear that they only tell a small part of the truth; and - that, if not judiciously considered, they may conceal awkward and - ugly facts which it will be perilous to ignore.”[49] - - “Sir Edward Sullivan alluded to a statement made, he said, by a - distinguished statesman, that, out of a population of thirty-four - millions seven millions were _toeing the line of starvation_.”[50] - -And these statements would appear to be in accord with the figures -I have given above. - -The statistics of your Right Hon’ble Ruler, which you receive with -thunders of applause, are not worth the paper on which they are -written. - -Again I ask your verdict--guilty or not guilty? - -Now for Crime. The statistics in this case are less defensible -than in the previous case, because they involve a dishonourable -_suppression of facts_. - -The statistics brought forward to show that a diminution of crime -has been the result of Free Trade, are as follows: - - Convictions in 1859 13,470 - ” 1881 11,353 - ------ - Apparent decrease of crime 2,117 - -Now this _apparent_ decrease is wholly due to the “Criminal Justice -Act” of 1855, which enables Magistrates to pass short sentences; -and these, coming under the head of “Summary Convictions,” do not -appear under the head of “Convictions,” _where they would have -appeared but for the “Act” of 1855_. - -If we take the total cases, _including summary convictions_, the -figures stand as follows:-- - - Convictions in 1859 246,227 - ” 1881 542,319 - ------- - Increase in crime 296,092 - -In other words, instead of your Right Hon’ble Ruler’s decrease -of 2,000 convictions, we have actually an increase of nearly -300,000. Is it possible to conceive a more glaring case of what Mr. -Gladstone himself terms “the simple but effectual plan of _pure -falsification_?” - -Now for Intemperance. The number of persons fined for drunkenness -in England: - - In the year 1860 88,410 - In ” 1881 174,481 - -or roughly speaking, the convictions for drunkenness have doubled -in twenty-one years. - -Truly, my Friend, you cannot congratulate Free Trade on the -decrease of pauperism, crime, and intemperance it has produced. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[45] “In fifty years, Great Britain has lifted her estimate on this -point so rapidly that she spends five times as much for a given -number of paupers? than she did fifteen years after the opening -of the century.” (‘Practical Political Economy,’ by Profr. Bonamy -Price, p. 237.) - -[46] _Comparative Cost of Relief to Paupers._ - - England £10 0 - France 2 2 - Belgium and Holland 1 3 - (Mulhall’s Statistics, p. 346.) - -[47] _Expenditure in London Charities._ - - 1859. 1881. - Orphanages £409,000 £458,000 - Homes for aged 88,000 770,000 - Asylums 25,000 156,000 - Hospitals, &c. 301,000 596,000 - ------- -------- - Total 823,000 1,980,000 - -[48] The financial condition of many of the Trades Unions is -causing serious alarm. The drain has been so heavy on them, that -their capital is greatly reduced, and unless some change takes -place, they will become bankrupt. The increase of pauperism will -then be enormous. - -[49] _Fortnightly Review_, January, 1871. - -[50] _The Mail_, December 19th, 1883. - - - - -CHAPTER XIV. - -JUGERNATH AFLOAT. - - -I see, my Friend, that you are bringing out your trump card. -“Behold!” you argue “the unfortunate condition to which America has -been reduced by her protectionist policy; she has scarcely a ship -afloat, whilst Free Trade England is carrying the commerce of the -world.” - -First, I would ask, are you _quite_ sure that all this is caused by -Free Trade? - -Don’t you think that it is just within the bounds of possibility -that our shrewd American cousins may possibly find a quicker and -more remunerative investment for their capital, in encouraging -their home-productive industries, and in employing their -home-labour productively, than in a keen competition with the -English for a barren trade that is not worth having? - -Are you ignorant of the fact that the shipping trade has been a -losing concern for some considerable period? - -Are you unaware of the fact that wheat has been frequently carried -as ballast, and has paid no freight; that other articles have been -carried at almost nominal rates? - -In the _Civil and Military Gazette_ of 7th December, 1883, under -the Telegraphic Summary, I read-- - - “It is predicted that, unless freight rates to India speedily - improve, a considerable number of steamers now engaged in the - trade will be laid up.” - -I also read in the _Madras Mail_, January 9th, 1884, that an organ -of the shipping interests in London has drawn up the probable -“results of the gross working of thirteen steamers of a well-known -Steam Navigation Company, the result of which is a total loss of -£34,000 in one year’s trading.” - -Are the Americans to be pitied, because they have no share in this -losing concern? - -If protectionism has kept them out of it, you can scarcely blame it. - -But even without such keen competition, the Americans are -justified, by the writings of your sacred shastras, as may be seen -by the following quotation: - - “The capital, therefore, employed in the _Home trade_ of any - country will generally give encouragement and support to a - greater quantity of productive labour in that country, and - increase the value of its annual produce, more than an equal - capital employed in the _Foreign trade_ of consumption; and - the capital employed in this latter trade has, in both these - respects, a _still greater advantage over an equal capital - engaged in the Carrying trade_.”[51] - -So you see that the authority of your own sacred writings is -favourable to the policy of our American cousins in this respect. - -FOOTNOTE: - -[51] ‘Wealth of Nations,’ by Adam Smith, Bk. II. Chap. V. - - - - -CHAPTER XV. - -ADVERSE PROSPERITY. - - -I have a few words to say about high wages and prosperity, before I -quit the subject. - -Although the rise of wages is, in fact, to some extent, the work -of protection, I am not proud of it; for trades unionism is -protection of an extreme character, generally narrow in its aims, -not sufficiently far-seeing, and consequently sometimes mischievous -in its results. - -The raising of wages within reasonable bounds is desirable; but, -in a Free Trade country, it is apt to be attended with serious -consequences in raising the cost of the manufactured article, when -competing against the manufacture of foreign countries, where wages -are lower and hours of work longer. - -It is said by Free Trade advocates, that although the cost of -provisions has not sensibly increased, yet _wages are 50 per cent. -higher, and hours of labour 20 per cent. less_, than they were -forty years ago. - -From the political economist’s point of view, this appears to be a -decrease of national wealth. Mill says:-- - - “Saving enriches, and spending impoverishes, the community along - with the individual. Society at large is richer by what it - expends in _maintaining and aiding productive labour_, but poorer - by what it expends in its enjoyments.”[52] - -Now if a stalwart race could have existed, and have done 20 per -cent. more work on the lower rate of wages,--although, doubtless, -some improvement in the condition of workmen was desirable,--50 -per cent. appears to be a large margin, when we consider that the -price of provisions is said to be unaltered. The British workman -is proverbially extravagant and improvident. High wages encourage -extravagance, whilst surplus cash furnishes the means, and short -hours the leisure, for gratifying a taste for drink. - -Setting aside for the moment the serious evils of intemperance, -we have practically, with high wages, the causes that lead to the -impoverishment of a community. - -A glance at the statistics of Mr. Giffen seems to indicate this, -for whilst the consumption per head of those commodities which are -termed necessaries of life, have only increased 33 to 40 per cent. -respectively, the consumption of those which may be considered -luxuries--namely, tea and sugar--have increased 232 and 260 per -cent. respectively. - -Again, statistics show that, whilst the other classes of the -community have increased in number by 335 per cent. of late years, -the working classes have only increased by 6½ per cent. In other -words, the unproductive classes have increased largely, but, whilst -there is only 6½ per cent. _numerical_ increase in the productive -classes, their labour has decreased by 20 per cent. from shorter -hours of labour. - -The drones in the hive have increased very largely, and the workers -have not done so, but have developed an alarming taste for honey. - -The question of waste of wealth would be comparatively of minor -importance were it not seriously complicated by the existence of -Free Trade; but we have now to confront the fact, that, in the -present day, we have to pay 50 per cent. more money for 20 per -cent. less labour than we did forty years ago; whilst Free Trade -brings into the market the products of the keen competition of a -thrifty and parsimonious class of workmen who accept lower wages -and work longer hours. The result must be a gradual extinction of -our industries: - -Cotton and woollen industries are struggling hard for existence.[53] - -Silk manufacture is dying out. - -Iron industries in a bad way. - -Gloomy predictions are made respecting the shipping trade. - -Agriculture is rapidly becoming extinguished. - -English pluck, capital, and credit are struggling manfully against -disaster, but the struggle cannot last much longer; capital is -sustained by credit; and credit is receiving heavy and repeated -blows from unremunerative industries. Meanwhile, high wages and -extravagant habits are not the best training for the millions that -will be thrown out of employment when the crash comes. - -Your prophet, Adam Smith, though an advocate for the repeal of the -Corn Laws, foresaw and forewarned you of these consequences, as -follows:-- - - “If the free importation of Foreign manufactures were permitted, - several of the Home manufactures would probably suffer, and some - of them perhaps go to ruin altogether.”[54] - -Verily, my Friend, you are like a shipowner who congratulates -himself that his sailors were never so well off before--never went -aloft less--never kept fewer watches--never remained so much in -their warm beds: meanwhile the devoted ship is drifting slowly, but -surely, on to the rocks.[55] - -FOOTNOTES: - -[52] ‘Political Economy,’ by J. S. Mill, Bk. I. Chap. V. - -[53] Mr. S. Smith, M.P., who is connected with cotton industry, has -recently stated that “with all the toil and anxiety of those who -had conducted it, the cotton industry of Lancashire, which gave -maintenance to two or three millions of people, had not earned so -much as 5 per cent. during the past ten years. The employers had -a most anxious life; and many, after struggling for years, had -become bankrupt, and some had died of a broken heart;” and he added -that he believed “most of the leading trades to be in the same -condition.” - -The cheap production of Belgian fabrics is stated by the employers -to be the cause of the depression in the cotton trade. (_Times_, -Dec. 1883.) - -[54] ‘Wealth of Nations,’ Bk. IV. Chap. II. - -[55] A writer in _Vanity Fair_, in analyzing the Board of Trade’s -statistics for the year ended March 31st, 1883, when compared with -those for the year ended March, 1880, or the three years of the -Gladstone Ministry, says: - -“We were promised cheaper Government, cheaper food, greater -prosperity. We find that so far from these promises being verified, -they have every one been falsified by the result. - -“Our Imperial Government is dearer by £8,000,000; our Imperial and -Local Government, together, is dearer by £10,000,000. - -“As to food, wheat has become dearer 1_s._ 3_d._ per quarter; beef, -by from 3_d._ to 5_d._ per stone; Mutton, by 1_s._ 3_d._; money is -dearer than 1¾ per cent. - -“As to prosperity, our staple pig iron is cheaper by 22_s._ 2_d._ -per ton. We have 398,397 acres fewer under cultivation for corn, -grain and other crops; 50,077 fewer horses; 129,119 fewer cattle; -4,789,738 fewer sheep in the country. We have, in spite of the Land -Act and the allegation of increased prosperity, 18,828 more paupers -in Ireland on a decreasing population. We find that 115,092 more -emigrants have left the country in a year, because they cannot get -a living in it. We lose annually 349 more vessels and 1,534 more -lives at sea. The only element of consolation that these figures” -(Board of Trade Returns) “have to show is, that we have 778,389 -more pigs and 4,627 more policemen in the country. In fact, we are -more lacking in every thing we want; more abounding in every thing -we don’t want. - -“The price of everything we have to sell has gone down; the price -of everything we have to buy has gone up; and what has gone up most -is the price of Government. - -“Dearer Government, dearer bread, dearer beef, dearer mutton, -dearer money; cheaper pig iron; less corn, potatoes, turnips, -grass, and hops, fewer horses, fewer cattle, fewer sheep; more -paupers, more emigrants, more losses of life and property at sea, -more pigs, more policemen. - -“These are the benefits that three years of liberal rule have -conferred upon us!!!” - - - - -CHAPTER XVI. - -SACRED RIGHTS OF PROPERTY. - - -I have already stated that Mill, when he allows that which Herbert -Spencer terms “political bias,”--and Luigi Cossa terms his “_narrow -philosophic utilitarianism_,” to warp his better judgment,--is -guilty of absurdities and inconsistencies that would disgrace a -schoolboy. This is notably apparent when he attempts to draw a -fundamental distinction between land and any other property, as -regards its “sacred rights.” - -Mr. Mill greatly admired the prosperity of the peasant proprietors -in France and Belgium, unfortunately forgetting that a system, -suited to the sober thrifty peasantry of the Continent, might -possibly not be equally suitable to the improvident lower classes -of Ireland and England,[56] neglectful also of the sensible view -taken by M. De Lavergne that “_cultivation spontaneously finds out -the organization that suits it best_.”[57] He wished therefore to -establish an Utopia of peasant proprietors in England and Ireland -as a panacea for the evils which Free Trade in the first place, -and mischievous legislation in the second place, had brought upon -agriculture. Without presuming to offer an opinion on the debated -subjects of “Grande” and “Petite Culture,” or peasant and landlord -proprietorship, I may say that cultivation appears to have found -out spontaneously the organization best suited to it, and that, -in England and Ireland, landlordism seems best suited to the -improvident character of the lower classes, in providing capital to -help the tenants over bad times, and enabling improvements to be -made in prosperous times. - -Be this as it may, peasant proprietorship has proved to be a -failure in Ireland, and is rapidly becoming extinct.[58] Writers -on the subject state that, under that system, labour was so -ill-directed, that it required six men to provide food for ten; -and consolidation of holdings is recommended. Mr. Mill, however, -thought otherwise, and biased by this political conviction, he has -propounded the following extraordinary arguments to prove that the -sacred rights of property are not applicable in the case of landed -property[59]:-- - - (1) “No man made the land.” - - (2) It is the original inheritance of the whole species.[60] - - (3) Its appropriation is wholly a question of general expediency. - - (4) When private property in land is not expedient, it is unjust. - - (5) It is no hardship to any one to be excluded from what others - have produced. - - (6) But it is a hardship to be born into the world and to find - all nature’s gifts previously engrossed. - - (7) Whoever owns land, keeps others out of the enjoyment of it. - -Now let us apply Mr. Mill’s arguments to any other kind of property. - -Suppose I say to you:--“My friend! you have two coats; hand one of -them over to me! Sacred rights of property don’t apply to it; you -did not make it; and Mill says--‘_it is no hardship to be excluded -from what others have produced_;’ but it is some hardship to be -born into the world, and to find all nature’s gifts engrossed. Your -argument that you paid for it in hard cash is worthless. _No man -made_ silver and gold, ‘it is the original inheritance of the whole -species, the receiver is as bad as the thief, and you have connived -in the robbery of those metals from the earth, leaving posterity -yet unborn to be under the hardship of finding all nature’s gifts -engrossed.’ - -“The manufacture of your coat is based on robbery and injustice, -and you have connived at it; the iron and coal used in its -production were _made by no man_, they are the _common inheritance -of the species_, those who have obtained them have robbed -posterity. You have bribed them to do so by silver and gold, also -robbed from posterity. - -“The very wool of which your coat is formed was _made by no man_, -it was robbed from a defenceless sheep. Your argument that the -sheep was the property of the shearer is useless. No man made the -sheep, it is the common inheritance of all, &c. Your argument that -his owner reared the sheep, is equally worthless. Monster! if you -find a child, have you a right to rob him and make a slave of him? -such an argument would justify slavery[61] or worse. - -“When _private property is not expedient it is unjust_, and from -my ground of view, it is not expedient that this private property -should be yours; public only differs from private expediency in -degree. ‘He who owns property keeps others out of the enjoyment of -it,’ the sacred rights of property don’t apply to this coat; so -hand it over without any more of your absurd arguments. Nay! if -you don’t, and as I see some one is approaching who may interfere, -its appropriation is one of expediency,--individual expediency -must follow the same law as general expediency,--it is expedient -that I should draw my knife across your throat, otherwise I shall -lose that which is my inheritance in common with the rest of the -species.” And so I might argue _ad infinitum_. - -Mr. Mill’s sophisms however are, what Cossa terms, “concessions -more apparent than real to socialism,” for further on, in his -Political Economy, he completely stultifies his argument by stating -that the principle of property gives to the landowners:-- - - “a right to compensation for whatever portion of their interest - in the land it may be the policy of the State to deprive them of. - To that _their claim is indefeasible_. It is due to landowners, - and to owners of any property whatever recognised as such by - the State, that they should not be dispossessed of it without - receiving its pecuniary value.... This is due on the _general - principles on which property rests_. If the land was bought with - the produce of the labour and abstinence of themselves or their - ancestors, compensation is due to them on that ground; _even if - otherwise_, it is still due on the ground of prescription.” - - “Nor,” he adds, “can it ever be necessary for accomplishing - an object by which the community altogether will gain, that a - particular portion of the community should be immolated.”[62] - -Unfortunately, however, his mischievous denial of the sacred -rights of property in land is eagerly read, while his subsequent -qualification of it is neglected by those who, like Mr. Bright, -aim at the destruction of a political opponent; or, like Mr. -Gladstone, are bent on a particular policy, reckless of the results -in carrying it out; or, like Mr. Parnell and his followers, whose -hands itch for plunder; and it has produced a general haziness -of ideas amongst that well-meaning class of people who are -good-naturedly liberal with the property of other people. - -Yet, clothe it with what sophism you will, any attempt, whether -legalized or otherwise, to deprive the landowner of his property -and to violate his rights, is as unjustifiable as the depredations -of the burglar or the pickpocket. Nay more so; because the -statesman or political economist cannot plead poverty or want of -education as his excuse. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[56] If we were to partition out England into a Mill’s Utopia of -peasant proprietors to-morrow, it would not last a week; half of -the proprietors would convert their holdings into drink, and be in -a state of intoxication until it was expended. - -[57] ‘Grande and Petite Culture. Rural Economy of France.’ De -Lavergne. - -[58] The yeomen and small tenant-farmers, men of little capital, -have almost disappeared, and the process of improving them off the -face of the agricultural world is still progressing to its bitter -end; homestead after homestead has been deserted, and farm has -been added to farm--a very unpleasing result of the inexorable -principle--the survival of the fittest--by means of which even the -cultivators of the soil are selected;--but a result which, not the -laws of nature, but the bungling arrangements of human legislators, -have rendered inevitable. (Bear., _Fortnightly Review_, September, -1873.) - -[59] ‘Mill’s Political Economy,’ Bk. II. Chap. II. - -[60] The original inheritors have, through their lawfully -constituted rulers, parted with their property, having, in most -cases, received an equivalent for it in the shape, either of -eminent services rendered to the State, or else of actual payments -in hard cash; and these transactions have been deliberately -ratified and acknowledged by the laws of the country from time -immemorial. It is therefore simply childish to argue that the land -thus disposed of still belongs to the original inheritors, after -they have enjoyed for past years the proceeds for which they have -bartered the land that once belonged to them. - -[61] I beg your pardon, my dear Fanatic, I see I have unconsciously -made a slight mistake. Mill says, that appropriation is wholly a -matter of general expediency, and on that ground you _may_ justify -slavery. - -[62] Mill’s Political Economy, Bk. II. Chap. II. - - - - -CHAPTER XVII. - -SELECTIONS FROM JUGERNATH’S SACRED WRITINGS. - - -Allow me, my dear Idolator, to make a few quotations from one of -your sacred Vedas, on the subject of land. - -You are fond of quoting them when it suits your purpose. - - _Wealth of Nations, by Adam Smith._ _Action of Free Trade._ - - (1.) Every improvement in the Free Trade has ruined - circumstances of the society agricultural industry. Can it - tends, either directly be an improvement in the - or indirectly, to raise the circumstances of the society. - real rent of land, to increase - the real wealth of - the landlord, his power of - purchasing the labour or - the produce of the labour - of other people. - - (2.) Every increase in the real Free Trade has lowered rents. - wealth of the society, Can it have wrought increase - every increase in the in the real wealth of society? - quantity of useful labour - employed within it, tends - indirectly to raise the real - rent of land. - - (3) All those improvements in The improvements in machinery, - the productive powers of science, steam, and electricity - labour which tend directly prevented the collapse of - to reduce the real price agriculture at first, and has - of manufactures, tend indirectly even given a semblance of - to raise the real temporary prosperity, and this - rent of land. has been dishonestly claimed by - Free-traders as their work. - - (4.) Whatever reduces the real In spite of this advantage - price of manufactured agriculture has collapsed - produce raises that of under Free Trade. - rude produce of the landlord. - - (5.) The neglect of cultivation Your Free Trade prophets, Bright - and improvement, the fall and Gladstone, are unceasing - in the real price of any in their endeavours to destroy - part of the rude produce the landlord and diminish his - of the land ... tend to power of employing productive - lower the real rent of land, labour. - to reduce the real wealth - of the landlord, to diminish - his power of purchasing - either the labour - or the produce of the - labour of other people. - - (6.) The whole annual produce - of the land and labour of - every country constitutes - a revenue to three different - orders of people, - --to:-- - 1. Those who live by rent. - 2. Those who live by wages. - 3. Those who live by profit. - The interest of the first - of these three great orders - is strictly and inseparably - connected with the general - interests of the society. - _Whatever either promotes Free trade obstructs the - or obstructs the one, promotes interests of the first of - or obstructs the other._ these three great orders, and - necessarily obstructs the - general interests of the - nation at large. - - (7.) The interest of this third Free trade has emanated from - order has not the same this order. - connection with the - general interest of the - society as that of the - other two. - - _Merchants and Master - Manufacturers_ are, in this - order, the two classes of - people who commonly employ - the largest capitals. - - (8.) The proposal of any new If attention had only been paid - law or regulation of commerce, to Adam Smith’s warning, we - which comes from should not now have to mourn - this order, ought always the decadence of England’s - to be listened to with great industries. - precaution, and ought - never to be adopted till - after having been long and - carefully examined, not - only with the most scrupulous, - but with the most - suspicious, attention. - - (9.) It comes from an order of - men whose interest is - never exactly the same - with that of the public; - who have generally an - interest to _deceive and - even to oppress the public_, - and who accordingly have, - upon many occasions, How true of your prophet Bright! - both deceived and oppressed Free Trade is another fearful - it. (Wealth of Nations, example of the _deception and - by Adam Smith, Bk. I. oppression_ practised by - Chap. XI.) this class. - - -You will probably, attempt to discredit your sacred writings when -they do not support your own views. - -You will argue that Adam Smith wrote when the conditions of society -and commerce were very different from what they are now. - -Mathematicians say, that when a formula will not accommodate -itself to altering conditions and circumstances, it is unsound. It -is the same with political science. Either the political science -of Adam Smith is unsound, and he is not reliable, or the serious -indictments against Free Trade given in the quotations above are -well-founded. - - - - -CHAPTER XVIII. - -THE VAMPIRE. - - -What is the nature of a country-life that it should breed such -a vampire,--such a monster of iniquity,--such a “squanderer of -national wealth” as the landlord whom your Free-trading friends -hold up to public execration? The old classical idea “procul -a negotiis” would indicate that it had a contrary influence. -How is it then that it produces the unmitigated miscreant whom -Bright delights to denounce,--whom Gladstone loves to pursue with -ruinous enactments,--and whom Parnell, with his murderous crew, -takes pleasure in “boycotting,” maiming, and assassinating? The -external appearance of this monster gives no clue to his character. -From personal acquaintance with men of this class in England I -should have said, that, on the average, they were well-meaning, -harmless, good-natured men; not always of the widest of views, -or shrewdest intelligence, but with the best intentions, anxious -in bad times to help their tenants, and in good times to improve -their property. Even your prophet Adam Smith appears to have been -deceived by them.[63] Again, appearances are deceptive; for, to -my inexperienced eye, there seemed to be a large amount of kindly -sympathy between tenant and landlord. - -I am unable to speak from personal experience respecting the same -classes in Ireland; but all novels and tales of Irish life, which -should reflect, with some degree of truth, the general aspect of -things, agree in describing scenes, probably founded on facts, -from which one would imagine that, before the present agitation -and enactments, there appeared to exist much kindly feeling and -sympathy between the peasantry and the “Masther,” who, with all his -faults, is represented as a generous, rollicking, devil-may-care -sort of fellow,[64] quite opposed to the grasping, grinding -miscreant whom your friends denounce; of course, there were -exceptions. - -Mr. A. M. Sullivan seems also to have been mistaken when he says:-- - - “The conduct of the Irish landlords throughout the famine period - has been variously described, and has, I believe, been generally - condemned. I consider the censure visited on them too sweeping. - I hold it to be in some respects _cruelly unjust_.... It is - impossible to contest authentic cases of brutal heartlessness - here and there; but granting all that has to be entered on the - dark debtor side, the overwhelming balance is the other way. The - bulk of the resident Irish landlords manfully did their best in - that dread hour. If they did too little compared with what the - landlord class in England would have done in a similar case, it - was because little was in their power.... They were heritors - of estates heavily overweighted with the debts of a bygone - generation.... To these landowners the failure of one year’s - rental receipts meant mortgage, foreclosure, and hopeless ruin. - Yet cases might be named by the score in which men _scorned to - avert_, by pressure on their suffering tenancy, _the fate they - saw impending over them_. They went down with the ship. - - “No adequate tribute has ever been paid to the memory of those - Irish landlords, and they were men of every party and creed, who - perished martyrs to duty, in that awful time.”[65] - -It is wonderful how, at such an awful time, the Irish landlord -should have continued to mask his true character. - -Still I am rather puzzled. - -I quite admit that the Irish landlord is wrong in rack-renting his -tenant to the extent of grinding out of him one-third of the amount -that is cheerfully paid by tenants in _protectionist_ countries. - -I admit that he should not have tried in a _Free Trade country_ to -have extorted more than one-tenth of the rent paid by protectionist -tenants. Nay, I will go further. I don’t think that a tenant in -Free Trade Ireland would farm to a profit even if he had the land -_rent-free_. I admit also that it was selfish of the landlord to -allow the question of his own pauperism to weigh in the question of -rent. - -Still, after making due allowance for all these faults, I cannot -quite understand how his guilt is sufficiently proven to -warrant his continued persecution and gradual extermination, by -enactment after enactment for his ruin, should he chance to escape -assassination. A snake or a rat could not be hunted down with -greater venom. I must say that, in spite of his crimes, he is an -object of pity. - -Perhaps an analysis of his villainy may help me to understand the -heinousness of his crime; let us apply, therefore, to the political -economist for the character of the rent, the instrument with which -he commits his crime--what does he say?[66] - - “Rent does not affect the price of agricultural produce.”[67] - - “Whoever does pay rent gets back its full value in extra - advantage, and the rent which he pays does not place him in - a worse position than, but only in the same position as, his - fellow-producer who pays no rent, but whose instrument is one of - inferior efficiency.”[68] - - “Rent is reached by bargaining between the landlord and tenant; - bargaining founded on the practical elements existing in the - business. Profit must satisfy the tenant, or he will not take the - farm; and on the other hand, if he claim an unduly low rent, he - will find a rival competitor stepping into the farm house.... The - position of an in-coming tenant is that of a man who is buying a - business for sale (for whether he purchases the farm outright in - order to cultivate it, or hires it, makes no difference in the - nature of the transaction). He is buying a specific business in - a given locality, as any man might do in a manufacturing town, - and his motive is _profit_. This consideration governs the whole - of the negotiation between the landowner and himself ... upon - the terms of an annual payment of the means of _profit_ which he - seeks to acquire.”[69] - -Yes! This appears to me to be just and business-like; the tenant -hires the land for the profit he expects to get out of it, and his -rent is a simple debt. Proceed:-- - - “To refuse to pay debt violently is to _steal_, and to permit - stealing is not only to dissolve, but to demoralize, society.”[70] - - “When a portion of wealth passes out of the hands of him who has - acquired it, without his consent, and without compensation, to - him who has not created it ... plunder is perpetrated.”[71] - - “Law is common force organized to prevent injustice.”[71] - - “If the law itself performs the action it ought to repress, - plunder is still perpetrated under aggravated circumstances.”[71] - - “To place the position itself of a landlord in an invidious - light, as a man who exacts from the labours of others that for - which he has neither toiled nor spun, is a most unwarrantable - process of argumentation.”[70] - - “It would be impossible to introduce into society a greater - change and a greater evil than this:--the conversion of law into - an instrument of plunder.”[71] - -Yes, yes! All this appears to me to be just and sensible! but -pardon me, I am a little obtuse. I cannot yet see that the -landlord’s guilt is proven. Let us recapitulate:-- - -Rent does not raise the price of corn! The tenant gets value for -his rent! He enters into a business contract for profit! The rent -is a simple debt. To refuse it, is to steal! To assist legally at -this refusal, is to be an accomplice in the theft! In this case -Government is the accomplice, and the Government is a plunderer -under aggravated circumstances! Moreover, it not only plunders, -but demoralizes society. Mr. Gladstone represents Government. -Messrs. Bright, Parnell, Davitt and Co. assist in this legalized -and illegal plunder; thus demoralizing the society. The property -of the landlord passes to another without his consent and without -compensation! Messrs. Gladstone and Co. use that which Professor -Bonamy Price terms a most “unwarrantable process of argumentation.” - -Stop! Stop!! for goodness’ sake!!! My brain is getting confused; in -my innocence, had I not been gravely assured that they were angels -of light, patriots, philanthropists,[72] I should have mistaken -Messrs. Gladstone, Bright, Parnell, Davitt, and Co. for the real -criminals. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[63] Adam Smith, in speaking of the class of merchants and -manufacturers, says:--“Their superiority over the country gentleman -is not so much in their knowledge of the _public interest_ as in -their having a better knowledge of _their own interest_ than he has -of his. It is by this superior knowledge of their own interest that -they have frequently imposed upon _his generosity_ and persuaded -him to give up his own interest and that of the public from a very -simple but honest conviction that their interest, and not his, was -the interest of the people.” (Wealth of Nations, Bk. I. Chap. XI.) - -How true in the case of Free Trade! - -[64] The landlordism of the days before Famine (1847) never -“recovered its strength or its primitive ways. For the landlord, -there came of the Famine the Encumbered Estates Court. For the -small farmer and tenant class there floated up the American -Emigrant ships.” (‘History of Our Own Times,’ Justin Macarthy.) - -[65] New Ireland, by A. M. Sullivan, p. 133. - -[66] Adam Smith contradicts himself about rent--in one set of -passages he says it is the _cause_, and in another the _effect_, of -prices. - -[67] Macleod’s Economics, p. 117. - -[68] Political Economy, by J. S. Mill, Bk. II. Chap. XVI. - -[69] Profr. Bonamy Price. - -[70] Profr. Bonamy Price. - -[71] Political Economy, Bastiat. - -[72] “Legal plunder has two roots. One of them is in human egotism, -the other is in false philanthropy.” (Political Economy, Bastiat.) - - - - -CHAPTER XIX. - -ODIMUS QUOS LÆSIMUS. - - -Your friend, John Bright, with his usual disregard for accuracy, -describes the large landlord as the “squanderer and absorber of -national wealth,” but seeing that the total rent of land in Great -Britain and Ireland is less than 5 per cent. of the whole national -income,[73] and that of this less than one-seventh is in the hands -of large landowners, it would require a more able statesman than -Mr. Bright to show how he can squander that, of which such a very -small proportion passes through his lands. - -No? friend Bright. You and your fellow free-traders are the real -squanderers of national wealth, and you seek to shift the blame -from your own shoulders, by dishonestly laying it on those of the -landowner. I command to your perusal the graphic description of a -large landowner--the Duke of Argyle--who states that, in Trylee, by -feeding the tenantry in bad times, by assisting some to emigrate, -by introducing new methods of cultivation, by expenditure of -capital in improvements, by consolidating small holdings when too -narrow for subsistence, he has raised a community, from the lowest -state of poverty and degradation, to one of lucrative industry and -prosperity. - -The prosperity these tenants enjoy is due to the beneficial and -regulative power of the landlord as a capitalist. The greater -the wealth of the landlord, the greater is his beneficial and -regulative power. There were thousands of landowners who acted up -to the limits of their power in this way, until you, friend Bright, -ruined them and deprived them of the power of helping their tenants. - -No, doubt, there are bad landlords, as there are bad men in all -classes, but the interests of the landowner and those of the tenant -are inseparably bound together; and the landlord is shrewd enough -to see that it is to his own interest to improve the property if he -can afford to do so. - -The old classic, with his insight into human nature, in _odimus -quos læsimus_, shows that human nature has not altered, and it does -not surprise me that you should hold up to execration the class you -have so cruelly injured. - -You, my Free-trading Fanatic, have (thanks to Mill’s unfortunate -sophisms and your leaders’ persistent misrepresentations) such a -very hazy view about landowner’s rights and duties, that I think a -few words on the subject may clear the atmosphere. - - (1.) Landed property is the capital of the landlord. - - (2.) Interest on capital is fair, reasonable, and consistent with - general good. - - (3.) Rent is interest on the capital of the landlord. - - (4.) The landlord may sell[74] his land, invest the proceeds in - any other way, and thus get interest on his capital. - - (5.) The tenant can get rid of rent, either:-- - - (a) by borrowing money to buy land, in which case he has to pay - interest on the loan; - - (b) by saving sufficient money to purchase land, in which case - he might, instead of purchasing, invest the money, so that its - interest would pay the rent. - - (6.) In any case the whole question of rent resolves itself into - a question of capital, and interest thereon. - - (7.) Law, from time immemorial, has recognised the right of - property in land. - - (8.) In most cases the owner has paid hard cash both for the land - and for the improvements of it. - - (9.) Land is therefore actual capital just as much as money, - coal, iron, cattle, or any other disposable commodity. - -It is absurd, therefore, to say, that a man possessing capital in -land may not act in the same way as the owner of any other form of -capital. (Of course he has his moral obligations, but those are -applicable to the possession of any other form of capital.) If -the tenant desires capital, he must work for it, or obtain it in -some legal manner. If he get it in any other way, it is theft; and -any legislation that transfers the capital of the landlord to the -tenant without due compensation, is legalized theft. - -As regards absentee landlords, I admit it is desirable, on many -grounds--on the ground of his own personal interest--to put it on -the lowest ground, that he should not be absent; but if the life -of the landlord and his family be at stake, is he to be blamed if -he declines to take the risk of being boycotted or shot? You argue -that _he does nothing for his money which he draws, and spends away -from the place in which it has been produced_, thus impoverishing -the district. - -Is he different in this respect from the capitalist who invests -money in colonial or foreign funds, who does nothing for his money, -and spends it away from the country in which it is produced? Is -he different in this respect from the London banker, who lends -money to the manufacturer in the provinces, or abroad? He does -nothing for his money, but spends it away from the locality in -which it has been produced. Would you argue on this ground, that -the railway shareholder, the foreign bondholder, the London banker -ought, in equity, to receive no interest on their money, and -should be held up to public execration? If you place any value on -the laws of political economy, which you are so fond of quoting, -my Fanatical Friend, drop your absurd arguments about landlords. -Land is a commodity to be bought, sold, improved by the capital -of the landlord, and if you treat it otherwise, you violate every -principle of sound political economy. - -Admitting that land is capital, and the landlord is the capitalist, -what does Political Economy say?-- - - “If a man has not wealth himself, but only his labour to sell, - what is most to his advantage? Why, of course, that there should - be as many rich men as possible to compete for his labour.... - Nothing can be more fatal than the _cry against capital_ so often - unthinkingly uttered.... It would be impossible to conceive - a _greater benefactor to his country_ than the one who would - permanently reconcile the interests of masters and workmen, and - _put an end to the internecine wars of capital and labour_.”[75] - -Verily! Friend Bright, the cry against the landlord is a “_cry -against capital unthinkingly uttered_.” Verily thou encouragest the -“_internecine wars of capital and labour_.” Verily thou art the -reverse of a benefactor to thy country. - -The verdict of Political Economy condemns thee!! - -FOOTNOTES: - -[73] - - Total national income £1,247,000,000 - Total rent for land 58,000,000 (Mulhall, p. 7.) - Percentage of rent to total income, 4⅔ per cent. - - No. Acres. Average acres per - landowner. - Large Landowners 34 6,211,000 183,000 - Medium ditto 841 3,156,000 3,760 - Small ditto 179,649 60,912,000 330 - ------- ---------- ------- - Total 180,524 70,279,000 390 (Mulhall’s Statistics, - p. 266.) - -The acreage of large and medium landowners is, therefore, less than -one-seventh of the total. - -[74] Or _could_ have sold it, until the iniquitous Land Bill was -passed. For my own part, I would not, under any consideration, -risk money in the investment of land under British rule, which has -proved itself capable of legalizing plunder and breach of contract. - -[75] Macleod’s Economics, pp. 138-39. - - - - -CHAPTER XX. - -PROSPEROUS ADVERSITY. - - -One conclusion at which the Commission of 1882 arrived was, that -the agricultural labourers were “never in a better position.” -When, however, we analyze the evidence on which that conclusion -was based, the case wears a very different aspect. The evidence -of landlords, agents, and factors,--of those who have to pay the -wages out of their struggle to make both ends meet,--is to the -effect that the labourer is well enough off; but the evidence of -the labourer himself--the recipient--gives rather a different -version of the case. It is true that wages are higher than they -were formerly: this naturally must follow the increase of wages in -manufacturing districts; but the evidence of the labourer shows -that these wages are insufficient to keep a family, or provide -for bodily wants, to say nothing of sickness or loss of work; -perquisites are being gradually taken away, and no compensation -given; families are suffering severely; physique degenerating for -want of sufficient food; articles of diet, such as cheese, bacon, -eggs are much more expensive than before; the supply of milk, and -especially of skimmed milk, formerly so plentiful and obtainable at -nominal prices, is now at prohibitory rates. Water, with a little -bread, sweetened with sugar, forms the general substitute for -wholesome milk in rearing children. - -The recent census shows that although the population of England has -increased 14½ per cent., there has been, in the purely agricultural -districts, a decrease in the population,--a sure sign of want of -prosperity. In all parts farms are badly cultivated, in a foul -condition, or out of cultivation altogether; neither the landlord -nor the tenant, have sufficient capital to make improvements.[76] -A clergyman writes from a rural parish:-- - - “I fear nothing will lessen the evil, the land of England will - gradually go out of cultivation, and our villages will become - impoverished and empty till the country is all urban, and the - population effeminate and demoralized. Then may follow a great - war, and disaster will ensue.” - -Emerson warned England of the fact that her-- - - “Robust rural Saxon population had degenerated, in the mills, to - the Leicester stockinger, and to the imbecile Manchester spinner - far on the way to be spiders and needles.”[77] - -Why did a handful of undisciplined Boers beat our soldiers in the -Transvaal? Simply because they are physically a finer set of men -than our 5 ft. 3 in. army, rapidly degenerating for want of a -healthy agricultural population for recruiting purposes. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[76] See _Fortnightly Review_, November, 1883. - -[77] Emerson--Traits, Chap. X. - - - - -CHAPTER XXI. - -IRELAND UNDER THE WHEELS. - - -I repeat the assertion that Ireland has been _ruined by Free Trade_. - -Let us take a brief retrospect of Ireland before the introduction -of Free Trade. - -At the earlier part of this century Ireland showed great -capabilities for improvement and national prosperity, and (in -spite of the somewhat selfish policy of England, which did not -sufficiently protect from herself the industries of Ireland) she -gave undoubted signs of a steady but rapid advance in prosperity. -Between the years 1825 and 1835, her exports and imports were more -than doubled. - -Her population between 1821 and 1841 increased from 6,802,000 to -8,196,000. That this population was not too great for the land, -is proved by the fact that the whole resources of land were not -utilized; moreover, her population was far smaller per square mile -than the population of Holland or Belgium[78]--countries that enjoy -a high state of prosperity. In the years of 1826 and 1835, the -ratio of exports was as follows:-- - - 1826. 1835. - Oxen 1·0 to 1·7 - Pigs 1·0 ” 5·1 - Sheep 1·0 ” 2·0 - Butter 1·0 ” 1·7 - Wheat, oats, &c. 1·0 ” 1·9 - -The county cess rose between 1825 and 1838 in the ratio of 1·0 to -1·5. - -The transfers of invested funds from England to Ireland between -the years 1832 and 1841 exceeded those from Ireland, to England by -£1,840,000. - -Deposits in savings banks, in 1831 and 1841, were relatively in the -proportion of 1·00 to 2·24. Crime and offences were diminishing. - -The Weavers Commission in 1840 reported as follows:-- - - “The comparative prosperity enjoyed by that part of Ireland where - tranquillity ordinarily prevails.--such as the Counties Down, - Antrim, and Derry,--testify the _capabilities of Ireland to work - out her own regeneration_, when freed of the disturbing causes - which have so long impeded her progress in civilization and - improvement. - - “We find there a population hardy, healthy, and _employed_; - capital fast flowing into this district; new sources of - employment daily developing themselves; and people well disposed - alike to Government and to the institutions of the country, and - not distrustful and jealous of their superiors.” - -In another place the Commission reports that the manufacturing -industries of Ireland were doing well, and that-- - - “The woollen trade in Ireland is in a more sound and healthy - condition than it has ever been, and its yearly advance may be - confidently expected.” - -There was an abundant supply of land for the increasing -population--1,200,000 acres of land being capable of cultivation, -besides upwards of 1,000,000 acres of bog land capable of -reclamation at a cost of little more than £1 per acre. - -With such capabilities for advancement, nothing short of the most -extraordinary prosperity ought to have followed the general advance -of wealth in the civilised world, caused by the improvements in -arts, sciences, machinery, steam, and electricity. But what do we -find after thirty-six years of the curse of Free Trade? Land out -of cultivation; farms abandoned; manufacturing industries extinct; -population decreasing by more than three millions[79] in forty -years. Anarchy, murder, assassination rampant. No doubt the Famine -of 1847 and the subsequent emigration caused a large decrease in -the population of Ireland, but disciples of the Malthusian theory -would have told you that this was an element of prosperity. I -do not hold this view, but any protectionist country would have -rapidly recovered the blow, whilst Free Trade Ireland has since -steadily decreased in population, and is sinking lower and lower -into the Slough of Despond. - -You argue that “_rack-renting is the cause_.” Nonsense! The average -rent of land in Ireland is only one-third of that which is paid -in prosperous protectionist countries;[80] any rent at all will -soon be a rack-rent. There is plenty of land in Ireland to be -had at nominal rents, land that has gone out of cultivation; but -Free Trade has taken away the possibility of its cultivation at -a profit, even if it were rent-free. You urge absenteeism as the -cause; it is the _effect_, not the cause. Moreover, only about -one-sixth of the land is owned by absentees. - -Ireland is like a child crying out in the pangs of starvation, -and you give it opiates in the shape of mischievous enactments -(such as the Encumbered Estates Act and the Land Act) which -only augment the evil. To use the words of a writer of the day: -“_Your Statesmanship knows no policy but that of coercion to-day, -concession to-morrow_.” Ireland cries in the pangs of hunger, you -alternately beat and coax it. - -You propose wholesale emigration, which may be compared to bleeding -the patient to death in order to cure it of starvation. - -_Fools!!_ Can’t you see it is dying of hunger? All it wants is -food, work, and employment of its labour,--development of its -resources. - -Take away your iniquitous policy of Free Trade,--abolish your -unjust enactments, your legalised instruments of confiscation -and plunder,--abandon your insane encouragement of internecine -war between capital and labour,--desist from your suicidal -encouragement to agitation and class antagonism,--encourage -capitalists,--protect industries,--employ labour,--and you will -soon find Ireland prosperous, contented, and loyal. - -The cry for Home Rule is a protest against your misrule. - -If you persist in your insane policy, Ireland must inevitably be -depopulated either by starvation or by wholesale emigration.[81] - -FOOTNOTES: - -[78] - - Population in Ireland in 1841 256 per square mile. - ” ” 1880 161 ” ” - ” Belgium in ” 480 ” ” - ” Holland in ” 312 ” ” - -[79] - - Population of Ireland in 1841 8,196,597 - ” ” ” 1881 5,174,836 - --------- - Decrease 3,021,761 - --------- - -[80] - - _s._ _d._ - Average rent in Ireland 10 3 per acre. - ” ” United Kingdom 19 9 ” ” - ” ” France 30 0 ” ” - ” ” Belgium 30 0 ” ” - ” ” Holland 30 0 ” ” - - -[81] I cannot think that, in a country where four millions of acres -of valuable land are calling out pitifully for labour,--where -thousands of families of agricultural habits and of laborious -instincts are pleading for work and hungering for the tenancy -of deserted farms,--where labour is becoming scarce,--where the -population is deteriorating in quality by the continued exportation -of its strongest and most promising elements; that, in such a -country, and under such circumstances, Englishmen should resign -themselves to accept the continued banishment of the flower of the -population to a foreign land as the best and only means of meeting -this great national difficulty. (E. Hart, _Fortnightly Review_, -1883.) - - - - -CHAPTER XXII. - -THE FINISHING STROKE. - - -I have not the slightest doubt, that you will tell me that Ireland -is _not ruined_, that she was never before in so satisfactory -condition, and that you will bring forward ingeniously manipulated -statistics to prove your case. - -You will tell me that the farms are larger,--that the farm stock is -richer,--that the peasant proprietors who were a failure (contrary -to Mr. Mill’s theories) are disappearing, and holdings are more -consolidated; but, my Fanatical Friend, if Ireland be not ruined, -what is the meaning of this frantic legislation, which many of its -supporters can only excuse on the ground of expediency, not equity? -How is it that, during the last thirty-two years, nearly 1,500,000 -acres have gone out of tillage and 677,000 acres have gone out of -farming altogether? - -How is it that, during the last nine years, there has been a -decrease of 1,000,000[82] live stock in Ireland, or nearly -one-ninth of the total? - -How is it that, during one year, 114,327[83] acres of land in -Ireland have gone out of farming, and that with a decreasing -population, and that in spite of a better crop in 1880 than in 1879? - -What is the meaning of the increase of 18,000 paupers and 115,000 -emigrants in Ireland within the last three years? - -Mill would have told you that the extinction of peasant proprietors -was a sign of retrogression; whether that be so or not, the -crushing out of weaker industries is decidedly not a sign of -prosperity. - -But now tell me, what would you think of the prosperity of an -undertaking in which the original shareholders had been ruined and -sold their shares at a greatly depreciated price; and this second -set of shareholders again being ruined, again sold their shares -at a still further depreciated price, whilst the third set of -shareholders, obtaining their shares at this enormously depreciated -value, were able to make some little show of temporary prosperity. -Would any business-man call that a prosperous undertaking? - -Now this is precisely the case with Ireland. Under the Encumbered -Estates Act, thousands were reduced to beggary,[84] and the new -landlords were able to make a temporary show of prosperity on the -ruin of their predecessors. When this was over, the still more -iniquitous Land Act of 1881 was passed to complete the ruin of -landlords. - -Mr. FitzGerald, of Dublin, states that there are more than 600 -cases before the Court, and that the Judges have, from time -to time, adjourned the sales rather than consent to a “wanton -sacrifice of property, for which there are no bidders.” - -Land, which one of the Judges declared to be worth thirty years’ -purchase, was sold for eleven years’ purchase, and the unfortunate -owner was told “You must submit to the inevitable.” - -But this is not all; the Land Act of 1880 has put a stop to all -possible improvement of land, for no reasonable man will expose -himself to the risk of losing his money on improvements, because, -notwithstanding any contract he may have made with his tenant, -the Land Commission may step in and legalize a breach of the -contract.[85] - -The typical landlords in Ireland, whom you hold up for public -execration, are not rich noblemen; it would be better for Ireland -if they were, but they are mostly men of the middle class, -struggling hard to escape the pauperism your iniquitous legislation -has brought upon them. - -Mr. Gladstone on one occasion said:-- - - “If Great Britain has become a place where the majority can - oppress the minority in this way, it has come to be a place of - which I should say that the sooner we get out of it the better.” - -I repeat Mr. Gladstone’s sentiment with greater emphasis. If Mr. -Gladstone, with his majority, are allowed to oppress the minority -in this way, England is no longer the place for honest and loyal -subjects. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[82] Total livestock in Ireland in 1874, 9,665,700; in 1883, -8,667,000. - -[83] Decrease of acreage farmed in 1882-- - - Cereal crops 20,356 acres. - Green crops 21,072 ” - Flax 33,643 ” - Meadow and Clover 39,256 ” - ------- - Total decrease 114,327 acres. - -_Statesman’s Yearbook_, 1883. - -[84] “It forced properties to a general auction, to be sold for -whatever they would bring, at a time when _legislation had imposed -new and unheard of burdens on landed property_. At a time of -unprecedented depression in the value of land, it called a general -auction of Irish estates. _English History records no more violent -interference with vested interests_ than the provision by which -this Statute forced the sale of a large portion of the landed -property at a time no prudent man would have set up an acre to be -sold by public competition.” (Tenant Right in Ireland, Butt, p. -881.) - -“Estates that would have been well able to pay twice the -encumbrances laid upon them, if property was at all near its -ordinary level of value, now failed to realize enough to meet the -mortgages, and the proprietors were devoted to ruin.... The tenants -complain that they have gained little and lost much in the change -from the old masters to the new.” (‘New Ireland,’ A. M. Sullivan, -p. 88.) - -At the sale of Lord Gort’s property thirteen years’ purchase was -the maximum; many lots were sold at five. Some portions of the -property since resold have fetched twenty-five and twenty-seven -years’ purchase. - -Excessive rack-renting has been attributed to sales under this -iniquitous Encumbered Estates Act. - -“In those sales persons buy small portions of property; of course -their interest is to get as large a return as they can, and they -think of nothing but an increase of rent.” (_Minutes of Evidence, -Lords Committee_, 1867.) - -[85] See Speech of Mr. W. H. Smith, M.P., Nov. 19, 1883, commencing -“No country on the face of the earth has been so misunderstood and -misgoverned as Ireland, &c.” - - - - -CHAPTER XXIII. - -LITTLE GREATNESS. - - -M. Merimée writes:-- - - “That which strikes me most in the English politics of our own - times, is its _littleness_. Everything in England is done with - a view to keep place” (conserver les portefeuilles), “and they - commit all possible faults in order to keep twenty or thirty - doubtful votes. They only disquiet themselves about the present, - and think nothing of the future.” - -Unfortunately the _littleness_ to which M. Merimée refers is not -always attended with _little results_. - -In his anxiety to secure the Irish votes, Mr. Gladstone, by his -notorious Midlothian speeches, directly encouraged Irish demagogues -to agitate. - -His advice was followed, and the result has been, as every one -expected, anarchy, murder, and assassination.[86] - -Froude, the historian, writing in 1880, clearly predicated it:-- - - “Mr. Gladstone will not willingly allow himself to be foiled. - Yet, if he perseveres, he may bring on the struggle so long - foretold between democracy and the rights of property, and in a - great empire like ours, with such enormous interests at stake, it - is not difficult to foresee on which side the victory will be. - However this may be, the apple of discord has been flung into - Ireland, there to spread its poison.”[87] - -Let us charitably hope that the results of Mr. Gladstone’s advice -to _agitate_ were not anticipated by him; but a man who will -scatter sparks in a powder magazine cannot be held altogether -guiltless of the results of the explosion that may ensue, whether -he did it in ignorant folly or with culpable intent. Froude, -alluding to the Midlothian speeches, says:--“No statesman who -understood Ireland would ever have spoken of the ‘_Upas Tree_,’ -unless he was prepared to sanction a revolution.” Mr. Gladstone -must, therefore, be held morally responsible for the blood -guiltiness--for the atrocious crimes and murders that have -disgraced Ireland; he has sown the wind, and he has reaped the -whirlwind; he has sown agitation, and reaped dynamite; he has not -only caused anarchy by his advice, but has encouraged it by the -weakness of his policy.[88] - -An admirer of Mr. Gladstone writes in the _Westminster Review_, -describing Mr. Parnell and his associates as “_indispensable_ -to the _success of Mr. Gladstone_!!” A fitting associate indeed -in a work of legalized plunder is Mr. Parnell, whom Mr. Forster -denounced in the House of Commons as the aider and abetter of -assassins and murderers; who dared not stand up and answer the -scathing denunciation, but slunk off to America like a whipped -hound. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[86] Lord Beaconsfield, with great foresight, vainly warned us of -the dangerous state of Ireland. - -[87] _Nineteenth Century_, September, 1880. - -[88] An admirer of Mr. Gladstone naively writes in the _Westminster -Review_: “During the six years of Tory repression and Tory refusal -of remedial measures, they were as mild as doves and comparatively -silent in Parliament, because they knew that the Tories would -strike with despotic severity and with exceptional laws; but from -the moment the magnanimous and friendly Gladstone came into power -... they excited the excitable Irish people to such a degree -against this friendly Government, that there were perpetrated a -long run of cruel and brutal outrages, &c.” (_Westminster Review_, -October, 1883.) - - - - -CHAPTER XXIV. - -BLUNDER AND PLUNDER. - - -I have already shown the utter failure of the prophecies of your -Free Trade Prophets, now let me show the failure of the prophecies -of your Right Hon’ble Friends with regard to the Land Act of 1881, -and ask if such lamentable want of discrimination is fitting in one -pretending to be an administrator. - - _PROPHECY._ _FULFILMENT._ - - Mr. Gladstone, in 1880, scouted Judge Flannagan, 1883:-- - the warning that there would “The rents are so well secured - be no bidders for land, after the that the property ought to bring - Land Act had been passed, and thirty years’ purchase.” - he fixed the value of land at - twenty-seven years’ purchase. The owner:-- - “Three years ago I could have - sold the property for £1,775.” - - Judge Flannagan:-- - “You must submit to the - inevitable. Is there no advance - on eleven years’ purchase? This - is the first estate I have had - to sell on which the rents have - been fixed by the Land Commission. - I hoped to get twenty-five or - thirty years’ purchase.” The land - was sold for £875; according to - Judge Flannagan’s valuation it - was worth £2,386. - Mr. Forster:-- - “My firm belief is, that no In 1840, the rents of Mr. - damage can be proved. On the Usborn’s estate in Kerry - other hand, if the landlord were amounted to £2,376 _punctually - compensated, you would compensate paid_. The nearest railway - him for conferring upon him station was then 150 miles - a benefit.” distant. There is now a railway - station on the property, the - landlord has spent money on its - improvement, and the “fair” (?) - rent now fixed by the Land - Commission is £1,893. - - Irish newspapers teem with - Lord Selborne, 1880:-- similar instances. - “I deny that it will diminish, - in any degree whatever, the rights Judge Ormsby, 1883. - of the landlord, or the value of - the interest he possesses. I should The Judge then asked if there - never agree to such a proposal.” was any advance on £2,200. - Hansard, cclxiv. 252. Offers were given until £2,450 - was reached. Mr. O’Meara, on - behalf of the estate, objected to - the sale. In Chancery proceedings - connected with the estate it - was mentioned that £4,500 had - been offered for this lot, and - refused. - - Lord Carlingford, 1880:-- Judge Ormsby:-- - “I maintain that the provisions “No one could foresee what - of the Bill will cause the would subsequently occur to - landlord no money-loss whatever.” depreciate the value of the - property. _I cannot adjourn for - a third time._” - - Mr. Gladstone, 1880:-- Mr. Fitzgerald, of Dublin, - “I certainly would be very slow states, that the Judges have - to deny that when confiscation adjourned sales from time to time - could be proved compensation rather than consent to a wanton - ought to follow.” sacrifice of property, and there - are “600 estates in the Court - waiting for sale, and for these - hardly a bidder.” - -Again I ask your verdict of guilty or not guilty? Are your Right -Hon’ble Rulers either incompetent or dishonest, to have made such -prophesies? It was not for want of warning that they have blundered -so hopelessly. The whole country rang with warnings[89] that the -measure was one of confiscation. Even Mr. Parnell predicted it, -telling his hearers that there would be no buyers, and the tenants -would have “an opportunity of purchasing their holdings under the -Bright Clause.” - -The whole measure is one which commenced by breach of faith and -ended in confiscation.[90] - -Mr. James Lowther, M.P., has been blamed for saying, that “loyal -subjects have been deliberately plundered by the Land Act.” - -Let us see how the political economist defines “plunder:” - - “When a portion of wealth passes out of the hands of him who has - acquired it without his consent and without compensation, whether - by force or artifice, to him who has not created it, I say that - property is violated, that _plunder is perpetrated_.... If the - law itself performs the action it ought to repress, I say that - _plunder is still perpetrated_, and even in a social point of - view, _under aggravated circumstances_.”[91] - -Now tell me, my Friend, how do the instances I have given above -differ from legalized PLUNDER as defined by Bastiat? - -When Judge Flannagan says, “you must submit to the inevitable,” he -says, in fact, “_you must submit to be legally plundered_.” - -When Judge Ormsby says “no one could foresee what would occur,” he -says in fact, “no one could foresee that the law would become an -instrument of _plunder_.” - -No one could foresee it? Why, every one with common sense could -foresee it--every one but those wilfully blind. An admirer of Mr. -Gladstone naively writes in the _Westminster Review_ respecting the -Land Act:-- - - “The people of the United States would not have tolerated such - an interference with the laws of contract as it involved. No - member of Congress could be found who would propose anything so - _indefensible_ from the American point of view.”[92] - -And he might have added _indefensible from every point of view_. - -Froude, the historian, says: - - “It was England which introduced landowning and landlords into - Ireland as an expedient for ruling it. If we choose now to remove - the landlords or divide their property with their tenants, we - must do it from our own resources; we have no right to make the - landlords pay for the vagaries of our own idolatries.”[93] - -FOOTNOTES: - -[89] See Appendix No. II, in which is a resumé of the unheeded -warnings, drawn up in 1880, from the arguments brought against -the Bill. Any one not blinded by party prejudices, who read those -arguments, could not fail to see that the Bill must be a measure of -confiscation; and the subsequent action of the Bill shows that the -forebodings have been verified. - -[90] Froude, the historian, writing in 1880, says:--“The policy has -been to make the property of the landlords worthless, and their -possession so dangerous, that they would find their estates not -worth keeping.” - -[91] ‘Political Economy’--Bastiat. - -[92] _Westminster Review_, October, 1883. - -[93] _Nineteenth Century_, September, 1880. - - - - -CHAPTER XXV. - -DEAR CHEAP FOOD. - - -Don’t you see, what a fallacy underlies your cry for cheap bread. -Does the consumer eat nothing but bread? Is everything to be -sacrificed to the consumer? Don’t you see that cheap bread is not -all that is necessary to prosperity. - -Have not you seen that, during one year of greatest prosperity, the -price of wheat rose to 58_s._ 8_d._ per quarter, far higher than -it was in ten years, 1831-40, before the repeal of the Corn Laws, -whilst during the present time of depression it is down to 41_s._ -5_d._, and that, in 1835, before the repeal of the Corn Laws, it -was down to 39_s._ 4_d._[94] - -Cannot you see that cheap food is dear if the causes of its -cheapness deprive the labourer of that employment which enables him -to purchase it? Cannot you see that, although a healthy competition -stimulates production, a crushing competition in the end causes the -rise of prices by the lessening of production? - -Do you not know that, in the opinion of many political economists, -dear food has been considered a cause of progress and prosperity -to a nation, by stimulating its inhabitants to exertion and -thrift,--notably so in the case of Holland? - -Do you not know that, in many countries, where food is cheap, the -natives are degraded and wretched? - -Cannot you see that the revenue of the country must be raised in -some manner, and if a tax be put on corn, it may be _taken off -some other article_ of consumption, almost equally important? and -therefore that, if the substitute be judiciously chosen, the tax on -it comes back to the consumer in some shape or other? Do you not -know that an import tax does not always fall on the consumer?[95] - -Cannot you see that the want of a _light_ tax on corn (I do not -defend the Corn Laws as they existed, for they imposed an excessive -tax) has ruined agriculture, and you are preparing for yourself a -serious difficulty? In case of war with any combination of strong -maritime powers[96] wheat will rise to famine rates. - -Don’t you see that if we transferred a small portion of the tax on -tea, sugar, coffee, &c., giving a preference to our dependencies -in the case of wheat, we should not only encourage our home, -but also our colonial, industries, which are trembling in the -balance between existence and nonexistence for want of some slight -fostering care. - -You are like Nero fiddling while Rome was burning. You are fiddling -with your Free Trade, whilst England is going to ruin. - -How can it be otherwise? Unlimited foreign competition must -necessarily end in disaster. Don’t you see that you are -handicapping your people in every way. They have higher wages than -other nations. You tax them more heavily, and you pass enactments -to prevent their working long hours. You thereby place them at a -disadvantage with people who are thrifty and industrious and are -not restricted in their hours of work. The same amount of money now -buys only half the labour it did forty years ago, this increases -the cost of production. Competition forces your manufacturers to -work only three or four days a week. This again increases it. -Increased leisure gives opportunities for intemperance. This again -has a deteriorating effect on produce. Your best hands emigrate to -prosperous countries not cursed with free trade,--another cause -of deterioration in quality of manufactures. The cheap freights, -almost nominal, place foreign productions in England at prices very -little beyond that at which they can be produced in their native -country. - -The money spent on foreign produce, instead of being spent in -England, is so much capital taken away from this country, helping -foreigners to compete with you. You have, in fact, in Free Trade, -the most ingeniously devised plan of impoverishing the country. -We had a good start, and other countries have been a long time -in catching us up, so that we did not feel their competition at -first, but they are now passing us hand over hand. English pluck, -English capital, and English credit have until now stood the strain -bravely, and the general advance of the wealth of the world has -blinded our eyes to our real danger, but the struggle cannot last -much longer. Capital is draining out to protectionist countries -in all directions, but the amount at stake in our manufactories -is so enormous that the struggle must be continued at any risk. -Credit alone sustains the fabric, and as soon as that is thoroughly -shaken, the collapse will be terrible and sudden. The working -classes, so long as they receive higher wages than before, are -unable to see the danger, but when the collapse comes--and come it -surely will before long--the working classes will be the first to -demand protection. There are symptoms of it already, for Sir Edward -Sullivan has stated:-- - - “Already a number of operatives, far more than is necessary to - turn a general election, have, through their delegates, given in - their adherence to Fair Trade.”[97] - -FOOTNOTES: - -[94] Average price of corn for ten years ending 1845 = 57_s._ 10_d._ - -[95] Taxes on commodities do not always fall on consumers, but -sometimes on producers, and sometimes on the intermediate agent. -When a duty is imposed on a foreign commodity, which the importing -country has facilities for producing at home, in ordinary cases -the duty falls, in the first instance, on the consumer; but when -the duty has the effect of increasing competition, the tendency is -to a reduction in price, and therefore to the ultimate benefit of -the consumers. As the duty equalizes the conditions of production -between the local and foreign producers, it enables an entirely -new class of competitors to enter the field,--namely, the local -producers; and as the circle of competition becomes extended, the -rivalry among producers becomes keener, and prices become lower; -for competition inevitably leads to this when it is genuine and -not a monopoly in disguise, as is often the case. If the duty -fails to increase competition, it goes direct into the treasury as -revenue; if it fails partially as a revenue tax, owing to the local -producer contributing part of the supply, and paying no duty, the -competition between the local and foreign producers will cause a -reduction in price to the consumer, so that the falling off in the -revenue will in some measure be compensated for. If the revenue -from duty fail altogether, owing to the local article taking the -place of the imported and duty-paying article, a three-fold benefit -will be secured. The consumer will gain by a reduction in the price -of commodities; the public will gain by increased employment of -labour and capital; and, lastly, the State will gain by increased -revenue from the additional number of revenue-producing population, -supported by the new industry. (David Syme. _Fortnightly Review_, -April, 1873.) - -So with the English shipping dues, which, as a matter of fact, are -not paid by the merchants or consumers, but by the shipowners. - -In answer to a deputation which waited on the Chancellor of the -Exchequer recently, Mr. Lowe, _adopting the popular view on the -question_, attempted to explain that the shipowners did not pay -the dues out of their own pockets, that they only advanced the -money to the merchant, that the merchant again indemnified himself -by raising the price of goods to the consumer. But it appeared -that in this particular case _Mr. Lowe’s theory did not square -with the facts_, as the deputation, which consisted of the leading -shipowners in England, positively assured him that no such transfer -took place. - -A tax may, under certain conditions, have the very opposite effect -from that which it usually has, for instead of increasing the price -of a commodity it may have the effect of diminishing it. (This has -been the case with cotton in America, as shewn by the evidence -given before the Select Committee of the House of Commons, in -1840.) (_Fortnightly Review_, 1873.) - -[96] Competent authorities state, that the French navy alone will -be far more powerful than that of England, when the ships now in -course of construction have been completed, and the French navy can -be much more concentrated than ours, which must be distributed over -the whole world. - -[97] _The Mail_, Decr. 19th, 1883. - - - - -CHAPTER XXVI. - -THE PAGODA TREE. - - -What has become of the Pagoda tree? Is it a myth? Did it ever exist? - -These are questions which you must have heard over and over again. - -Have you ever tried to answer them? No! - -Well! let me do so. - -The Pagoda tree is _no myth_. It exists, but in a deplorably -dilapidated condition, and bears but little fruit. Your car of -Jugernāth has crushed its roots; your wheels have excoriated its -bark; you have torn down its branches to cremate your victims. -You have denied it water and manure. Its vitality has been sadly -lowered, but it is not _quite_ dead. - -Only smash your detestable car of Jugernāth; send your false -prophets adrift; and devote a little attention to the cultivation -of the Pagoda tree; and it will flourish and bear more fruit than -it has ever borne before. - -Let us drop metaphor a little. - -India has every requisite for the production of unbounded -wealth--for the employment of untold capital. How is it then that, -with all the advantages it possesses, its industries languish and -struggle for bare existence, and in many cases die out altogether? -How is it that, with all its material advantages, it does not -enjoy unbounded prosperity? I have no doubt that you will point -to the increased exports and imports of India, and claim this as -an instance of unbounded prosperity due to Free Trade. I contend -that it is wholly due to extension in railways, improvement in -facilities of transport, and that with these improvements its -prosperity ought to have been enormous. If it be prosperous, why -do we have essays on the Poverty of India?[98] Why do Viceroys -dwell on the subject of its poverty?[99] Why do its industries -languish and die out? - -India has untold wealth, and wonderful natural resources, whether -agricultural, mineral, or industrial, but they are to a great -extent dormant. - -It has coal of an excellent character, and inexhaustible in -quantity; it has fine petroleum, large supplies of timber and -charcoal; it has iron, of a purity that would make an English -iron-master’s mouth water, spread wholesale all over the -country,--in most places to be had by light quarrying or collection -from the surface; it has chrome iron capable of making the -finest Damascus blades; manganiferous ore; splendid hematites in -profusion. It has gold, silver, antimony, tin, copper, plumbago, -lime, kaolin, gypsum, precious stones, asbestos. Soft wheat, -equal to the finest Australian; hard wheat, equal to the finest -kabanka.[100] It has food grains of every description: oilseeds, -tobacco, tea, coffee, cocoa, sugar, spices, lac, dyes, cotton, -jute, hemp, flax, coir, fibres of every description; in fact, -products too numerous to mention. Its inhabitants are frugal, -thrifty, industrious, capable of great physical exertion, docile, -easily taught, skilful in any work requiring delicate manipulation. -Labour is absurdly cheap; the soil for the most part wonderfully -productive, and capable of producing crop after crop without any -symptoms of exhaustion. - -The present yield of wheat is about 26,500,000 quarters, or about -9,500,000 quarters in excess of the total imports of wheat into -England; and in the Punjab alone there is cultivable waste land -sufficient to produce 12,000,000 quarters, besides enormous parts -in Burmah and other parts of India, only requiring irrigation or -population to bring them under the plough.[101] - -England imports annually commodities to the value of about -£148,500,000 under six heads alone,[102] a large portion of which -might be diverted to India by simply adopting a preferential -tariff slightly favorable to her dependencies. Take, for example, -wheat. If England be determined to persist in the endeavour to -ruin its agricultural industry for a political whim, a slight tax -on American and Russian wheat would suffice to turn the whole of -the wheat import trade to India and Australia. Such a tax would, -I believe, tend to lower, rather than raise, the price of wheat, -because India would steadily go in for the production of wheat, -if its calculations were not liable to be disturbed by a slight -fall in the price of wheat in America or Russia, which may throw -back a quantity of wheat on the hands of the Indian producers or -dealers.[103] - -Again, India suffers from a tax which prevents the export of rice -except on a tariff which is sometimes as high as 14½ per cent. on -the value of the rice. This not only handicaps India in its exports -when compared with other countries, but it drives the natives to -grow less remunerative crops of oilseeds for export, and the result -of this is that, when famine arises, there is no surplus food which -might be retained from exports, and thus prevent the painful scenes -of starvation and distress that India has witnessed of late years. -To take off the tax would prevent depletion, for no foreign country -could compete with the demand which failure of crops in any part of -India would inevitably cause. - -There is about £32,000,000 of English capital invested in Indian -manufacturing industries, of which £18,000,000, or more than -one-half, is invested in indigo, tea, coffee, jute, cotton, sugar, -coal and iron industries, and how are these thriving? Everywhere -throughout Bengal you see the ruins of English Indigo factories. - -Coffee and tea are struggling hard for existence. Planters are -ruined, and their estates bought at depreciated rates in times -of depression. This enables the industries to survive with some -show of prosperity in good times. Agricultural industries, such as -coffee or tea, draw off surplus population, and employ them on land -that would otherwise be uncultivated. Coal is doing fairly, but -not nearly so well as it might do if our manufacturing industries -prospered. - -Cotton manufacture sprung up under a protective tariff, and -appeared to be prospering; but selfish Manchester called aloud -for the sacrifice of the industry. The tariff was removed, and -the industry is left to struggle for life, or perish, as it may. -Several capitalists who have embarked capital in cotton manufacture -on the faith of this tariff, have lost their money. Everywhere in -India, you may see evidences of native iron manufacture crushed out -by Free Trade, with nothing but slag heaps remaining to testify -to former prosperity. The splendid native iron being superseded -by cheap worthless iron of English manufacture. Many attempts -have been made by English capitalists to revive, or start, fresh -iron industries, but they have one and all been crushed out -for want of a little fostering protection. The latest attempt -nearly succeeded, but the modest request for a little help was -sternly refused:--What!!! Foster your industry? What sacrilege -to advocate the violation of every principle of Jugernāth!!! -and so the helpless babe was thrown under the relentless wheels -of Jugernāth. There was a crunch,--a faint moan from the ruined -shareholders,--and then all was over. Hurrah for Jugernāth!! Pereat -India!!! - -FOOTNOTES: - -[98] “India is suffering seriously in several ways, and is sinking -in poverty.” (Poverty of India, by Dadabhai Naoreji.) - -[99] “India is, on the whole, a very poor country: the mass of the -population enjoy only a scanty subsistence.” (Lord Lawrence, 1864.) - -“I admit the comparative poverty of this country as compared with -many other countries of the same magnitude and importance, and I am -convinced of the impolicy and injustice of imposing burdens on this -people which may be called crushing or oppressive.” (Lord Mayo, -March, 1871.) - -“It is not too much to say that the very existence of our rule in -India may be gravely imperilled unless the finances of the country -are placed in a more satisfactory position.” (Professor Fawcett, -Feb., 1879.) - -“The first thing to do is to point out well that frequent -iteration, which alone impresses political masses, that India is -of no real use at all to us, that we should be _richer_, stronger, -better, happier without it, that we are cramped, distracted, and -_impoverished_ by it.” (Why keep India? by Grant Allen.) - -[100] Dr. Watson’s Report. - -[101] Government of India Records. Home Agriculture, and Revenue -Department, clx. p. 16. - -[102] - - Cotton 37,300,000 - Silk 2,400,000 - Grain 66,800,000 - Flax 8,700,000 - Sugar 22,400,000 - Tea 10,900,000 - ----------- - 148,500,000 - -[103] “With a more certain market for wheat, it would, in many -districts” (of Australia), “be profitable to bore for or to -store water and open railways or make rivers navigable, and thus -enormously increase the area of profitable wheat production.” (Duke -of Manchester, _Nineteenth Century_, 1881.) - - - - -CHAPTER XXVII. - - I know a maiden fair to see. Take care! - Trust her not, she is fooling thee. Beware!! - - -Fair Trade! Reciprocity! Retaliation! Such are the cries that have -been raised by those who have felt the evils of Free Trade, without -fully realising the mischievous principle involved in it. - -England, _with its dependencies, if properly governed_, might be -independent of foreign nations for its trade, commerce, markets and -productions. - -“Retaliation” is an action at once undignified, inexpedient and -unjust. - -Are we to injure ourselves by the imposition of protective tariffs, -which are mischievous when unnecessary, and to attempt to injure -our neighbour, because he declines to imitate our folly in ruining -ourselves for an economic “ignis fatuus?” - -The only true and statesmanlike policy of a great nation like -England is to pursue the even tenor of her way, governing the -empire with its dependencies _as one vast country_, the interests -of any one portion of which should be considered inseparable from -those of the whole;--protecting jealously every industry; seeking -every possible means of employing the labour and developing the -resources of _all_;--fostering every industry when it needs -fostering, and releasing the fostering care as soon as such care is -seen to be unnecessary; protecting only to the extent that may be -needed to prevent the decay of an existing industry, or to enable -a new industry to spring up; the primary aim being to utilise the -labour and produce of _the whole_, and to ensure a market for the -produce in our own great United Empire. - -With our enormous territory, two-half times as great as that of -America,--with our enormous capabilities and varied productions, we -ought, if governed rightly, to be able to secure this; and holding -such an immense area of territory we should have no want of healthy -competition without _calling_ in foreign nations to compete with us. - -We have within our grasp an imperial policy which would enable -us to outstrip America in a far greater degree than she is now -outstripping us. - -By an _imperial_ policy I do not mean that narrow insular policy -which takes all it can from its dependencies, and gives nothing in -return;--I do not mean that selfish policy which drove America to -separate from us, and which is now disgusting our Colonies, and -forcing them to federation--the first step towards separation. - -I mean a generous enlightened policy, which considers the welfare -and prosperity of each and every dependency identical with its own. - -We want the federation of _union with England_, not the federation -of _separation from her_. But where are we to look for such a -policy, surely not to the littleness described by M. Merimée, which -“_commits all possible faults to keep a few doubtful votes_--the -policy that _disquiets itself about the present, and thinks nothing -of the future_,”--not to the politicians who put party before -nation,--not to the petty caucuses of those economic charlatans who -have impoverished the empire. We want an extension of franchise, -but not _mob franchise_ such as Chamberlain and his crew propose. -We want extension of franchise to India and the Colonies. We want, -in the House of Commons, representatives of the interests of -England’s dependencies. We want practical, far-seeing, intelligent -men--those who have seen the world in its different aspects, and -know, by experience, its wants; not mere “globe-trotters” and -travelling M.P.s, who return to their country more ignorant and -puffed up with their partial knowledge than when they started; but -representative men who have lived out of England long enough to -have shaken off the idea that their “Little Pedlington,”--be it -London or Liverpool, or Manchester or Birmingham,--is the pivot on -which the world revolves. We want in fact an Imperial Parliament, -not a wretched caucus of narrow-minded party politicians, whose -view is limited to the horizon of the coming election, and whose -whole business in life is to stump the country, making flatulent -speeches, with exuberant verbosity, to gaping admirers, and -pandering to the fleeting popularity of the mob.[104] - -FOOTNOTE: - -[104] The old colonial system is gone. But in place of it no clear -and reasoned system has been adopted. The wrong theory is given -up, but what is the right theory?--There is only one alternative. -If the colonies are not in the old phrase, possessions of England, -then they must be a part of England; and we must adopt this view in -earnest. - -We must cease altogether to say that England is an island off the -north western coast of Europe, that it has an area of 120,000 -square miles and a population of thirty odd millions. - -We must cease to think that emigrants when they go to the colonies, -leave England or are lost to England. We must cease to think that -the history of England is the history of the Parliament that sits -at Westminster, _and that the affairs that are not discussed there -cannot belong to English history_. - -When we have accustomed ourselves to contemplate the whole Empire -together, and call it all England, we shall see that here too is a -United States. - -Here too is a great, homogeneous people, one in blood, language, -religion and laws, but disposed over a boundless space. We shall -see that though it is held together by strong moral ties, it has -little that can be called a constitution; no system that seems -capable of resisting any severe shock. But if we are disposed -to doubt whether any system can be devised capable of holding -together communities so distant from each other, then is the time -to recollect the history of the United States of America. For they -have such a system. They have solved this problem. They have shown -that in the present age of the world political unions may exist on -a vaster scale than was possible in former times. - -No doubt our problem has difficulties of its own, immense -difficulties. But the _greatest of these difficulties is one which -we make ourselves_. - -It is the false preconception which we bring to the question, -that the problem is insoluble, that no such thing ever was done -or ever will be done; it is our misinterpretation of the American -Revolution. (Expansion of England, by J. R. Seely, M.A., p. 158.) - - - - -APPENDIX No. I. - -DISCOURTESY _versus_ ARGUMENT. - - -FREE TRADE _vs._ FAIR TRADE. - -_Mr. Blood’s Letter to Mr. Bright._ - - - 32, CHARLOTTE STREET, BIRMINGHAM. - -DEAR SIR,--The Birmingham newspapers have recently published a -letter written to you by Mr. W. G. Lord, of Bradford, on the -subject of Free Trade. The letter is somewhat brief, and it struck -me that, though you might not feel called upon to enter into -correspondence on such subjects with persons who are not your -constituents, possibly you might feel more disposed to discuss the -question with an Elector of Birmingham. - -You say, to imagine that the bad trade from which Bradford is -suffering is due to hostile tariffs, is absurd; and then, as -though in your opinion it was an unanswerable objection to those -who contend that hostile tariffs have a great deal to do with it, -you add, “_because you have had great prosperity with the same -tariffs_.” Now, I venture to submit that this is no argument at -all,--that it is merely a statement based upon false conclusions. -You are, or at least you ought to be, aware, that the circumstances -under which the trade of this country is carried on have entirely -changed during recent years. At the period when, as you say, we -“enjoyed great prosperity with the same tariffs,” the foreign -nations, which now exclude our manufactures from their markets, -were not sufficiently advanced to do without our assistance. -Whether they liked it or not, they were compelled to buy of us -largely, and, therefore, comparatively speaking, their tariffs -were harmless. Now they can not only dispense with the bulk of -our manufactured goods, but, in many branches of industry, can -also compete with our manufacturers in our own markets. Hence, -hostile tariffs, which were once of little moment, have become -serious, and if you look at the question from this point of view, -you will probably see that absurdity is not with those who cry out -against the hardships of foreign tariffs, but with those who, like -yourself, shut their eyes to the changes going on around them, -and blindly adhere to an old system after it has become obsolete -and absolutely mischievous. You cannot be unaware that, since -the great Exhibition of 1851, the commercial relations of this -country with other nations of the world have undergone an entire -change for the worse. Then it did seem as though England was to -become the “workshop of the world,” as the apostles of Free Trade -predicted she would be. But at that Exhibition the manufacturers -of Europe and America were invited to inspect our machinery, were -shown all the intricacies of its mechanism, and made familiar -with the secrets of our manufactures. Among our visitors at that -period were experts, whose eyes were open wherever they went, and -who have since made good use of the information obtained. With -equal good nature--or shall I call it folly--we have sent our -machinery abroad, and skilled workmen to work it, without any -regard to consequences, and hence foreigners, who but for the -open-hearted candid nature of John Bull, would still have been in -the background, are now fully ahead of us in a great many branches -of manufacturing and commercial enterprise. Unprejudiced persons -cannot fail to see that arguments based on a state of things which -existed thirty or forty years ago, have no force, now that state of -things has passed away; and your contention that hostile tariffs -have nothing to do with our commercial depression, because under -the same tariffs we enjoyed prosperity years ago, falls to the -ground. On the contrary, unless our prosperity is to still further -decline, it becomes a matter of vital necessity that in those -manufactures in which England can still keep the lead, she shall -have the same privileges as she ungrudgingly gives to others; or -that we should be protected in our markets from those who refuse us -admission to theirs. - -You go on to say “to suppose your case will be improved by refusing -to buy what you want from foreigners, to punish them for not buying -freely from you, is an idea and scheme only worthy of the inmates -of a lunatic asylum.” But, if you seriously believe this statement, -you must believe also that the astute, far-seeing citizen of the -United States,--the plodding, theorizing German,--the thrifty and -ingenious Frenchman,--and the hard-headed, practical Russian,--the -intelligent Italian,--and even the hard-working Swede and -Norwegian, are all lunatics. Are you prepared, seriously, to assert -this as your belief? The fact is, you adopt an ingenious way of -misstating a principle. No one thinks of refusing to buy from the -foreigner when it is to our interest to do so. In our commercial -relations one with another, it is usual for every man to buy from -one who will probably become a return purchaser, or to put it in -plainer language, each man supports the person who will be most -likely to support him in return. But in buying from the foreigner, -we are buying from the man who will never buy from us if he can -possibly help it, and leaving those who would be our customers in -return to starve. - -Again, you say, that “to return to Protection under the name of -Reciprocity, is to confess to the Protectionists abroad that we -have been wrong, and that they are right.” But the fact is, no such -confession is necessary. The Protectionist abroad knows _too well_ -that he is right, without any confession on our part. The vast -progress of the United States, the immense strides they have made -in commerce, manufactures, and wealth--strides so vast that our own -progress, even at its greatest, is insignificant--will convince -every intelligent American that the principle of protection to -native industry is, under many circumstances, wholesome and -necessary. The same may be said of France, which has made even -greater progress in some particulars than ourselves; and of -Russia, which, under protection, seems likely to come to the fore. - -Again, you ask, “Who dares to propose another _sliding scale or -fixed duty on the import of foreign corn_?” Are you not aware that -even amongst your own constituents there is a large party who have -the courage to do this? You take it for granted that good seasons -would enable agriculturists to carry on their avocation with -profit. But many persons who have the best practical acquaintance -with the subject think differently. If, in the result, they should -prove to be right, are you prepared to see the bulk of the land of -the country go out of cultivation rather than impose a duty on the -import of foreign corn? With agriculture ruined, and its capital -absolutely gone, what would become of our home trade? But the fact -is, we don’t want any foreign corn at all. Our Colonists, who could -be induced to trade with us on reciprocal terms, could supply us -with all the corn we want, even though not one single quarter of -foreign grain found a place in our markets. The result might be a -very trivial rise in the price of bread-stuffs for a few years, but -I venture to submit that the disadvantage of this rise would be -more than counterbalanced by larger revenues from imports, which -would result in reduced direct taxation, not only to the farmer, -but to all classes, and by the increased occupation for the artisan -and labourer, which would result from the extension of our Colonial -markets, and from keeping our home trade to ourselves. - -As this is a question which, at the present time, is agitating the -public mind, and every one is looking for some practical solution -of existing difficulties, I shall be glad to have your opinion on -the views expressed in this letter. Your previous communication has -been widely circulated through the Press, and, therefore, I purpose -in due course, to publish this letter also, together with any reply -with which you may favour me. - - Yours faithfully, - FREDERICK BLOOD. - - -_Mr. Bright’s Reply._ - - DUCHY OF LANCASTER OFFICE, LONDON, W.C. - -SIR,--Mr. Bright desires me to acknowledge the receipt of your -letter of the 27th instant. - -In reply, Mr. Bright directs me to say that he has neither time nor -inclination to enter into a correspondence with a gentleman who -believes that we need no supplies of corn from foreign countries, -and who would impose duties on its importation. He fears that no -facts and no arguments can be placed before such a person with any -advantage. - - I am, sir, Your obedient servant, - BARRINGTON SIMEON. - - FREDERICK BLOOD, ESQ., - _32, Charlotte Street,_ - _Birmingham_. - - -_Mr. Blood’s Reply to Mr. Bright._ - - 32, CHARLOTTE STREET, BIRMINGHAM. - -SIR,--I am in receipt of your reply to my previous communication on -the Subject of Free Imports. You decline to discuss the question, -and in adopting this course, possibly you act wisely. There is so -very little to be said from your point of view in favour of our -existing system, that I can understand your reluctance to state -your case fully. Whether dignified silence would not have been -preferable to the uncourteous and dogmatic assertions in which you -take refuge, is another matter. You seem surprised that any one -should believe in the possibility of our doing without “Foreign” -wheat, but is your surprise real or feigned? Do you wish to mislead -the public by inducing it to attach a wrong meaning to the word -“foreign?” You know the meaning I attach to it, and you know -further that my statement was absolutely true, and that it has -often been made in public by persons who have a greater claim to a -hearing on this subject than yourself. - -I stated, that our Colonies and Dependencies could supply us with -all the wheat we require, and that we could do without any foreign -supply. Do you doubt this statement? If so, the doubt is scarcely -creditable to your intelligence, or to your industry in making -yourself acquainted with the facts. You may fix yourself on the -horns of which ever dilemma you please, but the public will hold -you guilty of a want of information, which is unpardonable, or -else of a desire to mislead. Happily, our Colonies are not foreign -powers, however much the policy of the government of which you are -a member has recently tended to drive them to become such. Hence -my statement holds good. I can only imagine that you presumed -upon the scanty information of many of your constituents as to -the difference in the meaning of the two words “Foreign” and -“Colonial,” and trusted to throw dust in their eyes by this means. -If your opinions require to be supported in this dishonourable -manner, I can only say that they are manifestly unsound, and the -sooner they are renounced the better for your political reputation. -The position you hold in Her Majesty’s Government, although a -lucrative one, is generally regarded as a sinecure, and, therefore, -I fail to see how you can plead want of time as an excuse for -writing a discourteous and contemptuous letter to one of your -constituents, who wrote you in perfect good faith. But I shall -leave it to public opinion to judge as to whether such conduct is -worthy of the prefix of “Right Honourable” which is now generally -attached to your name. - -It is scarcely necessary to add that no one proposes to tax the -imports of Colonial wheat to the same extent as that of foreign -growth, and for this reason; the Colonists are willing to adopt a -differential duty,--that is, to trade with us on something like -reciprocal terms. The foreigner will take no steps towards meeting -us fairly; hence the difference between the two cases is apparent -at once. Supposing a duty of 20 per cent. were imposed on Foreign, -and 10 per cent. on Colonial, wheat, it is well known that this -would not increase the price of the four-pound loaf more than a -half-penny. To an average working man’s family this would not -enhance the cost of living more than fourpence a week, and as it -can easily be shown that increased employment for labour would -follow on the judicious adoption of import duties, the working -classes would be large gainers, especially as the revenue derived -from these duties would enable us to reduce our other taxation. - -In a former letter to me you stated that the price of the loaf -would be doubled if we had not Free Trade in corn. It would be -interesting to know how you arrived at this conclusion. I fear -your usual method of assertion, without any endeavour to arrive at -the truth, was at the bottom of it. The statement was altogether -without foundation, although, no doubt, many people who have no -time to think out the matter for themselves were influenced by it. -You are now legislating for the people of Ireland, but has it never -struck you that the immense flood of importations from America, -which has been poured upon Ireland, has been the cause of much -of the suffering which that country has endured? It has rendered -agriculture unprofitable both in Ireland and in England, and -therefore labourers have been thrown out of work, while farmers, -especially the smaller ones, have been steadily impoverished. The -natural result of poverty is sedition. The agricultural classes -having no money to spend, all classes have suffered. Just now -there is a cry for fostering manufactures in Ireland, but how many -manufactures can you foster in which foreign competitors cannot -undersell you in the streets of Dublin? If matters go on, they may -perhaps eventually end in an attempted revolution, and if not put -down with the strong arm of force, there will be a separation. How -long in that case would Ireland, under the rule of her own people, -allow America to drain away her wealth and prosperity? The foreign -competition, against which agriculturists have to contend, will -shortly be intensified by increased importations of beef and mutton -from Queensland and other parts of Australia, and the struggle in -England will become keener, while Ireland will find it impossible -to continue any of the small exports of cattle and food she now -sends us, except at still more unprofitable prices. - -This letter is somewhat lengthy, but the abrupt and discourteous -nature of your communication has led me to write more fully than I -should otherwise have done. - - Yours faithfully, - - FREDERICK BLOOD. - -P. S.--As this is solely a public matter, I shall send my letter to -the Press, and shall be glad to take the same course with any reply -you may favour me. - - - - -APPENDIX No. II. - -UNHEEDED WARNINGS. - -The three F’s: Fixity of Tenure, Fair Rent, Freedom of Sale. - - _Contemporary Review_, February, 1881. - - -The grounds on which the principle of the three F’s were opposed in -1880:-- - - _The Act of 1870 was to be final, and it is a breach of faith to - reopen the land question._ - - 1. The Land Act of 1870 was an encroachment on the rights of - landlords, but was allowed to pass on the understanding that it - would be final. - - 2. To reopen the question with _further_ confiscation is a gross - breach of faith. - - 3. More especially it is a breach of faith with those landowners - who have, on the invitation of Government, purchased land in the - “Encumbered Estates Court.” The indefeasible title granted to - them by the Court (and for which they paid large sums) would be - turned into a mere claim to a precarious rent charge. - - - _The three F’s are an infringement of the rights of the landlord. - He must be compensated for the material, moral, and sentimental - wrong which he will suffer._ - - 4. “Tenant right” is landlord wrong. - - 5. Land is the absolute undoubted property of the landlord, - and he has a right to do that which he wills with his own. Any - curtailment of his power is an injustice, and affects the very - principle of property. - - 6. If the State interferes with his freedom of action, and causes - him any material, moral, or sentimental injury, it must properly - compensate him. - - 7. To take away the enjoyment, control, and management of his - land is a very tangible infringement of rights, and one for which - compensation must be given. - - 8. To fix a rent is to deprive the landlord of the advantages of - competition, and affects him financially. - - 9. It would reduce him to the position of a mere mortgagee, but - without the security and certainty of payment. - - 10. To deprive him of his power of eviction, is to take away a - privilege, a necessity. - - 11. The tenant’s claim to a “right” in the soil is not founded on - any tangible or real historical basis. - - - _The abuse of eviction or raisings of rent is rare; the use is - necessary and justifiable._ - - 12. There is little or no abuse of the power of arbitrary - eviction; and even when rent is not paid, the landlords, as a - class, are lenient. It is occasionally necessary for the good of - the estate to evict (compensation for “disturbance” being paid) - in order to consolidate holdings. - - 13. Eviction is seldom enforced, except in the case of bad and - wasteful tenants; good and improving tenants are never evicted. - Therefore, any diminution in the power of eviction would be - disastrous to the prosperity of the country by retaining on the - land worthless tenants. - - 14. Most landlords do properly compensate their tenants for any - improvements effected by them. - - 15. They are justified in raising the rents when the land - produces greater increase. - - 16. Even if a few bad landlords injure their tenants, it is - unfair to visit on the heads of the majority the sins of the few - by bringing them all under the same confiscating law. - - 17. The existing law provides ample safeguards against arbitrary - and unjust eviction; the landlord’s power is sufficiently - curtailed. - - - _The relations of landlord and tenant are those of contract; the - State must not interfere in freedom of contract._ - - 18. Any State interference in contract between man and man - is very inexpedient and demoralizing, more especially in - interference in the matter of price and value. - - 19. The relations between landlord and tenant are merely those of - contract. - - 20. The movement of progressive societies is from status to - contract, and not the reverse. - - 21. It is illogical and unfair of the tenant to demand freedom of - contract in the sale of tenant-right, and ask for curtailment of - contract in his dealings with the landlord. - - - _The objections to a fixed rent; and the difficulties in the way - of fixing a fair rent._ - - 22. It would be impossible to fix a rent which would content both - parties. - - 23. As tenants vary in ability, character, and energy, it would - be impossible to legislate so that the rent the tenant had to pay - would be that which he is able to pay. - - 24. A fixed rent, even if fair at first, would soon weigh heavily - on one or other of the parties. - - 25. All future enhancements of rent, based on whatever ground, - would be strenuously resisted. - - 26. While the landlord would be bound to accept the valuation, - the tenant could refuse to pay it and quit his holding. - - 27. If the Government, by valuation or arbitration, were to fix - the rent, the landlord would consider that he had been guaranteed - his rent by the State; while the tenant (in bad seasons) would - look to the State to assist him to pay it. - - 28. If fixity of tenure were conceded, the next demand would be - for the abolition of the rent charge, more especially on the - ground of increased absenteeism, which would itself have been - encouraged by the change. - - 29. At all events, in bad seasons, a demand would be made for - abatement of rent, on the ground that otherwise the value of the - tenant-right would be injuriously affected. - - 30. The power conceded to the landlord of selling the - “tenant-right” on breach of contract, would be rendered nugatory - by the combination of tenants to prevent a purchase; and so the - landlord would be deprived of all means of obtaining his rent, or - of preventing subletting or subdivision. - - 31. It is illogical and unjust that, in the matter of rent, the - landlord should be deprived of the benefits of competition, while - in the sale of tenant-right competition should be allowed. - - 32. The landlords, bound by a hard-and-fast rule, would expect to - receive their full fixed rents, and would not be willing or able, - as they are now, to allow indulgences in time or remission in bad - seasons. - - 33. The pressure of violence would be brought to bear on the - valuators to induce them to undervalue the rents. - - - _The right of free sale of “tenant-right” would amount to - confiscation of part of the landlord’s property. It would benefit - only existing tenants, and would cripple all future tenants._ - - 34. As the existing tenants would, on the day of the passing of - the law, be able to sell their tenant-right for a large sum, - _having done nothing_ to earn it, the amount at which it can be - valued, is so much subtracted from the rightful gains of the - landlord. - - 35. As tenants had not this scheme in view when they bargained - for their farms, its adoption would be conceding them a valuable - privilege entirely at the expense of the landlords. - - 36. Only the existing tenants would benefit pecuniarily from the - change; all future in-coming tenants would be burdened by the - amount they would have to pay for the “tenant-right,” and the - interest on this payment in addition to the “fair” rent, would - constitute a sum exceeding any rack-rent. - - 37. The unhealthy “earth-hunger,” which exists in Ireland, would - force up the price of tenant-right far above the real value, - and thus entrench on the security of the landlord for his rent, - whilst reckless tenants would outbid the prudent. - - 38. The payment for tenant-right would cripple the in-coming - tenant just at the moment when he most required capital to - cultivate the land--to the injury of production, while it would - leave him no margin to fall back upon in bad times. - - 39. The tenants who would benefit most would be those who have - had indulgent landlords. When rents are low “tenant-right” would - be more valuable than when they are high. - - 40. The tenants can obtain security of tenure by demanding and - accepting leases; many landlords are willing to grant long leases - at fixed rents on fair terms. - - 41. Therefore, at the most the law should force the landlords to - grant “security leases,” and leave them to obtain (by means of a - fine) any extra value which security will fetch. - - 42. Any further privileges obtained by the tenant would only be - used as additional facilities for borrowing money at ruinous - rates. - - 43. The Ulster tenants have obtained their tenant-right by - purchase, or by a _quid pro quo_; the concession of free sale - would gratuitously endow existing tenants with a valuable - property, which they have neither earned, bought, nor inherited. - - 44. Many landlords have bought up the tenant-right on their - farms; it is manifestly unfair to reimpose it without - compensation. - - - _The landlords have largely invested capital in the soil; the - three F’s would prevent them in future from making improvements; - and the tenants’ power to do so would also be diminished._ - - 45. The landlords, as a class, have invested capital very largely - in the improvement of the soil; the improvements have been by no - means entirely effected by the tenant. - - 46. It would no longer be to the interest of the landlord to - invest his capital in the soil; an effectual obstacle would have - been placed in the way of his doing so. - - 47. Therefore, those improvements,--drainage, straightening - fields and boundaries, &c., which affect many holdings, and can - only be done by the landlord, would no longer be executed. - - 48. As he will have to pay for the “tenant-right,” the in-coming - tenant will have less capital to invest in the soil than at - present, while the sum he has paid will be taken out of the land - for ever; thus, on both hands, the capital available for these - purposes would be diminished, and production would suffer. - - - _Further evils which would result from the adoption of the three - F’s._ - - 49. By making the landlord merely a rent-charger, and depriving - him of all power or interest in his land, absenteeism and - non-residence, with their attendant evils, would be enormously - increased. - - 50. The proposed scheme would perpetuate the present system - of landlord and tenant, while the desirable aim should be to - increase the number of proprietors. - - 51. The tenant, possessing security of tenure, would be less - desirous of purchasing land, while sale, except to the tenant, - would be greatly hindered. - - 52. It would perpetuate the absurd distribution of land at - present existing in many parts of Ireland. - - 53. While it would confirm not only good and bad tenants in their - tenure of land and affect equally good and bad landlords, - - 54. It would increase the antagonism between the landlord and the - tenant; - - 55. It would be practically impossible to prevent subdivision and - subletting with their manifold attendant evils. - - 56. The Irish people are so miserably lazy, thriftless, and - short-sighted, that no reform of the land-law would benefit them. - - 57. _Nothing short of separation from England will satisfy the - Irish_; land-reforms are useless. - - 58. Under small proprietors or semi-proprietors, the lot of - labourers would be harder than ever. - - 59. The various parts of Ireland differ so much in every way that - it would be inexpedient and impossible to apply one scheme to the - whole; if it answered in one part it would necessarily fail in - others. - - 60. If the principle of the three F’s were once conceded, it - would form a precedent for land-legislation in England; and then - for legislation directed against all forms of property. - - 61. It is the first step towards democratic and socialistic - legislation. - - 62. The concession is the more dangerous, inasmuch as it is only - conceded to clamour and lawlessness. - - - - - LONDON: - PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, - STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS. - - - - - TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE - - Obvious typographical errors and punctuation errors have been - corrected after careful comparison with other occurrences within - the text and consultation of external sources. - - Except for those changes noted below, all misspellings in the text, - and inconsistent or archaic usage, have been retained. For example, - livestock, live stock; highroad, high road; Free Trader, Free-Trader; - descanting; squib; cess; uncourteous. - - Pg 26, ‘Liberal politicans’ replaced by ‘Liberal politicians’. - Pg 41, ‘nearly 3,000,000’ replaced by ‘nearly 300,000’. - Pg 47, ‘M. DeLavergne’ replaced by ‘M. De Lavergne’. - Pg 58, ‘without his cousent’ replaced by ‘without his consent’. - Pg 74, ‘cause the landord’ replaced by ‘cause the landlord’. - Pg 84, ‘thoughout Bengal’ replaced by ‘throughout Bengal’. - Pg 87, ‘posperity of each’ replaced by ‘prosperity of each’. - Pg 92, ‘for the artizan’ replaced by ‘for the artisan’. - - - - - - - -End of Project Gutenberg's The British Jugernath, by Guildford L. Molesworth - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE BRITISH JUGERNATH *** - -***** This file should be named 55493-0.txt or 55493-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/5/4/9/55493/ - -Produced by Chris Curnow, John Campbell and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive) - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |