for manufacture. This preparation would render reasonable
the imposition of _some duties_." Here we find the commencement of
protection, because, at the same time, likewise commences the demand for
_national labor_.
"The third class comprehends finished articles, which can, under no
circumstances, furnish material for national labor. We consider this as
the most fit for taxation." Here we have at once the maximum of labor,
and, consequently, of production.
The petitioners then, as we here see, proclaimed foreign labor as
injurious to national labor. This is the _error_ of the prohibitive
system.
They desired the French market to be reserved for _French labor_. This
is the _object_ of the prohibitive system.
They demanded that foreign labor should be subjected to restrictions and
taxes. These are the _means_ of the prohibitive system.
What difference, then, can we possibly discover to exist between the
Bordalese petitioners and the Corypheus of restriction? One, alone; and
that is simply the greater or less extension which is given to the
signification of the word _labor_.
Mr. de Saint Cricq, taking it in its widest sense, is, therefore, in
favor of _protecting_ every thing.
"Labor," he says, "constitutes _the whole_ wealth of a nation.
Protection should be for the agricultural interest, and _the whole_
agricultural interest; for the manufacturing interest, and _the whole_
manufacturing interest; and this principle I will continually endeavor
to impress upon this Chamber."
The petitioners consider no labor but that of the manufacturers, and
accordingly, it is that, and that alone, which they would wish to admit
to the favors of protection.
"Raw material being entirely _untouched by human labor_, our system
should exempt it from taxes. Manufactured articles furnishing no
material for national labor, we consider as the most fit for taxation."
There is no question here as to the propriety of protecting national
labor. Mr. de Saint Cricq and the Bordalese agree entirely upon this
point. We have, in our preceding chapters, already shown how entirely we
differ from both of them.
The question to be determined, is, whether it is Mr. de Saint Cricq, or
the Bordalese, who give to the word _labor_ its proper acceptation. And
we must confess that Mr. de Saint Cricq is here decidedly in the right.
The following dialogue might be supposed between them:
_Mr. de Saint Cricq._--You agree that national labor oug
|