nhabitants; as grain, meat, woollen
and cotton goods, fuel, etc.
Let us suppose again that to-morrow every barrier to the introduction of
foreign goods should be removed.
Then, to judge of the effect of such a reform, let a new inventory be
made three months hence.
Is it not certain that at the time of the second inventory, the
quantity of grain, cattle, goods, iron, coal, sugar, etc., will be
greater than at the first?
So true is this, that the sole object of our protective tariffs is to
prevent such articles from reaching us, to diminish the supply, to
prevent low prices, or which is the same thing, the abundance of goods.
Now I ask, are the people under the action of these laws better fed
because there is _less_ bread, _less_ meat, and _less_ sugar in the
country? Are they better dressed because there are _fewer_ goods? Better
warmed because there is _less_ coal? Or do they prosper better in their
labor because iron, copper, tools and machinery are scarce?
But, it is answered, if we are inundated with foreign goods and produce,
our coin will leave the country.
Well, and what matters that? Man is not fed with coin. He does not dress
in gold, nor warm himself with silver. What difference does it make
whether there be more or less coin in the country, provided there be
more bread in the cupboard, more meat in the larder, more clothing in
the press, and more wood in the cellar?
* * * * *
To Restrictive Laws, I offer this dilemma:
Either you allow that you produce scarcity, or you do not allow it.
If you allow it, you confess at once that your end is to injure the
people as much as possible. If you do not allow it, then you deny your
power to diminish the supply, to raise the price, and consequently you
deny having favored the producer.
You are either injurious or inefficient. You can never be useful.
II.
OBSTACLE--CAUSE.
The obstacle mistaken for the cause--scarcity mistaken for abundance.
The sophism is the same. It is well to study it under every aspect.
Man naturally is in a state of entire destitution.
Between this state and the satisfying of his wants, there exists a
multitude of _obstacles_ which it is the object of labor to surmount. It
is interesting to seek how and why he could have been led to look even
upon these obstacles to his happiness as the cause of it.
I wish to take a journey of some hundred miles. But, between the point
of
|