The Times on Fair Trade.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume I, Issue 16, 19 July 1887, Page 4

The Times on Fair Trade.

AN ADVERSE CRITICISM. Osk of the election cries raised before the com'ng contest has bean Protection v. Freetrade. Many have been inclined to keep clear of both sides, I and occupy the proverbial middle •tool. The following article on Freetrade, condensed from the London Times, should be read with interest :— It is high time for the Fan-traders to do more than dine together. For several years they have been before the country with their proposals. If the phrase “ fair trade ’ is not very old, the origin of the idea which it expresses is ancient. And yet, they have made singularly little progress. They are still quarrelling over the rudiments of their faith when they ought to be carrying it into practice. They dine together; they unite in decrying free trade, in denouncing the Cobden Club and all its work, and in deploring the imperfections of the existing fiscal system. There, however, all unity ends. As soon as an attempt is made to reduce to shape their idea s and to pass from criticism to action in concert divisions appear. At the Conference much was said about the desirability of such a policy; but of the presence of a spirit which would make this possible there was little sign. To be sure, there was a discussion of the expediency of conferring with agriculturists—which we take to mean that Freetraders begin to see, what has long been plain to others, that they are at sixes and sevens as to points of principle. But what hope is there that much can come of deliberations of persons at issue in regard to fundamental matters, and not even agreed as to what they mean by fair trade ? If the colonial representatives who were invited were expected to say pleasant things about fair trade, their hosts must have been much disappointed. Mr Dodds put the pertinent query, if England extended to her Colonies exceptional fiscal advantages over the foreigner, would she not expect in the course of time reciprocal action, and the admission into colonial ports of English articles duty free ?— a demand which, he stated, could not for a moment be entertained. Those who dream of the establishment of the fiscal unity of the Empire and who talk as if we were on the eve of seeing it come to pass are much mistaken. We greatly fear that oncethe principles of free trade are abandoned, goods will be taxed according as they are likely to compete with native products. The more logical advocates of fair trade ask what is the good of it if it have not the effect of raising prices. As in all other phases of this agitation, the difference in opinion which it is sought to hide by a plausible phrase comes to light as soon as there is an attempt to do more than criticise ; one Fairtrader proves to be a Protectionist; another a humdrum Free trader; and a third a zealot and partisan prepared to go all lengths for a few favoured industries. We do not reproach the National Fair Trade League with the existence of these differences. They are inevitable ; differences and incongruities must be the outcome of what is an appeal to those who do not like free trade and yet flinch from being thoroughgoing Protectionists. The creed of the latter is intelligible. Every ounce of imported goods is an evil; and every native industry is a blessing and deserves to be protected. But to pick out this industry for favour and to exclude that, to vary the tariff according as ether countries raise or reduce theirs, to go part of the way with Protectionists and quit their company when they propose to push on boldly to all the applications of their principles, provokes the comment that a Fairtrader is a Protectionist without the courage of his convictions. Can we wonder that such ideas make little way? We are afraid that the Fairtraders do not show to advantage as compared with the advocates of Protection. The latter well know what they want, and they are not afraid to give effect to it. In the United States and Australia they seem prepared to extend protection from goods to labor -—which may yet be a prominent page in the legislation of democratic societies. The Fairtraders, on the other hand, seem to be striving after an impossible compromise, with the sure result that one-half of them will pass sooner or later into a Protectionist camp, and the other into the Freetrade ranks. These are dark days for the Fairtrader; but the deciple of Cobden must not be jubilant. He will find small comfort or hope in the speeches of Sir Graham Berry and other colonial statesmen. Free trade does not, any more than it did, make way in young communities ; as they grow older there is not much sign of improvement. The fair show of statistics in Cobden Club pamphlets makes little impression on the Victorian voter. He is incorrigible and unashamed though economists revile him. The secret of his persistency in heresy has not yet been clearly told, and a study of the problem might reveal other causes than cupidity and ignorance, the usual explanations of facts which have mocked predictions.