list4-第7节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！





8；000；000　pounds　（in　1871）　to　less　than　3；000；000　pounds。



　　　　On　the　other　hand；　since　List　wrote；　the　United　States　of



America　have　increased　and　steadily　maintained　a　considerable



protective　duty　on　the　importation　of　foreign　silk　manufactures。



The　results　of　that　policy　were　publicly　stated　by　Mr　Robert　P。



Porter　（member　of　the　United　States'　Tariff　Commission）；　in　a



speech　in　1883；　to　have　been　as　follows：



　　　　Five　thousand　persons　were　employed　in　silk　manufacture　in　the



United　States　before　the　Morill　tariff　（1861）。　In　1880　their　number



had　increased　to　30；000。　The　value　of　silk　manufactures　produced　in



the　States　increased　from　1；200；000　l。　in　1860　to　more　than



8；000；000　l。　in　1880。　'Yet　the　cost　of　the　manufactured　goods　to



the　consumer；　estimated　on　a　gold　basis；　has　steadily　declined　at



a　much　greater　rate　than　the　cost　of　the　raw　material。'　After



reference　to　the　earthenware　and　plate…glass　manufactures；　Mr



Porter　adds：　'The　testimony　before　the　Tariff　Commission　showed



unquestionably　that　the　competition　in　the　United　States　had



resulted　in　a　reduction　in　the　cost　to　the　American　consumer。　In



this　way；　gentlemen；　I　contend；　and　am　prepared　to　prove



statistically。　that　protection；　so　far　as　the　United　States　are



concerned；　has　in　every　case　ultimately　benefited　the　consumer；　and



on　this　ground　I　defend　it　and　believe　in　it。'　　TRANSLATOR。







4。　Chaptal；　De　l'Industrie　Fran鏰ise　vol。　ii。；　p。　147。







Chapter　34







The　Insular　Supremacy　and　the　German　Commercial　Union







　　　　What　a　great　nation　is　at　the　present　day　without　a　vigorous



commercial　policy；　and　what　she　may　become　by　the　adoption　of　a



vigorous　commercial　policy；　Germany　has　learnt　for　herself　during



the　last　twenty　years。　Germany　was　that　which　Franklin　once　said　of



the　State　of　New　Jersey；　'a　cask　which　was　tapped　and　drained　by



its　neighbours　on　every　side。'　England；　not　contented　with　having



ruined　for　the　Germans　the　greater　part　of　their　own　manufactories



and　supplied　them　with　enormous　quantities　of　cotton　and　woollen



fabrics；　excluded　from　her　ports　German　grain　and　timber；　nay　from



time　to　time　also　even　German　wool。　There　was　a　time　when　the



export　of　manufactured　goods　from　England　to　Germany　was　ten　times



greater　than　that　to　her　highly　extolled　East　Indian　Empire。



Nevertheless　the　all…monopolising　islanders　would　not　even　grant　to



the　poor　Germans　what　they　conceded　to　the　conquered　Hindoos；　viz。



to　pay　for　the　manufactured　goods　which　they　required　by



agricultural　produce。　In　vain　did　the　Germans　humble　themselves　to



the　position　of　hewers　of　wood　and　drawers　of　water　for　the



Britons。　The　latter　treated　them　worse　than　a　subject　people。



Nations；　like　individuals；　if　they　at　first　only　permit　themselves



to　be　ill…treated　by　one；　soon　become　scorned　by　all；　and　finally



become　an　object　of　derision　to　the　very　children。　France；　not



contented　with　exporting　to　Germany　enormous　quantities　of　wine；



oil；　silk；　and　millinery；　grudged　the　Germans　their　exports　of



cattle；　grain；　and　flax；　yes；　even　a　small　maritime　province



formerly　possessed　by　Germany　and　inhabited　by　Germans；　which



having　become　wealthy　and　powerful　by　means　of　Germany；　at　all



times　was　only　able　to　maintain　itself　with　and　by　means　of



Germany；　barred　for　half　a　generation　Germany's　greatest　river　by



means　of　contemptible　verbal　quibbles。　To　fill　up　the　measure　of



this　contempt；　the　doctrine　was　taught　from　a　hundred　professorial



chairs；　that　nations　could　only　attain　to　wealth　and　power　by　means



of　universal　free　trade。　Thus　it　was；　but　how　is　it　now？　Germany



has　advanced　in　prosperity　and　industry；　in　national　self…respect



and　in　national　power；　in　the　course　of　ten　years　as　much　as　in　a



century。　And　how　has　this　result　been　achieved？　It　was　certainly



good　and　beneficial　that　the　internal　tariffs　were　abolished　which



separated　Germans　from　Germans；　but　the　nation　would　have　derived



small　comfort　from　that　if　her　home　industry　had　thenceforth



remained　freely　exposed　to　foreign　competition。　It　was　especially



the　protection　which　the　tariff　of　the　Zollverein　secured　to



manufactured　articles　of　common　use；　which　has　wrought　this



miracle。　Let　us　freely　confess　it；　for　Dr　Bowring（1*）　has



incontrovertibly　shown　it；　that　the　Zollverein　tariff　has　not；　as



was　before　asserted；　imposed　merely　duties　for　revenue　　that　it



has　not　confined　itself　to　duties　of　ten　to　fifteen　per　cent　as



Huskisson　believed　　let　us　freely　admit　that　it　has　imposed



protective　duties　of　from　twenty　to　sixty　per　cent　as　respects　the



manufactured　articles　of　common　use。



　　　　But　what　has　been　the　operation　of　these　protective　duties？　Are



the　consumers　paying　for　their　German　manufactured　goods　twenty　to



sixty　per　cent　more　than　they　formerly　paid　for　foreign　ones　（as



must　be　the　case　if　the　popular　theory　is　correct）；　or　are　these



goods　at　all　worse　than　the　foreign　ones？　Nothing　of　the　sort。　Dr



Bowring　himself　adduces　testimony　that　the　manufactured　goods



produced　under　the　high　customs　tariff　are　both　better　and　cheaper



than　the　foreign　ones。（2*）　The　internal　competition　and　the



security　from　destructive　competition　by　the　foreigner　has　wrought



this　miracle；　of　which　the　popular　school　knows　nothing　and　is



determined　to　know　nothing。　Thus；　that　is　not　true；　which　the



popular　school　maintains；　that　a　protective　duty　increases　the



price　of　the　goods　of　home　production　by　the　amount　of　the



protective　duty。　For　a　short　time　the　duty　may　increase　the　price；



but　in　every　nation　which　is　qualified　to　carry　on　manufacturing



industry　the　consequence　of　the　protection　will　be；　that　the



internal　competition　will　soon　reduce　the　prices　lower　than　they



had　stood　at　when　the　importation　was　free。



　　　　But　has　agriculture　at　all　suffered　under　these　high　duties？



Not　in　the　least；　it　has　gained…gained　tenfold　during　the　last　ten



years。　The　demand　for　agricultural　produce　has　increased。　The



prices　of　it　everywhere　are　higher。　It　is　notorious　that　solely　in



consequence　of　the　growth　of　the　home　manufactories　the　value　of



land　has　everywhere　risen　from　fifty　to　a　hundred　per　cent；　that



everywhere　higher　wages　are　being　paid；　and　that　in　all　directions



improvements　in　the　means　of　transport　are　either　being　effected　or



projected。



　　　　Such　brilliant　results　as　these　must　necessarily　encourage　us



to　proceed　farther　on　the　system　which　we　have　commenced　to　follow。



Other　States　of　the　Union　have　also　proposed　to　take　similar　steps；



but　have　not　yet　carried　them　into　effect；　while；　as　it　would



appear；　some　other　States　of　the　Union　only　expect　to　attain



prosperity　solely　by　the　abolition　of　the　English　duties　on　grain



and　timber；　and　while　（as　it　is　alleged）　there　are　still　to　be



found　influential　men　who　believe　in　the　cosmopolitical　system　and



distrust　their　own　experience。　Dr　Bowring's　report　gives　us　most



important　explanations　on　these　points　as　well　as　on　the



circumstances　of　the　German　Commercial　Union　and　the　tactics　of　the



English　Government。　Let　us　endeavour　to　throw　a　little　light　on



this　report。



　　　　First　of　all；　we　have　to　consider　the　point　of　view　from　which



it　was　written。　Mr　Labouchere；　President　of　the　board　of　Trade



under　the　Melbourne　Ministry；　had　sent　Dr　Bowring　to　Germany　for



the　same　purpose　as　that　for　which　Mr　Poulett　Thompson　had　sent　him



to　France　in　the　year　1834。　Just　as　it　was　intended　to　mislead　the



French　by　concessions　in　respect　of　wines　and　brandies　to　open



their　home　market　to　English　manufactured　goods；　so　it　was　intended



to　mislead　the　Germans　to　do　the　same　by　concessions　in　respect　of



grain　and　timber；　only　there　was　a　great　difference　between　the　two



missions　in　this　respect；　that　the　concession　which　was　to　be



offered　to　the　French　had　to　fear　no　opposition　in　England；　while



that　which　had　to　be　offered　to　the　Germans　had　first　to　be　fought



for　in　England　herself。



　　　　Hence　the　tendency　of　these　two　reports　was　of　necessity　of



quite　a　different　character。　The　report　on　the　commercial　relations



between　France　and　England　was　written　exclusively　for　the　French；



to　them　it　was　necessary　to　represent　that　Colbert　had　accomplished



nothing　satisfactory　through　his　protective　regulations；　it　was



necessary　to　make　people　believe　that　the　Eden　Treaty　was



beneficial　to　France；　and　that　Napoleon's　Continental　system；　as



well　as　the　then　existing　French　prohibitive　system；　had　been