Democratic Sentinel, Volume 16, Number 28, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 29 July 1892 — Protection “Forever.” [ARTICLE]

Protection “Forever.”

The American Economist, which says its ’’readers are numbered by the millions,” is conducting an educational bureau to give protectionist speakers and leaders “tips" as to how to reply to free traders’ questions. Here is question No. 21, with the Economist’s reply: “How long should a protective duty on an article be retained?” “ForeVer. It finally abolishes itself, and as it then harms no one, it should be retained to guard against future exigencies and future dangers. ” The Economist should have given a few illustrations to make this economic fact clear to a few of its millions of readers who, though they may have equally acute minds, yet are untrained in economic thinking. Perhaps we can assist it. Suppose, for instance, that a farmer has a barbed wire fence in a particularly dangerous place. After it has killed ail of his farm animals that had spunk enough to run against it with any considerable degree of force, it will “then harm no one,” but “it should be retained to guard against future exigencies," when the farmer shall have obtained a new supply of really live animals. Or suppose that owing to imperfect plumbing which allows sewer gas to escape in the house, the proprietor is bereft of his wife and children; the unsanitary plumbing will then “harm no one,” but nevertheless “it should be retained to guard against future exigencies"—such as a second marriage might incur.