The protectionist extends it to everything--so he wishes to _protect_
everything.
"Labor constitutes _all_ the wealth of a people," says he; "to
protect national industry, _all_ national industry, manufacturing
industry, _all_ manufacturing industry, is the idea which should
always be kept before the people." The petitioners saw no labor
excepting that of manufacturers; so they would admit that alone to the
favors of protection. They said:
"Raw material is _devoid of all human labor_. For that reason we
should not tax it. Fabricated articles can no longer occupy national
labor. We consider them the most taxable."
We are not inquiring whether protection to national labor is
reasonable. The protectionist and the Bordelais agree upon this point,
and we, as has been seen in the preceding chapters, differ from both.
The question is to ascertain which of the two--the protectionists or
the raw-materialists of Bordeaux--give its just acceptation to the
word "labor."
Now, upon this ground, it must be said, the protectionist is, by all
odds, right; for observe the dialogue which might take place between
them:
The PROTECTIONIST: "You agree that national labor ought to be
protected.
Pages:
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169