ernment by means of direct taxation, it cannot be other than encouraging to all men who seek the improvement of government methods according to scientific principles to know that in this country, which has been given over for many years to protectionist theories, it has been possible for a few men to attain such a measure of success in the advocacy of absolute free trade doctrine.

"We are very glad that the organization has been so prosperous, and we hope that its future growth will be in all respects equal to its promising beginning."

The Chicago Tribune, in heartily endorsing the plan and work of the Alliance, says:

cess.

"The tariff robbers are all organized, and have representatives at Washington during every session of Congress. The tariff-robbed have no organization, no unity of purpose, and consequently no sucThe Free Trade Alliance offers the nucleus of the needed organization. A congeries of clubs, extending in a network over the whole country, and organized under one common management is by no means an impossibility. Take a man of education ardently imbued with a belief in the paramount importance of the cause, with a ready pen, fluency in speech, and some tact in meeting men,-take such a man, settle $40,000 on him, so that he can be guaranteed support for himself and his, and he can do some marvelous work. The combination of qualities is by no means uncommon, but the men who possess them are apt to have them deadened by the necessary pursuit of money, if they are born poor, and by the enervating influence of wealth, if they are born rich and reared in luxury. The time is ripe for such a man, and many eyes are looking for him. If the Presidential election of 1876, settles the currency question, the country will be all ready for a great struggle on free trade."

We do not know how soon "the great struggle" is coming-there are signs of it already in the air-but the men on the right side must begin now to inform the people, that they also may be on the right side when the time comes. It will be a life and death struggle when it does

come.

The Engineering and Mining Journal is a representative of some of our most important industries, which is neither prohibition nor free trade. in its policy, but gives the facts on both sides. It is, therefore, the more significant that, in discussing the duty on copper, it says that while a number of unprofitable mines would be closed without the tariff and the price be reduced 20 that the enormous earnings of the combination running the two chief mines would be much decreased, yet even then our production would exceed our consumption and no foreign copper would come in. The imposition of a tariff, therefore, simply "makes manufacturers demand from our own people prices greatly in excess of

those at which they are willing to sell to foreigners" and prevents our using American labor to manufacture it into other shape for export.

"Now, since no amount of coddling or subsidy can increase either the quantity or richness of ore in a vein, and since the production of our rich mines exceeds our consumptive demand, it seems unjust that every consumer of copper should be taxed to make good an unfortunate investment in unprofitable mines."

"Free trade should be one grand aim of our legislation. The arguments which uphold protection as between nations lose no force when applied to states, counties or towns. The only natural protection is that afforded by oceans or mountains, or other physical barriers, and certainly in our case these ought to be sufficient."-The Christian Union, Aug. 4th, 1875.

The one need of the people of this country, in the question of free trade, is information. When the people are thoroughly informed, there is no question what their verdict will be. It becomes, therefore, very important to disseminate the literature of political economy. Lists of many of the leading works will be found in our advertising pages, and we especially call attention to the fact that Bastiat's "Sophisms of Protection," as originally published in this country by the American Free Trade League, with Mr. Horace White's preface, is now in the list of G. P. Putnam's Sons.

The Christian Union for Nov. 17 says:

"Supervising Architect Potter recommends immediate steps for the construction of a new Custom House in this city. No doubt, if we are to have custom houses at all it is well to have good ones; and although we would like to see them wholly abolished, that is hardly to be expected within the present century. The only suggestion that we would make to Mr. Potter is that in drawing his plans he should try to render the Custom House utterly unfit for political machinery." The architect who can do this has not yet been born, and by the time he is born there will be no custom houses.

An incident occurred at our first public meeting, interesting to us because of its bearing upon the international character of our work.

A native of Japan, Mr. Sacchi Taneda, having become very much. interested in our advocacy of commercial freedom, attended the meeting. and desired to identify himself with us.

At a meeting of the Executive Committee, held at the close of the public meeting, Mr. Taneda was introduced by the President, and cordially welcomed to our membership.

MONTHLY PROCEEDINGS.

The first public meeting of the International Free Trade Alliancewas held at the rooms on Washington Square, on Monday evening, November 8th.

The rooms of the Alliance were well filled, and a deep interest was manifested in all the proceedings.

The President, Mr. F. H HARRISON, in calling the meeting to order, said:

GENTLEMEN,-This is the first meeting of the International Free Trade Alliance. It is the first meeting of this kind that has ever been held so far as I know in this country. Our organization is somewhat different from that of any other organization which has taken the name of free trade to itself. We are, as the American Free Trade League was, with whom a portion of us have labored, in favor of abolishing the protective features in our system of collection of duties; but we go further. Our objective point is that of absolute Free Trade. We are in favor of reform, as the American Free Trade League was in favor of reform; but we are not, as they were, in favor of stopping at any point short of free trade. We speak respectfully of them, because we know the object that they had in view and we know the gentlemen with whom we labored. It is scarcely necessary for me to prolong my remarks. I simply desire to say that we know something of the strength, and we know something of the wily arts of our opponents. We do not despise them, but we propose to meet them on fair ground, and discuss this subject upon its merits, believing that we have truth and justice on our side. The PRESIDENT then called upon the Secretary to make a statement and address regarding the work of the Alliance, which was responded to as follows:

GENTLEMEN, I have in my hands several letters received from gentlemen who express their sympathy with our work, but who are unable to be with us to-night. One from Professor Summer of New Haven, another from Dr. C. R. Agnew, another from Parke Goodwin,. Esq., and another from Robert B. Roosevelt, Esq. Also a note recently received from Dorman B. Eaton, Esq., in which he says: "I wish you "success in your proposed work. The darkness that needs to be en"lightened and the difficulties that need to be removed along your proposed path, are enough to discourage any man who has not an "unselfish and patriotic spirit."

This organization and this meeting to-night are the result of a quiet work which has been going on for about four years past. Our President and myself were once members of the executive committee of the American Free Trade League when that organization was in favor of "unrestricted commercial intercourse with all the world." We under

stood this to mean absolute free trade; we ascertained, however, that it was not so interpreted by the League, but that it was intended to mean an "anti-protective revenue tariff." This was too limited a meaning for us, but there was no organizatión more advanced with which we could become identified, and we continued to work in that field. In course of time the league changed its constitution and became an avowed advocate for a revenue tariff, was afterwards involved in the Cincinnati Convention of 1872, and since that event it has entirely disappeared. The American Free Trade League has no vital existence to-day.

After withdrawing from the League we prepared a pamphlet with the title of "Our Revenue System and the Civil Service: Shall they be "Reformed?" in which we proposed to secure reform by abolishing custom houses and officers as the best means to accomplish the result. This pamphlet we have sent to those whom we supposed would give it thoughtful consideration. We have distributed five thousand copies, and have received hundreds of letters cordially approving its proposed method, and of these, one hundred men, in as many different towns, have volunteered to co-operate with us in promoting the work. We have an Advisory Committee, so called, of eighteen gentlemen of this city, and an Executive Committee, recently formed, who are engaging in the work with an earnestness worthy of success.

We have been supported until recently by irregular but sufficient contributions, amounting thus far to less than a total of one thousand dollars. We do not believe the same proportion of results has ever been secured in the expenditure of so small a sum of money.

We are now preparing to issue a journal for the purpose of more readily communicating with our corresponding members and as a means of enlarging the boundaries of our work, and have adopted also definite conditions of membership, which will appear in our Journal, and we are preparing for an increasingly vigorous prosecution of the work.

This is, as has already been said, the first public meeting that we suppose has ever been held for advocating Absolute Free Trade. There have been individuals all along in the history of our country who have advocated "Free Trade and Direct Taxation," and there have been more of them in the Southern than in the Northern states, but I do not know that there has ever been an organization distinctly and definitely formed for the purpose of advancing the adoption of this system; and whether little or much or nothing grows out of this effort, we cannot tell. We hope, however, that in so far as endeavoring to sow pure political seed in a country devoted to freedom, the effort may be successful.

Free trade seems to be very offensive to a large number of men who claim that the system of "protection" is necessary for this country, because it is comparatively a new one among nations. Now, as the protective system is one which prevents us from buying what we need in the cheapest market-one which places obstacles in our way and requires a greater amount of effort to overcome them-the question arises whether

the country when in its infancy did not need greater freedom and less obstacles and fewer barriers than at any other time in its history? and if so, when did or when can the time ever come that such barriers should be raised? When this country was first settled in its little colonies did they want to shut out from all the world anything that could be brought to them in the way of clothing or tools, or even luxuries? Or did they need to get them of whomsoever they could on the best terms possible?

It seems to me that it is necessary for those who advocate the "protection" or shut-out theory to tell us when the time comes, if ever, that the first barriers should be raised.

We are of course opposed to the "protective" theory, believing that the more men are helped by the government the more they will need to be helped, and that the time will never come when they can stand alone. Let me illustrate what I believe is the true result of the first recognition of "protection" as an incidental feature of our revenue system: Nearly ninety years ago, when we first adopted a tariff for revenue, "incidental protection" was admitted as one of its features by the fixing of a duty of 5 per cent. on cottons and woolens and 7 per cent. on iron, and these rates were believed to be all that were at that time or would ever be necessary for protection as well as for revenue. To-day, very much larger rates, perhaps a full average of ten times more, are considered absolutely necessary for protection alone in order to sustain these interests, and the revenue feature has become a subordinate one. It seems to me very evident by this kind of comparison that "protection," applied thoroughly and increasingly as it has been, has proved more enervating in its effect than anything that could be foisted upon the country, and from the effects of which we cannot recover except by removing it entirely.

Now, in regard to a revenue tariff, a great many persons claim to be free traders who advocate a revenue tariff. We differ with them in this construction, because, not only as a matter of principle, but practically, it is not possible to frame a tariff for revenue that will produce sufficient income for the government and not be in some essential respects and to a large degree a protective tariff. It is therefore very difficult for many persons to understand the difference between a revenue tariff which is largely protective and a protective tariff.

The working of either of these requires custom houses and all the cumbrous and expensive machinery of the government to enforce the laws of commercial obstruction, resulting as the custom house system has in becoming so corrupt that it is a curse to the country. There has been an outgrowth of systematic smuggling, bribery, corruption and extravagance, together with a host of officials who use their places and power for partisan ends, and this outgrowth has become so identified with and a part of the system that it cannot be exterminated while the system exists. With regard to free trade, as we understand its meaning. trade absolute is the underlying element of all the questions of reform before the country to-day. Free trade is a question of exchange, and