Question: Resolved. That the time has now come when the policy of protection should be abandoned by the United States.

Brief for the Affirmative.

C. E. COOK and A. F. COSBY.

Best general references: Bastiat Sophisms of Protection; Grosvenor, Does Protection Protect; Henry George, Protection or Free Trade; Mill, Principles of Pol. Econ. II, 531-510; The Nation, IX, 428 (Nov. 18, 1869), XXVIII, 161 (Mar. 6, 1879), XXIX, 338 (Nov. 20, 1879), XXXIV, 288 (Apr. 6, 1882), XXXVI, 118 (Feb. 8 1883); Sen. Carlisle, Cong. Rec, XXIII, 7, pp. 6910-5917 (July 29, 1892); Speech, Col. McClure, Sept. 26, 1892, pamphlet; Democratic Campaign Book; D. A. Wells in Forum. Sept. 1892; F. A. Walker, I. J. of Ecn., Apr. 1890; E. A. Atkinson in Pop. Sci, Monthly, XXXVII, Aug. 1890; Sen. Vest. in No. Amer. Rev. CLV, Oct. 1892; Papers, Oct. 1892.

I. Protection is unsound in theory: Mill, II, 532; Bastiat, 1.-(a) It shuts out what by nature is ours: Bastiat, 73-80.-(b) It raises unnatural obstacles to intercourse; Bastiat, 84-85.-(c) It can only raise prices by diminishing quantities of goods for sale: Bastiat, 7, 17.-(d) It endangers the interests it aims to promote: Nation, XXXVI. 118.-(e) It may transfer, but not increase, capital: Bastiat, 93.-(f) The doctrine of protection for revenue is inconsistent: Mill, II, 538.-(g) It is antisocial: Bastiat, 15, 127; Nation, XXXVI, 118; ibid, XXVIII, 161.

II. Protection is unsound in general practice.-(a) It makes capital and labor less efficient: Mill, Ii, 532, 539.-(b) It hurts our carrying trade: Nation, XXXVI, 118.-(c) It closes against us many of the world's best markets: Mill, II, 537; Nation, XXVIII, 161; ibid, XXXVI, 118.

III. Protection is not beneficial to any class.-(a) It raises prices to consumers. E. A. Atkinson, Pop. Sci. Mth. 37, Aug '90.-(b) It does not raise wages of laborers. Carlisle. E. A. Atkinson, Bost. Her. Nov. 2, '92.-(c) It hurts farmers, McClure, p. 16.-(d) Hurts community by keeping us from foreign markets, Sen. Vest. No. Amer. Rev. 155. Oct. '92.-(e) Increases cost of materials. Dem. Camp. p. 91.-(f) Does not help us against pauper labor. E. A. Atkinson Pop. Sci. Mth. 37, Aug. '90.-(g) Does not benefit the majority, Nation LV. 299.-(h) Infant industries not permanently aided, F. A. Walker, I. J. of Econ. Apr. '90.

IV. Protection tends to run to extremes.-(a) Perverts taxation from its proper uses, D. A. Wells, Forum, Sept. '92.-(b) Creates dangerous precedents, Ibid.-(c) Now seek permanent protection, F. A. Walker, I. J. of Econ, Apr. '90.-(1) Which is impossible, Nation LV. 252.-(d) Applied indiscriminately, Walker, I. J. Econ. '90.-(e) Creates monopolies.

V. The people want protection no longer.-(a) Elections of 1890, 1892, Bost. Her. Nov. 9, 10, 11, 12, 1892.-(b) Harrison defeated because of the McKinley Bill, Ibid.

Brief for the Negative.

F. W. DALLINGER and WM. HILL.

Best general references: Patten's Economic Basis of Protection; Hoyt's Protection vs. Free Trade; Start's Phamphlet, Early American Statesmen on the Tariff; McKinley's Speech, Cong. Rec. (1890) Vol. 21, p. 4248. Aldrich's speech, Cong. Rec. (1892) Vol. 23, p. 6746.

I. The policy of protection is sound in principle.-(a) It enables a country to fix the terms of exchange in foreign trade.-(1) Foreign demand for our commodities is necessarily great.-(2) Protection lessens our demand for foreign commodities: Bowen, Am. Pol. Economy, 480.-(b) Protection is the best means of increasing the "consumer's rent;" Marshall, Principles of Economics, 508; Patten's Economic Basis of Protection.

II. The policy of protection has proved beneficial in practice.-(a) Without it no country has secured a symmetrical development of its industries; Thompson, Pol. Econ., 267.-(b) Every period of protection in the United States has been followed by great material prosperity; Statistical Abstract, passim.

III. Protection secures a home market for commodities incapable of transportation abroad: E. E. Hale, Tom Torrey's Tariff Talks.-(a) It enhances the value of land; J. R. Dodge, How Protection Protects the Farmer.

IV. A Protective tariff does not raise prices.-(a) The establishment of a new industry has been invariably followed by lower prices; Cong. Rec. Vol. 21. 4248, case of.-(1) steel rails,-(2) Glass and earthenware,-(3) wool,-(4) Tin plate.-(b) Since the passage of the McKinley Act the cost of living in the U. S. has diminished; Aldrich's Report in Cong. Rec. (1892) Vol. 23, pp. 6746-6776.

V. The policy of protection to young industries is manifestly advantageous to a country.-(a) It is sound in principle; Mill. Bk V. Ch. 10. Section 1.,-It is successful in practice:-(1) Case of Tin plate.-(2) pearl buttons $c: Ayer's Rep. Aug. 15, '92.