Please wait. Contacting image service... loading

Article text

CORRESPONDENCE.
Sir.—I am somewhat relieved to
find it necessary to den I with only one
Idler in your issue of May 21st, and
appeal for your consideration once
a^ain. as this will be my final con
tribution. Your correspondent. J. A. ,
Hodgson, as might be expected, has
drifted from the alleged iniquity of
the town council on to the wholly ir
relative matter of freetrade. He quotes
the Scripture, speaks of truth and
justice, admits being a non-ratepayer.
He accuses all protectionists as up
holders of legalised robbery, and
marvels at my effrontery in supporting
it. An explanation just here from me,
1 see by my previous letter that "in
dividuality" takes the place of the in
u-:ided word "individualism." As both
these words have a totally different
meaning, and if the error was mine in
writing, or the printer's in printing, I
would like to correct same to read
"individualism." J do most certainly
believe in the separate existence of
mankind. Mr. Hodgson states he has
worked beside me as stoker. So he
has. I remember now, and I never
forget anything 1 remember. The
brakes mentioned by him were often
on wheti 1 would have wished it to be
otherwise, so that I could have re
ported better progress; This "is for
the information of those in the posi
tion to understand. Mr. Hodgson
quotes Henry George, the Prophet of
'Frisco, and professes to be a desciple
of that undoubtedly clever man. If
any person in Peterborough, or else
where can give me a clear exposition
of what friend Hodgson really does
want, I would deeply appreciate the
knowledge, as I feel certain he is not
too certain himself. Of course, it is
the privilege of your readers, and my
self in particular, to doubt the sincer
ity of Mr. Hodgson if we desire to do
so. However, we will lea vie it to
tweedledum and his offsider tweedle
dee to decide. J. Stuart Mill once
stated, "He who knows only his side
of the case, knows little of that."
Does Mr. Hodgson know the case for
protection? 1 have read "Progress
and Poverty/' and I am still a protec
tionist. 1 have found much pleasure
in reading the works of great men .
who have lived. One in particulor im
pressed me a great deal, ''Aristotle
on Government" It is in our local
library, and 1 strongly recommend it
to our friend. Mr. Hodgson claims
to have discovered the means whereby
the workers will come into thear own,
So do the followers of Karl Marx,
and so did the renegade Socialist Mus
solini. This individual now views
liberty as a decomposed corpse, and
gets a big following to back him up.
The workers in Italy do not want li
berty, accprding to him. Mr. Hodgson
mentions my not receiving full wages
for eight hours work a day. X am well
aware of it, but I dare not let my
mind dwell on what I would get if
I depended on htm for help. Has it
ever occurred to him that he is ac
cepting wages, hours of labor, condi
tions of employment, and conditions
of life that he has never in any way
helped to bring about? He left Eng
land 13 years ago to better himself, I
presume, and walked into something
he never had before. It was made
for him. What has been his quota
in helping to maintain it. Nil. A La
bor Government built him a cottage
for wheh he pays 15/6 a week. Pri
vate enterprise charges '30/ and more
for the same design of cottage. Yet
he votes for -private enterprise.
Grateful man. His workmates spend
much money and time in the courts
of law endeavoring to improve his
wages and conditions. They cannot
wait for freetrade to come along. They
are working collectively now. His
contribution to all this is nil. He is
alone, isolated, all of his own choosing.
It is a wonder that his mates are as
tolerant as they are towards him.
They are, to my mind, very gener
ous. 1 have the audacity to believe in
protection. Why? I have my rea
sons. In the year 1842, Sir Robert
Peel started a freetrade movement in
England by abolishing certain duties,
and a gradual process of elcminating
duties was carried on, until England
was a freetrade country. The only
one in the world. All other coun
tries became increasingly protection
ist. England opened up her markets
to all other countries, and they shut
theirs against her. Germany and
U.S.A.. the home of the prophet,
Henry George, have grown rich under
protection. They have most success
fully challenged England's industrial
supremacy. Under protection a coun
try te«ds to become strong industri
ally, and independent. While the ex
port trade of the chief protective
countries was on the up-grade. Eng
land's was on the down grade. Her
then greatest industry, agriculture, on
which the physical, moral and econ
omic well-being depended had been
reduced by freetrade to a disastrous
condition. While universal freetrade
might benefit mankind, any one-sided
policy is economic suicide to the coun
try that adopts it. Knowing this (and
there is much more that could be said)
and being an Australian who has not
known hunger, I vote for Australian
labor and protection. Some day I
"may have reason to alter, but I think
not. 1 sincerely hope that Australia
will never reach the sad condition of
"Merrie England," as vividly described*
by the genial Robert Blatchford. Eng
land is the most miserable country
on God's earth atjthe present time, as
far as workers are concerned. The in
evilablc result of froetracle.
-H. H.
WOOD.
Simplicity of manner is the last at
tainment. Men are very long afraid
of beiiiK natural, from the flread of
lieinjf taken for ordinary.
$