the poverty of any European State. The real cause of poverty in Europe is the great wealth of the few. The masses must always be poor when a few kings and nobles hoard such enormous lion's shares. The Czar of Russia drains his people of $9,125,000 a year, or $25,000 a day. Germany's emperor receives $6,000 a day; the emperor of Austria $10,000. The Sultan of Turkey gets $18,000 a day and five hundred wives to boot. Is it surprising that the people of Turkey are dissatisfied? Is not the costly bauble of monarchy, the oppression of standing armies, the scandalous waste by corrupt officials of the people's money-is not all this in great part responsible for the poverty and suffering of the European masses?

How absurd to attribute the cause to free-trade; free-trade, the very thing which European States have not—the very thing which they know least about! When America has a monarchy and an aristocracy and a royal family alone costing sixty-five million dollars a year-the yearly sum Europe pays directly for royalty— when that day comes, then indeed it may come to pass that the level of American labor will sink to the level of European labor.

England-England with its royalty, its endless red tape, its idle aristocracy, its army of useless officials-England alone of all monarchical forms of governments pays its laboring classes living wages, and England alone has free-trade. America with all its abundance of land, its democratic and comparatively inexpensive government, its sparsity of population-even favored America is pulling behind that little island in the sea; is taking a second place when her natural advantages entitle her to the very foremost seat among the nations. Formerly we had the lion's share of the carrying trade of the world. What have we now? I have been in the ports of almost all the seas on the globe. When I saw au American vessel I stared at it curiously, so great a rarity was it amid the forest of masts of vessels belonging to other countries.

Italy has protective tariffs; skilled Italian mechanics earn only half a dollar a day. England has no tariffs, but English mechanics earn from $1.21 to $1.50 a day.

Germany is heavily protected; a German bricklayer earns sixty cents a day. German weavers and spinners receive sixty cents for a day of twelve to thirteen hours. For a day of only nine to ten hours the unprotected English spinner gets $1.15.

Russia has high tariffs; but the Russian laborer averages onethird less wages than the English laborer.

I have prepared two tables; the one will show at a glance the wages received in protected Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Russia, France, and Belgium as compared with the wages received in freetrade England--the other will show the amount of tariffs imposed upon certain articles by different European States. For the wagetable a claim to only approximate and relative correctness is made; to attempt more in so small a compass would be impossible as well as absurd. Wages differ in the same country, in the same town, in the same shop or factory. It is sufficient to the purpose to give the average, or general figure. For instance, in Berlin bricklayers receive four to five marks a day-ninety-eight cents to one dollar and twenty cents. But, generally speaking, the German bricklayer receives no more than fifty to sixty cents a day; moreover, the cost of living in Berlin is dearer than elsewhere in Germany. I weigh such facts, and in my table state the wages of a German bricklayer as being sixty cents a day.

For Russia the estimates are based upon the time actually engaged at work, which is seldom above nine months a year. To deduct one-fourth from the amount received when actually at work, in order to strike an average for the year, would convey an incorrect idea, for the Russian lives only nine months, the other three he is existing existing at a cost of from five to six cents a day. During the three coldest months of the winter he remains buried in his hovel, making nothing, spending almost nothing-hibernating liko the bear. I have for these reasons chosen to regard the Russian year as consisting of but nine months, and the figures in the tablo are constructed on that basis.

Let the Protectionist read these tables and say why, if protection protects, if tariffs make high wages, the protected States of Europe are in so impoverished a condition. If free-trade causes stagnation and low wages, why is England so far ahead of her protected European competitors? so far ahead of her own condition forty years ago, before she had the sense to adopt a free-trade policy?

Until these questions are answered, the thoughtful student cannot but ask himself,

"Does protection protect?"

12*

N. B.-A blank space opposite the name of an article does not necessarily mean that that article is not taxed; the author was able to obtain only a partial list of articles subject to tariff taxation in the several States mentioned.