There is good reason to believe, however, that the administration is not going to succumb so easily. Thus far there may have been something more of promise than performance, and they only can understand a difficulty like this who have tried to remove it. Certainly, there is a high degree of expectation that President Hayes will leave this Custom-house business a great deal better than he found it, and that he is preparing the way for a reform as "thorough, radical, and complete" as in this degenerate world we can well hope for. So far, at least, as he tries to equal his pledges he can rest assured of the sympathy and coöperation of the people, which are, in fact, the guarantee of ultimate success.

ARTICLE IX.-NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS.

PROTECTION IN THE UNITED STATES.*-This volume contains the lectures originally delivered before the International Free Trade Alliance of New York by Prof. Sumner of Yale College in the spring of 1876. The author seeks to show by the history of the protective legislation of the United States, which he claims to have been framed in ignorance of its effects, and to have been frequently changed without any conception of the public interest, that such legislation tends to diminish national production.

In the first lecture he argues that as trade is absolutely free between the States of the Union with the best possible results, the same good results would follow were trade free between the United States and other countries. This, he says, is the true American system. Texas was won from Mexico, and when admitted into the Union was open to trade to the other States of the Union, while Mexico, of which it had been a part, remained under the former restrictions. A citizen of Vermont can trade freely with New Hampshire, Massachusetts, and New York, "but if he wants to trade northward to Canada, it is regarded as fatal to him and to his country that he should do so freely."

In the second lecture he discusses the theory that the legislature of a State can direct and regulate the business of the citizens better than they can do it themselves, claiming it to be an American. principle that no man shall obtain by law any advantage from traditional or fictitious privileges. He denies that taxation can ever be a productive force. This denial he enforces with great acumen and power, and illustrates in various ways. The arguments in these introductory chapters are not new, but are urged with much strength and ability.

The remainder of the volume is devoted to the history of tariff legislation in the United States. Beginning with the statement that "the war of American Independence was a revolt against unjust taxation, he speaks somewhat cursorily of the attempts

* Lectures on the History of Protection in the United States, delivered before the International Free-Trade Alliance. By W. G. SUMNER, Professor in Yale College. Reprinted from "The New Century." Published for the International Free Trade Alliance by G. P. Putnam's Sons, 182 Fifth Avenue, New York. 1877.

during the period of the Revolution to make treaties of commerce with other nations, and then more at length of the discussions in the constitutional conventions. He speaks of the legislation at that time as illustrating all subsequent tariff legislation in this country, and as "a grand grab struggle between interests and sections." He criticizes at some length the report on manufactures made in December, 1791, by Alexander Hamilton, to whose good faith and philosophical spirit he pays tribute.

He traces the establishment of protection in this country during the early part of this century, and sketches the commercial legis lation during the Napoleonic wars and down to the close of the war with Great Britain, and gives the history of the tariff of 1816, remarking that down to 1832 tariff laws were passed in every presidential year except one. The tariff bill of 1824 comes in for a thorough examination, as does the bill of 1828. Following the history down to the present time, he concludes with several deductions.

1st. This notion that there is some means to increase, by an adjustment of taxes, the wealth of a country, has had a very full trial amongst us. It was inherited from older countries; it was hostile to all the beliefs and habits of thought of the American people and totally incongruous with our social and political system. The Americans adopted the notion, that they could get certain industries started, which would then go alone and become independent sources of wealth. "But instead of strong, independent industries, we have to-day only a hungry and clamorous crowd of infants."

2d. This continual law making about industry has been prolific of industrial and political mischief. It has tainted our political life with log-rolling, presidential wire-pulling, lobbying, and custom-house politics.

The book well sustains its author's reputation, but must be read to be appreciated. No sketch like that we have attempted can do it justice.

ESSAYS ON POLITICAL ECONOMY.*-The interest newly awakened in the questions of Political Economy has led Mr. David A. Wells to publish some selected essays from the writings of F. Bastiat,

* Essays on Political Economy. By FREDERICK BASTIAT. English Translation, revised, with notes. By David A. Wells. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 182 Fifth avenue. 1877.

one of the leaders in opinion on this subject in France, who lived in the first half of this century. Some of these essays have been published in Germany, Italy, England, Belgium, and the United States, and in all these countries have passed through several editions. Their sprightliness of tone and fullness of illustration make them singularly attractive and interesting to all readers.

The first essay on "capital and interest" is largely devoted to showing that capital is entitled to remuneration, in other words, that interest is a legitimate result of the use of capital; a question which has hardly been brought into discussion in this country, but which has been much discussed in France; Mr. Proudhon and other Socialists claiming that "the productiveness of capital, which is condemned by Christianity under the name of usury, is the true cause of misery, the true origin of destitution, the eternal obstacle to the establishment of a true Republic." These ideas are beginning to obtain foothold in the United States, and the reproduction of this essay is very timely. Other essays, on "What is Government ?" "The Law," and "What is Money ?" exhibit the author's characteristics, and are interesting discussions of topics which will attract much attention, if they have not already done so.

The essay, however, which we think the ablest, the most interesting and the most suggestive, is entitled "That which is seen and that which is not seen," the object of which is to show that the effect of an economic law is not limited to its immediate visible influence, but is to be traced in ulterior consequences. In this essay occurs the famous illustration of "the broken window;" but the author does not confine himself to one illustration, but enlivens the discussion with such a variety of anecdote, explanation, and elucidation, that the reader is carried along with all the interest of a romance. Yet one feels inclined to ask, as of a romance, is it true? Does it express the whole truth? M. Bastiat states some things which "are not seen," that is, some remote consequences, does he state all? Take the "broken window" illustration as an example. A shopkeeper has a pane of glass broken, and a glazier is employed to replace it, and receives for his labor one dollar. This, says M. Bastiat, is what is seen. What is not seen is, that as the shopkeeper has spent a dollar upon this, he has it not to spend for anything else. If he had not spent it to replace his broken window he would have had it to replace his old shoes, or to add a book to his

library. "In short, he would have employed his dollar in some way which this accident has prevented." And "therefore," he argues, "neither industry in general nor the sum total of national labor is affected whether windows are broken are not."

The anecdote is first used to show that there is no profit in the destruction of property, either direct or remote. The author applies the same illustration and the same mode of reasoning to various forms of restriction. To the levy of taxes and the tariff laws he applies his theory, also to the employment of men by the government on public works, the use of machinery, and various other activities; and it is very interesting to see how in each instance he brings to the front some remote consequence which seems to have escaped the notice of the advocates of the opposing theory.

As in his illustration of the broken window, he says "if the shopkeeper had not spent his dollar to replace his broken window, he would have employed it in some way which this accident has prevented;" so he subsequently puts his theory into a more general statement. "If there is in the world a workman with unemployed arms, there is also in the world an unemployed dollar. These two elements meet and combine." But is there not something which is still unseen, at least by M. Bastiat and the political economists of his school. It is not true that the capitalist, although his money is unemployed,' will always use it. He may think it safer and more profitable to allow it to remain unused for a time, waiting for new and more advantageous investments, than to expose it to risk by employing it at present, when the promise of remuneration is small and the danger of loss great. This is the meaning of the large amount of capital at the present moment unemployed in all the nations of the world, while there are thousands upon thousands of unemployed or poorly employed hands.

M. Bastiat says, "if you will go to the root of all the arguments, which are adduced in its [restriction] favor, all you will find will be the paraphrase of this vulgar saying: What would become of the glazier if nobody broke windows?" But this is the question of questions to-day: What shall be done with the workmen when capital does not furnish employment? It is useless to say to a starving workman with a starving family that supply and demand are equal and expect him to be satisfied with this aphorism. The immediate necessity is upon him, and he will