164 PREFERENTIAL TARIFF 



many, and the rigid discipline under which they are 

 schooled, have had a somewhat similar result in 

 that country. But even in Germany and America 

 the revolt against Protection has been growing in 

 recent years, and appears to incline towards a 

 movement away from Protection. 



I mentioned these instances to show that the 

 introduction of Protection into a. country is not 

 universally and necessarily followed by disaster. 

 But the natural and economic conditions which 

 prevail in India are what we have to consider. 

 In other words, what results would Protection 

 produce for her ? We have here an enormous 

 population of the very poor; and however limited 

 their physical requirements may be, the cheapness 

 of the things they need is essential to their very 

 existence. Can it be denied that artificially-pro- 

 duced dearness would be injurious to the well- 

 being of a great majority of the people of this 

 country ? And if we are told that Protection 

 will increase wages so as to compensate the wage- 

 earner for the rise in prices, we must remember 

 that by far the largest proportion of the working 

 Indian population is engaged in agriculture. 



Assuming that Protection would lead to a general 

 increase in the wages of our manufacturing indus- 

 tries, what would be the effect on the rest of the 

 population, who are to a large extent merely 

 consumers ? Where are the increased wages to 

 come from which are to enable them to face with 

 equanimity any artificial increase in the cost of 

 living ? 



Agriculture is not in the main, so far as I under- 

 stand the Protectionists' arguments, one of the 

 industries which a tariff wall would assist in India; 

 and consequently the rise in wages of the manu- 

 facturing classes would not extend ipso facto 

 to the rural classes. Very possibly the general 



