BY R. M. JOHNSTON, F.L.S. 163 



In tliese simple illustrations the direct effects of increased 

 obstacles between producer and consumer are set forth in 

 plain terms, so far as interchange with a distant country- 

 affects the conditions of a country circumstanced like our 

 ideal Euphrasia. To apply the argument involving obstacles 

 to other countries not so favourably conditioned as Euphrasia 

 might favour the adoption of interchange between two or 

 more distant countries, as effecting improvement in the 

 condition of consumers in each country — but this improve- 

 ment could only reach the highest possible quota for such a 

 place where the exchanges are confined to the necessary 

 products, which are either naturally easily produced beyond 

 local needs, or in respect of products which are naturally 

 deficient within its own border. In such case the exchange 

 •of the former by exports would have to be met with a similar 

 value of imports of the latter. But even here the disadvan- 

 tageous effects of obstacles are not a whit lessened. The 

 disadvantageous effects of obstacles have to be endured so 

 long as they do not outweigh the advantages of the desired 

 exchanges. 



Nay, there is one form of want— Food — which no obstacle 

 ■can outweigh so long as the energies of the labourer in other 

 directions remain imexhausted. The unfortunate country so 

 circumstanced must of necessity effect exchanges with food 

 ■countries, or perish as a community. Still more terrible is it 

 for the masses of this country if it should happen that it lacks 

 the natural or raw products upon whose manufacture the 

 exchanges for the food of other countries depends. 



In such a case the friction of obstacles (distance) between. 

 (1) producer of raw products (2), manufacturer, and (3), 

 consumer — attains its maximum — notwithstanding that 

 science and skill may have done, and are still doing, wonders 

 by steam and other contrivances on sea and land to minimise 

 its lowering influence on the amount of satisfactions propor- 

 tionate to labour exerted. 



The Economist may here exclaim : How does the Euphrasian 

 argument from obstacles reconcile itself with such a case as 

 the United Kingdom. He will no doubt proceed to show that 

 no nation on earth has carried the method of interchange 

 with other countries to so high a pitch as the United Kingdom. 

 Her vessels are found laden with the products of exchange 

 in every important harbour of every country. 



Her aggregate wealth is the envy of nations, amounting to 

 a sum something approaching =£130,000,000 as a yearly 

 income. Her external interchange trade amounts to 64^ 

 millions yearly, 362 millions being imports and 281 millions 

 being exports. Her annual value of real estate alone reaches 

 ^196,000,000. Surely, he would continue confidently, this 



