RELATED TOPICS 259 
The corresponding figures for the year 1910 were 
£19,937,853 and £29,534,632. That is to say, the value 
added by our manufacturing processes in 1905 was 
£9,741,368, and £9,596,779 in 1910—an actual decrease, 
despite the fact that meat freezing, butter and cheese 
factories are included, for which the corresponding 
statistics would undoubtedly show a large increase. 
Now, what conclusions do these statistics furnish? 
I am fully aware of the fact that without studying 
fluctuations in prices mere comparison of values is 
misleading. The simplest way of making a rough esti- 
mate of the effect of price changes is to consider the 
relative changes in the price index number of the two 
main groups of products—farm and non-farm products. 
We find from Dr. MclIlraith’s index numbers that both 
groups rose in price in 1910 compared with the prices 
for 1905, but that non-farm products have risen less in 
value than farm products, as is always the case in a 
time of rising prices. But this difference alone is not 
sufficient to account for either the stagnation in the 
progress of manufactures or the rapid strides which the 
primary industries have made. The general conclusion 
is that while the period 1905-1910 was a prosperous one 
generally, our manufacturing industries were at a 
standstill, and this despite the fact that they were 
protected to an extent of at least 20 per cent. all 
round. 
The truth probably is that they had already suffered 
reaction after the false stimulus given them by the 
protective tariff which our manufacturers had secured 
for their industries previously. Under these circum- 
stances we are not surprised that they now require 
another stimulant. Hence the recent cry for more 
protection and still more protection, even though the 
protected industries of the country afford employment 
for only some 5 per cent of the population. The pro- 
