November 30, 1916 
LAND & WATER 
17 
commodities or services, and in any case they provide 
employment for our own people." "This" they add, 
" is the conclusion of the whole matter." " The notion 
of trade as a ' contest ' in which one of the trading 
parties secures ' domination ' over the other, the notion 
that protective tariffs and other barriers are needed 
for ' defence ' and the notion that such ' defence ' 
can be successfully obtahied by any of these methods," 
are termed by the Free Trade Professor " curious assump- 
tions." 
Now if the assertions of the so-called Free Trade 
school are correct, if international trade is nothing more 
than simple barter — ^the exchanging of one class of goods 
for another, the shipment of the surplus products of one 
country in return for those of another — beginning and 
ending at the frontiers of such countries, all this talk 
of trade " war," economic " slavery " and " aggression " 
is imdoubtedly mere " idle vapouring." In this case, 
we must also regard the Paris Conference as a waste of 
time and money, and its recommendations should be 
disregarded. If, however, international trade is some- 
thing far more serious than barter, if it means the possible 
foreign control of our factors of wealth production to 
such an extent as to threaten our national existence, 
then every barrier possible — no matter by what name 
it has hitherto been known, whether " Tariff Reform," 
" Trade Protection " or " Prohibition " — should be raised 
by us and our Allies against the enemy. And those 
writers who would seek to deceive the nation by lulling 
us into a false security by dehberate deception and the 
propagation of economic heresies, should be branded 
as false teachers and traitors. 
Power of the Trust 
Half a century and more ago, when the Manchester 
school was in its zenith, trade was a much simpler and 
less comprehensive affair than it has since become. 
Trade, as defined and understood by Richard Cobden, 
was precisely as it is defined to-day in standard Free 
Trade books. The ' ' Trust " and '' Combine " had not been 
invented. Finance was then a far less potent factor 
in trade and industry than it is now. It was regarded 
as the tool of exchange and little more. Finance rules 
supreme to-day. Industry and Commerce are its servants. 
In all countries finance dominates every sphere pi human 
activity. It governs trade, commerce, industry, in- 
^•entions, science, art, politics, the State and even the 
Church itself ! The creation of the Trusts has been the 
work of Finance. And nowhere have these Trusts met 
with greater encouragement from the State than in Ger- 
many. The United .States which has been dominated 
by them, has attempted by legislation to suppress them— 
although with comparatively little success owing to their 
vast political power. Those familiar with their methods 
know how all-pervading this power is, how ruthlessly 
individuals and pri\ate firms have been driven out of 
business — exterminated — by the unscrupulous use of 
concentrated economic power ! 
The foreign trade of Germany of late years was largely 
in the hands of these great Combines and Trusts. When 
a foreign market seemed desirable for certain German 
staples, the well-known methods of under-selhng 
competitors and offering long credits were practised. 
Behind these Trusts stood the German Government ready 
to guarantee them against losses incurred in strangling 
foreign competitors and securing foreign markets"! I 
know of one case where a great Electrical Supply com- 
pany of Berhn furnished the Buenos Aires market with 
£500,000 of electrical apparatus far below cost — at a 
loss of £300,000 at least — which was afterwards repaid 
them by their own Government. Hand in hand with 
these methods went also the control of all the agencies 
by which the public wants were supplied, such as ad- 
vertising, transportation and distribution. Germans of 
all classes and occupations flocked to these various mar- 
kets in order to control every branch and avenue of 
trade and its tributaries. In Belgium for example, the 
Germans controlled most of the merchandise transport. 
Everywhere they established their banking houses, 
and by offering cheaper credit facilities than their com- 
petitors they secured a vast volume of the financial busi- 
ness of foreigners. This gave them an insight into the 
urivate affairs of their trade competitors regarding terms. 
prices, etc., which they did not scruple to make use of for 
the benefit of Germans. They started iai all foreign cities 
German clubs which were mere centres for their Govern- 
ment spies. They secured interests in foreign journals 
which they utilised to foster German influence and power, 
in every sphere. To what extent they used these privi- 
leges and opportunities afforded them by the generosity of 
their unsuspecting friends and neighbours, Belgians, 
Dutch, Itahans, Americans — to say nothing of ourselves— 
the history of the past twenty-nine months bears eloquent 
testimony. Prior to the war, the Belgians belie\ed 
that within a few years the annexation oi their country 
to tlie German Em]:)ire was a certainty, by the growtli 
and extent of Germany's peaceful penetration. 
Free Trade's Fundamental Error 
The fiindaniental error of Free Traders, is in supposing 
thai trade is merely an exchange of commodities. On the 
contrary, trade nowadays means the exchange of com- 
modities or services for moi.iey or credit, i.e., legal 
claims upon society. The object of the successful 
trader is to acquire wealth, which takes the 
form of investments — lands, bonds, shares, mortgages, 
etc. And all these forms of wealth are merely claims 
backed by the power of the State upon labour, present 
and future. These claims are a source of economic 
po'wcr. 
Economic power is the basis of political power. Surely 
there can be few questions more serious or important 
than into whose hands the economic and political 
power of a nation is to reside ? Moreover the 
political affairs of a nation naturally affect those who 
control its economic power, for the reason that such 
power can only be enjoyed by the authority of the 
State. States have been known to repudiate their 
foreign obligations. Hence universally we find the 
foreign claims of the financial and commercial classes 
of each country backed by its own military and naval 
power. The naval power of Great Britain was called 
upon some years ago to enforce the claims of British 
owners of p:gyptian bonds, whilst Germany did the same 
with Venezuela on behalf of her own financiers. 
Political and economic power arc always found in 
close alliance.. They act and react on each other, each 
rendering assistance and support to the other when re- 
quired. Trade warfare is therefore a struggle for economic 
power, for the control of men and of all factors of wealth 
production. International Free Trade can only flourish 
among free nations. It cannot be • truthfully said to 
exist where the tools of trade — money and credit — are 
the subjects of private monopolies, as they are in this 
country to-day. Moreover, Free Trade, like cricket, 
has its rules and obligations, observance of which is 
essential to a continuance of the policy. With a nation 
like Germany that holds such rules and obhgations in 
contempt, how could Free Trade be resumed or attempted 
with safety ? Free traders' are right in asserting that 
tariffs tend to restrict the production of wealth. If 
(iermany had succeeded in conquering Europe, Free 
Trade would probably have been established throughout 
the entire Continent (which would have become an en- 
larged Teutonic Empire), just as it was established 
throughout Germany when Bismark welded all the former 
petty States into one nation. No Protectionist or Tariff 
Reformer would deny that economically (Jermany has 
benefited enormously by the abolition of all her former 
inter-State tariffs. 
But Europe is confronted by a far more serious danger 
than a curtailment of her annual wealth production, 
and that is the danger of each nation — especially the 
smaller ones — losing its liberty and nationality. 
Rather than forfeit these things, few would hesitate to 
sacrifice a portion of their annual revenue for the pur- 
pose of securing themselves and their own people against 
such a menace. On behalf of the future security of the 
British race and empire, our enemy — who ad\'crtiscs 
liimself as our sworn and implacable foe, who has shewn 
himself to be false, treacherous, cunning, and utterly 
untrustworthy — should be denied every opportunity of 
acquiring the means of again threatening tlic peace and 
safety of the world, 'i'he measures recommended by the 
Allied representatives at the Paris Conference should be 
adopted by the /Ulies at once. 
