many years to come. But, of all men, a citizen of the United States
should be the very last to accept the protective system as final; for
when he looks abroad over the great assemblage of sovereignties which
he calls the United States, and asks himself the reason of their rapid
and uniform prosperity for the last eighty years, what answer can he
give but this?--_There is free trade among them_. And if he extends
his survey over the whole earth, he can scarcely avoid the conclusion
that free trade among all nations would be as advantageous to all
nations as it is to the thirty-seven States of the American Union. But
nations are not governed by theories and theorists, but by
circumstances and politicians. The most perfect theory must sometimes
give way to exceptional fact. We find, accordingly, Mr. Mill, the
great English champion of free trade, fully sustaining Henry Clay's
moderate tariff of 1816, but sustaining it only as a temporary
measure. The paragraph of Mr. Mill's Political Economy which touches
this subject seems to us to express so exactly the true policy of the
United States with regard to the tariff, that we will take the liberty
of quoting it.

"The only case in which, on mere principles of political
economy, protecting duties can be defensible, is when they
are imposed temporarily, (especially in a young and rising
nation,) in hopes of naturalizing a foreign industry, in
itself perfectly suitable to the circumstances of the
country. The superiority of one country over another in a
branch of production often arises only from having begun it
sooner. There may be no inherent advantage on one part, or
disadvantage on the other, but only a present superiority of
acquired skill and experience. A country which has this
skill and experience yet to acquire may, in other respects,