Amongst the most prominent superstitions in which our forefathers believed, as a commercial opinion and rule of legislation, was “Protection;” and we have not awakened too recently from the delusion which descended from them not to perceive its absurdities, especially on looking over their voluminous legacy, the Statute Book. Before, however, we open some of its most comical pages, let us premise that the question of Protection is not a political one. Of the precise force and meaning of the term, there is a large class of “constant readers” who have no definite idea. The word “Protection” calls up in their minds a sort of phantasmagoria composed chiefly of Corn-law leagues, tedious debates in Parliament, Custom-houses, excisemen, smugglers, preventive-men and mounted coast-guards. They know it has to do with imports, exports, drawbacks, the balance of trade, and with being searched when they step ashore from a Boulogne steamer. Floating over this indefinite construction of the term, they have a general opinion that Protection must be a good thing, for they also associate it most intimately with the guardianship of the law, which protects them from the swindler, and with the policeman, who protects them from the thief. That powerful and patriotic sentiment, “Protection to British Industry,” must, they think, be nearly the same sort of thing, except that it means protection from the tricks of foreigners instead of from those of compatriots. They confess that, believing the whole matter to be a complicated branch of politics, they have had neither time nor patience to “go into it.” In supposing the question of Free Trade or Protection to be a political one, they are, as we have before hinted, in error. It has no more to do with politics than their own transactions with the grocer and the coal-merchant; for it treats of the best mode of carrying on a nation’s, instead of an individual’s dealings with foreign marts and foreign customers. They are also wrong in supposing that protection to life and property is of the same character as that to which British industry is subjected. The difference can be easily explained; and although doubtless the majority of our readers are quite aware of it, yet for the benefit of the above-described, who are not, we will point it out:—Connected, as everybody knows, with whatever is protected, there must be two parties—A, in whose _favour_ it is protected; and B, _against_ whom it is protected. Legitimate and wholesome protection preserves the property we wish to guard against our enemies; impolitic and unwholesome protection too securely preserves property to us which we are most anxious to get rid of—by sale or barter,—against our best friends, our customers. These elementary explanations are absolutely essential for the thorough enjoyment of the broad comedy, which here and there lightens up that grave publication, the Statutes at Large.