The amount of the tax decided on was to be only enough to put our would-be manufacturers on an even basis with the foreigner. This meant what? By general consent, it meant giving our people enough to cover the difference in the cost of labor. Plainly, Americans were not going to work for the same wages that Europeans did. There were too many ways in which they could earn more. The country was new, and men could have land of their own on easy terms. Commerce called them; for, having land, we were raising foods, and Europe and the Orient, worn and old and privilege-ridden, were crying for food. They could make everything we wanted, cheap as dirt. They were eager to exchange. If we were to do our own manufacturing, we were obliged to devise a scheme which would make the wages of operatives approximately equal to those which could be earned in our natural occupations. _Thus protection was not adopted for the sake of producing generous wages for labor. It was adopted because the rewards to labor in the new country were already generous and promised to be more so._ There is another equally important point to remember, and that is that it was expressly understood that the duty was never to be prohibitive. It was to be one that would permit the man at home to compete with the man from abroad; no more. Sensible people have always agreed that we would injure ourselves if we allowed prohibitive duties, since they would _cut us off from the stimulus of competition and also from models_. The old countries had been for centuries making the goods we wanted. _They knew how to do it. We needed constantly before us in our markets the educational effect of their work._ There were few, if any, at the start to deny that this taxing of ourselves to establish industries was dangerous business, undemocratic, of course—probably unconstitutional—and an obvious bait to the greedy; but they comforted themselves with the gains which they believed would speedily result. The list was tempting: 1. We were to build up industries which would supply our own needs. 2. The laborers attracted into these industries were to make a larger home market. 3. We were soon to out-rival the foreigner in cost of production, giving the people in return for the tax they had borne cheaper goods than ever the Old World could give. 4. We were to outstrip the Old World in quality and variety—another reward for taxation patiently borne. 5. We were to over-produce and with our surplus enter the markets of the world. Nobody pretended to deny that if it was found on fair experiment that these results were impossible in a particular industry the protection must be withdrawn. Otherwise it amounted to supporting an industry at public expense—an unbusinesslike, unfair, and certainly undemocratic performance.