William Ewart Gladstone
ON DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
November 7，1879
Today，gentlemen，as I know that many among you are interested in the land，and as I feel thatwhat is termed“agricultural distress” is at the pre－sent moment a topic too serious to be omitted fromour consideration，I shall say some words upon thesubject of that agricultural distress，and particu－larly，because in connection with it there havearisen in some quarters of the country propo-sals，which have received a countenance far beyond theirdeserts，to reverse or to compromise the workwhich it took us one whole generation to achieve，and to revert to the mischievous，obstructive，andimpoverishing system of protection.
But are we such children that，after spendingtwenty years—as I may say from 1840 to 1860—inbreaking down the huge fabric of protection，in1879 we are seriously to set about building it up a－gain？ lf that be right，gentlemen，let it be done，but it will involve on our part a most humiliatingconfession.In my opinion it is not right.Protec-tion，however，let me point out，now is asked forin two forms，and I am next going to quote LordBeaconsfield for the purpose of expressing my con－currence with him.
Mostly，I am bound to say，as far as my knowledge goes，protection has not been asked forby the agricultural interest，certainly not by thefarmers of Scotland.
It has been asked for by certain injudiciouscliques and classes of persons connected with otherindustries－connected with some manufacturing in－dustries.They want to have duties laid upon man－ufactures.
But here Lord Beaconsfield said-and I cor- dially agree with him-that he would be no party to the institution of a system in which protectionwas to be given to manufactures，and to be refusedto agriculture.
That one－sided protection I deem to be totallyintolerable，and I reject it even at the threshold asunworthy of a word of examination or discussion.
But let us go on to two-sided protection，andsee whether that is any better-that is to say，pro-tection in the shape of duties on manufactures，andprotection in the shape of duties upon corn，dutiesupon meat，duties upon butter and cheese andeggs，and everything that can be produced fromthe land.Now，gentlemen，in order to seewhether we can here find a remedy for our difficul－ties，I prefer to speculation and mere abstract ar－gument the method of reverting to experience.Ex－perience will give us very distinct lessons upon thismatter.We have the power，gentlemen，of goingback to the time when protection was in full and unchecked force，and of examining the effect which it produced upon the wealth of the country.How，will you say，do I mean to test that wealth？ I mean to test that wealth by the exports of the country，and I will tell you why，because your prosperity depends upon the wealth of your customers—that is to say，upon their capacity to buy what you pro- duce.And who are your customers？ Your cus- tomers are the industrial population of the coun- try，who produce what we export and send all over the world.Consequently，when exports increase，your customers are doing a large business，are growing wealthy，are putting money in their poc- kets，and are able to take that money out of theirpockets in order to fill their stomachs with what you produce.When，on the contrary，exports do not increase，your customers are poor，your prices go down，as you have felt within the last few years，in the price of meat，for example，and in other things，and your condition is proportionallydepressed.
What has been the case，gentlemen，since wecast off the superstition of protection，since wediscarded the imposture of protection？ From 1842，gentlemen，onward，the successive stages of freetrade began ；in 1842，in 1845，in 1846，in 1853，and again in 1860，the large measures were carried which have completely reformed your customs tar-iff，and reduced it from a taxation of twelve hun- dred articles to a taxation of，I think，less thantwelve.
Now，under the system of protection，the ex－port trade of the country，the wealth and the pew－er of the manufacturing and producing classes topurchase your agricultural products，did not in- crease at all.
But since 1842，and down to the present time，we have had the successive adoption of free－trademeasures；and what has been the state of the ex-port business of the country？It has risen in thisdegree，that that which from 1840 to 1842 aver－aged ￡50，000，000，from 1873 to 1878 averaged￡218，000，000.You know very well，that whilerestriction was in force，you did not get the pricesthat you have been getting for the last twenty years.The price of wheat has been much the sameas it had been before.The price of oats is a betterprice than was to be had on the average of protec－tive times.But the price，with the exception ofwheat，of almost every agricultural commodity，the price of wool，the price of meat，the price ofcheese，the price of everything that the soil pro- duces，has been largely increased in a market freeand open to the world；because，while the artificialadvantage which you got through protection，as itwas supposed to be an advantage，was removed，you were brought into that free and open market，and the energy of free trade so enlarged the buyingcapacity of your customers that they were willingand able to give you，and did give you，a great dealmore for your meat，your wool，and your productsin general，than you would ever have got under thesystem of protection.
Pericles，the great Athenian statesman，saidwith regard to women，their greatest merit was tobe never heard of.
Now，what Pericles untruly said of women，Iam very much disposed to say of foreign affairs—their great merit would be to be never heard of.Unfortunately，instead of being never heard of，they are always heard of，and you hear almost ofnothing else； and I can't promise you，gentlemen，that you will be relieved from this everlasting din，becuase the consequences of an unwise meddlingwith foreign affairs are consequences that will forsome time neccessarily continue to trouble you，andthat will find their way to your pockets in theshape of increased taxation.
The first thing is to foster the strength of theempire by just legislation and economy at home，thereby producing two of the great elements of na－tional power—namely，wealth，which is a physical element，and union and contentment，which aremoral elements—and to reserve the strength of theempire，to reserve the expenditure of that strengthfor great and worthy occasions abroad.Here is myfirst principle of foreign policy：good government athome.
My second principle of foreign policy is this，that its aim ought to be to preserve to the nationsof the world—and especially，were it but forshame，when we recollect the sacred name we bearas Christians，especially to the Christian nations ofthe world—the blessings of peace.That is my se-cond principle.
In my opinion the third sound principle isthis：to strive to cultivate and maintain，aye，to thevery uttermost，what is called the concert of Eu-rope；to keep the powers of Europe in union to－gether.And why？ Because by keeping all in uniontogether you neutralize，and fetter，and bind upthe selfish aims of each.
My fourth principle is：That you should avoidneedless and entangling engagements.You mayboast about them，you may brag about them，youmay say you are procuring consideration fof thecountry.You may say that an Englishman can nowhold up his head among the nations.But what doesall this come to，gentlemen？ It comes to this，thatyou are increasing your engagements without in－creasing your strength；and if you increase engage-ments without increasing strength，you diminishstrength，you abolish strength；you really reducethe empire and do not increase it.You render itless capable of performing its duties；you render itan inheritance less precious to hand on to futuregenerations.
My fifth principle is this，gentlemen：To ac-knowledge the equal rights of all nations，You maysympathize with one nation more than another.Nay，you must sympathize in certain circumstanceswith one nation more than another.You sympa－thize most with those nations，as a rule，withwhich you have the closest connection in language，in blood，and in religion，or whose circumstancesat the time seem to give the strongest claim tosympathy.But in point of right all are equal，andyou have no right to set up a system under whichone of them is to be placed under moral suspicionor espionage，or to be made the constant subject ofinvective.
And that sixth is：That in my opinion foreignpolicy，subject to all the limitations that I have de－scribed，the foreign policy of England should al-ways be inspired by the love of freedom.Thereshould be a sympathy with freedom，a desire togive it scope，founded not upon visionary ideas，but upon the long experience of many generationswithin the shores of this happy isle，that in free－dom you lay the firmest foundations botn of loyaltyand order；the firmest foundations for the develop－ment of individual character，and the best provi－sion for the happiness of the nation at large.
威廉·尤爾特·格萊斯頓
論內(nèi)政和外交
1879年11月7日
先生們：今天，據(jù)我所知，你們中許多人對土地感興趣，而我覺得目前所謂“農(nóng)業(yè)不景氣”是個(gè)十分嚴(yán)重而無法忽視的問題。我將就農(nóng)業(yè)不景氣的問題說幾句話，特別是因?yàn)樵谖覈恍┑胤教岢隽艘恍┙ㄗh，這些建議所得到的贊揚(yáng)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過了其應(yīng)得的評價(jià)。這些建議的目的在于改變或者損害我們整整一代人為之奮斗的工作，并恢復(fù)那種有害的、起阻撓作用的、使農(nóng)村貧瘠的保護(hù)制度。
但是，在把20年時(shí)間——我可以說是從1840至1860年——用在摧毀這個(gè)巨大的保護(hù)結(jié)構(gòu)之后，1879年我們又認(rèn)真地著手重建，我們是這樣幼稚的人嗎？先生們，如果它是正確的，那么就讓它重建起來吧！但對我們而言，卻須非常丟臉地承認(rèn)它。依我看來，它是錯(cuò)誤的?？墒牵?jiān)试S我指出，人們以兩種。
形式要求保護(hù)；我將引用比肯斯費(fèi)爾德勛爵的話以示我與其觀點(diǎn)的一致。
我必須說明的是，據(jù)我所知，提出要求保護(hù)的人多半并非出于農(nóng)業(yè)方面的利益，蘇格蘭農(nóng)民當(dāng)然更不要求保護(hù)。
提出要求保護(hù)的是某些與其他行業(yè)有關(guān)系，與某些制造業(yè)有關(guān)系的不明智的集團(tuán)或階級(jí)的人士。他們要求向制造業(yè)抽稅。
但是，比肯斯費(fèi)爾德勛爵在這里說過（我衷心擁護(hù)他的觀點(diǎn)）：他不愿參與那種保護(hù)制造業(yè)而拒不保護(hù)農(nóng)業(yè)的體系。
我認(rèn)為那種單方面的保護(hù)是完全不能容忍的，從一開始我就認(rèn)為它不值得研究或討論而摒棄它。
但是，讓我們繼續(xù)談?wù)勲p向保護(hù)，看看是否要好些——雙向保護(hù)就是向制造業(yè)的產(chǎn)品征稅，也向糧食、肉食、黃油、奶酪、禽蛋以及地里產(chǎn)的一切東西征稅。先生們，現(xiàn)在為了找到克服困難的辦法，我主張借鑒于經(jīng)驗(yàn)而不是進(jìn)行猜測和完全抽象的討論。經(jīng)驗(yàn)可以為我們提供有關(guān)這個(gè)問題的十分清楚的教訓(xùn)。先生們，我們有權(quán)回顧那保護(hù)盛行，不受抑制的時(shí)代；有權(quán)檢驗(yàn)它對國家財(cái)產(chǎn)所起的作用。我所說的檢驗(yàn)財(cái)產(chǎn)是什么意思？我是說根據(jù)國家的出口來檢驗(yàn)財(cái)產(chǎn)，我將說明其原因，因?yàn)槟銈兊姆睒s取決于你們的顧客的財(cái)富——換言之，取決于購買你們的產(chǎn)品的能力。誰是顧客？顧客是國家的工業(yè)人口，他們生產(chǎn)我國出口和運(yùn)往全世界的產(chǎn)品。所以，出口的增加表明顧客的生意興隆，正變得越來越富，正將錢裝進(jìn)腰包，他們有能力從腰包中掏出錢來填飽肚子。相反，出口不增加時(shí)，顧客就窮！物價(jià)就下跌，就像過去幾年內(nèi)你們所感覺到的，比如：肉價(jià)和其他東西的價(jià)格即是如此，你們的情況也就相應(yīng)地變壞。
先生們，自從我們拋棄了對保護(hù)的迷信，扔掉保護(hù)這種欺騙行為之后，情況怎么樣了呢？先生們，自由貿(mào)易從1842年開始后，連續(xù)進(jìn)行了幾個(gè)階段。1842年、1845年、1846年、1853年和1860年采取了強(qiáng)有力的措施，全面改革了關(guān)稅，應(yīng)課稅的1200種商品，我想，減少到了不到12種商品。
而在保護(hù)制度下，國家的出口貿(mào)易，從事生產(chǎn)和制造業(yè)的階層購買農(nóng)產(chǎn)品的財(cái)力卻根本沒有增加。
但是從1842年起到目前為止，我們連續(xù)采取了自由貿(mào)易措施；我國的出口貿(mào)易情況如何呢？出口貿(mào)易增長了，增長程度為：1840至1842年平均年增長5，000萬英鎊；1873至1878年，平均年增長2.18億英鎊。諸位都知道，實(shí)行限制時(shí)，就不可能按過去20年內(nèi)的價(jià)格定價(jià)。小麥的價(jià)格與過去的價(jià)格大致相同。燕麥的價(jià)格比保護(hù)時(shí)期的平均價(jià)更公平合理。然而，除小麥的價(jià)格外，幾乎所有農(nóng)產(chǎn)品的價(jià)格、羊毛的價(jià)格、豬肉的價(jià)格、乳酪的價(jià)格、地里生產(chǎn)的任何東西的價(jià)格，在自由和對外開放的市場上扶搖直上；因?yàn)?，通過保護(hù)獲得的這種人為的有利條件——它曾被認(rèn)為是有利條件 ——一旦取消了，你們就被推向自由開放的市場，自由貿(mào)易的力量大大提高了你們的顧客的購買力，使他們愿意并能夠也確實(shí)對你們的肉、羊毛和一般產(chǎn)品付出了比你們在保護(hù)制度下所能得到的多得多的錢。
偉大的雅典政治家伯里克利談及婦女時(shí)說，婦女的大優(yōu)點(diǎn)就是永遠(yuǎn)默默無聞。
伯里克利關(guān)于婦女所說的不正確的話，現(xiàn)在我卻很愿意用來說明外交事務(wù)——其優(yōu)點(diǎn)將會(huì)是永遠(yuǎn)默默無聞。令人遺憾的是，它們并非永遠(yuǎn)默默無聞，而是經(jīng)常被人提及，而且你們幾乎再也聽不到其他事物了。先生們，我無法允諾你們擺脫這種喧囂，因?yàn)橛薮赖睾鷣y處理外交事務(wù)的后果必將在一段時(shí)間內(nèi)繼續(xù)困撓你們，將以提高稅收的辦法想方設(shè)法讓你們掏腰包。
我們的首要任務(wù)是通過國內(nèi)公正的立法和經(jīng)濟(jì)來培植帝國實(shí)力，并由此產(chǎn)生國力的兩大要素——財(cái)富，那是物質(zhì)要素；融洽及知足，那是精神要素——并且保存帝國的實(shí)力，以便用于國外重要而值得的場合。這就是我的外交政策的第一原則：搞好內(nèi)政。
我的外交政策的第二條原則是：外交政策的目標(biāo)應(yīng)是世界上的各個(gè)國家——為使我們在想到我們所具有的基督教徒的神圣稱呼時(shí)問心無愧，那就特別要使世界上的基督教國家——享有和平的幸福。這就是我的第二條原則。
依我之見，第三條原則是：努力培養(yǎng)并盡力維持人們所說的歐洲和諧；保持歐洲列強(qiáng)團(tuán)結(jié)一致。為什么要這樣呢？因?yàn)榘汛蠹衣?lián)合起來，就能抵消、束縛和限制每個(gè)國家自私的目的。
我的第四條原則是：你們應(yīng)避免多余的令人困擾的義務(wù)。你們可以炫耀這些義務(wù)，吹噓這些義務(wù)，你們可以說你們是為國家著想的。你們可以說英國人現(xiàn)在能夠在國際上昂起頭來了。但是，先生們，這一切會(huì)有什么結(jié)果呢？結(jié)果是，你們的義務(wù)增加了，而力量卻沒有增加；你們減少了實(shí)力，破壞了實(shí)力；你們實(shí)際上削弱了帝國，而不是增強(qiáng)了它。你們使帝國履行職責(zé)的能力下降，給子孫后代遺留下的寶貴東西越來越少了。
先生們，我的第五條原則是：承認(rèn)所有國家享有平等權(quán)利。你可以對某一國家給予比對其他國家更多的同情。而且，在某些情況下，對某國必須給予比對別的國家更多的同情。通常，你們同情在語言、血緣、宗教上有著密切聯(lián)系的國家；或者其境況在當(dāng)時(shí)值得給予同情的國家。但是，就權(quán)利而言，大家一律平等。你們沒有權(quán)力建立一種體制，在那種體制下，某一個(gè)國家的道德品行受到懷疑，或者受到監(jiān)視，或者經(jīng)常挨罵。
我的第六條原則，依我之見，是外交政策受到我所談到的所有各點(diǎn)的制約，英國的外交政策應(yīng)該始終以對自由的愛為依歸。要同情自由，要給它以發(fā)展的機(jī)會(huì)，這不應(yīng)建立在不切實(shí)際的觀念上，而應(yīng)建立在這個(gè)幸福島嶼的邊界內(nèi)許多代人長期積累的經(jīng)驗(yàn)之上；因?yàn)樵谧杂芍心隳軌虻於ㄖ艺\和秩序的基礎(chǔ)；奠定發(fā)揮個(gè)性的好的基礎(chǔ)，并為整個(gè)國家提供大程度的幸福。
ON DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS
November 7，1879
Today，gentlemen，as I know that many among you are interested in the land，and as I feel thatwhat is termed“agricultural distress” is at the pre－sent moment a topic too serious to be omitted fromour consideration，I shall say some words upon thesubject of that agricultural distress，and particu－larly，because in connection with it there havearisen in some quarters of the country propo-sals，which have received a countenance far beyond theirdeserts，to reverse or to compromise the workwhich it took us one whole generation to achieve，and to revert to the mischievous，obstructive，andimpoverishing system of protection.
But are we such children that，after spendingtwenty years—as I may say from 1840 to 1860—inbreaking down the huge fabric of protection，in1879 we are seriously to set about building it up a－gain？ lf that be right，gentlemen，let it be done，but it will involve on our part a most humiliatingconfession.In my opinion it is not right.Protec-tion，however，let me point out，now is asked forin two forms，and I am next going to quote LordBeaconsfield for the purpose of expressing my con－currence with him.
Mostly，I am bound to say，as far as my knowledge goes，protection has not been asked forby the agricultural interest，certainly not by thefarmers of Scotland.
It has been asked for by certain injudiciouscliques and classes of persons connected with otherindustries－connected with some manufacturing in－dustries.They want to have duties laid upon man－ufactures.
But here Lord Beaconsfield said-and I cor- dially agree with him-that he would be no party to the institution of a system in which protectionwas to be given to manufactures，and to be refusedto agriculture.
That one－sided protection I deem to be totallyintolerable，and I reject it even at the threshold asunworthy of a word of examination or discussion.
But let us go on to two-sided protection，andsee whether that is any better-that is to say，pro-tection in the shape of duties on manufactures，andprotection in the shape of duties upon corn，dutiesupon meat，duties upon butter and cheese andeggs，and everything that can be produced fromthe land.Now，gentlemen，in order to seewhether we can here find a remedy for our difficul－ties，I prefer to speculation and mere abstract ar－gument the method of reverting to experience.Ex－perience will give us very distinct lessons upon thismatter.We have the power，gentlemen，of goingback to the time when protection was in full and unchecked force，and of examining the effect which it produced upon the wealth of the country.How，will you say，do I mean to test that wealth？ I mean to test that wealth by the exports of the country，and I will tell you why，because your prosperity depends upon the wealth of your customers—that is to say，upon their capacity to buy what you pro- duce.And who are your customers？ Your cus- tomers are the industrial population of the coun- try，who produce what we export and send all over the world.Consequently，when exports increase，your customers are doing a large business，are growing wealthy，are putting money in their poc- kets，and are able to take that money out of theirpockets in order to fill their stomachs with what you produce.When，on the contrary，exports do not increase，your customers are poor，your prices go down，as you have felt within the last few years，in the price of meat，for example，and in other things，and your condition is proportionallydepressed.
What has been the case，gentlemen，since wecast off the superstition of protection，since wediscarded the imposture of protection？ From 1842，gentlemen，onward，the successive stages of freetrade began ；in 1842，in 1845，in 1846，in 1853，and again in 1860，the large measures were carried which have completely reformed your customs tar-iff，and reduced it from a taxation of twelve hun- dred articles to a taxation of，I think，less thantwelve.
Now，under the system of protection，the ex－port trade of the country，the wealth and the pew－er of the manufacturing and producing classes topurchase your agricultural products，did not in- crease at all.
But since 1842，and down to the present time，we have had the successive adoption of free－trademeasures；and what has been the state of the ex-port business of the country？It has risen in thisdegree，that that which from 1840 to 1842 aver－aged ￡50，000，000，from 1873 to 1878 averaged￡218，000，000.You know very well，that whilerestriction was in force，you did not get the pricesthat you have been getting for the last twenty years.The price of wheat has been much the sameas it had been before.The price of oats is a betterprice than was to be had on the average of protec－tive times.But the price，with the exception ofwheat，of almost every agricultural commodity，the price of wool，the price of meat，the price ofcheese，the price of everything that the soil pro- duces，has been largely increased in a market freeand open to the world；because，while the artificialadvantage which you got through protection，as itwas supposed to be an advantage，was removed，you were brought into that free and open market，and the energy of free trade so enlarged the buyingcapacity of your customers that they were willingand able to give you，and did give you，a great dealmore for your meat，your wool，and your productsin general，than you would ever have got under thesystem of protection.
Pericles，the great Athenian statesman，saidwith regard to women，their greatest merit was tobe never heard of.
Now，what Pericles untruly said of women，Iam very much disposed to say of foreign affairs—their great merit would be to be never heard of.Unfortunately，instead of being never heard of，they are always heard of，and you hear almost ofnothing else； and I can't promise you，gentlemen，that you will be relieved from this everlasting din，becuase the consequences of an unwise meddlingwith foreign affairs are consequences that will forsome time neccessarily continue to trouble you，andthat will find their way to your pockets in theshape of increased taxation.
The first thing is to foster the strength of theempire by just legislation and economy at home，thereby producing two of the great elements of na－tional power—namely，wealth，which is a physical element，and union and contentment，which aremoral elements—and to reserve the strength of theempire，to reserve the expenditure of that strengthfor great and worthy occasions abroad.Here is myfirst principle of foreign policy：good government athome.
My second principle of foreign policy is this，that its aim ought to be to preserve to the nationsof the world—and especially，were it but forshame，when we recollect the sacred name we bearas Christians，especially to the Christian nations ofthe world—the blessings of peace.That is my se-cond principle.
In my opinion the third sound principle isthis：to strive to cultivate and maintain，aye，to thevery uttermost，what is called the concert of Eu-rope；to keep the powers of Europe in union to－gether.And why？ Because by keeping all in uniontogether you neutralize，and fetter，and bind upthe selfish aims of each.
My fourth principle is：That you should avoidneedless and entangling engagements.You mayboast about them，you may brag about them，youmay say you are procuring consideration fof thecountry.You may say that an Englishman can nowhold up his head among the nations.But what doesall this come to，gentlemen？ It comes to this，thatyou are increasing your engagements without in－creasing your strength；and if you increase engage-ments without increasing strength，you diminishstrength，you abolish strength；you really reducethe empire and do not increase it.You render itless capable of performing its duties；you render itan inheritance less precious to hand on to futuregenerations.
My fifth principle is this，gentlemen：To ac-knowledge the equal rights of all nations，You maysympathize with one nation more than another.Nay，you must sympathize in certain circumstanceswith one nation more than another.You sympa－thize most with those nations，as a rule，withwhich you have the closest connection in language，in blood，and in religion，or whose circumstancesat the time seem to give the strongest claim tosympathy.But in point of right all are equal，andyou have no right to set up a system under whichone of them is to be placed under moral suspicionor espionage，or to be made the constant subject ofinvective.
And that sixth is：That in my opinion foreignpolicy，subject to all the limitations that I have de－scribed，the foreign policy of England should al-ways be inspired by the love of freedom.Thereshould be a sympathy with freedom，a desire togive it scope，founded not upon visionary ideas，but upon the long experience of many generationswithin the shores of this happy isle，that in free－dom you lay the firmest foundations botn of loyaltyand order；the firmest foundations for the develop－ment of individual character，and the best provi－sion for the happiness of the nation at large.
威廉·尤爾特·格萊斯頓
論內(nèi)政和外交
1879年11月7日
先生們：今天，據(jù)我所知，你們中許多人對土地感興趣，而我覺得目前所謂“農(nóng)業(yè)不景氣”是個(gè)十分嚴(yán)重而無法忽視的問題。我將就農(nóng)業(yè)不景氣的問題說幾句話，特別是因?yàn)樵谖覈恍┑胤教岢隽艘恍┙ㄗh，這些建議所得到的贊揚(yáng)遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過了其應(yīng)得的評價(jià)。這些建議的目的在于改變或者損害我們整整一代人為之奮斗的工作，并恢復(fù)那種有害的、起阻撓作用的、使農(nóng)村貧瘠的保護(hù)制度。
但是，在把20年時(shí)間——我可以說是從1840至1860年——用在摧毀這個(gè)巨大的保護(hù)結(jié)構(gòu)之后，1879年我們又認(rèn)真地著手重建，我們是這樣幼稚的人嗎？先生們，如果它是正確的，那么就讓它重建起來吧！但對我們而言，卻須非常丟臉地承認(rèn)它。依我看來，它是錯(cuò)誤的?？墒牵?jiān)试S我指出，人們以兩種。
形式要求保護(hù)；我將引用比肯斯費(fèi)爾德勛爵的話以示我與其觀點(diǎn)的一致。
我必須說明的是，據(jù)我所知，提出要求保護(hù)的人多半并非出于農(nóng)業(yè)方面的利益，蘇格蘭農(nóng)民當(dāng)然更不要求保護(hù)。
提出要求保護(hù)的是某些與其他行業(yè)有關(guān)系，與某些制造業(yè)有關(guān)系的不明智的集團(tuán)或階級(jí)的人士。他們要求向制造業(yè)抽稅。
但是，比肯斯費(fèi)爾德勛爵在這里說過（我衷心擁護(hù)他的觀點(diǎn)）：他不愿參與那種保護(hù)制造業(yè)而拒不保護(hù)農(nóng)業(yè)的體系。
我認(rèn)為那種單方面的保護(hù)是完全不能容忍的，從一開始我就認(rèn)為它不值得研究或討論而摒棄它。
但是，讓我們繼續(xù)談?wù)勲p向保護(hù)，看看是否要好些——雙向保護(hù)就是向制造業(yè)的產(chǎn)品征稅，也向糧食、肉食、黃油、奶酪、禽蛋以及地里產(chǎn)的一切東西征稅。先生們，現(xiàn)在為了找到克服困難的辦法，我主張借鑒于經(jīng)驗(yàn)而不是進(jìn)行猜測和完全抽象的討論。經(jīng)驗(yàn)可以為我們提供有關(guān)這個(gè)問題的十分清楚的教訓(xùn)。先生們，我們有權(quán)回顧那保護(hù)盛行，不受抑制的時(shí)代；有權(quán)檢驗(yàn)它對國家財(cái)產(chǎn)所起的作用。我所說的檢驗(yàn)財(cái)產(chǎn)是什么意思？我是說根據(jù)國家的出口來檢驗(yàn)財(cái)產(chǎn)，我將說明其原因，因?yàn)槟銈兊姆睒s取決于你們的顧客的財(cái)富——換言之，取決于購買你們的產(chǎn)品的能力。誰是顧客？顧客是國家的工業(yè)人口，他們生產(chǎn)我國出口和運(yùn)往全世界的產(chǎn)品。所以，出口的增加表明顧客的生意興隆，正變得越來越富，正將錢裝進(jìn)腰包，他們有能力從腰包中掏出錢來填飽肚子。相反，出口不增加時(shí)，顧客就窮！物價(jià)就下跌，就像過去幾年內(nèi)你們所感覺到的，比如：肉價(jià)和其他東西的價(jià)格即是如此，你們的情況也就相應(yīng)地變壞。
先生們，自從我們拋棄了對保護(hù)的迷信，扔掉保護(hù)這種欺騙行為之后，情況怎么樣了呢？先生們，自由貿(mào)易從1842年開始后，連續(xù)進(jìn)行了幾個(gè)階段。1842年、1845年、1846年、1853年和1860年采取了強(qiáng)有力的措施，全面改革了關(guān)稅，應(yīng)課稅的1200種商品，我想，減少到了不到12種商品。
而在保護(hù)制度下，國家的出口貿(mào)易，從事生產(chǎn)和制造業(yè)的階層購買農(nóng)產(chǎn)品的財(cái)力卻根本沒有增加。
但是從1842年起到目前為止，我們連續(xù)采取了自由貿(mào)易措施；我國的出口貿(mào)易情況如何呢？出口貿(mào)易增長了，增長程度為：1840至1842年平均年增長5，000萬英鎊；1873至1878年，平均年增長2.18億英鎊。諸位都知道，實(shí)行限制時(shí)，就不可能按過去20年內(nèi)的價(jià)格定價(jià)。小麥的價(jià)格與過去的價(jià)格大致相同。燕麥的價(jià)格比保護(hù)時(shí)期的平均價(jià)更公平合理。然而，除小麥的價(jià)格外，幾乎所有農(nóng)產(chǎn)品的價(jià)格、羊毛的價(jià)格、豬肉的價(jià)格、乳酪的價(jià)格、地里生產(chǎn)的任何東西的價(jià)格，在自由和對外開放的市場上扶搖直上；因?yàn)?，通過保護(hù)獲得的這種人為的有利條件——它曾被認(rèn)為是有利條件 ——一旦取消了，你們就被推向自由開放的市場，自由貿(mào)易的力量大大提高了你們的顧客的購買力，使他們愿意并能夠也確實(shí)對你們的肉、羊毛和一般產(chǎn)品付出了比你們在保護(hù)制度下所能得到的多得多的錢。
偉大的雅典政治家伯里克利談及婦女時(shí)說，婦女的大優(yōu)點(diǎn)就是永遠(yuǎn)默默無聞。
伯里克利關(guān)于婦女所說的不正確的話，現(xiàn)在我卻很愿意用來說明外交事務(wù)——其優(yōu)點(diǎn)將會(huì)是永遠(yuǎn)默默無聞。令人遺憾的是，它們并非永遠(yuǎn)默默無聞，而是經(jīng)常被人提及，而且你們幾乎再也聽不到其他事物了。先生們，我無法允諾你們擺脫這種喧囂，因?yàn)橛薮赖睾鷣y處理外交事務(wù)的后果必將在一段時(shí)間內(nèi)繼續(xù)困撓你們，將以提高稅收的辦法想方設(shè)法讓你們掏腰包。
我們的首要任務(wù)是通過國內(nèi)公正的立法和經(jīng)濟(jì)來培植帝國實(shí)力，并由此產(chǎn)生國力的兩大要素——財(cái)富，那是物質(zhì)要素；融洽及知足，那是精神要素——并且保存帝國的實(shí)力，以便用于國外重要而值得的場合。這就是我的外交政策的第一原則：搞好內(nèi)政。
我的外交政策的第二條原則是：外交政策的目標(biāo)應(yīng)是世界上的各個(gè)國家——為使我們在想到我們所具有的基督教徒的神圣稱呼時(shí)問心無愧，那就特別要使世界上的基督教國家——享有和平的幸福。這就是我的第二條原則。
依我之見，第三條原則是：努力培養(yǎng)并盡力維持人們所說的歐洲和諧；保持歐洲列強(qiáng)團(tuán)結(jié)一致。為什么要這樣呢？因?yàn)榘汛蠹衣?lián)合起來，就能抵消、束縛和限制每個(gè)國家自私的目的。
我的第四條原則是：你們應(yīng)避免多余的令人困擾的義務(wù)。你們可以炫耀這些義務(wù)，吹噓這些義務(wù)，你們可以說你們是為國家著想的。你們可以說英國人現(xiàn)在能夠在國際上昂起頭來了。但是，先生們，這一切會(huì)有什么結(jié)果呢？結(jié)果是，你們的義務(wù)增加了，而力量卻沒有增加；你們減少了實(shí)力，破壞了實(shí)力；你們實(shí)際上削弱了帝國，而不是增強(qiáng)了它。你們使帝國履行職責(zé)的能力下降，給子孫后代遺留下的寶貴東西越來越少了。
先生們，我的第五條原則是：承認(rèn)所有國家享有平等權(quán)利。你可以對某一國家給予比對其他國家更多的同情。而且，在某些情況下，對某國必須給予比對別的國家更多的同情。通常，你們同情在語言、血緣、宗教上有著密切聯(lián)系的國家；或者其境況在當(dāng)時(shí)值得給予同情的國家。但是，就權(quán)利而言，大家一律平等。你們沒有權(quán)力建立一種體制，在那種體制下，某一個(gè)國家的道德品行受到懷疑，或者受到監(jiān)視，或者經(jīng)常挨罵。
我的第六條原則，依我之見，是外交政策受到我所談到的所有各點(diǎn)的制約，英國的外交政策應(yīng)該始終以對自由的愛為依歸。要同情自由，要給它以發(fā)展的機(jī)會(huì)，這不應(yīng)建立在不切實(shí)際的觀念上，而應(yīng)建立在這個(gè)幸福島嶼的邊界內(nèi)許多代人長期積累的經(jīng)驗(yàn)之上；因?yàn)樵谧杂芍心隳軌虻於ㄖ艺\和秩序的基礎(chǔ)；奠定發(fā)揮個(gè)性的好的基礎(chǔ)，并為整個(gè)國家提供大程度的幸福。