Gentlemen deceive themselves.  It is not free trade that they are recommending to our acceptance.  It is, in effect, the British colonial system that we are invited to adopt; and, if their policy prevails, it will lead substantially to the recolonization of these States, under the commercial dominion of Great Britain. * * *

I dislike this resort to authority, and especially foreign and interested authority, for the support of principles of public policy.  I would greatly prefer to meet gentlemen upon the broad ground of fact, of experience, and of reason; but, since they will appeal to British names and authority, I feel myself compelled to imitate their bad example.  Allow me to quote from the speech of a member of the British Parliament, bearing the same family name with my Lord Goderich, but whether or not a relation of his, I do not know.  The member alluded to was arguing against the violation of the treaty of Methuen—­that treaty not less fatal to the interests of Portugal than would be the system of gentlemen to the best interests of America,—­and he went on to say: 

“It was idle for us to endeavor to persuade other nations to join with us in adopting the principles of what was called ‘free trade.’  Other nations knew, as well as the noble lord opposite, and those who acted with him, what we meant by ‘free trade’ was nothing more nor less than, by means of the great advantages we enjoyed, to get a monopoly of all their markets for our manufactures, and to prevent them, one and all, from ever becoming manufacturing nations.  When the system of reciprocity and free trade had been proposed to a French ambassador, his remark was, that the plan was excellent in theory, but, to make it fair in practice, it would be necessary to defer the attempt to put it in execution for half a century, until France should be on the same footing with Great Britain, in marine, in manufactures, in capital, and the many other peculiar advantages which it now enjoyed.  The policy that France acted on was that of encouraging its native manufactures, and it was a wise policy; because, if it were freely to admit our manufactures, it would speedily be reduced to the rank of an agricultural nation, and therefore a poor nation, as all must be that depend exclusively upon agriculture.  America acted, too, upon the same principle with France.  America legislated for futurity—­legislated for an increasing population.  America, too, was prospering under this system.  In twenty years, America would be independent of England for manufactures altogether. * * * But since the peace, France, Germany, America, and all the other countries of the world, had proceeded upon the principle of encouraging and protecting native manufacturers.” * * *