At that time very little was written about the great fallacy of the present day, Free Trade; which is an illusion about which men now talk, and dispute, and almost fight, while no living mortal can tell what it really is.  It is wise for us in America, who never had anything but free trade, according to modern doctrines, to look a little closely into the sophisms that are getting to be so much in vogue; and which, whenever they come from our illustrious ancestors in Great Britain, have some such effect on the imaginations of a portion of our people, as purling rills and wooded cascades are known to posses over those of certain young ladies of fifteen.

Free trade, in its true signification, or in the only signification which is not a fallacy, can only mean a commerce that is totally unfettered by duties, restrictions, prohibitions, and charges of all sorts.  Except among savages, the world never yet saw such a state of things, and probably never will.  Even free trade ports have exactions that, in a degree, counteract their pretended principle of liberty; and no free port exists, that is anything more, in a strict interpretation of its uses, than a sort of bonded warehouse.  So long as your goods remain there, on deposit and unappropriated, they are not taxed; but the instant they are taken to the consumer, the customary impositions must be paid.

Freer trade—­that is, a trade which is less encumbered than some admitted state of things which previously existed—­is easily enough comprehended; but, instead of conveying to the mind any general theory, it merely shows that a lack of wisdom may have prevailed in the management of some particular interest; which lack of wisdom is now being tardily repaired.  Prohibitions, whether direct, or in the form of impositions that the trade will not bear, may be removed without leaving trade free.  This or that article may be thrown open to the general competition, without import duty or tax of any sort, and yet the great bulk of the commerce of a country be so fettered as to put an effectual check upon anything like liberal intercourse.  Suppose, for instance, that Virginia were an independent country.  Its exports would be tobacco, flour, and corn; the tobacco crop probably more than equalling in value those portions of the other crops which are sent out of the country.  England is suffering for food, and she takes off everything like imposts on the eatables, while she taxes tobacco to the amount of many hundred per cent.  Can that be called free trade?

There is another point of view in which we could wish to protest against the shouts and fallacies of the hour.  Trade, perhaps the most corrupt and corrupting influence of life—­or, if second to anything in evil, second only to politics—­is proclaimed to be the great means of humanizing, enlightening, liberalizing, and improving the human race!  Now, against this monstrous mistake in morals, we would