It is impracticable if it were expedient.  Theoretical writers may coolly discuss in their closets the total destruction of various important branches of industry, the “absorption” of the persons engaged in them in other pursuits, and the transference of national capital and industry from agriculture to manufactures, and vice versa; but it is impossible to effect such changes by the voluntary act of government, even in the most despotic country.  We say by the voluntary act of government; because there is no doubt that it may be effected, though at an enormous sacrifice of life, wealth, and happiness, by the silent and unobserved operation of the laws of nature, which are irresistible; as was the case with the transference of industry from agriculture to pasturage, under the effect of free trade in grain in the countries bordering on the Mediterranean, in the later stages of the Roman empire; or from manufactures to agriculture, from the consequences of the discovery of the Cape of Good Hope in the Italian republics in modern times.  But no government, not even that of the Czar Peter or Sultaun Mahmoud, could succeed in destroying or nipping in the bud brances of national industry, by simple acts of the legislature or sovereign authority, not imposed by external and irresistible authority.  The Emperor Paul tried it, and got a sash twisted about his neck, according to the established fashion of that country, for his pains.  The Whigs tried it, and were turned out of office in consequence.  All the governments of Europe, despotic, constitutional, and democratic, meet our concessions, in favour of free trade, by increased protection to their manufacturers.  They dare not destroy their rising commercial wealth any more than we dare destroy our old colossal agricultural investments.  The republicans of America even exceed them in the race of tariffs and protection.  Sixty-two per cent has lately been laid on our British iron goods in return for Sir Robert Peel’s tariff; a similar duty on iron and cotton goods, it is well known, is contemplated in the Prussian leagues in Germany.  The British government has at length, through its prime minister, spoken out firmly in support of the existing corn-laws.  The feeling of the agricultural counties, as evinced at the late meetings, left them no alternative.  All nations, under all varieties of government, situation, race, and political circumstances, concur in rising up to resist the doctrines of free trade.  Necessity has enlightened, experience has taught them:  a very clear motive urges them on, which is not likely to decline in strength with the progress of time—­it is the instinct of self-preservation.

Such a system as the free traders advocate, if practicable, would be to the last degree inexpedient.