They are only a little more inconsistent than the pure protectionists, as these are more inconsistent than the absolute prohibitionists.
I will illustrate this by a fable.
STULTA AND PUERA (FOOL-TOWN AND BOY-TOWN).
There were, it matters not where, two towns, _Stulta_ and _Puera_, which at great expense had a road built which connected them with each other.
Some time after this was done, the inhabitants of _Stulta_ became uneasy, and said: _Puera_ is overwhelming us with its productions; this must be attended to.

They established therefore a corps of _Obstructors_, so called because their business was to place obstacles in the way of the wagon trains which arrived from _Puera_.

Soon after, _Puera_ also established a corps of Obstructors.
After some centuries, people having become more enlightened, the inhabitants of _Puera_ began to discover that these reciprocal obstacles might possibly be reciprocal injuries.

They sent therefore an ambassador to _Stulta_, who (passing over the official phraseology) spoke much to this effect: "We have built a road, and now we put obstacles in the way of this road.

This is absurd.