REVOLUTION IN AMERICAN TRADE.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume III, Issue 625, 2 May 1882, Page 2

REVOLUTION IN AMERICAN TRADE.

[“ SCOTTISH AMERICAN JOURNAL.”]

The United States is greatly startled by the fact that during the last four months of the year its total exports de- - creased to the alarming extent of 61,402,502 dols. There is no mistake ', about it ; the; fact is proved by the official returns. Not only so; they show clearly that but for an accidental - and most unusually large export, chiefly of petroleum, the decrease would have nearly one-third more. All are puzzled ■ to account for the sudden change, and i many are the theories advanced. For. the first eight months of the year the trade ot this country was practically the ' same as during the former year. Up to 31st August, 1881, the total export . . amounted to 542,812,684 dols, and oh / 31st August, 18S0, they were;'' 542,381,205 dols. The eight months of 18S1 were thus upwards of four hundred thousand dollars more than those of 1880. But what a change took place during the next four months! For the four months ending 31st December, 1881, the total exports amounted to 271,348,889 dols, while during the corresponding period of 1880 they amounted to 333,182,870 '' dols—a decrease of no less than 61,833,981 dols. During the last two years the exports in the three leading ' classes were as follows : —ln 1880 the exports of breadstuffs (including wheat, - flour, and corn), amounted to 279,440,181 dols; cotton, 239,311,312; and provisions, 156,586,853 dols; while in 1881 they were at the close of the year, breadstuff's, 228,615,757 dols; cotton, 222,136,337 dols; and provisions, 146,050,459 dols —the total decrease on the three being 78,533*793 dols; but then there was an unusual increase on petroleum, tobacco, and other exports, which reduced the decrease to sixty one millions odd, as stated. But, as will be seen, the decrease was not confined to breadstuffs. The falling off in the export of cotton is no less remarkable. . At 31st August, 1881, the cotton exports greatly exceeded those at the same date in the former year, and yet within the next four months •ht excess was not only completely

swallowed up, but 17,1 74)975 dols more. Cotton may be called the staple export, and such decline may well startle the producers. No less alarming is the results to the Western farmers. Within these four months the decrease in the export of wheat was 12,000,000, dols, of flour, 5,000,000 dols, and of corn 5,000,000 dols. And though talcing the whole year there is a slight increase upon the exports of tobacco, there is a decrease of no less than 2;5po,ooo dols during these four months as compared with the same period of 1880. And not only has there been-a great decrease in the exports, there has been a considerable decline in the prices. But for this it might have been supposed that the producers were storing the commodities, and keeping them back from the market so as to raise the prices. The simple fact, however, seems clearly to be, that there is less demand for American goods in the foreign market. This may have been produced by the former high prices being artificial and unwarranted, and by supplies having been obtained elsewhere. It is difficult, however, to conceive how so very sudden and great achangecould havebeen thus produced. We rather incline to the opinion that it is a result of the Protective Tariff of this country, which handicaps the American merchants in the foreign market. Mr • Gladstone, in one of his speeches, said that Great Britain need never be afraid of American competition so long as the latter maintained a protective tariff; but so soon as it was abandoned, and free trade adopted, then, and not till then, would America become a formidable rival in foreign markets. These official returns would seem to establish the verity of his remarks, and unless America can rely solely upon her home trade the sooner she adopts free trade principles the better. It is, however, somewhat remarkable, and still more against the interest of the United States, that while during these four months the exports have been decreasing the most important class of imports have largely increased. It is all the more so when it is considered that there had been a .great filling off during the preceding eight months. During the eight months there was a decrease of nearly 823,000 tons in the iron imported, and during

the four months there was an increase of fully 62,000 tons. In the imports of lead again there was a decrease during the eight months of 1,632,926 lbs, while during the four months there was 4n increase of 3,064,020 lbs. The imports of zinc was somewhat similar. It liras'the- same with manufactured cottons. There was a decrease during the eight months of cotton prints imported of 585,428 yards, and during the four months there was an increase of 744,993 yards. In cotton jeans the difference was still greater, as during the eight months there was a decrease on the imports of 1,268,854 yards, and during the last four months of the year there was an increase of 1,166,681 yards. That state of facts may well command the attention and serious consideration of American manufacturers. We cannot help thinking that the recent discussion in Britain of Free Trade and Protective principles in trade, if it has not produced, has greatly hastened, these results. It has been'the means of bringing the matter fidly under the consideration of all interested, both in Britain and other countries, and probably has originated art opposition to, and competition with, American produce that might never otherwise have existed. It cannot be * denied, too, that the very liberal manriei: in which the landlords of Britain are dealiag with their tenant farmers ate/enabling the latter at present to compete with foreign producers.