GERMAN VERSUS BRITISH TRADE.

Motueka Star, Volume II, Issue 89, 20 June 1902, Page 4

GERMAN VERSUS BRITISH TRADE.

An able correspondent of Tie Times l as contributed to that journal an a * tide in which he institutes a eohu parison in regard to many features of Germtn and British trade. The article is published in The Times of 3rd April. The concluding portion is as follows : “ And what, now, is the general conclusion to be drawn from this enquiry into the relative industrial progress of the two nations? It is most assuredly, not that Great Britain has suffered. It is literally true, in spite of the war, that \ye are ‘more prosperous than ever’ ; for 1899 our exports per head of population reached the highest ever recorded-namety, £7 2s 4d per capita. In spite of isolated and trifling exceptions all our leading trades are very active and yield good profits ; labour and pauperism statistics are more favourable than the average. Most of our trade statistics show continuous ana steady growth. But, if as a nation we continue to advance, it cannot be denied that Germany, if we overlook her passing trade crisis, pro'*’-esses still more rapidly. This is partly explained by the circumstance that she had a humbler level to start from. ; it is easier to double a small business than a vast establishment. it is also in part due, no doubt, to many special advantages which she enjoys, such as the effect of compulsory military service upon the habits and discipline of the population, and almost ideal jet cheap Civil Service, and an excellent system of cheap education. The standard of living, and-hence the standard of wages, is lower than here. [Litigation is more expeditious and far less costly, llailways are cheaper, and railway rates are consequently much lower. Her splendid rivers provide cheap transport, and they are supplemented by numerous canals, which have riot, like the English canals, been bought up by the railways to be killed. There is no trade unionism in the British sense, if trade unionism and sense may be mentioned together in one sentence. Her Government and diplomacy seem to make trade expansion their first and foremost aim. With such advantages it would have been marvellous indeed if her trade and her industries had not alvanced by leaps and bounds. [No wonder her material prosperity increases in all directions. Yet it cannot be shown that the progress of Germany has brought about British trade retrogression. We, too, make headway, and if we cannot show such growth per cent., partly because we had such a large business already and were so far ahead, we yet maintain an appreciable lead in all the great trades, and remain, in spite of competition, by far the leading trading nation. One cannot, indeed, better illustiate the position - than by comparing the two countries with two rival shop keepers in the same district. Great Britain is the “Universal Provider’ with the 1 u-gest turnover and steadily expands its business ; Germany began later and o i a humbler scale, and has r elatively had more expansion, notably in one or two special lines, which it cultivates with remarkable assiduity. But the ‘district’ in which the two operate, the world’s trade, is growing, and there is room for a new concern now and then. [Meanwhile the Universal Provider remains paramount on the whole, although one or two of his departments foci the influence of the rival, and although he has failed to add some new articles for which a demand has arisen. It, should not require a superhuman effort on his part to retain, on the whole, his lead, though on the alert he must remain r and though he cannot hope to remain pre-eminent everywhere and in everything.