The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-02-10

certain other financial phenomena clearly es-
tablish the precedence of the foreign imports
in tho confederation Of causes and effects /
throughout all the great changes in our |
economic affairs.
In the treatment of the question, we shall |
exclude the specie account from the imports, |
and the bank deposits from the currency.
The inclusion of the specie imports through |
period that overlaps the discovery of pre- |
cious metals in California, and the treatment
of deposits as currency, complicate the, ques-
ton unnecessarily, though it happens that
doing so does not materially vary the results.
First, of the relation between the value of
the foreign imports and the amount of cur
rency in circulation, under our two highest
and two lowest tariffs prior to 1860 fthe
amounts in millions and tenths of millions of
dollars).
UNDER THE TARIFF oF 1929 AND THAT OF 1s4Q.
1929, 80, s1, '99-Average yearly imports, $500;
average bank notes, SOLO.
1s4S, ~, 4T, Ye-Ayerage yearly imports, siOO1;
average bank notes, sS22.
UNDER coMPRoMIsE TARIFF OF 1888 AND THAT OF 1881
1884, 3b, se, '8l-Ayerage yearly imports, $780,
1851, IS, 80, Go~Ayerage yearly imports, ss24q
Average consumption OF imports and average bank
note circulation per capita dn dollars and cents).
UNDER TARIFFS OF 1928 AND THAT OF 1912
1929, 80, yl, B2-Average consumption, s5ai;
lsls, q. 4, 4S.Ayersge consumption, ASS;
UNDER COMPROMISE TARIFFS OF 1888 AND THAT OF
1851.
1884,, a5, 'e0,. s7-Ayerage consumption, $3.50;
| average circulation, tT46.
1857, DS, 80, '60-Average consumption, St040;
| average circulation, s64s.
Averages are always inaccurate, more es-
| pecially In matters subject to great fiuctua-
| tions. Sometimes, where errors Of brevity
and clearness OF statement can be afforded
as in the present cSse they may be adopted,
| though they have the vice of leveling fuctua-
tons, which are the strongest features of the
| matter in hand.
Let us look at shorter periods in which the
contrasts of the systems of duties and the
concurrence of the effects are still bolder,
and SO much the more just as they are nearer
in cause and effect
In the years 1880, 81, '32, the foreign i'm
ports retained for consumption aggregated
$207, 700 900; the note circulation stood at
$61 900, 900; the total duties upon the i'm
ports averaged 32 per cent. In the years
1885, '36, '37, the aggregate imports for con-
sumption rose to 1914, 100, 900; the circula-
ton, at the highest $149, 900, ,000 and the
total duties were % per cent. Here we have
the imports increased so per cent, the duties
reduced so per cent, and the average circu-
lation nearly doubled. Then came the revul-
sion of 1887 of imperishable memory.
Again-the aggregate imports for consump-
ton in the years 1S34-5-G, were 1912, 900, OOO
|
] duties 29'2 per cent; but nine years later,
under the tariff of 1916, the imports rose in
the aggregate of the years 1861 to $500,
500, 900; the circulation to an average of
$199, 900, 900, and the duties on the duty
, paying goods were down to 234 per cent.
Whereupon followed the revulsion of 1857.
Here again, after a lapse of nine years, three
J times longer than the interval of the former
= periods contrasted, for which allowance
| oh ha roa1a tha ONvth nf
, wealth and population, we have an increase of
: the imports of 175 per cent. and CORE
spending increase of the circulation of 121
, per cent, with average duties 20 per cent
: lower.
Here again the ineradicable vice of general
8 averages appears. The duties upon woollens
g cottons, hempen goods, iron, and manufac
Q lures of iron, in 1914, 5, 6, were 1874 pei
cent, and in 1866, g, Y, only 27'2 per cent
Q a reduction in the protective duties on goods
g which covers almost the entire system oi
: | American protection of Al per cent, instead
Q of the 25 per cent of the general average
r upon all imports; none of which are important
Q to our industry except those charged at th'
u highest rates.
q The California gold, the Crimean war, ant
Q our freedom from extraordinary expenditure
y heightened the run of the tariff of 1916; elst
a we should have had its catastrophe earlier
d and the proportion between the circulation
|, and the imports still nearer. The oritica
n years of our financial history best show tn
% connection between excessive imports, ex
panded currency, low tariffs, and the result
s ing business catastrophes the years 1916
y 1886, and 1856, and their respective sequels
Q in duration and severity, show equally we
1t the dependence of all our grand explosion
J. upon the foreign trade as their real primar
G. and efficient cause, and the low tariffs rulin
IT at the times being the predisposing causes G
o all the mischief.
n AS starting point-a standard-it is to b
l. noted that in the two years 1881 and 1888:
% under the high tariff of 1928, the import
Of amounted to 81 5S 200, ,O0O and the circulatio
pi stood at SOL, 900. Now, in these tw
n years, the sales of the public lands and th
Of receipts from them averaged $4,000, 0e0 pt
a the seven preceding years, varying but
h, trife in any year from 1924 to 1880. In 1SS
of the Compromise act was passed. 1t began b
an its first reduction of customs rates In 1873
is and displayed its full force in 1885 and 183
r. In these two years the imports rose first
ng 1922, 900, 900 in 1885, and then to $158,900
600 in 1836-an increase of n per cent.
three years, which was followed by a redu
3, ton of 40 per cent. in the next two year
In those two years, the sales of the publ
lands went up, in 1886, to $14, 700, 900, an
1r- in 1886 to $24, 500, 600; the circulation mo-
~, than doubled and the public land sales ii
'n- creased to thirteenfold above all preceden
is, and fell Immediately thereafter to their o
,n, average, until 1855 brought them up again
m $1l, 500, ,O0e, in preparation for the revulsiC
'of of 1857 1t must not be forgotten, that,