The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-11-25


is entirely above and beyond the people. 1t
refuses to let the people know how much of
their money 1t spends, or how 1t spends it,
No citizen can ascertain how many employees |
tie city has, what their names are, or how |
much they get. In a word, our whole muni-
cipal government, as now administered is a |
secret conspiracy to plunder the public, and |
taxpayers have as little knowledge of what
becomes of their money as though it we're
disbursed by a band of robbers in a cave in
Algiers.
And this grand achievement of the New
York Democracy is a practical illustration of
what the World calls the mission of the
Democratic party" To fulfill this Emission"
it is only necessary, according to the World,
for the party to do all over the country what
it does here-eschew affirmative issues,
hold no fixed principles, and sell out, as occa-
sion may require, to the highest bidder
EUROPEAN WAR AND THE BALANCE
OF TRADE.
r. ons the N. Y. World.
The expectation that Russie.'s attempt to
abrogate the treaties of 1856 might lead to
general European war has induced some of
the political economists of the day to hunt
up the statistics of our foreign trade for the
years OF the Crimean war, and to demon
st1ate that during that time the balance of
trade was in our favor; that therefore we
were as nation benefited by that war, and
ought now to rejoice should Russia's demand
lead to renewed complications, because they
would again ipure to our benefit. Not to
speak of the monstrous doctrine that we can
possibly derive a sum total of advantage
from q general European war, the argument
itself, in SO far as based upon the balance of
trade theory, is fallacious No greater alb
surdities have ever been perpetrated in the
history of commercial legislation than those
based upon this delusive theory. which has
not the, slightest foundation of reality to
stand upon.
In the first place the Importance of all
foreign trade is constantly and enormously
overrsted The domestic production of the
United States is now estimated by the best
ststisticians at $40, 600, O0O 900 per annum,
while our import or export trade has never
yet materially exceeded $4OO, 900, 600 in
any one year, showing that domestic produc-
ton exceeds FOREIGN imports twenty-five fold
in numerical importance, and that hence q
variation of even 800, 600, 600 in our exports
and imports is no indication whatever of our
general prosperity.
In the second place, it has yet to be proved
that an excess of exports is thing TO be de-
sired. England, which cannot certainly be
quoted as an illustration of an Improbable
commerce. has for the last twenty years i'm
ported every year largely in excess of her ex-
years alone what callow 'balance of trade"
economists would call an unfavorable balance
of trade to the extent of G530 600, 600, or
nearly So, 700, 000 900 in coin. If such
an enormous excess of imports does not
ruin England, why should much more mode
rate excess be SO injurious to us, or why
should we be so anxious to produce the re-
verse condition? These whole figures
though valuable in their way for statistical
purposes are totally valueless as indications
of national prosperity. Primarily every ma
tion should export in value as much as it i'm
ports. If it carries on both export and i'm
port trade on its own account, as England
does almost everywhere, and as we do to
some extent, it should import an excess suifi-
cient to pay the profits of trade. If it carries
on any portion of its trade in its own vessels,
it should import an additional excess to pay
| the freights earned with them. If it owns
capital employed abroad, it must bring the
interest home in the shape of imports And
| if it borrows capital abroad, or foreign capi-
| tai comes to it for investment, that capital
| must come in the shape of imports and must
| swell the apparent balance of trade against
| a country. 1t is evident that no statistics
| can be invented to show to which of these
| causes the Balance of trade is due, and that
| therefore, the argument based upon it is
| quite falacious.
The period of the Crimean war is the very pc
| rlod which should warn unHedged StaStltlclanS
| not to meddle with the balance of trade. In
1858 we were unusually prosperous, and our
| excess of imports was unusually large; in fact,
| one of the three largest unfavorable balances
for thirty or forty years. In 1854 the unfa-
| vorable balance was smaller, but still heavy
AS soon as England felt the strain upon her
resources caused by the Orimean war, she
sought to collect from all parts of the
world all balances due to her, and nota-
bly, from this country. For the first time in
a number of years we in 1855 exported
more than we imported, and we did so in
order to enable England to use all her re-
sources in fighting Russia Our merchandise
exports were not sufficient to pay what we
owed, and we were obliged to drain ourselves
of large amount of specie, losing nearly
one hundred and fifty millions in coin in the
three years of 1854, 1855, and 1856 1t was
this loss of coin in those three years which,
in spite of favorable balance of trade in
each year, brought about the terrific crash of
1857, when we were totally unable to pay
what we owed, and when we were obliged to
temporarily defer all foreign payments by a
following, 1858, by dint of the bountiful
crops of the previous year, we were enabled
to again export more than we imported, the
balance of trade in our favor CD that year,
which will long be remembered as a year of
misery and poverty, being the largest one in
the history of this country.
1t will not be denied by any one that there
is large amount of foreign capital, espe-
cially English and German, now invested in
this country, precisely as there was in 1853,