The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1881-10-20
rne mhbAsoe ~ rnAOg' 0Efg
sOfn.

UOu0Cf over INC NlFHUlUlo w WV v ''''f w.
received last evening with the request to
publish, accompanied by the observation
that ho "thought MFR. Magic'sarticlc hardy
worth answering; for II shows how some
persons, otherwise intelligent, have very
crude ideas of finance and political econ
omy." Considering that the argu-
ment and views presented by
our correspondent are the long
since exploded ones of what, in It's
day, before Adam Smiths time, was known
as the Mercantile System, his structures on
the eminent and clear Drained Mr.. Magic,
are refreshing and amusing. All are agreed
that foreign trade and large expectations are
q benefit. ButRsay some,we must import less
than we export to be in healthful condi-
ton. Now, pursue this argument, and let
us say with our correspondent that our an
nual excess of exports is lOo,OOO,ooo Now
if this is the great good $Aooo'-
600 excess must be an increase
of that good, and so on ad intinitum' until
we come to expectation exclusive of impor-
tation. But let us assume that we keep on
as now presented. viz: on the Sloo'Voo,ooo
excess, or say that we had thus kept on for
the past fifty years, then the accumulation
of gold and silver in this country to-day
would be $4,000, 100000 to say nothing OF
interest. Now this is just the estimated
amount of all the specie in circulation IN
this world. What good would tins
hard cash do us OF ltsell
We could neither eat it. drink IT,
wear it, nor otherwise advantage ourselves
bv it's ext stence in our pockets, old STOCK
ings or treasury vaults. We could spend II
for comforts and enjoyments, to be sure
This does not, however, vary the case, save
TINT in one instance we expend it from
largely accumulated stock, whereas, had we
an exact reciprocity of trade, no balance,
we would have expended it piecemeal ana
throughout the half-century. We would be
no richer, there would simply have
been. after all, an interchange
of commodities. Now, to demonstrate that
ON the other hand an excess OF import
doe, not iniure or drain a country let us
take the case of the richest, most powerful
most wealthy country on the globe, Eng
land. For the last twenty years, save lo'l-
2-3-4, her import valuations have exceeded
her exports, on q balance, by more than
81 500. OOO, O0O Here is living contradic-
ton of our opponents position. She did not
even settle these balances with specie. Per
contra, during that period she received
by importation $3.50, 100000 of specie. Or,
to view it in another light: during those
excepted years, as above, 1S7l-2-34, Eng
land exported more than she imported by
$50 ,OOO, OOO while in the four succeeding
years her excess of importations was ST.
600, 100000 Now, during the first period,
the balance of specie received.by her over
the specie exported was some Sol ,oOoWo,
while during the second it was some $780,
DOC, 900. In other words, during the four
years when she largely exported she re-
ceived 81, 600 900 less specie than when she
imported. But the "mistress of the seas"
is not the only country whose imports are
almost constantly in excess of the exports,
for the same is true of Germany, Belgium,
Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Netherlands,
etc. The truth is all prosperous nations
import more than they export, and vice
versa. An excess of exports near
ly always indicates an indebted coun-
try, this excess often going for
the payment of obligations maturing, or
the current interest thereon, national debts
or otherwise. In England's case over $780,
600 900 are annually received by her for in
terest from India and America alone, and
about the same amount from other debtor
countries. The fact Of the United States
being now prosperous, however, is not at all
necessarily caused by the exports exceeding
the imports. She may be prospering despite
of and not because of that very thing, and
indeed it is so in reality. Mil
lions of dollars transmitted hence
to British capitalists is no symp-
tom of our wealth. Did we hold our
own bonds, it is clear the export column,
whether of specie or commodities sent to
pay on their account, would not foot up SO
big. No, no. five expect to export much,
we must of necessity import. To restrict
imports is, by the memorable law of logical
sequence, to restrict exports to
the same extent. The attempt
TO so restrict them is the delusion, the par
adox of valley without the mountain, a
shadow without light, square without
corners. But some regard exports as in
come, because they have to be collected for
by us; and our imports as outlay, because
they have to be paid for by us. The reverse
view is the correct one. Our exports repre-
sent our expenditure, as they are the things
we pay WITH and the imports represent our
profits, as they are what we re-
ceive for the expenditures. These
are the conclusions of sound,
honest political econnmy. They may be
at war with certain selfish, sectional inter
ests in this country, but they are truism,
and he who takes the other course is follow
ing after false and deceiying gods. The
trouble with our correspondent is that his
view is circumscribed. He omits in his
calculation and illustration that in custom
house returns Of exports and imports,
| freights, insurance, commissions, etc, etc,
arc part and parcel Of the figuring on val
ues The product that A in Texas