The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1888-07-28
BALANCE or TRADE CRUDITEs.

BALANCE or TRADE CRUDITEs.
The FREE TRADER is regretfully compelle,
to express its establishment that its frien'
&C. D. To- Of the Ottawa Republican, is una
Bile to get through his wool Its simple illus
tration-so simple that . child ought to un
derstand it-of the point that balance o
trade Gin our favor" ss il 10 called-that il
when we export moro than We imports
proof rather that we are driving Q losinl
than . profitable trade with the outsid,
world. Our illustration was this: Eng
land comes to America and buys 500, 900, -
600 worth Of cotton, work IL up in her MILL
adds Sl00,000,000 to its value, export,
800, 900 900 Of It to South America, Japan
&C., and brings home $3.50, OOO, 900 worth Of
coffee, tsa, &c., being thus $4,000, OOC
ahead.
On this the sccute C. d. T. remarks:
To the ordinary calculator It would seem
that the country in the case given had lost
just $50 600, 900 in the volume assumed. For,
If the first cost Of the cotton was 800, 900,
600, and the added cost 500, 100000 and
the manufactured product ON being exported
to "South America, Japan, etc, could bring
home but $780, ZOO, 900 worth Of coffee, tea,
etc there must have been shrinkage Of
$5o, OOO, 900 somewhere.
He forgets that English labor having added
$l00,0O0,000 to the value Of the cotton, it
WAS worth 100000, 900, lin point of actual
fact, great deal more), and that but one
half of this was exported to South America,
ETC., to bring back $3.50, 1000, 900 worth Of
tea and coffee
Has c. D. I. ever heard Of the productive
power Of trade? If he had he could utter no
such nonsense as this:
How is it possible for any country to buy
raw material for $l00,0 600, 900. work it up at
q cost Of Sl00,000,00 more, then sell 1t for
$4,000 900 only and make money? Yet
that is precisely what England last year did
with the sole exception that every dollar of
the excess Of her imports over her exports
she paid not to her own laborers, but to the
world, in gold and silver coin, or solid
bullion.
You totally ignore the $l00,OOO,O 900
English labor has added to the value of the
raw material, and are Obvious or innocent
of the fact that it was by productive trade
that England gained $4,000, 900 by expor.
tation 500, 600, 900 worth of manufactured
product. As to the gold and silver and
solid bullion, her adverse balance of trade
cost England the state Of her Golfers and the
freedom with which she is, according to
republican pretense, now ready to pour out
the yellow stuff to promote free trade in
other countries, would indicate no particular
scarcenses at home. The truth is, free trade
England owns more gold today than all of
high protection Europe combined.
Why is it profitable to send things in trade
from one country to another? Because
things of more value are brought back in
return for them. Does not common sense
then say to lay unnecessary restrictions on
imports is injurious, because in the same
degree that imports are diminished exports
must be. lfthe republicans idea that every
dollars worth of goods we import from
abroad is injurious to home industry, then
we insist that there shall also be tax laid
on exports, that home consu ners may get the
advantage Of lower prices to offset the higher
prices home producers get through the
imposition Of taxes on imports.
Nothing is more simple of comprehension
and more fully settled iu political economy,
that that 'in profitable international trade
the value Of the imports will always exceed
the value Of the exports that pay for them,
just as in profitable trading voyage the
return cargo must exceed in value the cargo
carried out" Is it possible that any man
Of the intelligence Of c. D. 7. can be so
blinded by political prejudice as not to see
this? lfso, we suggest that he might find
some primer on political economy a profitable
study.
| ----------
| RaDrhlicap napar.