New-York tribune., 1890-05-27
DISCOUNTS FOR EXPORT TRADE.

Unnecessary fuss is made by some papers
about rhe undoutted fact that manufacturers
in this country sometimes make spccaI as
counts i'm order TO secure foreign customers.
Certain Frec-Tradc organs arc Just now max
iuo q great parade Of such discounts adVcr-
tiscd for export trade exclusively, and pretend
that every such advertisement bears evidence
81 \ robbery of American consumers through
,nononolies which the tariff creates and de
fends. The manufacturers will not give as
large discount to American consumers, it i
said because they are protected, and can
charge what they like on the trade III ms
country. But they show what the goods act
ualv cost. and prove that they ex'ort profits
from American consumers beyond that cost
,vbon thcv offer to sell at lower prices to for
eigncrs.
The candid man. if impressed at all by this
reasoning. proceeds at once TO examine what
kind of articles are thus enumerated as beng
sold for export on special discounts. At once
he sees that nearly all of them are articles
produced in this country without the stimulus
of any duty, and sold abroad in free compcu-
ton lust as they would be if there were no
duties on similar articles or second, they are
nroducts Of new American inventions or pro
ccsscs which the manufacturers are STRIVING
10 introduce abroad, just as they have already
introduced them here and they therefore ciler
inducements in price to attract customers III
such cases there is no excuse Tor saying 'hd'
the tariff has anything TO do with the dllicr-
ence in price Moreover, it will be Observed
that the reported difference in discounts be
tween domestic and export trade Is rarely
more than or per cent, which Is much leSs
than the duty on corresponding dutlaple aru-
clcs IF the difference proves anything, II
nroycs that the American manufactures Is al
ready selling such goods within or Z per
cent Of the foreign price, notwithstanding the
! fact that a duty Of 40 or 80 per cent exists
which is supposed to give him an opportunity
TO extort as much from American consumers.
! Thus the witnesses oiled do in fact testify
! that the Frec-Tradc prctences are false. But
| ought the manufacturer to sell goods Tor less
| money to foreigners than To Americans? Is
| there not a wrong in thus giving preference 10
| aliens? Let il be noted just here that no
/ difference even approxmating to the rate OF
! duty appears in any instance. The American
is selling to American consumers at about the
same price that foreign manufacturers OF "A
/
| sumcrs So the tariff does not, In fact, burden
or rob the consumers here But the manu-
facturcr seeks to seize foreign trade by under
selling foreign producers, even though he may
do so for a time without profit or at loss, eX-
actly as British manufacturers would snatch
the American trade in many products If the
tariff hid not prevent
The manufacturer is doing exactly what the
shrcvd merchant does in his business when he
resorts 10 a great " drive' to get new custom
ers. The loss on any goods which he sells at
a loss is simply the cost of an advertisement.
II is a premium which he pays in order to get
a business that will ultimately be profitable
In many cases the manufactures sells for eX-
mort. not at loss, but at so narrow a rate OF
profit that he would have to stop work if he
realized no more on other sales. Again why
not He is contending for a custom which
he cannot get at all if he charges an ordinary
living profit. But he can better afford TO take
than TO refuse it, just as railway trunk line
can better afford to take through freight at
bare cost, and keep its wheels rolling and its
men employed than TO refuse it and enable a