The Forrest City times., 1891-04-17
EXPORTS AND IMPORTS,
A Damaging AdmlssiOn-Ex Exports Pay fo, Imports = Balance of Trade and the Tarmers' Market.

A Damaging AdmlssiOn-E Exports Fay for Imports = Balance of Trade and the Farmers' Market.
 The American EcOnOn,ist, the mouth piece of the American Protective Tariff League, makes fatal admission when it says: "Probably no economic law is moro rigid than that a nations imports must, in the long run, be paid for by it's ex- ports"
 Very true; but the Economist has for months been wrestling in agony to prove just the contrary. It has taken up the principle held by all opponents of pro- lection, that we cannot sell abroad un- less we will buy there fin other words, that exports pay for imports; and it has tried by various examples to prove that this is false. It could show that we sell to England about S200,0oO,O0o 8 year more than we buy there. But it is well known that our excess of exports to En- gland pay for our excess of imports from South America and other parts of the world.
 At present our total exports and im- ports are not far from being equal, some years our exports being larger and other years imports being in excess. Most of the years since the war. however, we have sent out more than we brought in from abroad-a fact which gives the protectionists exceeding great joy. When exports are greater than imports, the balance, they say, comes back to us in gold and silver.
 Thus this Economist said some time ago.. "Since 1875 the balance of trade has been in our favor for every year ex- cept 1888 and 1889, and we have received in . <.f what we lost under free trade" But the Economist could very easily verify this statement. The Treasury Depart ment publishes the figures of exports and imports of gold and silver. If we have teen receiving back gold and silver from Europe, tho Treasury reports ought to show the fact
 What Go they show?
 That we have received backn So05,- 000, 900 since 1875, all tod. and that in the same time we have sent abroad s277,- GOO, 900, all in gold and silver. During the very time when the Economist fam cies that we have been receiving back gold and silver in payment for goods, we have sent away $7c, 00O, GOO moro than we brought in.
 The explanation of this Is simple enough. The S1,5sl, ,00o, ,0oO merchan- disc and S72, GOO, 900 in gold and silver, a total of $1,653, GOO, GOO, which we have sent abroad since 1875 over and above what came In, was sent in payment of interest on foreign investments in the United States, in taking up Government State, and railroad bonds, in premiums on insurance policies, and in paying freights to foreign vessels But tho Economist makes another admission. It says that "our imports of 800 or 900 millions annually are now largely paid for by agricultural exports" From which 1t naturally follows that the moro we import the greater will be the de- mand for our farm products to pay for those imports Our farmers, therefore, have the highest possible interest in in- creasing our importations of foreign goods. Even if they should not need many of those imported goods them selves, the importation of them enlarges tho foreign demand for wheat, flour, corn, beef, pork and other commodities produced by our farmers