Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1891-04-17
COMPRISING THE TRUTH.

A Protection Organ Sees a Great Light.
Exports. Imports and Balance of Trade.
The American Economist is the week
ly paper published by the American Pro-
tective Tariff league for the dissemina
ton OF protective ideas. Itgoes into the
offices of large number of country pa
pers in sympathy with protection, for
the purpose of enlightening the brethren
on the beauties of protection.
This Economist is an "amoosin' little
cuss. 1t has for long time been try
ing to disprove the law that a nation
cannot sell unless it will buy, and that
In international trade, therefore, exports
ana imports must always be equal, or
nearly SO. In casting about for facts
with which to undermine this funda
mental principle of trade The Economist
aosurdly enough examined the statistics
OF trade between two countries only.
rather than the simple and more OBJ
Vlously correct method of comparing the
exports and imports of each country
singly.
After The Economists method of proof
1t could point to the fact that our exports
10 England exceed our imports from the
country by about $500, 000. 900. Yet it
Is well known that our imports from the
American markets south of us are now
more than $100,O00,000 above our ex
ports to them, and The Economist
knows that England and the United
States exchange their debts in those
countries, we sending England an excess
OF agricultural products, and England
paying our debt in South America and
the West Indies with manufactured
products which we try to exclude through
hlgh tariffs. In thisaway, by bills of ex-
change, international debts are trans
ferred, and so in the long run exports
and imports will always be made equal
1here may be IN some cases large
excess OF imports over exports, as is true
OF England, to pay interest on foreign
investments, ocean freights. insurance
premiums, etc, or exports may be greater
than imports, as is the case with US. in
paying out commodities to meet those
same expenses
Inns Is all very obvious, is in fact the
A, b, OF international trade. But
NOBODY would have expected to see
The Economist admit it, considering its
frantic efforts to prove the contrary. In
a late number, however, The Economist
says:
PROBABLY no economic law is more
r1gld than that nations imports must
IN the long run be paid for by its ex-
ports. If its export of goods falls short
1t must make up the deficiency by its ex-
port of gold and silver. If these are
continuously exported the consequent
scarcity of gold and silver money will
produce poverty and depression of prices
until the import of goods is checked and
the outflow of merchandise is enlarged ~
just what you have been DENYING all
along, and just the position taken by
the opponents of McKinleyism an over
the world. Now, after The Economist
has learned the alphabet of trade, let it
go step further, put two letters to-
gether, and see if it does not inevitably
follow from this rigid law that foreign
nations cannot increase their purchases
Of our farm products and manufactures,
except as we increase our purchases
from them; and that therefore when
we erect tariff barriers to diminish i'm
ports we thereby strike a blow at our
export trade; that in protecting our
manufactures in the home market we
injure our farmers in their foreisn mar
ket.