Omaha daily bee., 1896-12-26
DRAUIyG FALSE CONCLUSIONS.

The fact that the excess of exports
over imports for the current year is eX-
ceptionally large is referred to by the
supporters of the present tariff law as
evidence that the law has not crippled
the export trade of the Cnited States
and that ii has not caused the country
to be flooded with foreign imports. The
large trade balance in our favor is II
gratifying condition, but it cannot fairly
democratic tariff.
AS matter of fact during the first
year of that tariff the American mar
ket was flooded with foreign goods. 1t
gave tremendous stimulus TO the
wo0len industry Of England anu it re-
vived other European industries If
this were not so, why IS it that the
manufacturers of England, Germany
and France are so apprehcnsiyc of the
enactment of high tariff law by the
next congress? All advices from abroad
report that the manufacturing interests
are greatly concerned about the new
tariff ana this is certainly not from any
interest In our welfare. What they fear
is n policy that will cut down their trade
with this country. The great depression
OF the past year and the fact that the
market had been oyerStOcked, together
with the feeling of uncertainty during
the presidential campaign, naturally re-
duced imports. but heavy orders were
placed abroad Immediately after the
election, in anticipation of a revival of
business. and these will in due time
make themselves apparent in aug
mentcd imports. The suggestion that
the present law has not encouraged the
importation of foreign merchandise is
known by every manufactures with
whose products foreigners compete and
by every merchant who handles foreign
goods To he absurd. That we have not
had a greater flood of such goods is not
because the tariff did not invite it, but
Is due to conditions which would have
kept down imports even were there abso-
Lutte free trade.
With regard to exports, it Is well
known that there has been an eXtraordi-
nary demand for our wheat and cotton.
with which the tariff had nothing what
ever to do, and it is this demand which
largely accounts for the Increased cX
ports. 1t is true that there has been IN
increase in the amount OF our manufac
tured products sent abroad, but it can
not be yet determined that this means
permanent growth in the foreign de
mand for these products, nor is there
any assurance that this increase was
as whole profitable to Our manufac-
turers. There Is reason to believe tha
II considerable amount of the manufac
lures sold abroad brought no more than
the cost of production and it is quite
possible that there was loss on some of
them. There is no substantial ground
for assuming that the present tariff has
conduced TO an increase of exports or
has in the least degree contributed to
make the large trade balance in favor of
the United States.
The advocates of continuing the demo
cratic tariff, from President Cleveland |
down. will make no impression upon the
country or upon congress by any such
assumptions as noted. Neither will the
theory of Secretary Carlisle, that pro
tectiye duties are destructive of revenue,
have any weight with those who are
familiar with our economic history. The
existing tariff has favored foreign manu-
facturers and been correspondingly |
damaging to American manufacturers |
1t has operated against the interests |
and welfare of both the people and the |
government Our greatest progress and |
highest prosperity have been attained |
under the protective policy. The coun-