The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-06-28
NO FEAR OF COMMERCIAL WAR
PROTESTING NATIONS WOULD SUF-
FER MORE THAN UNCLE SAM,
AS They Sell More Here than They
Buy-POssibiIity that Democrats May
PrOlOng the Tariff Debate.
Special to he indianapolis Journal.


protests are simply placed on tile' and that
is the end of them. They rarely provoke
even as much as a formal reply. The prac-
tice is altogether offensive and, so far as 1t
relates to the United States and other ma
tions it is one-sded. Tariff laws come and
go with other nations and the United States
pays not the slightest attention. A pro-
tecttve system grows apace in Europe and
elsewhere and such nations as France Ger
many, Austria-Hungary, Spain and others
which are now scolding about our proposed
new tariff, increase year by year or from
period to period their protective tariff rates
but in all these cases the world over the
United States has never entered a protest
of general character against anybody's tar
if laws or proposed tariff legislation. There
have been occasions in which attention of
foreign governments has been called to
certain of their laws or regulations which
seemed to bear unjustly upon a single in
dustry in the United States or discriminate
against productions of this country as COM
pared with those of other countries, but
there is no case on record in Which the gov
ernment of the United States has offered
any protest to q general tariff measure pro-
posed by other countries which would bear
with equal weight upon all nations send
ing their produce to the markets of these
countries.
That any nation should a isume to offer a
protest against a proposed law by another
nation, which law is to bear with equal
weight on the productions of all nations
article by article, is absurd, but that these
protests should come from nations which
themselves have high and steadily grow
ing protective tariff, adds very much to
the impertinence of such a proposition. 1t
is little curious, for instance to observe
that Italy, which collects about $5,0 600 a
| year tarinA-on American petroleum and
| equally high rates on many other articles,
should be offering protest, either officially
or otherwise, against tariff legislation by
the United States. Some people might sup
| pose 1t a trifle inappropriate for Germany
| which collects tarin OF $265.S0 per 100
! klloS on certain grades of clothing and ], 2OO
| marks per lUO klIoS on other articles OF a
! similar caracter, TO sumo to oner a pro-
! test against tariff measures of any other
| country. 1here might seem slight i'm
! proprlety IN protest from France, which
! places duty OF $26y.50 per 1JJ klos on
! smoking tobacco and 800 francs per 100
| kllos on cigars or cigarettes. So, also, there
| might appear reason Tor criticism upon a
| protest from Spain, which in her tariff
| places trit1ing duty of 1890 pesetas on
| every four-seated coach Or calash imported
| ana $40 peSetaS on each omnibus and dill
! gence
BLUFFING IS NOT CALLING.
this question of protests against our tariff
and especially as to the improbability of
| any action following these protests 1t is
| one thing to make bluff while d measure
| of this character is under consideration
| and quite another to cali the tariff and
| commercial hand of such a nation as the
| United States, especially under the circum-
| stances existing with those countries,
which are reported as limiting at retaliation
in case their protests are not regarded.
Among the countries which are reported as
| offering objections, either officially unof-
! ncially or IN public prints in reference to
| our new tariff are Japan, China, Austria
Hungary, Germany, France, Italy, Turkey,
| Greece, Spain, Netherlands, Switzerland,
! Argentine, Mexico, Canada and possibly
Brazil. Less than half this number have
| filed formal protests at the State Depart
ment but there have been sundry grum-
! bGngs and mutterings among the others,
either in their legislative bodies, in the in
| iVidual utterances of their representatives
! mere and elsewhere or in the public press.
The practical business question with re-
| gard to these people and governments is
whether they can afford to take any re-
| tdlatory steps against a tariff which makes
no discrimination as between countries or
! which does not discriminate against any
one of them individually. If they were to
attempt retaliation by adverse legislation,
| which should exclude American products
| from their markets or discriminate against
our productions in any way it would be
expected and very properly, that the Uni
| ted States would return the compliment by
| excluding or discriminating against the
products of the country which had taken
| such action. The practical business results
of an occurrence of this kind would be that
| nearly every one of the countries in ques-
ton would suffer a greater loss in the sale
States
OF the fifteen countries included in the
| above list, thirteen sell more goods TO the
United States than they buy from US, and
| the total sales of the fifteen countries in
| question to the United States are hundreds
| dnII tori han
| to them. The results would be that if they
! should undertake to exclude our goods from
their ports, similar acton on our part
would cut off a much larger market for
their producers than would their action af-
| feet the markets of our producers. An at
tempt at retaliation by the countries in
question with possibly two exceptions,
| would therefore be much more disad-
vantageous to them than to the United
| states Hence the improbability that the
nations which are offering these protests
have the slightest expectation that their
action will be anything more than mere
bluff or be followed by any attempt at re-
taliation by them in case their protests are
unheeded.
WHAT THE FIGURES SHOW.
few examples of the commercial rela-
tions existing between some of the nations
in question and the United States will be
Sufficient to show that there is no prob
ability that they are going to endanger
their own business and the markets for
their own producers by any step which
might possibly close the ports of the United
States against their productions. In the
statements which follow ten years pc
/ riod has been covered in showing the COM
mercial relations between the United
| States and the countries in question, in
| order to give a fair average showing of
| the sales of those countries to people of
| the United States and the return sales of
| our products to those countries 1t will be
| observed in the. statements which follow
| that IN practically every case the countries
| now suggesting retaliation which would af-
feet commercial relations have. sold US
! very much more Of their productions than
] we have sold to them, and therefore any
| action on their part disturbing or closing
/ these relations would cut off larger mar
| ket for themselves than they would de-
| stroy for us.
| Japan has sold to us in the past decade
| S2l2, 100 200 worth of goods and bought from
| us $450071l7 worth of our productions.
/ China's sales to us in the past ten years
are $lS9 246, ,349, and her purchases from us
| $54 $40.