The daily morning journal and courier., 1902-07-14
OUR VANISHING GRAIN TRADE.

OUR VANISHING GRAIN TRADE.
 Some current statistics put forward
 by committee of the New York Pro- duce Exchange show in a startling manner the extent to which this port, and thefore all the United States, is los ing the export trade in grain and flour.
 As we have hitherto pointed out, such trade is being diverted to Canadian
 ports. So far has the transfer pro- ceeded that Canadian ports now ship the bulk of the grain crop of the con-
 tinent and the major part of our own crop goes abroad from Canadian ports. According to official statistics, the population of Canada in 1900 was about
 5,50O,OOO, and her exports of her own grain and breadstuffs to Great Britain amounted to $14,SS3,171. At the same time the population of the United States was 77,000 000, and it's exports of grain and breadstuffs to Great Britain were | $155, 096445 Thus the United States, fourteen times the size of Canada in population, was sending to Great Brit ain ten times as much grain and flour. | Yet last week there went abroad by l Canadian routes 1,0O2,2G5 bushels. and from the Atlantic ports of the United States only 742, S06 bushels. If we add
 the Gulf ports the United States total was 1,331,611 bushels. That is to say, l Canada, only one-fourteenth the size of the United States and selling only one tenth as much grain, is shipping about 35 per cent more than our Atlantic ports, and within 25 per cent. of our entire At lantic and Gulf ports shipments The explanation is, of course, that it is our
 grain she is shipping. Her superior fla ciIities for getting grain from the in- terior to tidewater and her superior port terminal facilities are drawing the products of our Western farms away
 from our ports to her own.
 There may be those who regard such trade movements lightly. To most men it will seem serious thing that we are so rapidly losing, and have so largely lost, the shipping trade in one of the very greatest of our exported products. Once New York exported more grain than all other American ports put to- gether. Last week Montreal shipped
 about s5 per cent more than New York. New York may be able to endure such loss and still to retain it's primacy
 among American ports. But if the pro-
 cess should be indefinitely continued, what then? And why should New York
 and the United States suffer any loss
 at all which might be prevented by the
 exercise of such energy and enterprise
 as our Canadian rivals display?
 We speak of New York particularly,
 not only because of especial interest in
 this port and city but also because .t is perfectly evident that New York's
 loss is the loss of the whole nation.
 The other United States ports are losing
 little, if any. The loss is all or nearly all, right here. The United States has
 fallen behind Canada in grain ship
 ments because of the decline of New
 York as grain shipping port. Tn ne-
 glect of New York's harbor and ter minal facilities and the discriminations
 made in various ways against this port
 have not only proved injurious to New York-they have also proved disastrous
 to the grain shipping trade of the Unit ed States. SIN? oLtNsent V
 ed states.--From the New York Trib- une.