New-York tribune., 1904-08-11
FAITH VESTS FACTS.

''The New-York Times" rehuked US last week
for raising q few loud. unthinking hurrahs"
over the recent gains made in our foreign COM
merce The Department Of Commerce and
Labor's summary Of foreign trade for 1903'O4
disclosed the highly gratifying fact that this
country now leads the world as an exporter Of
domestic products. II also proved that our
aggregate Of imports and exports for the year
just endeG-S2 45l, 81. .623-broke all American
records. The Times refused 10 Join in our
'hurrahs" over this creditable exhibit It pre-
ferred to think that so long as more than 90
'per cent Of our exports is made up Of agri-
cultural products" our export trade is a cause
not for unthinking congratulation, but "for
serious uneasiness" Until we sell abroad more
manufactures than raw products, The Times"
contended, our foreign commerce, however
hourishing. must rest on an unstable and
ilusory basis
We were prepared 10 accept this saddening
conclusion with as much resignation as pos
sible and TO hope that inasmuch as our ex-
ports OF manufactures have risen from about
S22o,o0O,oO0 II 1886 to about 100000 in
1e08-o4. they might some day reach q total i'm
posing enough to dispel at least portion Of our
neighbor's gloom. But from "The Times" Of
Monday we gather that such a consummation
is. under present conditions. quite beyond at
tainment So long as the Dingley tariff re-
mains. THE Tines" now assures US, the expan-
sion Of our foreign trade is q bleak and bald
lmposSbLify The idea we have labored under.
mat foreign commerce could grow. or has
grown under the Dingley tariff, is al an illu-
sion. In biting comment on the State De-
parmeurs folly in seeking to foster trade
abroad The Times" says. with a fne show Of
indignation:
Il IS not Yaeral,, h,.ro.-s.so,, .. 4. 4, -,
measure futile, for US 10 instruct our Diplomatic
tepIeSentaUVes 10 bother themselves about
se.I 11.ti-lles 70 our foreign trade when our CO.
...eSuc avs aVowedly and effectively stand in
ths way OF foreign trade The Dingley Act is an
GCt 20 restrict Imports In the very nature OF
Tie case II must also restrict exports since II is
an elementary truth that commodities eoUyirg
ole way beget e trade in commodities Aov,in )
ne osaer way, Until TIE Dingley Act is revised
i&clc2lly the diplomats officers OF the govern
rle1t might IS well spend their time sineiI1,
psalm times as in hunting foreign buyers for oT
manufactured goods.
Il Is piece OF cruelty, Of course % os,, =
confirmed Cobdenite to test his theories nv
ieeis Yet The Timess" logic raises a direct
Eho unavoidable issue with the Department OF
commerce and Labor's recent bulletin. If our
ne-sADor IS right that bulletin and every sim
Lar one issued in the last ten years ourbt n
De recalled and suppressed II the Dinplov no,
was meant to restrict and did restrict. both i'm
ports ana exports, why are we ''buncoine" tho
world oy publishing each year an arrav ~
hsefes showing an extraordinary expansion
nnoer that act In both imports and exports,
WIN the lower rates OF tho Wilson Gorroan CO.
our imports IN 1s94-'95 and lsa5.,0e roorhod
sespectiVely, SISl.oooooO and s77o, 100000. Fo,
s1<-o Us ana 10000. after eight years OF ere
Aulclon.' they reached the totals, regpectivelv
or Slo2o,5le.2S7 and $3.50, ,745.Oe4.
ADs restrictive effects Of the DingIev ~
10 ''p ports have been even more appalling. I,