The border vidette., 1933-05-06
HAYDEN CITES COPPER FACTS

| U. S. Senator Carl Hayden re
Gently addressed the following
letter to the New York Times,
regarding an article on eco
nomics in that paper in which a
misleading reference to exports
of copper from the United States
occurred:
Washington, D. c.,
April 20, 1888.
Mr.. Charles Merz,
Care of Sunday Dept,
New York Times.
New York City. N. Y.
My dear Mr.. Merz:
I have been reading with in
terest your articles on business
and economic questions which
have appeared ia the New York
Times. I feel sure that you
make every effort to attain &C
curacy in your facts, but mas
much as your articles are widely
read and often times are insert
ed in the Congressional Record,
I cannot refrain from calling to
your attention a statement in
your last Sundays article which
to. me seems to be somewhat
misleading.
Discussing foreign trade as an
indispensable factor 10 our pros
perity before 1880 you say:
| Ia 1929 the United States ex
ported 81 per cent Of the cotton
it produced. Al per cent of the
tobacco. 36 per cent of the cop
| per, 33aper cent of the lard, %
per cent Of the sewing machines
and from 81 to 40 per cent of the
agricultural machinery, locomo
tives. typewriters, lubricating
oils and kerosene.
I refer now specifically to that
part of the foregoing statement
With reference to copper. [ do
not know the sourse of your in
formation but assume that it
must have originated in an at
tempt to compare domestic pro
duction with the total exports
for that year without taking into
consideration the imports of the
same commodity.
l am sure you agree with me
that the effect of imports cannot
be ignored. After all. we are
considering that ability of the
domestic producer to market his
product within or without the
United states.
II its report to the senate,
November 30. 1881. the United
States tariff commission made
the following statement regard.
ing trade balances in copper:
Before entry Of the United
States, into the World War the
excess of exports averaged
roughly 100000 short tons :.
During the last two years plott
ed 1929 and 193O). however, not
only did the excess disappear,
bat imports were greater than
exports.
This statement was based on
exports and imports of uumanu
featured copper and copper
scrap II exports Of copper
manufactures are also consider.
ed it will be found that domestic
consumption were very close to
being equal. Ia present dis.
cussion of trade balances, in cop
per, it is also enlightening to
consider the situation for theyear
preceding the present 4 cent i'm
port tax, namely through July,
1881, to June, 1882. inclusive.
For this psriod, giving full con
sideration to all exports includ.
ing manufacturers and scrap
copper, the folio wing relation
existed according to the Amer
lean Bureau of Metal Statistics:
Exports, 1875 4l6 tons.
Imports. 316, 189 tons.
Excess imports, 120 773 tons. .
Ioasmuch as the total domestic
consumption ling the same
period was only slightly in excess
of 400, 600 tons, it is seen that con
ditions had reached point
where excess imports represent
ed almost 80 per cent Of dom es-
tic consumption.
I want, furthermore, to take
the liberty of pointing out that
your article fails to take into a;
count ons controlling factor
which enters into thu problem
in respect to copper.
II is true that American cop
per enjoyed q world market ap
prOximately upfto the date given
in YOUR article. American pro