« PreviousContinue »
reased; and it may be noted also that Canada accounts for the whole lecrease in the percentage of American exports to colonies in 1920 as compared to 1913.
American statistics are no exception to the rule that figures for the destination of exports and the origin of imports lack accuracy, especially in relation to the more distant and smaller colonies. This is due to the lack or inadequacy of means of direct consignment and transportation. As trade grows, however, direct communication is established with a greater number of colonial ports and the trade. is recorded with a greater approximation to completeness, according to its origin or destination.
The degree of accuracy of the figures for imports from the colonies can be checked roughly by the figures for the total imports of those articles which are derived most largely from the colonies. Thus, selecting rubber, tin, Egyptian cotton, cocoa, and tea as articles produced in distant colonies, it is found that the imports of these five articles from Europe and from Canada were valued in 1900, 1913, and 1920, respectively, at $23,000,000, $87.600,000, and $103,300,000; that is, these items, if they might be regarded as derived altogether from colonial sources, would add 14 per cent, 23 per cent, and 6.4 per cent, respectively, to the recorded totals of imports from colonial sources. These percentages are certainly not excessive, for though some parts of the importations of the articles named were doubtless derived from noncolonial sources, only a small number of the colonial products have been included in the computation. An exhaustive tabulation would probably show that our total trade with the colonies as recorded in Tables 5 and 6 should be increased by, say, 20, 30, and 10 per cent, respectively, for the three years. These corrections magnify the importance of colonial trade, but reduce the rate of its growth since 1900. In like manner the figures for exports from the United States to colonial markets should be increased to account for the American manufactures reshipped from European and other entrepots to the colonies.12
If the colonies of other powers be divided into three groups-the open-door colonies, the British Dominions, and the dependent colonies enforcing discriminatory duties 4-it can be seen at once that the trade of the United States with either of the first two groups greatly exceeds that with its own colonies. The possibility of the growth of this trade is also much greater, for American merchants already have most of the trade of Porto Rico and the Philippine Islands, so that American trade with them can grow only as the total trade of these islands continues to develop; but if American. merchants continue to have approximately an equal chance in India, Egypt, the Straits Settlements, the Dutch East Indies, Morocco, and the minor open-door colonies, they may well expect to expand their trade in a much higher ratio than that of the general development of the commerce of those countries. With the third group of colonies, which includes the British West Indies and most of the French,
42 On the other hand, corrections might be made in the figures to exclude goods imported into the United States for shipment to Canada, Canadian goods exported by way of the United States, and trade with independent countries through such colonial entrepots as Aden, Hongkong, and Dairen. In 1915 nearly 16 per cent of Canadian exports went through the United States, but in 1919 only 12 per cent. (Times Trade Supplement, Apr. 10, 1920, p. 84.)
43 See list on pp. 36-37.
Spanish, Italian, and Japanese colonies, the amount of the present American trade is given in the available statistics as much les than that with the American colonies. The published figures are however, as already explained, incomplete and it is certain that the large territories and populations involved, if the great handicap o American trade could be removed, would offer to it a greater marke than the American colonies now afford or will be able to afford in the future.
In comparing prewar and postwar values the great rise in price must be constantly borne in mind. For this reason the percentages of Table 6, which show the development of our trade with the col onies in relation to our total trade, are more significant than are the total values. For the same reason it is desirable to examine mort closely the demand of the United States for typical colonial prod ucts, since in dealing with commodities singly the quantities as well as the values may be compared.
Table 7 shows the quantities and values of the imports into the United States in the fiscal years 1900, 1913, and 1920, of the principal articles of which more than one-half of the world's supply is de rived from colonial sources. The table shows that the importation of these typical colonial products increased from 14.8 per cent of the total imports in 1900 to 19.6 per cent in 1913, and to 22.4 per cent in 1920.
A comparison of the quantities imported shows that the demand for every article on the list was greater in 1913 than in 1900, and with four minor exceptions, greater in 1920 than in 1913.40 In most cases the increases are very great. Taking those articles in the table whose weight is expressed in pounds and for which the weights are available for all three years, the total quantity imported is found to have increased, in millions of pounds, from 975 in 1900 to 1,505 in 1913, and to 2,945 in 1920-that is, the importation of 1920 was three times as great as in 1900 and practically twice as great as in 1913. The value of the imports listed in Table 7 was three times as great in 1920 as in 1913. In normal times this would be a striking increase. but in view of the doubling of the quantities imported and in view of the general rise of world prices the mere trebling of the total value of the articles listed undoubtedly minimizes the importance of colonial trade. The relatively small increase in value may be seen from the table to be due to the great fall in the price of rubber 47 and to the relatively small increase in the price of certain other commodities.
44 The figures are not given separately for Formosa and for some other colonies of this group, but it would appear that our total trade with these colonies was in 1919 about $85,000,000 and in 1920 about $110,000,000, including in the list of colonies Cyprus and those of the British West Indies whose adoption of a preferential tariff came after the end of the fiscal year 1920.
45 In the case of wool alone an article has been included of which the colonies produce less than one-half of the world's production; they produce, however, considerably more than one-half of the wool which passes in international trade.
40 The decreases are in coconut oil, manganese ore, graphite, and hemp. The decrease in coconut oil is much more than offset by the increase in copra; the decrease in manganese ore was due to oversupplies on hand at the end of the war.
47 The great fall in price was due to oversupply, caused by the rapid development of plantations in Malaya. The planters allege that the present price is considerably less than the cost of production and they tried to arrange to curtail production for the current year (1921) by as much as 50 per cent.
CABLE 7.-Imports into the United States of principal articles of which more than one-half of the world's supply is derived from colonies.1
[Values in millions (and tenths) of dollars and quantities in millions of pounds or other units.]
Commerce and Navigation, 1900 and 1913; Monthly Summary of Foreign Commerce of the United States, June, 1920. The figures are those of general imports for fiscal years ending June 30. In giving values per pound fractions of a cent have been omitted where the value exceeded 10 cents.
2 Including balata, guayule gum, gutta joolatong, and gutta-percha, valued at $5,161,000 in 1920.
To obtain figures from which five digits could be dropped and to facilitate comparisons, tons have been changed to pounds for the items indicated.
a None imported. Tin ore was first smelted in the United States during the war (see p. 339). Note that these figures are for total imports, regardless of source. For instance, all the tin ore comes from Bolivia, as the most important colonial sources are closed to the United States.
b Quantities not given in returns.
e Included in other vegetable oils, fibers, or feathers.
If a calculation be made of the value of the imports in 1920 on the basis of the prices of 1913, a figure of $856,000,000 is obtained as a total for the articles whose value per pound is given in the table for the two years, as compared with an actual value in 1920 of $1,051,000,000 48-that is, the increase in the total due to the higher prices of 1920 is only 23 per cent, a percentage far below that of the rise of world prices generally-and it follows, therefore, that the increase in the percentage of the total merchandise imported from 19.6 per cent in 1913 to 22.4 per cent in 1920 is not a full measure of the increased importance of these colonial products in the trade. of the United States.
48 I. e., omitting tin ore, diamonds, coconuts, managanese ore, and ostrich feathers.
V. TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS IMPOSING LIMITATIONS IN REGARD TO COLONIAL TARIFFS.
The various international obligations which affect or have in re cent times affected the tariffs of colonies may be discussed in thre groups according to their objects:
(1) Open-door treaties.-The so-called "open-door" treaties and agreements guarantee equality of tariff treatment, and, generally equality in other commercial matters, as between nationals and for eigners and between national and foreign products. They may b either treaties between two or three powers or general international treaties, and they may be either limited or unlimited in respect to time. The pledges may be unilateral, bilateral, or multilateral: and the treaties may be between two or several or a considerable number of states. With these may be associated unilateral pledges. not in treaty form, to maintain the open door for certain periods of time in certain possessions.
(2) Rate-limiting treaties.-Certain treaties fix maximum, minimum, or uniform rates for the tariffs of two or more colonies or on one or more articles for a larger group of colonies. With these may be discussed certain treaties which limit to fixed maxima the tariffs of certain more or less independent states.
(3) Commercial treaties of ordinary types.-Commercial treaties. or treaties of commerce and navigation or of "friendship, commerce, and navigation" are entered into generally by all the com mercial powers. Before the war they usually contained the mostfavored-nation clause. These treaties, however, by no means always include the colonies, and when the colonies are mentioned the same provisions do not always apply to them as to the mother countries: also, unless there is a special stipulation to that effect, the most-fav ored-nation clause does not apply to special relations between colonies and mother countries.49
The most important treaties affecting the tariffs of colonies are as follows:
OPEN-DOOR AGREEMENTS AND PLEDGES.
By the general act of the Conference of Berlin (1885) the Eu ropean powers established in Central Africa, "the conventional basin of the Congo," in which there was to be freedom of navigation. freedom from transit duties and commercial equality generally. Export duties were not restricted in amount, but import duties were prohibited. A modification made in 1890 allowed a general import rate as high as 10 per cent ad valorem at the port of entry, and higher rates on alcohol and alcoholic beverages, to which in 1910 were added arms and munitions. The United States took a leading part at the conference, but did not ratify the treaty. A revision of this treaty (and of the Brussels treaties relating to the traffic in alcohol and arms) was contemplated in the framing of the treaties of peace by
49 For full discussion of most-favored-nation clauses, see the Tariff Commission's report on Reciprocity and Commercial Treaties, pp. 389-510; see also Hornbeck, S. K.: The MostFavored-Nation Clause in Commercial Treaties, 1910.
50 See map.
51 For further information concerning this treaty, see Chapter II, p. 85.