STATISTICS OF EXTERNAL COMMERCE 19 
ways. First, it is important to remember that such returns for the 
same country do not always refer to the same economic unit. When 
accessions of territory are gained by any country there is likely to be 
a change of this nature. Thus in former editions of this work Chilean 
statistics were given from 1874-75, but the cession of the provinces 
of Tarapaci and Tacna by Peru in 1883 renders these incom- 
parable with present day figures. The notes necessary to prevent 
arrors from this cause are given on the individual tables. Next, it is 
to be noted that there is no uniformity in the nature of the total given 
for the trade of a country, whether the commerce referred to be desig- 
nated general or special. Under the name of general commerce all 
articles imported and exported are included, but under the head of 
special commerce only goods imported for home consumption and 
goods of home production exported are supposed to be reckoned. But 
this is far from being uniformly true. Very generally goods that enter 
into circulation in the country free from the control of the customs 
are taken as part of the special commerce of the country. This is so, 
for example, in Germany. Now in the tables of German trade for 1911 
raw cotton, caoutchouc, and rice appear among the special exports to 
the aggregate value of more than £6,000,000, although obviously none 
of these is a product of Germany, and we cannot tell how great may have 
been the value of other re-exports when the goods are of such a nature 
that they may or may not have been German products. In our own 
country, on the other hand, no attempt has been made to distinguish 
goods imported for home consumption, but a distinction is always 
made between exports of native origin and manufacture, whether free 
goods or goods subject to customs duty, and goods of foreign and 
colonial origin. Note, however, that goods that have undergone the 
slightest manufacturing operation, such as colonial wool combed in 
Great Britain, are included (rightly) among the goods of British manu- 
facture. In two points, however, our tables are misleading or 
inadequate from causes which perhaps cannot be remedied. The 
general tables are exclusive of what is called transhipment trade, of 
which a separate statement is made. Formerly one was led to infer 
that this was a statement of commerce that came to British ports on 
through bills of lading for ports outside of the United Kingdom, and 
in former editions of this work it was expressly stated to be so, but 
from the fuller information now given it appears that this is not the 
case. The transhipment trade is exclusively of articles imported and 
exported in bond, and may include, actually does include, a consider- 
able amount of trade on British account, that is, the import of goods 
bought by British merchants and resold by them abroad. The trade 
in free goods on through bills of lading is now also the subject of a 
separate statement, but this trade is also included among the general 
imports and exports of articles of foreign and colonial origin. It 
chus relates to commerce which forms indeed part of the business of