20

COMMERCIAL  INTELLIGENCE  COMMITTEE  :

imported  into  and  exported  from  Germany  in  each  of  the  last  five  years
for  which  we  have  information  have  been—

Years,

1896
1897
1898
1899
1900

Imports,

Million  kilogs.
2-7
7-8
6  0
5*9
6  1

Exports.

Million  kilogs.
20  1
216
217
23  1
25  6

On  the  average  of  these  five  years  Germany  has  exported  under  existing
conditions  four  times  as  much  in  the  way  of  cotton  piece  goods  as  she  has
imported.  Even  from  the  Protectionist  point  of  view  these  figures  afford  a
strong  argument  against  the  need  for  further  protection  by  increased
duties  on  imports.
As  to  woollen  tissues  (cloths  and  stuffs),  the  German  official  figures  of
importa  and  exports  in  the  same  five  years  are  as  follow  :—

Years

1896
1897
1898
1899
1900

Imports.

Million  kilogs.
20
15
1-7
17
2  0

Exports.

Million  kilogs.
25  2
23  7
219
215
22  7

Here  again  the  exports  under  existing  conditions  have  been  about  13
times  the  imports  on  the  average  of  the  five  years.
As  to  finished  iron  and  steel—that  is,  all  forms  of  iron  and  steel  except
pig  and  scrap  iron,  but  including  cutlery,  firearms,  and  machinery—  the
figures  are  —

Years.

1896
1897
1898
1899
1900

Imports.

Million  kilogs.
84*2
103-7
115-9
164-0
156-0

Exports.

Million  kilogs.
1,325-7
1,264-0
1,353  8
1,274-7
1,358-1

These  figures  tell  a  similar  tale  to  those  quoted  above.  The  exports  in  the
five  years  have  been  nearly  11  times  the  imports  on  the  average,  and  no  case
can  be  based  upon  this  statement  for  increased  protection.
Instances  of  this  sort  might  easily  be  multiplied,  both  as  regards  other
descriptions  of  goods  (e.g.,  earthen  and  china  ware)  and  as  regards  details  of
the  groups  of  articles  referred  to  above  {e.g.,  hosiery,  iron  wire,  sheet
steel,  &amp;c.).
We  assume  that  the  object  of  the  proposed  increase  in  duties  is  either  to
obtain  additional  revenue  for  the  State  or  to  afford  additional  protection  to
German  manufactures.  But  it  will  be  admitted  that  the  increase  of  duties
beyond  a  certain  point  necessarily  entails  a  reduction  and  not  an  increase
of  State  revenue;  while  the  necessity  of  further  protection  in  the  three
great  groups  of  articles  to  which  we  have  referred  seems  to  be  effectually
disposed  of  by  the  figures  we  have  quoted.  Whatever  was  the  intention  in
framing  the  new  scale  of  duties,  however,  the  result  as  regards  cotton,
woollen,  and  iron  goods  would  apparently  be  to  give  a  virtual  monopoly  of
the  home  market  to  German  manufacturers,  who,  in  the  absence  of  outside
competition,  and  by  means  of  combinations,  would  be  enabled  to  fix  home
prices  at  their  own  will,  while  the  German  consumer  would  have  to  bear