Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 6.djvu/232

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

204

COMMERCE

found, on its well-established modern basis, to make steady progress from one series of years to another. The powers of production had been greatly increased by a brilliant development of mechanical arts and inventions. The United States had grown into a commercial nation of the first rank. The European colonies and settlements were being extended, and assiduously cultivated, and were opening larger and more varied markets for manufactures. In 1819 the first steamboat crossed the Atlantic from New York to Liverpool, and a similar adventure was accomplished from England to India in 1825—events in themselves the harbingers of a new era in trade. There began also to be signs, in the general prominence given to the study of economic principles, and in the policy of Mr Huskisson in England, of a growing public opinion in favour of greater freedom of trade; and China, after many efforts, was opened under treaty to an intercourse with foreign nations which was soon to attain surprising dimensions. These various causes supported the activity of commerce in the first four decades; but the great movement which has made the century so remarkable was chiefly disclosed in practical results from about 1840.

It has been seen above what the amount of the foreign trade of Great Britain was in the last year of the 18th century. In 1839 the total value of British produce and manufactures exported, then including under the Legislative Union of the Kingdoms Irish produce and manufactures, was £53,233,580; and the total value of imports was £62,048,000, of which £12,796,000 was exported to other countries. The number of vessels belonging to the British empire in 1839, while the navigation laws were still in force, was 27,745, of an aggregate tonnage of 3,068,433, and 191,283 men. In 1850 the exports of home produce and manufactures had increased to £71,368,000, and the imports to £100,469,000, of which £21,874,000, was exported. In 1873, which may be taken as the close of the period under review, the declared value of exports of British and Irish produce and manufactures reached the enormous total of £255,073,336, and the imports the still more astonishing total of £370,380,742. In the returns for 1873 the exports of foreign and colonial merchandize are given only in quantities, but in the two succeeding years the value of this branch of export trade is given as £10,251,220 in 1874, when the total imports were £370,054,834, and £12,103,732 in 1875, when the total imports were £373,941,125—much less than in 1800, when the official value of re-exports is given as £18,847,735, on a total import of only £30,570,004, indicating, on the one hand, how greatly direct import from the countries of origin to the countries of use must have increased during the century, and, on the other hand, in how much larger proportion our imports of foreign and colonial merchandize had been entered for home consumption, The shipping in 1873, not of the British empire as in 1839, but of the United Kingdom alone, had increased, under repeal of the navigation laws, to 21,581 vessels, 5,748,097 tons, and 202,239 men.

The total value of British and Irish exports in 1873, as compared with 1839, shows an increase of 379 per cent., and of imports an increase of 496 per cent.—an expansion of trade within the third of a century wholly without example. In the years from 1800 to 1839 the increase of domestic exports had been only 119 per cent., and of imports 102 per cent. A larger progressive increase of imports than of exports has been a feature of British commerce for the last twenty years, and would seem to bear out the opinion of economists that this is the result of all prosperous foreign trade, though an excess of imports over exports so large as £120,000,000 per annum cannot possibly be due to the cause which they have usually assigned for it, viz., the profit accruing from the exchange of goods less valuable for goods more valuable in the respective countries, and is probably only accounted for by the large investments of British capital of late years abroad, the interest of which has for the most part to be paid in merchandize.^[1]

An increase of the foreign trade of the United Kingdom from £115,281,580 to £625,454,078, in the course of thirty-four years, presents a vaster theme than can be easily grasped, and it may be enough here simply to supply some concise information—(1) as to the commodities which entered into so large a commerce, and (2) as to the distribution of the movement in the various quarters of the world. In the Parliamentary Account of Revenue, Population, and Commerce for 1839, a summary is given of the principal articles of British and Irish export, and their respective values; and by placing these in juxtaposition with the same articles of export from the Board of Trade returns for 1873, as in the following table, a pretty comprehensive view may be obtained of the impulse given to our various manufacturing industries:—

			1839.				1873.
Apparel and Haberdashery..			£1,332,427		.................................		£10,032,483
Brass and Copper Manufac-		}	1,280,506		.................................		3,820,508
⁠tures..............................		}			.................................
					Copper Unwrought...		1,207,411
Coal ...................................			542,609		.................................		13,205,618
Cotton Manufactures .........			16,378,445		.................................		61,447,357
,,	Twist and Yarn .........		6,858,193		.................................		15,876,363
Earthenware ......................			771,173		.................................		2,063,633
Glass .................................			357,315		.................................		1,344,694
Hardware and Cutlery......			1,828,521		.................................		4,938,182
Iron and Steel, Wrought and		}	2,719,824		.................................		37,779,586
⁠Unwrought..................		}			.................................
Linen Manufactures...........			3,292,220		.................................		7,295,121
,,	Yarn........................		818,485		.................................		1,975,738
					Jute Manufacture ....		1,591,581
					,, Yarn ...................		206,525
Machinery and Mill Work ...			236,482		.................................		9,994,169
Silk Manufactures...............			868,118		.................................		1,876,313
					Thrown, Twist, and	}	1,567,837
⁠Yarn.................						}
Woollen Manufactures—
⁠By Piece........................			5,300,869	}	.................................		25,279,235
⁠By Yard..........................			620,247	}	.................................
Woollen and Worsted Yarn ..		423,320		.................................		5,403,983

These figures speak largely for themselves. The British export of cotton manufactures in 1839 was so great as to cast into the shade every other export, and, though its increase since that period has been wonderful, yet it is gratifying to observe, in the progress of other branches, the greater breadth and variety which the manufacturing industry of the United Kingdom has assumed. The export of cotton goods and yarns in 1839 was nearly a half of our whole export of produce and manufactures. In 1873 they were less than a third. Indeed, if coal and iron, and iron and steel manufactures be put together, they

↑ The difference between official and real value in the returns, over the periods here referred to, vitiates in some measure the figures, not only as regards the old and discarded criterion of “the balance of trade,” but as a means of exact comparison of one period with another; while, at the same time, they hold valid enough as regards the relative value of the several branches of import and export trade. Official valuation, the rates of which were fixed as far back as 1698, was long applied both to imports and exports, till at the close of last century the real or declared value of domestic exports began to be given along with the official value, and the discrepancy of the two—the official value increasing, and the real value declining in proportion to the quantities—gave rise to an opinion that we were always selling more of the products of our industry for less value in exchange, whereas it was the result of the cheapening of production by machines and steam-power, and anything but a proof either of industrial or mercantile loss. The official valuation of imports was much longer adhered to than in the case of exports, till of late years the practice has been to give the real or declared value in both branches of the commerce. It must be admitted, however, to Mr M‘Culloch and other authorities, that these returns of value, however near the mark, can never show a balance of trade in the sense once supposed. The value given in the ports cannot exactly correspond with the value realized, since the whole system of trade proceeds on the fact that certain goods and produce are of more value in one country than in another. It was remarked as long ago as 1800 that the export of coffee was much over valued in the official returns, and if coffee, one would say tea, and most other foreign and colonial produce; but the import of these articles having been valued on the same official scale, this could not affect the proportion either in quantity or value between the re-export and the total import of foreign and colonial merchandize. What is shown by the above figures to have been this proportion then, and what has occurred since so greatly to change the relation of imports and exports, is consistent with what might be predicated on grounds of general reason. It was certain that when Britain was supporting a great war on the Continent, and paying heavy subsidies to European Governments, she would have to send large quantities both of her own produce and her foreign and colonial imports to the countries where she was spending her capital so freely and continuously. It was equally certain that, when this burden was thrown off, when her great debt had been consolidated, and its interest was being paid out of her own resources, and a surplus capital was once more developed, she would use her foreign and colonial merchandize more largely in her own arts, manufactures, and consumption, and that in any lengthened course of such prosperity her imports would begin to exceed her exports instead of the reverse. The excess of British imports over exports, including exports of foreign and colonial merchandize, began to appear in the Board of Trade returns about 1850; and this is coincident with, the period within which we have to date an increasing investment of British capital in foreign and colonial securities.

[1] The difference between official and real value in the returns, over the periods here referred to, vitiates in some measure the figures, not only as regards the old and discarded criterion of “the balance of trade,” but as a means of exact comparison of one period with another; while, at the same time, they hold valid enough as regards the relative value of the several branches of import and export trade. Official valuation, the rates of which were fixed as far back as 1698, was long applied both to imports and exports, till at the close of last century the real or declared value of domestic exports began to be given along with the official value, and the discrepancy of the two—the official value increasing, and the real value declining in proportion to the quantities—gave rise to an opinion that we were always selling more of the products of our industry for less value in exchange, whereas it was the result of the cheapening of production by machines and steam-power, and anything but a proof either of industrial or mercantile loss. The official valuation of imports was much longer adhered to than in the case of exports, till of late years the practice has been to give the real or declared value in both branches of the commerce. It must be admitted, however, to Mr M‘Culloch and other authorities, that these returns of value, however near the mark, can never show a balance of trade in the sense once supposed. The value given in the ports cannot exactly correspond with the value realized, since the whole system of trade proceeds on the fact that certain goods and produce are of more value in one country than in another. It was remarked as long ago as 1800 that the export of coffee was much over valued in the official returns, and if coffee, one would say tea, and most other foreign and colonial produce; but the import of these articles having been valued on the same official scale, this could not affect the proportion either in quantity or value between the re-export and the total import of foreign and colonial merchandize. What is shown by the above figures to have been this proportion then, and what has occurred since so greatly to change the relation of imports and exports, is consistent with what might be predicated on grounds of general reason. It was certain that when Britain was supporting a great war on the Continent, and paying heavy subsidies to European Governments, she would have to send large quantities both of her own produce and her foreign and colonial imports to the countries where she was spending her capital so freely and continuously. It was equally certain that, when this burden was thrown off, when her great debt had been consolidated, and its interest was being paid out of her own resources, and a surplus capital was once more developed, she would use her foreign and colonial merchandize more largely in her own arts, manufactures, and consumption, and that in any lengthened course of such prosperity her imports would begin to exceed her exports instead of the reverse. The excess of British imports over exports, including exports of foreign and colonial merchandize, began to appear in the Board of Trade returns about 1850; and this is coincident with, the period within which we have to date an increasing investment of British capital in foreign and colonial securities.

[1]