« НазадПродовжити »
worth some £3,500,000 more than in 1894, out of a total import smaller than in 1894 by some £15,000,000. In view of the extreme depression, which in 1896 and 1897 showed signs of having passed, a short comparison of movements in the case of trade with the mother-country by those of our possessions which figure most largely in the aggregate, seems desirable.
+ It should be remembered that the intercolonial trade is not included here.
This table illustrates, on the one hand, how little progressive imports into the first four of these five British Possessions have been, and, on the other, how great an effect the depression has had on their trade with this country itself. In the first period of five years, imports of £125,500,000 grew by £15,500,000, and the £86,000,000 from the United Kingdom took £7,500,000 of this growth. The table on the preceding page includes £35,000,000 of imports by other colonies and possessions, of which £10,250,000 were from the mother-country. These £35,000,000 grew in the quinquennial interval by £8,500,000, and the mother-country's share grew by £3,500,000. Thus the numerous smaller contributors to the grand aggregate of colonial trade showed considerably greater advance than the most important few to which the last table refers. Over the ten year interval the contrast is even greater. The colonies whose names are not separately enumerated increased their imports by some £7,250,000 in the ten years, and their imports from the United Kingdom by £1,500,000. The five above enumerated decreased their total imports by £5,000,000, and decreased their imports from the United Kingdom by £9,000,000. If we had not included the figures for Cape Colony in the table preceding, the contrast would, as is obvious, be far more striking. The object in view in extracting these last figures is now attained, for it is clear that the falling off in the British trade with Greater Britain is to be traced mainly to the special features of the Australian trade and to the Indian fall of exchange. The very great influence produced by these causes on our total trade is attributable to the important place which trade with those parts of the empire occupies in that total.
The partial totals may now be gathered together, and a summary view of the whole field surveyed thus obtained. In doing this the opportunity will be taken to present a comparison with the records of the same trade from the returns of the selling countries. For brevity the aggregate of the countries included in all the preceding tables will be referred to as neutral countries.
Average total Imports
in Millions of £.
Imports from France,
Special Exports of France, Germany, and
U.S.A., and Total Exports of U.K. to the
1884-86, 1889-91. 1894-96. 1884-86. 1889-91.1894-96. 1884-86, 1889-91. 1894-96.
584 2 6733 674 1 373.7 419.01 4014 United States 130-6 165-2 150.5 58-5 73:7
168.5 180-3 1516 48.6 52:3 44.5 Germany
150.2+ 2055 206.1 40:87 62.2 62:1 United Kingdom... 370-3 427:9 | 422:31441 170-9 168.3
+ Hanse Towns not included in Zollverein at this time.
The last sections of this table need a word of explanation. In the line corresponding to France, for example, we have, in the first section, the average total imports( special), in the second the imports from Germany, Great Britain and the United States, and in the third the exports of these three countries to France. The destinations of German exports and countries of origin of German imports were so perverted by the mode of record previous to the inclusion of the Hanse Towns in the Zollverein, that it appeared useless to compile the omitted totals of exports in the column headed 1884-86.
The details of which the second and third sections of the preceding table are a summary, are stated at length in the tables which follow.
The figures in brackets in the last two columns are the Total Exports for the
Average (Special) Exports of France
These tables bring into juxtaposition with our compilations the figures which would generally be employed as indices of the same trade movements. Naturally, a general correspondence is shown; to criticise the differences in particular cases is no part of the purpose of the present article. A principal object has been, while presenting the two views of what is substantially the same set of facts, to provide the means of estimating whether the trade of the different rival exporting countries is directed in the same degree in the later periods of comparison as in the earlier to the countries specified in our tables. Has the course of development of some of the rivals been marked by an increasing or by a decreasing direction of trade to the numerous countries not included in our tables, or does the evidence indicate no marked variation of such a nature ?
In the case of the United Kingdom, judged by the returns made to the Customs officials, we survey, to within a fraction of 1 per cent., 85 per cent. of the export trade at each date. The direction of such change as is deducible from our tables is this: that the three rival countries take about as large a proportion of our exports as formerly, but possibly this proportion is fractionally decreasing; that neutral Europe occupies also about the same degree of prominence as formerly in our trade: that our possessions in other parts of the world, with the exception of Australia and India, also remain as of old; and that miscellaneous foreign countries, principally South American states, form a relatively more important market than formerly. Our commerce does not seem to have been in any marked degree diverted towards the newly-developed portions of the world not included in the tables of this article. The countries named buy still not far short of one-quarter of all their imports from this country, and, as some set-off to the effect of our latest period of comparison falling on the greatest depth of depression in our export trade, the signs of revival in the most recent returns of trade with Greater Britain, some of which are more recent than the figures we have tabulated here, may fairly be mentioned. Further, our country seems to occupy a position of not less importance in the markets not examined in detail here than in those which are examined.
Corresponding reflections on the indications of the tables as to such changes of direction of trade from our rivals as are indicated by them may be left to any reader interested enough to desire to make them. In part, they would be a repetition of some comments already made in the discussion of tabulated results.
The growth of the foreign commerce of the world in the ten years between 1884-86 and 1894—96 is remarkable. The table on p. 179 shows that countries whose accounts contribute to our comparisons imported to a value of about £1,400,000,000 sterling annually in the triennium 1884—86. Five years later this had risen to £1,650,000,000, and in another five years, spite of trade depression, was as high as £1,600,000,000. Without going into details of single years, these averages sufficiently show how fast the dependence of different nations on their trade with others is growing. The trade not enumerated in our tables appears to be growing even faster. The Foreign Statistical Abstract enumerates totals for several countries for which it gives no details, or for which the details relate to too short a period for inclusion in our tables. Austro-Hungary and Turkey alone account for £80,000,000 of imports in 1894—96, an increase of over £14,000,000 in ten years. Other European countries account for a further £12,000,000, or thereabouts. British Colonies, not included in our summary, have imports of £2,500,000, besides Hong-Kong and Aden, Malta, and Gibraltar, which, together, will account for a considerable amount. China imported to the average value of over £29,000,000 in 1894—96, and only three-quarters of that amount ten years earlier, while a host of other countries maintain a considerable commerce, the growth and distribution of which we have not here investigated. By use of the tables given by Dr. von Juraschek, one may estimate that countries for which no totals of trade are given in our admirable Foreign Statistical Abstract, have, together, an