Page images
PDF
EPUB

year's revenue is to be. Hence one cause of deficits. For the four years ending July 1 they will have mounted to two hundred million dollars. The radical difference between the British method and our own is that, while Parliament often refuses some of the requested appropriations, it never increases them. According to the last Budget, British finances are in a notably favorable condition. During the past year receipts were $12,000,000 more than expenditures, and there has been a reduction in the national debt of $37,000,000. The surplus this year will not be devoted to the remission of taxation, but to an increase of the naval estimates of the Imperial garrison in South Africa, to education in Ireland and Scotland, and to postal reform. This last includes the cost of the reduction for foreign postage to four cents a half-ounce, which the British delegate will propose at the International Postal Congress at Washington. This being the sixtieth year of Queen Victoria's reign, Sir Michael compared the finances of sixty years ago with those of the past year. Then the revenue was $262,000,000. Now it is three hundred millions more. Then seven-tenths of the revenue was derived from taxes on commodities; now only 44 per cent. is derived in that way. Then the total value of British trade was five-eighths of a billion dollars. Now it is three and a half billions. There is some significance to other countries in the Chancellor's words referring to the payments to the royal family: "We were the best and cheapest monarchy in the world in 1836-7; it cost the nation £534,000 ($2,670,000); now it costs the nation £185,000 ($925,000)."

The most striking event in last week's business world was the beginning of gold exports; these have now reached about seven million dollars in amount. In face of the large actual merchandise balance in our favor from foreign trade, apparently over three hundred million dollars, the present gold outflow seems at first incomprehensible. The foreign trade in gold and silver, however, lessens the above amount. During the past month there has been an abnormal increase in merchandise imports from all parts of the

world in order to escape the higher rates of the proposed new tariff. Again, there is now a special demand for gold abroad. The countries making this demand are the three now placing themselves on a gold basis, Austria, Russia, and Japan. An event of quite as much political as financial significance is the conclusion by the Russian Government of a $50,000,000 4 per cent. loan exclusively in Germany. Another cause for the outflow is, of course, in the unsettling caused by the Græco-Turkish war. The gold exports have occasioned no alarm; we have $155,000,000 of the metal in the United States Treasury, and $87,000,000 in the banks, besides our own product. There is usually a gold outflow at this season; the present movement has begun slightly earlier than is customary. An event of considerable moment across the border has been the protest at Montreal of the German, Belgian, and Swiss Consuls against the preferential clause of the new. Canadian tariff favoring Great Britain. The latter country has "most favored nation" treaties with Germany, Belgium, and other countries. These treaties provide that in no British colony shall the products be subject to higher import duties than obtain for the products of the United Kingdom. Replying to the protest in his speech last week, Sir Richard Cartwright quoted from Wharton's "International Law Digest:" "A covenant to give privileges granted to the 'most favored nation' only refers to gratuitous privileges, and does not cover privileges granted on the condition of a reciprocal advantage." However it be decided, the case is an extremely interesting one in both commercial and political aspects.

In the April number of "Harper's Magazine" Lieutenant Richard Mitchell gives us the benefit of his six years' service on the South American coast, and tells why we have no larger trade with South America. Before our Civil War, United States merchants enjoyed a commerce not equaled since. To be sure, raw products, such as lumber, kerosene, and resin, so manifestly belong to us that the lost trade in them has returned; this is also true of agricultural products and agricultural machinery. That we are far

from occupying our proper position, however, is seen in Lieutenant Mitchell's statement of our exports to Brazil, Argentine, and Uruguay. Our exports are less than nine per cent. of what those countries receive in all, while our imports from them are nearly one-third of their total exports. This small amount of exports from us seems strange when we read

that

South America has long been the dumpingground for the refuse manufactures of Europe.. In six years' service on that coast I never bought an imported article on shore that I could not have duplicated at home with a better article for the same money.

It would be well for our people to study the methods of Germany. By means of commercial museums at home, and the permanent exhibitions of the wrought-iron industries in South America, as well as by opening chambers of commerce at Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Ayres, and Montevideo, she has increased her trade two hundred per cent. in the last five years. The Germans see that trade in one article leads to another; therefore our barbed wire is entering Japan through German exporting houses at a lower price than they can manufacture it; besides, it is to their advantage that the variety of our exports should not extend. Again, the United States is the only one of the great commercial nations having no Department of Commerce. Of steamers entering Argentine ports, not one carries the American flag; and of the whole volume of trade to and from Brazil and the United States, only one-twentieth is carried on sailing ships flying our flag.

The promotion of the Japanese ConsulGeneral at Hawaii to be Minister Resident is significant, in view of the recent troubles. Japan's agent will now have larger authority in dealing with diplomatic affairs. The sending of our cruiser, the Philadelphia, to Honolulu (in addition to the Marion, now on the station), has been thought by some of the Japanese to be a menace to their Government. It is probable, however, that both events should be interpreted in the light of a peaceful solution of present difficulties. Hawaii has a treaty with Japan under which all Japanese have unlimited ingress into

[ocr errors]

Hawaii. This treaty may not be amended or abrogated except by consent of both parties. Mr. Thurston, the former Hawaiian Minister to Washington, says that until recently no, Japanese were allowed by their Government to come to Hawaii except under labor contracts; that policy has been recently changed. Five lines of steamers between Honolulu and Japan make monthly trips, and every steamer brings from 200 to 800 Japanese. In order to meet this emergency (since the amount of employment on the islands is necessarily limited), the Hawaiian Government passed a law prohibiting the landing of any person in Hawaii unless he were possessed of cash to the amount of fifty dollars. Japan has made various protests and attempts to evade this, and the peaceful invasion goes on. The Japanese in Hawaii now number more than any other nationality except the natives, and there are two Japanese to every three natives. Annexationists in this country have been somewhat aroused; perhaps the most prominent has been Captain Mahan, who says: "Shut out from the Sandwich Islands as a coal base, an enemy is thrown back for supplies of fuel to distances of 3,500 or 4,000 miles, or between 7,000 and 8,000 going and coming-an impediment to sustaining maritime operations well-nigh prohibitive." The New York "Times" well replies that, from the point of view of sea-fighting, this is a perfectly intelligible reason why we ought to annex Hawaii; but if we annex it we must be prepared to defend it with a powerful fleet; and a fleet strong enough to hold Hawaii would be strong enough to defend our own coast against any enemy using the islands as a coal basis.

The Dingley Tariff Bill as revised by the Republican members of the Senate Finance Committee is to be reported to the Senate this week, but consideration of it will probably be deferred a fortnight in order that the Democratic members may have an opportunity to examine the schedules. It is understood that Senator Jones, of Nevada, the Populist member of the Finance Committee, remains a Republican on the tariff issue, and will vote with his former party colleagues on condition

that a very high tariff is imposed on the raw materials produced in the West-especially hides, wool, and lead ore. This condition seems to have been met, and the bill is practically sure, not only of a favorable report, but also of a substantial majority, in the Senate. The ending of the prolonged deadlock in Kentucky by the election of Dr. W. J. Deboe gives the "regular" Republicans control of the Senate by means of the casting vote of VicePresident Hobart. On the tariff bill this narrow majority will probably be increased by the votes of the half-dozen former Republicans who supported Mr. Bryan in the recent campaign. The most interesting speech recently made in the Senate was that of Senator Mason, of Illinois, calling for a modification of the Senate rules so as to prevent a minority from blocking legislation. The speech was Senator Mason's maiden effort, and the new Senator adroitly apologized for it by saying that he wished to express the sentiments of everybody outside of the Senate before he, too, succumbed to the Senatorial desire to retain power to impede measures he did not like. Senator Hoar apologized for the Senate rules by declaring that they were far more democratic than those of the House. The House rules, he said, lodged all power, not in a minority, but in one man, who could prevent the consideration of any measure he did not like, and pass a tariff bill he did like, without so much as the reading of one-quarter of its sections. Both Senator Mason's point and Senator Hoar's were eminently well taken. The rules of both bodies should be revisedthe House rules so as to permit deliberation, and the Senate rules so as to permit action. At the present time the House is doing nothing but adjourning. Speaker Reed has not even appointed the committees his programme being that no legislation shall be enacted until the tariff bill is finally disposed of.

[blocks in formation]

that this year China will enter the Postal Union, which will then include every important country in the world. The Union has now been in existence for twenty-three years, and has effected important reforms in simplifying and lowering the rates for international communication. At this year's convention a further reduction of rates is proposed, the English Ministry having definitely indorsed the proposition to reduce charges on ordinary letters from five cents to four. This change will be welcomed by the public, and if it results as previous reductions of rates have resulted, it will not be costly to the various PostOffice Departments. The postal systems of the world furnish the best illustration of the way by which reduced charges may be made to increase receipts. Prior to 1840 the private companies, and even the Government, in Great Britain fixed the charges with a view to the greatest possible profit. The result was that postal rates, instead of falling with the course of time, gradually became twice as high as two centuries earlier. In the year named the Government accepted the "theory" of Rowland Hill, and reduced charges from sixpence for twenty miles to one penny for all distances. In a few years this decrease in charges resulted in an increase in revenue to the public as well as an incalculable service to the individual citiIn the half-century that has since elapsed, the number of letters handled yearly has increased from 76 millions to 2,800 millions. Concerning the growth of international mail under the Postal Union we have no statistics at hand, but the increase has been very large. It is worthy of note that the different countries rely upon the principle that correspondence is reciprocal, and do not attempt to ascertain whether there is any "balance of trade" for or against any particular country. Germany and France formerly tried to adjust their balances in a strictly accurate way, but an infinite amount of bookkeeping was entailed with no other result than to show that it was all useless, since each nation received almost exactly the same number of letters

zens.

as it sent.

The Illinois House of Representatives, by a vote of 125 to 3, has passed the

Senate bill re-establishing the Torrens system of registering land titles. The law enacted two years ago, it will be recalled, was overthrown by the State Supreme Court, on the ground that it gave the registrar of titles certain judicial functions. The present bill meets this objection by providing that these functions shall be discharged by a Court of Chancery. This modification will somewhat increase the cost of registration, as a formal suit must be entered in order to establish titles. The cost of this suit, however, according to the framers of the measure, will be but $20, except in complicated cases, where the court may allow

additional fees to examiners. When the certificate is once issued, every subsequent transfer will cost but $3, without any abstract fee. The certificate will thus be as readily negotiable as any bond. In this way real estate will be transformed into a quick asset, and the danger of bankruptcy to business men because they cannot at once realize upon real estate investments will be greatly reduced. This desirable end furnished one of the chief reasons for the unremitting advocacy of the bill by the Real Estate Board in Chicago. The measure will, of course, enormously reduce the costly labor required from lawyers in the examination of titles. Hereafter one examination is to suffice, and the title of a piece of property will no longer need to be searched from the beginning with each transfer. The present Illinois measure is substantially identical with the new law in Ohio. California also has adopted a similar measure, and the recent action of the Minnesota and Massachusetts Legislatures upon the same general system promises that this Australian reform will meet with as wide favor in the United States as the Australian ballot.

In Chicago the agitation against the Humphrey Bills, which would fasten fivecent fares on the city for fifty years, and lodge the control over city roads in a State Commission, continues to gather strength. The Federation of Labor has issued a most effective protest against them, and a good many Chicago pulpits have denounced the social injustice of the prop ositions they contain. One important

feature of these protests is the belief they manifest that it is safer to intrust the interests of the people of Chicago to an elected City Council than an appointed State Commission. On this point the Rev. Dr. Thomas, on Sunday of last week, stated the general attitude of publicspirited men in these words:

A corporation is trying by hasty legislation to take the management of local affairs out of our own control and to place it in the hands of a State Commission. Personally I stand with our city in this. I do not want to see the unborn millions of thirty or fifty years hence deprived of their just rights of local government. The people have suffered enough, the city has lost enough, by the corruption of the City Councils, and will continue to lose until the power of that Council to sell or give away their rights is restricted by some form of referendum government in which the power to grant franchises shall be placed in the hands of the people. But it is far better to suffer under present abuses and try to correct them than to lose the right of self-government and be at the mercy of an outside power.

A sensational feature has been added to the campaign by the taking out of warrants for the arrest of several of the Senators who supported the Humphrey Bills. The charge, of course, is bribery.

In Boston, without any measure before the Legislature to arouse popular excitement, the agitation for public control of the street railways is rapidly gaining headway. The Boston Citizens' Committee is most sensibly laying stress upon lower fares rather than higher taxes from the street railway companies. Professor Frank Parsons, of the Boston University Law School, in an admirable letter to the Boston "Transcript," brings out the fact that the Ohio law now provides that street railway franchises shall be sold to the company offering the lowest rate of fare, and that the Massachusetts commission and the New York special committee on street and elevated railways in their reports last year both recommended this plan. This is certainly the plan both of justice and of economy. If the street railway business were controlled by competition, like the grocery business, its patrons would pay lower rates and would not be taxed indirectly. What competition would establish in such cases public control should establish. The plan of low rates is also far more economical, for the roads can better afford to give the

public a 40 per cent. concession in the matter of fares than a 10 per cent. concession in the matter of taxes, for the lower fares would in a few years double

business.

The Constitutional Convention now in session in Delaware will close its work this month. The present Constitution dates from 1831, so there are, naturally, many changes to make. Those who have been following the progress of the SingleTaxers in the "Diamond State" will be interested to learn that the Convention has rendered their task considerably more difficult by inserting the following clause:

In all assessments of real estate for taxation, the value of the land and the value of the buildings and improvements the reon shall be included; and in all assessments of the rental value of real estate for taxation, the rental value of the land and the rental value of the buildings and improvements thereon shall be included.

The advocates of equal suffrage in Delaware have also been disappointed by a negative vote in the Convention of 17 to 7, though woman organizers and workers from other States conducted a vigorous campaign at Dover. The great majority of the Delaware women themselves, however, showed little interest. Several radical changes have been made in the legislative system. The legislators are henceforth to be elected by districts, and not, as before, by counties; and these districts are to be fixed by the Convention, and not left to the gerrymandering of either party in the future. A Lieutenant-Governor is also provided for, and the Governor is given a veto power, which he has not possessed hitherto; but, on the other hand, his power of appointment is greatly limited, and all of his more important appointments must hereafter be confirmed by the Senate. The judiciary remains appointive, and not elective. most important change is in the removal of the old tax qualification for voters, which has been a fruitful source of fraud

A

for years. Instead of the payment of a tax, assessed at least six months before an election (which practically disfranchised many voters), a system of registration has been substituted. An educational qualification will be required of all voters who attain twenty-one years of age, or become naturalized, after 1900. Very

severe provisions are made for the prevention and punishment of bribery at elections. An important temperance gain is that local option is recognized as constitutional, and on this wise measure the Convention is to be congratulated. The Constitution will probably not be submitted to the vote of the people, as this is not required by Delaware precedent.

Governor Richards, of Wyoming, is a civil engineer by profession, and has personally superintended much of the surveying of his State under Government contract. He has taken a position against the recent act of President Cleveland setting aside 21,000,000 acres for forest preserves, and claims that hardships will result to farmers, ranchmen, and miners if the order is permitted to stand. thinks that the Forestry Commission has made recommendations without sufficient knowledge of the facts, and has thus discredited a worthy cause. Governor Richards says:

He

It is the experience of the people of this State, and the admission of the Commission which recommended these reserves, that the present law does nothing to preserve timber from fire, the chief agent of its destruction. Withdrawing these areas from all beneficial uses is of itself of no service unless some provision is made for their management and for police supervision. The present law makes no such provision. It withdraws from those reserves the protection of local interests, and leaves them exposed to the camp-fire of the hunter, tourist, and sheep-herder. When we reflect that, if a settler's home is included within the boundaries of a reserve, there is no way for him to get title thereto; that if untimbered agricultural land is included within such boundaries, there is no provision in our present laws for having this mistake corrected, and the lands opened up for settlement and development; when we remember that there is no provision for the miner to continue his search for the undiscovered mineral wealth, or to operate mines already known, that there is no legislation under which we can use the splendid irrigation reservoirs which exist in these mountains, or by which rights of way can be had for ditches, roads, or other needed local improvement, we are warranted in believing that the advantages of these reservations are in no wise commensurate to their abuses.

In reply to this it may be said that the Forestry Commission has prepared a bill proposing measures for the safeguarding of all legitimate interests; certainly the withdrawal of agricultural land should be avoided when possible. Instead of waiting for this bill, however, the enemies of

« PreviousContinue »