Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2008 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/colonialtariffpoOOgirarich THE COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY OF FRANCE BY ARTHUR GIRAULT PBINTED IN ENGLAND AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS Carnegie Endowment for International Peace DIVISION OF ECONOMICS AND HISTORY John Bates Clark, Director THE COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY OF FRANCE By ARTHUR GIRAULT nomMB or foutical kcovomt in the law facultt of the inriTEBamr or FornKBs EDITED BY CHARLES GIDE I' PBOrBMOB OF EOOVOMICS IV THE UXITKUITT OF PAEIS OXFORD : AT THE CLARENDON PRESS London, Edinburgh, New York, Toronto, Melbourne and Bombay HUMPHREY MILFORD 1916 i. f •/ • !•• INTRODUCTORY NOTE BY THE DIRECTOR The Division of Economics and History of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is organized to ' promote a thorough and scientific investigation of the causes and results of war *. In accordance with this purpose a conference of eminent statesmen, publicists, and economists was held in Beme, Switzerland, in August 1911, at which a plan of investigation was fonned and an extensive list of topics was prepared. The progranmie of that Conference is presented in detail in an Appendix. It will be seen that an elaborate series of investigations has been undertaken, and the result- ing reports may in due time be expected in printed form. Of works so prepared, some will aim to reveal direct and indirect consequences of warfare, and thus to furnish a basis for a judgement as to the reasonableness of the resort to it. If the evils are in reahty larger and the benefits smaller than in the conmion view they appear to be, such studies should furnish convincing evidence of this fact and afford a basis for an enlightened pohcy whenever there is danger of inter- national conflicts. Studies of the causes of warfare will reveal, in particular, those economic influences which in time of peace bring about clashing interests and mutual suspicion and hostihty. They will, it is believed, show what pohcies, as adopted by different nations, will reduce the conflicts of interest, inure to the conmaon benefit, and afford a basis for international con- fidence and good will. They will further serve to reveal the natural economic influences which of themselves bring about more and more harmonious relations and tend to substitute general benefits for the mutued injuries that follow unintel- ligent self-seeking. Economic internationalism needs to be fortified by the mutual trust that just dealing creates ; but 359S03 vi INTRODUCTORY NOTE just conduct itseK may be favoured by economic conditions. These, in turn, may be created partly by a natural evolution and partly by the conscious action of governments ; and both evolution and public action are among the important subjects of investigation. An appeal to reason is in order when excited feelings render armed conflicts inmiinent ; but it is quite as surely called for when no excitement exists and when it may be forestalled and prevented from developing by sound national poHcies. To furnish a scientific basis for reasonable international policies is the purpose of some of the studies already in pro- gress and of more that will hereafter be undertaken. The publications of the Division of Economics and History are under the direction of a Committee of Research, the membership of which includes the statesmen, pubHcists, and economists who participated in the Conference at Berne in 1911, and two who have since been added. The list of members at present is as follows : Eugene Boeel, Professor of PubHc and International Law in the University of Geneva. Lujo Beentano, Professor of Economics in the University of Munich; Member of the Royal Bavarian Academy of Sciences. Chaeles Gide, Professor of Comparative Social Economics in the University of Paris. H. B. Geeven, Professor of Political Economy and Statistics in the University of Leiden. Feancis W. Hiest, Editor of The Economist, London. David Kinley, Vice-President of the University of lUinois. Henei La Fontaine, Senator of Belgiimi. His Excellency Luigi Luzzatti, Professor of Constitu- tional Law in the University of Rome ; Secretary of the Treasury, 1891-3 ; Prime Minister of Italy, 1908-11. GoTAEO Ogawa, Professor of Finance at the University of Kioto, Japan. Sir Geoege Paish, Joint Editor of The Statist, London. INTRODUCTORY NOTE vii Maffeo Pantaleoni, Professor of Political Economy in the University of Rome. EuGEN Philippovich von Philippsbeeg, Professor of Political Economy in the University of Vienna ; Member of the Austrian Herrenhaus Hofrat. Paul S. Reinsch, United States Minister to China. His Excellency Baron Y. Sakatani, recently Minister of Finance ; Present Mayor of Tokio. Theodor Schiemann, Professor of the History of Eastern Europe in the University of Berlin. Harald Westergaard, Professor of Political Science and Statistics in the University of Copenhagen. Friedrich, Freiherr von Wieser, Professor of Political Economy at the University of Vienna. The function of members of this Committee is to select collaborators competent to conduct investigations and present reports in the form of books or monographs ; to consult with these writers as to plans of study ; to read the completed manuscripts, and to inform the officers of the Endowment whether they merit pubUcation in its series. This editorial function does not conmiit the members of the Committee to any opinions expressed by the writers. Like other editors, they are asked to vouch for the usefulness of the works, their scientific and Hterary merit, and the advisability of issuing them. In Uke manner, the pubUcation of the monographs does not commit the Endowment as a body or any of its officers to the opinions which may be expressed in them. The standing and attainments of the writers selected afford a guarantee of thoroughness of research and accuracy in the statement of facts, and the character of many of the works will be such that facts, statistical, historical, and descriptive, will constitute nearly the whole of their content. In so far as the opinions of the writers are revealed, they are neither approved nor condemned by the fact that the Endowment causes them to be published. For example, the pubUcation of a work describing the attitude of various socieiUstic bodies vui INTRODUCTORY NOTE on the subject of peace and war implies nothing as to the views of the officers of the Endowment on the subject of sociaUsm ; neither will the issuing of a work, describing the attitude of business classes toward peace and war, imply any agreement or disagreement on the part of the officers of the Endowment with the views of men of these classes as to a protective poHcy, the control of monopoly, or the regulation of banking and currency. It is necessary to know how such men generally think and feel on the great issue of war, and it is one of the purposes of the Endowment to promote studies which will accurately reveal their attitude. Neither it nor its Committee of Research vouches for more than that the works issued by them contain such facts ; that their state- ments concerning them may generally be trusted, and that the works are, in a scientific way, of a quality that entitles them to a reading. John Bates Clark, Director, TABLE OF CONTENTS FIRST PART PAGE Inteoduction ......... 8 Chapter I. The Ancient Regime : Exclusion 11 „ II. The Revolution : Tariff Assimilation 42 „ III. The First Half of the Nineteenth Cen- tury ; the Return to Exclusion . 50 „ IV. The Second Empire : Commercial Freedom AND Tariff Autonomy .... 66 „ V. The Third Repubuc : Tariff Assimilation 81 „ VI. New Tendencies : Tariff Personality 134 SECOND PART PAOE Introduction 161 Chapter I. The Small Colonies 174 „ II. Indo-China 201 „ III. Madagascar and Dependencies . . . 217 „ IV. French Possessions in West Africa . . 225 V. French Possessions in Equatorial Africa . 286 VI. Algeria 247 VII. The Protectorates of Tunis and Morocco 268 „ VIII. Conclusion 280 Index 803 Appendix FIRST PART THE EVOLUTION OF THE COLONIAL TARIFF POUCY OF FRANCE tM» warehouses in the Antilles and in Reunion. At the same time the tariff regime of these colonies was revised. This revision was carried into effect, for the Antilles, by an ordinance of December 14, 1839, replaced some years later / by the law of April 29, 1845. This law gave a long list of articles of foreign merchandise of which it authorized the * importation, and fixed at the same time the duties appHcable to these articles. It required only that merchandise coming from Em-ope or from the non-European countries situated on the Mediterranean, be brought in by French ships. The law of 1845 suppressed in addition the three percent duty formerly f levied in the Antilles upon merchandise imported from France. But it brought no mitigation of the regulations which forbade the exportation of the products of the Antilles, notably sugar, to foreign countries, and the use of the foreign flag in colonial intercourse. It confined itself to the con- K cession that the products of the Antilles exported into France should pay no export duty. The ordinance of October 18, 1846, regarding the tariff regime in Reunion went a Kttle farther in the sense of freedom. Table A annexed to this ordinance gave a long list of articles of foreign merchandise the import of which was permitted in the isle of Bourbon, on payment of a specific duty which varied according to whether the importation had taken place by French or by foreign vessels. Table B enumerated a whole series of articles coming from China which were to be admitted on payment of a duty of twelve per cent ad valorem. Table C related to merchandise imported from Pondichery or other French dominions. Table D enumerated a whole series of products which were to be admitted free when imported by French ships and which were to pay, on entering, the duties regis- tered in the French national tariff when imported by foreign ships. Finally, list E treated of the navigation duties. In RETURN TO EXCLUSION 61 regard to exports, the ordinance of 1846 permitted in prin- ciple the exportation of the products of the isle of Bourbon to foreign countries, with the exception of sugar, coffee, and cotton. It aboUshed, moreover, export duties on products exported under the French flag. The importance of these modifications was such as to indicate that the disappearance of the colonial reciprocal system was only a matter of time. But the ancient system continued to exist nevertheless, in principle. The General Table of the Commerce of France for the year 1847 shows the importance of the trade of France with its colonies just before the abolition of slavery. The following figures are those of the special commerce : for the first time, they are expressed in actual values. They are given in milUons of francs. Import*. Exports Guadeloupe ■ 23-7 »4-3 Martinique i8i '5-4 Bourbon .... 192 IO-4 Guiana .... 1-6 2-3 French India 2-9 04 Senegal .... ■ 3-8 6-3 Saint Pierre and Miquelon . IO-5 7-2 79-8 563 Algeria. — ^Before the conquest, Algeria, included in the Barbary States, was for France a foreign country. After the conquest, ' the French possessions of the north of Africa ' could not rationally be considered as such. As soon as it was decided by the government to retain Algeria perma- nently (Ordinance of July 22, 1834), it became necessary to establish on a new basis the regime applicable to Algerian products on their entrance into France, and to determine the regime to which both French and foreign products should be subjected, on their entrance into Algeria. The years 1835, 1843, and 1851 mark three stages of evolution. A twofold tendency characterizes this evolution : (1) a tendency towards a progressive lowering of the barrier between France and Algeria ; and (2) a tendency towards / 62 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY I a progressive raising of the barrier between Algeria and foreign countries. A customs service had been organized in Algeria imme- diately after the conquest by an order of the General-in- chief, September 8, 1830, and a tariff had been decreed by another order of October 17 following. But these pro- visional measures, taken by the local authorities, offer only a mediocre historical interest. The first decisive text proceeding from the central government is the royal order of November 11, 1835, ' which determines the customs and navigation duties to be levied in the French possessions of the north of Africa.' In regard to the duty, the ordinance made a distinction between French products and foreign products. French products entered free, with the exception Iv of sugars (art. 7). Foreign products were subjected to a tariff duty, but less than that collected in France : a quarter of the French duties, if they came from a foreign port, a fifth, if they came from a French port (art. 10). ' The prohibitions were replaced by an ad valorem duty of fifteen per cent or twelve per cent according to the same principle of distinction (art. 11). Certain articles of foreign merchandise enumerated by article 8 (grain and flour, hay, straw and fodder, vegetables, fruits, wood and coal, horses and other domestic animals, plants and seeds, divers con- struction materials) were even permitted to enter free. Light duties, purely fiscal, were established by article 9 on sugars and coffees : 10 francs on French sugar and 20 francs on foreign sugar (16 francs on the latter if withdrawn from the government warehouses of France), 15 francs on coffees (12 francs if withdrawn from the government warehouses of France). A corresponding distinction was made in the matter of K exports. Products exported to France were free of all export duty (art. 13) ; products destined for foreign countries paid duties established by the export tariff in force in France (Merchandise, whose exportation from France was forbidden, V RETURN TO EXCLUSION 63 paid fifteen per cent export duty from Algeria). As to navigation, the ordinance of 1835 decided that transportation between France and Algeria could be carried on only by French ships (art. 1)." Also navigation from Algerian ports to Algerian ports was reserved for French ships and for the craft called sandals (art. 2). French ships and sandals were exempt from all navigation duties (art. 4). On the other hand, foreign vessels paid 2 francs per measured ton, and other small taxes (art. 5). On the whole, this ordinance gave satisfaction to France in its conmiercial and maritime relations with Algeria. But there was no reciprocity : the French tariff adminis- K, tration continued to treat Algeria as a foreign coimtry, and Algerian products as foreign goods. It was not until 1843 that a preliminary modification was introduced into this situation by an ordinance of December 16. Article 1 of this ordinance, relative to imports from Algeria into France, reduced by one-half the duties collected \ on certain Algerian products and granted to others the same treatment as to similar products of Senegal and of the other French colonies. The products thus favoured were, in general, crude materials (unsorted wool, raw skins, raw -ij silk, raw cotton, minerals, crude cork), or special products of local cultivation (olive oil, table fruits). They were, however, few (twenty-four articles only). The antiquated principle according to which Algerian products were treated in France as foreign, still remained the general rule. Article 2 related to the exports from France to Algeria. It freed them from all export duty, with the exception of / some raw materials. Merchandise whose exportation to ^ foreign countries was forbidden was denied the privilege of exportation to Algeria. As against these first meagre concessions to the trade between France and Algeria, we must set the increasingly N severe restrictions upon foreign shipping and foreign goods in Algeria. This was the subject of another ordinance of 15 6 82 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY formula of M. Dislere,^ seemed at that time the ideal to be realized. Logically, this policy of assimilation was bound to exert an influence on commercial affairs. But this theoretical reason alone would doubtless have been inadequate to effect a change in commercial policy. The desirability of complete pohtical assimilation served as an argument before the Chambers. But we must seek elsewhere for the profound causes of the transformation which took place. 2. The essential cause is to be found in the protectionist reaction which vigorously manifested itself in France, begin- ning with the year 1883. The defeat of France in 1870-1 had not checked her economic progress. The Franco-German War had been followed, on the contrary, by a period of remarkable prosperity, as shown by the increased yield of the imposts, by the development of the traffic on the railroads, and by the progress of foreign commerce. This period of prosperity extended until 1882. But in that year there occurred a crisis, long remembered by the business world. The surplus revenues from the imposts disappeared and rail- way traffic dwindled. There was no longer the same confi- dence in the future ; the business world became uneasy and cautious. A period of low prices had set in. The lowest level was reached in 1886, but the rise was very slow. Dm-ing more than ten years French producers in general, and especially the agriculturists, who suffered very severely under the crisis, complained bitterly. The representatives of the rural interests began to demand duties on foreign grain and animals. The agrarian vote won for the protectionist party a first and briUiant victory in the laws of 1885 and 1887. Foreign example, moreover, provided the representa- tives of the protectionist party with a powerful argument. The impopularity of the hberal pohcy, which had been held in honour during the third quarter of the nineteenth century, affected all the subsidiary manifestations of this policy. The beaten free-trade party could not preserve commercial Hberty THE THIRD REPUBUC 83 in the colonies when it was incapable of maintaining it in jf France. The same law of January 11, 1892, which crowned \i the triumph of protectionism in France also established the policy of^ tariff Assimilation. 3. A third reason for the tendency toward tariff assimila- tion is to be found in the sacrifices which France imposed upon herself at the time of Jules Ferry in order to develop her colonial empire, and in the state of mind which had resulted from these sacrifices. The policy of colonial expansion was then very much discussed and bitterly fought. The sacrifices in men and in money appeared heavy, and pubhc opinion did not appreciate the utihty of these colonies for France. ' At any rate,' so it was said, ' this domain, for the acquisition of which we make so many sacrifices, ought to be made to jrield some return. The markets for French products in foreign countries are in danger of being closed in consequence of the progress of protection. Might not the colonial market offer us at least a partial compensation ? ' Once pubhc attention came to be fixed upon the colonies, it appeared that they did not buy enough from France. Here was a market in which French products were not protected. The adver- saries of colonial expansion, who asserted that the colonies were not sufficiently profitable to the imperial state, and the supporters of the policy of expansion, who laid emphasis upon the prospective colonial markets, agreed in insisting that the colonies should be made as profitable as possible to France / through the strict reservation of their market to the French producers. 4. The colonies, menaced in this way, were not in a good position to defend themselves. On the one hand, the selfish poHcy pursued by the old colonies under tariff autonomy had created an unfavourable impression on public opinion in France. On the other hand, the colonial party was not yet powerful enough to make itself heard. It was neither ' organized nor numerous. Prudence suggested to it not to attempt to resist a current by which it would inevitably have G2 r 84 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY been swept away. M. Melines, in his general report upon the bill for a new general customs-tariff, wrote : ' Our colonies must offer better markets to French products ; otherwise the colonial poHcy will be radically condemned.' M. Etienne, Under-Secretary of State for the colonies, said in the Senate, December 17, 1891 : ' We do indeed beHeve, and we assert it emphatically that, since France must incur the obhgations involved in a colonial domain, it is just and proper that this domain be reserved as a market for French products. If we ^ere not to make such reservation, if we had colonies only to export to them each year millions of capital and soldiers, our colonial poHcy would be of questionable expediency.' Thus the statesman who has since been called the head of the colonial party in France, beUeved it prudent to make use of the same language as the head of the protectionist party. 5. Finally, the growing importance of our colonial domain led us to attach more value to the conquest of this market. Before 1883 the colonial domain was neither populous nor extensive enough to offer an important market to French products. After 1883 the conquest of Tonkin, the penetra- tion into the African continent, and the conquest of Mada- gascar increased greatly the extent of this domain. A result of this colonial expansion was the placing imder the control of France of several tens of miUions of human beings. Speak- ing commercially, these were customers to whom French industry might seek to furnish with clothing and tools. For the textile and metallurgical industries these colonies were new markets in which we could not afford to allow ourselves to be distanced by our English or German rivals. The Tariff Assimilation of Algeria. — ^The regime of assimila- tion was first of all applied to Algeria. One of the earliest manifestations of the awakening of protectionism occurred in connexion with the Algerian trade. French producers — especially the metallurgical industries — ^had complained that they were being supplanted in the Algerian market by foreign producers. In order to appease them, the finance THE THIRD REPUBLIC 85 law of December 29, 1884, laid down the rule (art. 10) : * Foreign products imported into Algeria are subject to the same duties as if they were imported into France.' Excep- tion was made for the colonial staples that continued to pay the duties inscribed in Table A of the law of 1867, and for the products coming from Tunis, Morocco, and the south of Algeria, which remained subject to the regulations established by Table D of the same law (art. 10, pars. 2 and 3). As a consequence of tariff assimilation, paragraph 5 added that the provision of article 30 of the law of May 16, 1863, relative to admission in bond, ceased to be applicable to Algeria. This reform was accepted without difficulty : tariff assimilation appeared to be an altogether natural solution, in view of the proximity of France and Algeria and the accepted habit of looking upon Algeria simply as three French departments. Article 7 of the general tariff law of January 11, 1892,\ limited itself to re-enacting the provisions of article 10 of \ the law of 1884. But, in fact, by the increase of protection i which it granted to French products on the Algerian market " and to Algerian products on the French market, the tariff of 1892 drew much closer the business ties between Algeria and France. Since then, the duties levied upon the products enumerated in list A of the law of 1867 have again been raised (finance law of December 28, 1895, arts. 11 and 12). The differentials in rates resulting from the maintenance of this list have been reduced or abolished. The present situation is as follows : Products imported into Algeria are subject to the same ^ duties as if they were imported into France. This general rule is applicable to the products coming from foreign countries, to those coming from French colonies, and to those coming from Tunis or from Morocco by sea. The ware- housing surtaxes, which exist in France, are employed in like manner in Algeria. The countries that enjoy the benefits of the French minimum tariff receive the same benefits in 86 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY Algeria. A single restriction is made regarding merchandise coming from Switzerland : such merchandise is admitted under the minimum tariff in Algeria only on condition of having made the transit by way of France. In short, we are in the presence of a simple return to imperial tariff legislation. There are, nevertheless, some exceptions. The first, which concerns sugars, is rather apparent than real. There is a difference of 15 francs per 100 kilogrammes between the duty collected on entering Algeria and the duty collected on entering France. But, as sugar is subject in Algeria to a wharfage duty of 15 francs which does not exist in France, it is clear that the burden is in reality exactly the same.^ The duties on coffees are at present fixed by article ^ of the law of February 24, 1900. The general tariff is the same as in France ; but the minimum tariff, the only one having a practical importance, is 31 francs 20 centimes per 100 kilogrammes (instead of 136 francs). Spices (pepper, allspice, cinnamon bark, nutmeg, vanilla) are subject to a duty equal to two- thirds of that which is fixed in the national tariff (law of December 28, 1895, art. 11). Other exceptions are the result of the fact that certain fiscal monopolies or internal revenue taxes which exist in France are not found in Algeria. The tobacco and matches monopolies do not operate south of the Mediter- ranean. Further, there is nothing in Algeria to correspond with the impost on salt, nor the consumption duty on beer. Accordingly it has been necessary to establish special duties on tobacco and matches imported into Algeria and to reduce the tariff duties on beer and on salt meats. These provisions explain themselves. As for the products exported from Algeria, they continue to go out free as do those exported from France. By exception, a duty, purely fiscal, . of fifty centimes per ton, is levied upon phosphates of lime on their exportation from Algeria (Decree of March 25, 1898, art. 21). THE THIRD REPUBLIC 87 After Algeria had been assimilated to France in regard to the tariff rates the colony was assimilated to France in \ regard to navigation. The laws of April 2, 1889, and of December 28, 1895, are logically complementary to the work begun in 1884. The law of April 2, 1889, whose provisions, on account of existing treaties, could not wholly be put into force before October 4, 1893, established the rule that ' navigation between France and Algeria can be carried on only under the French flag'. This return to the system prevailing prior to the law of 1866 is remarkable : the navigation from an Algerian port to a French port is, like the coast trade between two French European ports, reserved to the national flag. This assimilation has been not without serious incon- veniences. Since almost all the external commerce of Algeria is carried on with France, if, for any reason, French vessels are temporarily prevented from handling the traffic, the whole business finds itself abruptly interrupted. This occurred, as is well known, in 1904, at the time of the double strike of the marines and of the dockers of Marseilles. Algeria was in a state of blockade during several weeks. It was impossible to ship the sheep, fruits, and produce which piled up on the wharves of Algeria. It was an intolerable situa- tion, the recurrence of which it was necessary to prevent. Hence the law of July 22, 1909, which permits the govern- \ ment, in case of exceptional conditions causing a temporary interruption of maritime relations under the French flag, to suspend, by decree, the application of the law of 1889. The Finance Law of December 28, 1895, deals with wharf- age and registration duties. Before 1895, all vessels, what- ever their flag, whether French or foreign, touching at the ports of Algeria, were subject to the payment of a wharfage duty. A wharfage duty was likewise collected in France on all vessels, without distinction as to flag ; but French vessels confining themselves simply to the coast trade between French ports of Europe escaped it. The law of 88 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY 1895 (art. 14) exempted from wharfage, in France as well as in Algeria, French vessels going from one shore to the other of the Mediterranean, thus assimilating navigation between France and Algeria with the coast trade. On the other hand, the law prescribed that in Algeria, as in France, wharfage duties should be based, not on the quantity of merchandise unloaded, but on the tonnage of the vessels. This last provision raised very emphatic remonstrances in Algeria.* Was it not of a nature to keep away from the ports of Algeria foreign ships that had been in the habit of putting in there ? To remove this danger, the law of December 23, 1897, decreed that wharfage duties should be collected in Algeria only on the merchandise, passengers, animals, or vehicles, disembarked. The same ideal of assimilation inspired article 13 of the law of December 28, 1895, relative to the registration duty (of ten centimes on all objects entering or leaving, intro- duced into France by the law of January 22, 1872). Formerly the registration duty was not collected in Algeria. It existed only in France, but it was applicable to the merchan- dise imported from Algeria into France or sent from France into Algeria. The law of 1895 rendered the registration duty applicable to Algeria ; but at the same time, it decreed that this duty should not be collected on objects sent from France to Algeria or from Algeria to France. This registra- tion duty, formerly fixed at ten centimes, was raised to fifteen centimes by article 28 of the Finance law of April 8, 1910. In short, both from the standpoint of navigation and from that of the tariff, Algerian territory is treated to-day as national territory. Were it not for the fact that each of the two countries keeps for herself the revenue from the customs and navigation duties collected on her frontier, a true tariff-union would exist between Algeria and France. THE THIRD REPUBUC 89 Introduction of Customs Dviies oil Foreign Merchandise in Various Colonies In the year 1884 and in the following years, the protec- tionist reaction manifested itself by establishing duties on foreign products in various colonies where these duties had been abolished or had never existed. The market of the Antilles and of Reunion first attracted attention. The abolition of customs duties in these three colonies had displeased the French producers. They com- plained that in these islands foreign products took the place of French products. In this connexion, the experience of fifteen years appeared conclusive. The comparison of the years 1865 and 1880 seemed altogether decisive : Imports (in Thousands of Francs) French Merchandise. Foreign Merchandiae. 1865. 1880. 1865. 1880. Martinique • »7.334 14.037 9.963 •7.327 Guadeloupe 18,890 11,631 3.8'9 13.624 Reunion 14,431 9,198 l2,OIO 25.707 Total . 50,655 34,866 25.79* 56,658 Thus, the quantity of merchandise from France imported into the Antilles and into Reunion was diminishing. Mean- while, the total of imports was increasing. All the profit resulting from the increase in imports was going to foreign trade. In order to still the complaints of the French mer- chants, the government brought pressure to bear upon the Councils-General of the colonies with a view to forcing them to re-establish the customs duties.^ The government employed both threats and promises. It threatened them with a vote on the proposition of Peulevey, which aimed to apply to the colonies the French tariff system, and it also threatened a stoppage of the public works undertaken in the colonies under subsidies from the mother country. It promised them favourable treatment for colonial sugars. Arguments so powerful were irresistible. Very wisely, the 90 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY three colonies re-established, one after another, their customs duties. In Guadeloupe, a decree of November 16, 1884, established duties varying between five per cent and eight per cent ad valorem on thirteen classes of foreign products (prepared skins, textile fabrics, clothing, clocks and watches and jewellery, haberdashery, articles of fashion, furniture, &c.). In Martinique, the decree of April 25, 1885, established on several foreign products (textile fabrics, paper, prepared skins, jewellery, furniture, and toys) duties, some specific, others ad valorem, on the whole a little higher than in Guadeloupe. In Reunion, the decree of January 19, 1885, introduced, on a long series of manufactured objects, cus- toms duties perceptibly approaching the French rates. The reward for colonial compliance was not long in coming : the law of July 29, 1886, granted a manufacturing abatement of twelve per cent to sugar from the French colonies imported directly (art. 5) and laid an additional tax of seven francs on unrefined sugars imported from European countries or from European warehouses (art. 10). At the same time, the government, enlightened by experi- ence, was careful not to extend to the newly created Councils- General the exaggerated powers which those of the Antilles and of Reunion held from the senatus-consultum of 1866. The decree of December 23, 1878, creating a Council-General in Guiana, did indeed reproduce, in article 36, the provision of article 2 of the senatus-consultum. But the later acts were much more cautious. The decree of January 25, 1879, which instituted a Council-General in the French establish- ments of India, empowered this body to vote taxes and contributions, with the exception of the customs tariffs (art. 32). The decree of February 4, 1879, creating a Council-General in Senegal, empowered the council to vote taxes, with the exception of the customs and the wharfage duties (art. 34). The Council- General might deliberate upon the wharfage duties which must afterwards be approved by decree (arts. 35 and 36). It might only offer advice upon THE THIRD REPUBLIC 91 tariff duties (art. 37). The decrees which created a Council- General in Saint-Pierre and Miquelon (April 2, 1885), in New Caledonia (April 2, 1885), and in the French establish- ment of Oceania (December 28, 1885), contain identical provisions. In these colonies, the Council-General might vote the wharfage duties on objects of all kinds and of whatever origin ; it might offer its advice upon the rates, and the manner of assessment and collection of the customs duties.* In the other colonies, not possessing Councils- General the government naturally reserved the right to establish customs duties by decree, in conformity to the decree of January 30, 1867, and to the law of May 7, 1881. The central power profited by these provisions to establish in some colonies duties designed to protect French products from the competition of foreign products. In Senegal, a decree of October 17, 1880, established an import duty of four centimes per metre, on cloth (reduced to two and a half centimes by decree of June 14, 1881), while adding a supple- mentary duty of four centimes for the cloth manufactured elsewhere than in France or in the French colonies. A decree of December 2, 1890, next raised to six centimes per metre the duty on foreign cloth, and established a duty of seven per cent on other foreign products. In Gabon y customs duties on merchandise of whatever origin were established by a decree of August 27, 1884, article 2 of which determined that these duties should be reduced by sixty per cent for French merchandise. These duties were afterwards increased by decree of November 18, 1890. In Nossi'Be, a decree of June 21, 1887, established on foreign merchandise duties of two per cent and five per cent. In Mayotte, the decree of February 6, 1888, estab- lished customs duties for foreign products, amounting to fifteen per cent on textile fabrics. In Saint-Pierre and Miquelon, a decree of July 27, 1889, restored the cus- toms duties previously collected. In Guiana, a decree of January 7, 1890, added to the previous duty of three per cent 92 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY on products of whatever origin a duty of four per cent on foreign merchandise. Some imports (oxen, asses, mules, fish, salt, wood, shale oil, &c.) were exempt. On the other hand, foreign rum and tafias paid a supplementary tax of forty centimes per litre. No customs duty was established in India, in New Caledonia, or in the establishments of Oceania. These measures were, on the whole, moderate. They concerned, moreover, colonies whose commerce had but a limited importance. The Tariff Assimilation of Indo-China"^ Much more important was the Indo-Chinese market, and the sacrifices necessitated by the Tonkin expedition focussed the attention of the authorities upon this colony. In 1883 the question of introducing customs duties in Cochin-China began to be agitated. When the colonial authorities learned through official correspondence that the central power was working out a tariff system for them, they decided that it was good politics to take the initiative. A commission com- posed of members of the Colonial Council, of the Chamber of Commerce, and of the Municipal Council of Saigon assembled at the end of October 1883 to discuss the tariff question. Advocates and opponents of the introduction of customs duties presented their arguments. At the close of the discussion the commission adopted a resolution accepting the principle of a customs tariff. In 1884 the administration submitted to the Colonial Council a project of customs regulation, which the council accepted, in its main features. But progress at Paris toward definite legislation was exceed- ingly slow. During the discussion of the Finance law of 1887, MM. Waddington, Thomson, and Bautresme offered an amendment extending to Indo-China the general tariff of the mother country. This amendment became article 47 of the law of February 26, 1887, which reads as follows : ' Foreign products imported into Cochin-China, Cambodia, Annam, THE THIRD REPUBUC 93 and Tonkin shall be subject, after June 1, 1887, to the duties inscribed in the general tariff of the mother country. It shall be determined by administrative ordinance what products shall, by exception to the present provision, be the object of special rates of duties, and in what localities bonded warehouses shall be established.' The local administration hastened to make provisional regulations in view of the application of the new rule (Order of the Resident-in-Chief of Annam, Tonkin, of May 27, 1887 ; * Order of the Governor of Cochin-China, June 22, 1887,* without waiting for the official publication of the promised decree, which occurred on September 8, 1887. The application of the French ,' national customs tariff to Indo-China produced disastrous effects and aroused energetic protests. Imports, which had amounted in Cochin-China to almost sixty millions of francs in 1887, fell to forty- two millions in the following year. The number of failures in Saigon rose from three to fifteen during the first seven months of 1888. Numerous com- mercial houses had to close their doors. The increased cost of living and the impoverishment of the colony compromised the fiscal situation which had been prosperous up to that time. The local budget was threatened with a deficit. With the aim of quieting the complaints of the colony, article 10 of the Finance Law of March 30, 1888, sought to give compensation to Indo-China by granting to the products of the colony free entry into France and Algeria. The decree of September 8, 1887, was replaced by that of May 9, 1889, which reduced the duties on products not competing with those of France. But these measures were inadequate to remedy the evil. The national colonial congress of 1889 voiced most emphatically the protests of the colony.*" It was, unfortunately, impossible to check the protectionist current which had now become very strong. The policy of tariff assimilation to which Indo-China had been, by excep- tion, subjected, was made generally applicable by the law of January 11, 1892. I 94 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY The Law of January 11, 1892, and the Tariff Assimilation of the Colonies.^ — ^The principle of tariff assimilation won an easy victory in the Parliament at the time of the discussion of the new general customs -tariff. The statistics of trade provided the opponents of the policy inaugurated under the Second Empire with a specious argument. In 1890, the merchandise imported into our colonies reached a total of 215,792,000 francs, distributed as follows : Imports from France, 70,903,000 francs ; imports from French colonies, 3,293,000 francs ; imports from foreign countries, 136,594,000 francs. Thus the inhabitants of the colonies were buying \ about fifty per cent more from foreign countries than from \ the mother country. Colonial exports, on the other hand, \ amounted to 191,986,000 francs, of which 100,845,000 were shipped to France, 3,538,000 to the French colonies and j 87,003,000 to foreign countries. Accordingly, France was the j best customer of the colonists, although the colonists were not buying French products. What ingratitude ! This argument, drawn from the balance of trade, seemed decisive. ' It was not admitted at that time,' says M. Artaud,^ that there is as much profit in buying what you Avant as in selHng what you have to dispose of, and that colonial trade, whether it consisted of imports or of exports, was none the less advantageous to both contracting parties. According to the opinion of the time, exports were sacrosanct and imports were anathema, and it was not understood that colonial sugar, even not balanced by an export of textile fabrics, furnished freight for French shipping, as well as material for the industries of the ports, and that at all events there would have been no profit in having the sugar go to foreign countries merely because the colonies found it profitable to make purchases from those countries. Accordingly the reform of the customs, although so far- reaching, met with only a very feeble resistance. In the Chamber of Deputies, on July 17, 1891, M. Felix Faure made a motion to adjourn upon article 3. But as the most ■distinguished representatives of the old colonies, M. de Mahy and M. Gerville-Reache, had declared themselves in favour THE THIRD REPUBUC 95 of tariff assimilation, the m otion for adjournment was not even voted on. In the senate, a better informed repre- sentative of tlie colonies, M. Isaac, offered a motion of adjournment, which was supported by M. Buffet. In spite of the excellence of his arguments, which would have con- vinced a less prejudiced assembly, the motion was rejected ~) by 202 votes against 51 (sitting of December 17, 1891).** J Tariff assimilation, however, could not be made the universal rule. It was practically inapplicable for the scattered territories such as those of the establishments of India and Oceania. In several parts of the African continent, inter- national engagements prevented its being put in force. Accordingly it was necessary to make a distinction. Two groups of colonies were created : (1) the assimilated colonies,"^ including Martinique, Guadeloupe, Guiana, Saint -Pierre and Miquelon, Reunion, Mayotte, Gabon, French Indo-China and New Caledonia ; (2) the non-assimilated colonies, including the French territories of the western coast of Africa (except Gabon), Tahiti and its dependencies, the French establishments of India, Obock, Diego Suarez, Nossi-Be and Sainte-Marie of Madagascar. But in the minds of the legislators, assimilation constituted the rule. The non-assimilated colonies, in the very terms of article 3, constituted an exception. This exception had been admitted with regret and it seemed destined to disappear. ' The exclusion of certain colonies was only provisory and each of the non-assimilated establishments was to retain its own regulations only until circumstances should permit its sub- jection to the general legislation.'** As a fact, the list of assimilated colonies was extended in the years following. A decree of May 23, 1896, added the Comores. The law of April 16, 1897, subjected to the regime of assimilation the colony of Madagascar, and this carried with it the small establishments, formerly separate, of Nossi-Be, Diego-Suarez, and Sainte-Marie, which were absorbed in the colony of Madagascar. From that time the 96 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY group of assimilated colonies seemed much the more impor- tant. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the external commerce of the assimilated colonies amounted, in round numbers, to 600,000,000 francs and that of the non- assimilated colonies to 200,000,000. Thus, three-fourths of the colonial commerce was conducted under the new regime. To analyse the legislation now in force, separate account must be taken of the assimilated and the non-assimilated colonies. For each of these categories we must examine, first, the regulations governing the import and export of products in the colony itself, and, second, the regulations to which the products of these colonies are subjected on their entry into France. Tariff Regulations of the Assimilated Colonies. — These regulations are based on articles 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the law of January 11, 1892, the provisions of which may be analysed as follows : On importation into the colonies, wharfage dues are collected on all products to which the duties are applicable, without distinction of origin. There would be no reason for dwelling upon this point, if the law of 1892 had not reduced perceptibly the rights of the local authorities in the matter. Article 6 of this law declares The manner of assessment, the rules for collecting and the dis- tribution of receipts from the wharfage duties shall be established by the deliberations of the Councils-General or of the Councils of Administration, approved by decrees rendered in the form of ordi- nances of the central administration. The rate of wharfage duties shall be voted by the Councils-General or the Councils of Adminis- tration of the colonies. They shall be rendered executory by decrees given upon the report of the Ministers of Commerce, of Industry, and of the Colonies. They may be provisionally put into execution in virtue of an order from the governors.!^ Thus, even in regard to the wharfage duties the central power reserves ultimate control. In regard to the customs, we must distinguish (1) imports THE THIRD REPUBLIC 97 from France, (2) from another French colony, and (3) from a foreign country.^* 1. Imports from France. French merchandise and foreign merchandise nationalized by the payment of duties in France are admitted into the assimilated colonies duty-free. This privilege is, however, made conditional upon direct shipment, which may take place under any flag. What of the merchandise, of foreign origin, admitted to France in bond, and re-exported to the assimilated colonies after having been subjected to elaborative processes by national industry ? Logically, such merchandise, when consumed in the territory of an assimilated colony, should not be treated otherwise than if it were consumed within the national domain. Otherwise, the colonial consumer would find himself more favourably treated than the home con- sumer. Accordingly the principle has been accepted that such products exported from France to assimilated colonies should be subject on arriving at their destination to the payment of duties commensurate with those otherwise paid by the foreign materials which they are supposed to contain (Opinion of the Council of State of August 2, 1887). By exception, this principle is not applied to the Antilles and Reunion, where the contrary rule, established by article 30 of the law of May 16, 1863, still remains in force. The inconsistency is a fortunate one, from the point of view of these three colonies, and beneficial to their trade. It is proposed, however, to do away with it.^' As for the drawback established by article 10 of the law of January 11, 1892, on the exportation of cotton fabrics, it is naturally denied to the fabrics exported to the assimilated colonies (ministerial decision of March 23, 1893).^* 2. Imports from the other Colonies. This matter is regulated by article 5 of the law of January 11, 1892, which makes no distinction between products coming from an assimilated colony and those coming from a non-assimilated colony. * Products from one French colony imported into another 1569.15 Q 98 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY French colony', says article 5, 'shall not be subject to customs duty.' To this rule, which was at first absolute, a law of April 19, 1904, declared an exception in regard to the products of French India. These products are subject to the same rates as those of the most favoured foreign countries, with the exception of a limited quantity of long cloth which India has the right to export annually, free, to the other French colonies. Foreign merchandise sent from one French colony to another is subject, on arrival, to the payment of the difference between the duties of the local tariff and those of the tariff of the colony from which the merchandise has been shipped. 3. Imports from Foreign Countries. Foreign products im- ported into the assimilated colonies are subject to the same duties as if they were imported into France. This is the principle of assimilation, pure and simple. It is tempered, however, by the following provision : Decrees rendered in the form of ordinances of the central administration shall determine the products which, by exception, shall be the object of a special rate of duty. The Councils-General or of Administration are called upon to give their advice regarding the proposed exceptions and may offer resolutions proposing other exceptions, which a new decree, given in the same form, may then grant them (arts. 3 and 4). According to paragraph 5 of article 3 of the law of January 11, 1892, the French national tariff becomes applicable to each colony only upon the promulgation of the decree deter- mining upon the exceptions, which must be given within a year of the enactment of the tariff law. As a fact, the decrees concerning Reunion, Mayotte, and New Caledonia were signed on November 26, 1892. Those concerning Gabon, Indo-China, Martinique, Guadeloupe, and Guiana were signed on November 29 ; and that concerning Saint Pierre and Miquelon on December 21. Next followed the decree of May 23, 1896, promulgated after the tariff assimila- tion of Comorre, and the decree of July 28, 1897, rendered THE THIRD REPUBLIC 99 after the tariff assimilation of Madagascar. The several decrees have, moreover, since undergone a good many modifications, some of which have diminished and others have increased the customs duties established in the first instance. The power thus granted to the government to declare by^ decree exceptions to the general customs tariff, gave it the means of abating in some measure the hardships which the application of the French tariff inflicted upon the colonial consumer. To this end it was sufficient to give due con- sideration to the advice of the Councils-General of the colonies concerned. This mitigation of burdens was approved by M. Jules Ferry, whose protectionist convictions were happily counterbalanced by an ardent zeal for the develop- ment of the French colonies. It has never entered into the thought of a reasonable being, to apply, as a whole, the national customs tariff to the French colonies, without taking into account distance, climate, or the infinite variety of this distant domain, scattered over all parts of the world, in all habitable latitudes. Such a narrow, absolute, radical conception was not that of the parliament ; it would be a caricature of the new regime, not at all its sane and loyal application. By the fourth paragraph of article 8, the door is left wide open for the necessary exceptions. In short, each colony shall have its special tariff. . . . Unfortunately these wise counsels have not been closely followed by the government and the Council of State, which are ' preoccupied ', said M. Bouchie de Belle, ' much more in realizing the intentions and the aim pursued by the authors of the law of January 11, 1892, than in attending to the advice given by the local councils.' ^* It would be a waste of time to enumerate here the diverse exceptions contained in each of these decrees. They relate especially to foodstuffs. Live animals, rye, maize, and rice, fish, salt, and legumes enter free, or on payment of a very low duty, in almost all the assimilated colonies. Coffee, tea, and spices enjoy, in a certain number of the colonies, a reduction of duty. Chemical fertilizers enter free in the sugar-producing H2 A 100 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY colonies. Coal enters free in the Antilles and Madagascar. As for manufactured products, the reductions made in the French national tariff are much less numerous. The most important exception concerns the sacks or casks which are used for the packing of colonial products. Only the tariffs of Madagascar, of Indo-China and of New Caledonia permit notable reductions in favour of manufactured products. In Madagascar, cotton fabrics, furniture, and articles in wood enjoy reduced rates. In Indo-China, the exceptions concern principally manufactured products of Chinese origin for the use of the native consumers. In New Caledonia, the exceptions are more varied. They relate to metals and metal-work, work in wood, carriages, &c. The extreme remoteness of this colony necessitated this greater number of exceptions. Two observations apply equally to all these decrees : (1) the excepted products are subject to a specialized rate which takes the place of both the French general tariff and of the minimum tariff ; (2) the products imported into the colonies are exempt from the warehousing surtax indicated in lists C and D, annexed to the law of January 11, 1892. Customs assimilation constitutes, in principle, a return to the French national tariff. But since 1892 many modi- fications have been made in this tariff. Hence have arisen two very interesting questions. The first concerns the changes made in the tariff (list A) by later laws. The greater number of these laws had for their object the raising of the original duties on certain products. As a result the colonies have been subjected to the consequences of the new provisions, except in so far as the new laws bore upon products comprised in the decrees of exception. In the debate on one of the most important of these laws, that of March 29, 1910, an important principle was, however, introduced. The defenders of the colonial interests, who had remained silent at the time of the discussion of the tariff of 1892, were on the watch.^o They obtained the THE THIRD REPUBLIC i . i \1&L insertion in the law of article 7, paragraph 2, which reads as follows : The tariff rates forming the subject of the present law shall come into force in the colonies, the French possessions and the countries of the protectorate of Indo-China, only after decrees, in the form of central administrative ordinances, rendered upon the report of the Minister of the Colonies, the Minister of Commerce and of Industry, and the Minister of Finances, and after advice of the Councils-General and of the Councils of Administration of the colonies, shall have determined the products, which, by exception to paragraph 8 of article 8 of the law of January 11, 1892, shall be the subject of a special tariff rates. Such decrees must, however, issue within a year of the enactment of the law. Thus the colonies obtained at least a respite. This respite was even a little longer than had at first been foreseen. The year passed without the decrees having been signed. A law of March 30, 1911, extended the time by three months, and it was only on June 30, 1911, that the decrees in question were rendered. These decrees, however, made but insigni- ficant ameliorations in the revised tariff. They practically confined themselves to the maintenance.of former exceptions, with some modifications and additions. There is an inter- esting point to be noted in regard to the Indo-Chinese tariff. Cotton thread, Chinese fancy articles in wood, and boxes of white metal, are subject to a double tariff ; pro- vision is made for a minimum tariff in addition to the general tariff applicable to Indo-China. But the colonies paid dearly for the respite given them by the law of 1910 and the satisfaction of seeing their tariff examined again in detail. The law of March 29, 1910, decided that the decrees granting special tariffs to the colonies should be countersigned by the three ministers of the colonies, of commerce, and of finances. ' This \ writes M. Gervais in his 1911 budgetary report of the ministry of the colonies,^ is an aggravation which renders much more difficult the granting of concessions in these particular tariffs. Under the former regime when there was opposition between the propositions of the Xrk1>? 102 E^^^OLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY Minister of the Colonies and the opinion of the Minister of Com- merce, the Council of State arbitrated the difference. Furthermore, the Minister of the Colonies, having full responsibility, could brush aside the opposition of his colleague and even the conclusions of the Council of State. This is no longer true. An agreement must be reached by the three administrations concerned. If this understanding is not effected, there can be no outcome ; accordingly it follows that each of the three ministers enjoys practically a veto upon the demands of the colonies. The granting of special rates has thus become more difficult and the procedure of initiating such rates has become much slower. The second question concerns the applicability to the colonies of the commercial treaties which have accorded to different foreign powers the benefit of the minimum tariff. But this question, because of its importance, will be examined independently (see below). Export Duties. — ^In regard to exportation, there is an important difference between the tariff legislation of the assi- 1 milated colonies and that of the mother country. In France no export duty has been levied since 1863. No customs duty appears in list B (exports) annexed to the law of January 11, 1892. On the other hand, export duties appear in a good jmany of the colonies. These duties are of three kinds. The first are purely fiscal duties, levied upon certain products exported, whatever their destination. The second have a differential character : they affect products exported to I foreign countries, but they spare those sent to France. The third have the character of compensatory taxes : they take the place of certain direct imposts which have disappeared or which were considered too difficult to collect. Export duties, purely fiscal, levied regardless of the destination of the pro- duct exported, exist in Madagascar, Gabon, Guiana, and New Caledonia. In Madagascar , they fall upon cattle (2 francs 50 centimes per head), and on india-rubber (40 centimes per kilogramme). In this colony, export duties have a temporary character ; they are to cease to be levied at the end of the year 1914, unless a new provision is made to retain them in THE THIRD REPUBLIC 103 force. In Gabon, export duties of ten per cent ad valorem are levied on ivory and india-rubber ; those which up to the past year were levied on divers other products have been abolished (decree of October 11, 1912). In Guiana, there is an export duty of 226 francs or 238 francs per kilogramme, according to condition, on native gold and a duty of 50 centimes per ox- hide. In New Caledonia, ores of nickel, copper, and chrome pay on exportation one franc twenty-five centimes per ton, and the ores of cobalt one franc fifty centimes (decree of December 21, 1905). In Indo-China export duties are levied upon products destined exclusively for foreign countries. It was otherwise before 1898 : export duties had then a purely fiscal character and were collected regardless of the destination of the product exported, even if this product passed simply from one part of Indo-China to the other. The decree of September 29, 1898, decided that, in the future, exemption from export duties should be granted (1) to products exported intended for France or the French colonies (with the condition, however, that they be transported direct), and (2) to products going simply from one part of Indo-China to another. Accordingly this decree finaUy created an Indo-Chinese tariff union. At the same time, it gave to the export duties a differential character. The number of products affected by export duties in Indo- China was decidedly diminished by the decree of October 10, 1908. The only products now subject to the export duty are : horses, oxen, buffaloes, pigs, elephants, silk, paddies, Indian anis, swallows' nests, fish, rice, sugar, amomum and cardamom, cinnamon, vegetable oils and sugars, charcoal, raw and ginned cotton, and cunac. There are also levied in Indo-China, transit duties on foreign merchandise which passes through Indo-Chinese territory. The transit duty is equal to one-fifth of the duty collected on the importation of foreign merchandise intended for consumption in Indo-China. 104 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY Compensatory export duties appear in the Antilles and in Reunion : they were originally created in compensation for the abolition of the capitation tax on slaves, and they have been maintained in lieu of the tax on unimproved land, which does not exist in these islands. In those plantation colonies that export the whole of the products of their soil (except the very small part retained for local consumption), the export duty may properly be considered the most prac- ticable form of land taxation. It is easier to collect, and follows more faithfully the fluctuations in the return from land from one year to another. In Martinique, the export duty falls only upon sugar, molasses, rum, and tafia. In Guadeloupe, it is levied upon coffees, cocoa, logwood, rocoa, and brandy. In the Antilles, export duties take the form of specific duties ; the most important of the products, exported sugar, pays one franc twenty centimes per 100 kilogrammes. In Reunion, the products affected by export duties are more numerous, and these export duties take the form of ad valorem duties (two per cent). In these three colonies, some addi- tional centimes for local purposes are added to the export duties. Under the name of taxes in lieu of the land tax, there appears in Indo-China an impost which falls on rice and paddies exported, whatever the destination. For rice and paddies exported to foreign countries an export duty is added. The taxes in lieu of land tax are levied only on rice and paddies exported to France. It is not scientifically accurate to describe this as a com- pensatory tax, since Indo-China levies a direct tax on the rice-fields. The export impost is rather complementary to the land tax than in lieu of it. This tax, moreover, is very light (it is much lower than the export duty on the same products), and has a purely fiscal character. It was established by an order of the Governor-General of February 7, 1899. Regulations applicable to the Products of Assimilated Colonies on their Entry into France. — ^The application to the assimi- THE THIRD REPUBUC 105 lated colonies of the customs tariff imposed by the mother country in her own interest, called for a compensation in favour of the colonies. The logical consequence of the prin- ciple of assimilation would have been the complete abolition of all customs duties on the importation of products of the French colonies into the mother country. Unfortunately, this desideratum came into collision with a considerable fiscal interest. It is true that from the protectionist point of view there is no reason for taxing colonial commodities which are not in competition with the products of the hoiAe country. But, from the fiscal point of view, it is easy to understand why there should be a consumption tax on these commodities, which will naturally be collected by the admin- istration of the customs. Sugar, coffee, and cocoa furnish for the French budget important resources, the total of which amounts to several hundreds of millions of francs, and which it is evidently impossible to abandon.^ This is why, although admitting in principle the free entry into France of the products of French colonies, the legislature of 1881 excepted sugar and the other colonial consumption staples. The legislators of 1892 did the same. All that they believed it possible to concede, was to grant to colonial commodities, other than sugar, the benefit of duties reduced by one-half. The regime applicable to the products imported from the assimilated French colonies into the mother country was established by list E, annexed to the law of January 11, 1892. The rules contained in this list may be analysed as follows : List E draws a fundamental distinction between products originating in the colonies and goods from foreign countries which, after having been imported into a colony, are later re-exported to France. (I) Products of Colonial Origin. In principle, these pro- ducts enter France free of duty, on condition that they be imported directly and that the proofs of origin required by the regulations be produced. To this principle list E makes a double exception. 108 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY («) The first, which to-day has practically lost all impor- tance, concerned the colonial consumption staples proper : coffees, cocoa, tea, pepper, allspice, amomum and cardamom, cinnamon, cassia lignea, nutmeg, mace, cloves, and vanilla. These commodities had to pay only one-half of the duties registered in the French tariff (see list A, nos. 96 to 108). In this list, colonial consumption staples appear only in the general tariff. As the figures called for by this tariff were very high, the protection resulting from the differential duty was very important. The coffee of the French colonies paid 78 francs per 100 kilogrammes instead of 156, cocoa 52 instead of 104, vanilla 208 instead of 416, mace and nutmegs without shell 156 instead of 312, tea, pepper, allspice, amomum and cardamom, cinnamon, cassia lignea, and nutmegs in shell, 104 instead of 208. The difference in ratesbetween foreign and colonial products indicated by the foregoing figures has long been regarded as both a necessary and an adequate protection to colonial production. Accordingly, when the tariff applicable to simi- lar foreign commodities was modified, arrangements were made to retain the same margin of advantage to colonial products. Thus the law of July 17, 1900, which reduced to 136 francs the duty on foreign coffees, determined that coffees from the colonies should pay, not one-half of this rate, that is to say 68 francs, but 58 francs, so as to maintain the differ- ence of 78 francs which had existed previously. On the other hand, when the law of March 29, 1908, raised to 312 francs the duties on foreign peppers, it determined that peppers from the French colonies should pay thereafter, not one-half of 312 francs, that is to say 156 francs, but 208 francs, so as to maintain the former difference of 104 francs which had been judged sufficient. Duties on colonial consumption staples were perceptibly raised, in theory, by the law of February 24, 1900. By this law these staples, with the exception of cocoa, were listed in both the general and the minimum tariffs. The duties previ- THE THIRD REPUBLIC 107 ously levied became those of the minimum tariff and the new general tariff represented much higher rates (300 francs for coffee, 400 francs for tea and spices, 600 francs for mace and nutmegs without shell, 800 francs for vanilla). Since, however, this new general tariff serves chiefly as a club in commercial negotiations, while in fact the minimum tariff alone is actually applied, the advantage resulting from this increase of the general tariff for the French colonies has been theoretical rather than practical. These provisions, however, have only a retrospective in- terest. According to the law of August 5, 1913, of which we shall speak more at length in the following chapter, beginning with January 1 , 1 91 4, all colonial consumption staples proceed- V"^ ing from assimilated French colonies enter France free, with the exception of pepper, in regard to which there is no change. (6) The second exception concerned sugar and its deriva- tives, molasses, S5rrups, biscuits, preserves. In regard to these products, list E merely refers to nos. 90 to 95 inclusive, of list A. According to the latter list, there was no consider- able difference in the treatment of sugars from the French colonies and that of foreign sugars : The chief difference con- sisted in the surtax of seven francs levied upon sugars of Euro- pean origin or those imported through European entrepots. This second exception appears to have been inevitable. To grant free entrance to sugars from the French colonies was not to be thought of, for it was absolutely necessary to make them bear the equivalent to the impost laid in France on native beet-sugars. Furthermore, in the interest of the refineries established in our sea-ports itjwas_necessary to maintain t h e equality between French cane-sugar and ford gn cane-sugar , in order to keep the foreign sugar from ^oing elsewh ere to be refined. Later, it is true, certain advantages were accorded to the colonial sugar production. The law of April 7, 1897, gave it the benefits of the export bounty ^-^"^ instituted by the law (art. 1). Furthermore, article 2 of this law re-established, in favour of the sugars of the French 108 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY colonies, a tax abatement for distance of two francs twenty- five centimes per 100 kilogrammes of refined sugar from the American colonies, and of two francs fifty centimes for the sugar from the other colonies. Article 9 raised the surtax on foreign sugars and extended its application to foreign sugars imported from countries outside of Europe. But the greater part of these advantages disappeared as a result of the Brussels convention of March 5, 1902. France, having adhered to this convention, had to suppress all the advan- tages, direct or indirect, granted by her to the production or exportation of sugar. From that time, it has not been possible to grant manufacturing abatements or premiums on exportation ; the surtaxes on foreign sugars could not exceed six francs per 100 kilogrammes on refined sugars and five francs fifty centimes on other sugars. The abatement for distance has been retained because its aim is, not to procure an advantage for colonial sugars, but to lessen the disadvan- tage resulting from their distance from the home market. At the same time, in part compensation to the sugar interests, France sought to develop the consumption of sugar in her internal market by lowering the impost on sugar from sixty francs to twenty-five francs, beginning with September 1, 1903 (law of January 28, 1903). II. Foreign Merchandise imported from the Colonies into the Home Country. Logically, foreign merchandise imported into the assimilated French colonies should be considered as nationalized by the payment of duties. On their importa- tion into France, they should pay only the difference between the two tariffs in case these articles are of those included in the decrees of exception. To express it in another way, what is true of foreign merchandise re-exported after having entered the French market should be equally true of those re-exported to France after having been in the colonial market. But the actual practice is very different. Foreign merchandise, imported from the colonies, must pay on arriving in France the duties of the national tariff. This THE THIRD REPUBUC 109 regulation has been criticized as unjust by certain authors,** and so, in fact, it would seem, if we disregard realities in order to fix our attention upon the principles. M. Pallain ** offers for the policy the following justification : If one considers that foreign merchandise never needs to go to France by way of the colonies and that the coast or frontiers of these possessions beyond seas are not policed like those of the mother country, one will recognize that the policy adopted injures no legitimate interest and closes the door upon a fraud which illicit traders would be only too much tempted to practise. An exception, however, has been made to this regulation by the law of February 24, 1900, article 3 of which decides that foreign colonial commodities that have paid special taxes in the colonies ' are liable, on their importation into France, to the duties of the general tariff, with the deduction of the special tax already paid '. But this does not mean that such merchandise pays in the aggregate a tax merely equal to what it would have paid if imported directly into France. Most of the countries producing colonial commodities have the benefit of the French minimum tariff, and the duties of the general tariff, even diminished by the amount of taxes already paid in the colonies, remain higher than those that figure in the minimum tariff. Accordingly, foreign colonial conmiodities gain an advantage by coming directly to France. Finally, Table E contains a regulation which applies equally to products of colonial origin and to those of foreign origin. The prohibitions or restrictions established on grounds of public policy or in consequence of monopolies (for instance those relating to tobacco and to matches) are applied to products imported from the colonies without distinction. Tariff Regime of the N on- Assimilated Colonies The customs duties collected on the products imported into the non-assimilated colonies have nothing in common ,<^ with those established by the law of January 11, 1892, and N 110 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY are determined by special decrees for each colony. The same thing holds true of the export duties on the principal products exported. These import and export duties, moreover, do not appear in all the colonies. We must therefore study the different establishments separately. (1) French Possessions in Western Africa, The system of customs duties in the colonies which form, to-day, the French possessions of western Africa, were formerly rather compli- cated. In the first place, each colony had its particular tariff ; consequently, the duties to be paid, whether on importation or on exportation, varied according to the colony. In the second place, in the greater number of these colonies, in addition to the customs duties established by decrees and levied only on foreign products, local ordinances had estab- lished consumption taxes falling without distinction upon objects, whether of French or foreign origin. These differences in customs rates must appear somewhat irrational. The divers coastal colonies of French West Africa have a hinterland in common, the Sudan, which European merchandise can enter either by one port or the other : the diversity of tariffs was of a nature to favour certain colonies to .the detriment of others. Again, the distinction between the customs duties and the consumption taxes was somewhat artificial, and had raised difficulties requiring judicial settlement. Both were collected upon importation ; the consumption taxes, like the customs duties, reached only products coming from outside, since similar local products did not exist or were not important enough to make it worth while to include them. A decree of April 14, 1905, endeavoured to do away with these distinctions. This decree was the logical consequence of the creation of the general government of French West Africa. The decree of October 18, 1904, which gave cor- porate existence to the general government of French West Africa, indicated the expenditures and the receipts which should figure in its budget. Among the receipts, article 7, THE THIRD REPUBUC 111 paragraph 2, of this decree specified ' the yield of the duties of all kinds, with the exception of communal consumption taxes, collected on imports and exports throughout the whole extent of French West Africa upon merchandise and upon ships '. When the duties collected from products impmled or exported ceased to be a source of revenue to Senegal, Guinea, the Ivory Coast, or Dahomey, and fell to the govern- ment of French West Africa it was logical to reduce them to uniformity throughout the whole extent of the general government. But the attempt to establish uniformity encountered a serious difficulty. Four English colonies, one Portuguese, and one German colony are enclosed in French West Africa. The very marked differences in the tariffs of these colonies might lead importers to consign products intended for the Sudan to the foreign ports, a result which it was necessary to avoid. On the contrary it was desirable to attract com- merce to the French ports. To attain this end it was neces- sary to introduce special regulations for the several parts of French West Africa. Again, in regard to Dahopiey and the Ivory Coast, the French government was fettered in its action by article 9 of the Anglo-French convention of June 14, 1898, which stipulated equality of treatment in the curve of the Niger during thirty years ' in so far as concerns river navigation, commerce, the customs and fiscal regime and taxes of all kinds *. Accordingly, it was necessary to make a distinction between Dahomey and the Ivory Coast on the one hand, and the rest of French West Africa on the other. The import tariff established by the decree of April 4, 1905, was extremely simple. It contained about twenty numbers. These import duties took the place both of the consumption taxes and of the former customs duties. Both were fused into a single tariff comprising import duties upon both French and foreign merchandise, and, when necessary, surtaxes upon foreign products. These duties were specific in some cases and ad valorem in others. Specific duties were laid on salt, 112 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY tobacco, sugars, kola, alcohol and liquors, powder and salt- petre. In Senegal they were also levied upon the cotton textiles called guinees?^ Other products were subjected to ad valorem duties calculated according to official rating, or, that failing, according to the amount of the invoice increased by twenty-five per cent. In Senegal and in Guinea, the ud valorem duties were in general twenty-five per cent, with a surtax of seven per cent on foreign^)roducts.2^ On the Ivory Coast and in Dahomey, they were^^jg^«Lcentonboth foreign and French products. Later, a decree of 1905 enumerated a rather long list of objects which might enter free throughout French West Africa. The chief items were live animals, meats, fish, fruits, vegetables, coal, agricultural implements, and other products designed principally for the use of Europeans. Freedom was also accorded to certain products coming from neighbouring foreign colonies which simply traverse the territory of French West Africa in order to embark at one of the ports (almonds, india-rubber, gum-arabic, ground- nuts, etc.). With the purpose of preventing products destined for French Guinea from arriving in the territory otherwise than through its own ports, the decree of April 14, 1905, retained the surtax on indirect importation falling on merchandise of whatsoever origin imported into the colony, after transit through non-French territory of the African continent. This surtax was fixed at twenty-five francs per 100 kilo- grammes on textiles and clothing materials, twenty francs on powder and munitions, ten francs on tobacco, and three francs sixty centimes on other products. On the other hand, the decree of April 14, 1905, did away with the rather numerous export duties. It simply preserved a tax of seven per cent on india-rubber exported. (2) French Equatorial Africa. A distinction must be made here between Gabon, or rather the part of Gabon which lies outside of the conventional basin of the Congo,^'' and the THE THIRD REPUBLIC 113 remainder of equatorial Africa. It was possible for the French legislation to include among the assimilated colonies the part of Gabon where French liberty of action was com- plete. But, in respect to the territories situated south of the parallel 2 (degrees 30 minutes, south latitude, which ends at the lagoon of Sette-Kama — ^territories forming part of the conventional basin — France was limited in its action by the general act of the conference of Berlin, February 26, 1885. Chapter i of this act established the principle of complete liberty of commerce for all nations in the territories forming this conventional basin, as well as the principle of equality of treatment for all flags, and for merchandise of whatever origin. Indeed, article 4 adds : ' Merchandise brought into these territories shall remain exempt from import and transit duties.' It was, however, necessary to provide sources of revenue for the Congo Free State and for the colonies owned by France and by Portugal, in the conventional basin. Accord- ingly, a declaration, signed at the time of the conference of Brussels, July 2, 1890, granted to the powers having poses- sions in this region, the right of levying on merchandise imported customs duties not exceeding eight per cent ad valorem. Jn consequence, the protocol of April 8, 1892, signed at Lisbon by the representatives of France, Portugal, and the Congo Free State, fixed the duties to be collected upon merchandise on importation and exportation. This arrangement, limited to a period of ten years, was extended until July 2, 1905, by the convention of May 11, 1902. By this convention the arrangement, after 1905, might be ex- tended, year by year, but each of the three powers was free to terminate it at three months' notice.^* As a fact, the arrange- ment was denounced by France, July 2, 1911, but the status quo was provisionally maintained 2» until the decree of Octo- ber 11, 1912, which established the present tariff for Equatorial Africa. According to article 1 of this decree, products of whatever origin, imported by land or by sea, into the French 1569-15 I 114 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY possessions of equatorial Africa (with the exception of Gabon), pay as a general rule ten per cent. By exception, the duty is reduced to five per cent for live animals, rice, lime, cement, bricks, iron, and steel, and to three per cent for coal, machines, and railway material. (3) The French Coast of Somaliland. There are no customs duties on imports in this colony. There is only a consumption tax, levied upon a certain number of articles of merchandise without distinction as to place of origin. Divers products destined for Abyssinia, notably beverages and arms, are subject, in addition, to a registration tax. Export duties are levied upon live animals, skins, wax, coffee, and ivory. They constitute one of the chief fiscal resources of the colony. Western Africa, equatorial Africa and the coast of Somali- land all lie in that part of Africa falling between 20 degrees north latitude and 20 degrees south. These three colonies are, in consequence, subject to the special regulations pro- claimed with the intention of restricting the sale of ardent spirits, by the general act of the Anti-Slave Conference of Brussels of July 2, 1890, chapter vi, articles 90 to 95. The duties upon alcohol at first fixed at fifteen francs per hectolitre of 50 degrees, were afterwards raised to seventy francs by the convention of Brussels, June 8, 1899, then to 100 francs by the convention of November 3, 1906. This last convention, executed for a term of ten years, has been promulgated in France by a decree of November 7, 1907. On the expiration of the period covered by this decree, duties on alcohol were raised in the colonies in question to 200 francs per hectolitre of alcohol of 100 degrees. (4) French India, Customs duties are unknown in French India, either for imports or exports. There are only con- sumption taxes bearing principally upon ardent spirits, levied without distinction as to origin, and varying, besides, accord- ing to the establishments. (5) French Establishments of Oceania. Customs duties were established upon foreign merchandise imported into the THE THIRD REPUBUC 115 colony by a decree of May 9, 1892. This decree has been partially modified, several times ; a decree of February 17, 1906, increased a certain number of duties. The tariff admits of both specific duties and duties ad valorem upon the invoice bill, increased by 25 per cent. The ad valorem duties are in general 8 per cent, 13 per cent, or 15 percent. The higher duties reach 20 per cent, some even 30 per cent. An export duty of fifteen francs per 100 kilogrammes was established on mother-of-pearl by a decree of March 12, 1899. At first this duty was reimbursed to the exporter upon the production of a certificate from the French customs declaring that the mother-of-pearl exported had been unloaded for consumption in a French port. A decree of June 13, 1906, reduced the duty to six francs, at the same time deciding that it should be collected regardless of the destination of the product. Export duties are likewise levied upon copra (six francs per 100 kilogranmies) and on phosphates (seventy- five centimes per ton).'" In 1912 the income from the export duties amounted to 37,367 francs for mother-of-pearl, 56,896 francs for copra, and 29,234 francs for phosphates.'^ As a final observation, we may note that the provision by which products of a French colony, imported into another French colony, are admitted duty free. Is applied to non- assimilated as well as to assimilated colonies. Exception is made only for the products of French India other than guinees (long-cloth), which are accorded most-favoured- nation treatment .'^ Regulations affecting the Products of the N on- Assimilated Colonies on their Importation into France. — Exemption from import duties, which is the rule for the products of the assimilated colonies, is the exception for those of the non- assimilated colonies. According to article 3, pareigraph 2, of the law of January 11, 1892, the provisions of list E are not applicable to them. These products are subjected, in principle, to the rates of the minimum tariff. The products of the non-assimilated colonies have not, 12 116 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY however, been subjected to the consequences of the advance in rates resulting from the law of March 29, 1810. According to article 7, paragraph 1, of this law : Until new decrees have been promulgated fixing the tariff regula- tions of the free zones of the province of Gex and of Upper Savoy, of Corsica, of the colonies and protectorates, the present law shall be applicable to the imports from these territories into France only in so far as concerns the special reductions made in previous tariffs. This provision is, however, subject to the action of the appropriate administrative authorities. Accordingly, the application of the new law is in abeyance, and the products of the non-assimilated colonies continue to receive the benefit of the former minimum tariff. The appHcation of the minimum tariff to the products of the non-assimilated colonies admits, however, of three modifications. The first concerns sugars and their deriva- tives, which are subjected to the same regime as those of the assimilated colonies. The second concerns the guinees (or long-cloth) of French India. Article 3 of the law of January 11, 1892, had granted them free entry into France. In consequence, with the aim of checking the development of this industry, which, it was complained, competed with the cotton industry of the mother country, the law of April 19, 1904, hmited to 2,000,000 kilogrammes of cotton fabrics (up to number 26) and to 1,500,000 kilogrammes of thread (up to number 20) the amounts admitted free of duty, and decreed that the textile fabrics should be admitted free only on condition of having been woven from thread manufactured in Pondichery. A decree of February 17, 1906, rendered in execution of this law, imposed upon the proprietors of the spinning factories and of the weavers of French India the obHgation to make declarations, and subjected them to a very strict supervision by the tax collectors. The third modification consists in the possibihty of granting exemptions or tax abatements on certain products of the non-assimilated colonies by decrees of the Council of State. THE THIRD REPUBUC 117 Under authority of this regulation, registered in article 3, a decree of June 30, 1892, exempted from all duty palm oil and the woods from the western coast of Africa, without limitation as to quantity ; in addition it reduced by one- half the duties of the national tariff on coffee from the western coast of Africa and on the vanilla from Tahiti, but only up to the amount fixed annually by decree for each colony. A decree of April 22, 1896, exempted from all duty the bananas of French Guinea, up to the limit of a quantity to be^decided upon from time to time. A tax abatement of one-half was granted, up to a limited amount, to be fixed annually, to the cocoa of Guinea, by a decree of September 14, 1898 ; to that of Dahomey, by a decree of August 17, 1907 ; and to that of the Ivory Coast by a decree of November 16, 1911. Free importation was granted, under the same conditions, to oxen coming from Senegal and from Upper Senegal-Niger by a decree of September 4, 1909, and to oxen from Guinea by a decree of October 31, 1911. In consequence of the decrees which reduced the duties on the coffees and the cocoas of the western coast of Africa, a duty upon similar foreign products imported into Guinea, equal to this abatement, was estabhshed, and on all similar products, without distinction as to origin, imported into the Ivory Coast and into Dahomey, where it was necessary to maintain equahty of treatment. The recent abolition o| the tax abatement will without doubt very soon have, as a consequence, a correlative modification of these different decrees. Finally, we must call attention to the decree of April 22, 1899, which granted to coffee and to cocoa coming from the conventional part of the basin of the Congo included in French Equatorial Africa, a tax abatement equal to the total of the duty collected in the colony on similar products coming from foreign countries. The Tariff Regulations Applicable to the Prodtids of the New Hebrides— The Treaty of London of October 20, 1906, 118 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY made of the archipelago of the New Hebrides a territory under the joint influence of France and of England.^^ From that time, this archipelago may be considered as a sort of undivided interest of the two countries. As no customs duties exist in these islands, there is no reason for analysing the situation of French, EngHsh, and foreign imports. The exemption is absolute. But the question has arisen as to whether it is not desirable to grant preferential treatment to goods produced or manufactured by the French estab- lished in the New Hebrides on importation into France or into the colonies. It has seemed just not to treat as strangers those of our compatriots who have devoted themselves to work for the development of French influence in these islands. This point of view has inspired a whole series of measures. The principle at issue found expression in the law of July 30, 1900, article 2 of which authorized the government to establish by decree the customs regime appHcable to products coming from the New Hebrides, ' gathered or manufactured by the commercial or agricultural estabhsh- ments owned or worked by Frenchmen, or by civil or com- mercial French companies.' Under authority of this law, the decree of November 12, 1901, reduced the duties collected, on importation into France or into New Caledonia, on maize, coffee, cocoa, or vanilla exported by the French estabhshed in the New Hebrides. This preferential regime is subject to the condition of direct importation, but with the privilege of transhipment to Noumea. The amounts so admitted under reduced duty are fixed by decree each year, for the colony as a whole, and individually for each producer by the governor of New Caledonia. A decree of July 24, 1902, granted free importation into New Caledonia to divers fruits gathered in the New Hebrides, without limitation as to quantity. Finally, a decree of April 16, 1904, granted free importation to maize coming from the New Hebrides imported into New Caledonia and to all THE THIRD REPUBUC 119 products coming from the New Hebrides imported into the other French colonies. But this privilege is Hmited to the quantities fixed annually, by decree, for the colony, and by order of the governor of New Caledonia for each producer. It may be a matter of surprise that the products of the New Hebrides are not treated as favourably in New Caledonia as in the other French colonies. The desire to reserve a more advantageous situation for the New Caledonian producer in the local market is the only explanation of this unreasonable difference. Regulations Applicable to Algerian Products on their Import tation into the Colonies^ and to the Products of the Colonies on their Importation into Algeria.^ — Efforts made by certain manufacturers and merchants to create a direct line of trade between Algeria and the colonies have given rise to a very delicate question which the legislators of 1892 had failed to foresee. What regulations should be applicable to the products of French colonies on their importation into Algeria ? And to what regulations should Algerian products be subjected on their importation into the colonies ? In order to solve this twofold problem, it is necessary to go back to principles. The question will then present itself in the following form : Should Algeria be considered as an assimilated colony or as an integral part of the national territory ? If Algeria is considered as a colony, article 5 of the law of January 11, 1892, ought to be apphed. According to this law, the products of a French colony imported into another French colony are to be admitted duty free. Thus we should be forced to the conclusions : (1) Algerian products should have free entry into the colonies ; (2) The products from the colonies should have free entry into Algeria. This \ is the position of the Ministry of the Colonies. The Council ^ of State has twice accepted it. If, on the other hand, one regards Algeria, not as a colony^ but as an integral part of the national territory, one is 120 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY forced to the following conclusions : (1) Algerian products should be subject on their importation into the colonies to the same treatment as similar national products ; they should enter free in the assimilated colonies and should pay, in the non-assimilated colonies, the import duties to which national products are subject ; (2) The products of the colonies should be subject in Algeria to the same regulations as on their importation into the mother country, with necessary allowance for the fact that certain fiscal monopoHes which exist in France are not found south of the Mediter- ranean. The products of the assimilated colonies should enter free, with reservation of the exceptions declared in list E ; the products of non-assimilated colonies should pay, unless excepted, the duties registered in the minimum tariff. As a fact, the question first presented itself in the matter of Algeria,!! tobacc o imported into French colonies (for instance, into Indo-China). The Council of State, being consulted, gave on May 11, 1897, the opinion that these tobaccos should entfirjfree, founding its opirdon upon article 5 of the law of January 11, 1892. From the practical point of view, this solution of the problem was very favourable to Algeria, since it gave her a prospect of findi!ig in the French colonies a market for her tobacco. Some years later the question presented itself under a different aspect. Matches manufactured in Hanoi and tobacco from Indo-Chiria were imported into Algeria. The f Algerian customs claimed the right to tax them. The Ministry of the Colonies naturally protested : exemption, it claimed, should be reciprocal ; both justice and article 5 of the law of 1892 demanded such exemption. The govem- y ment of Algeria, whose side was taken by the Mi!iistry of the In terior ai!d the Mi!iktry j)f Fiim!iceSj^end^ to refute the argument of the Ministry of the Colonies. The question was submitted to the Council of State, which on November 30, 1909, reached a decision supporting the (^contention of the Ministry of the Colonies. The Council of \^ THE THIRD REPUBUC 121 State was logical ; it considered that exemption, which, according to article 5 of the law of 1892, is the absolute rule in the relations between colonies, should benefit the imports of the colonies into Algeria as well as the imports of Algeria into the colonies. But the legislature took the part of the Algerian government. In the Finance law of April 8, 1910, it introduced an article, No. 27, which read as follows : Colonial commodities, other than sugar and tobacco, produced by the colonies, the French possessions, and countries of the protectorate of Indo-China, shall pay in Algeria, under the same conditions, the same duties as in France, with the exception that the special Algerian tariff shall be applied when that is more favourable. Tobacco produced by the above-mentioned territories is liable in Algeria to the tax inscribed in the local tariff ; chemical matches from the same source shall pay the duty required by the national tariff in regard to matches imported on public account. At the time of the discussion of this article 27 it was said that it was simply a question of confirming under a pro- visional title the practice that had been adopted by the Algerian government, and that the question of commercial relations between Algeria and the colonies would later be the subject of a thorough examination at the time of the discussion announced for the whole colonial tariff regime. In reality, the question is one for the legislature to settle. It had merely been overlooked in 1892. Algeria is not a colony. Legal terminology and practical administration have established a very clear-cut distinction between the colonies on the one hand and Algeria and the protectorates of the north of Africa on the other. The desire to find a solution of the problem in the letter of the law impelled the Council of State to make an appHcation to Algeria of article 5 of the law of January 1892. But such action was in conformity neither with the nature of things nor with the thought of the legislators. To classify Algeria with the assimilated colonies, was to pervert the meaning of the term. The law of January 11, 1892, does not speak of Algeria 122 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY in articles 3 to 6 which relate to the colonies ; it speaks of her farther on in article 7. The relation of Algeria to France is, whatever arguments may have been advanced to the contrary,^* much closer than that of the colonies. In this connexion it would be easy to exhibit a whole series of characteristic differences.'* If it was absolutely necessary to treat Algeria either as an assimilated colony, or as a part of France, it would have been much more consistent to treat her as a part of France. But happily the legislature is not reduced to such a dilemutna. It may take the position that Algeria is neither a part of France nor a colony, but a part of minor Africa, for which it is proper to estabhsh a special regime. New regulations are requisite. Let the colonies on the one side, Algeria on the other, make the best of their arguments. It will then remain for the impartiaHty of the national legislature to estabhsh just regulations to which their commercial relations may be submitted. The Application to Algeria and to the Colonies of the Com- mercial Agreements between France and Foreign Powers In deciding that foreign products imported into our colonies shall be submitted, in principle, to the same duties as if they were imported into France, article 3 of the law of January 11, 1892, Hmited itseK, in short, to universahzing the national tariff. From this it naturally follows that foreign powers, which would have in France the benefit of the minimum tariff, should also enjoy it in the assimilated colonies, as well as in Algeria. This solution offered no difficulty to the mind of the legislature of 1892. The decree of January 30, 1892, which authorized the apphcation of the minimum tariff to merchandise coming from Sweden and Norway, from Belgium, Switzerland, the Low Countries, Greece, and consequently all the powers enjoying most- favoured-nation treatment, declared in article 1 that the minimum tariff should be applied to these products, ' in THE THIRD REPUBLIC 123 France, including Algeria, beginning on February 1, 1892, and in the colonies, the French possessions and the pro- tectorate countries, under the conditions estabUshed by article 3.* It does not seem that in this text the legislator would have taken the trouble to include by name Algeria and the colonies, unless the need had been felt of estabUshing beyond cavil the basis for the application of the minimum tariff. In later texts of similar purport, the provision regarding Algeria and the colonies became a mere fonn of expression, the omission of which, if it occurred, mattered httle.'« Later, it was urged that it was perhaps extravagant thus to grant, freely, without any equivalent compensation, the benefit of the minimum tariff in the French colonies to powers that granted to French products advantages which were merely the equivalent of the concession of the minimum tariff in France proper. Hence arose a tendency to exclude the colonies from the scope of commercial agreements, or, at least, to base the grant of the minimum tariff in the colonies upon certain conditions or formaUties. A first manifestation of this tendency is met in the commercial convention of July 31, 1900, between France and Haiti. Article 1 of this agreement declares that the colonial con- sumption staples coming from Haiti shall have the benefit, on their importation into France and into Algeria, of the minimum customs duties ; and article 2 grants a Uke favour to products coming from France and from Algeria into the repubhc of Haiti. This intentional silence in regard to the French colonies leaves them outside of the agreement. The new commercial agreement with Haiti, January 31, 1907, observed the same reserve and expressed itself in identical terms. Haiti, therefore, offers the first instance of a country which has the benefit of the minimum tariff in France and in Algeria without enjoying it in the colonies. There were, no doubt, special reasons for thus Hmiting the effect of the agreement in the relations of France with 124 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY the republic of Haiti. , Nevertheless a precedent was given by this convention of 1900. Some years later commercial agreements signed with t he Balkan powers l eft the French colonies out. It seemed, no doubt, of no importance and somewhat childish to extend the benefit of the agreement to colonies with which the small countries of the Balkans had almost no business relations. In this way may be explained the provision of article 25 of the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation between France and Bulgaria, signed at Sophia, January 13, 1906 (promulgated by decree, January 13, 1907). This document reads as follows : The provisions of the present treaty shall be applicable to Algeria. It is, moreover, understood that they shall become apphcable to the French colonies or protectorate countries, for which the French government may demand the benefit of the treaty, two months after a notification to this effect shall have been addressed to the Bulgarian government by the representative of the French govern- ment at Sophia." An identical provision is found in article 22 of the commercial agreement of January 5, 1907, wit h Servia (promulgated by decree of November 7, 1907) and in article 15 of the treaty of conmierce and navigation between France and Roumania of March 6, 1907 (promulgated by decree of July 31, 1907). Thus it had become customary to distinguish between France and Algeria, on the one hand, and the colonies on the other. Even in a case where it is considered best to grant to the products of a certain country the benefit of the mini- mum tariff everywhere, this concession is confirmed by distinct provisions, some of which regard Algeria, and others the colonies. Thus the treaty of commerce signed with Switzerland, October 20, 1906 (promulgated by decree of November 21, 1906), contains an article, 25, paragraph 1 of which concerns Algeria, and paragraph 2 the colonies. The law of March 29, 1910, relative to the appHcation of the customs tariff to products coming from the United States of America and from Porto Rico was followed by two distinct THE THIRD REPUBUC 125 decrees : one, of March 29, concerning the grant of the minimum tariff in France and in Algeria, the other, of April 4, concerning the grant of the minimum tariff in the colonies. At the time of the negotiations with Portugal ^ the Portuguese colonies were intentionally left out, as well as the French colonies. Portugal limited herself to the inclusion in the agreement of ' the adjacent islands of Madeira, Porto Santo, and the Azores ', and France Umited itself to the inclusion of Algeria. The decree of February 20, 1911, thus granted to Portuguese products the benefit of the minimum tariff in France and in Algeria, without granting it in the colonies. The agreement of August 19, 1911, with Jayan o ffers the most striking example of the interests that may be at stake in including a particular colony in the agreement or in excluding it. At the time of this convention Japan refused to make the concessions demanded by France in favoiw of rice produced in Indo-China. It was natural under these conditions not to impose upon Indo-China the appUcation of an agreement from which she would derive no benefit. In consequence, article 19 of the agreement of Conunerce and Navigation of August 19, 1911 (promulgated by decree of February 28, 1912), reads as follows : The provisions of the present agreement are applicable to Algeria. They may later be extended as a whole, or in part, to the colonies, French possessions, or protectorates, by a declaration agreed to by the two governments. It is, moreover, understood that the present agreement is applicable to all the colonies and possessions of Japan. Later, under the terms of this provision, France, in a note inserted in the Official Journal of October 13, 1912, approved an extension of the agreement to a whole series of colonies enumerated in the said note. But neither Indo-China nor the estabHshments of Oceania figured in this series. Thus was estabUshed a new principle : that the grant of the privileges of the minimum tariff in France should be regarded as compensation for advantages accorded to the 126 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY products of France proper, while the grant of the privileges of the minimum tariff in the colonies should be regarded as compensation for advantages accorded to the products of those colonies. From this point it is only a step to a poHcy of separate agreements, some relating to the national domain, others, not to the colonies in general, but to the several colonies in particular. This step will doubtless be taken sooner or later. The Tariff Regime of Tunis. — ^The protectorate of France over Tunis is based upon the treaty signed at Bardo, May 12, 1881. The word protectorate does not even appear in the text of this treaty. It is met for the first time in the con- vention of Marsa of June 8, 1883, article 1 of which reads as follows : ' In order to facihtate for the French government the exercise of its protectorate, His Highness, the Bey of Tunis, pledges himself to carry out the administrative, judicial and financial reforms which the French government shall consider desirable.' Among the financial reforms was naturally the estabhshment of a new tariff regime. The new tariff regime of Tunis was in no way influenced by the tendencies toward assimilation that found general favour after 1883. This fact, which may be surprising to minds not famiHar with Tunisian questions, is easily explained. /The protectorate of Tunis was placed under the Ministry of V Foreign Affairs. Accordingly it was easier for it to escape , the influences which made themselves felt in ministerial (departments animated by a different spirit. Above a ll, the " protectorate system involved one important consequence : Tunisian legislation continued to be worked out on the spot imder the name of the Bey. Therefore it evolved, in an independent manner, largely in response to local necessities, \l One author ^^ has written that this legislative decentrahzation is ' the whole secret of the success of the Tunisian protec- torate '. The Tunisian legislator was in the best possible position to resist the selfish interests of the French producers. It was much easier to bring pressure to bear, in Paris, upon THE THIRD REPUBLIC 127 the making of laws and decrees concerning Algeria and the^ colonies. Finally, there must be added a reason which, during t he first fifteen years of the protectorate, would in itself have been decisive. Tunis was bound by the treaties which she had previously made with different foreign powers, and could not offer any advantages to French products without granting the same advantages to the products of these powers. It would no doubt be absurd to maintain that these powers could still claim the benefit of the con- cessions made by Tunis, that they could still avail them- selves of the most-favoured-nation principle to demand the same favours accorded by Tunis to France, after Tunis was placed under the French protectorate. But to put an end to this situation, it was necessary to obtain the consent of the governments interested. This was the object of the diplomatic negotiations that ended in the declarations of 1896 and of 1897. Austria-Hungary was the first to give her consent by the declaration of July 20, 1896 : Austria-Hungary declares that she renounces the right to invoke in Tunis the privileges of the capitulations, and she will abstain from demanding there, for her consuls and her nationals, other rights and privileges than those accorded to them in France, in virtue of the treaties existing between Austria-Hungary and France. Nor does Austria-Hungary expect to claim the benefits of the arrangements established or that shall be established in regard to the customs and navigation between France and her protectorate, Timis, provided that she shall continue to enjoy most-favoured- nation treatment in relation to all other powers. Italy,'* Russia,** Switzerland,*^ Germany,** Spain,*' Den- mark,** England,** Sweden and Norway,** the Low Coun- tries,*' and Greece ** very soon consented to this reform in almost identical terms. With only two of these powers, Italy and England, were the negotiations particularly difficult, and France was obhged to consent to certain restrictive conditions. With Italy, it was necessary to enter into an agreement that the new duties that might be estabUshed in Tunis should not be higher than those called 128 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY for in the minimum French tariff, with the exception of those mentioned in the tariff imder the nmnbers 88 and 110 (convention of September 26, 1896, art. 9).*' Even in the terms of the agreement, however, this engagement terminated on October 1, 1905. As far as Italy is concerned, Tunis has long since recovered her Hberty of action.^" England stipu- lated that her cotton goods should not be made to pay a duty higher than five per cent of their value at the port where they are unloaded.^^ This provision was to remain in force up to December 31, 1912, and, after that date, until the end of the sixth month, counting from the day upon which one of the contracting parties should have notified the other of its intention to terminate the agreement (agree- ment of September 18, 1897, art. 2). Since this arrangement has not been denounced by France, it continues to exist. The denunciation of this article 2 of the arrangement is one of the demands of the protectionist party in France.^^ With the exception of these two restrictions, Tunis had in (1897 Recovered her Hberty of action in regard to customs maHers. She very soon availed herself of it to give herself a new tariff system. This was the object of two decrees dated May 2, 1898. Three ideas sum up the spirit that inspired them : (1) to give privileged treatment to French products ; (2) not to diminish the receipts indispensable to the maintenance of budgetary equihbrium ; and (3) not to distm-b the business relations between Tunis and the countries with which she had always carried on trade. These I C ideas were moderate and practical. The first of these decrees fixed the duties levied in Tunis on imports and exports. Import duties are indicated in list A, which contains 827 numbers. Some are specific, others ad valorem. The latter are usually eight per cent, as in the old tariff. A rather large number of products enter free. On the other hand, there are some prohibitions made for sanitary or pohce reasons. Export duties are indicated in fist B. These seem destined THE THIRD REPUBLIC 129 gradually to disappear. Their number was considerably reduced in 1898 and some have also been abolished since. These duties are all specific and the unit on which they are laid is 100 kilogrammes. At present they fall only on trinkets (2fr. 55), washed sponges (20 fr.), unwashed (10 fr.), the residuum of olives (35 c), olive oil (6 fr., with the addition of a tax of 1 fr. 50 which did not exist at first except in certain districts " and which has been generahzed by a decree of December 31, 1909), oil from the residuum of olives (1 fr. 50), fresh ohves (4fr.), goats and kids (6fr.), sheep and lambs (5fr.), edits of less than four years and a half (50 fr.), fiUies and mares of less than six years (75 fr.), fresh fish (2fr.), and cuttle-fish (12 fr.). As a general rule, products entering Tunis from France and Algeria pay the duties registered in fist A of the decree of 1898. By exception, a certain number of them ente r Tunis free. The second decree of May 2, 1898, gives a fist of these "n articles. These exceptions concern chiefly five animals, sugars, / iron goods, yams and textiles, embroideries and clothing, machines and mechanical apphances, metal-work, &c. Wines i from fresh grapes pay only ten per cent ad valorem. Foreign | merchandise, nationalized by the payment of duties in France or in Algeria, that are afterwards imported into Tunis, do not receive the benefit of these advantages. Two observations are required to complete this statement of the tariff regime of Tunis : 1. A decree of January 28, 1898, still in force, enumerates (art. 1) certain objects which are admitted free without distinction as to origin : the baggage and effects of travellers, household belongings of persons who come to establish themselves in Tunis, tools and agiicultural implements brought by colonists, trousseaus, objects intended for collections in the museums and libraries. 2. A decree of May 27, 1895, regulates the conditions for admission under bond into Tunis. Special decrees indicate the products the admission in bond of which is authorized. 1569-15 K / 130 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY These products are oil-cakes of colza (decree of June 21, 1896) and castor-oil beans (decree of April 22, 1900) destined to furnish material for the oil factories during the dull season, lumber destined for the making of packing cases, empty casks and sacks (decree of July 8, 1908), the cocoa and sugar destined for the fabrication of chocolate (decree of May 24, 1911). The Position of the Products of Tunis on their Importation into France. — -At first the products of Tunis were treated by the French customs hke foreign products. They_did not even enjoy most-favoured-nation treatment. Thus Tunisian oils paid a diity offourTrancs per 100 kilos, while oils coming from Spain paid only three francs. This situation, which was accepted without question before 1881, became abso- lutely anomalous upon the establishment of the protectorate. The first French colonists, counting on the fact that more natural commercial relations would soon be established, had proceeded boldly with the development of their interests. But one year passed after another, and the expected changes failed to take place. The French market remained closed to the products of the colonists. Indeed, it was to the advantage of the Tunisian producer to ship his products to France by way of a foreign country, so far was he from enjoying privileged treatment. Not until 1890 did the colonists succeed in making them- selves heard. T he French law of 1 890 gave them partial satisfaction. This law admitted free into France, not, indeed, all Tunisian products, but the mostjmpojtant ones. These were ' grain, oHve oil, oil from the residuum of oHves and the residuum itself, horses, asses, mules, cattle, goats, and pigs, fowls Hving and dead, game hving and dead ' (art. 1). Wine from fresh grapes, under 11-9 degrees, was admitted on payment of a reduced duty of sixty centimes per hectoHtre (art. 2). Other products were subjected to the lowest rates payable on similar foreign products (art. 3). The word ' foreign ' should be emphasized : Tunisian pro- THE THIRD REPUBUC 131 ducts did not enjoy the advantages granted in France to colonial products according to list E annexed to the law of 1892. Article 5 hedged these favours about with rigorous con- ditions in order to prevent foreign products from entering France via Tunis. These conditions were five in number : 1. Tunisian products were to be imported directly into France and without putting into a foreign port. They might touch only at Corsican or Algerian ports. 2. They were required to leave Tunis only by certain ports named for that purpose. These ports, eleven in number, were those of Tunis, La Goulette, Bizerte, Sousse, Souissa, Monastir, Mehdia, Sfax, Gabes, Djerba, and Tabarka. 3. Tunisian products were to be accompanied by a certi- ficate of origin given by the civil controller and were to be viseed on shipment by a collector of the customs of French nationahty. 4. They had to be carried by French ships. 5. Every year, the amount of each product that might be imported into France free of duty was to be fixed by decree of the President of the Repubhc. This last condition has created serious difficulties. Agri- cultural production in North Africa fluctuates very con- siderably with variations in the rainfall. At times it has happened that the quantities fixed by the annual decree proved to be insufficient to permit Tunis to sell in France the excess of her production over the needs of local con- sumption. On such occasions the government might issue a decree increasing the quantities admitted free. This occurred in 1904. A decree of July 11, 1903, had fixed at 800,000 quintals the amount of wheat, and at 450,000 quintals the amount of barley that might be admitted free of duty into France from July 1, 1903, to July 1, 1904. A second decree, of May 5, 1904, increased these quantities, for the same period, by 350,000 quintals for wheat and 200,000 K2 132 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY quintals for barley. This procedure brought forth energetic protests from certain members of parliament. They asserted that the government was authorized to make only one decree annually for each product and dananded a promise that this interpretation of the law should be followed in the futm-e (motion of MM. Debussy, €astillard, and PHchon, in the Chamber of Deputies, session of May 20, 1904). Under the conditions the demands of the French parlia- ment were not unreasonable. The intention of the authors of the law of 1890 had been to permit Tunis to sell in France the excess of her production over her own consumption. But the Tunisians had every reason for attempting to sell in France all the wheat they produced, leaving their own consumption to be covered by foreign suppUes. Between the price of wheat in Timis and the price of wheat in France there was, in fact, a difference equal to the sum- total of the duty of seven francs collected by the French customs, and no corresponding duty was levied in the protectorate. It was not even necessary for the Tunisians to buy wheat from a foreign country ; they had only to import from Marseilles flour manufactured in bond from foreign wheat. In order to break up this abuse, the government adopted a twofold reform : (1) It admitted into France, free from duty, aU cereals and their derivatives of Tunisian origin, under reservation only of the formalities called for by article 5 of the law of July 19, 1890 ; (2) At the same time, and as a condition to this privilege, it stipulated that similar foreign products, on their importation into the protectorate, should pay the duties of the French minimum tariff. This reform was put into effect by the French law of July 19, 1904, and by the decree of the Bey of July 9 of the same year. A similar measure was taken in 1907 for the pm-pose of increasing the quantity of beans from Tunis that might be admitted free into France. A decree of November 27, 1907, THE THIRD REPUBLIC 133 established the rule that French beans should be admitted free into the protectorate and laid upon beans of foreign origin imported into Tunis duties equivalent to those of the French minimum tariff. These measures are remarkable on account of the tendency which they reveal. They constitute a first step in the direction of tariff assimilation. To estabhsh assimilation, it would be sufficient to generalize these provisions, which have hitherto remained exceptional. CHAPTER VI NEW TENDENCIES. THE DOCTRINE OF COLONIAL CUSTOMS PERSONALITY Causes of the Evolution of Ideas. — On the enactment of the law of January 11, 1892, it seemed as if the cause of the colonies was definitively lost. The iniquitous regime created by this law raised in the capital only rare and isolated pro- tests which remained without echo.^ PubHc opinion took no interest in reparation for an injustice of which it knew nothing. Not until 1906 was the reform campaign undertaken, the ultimate triumph of which we now have reason to predict. The causes for the change in public opinion are diverse and manifold. But the essential reason for the appearance of the campaign for reform is found in the fact that the colonial party has become more numerous and powerful, and has become convinced that success is not impossible. In 1892 this party hardly existed. In 1894 merchants interested in colonial commerce founded, for the defence of their own interests and for that of the colonial cause in general, the French Colonial Union. The Colonial Union soon became an active centre of action and of agitation. It estabhshed an organ [The Colonial Fortnightly),^ for the defence of the new ideas that it represented . The members learned to know each other, to exchange ideas, to unite their efforts. The Colonial Union profited largely by the personal influence of the men whom it had the wisdom to place at its head. It overcame initial prejudices, organized congresses, and secured active friends in parhament and in the press. Among the most influential men in the Chambers there are many to-day who are devoted to the colonial cause. The colonial party has not only its own journals, but also has access to some of the w NEW TENDENCIES ~ 135 great dailies ' and finds expression for all the activities it can put into motion. Moreover, external circumstances lent themselves admirably to this campaign in favour of the revision of the colonial tariff regime. y After the creation of the Ministry for the Colonies in 1894, ^ the doctrine of assimilation lost its former supremacy and began to fall into a growing disrepute. As always happens, the reaction went to extremes. From 1878 to 1885 the assimilation poUcy had carried everything before it, and in the colonial congress of 1889 the idea of assimilation still prevailed. But in the congress of 1900 a change of vipw n\ fidp its appearance. After this congress the prevailing view was not only that the colonies should not be given the same treat- ment as the home territory, but further, that they should not all be treated ahke. Each colony, it was urged, has needs pecuhar to itself and should be subjected to a particular regime specially adapted to it. Assimilation was no longer the magic word, representing an ideal to pursue. It had ceased to be fashionable, and men hesitated to avow faith in it. Accordingly, what was once a triumphant formula has now come to be a reproach. The first pages of the report presented by M. Jules Harmand upon the revision of the colonial tariff regime to the congress of the old colonies in 1909 are, from this point of view, quite characteristic. In his view, it was less a question of a new reform to be estab- Ushed than a new battle to be won over the defenders of assimilation. After showing that we are tending more and more towards autonomy, he expressed the conviction that ' the ground gained would not again be lost ', that ' the first successes promise others ', and he added, * that the tariff question presents one of the most efficacious weapons avail- able to make a breach in the superannuated edifice of our colonial organization.' Again, the irony of fate had baffled the hopes of the legis- lator of 1892. As we have seen above, the legislator regarded the assimilated colonies as the model upon which the other 136 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY f: colonies would soon be patterned. But the comparative experience of some twenty years had turned to the confusion of the legislator. The most important of the non-assimilated colonies, the French possessions in western Africa, had, as a result of various causes, developed with a marvellous rapidity. This colony has caused the capital but a minimum of anxiety and expense, and has become the favourite in pubUc opinion. On the other hand, the two most important of the ^assimilated colonies have not had the same good fortune. Madagascar, at first the subject of immoderate popular over- valuation, has fallen into equally immoderate disesteem. This colony has developed slowly and seems to promise only a modest future. Indo-China has always remained a source of I uneasiness. There exists an iU-concealed fear that this I colony may in the end escape from us. It is a curious fact that the work of the governors-general who have succeeded one another in Madagascar and in Indo-China has been much debated ; that of MM. Roume and Ponty in western Africa has practically escaped criticism. Consequently there has appeared a general tendency to say that it is French West Africa that should serve as an example, and that it would be well to imitate the poHcy followed in this part of our colonial domain. The appHcation of this mode of reasoning to com- mercial matters inevitably leads to a condemnation of tariff assimilation. Finally, experience has shown that, from many points of view, tariff assimilation involved serious embarrassments. The pohcy of protection pursued by France in her colonies had become a powerful argument invoked by foreign govern- ments seeking to raise objections to the growth of our colonial domain. The fear that the door would be closed caused Europe to dread to see the key in the hands of France. The tariff pohcy followed by the other powers in their colonies was perceptibly less strict than that of France. This put the French government in a bad position, particularly in its discussion of African questions with Germany. Accordingly NEW TENDENCIES 137 it began to be urged that it would be much better to show greater Hberality and to arouse fewer prejudices. With time, tariff assimilation appeared to be a formida too narrow, of a nature capable of producing unforeseen conse- quences, regretted even by those who had favoured the policy. Under the shelter of our general customs tariff, new industries had been created in Indo-China. These industries were capable of entering into competition with vsimilar French industries, and under another policy they would not have been established. Again, assimilation had led to the uncom- pensated extension to the colonial market of the advantages granted in the national market to the powers with which France had signed new commercial agreements. Thus the protectionist party found itself caught in its own trap. It was therefore forced to recognize that tariff assimilation was not the ideal formula, responding to aU needs, and to admit that there might be something to improve in it. Such are the general reasons that have determined the course of public opinion during recent years. Those who sought to remedy the injustice committed by the legislature of 1892 have turned their efforts in two directions, not opposed, but different. Some have demanded the abolition ' of the reduced duties collected in France on colonial com- modities. The more ambitious reformers have brought forward the idea of ' tariff personality ' ♦ for the colonies. The Abolition of the ' Half- Duty ' on Colonial Prodtccis The abolition of the ' half-duty ' on the secondary colonial commodities has been demanded with special insistence by the inhabitants of the old colonies (Antilles and Reunion) and by their representatives in parHament. The latter have ♦ ' Personnalitd douani^re.' The phrase has no exact English equivalent, but its content is readily intelligible. It is applicable to a system adjusted \ to the specific needs and interests of each colony, and differs from tariff autonomy only in that it derives its authority from central instead of local sources. — ^Trans. -I 138 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY advanced this very simple argument : Let us be logical ; the colonies that support the cost of tariff assimilation should have the advantages of it. Since French products enter the colonies free of duty, the products of the colonies should Hke- wise enter France free of duty. If it is impossible to aboHsh the duty on colonial sugar which is levied to countervail the excise taxes collected on domestic sugar, it is at least possible to abolish the half-duty levied on coffee, cocoa, and the other secondary colonial commodities. It is highly offensive to the inhabitants of the colonies that they should be ' treated as French when they buy and as half -French when they sell '.* Numerous bills with this object in view have been presented in the Chamber of Deputies by the representatives of the old colonies. The first of these was the bill proposed by Isaac, Deproge, and Caesar Laine (extra session of 1893, sitting of November 25, annex 46). A second was the Guieysse bill on the abohtion of duties on coffees (extra session of 1904, sitting of December 14, annex 561). Again, a resolution was offered, signed by a number of deputies (ordinary session of 1907, sitting of January 18, annex 667), and another by Archam- baud (extra session of 1907, sitting of November 21, annex 1322). None of these propositions came to anything, but the tenacity with which the idea was taken up again by each legislatiu-e was decidedly significant. The idea was again brought forward in 1909, in the Con- gress of the Old Colonies, where it was natural that it should receive a very favourable reception. The government appropriated it, and the bill on the estabHshment of a colonial tariff regime, introduced in the Chamber of Deputies on December 12, 1912, contained, among other provisions, an article exempting from all customs duties, on their importa- tion into France, products originating in the assimilated colonies, with the exception of sugars and molasses, other than that destined for distillation, and peppers. On account of the difficulty of carrying the project as a whole, the govern- ment decided, some months later, to separate from it, with v^ NEW TENDENCIES 139 the consent of the commission of customs, the provisions relating to the exemption of colonial consumption staples from the tariff duties. With respect to these provisions there appeared to be general agreement ; accordingly it was believed that they would be voted without opposition.* As a fact, the bill thus amended was passed without difficulty ; it became a law on August 5, 1913. The readiness with which this reform was adopted is ~ explained by the following reason. The protectionist party judged it good policy not to oppose it. The Society of Agriculturists of France, which is in our country one of the citadels of protection, had even announced in its meeting of February 24, 1913, an opinion favourable to the project. The protectionists reahzed that it was impossible to avoid making certain concessions to the colonial party. They hoped to disarm it by granting it cordiaUy this first conces- sion, and counted that the matter would stop at that. The abohtion of the half-duty was besides a logical consequence / of the assimilation policy, and was in no way a contradiction of the doctrines of protection. Quite the contrary, this abohtion resulted in creating a strongly protected position in the French market for commodities that were in no way in competition with European products. Was this not the best way to prevent those who would be benefited by it from criticizing the system of protection? Finally, by granting this favour to the products of the assimilated colonies alone, the protectionists counted on checking the development of colonial opinion in the direction of ' tariff personaUty '. The fear of losing the benefit of exemption from the half -duty might be expected to deter the colonists from demanding reUef from the regime of assimilation. — ^ The abohtion of the half-duty, which no one had dared to oppose in the Chambers (the partisans of conunercial liberty could not attack the colonists, who were their aUies), did not escape certain objections from the press on the part of the economists and financiers of the mother countrv. To the / 140 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY financiers this abolition appeared to be a future menace to the public finances. For the present, to be sure, the reduc- tion in the receipts of pubHc revenue would not be very serious, since the old colonies provided France with only a very small part of the colonial commodities consumed. In 1912 the duties collected on the coffees of the French colonies amounted to 1,818,747 francs, and the duties on cocoa to 807,692 francs. The whole sacrifice thus amounted to two and a half millions in round numbers. But what would happen in the future ? Let it be supposed that the cultivation of the secondary staples would remain what it is to-day in the old colonies. In such case, if these coimtries should remain speciaHzed to a single product, there would be little gain in the abolition of the half-duty. The number of producers benefiting by this aboUtion would be too few. On the other hand, let it be supposed that the production of coffee, artificially encouraged, would again rise to importance in our old colonies. French colonial conunodities would gradually supplant foreign colonial commodities in the French market. What would then become of the revenues derived from foreign coffees (147,775,901 francs in 1912) and from foreign cocoa (46,975,600 francs in 1912) ? Let us make an extreme assmnption. Let us suppose that finally foreign colonial commodities are completely supplanted in the French market by similar commodities from the French colonies : this would mean an annual deficit of 200,000,000 of francs in the future budgets. It was fiuiher urged by the financiers that it was natural and reasonable that colonial commodities, such as coffee, cocoa, tea, or vaniUa, should be subject to a consumption tax for the same reason as wine or beer. The half-duty levied up to this time on these commodities was not in reaHty anything else. This consmnption tax was, indeed, collected by the administration of customs, but this was because the customs administration was best fitted for the work. This circumstance should not cause us to lose sight of the real character of this tax. NEW TENDENCIES 141 The liberal economists, on their side, objected to the extreme protection which the aboUtion of the half-duty would give colonial commodities. Differences in favour of the colonial producers of 104 francs per 100 kilos, on cocoa, of 136 francs on coffee, of 208 francs on tea, of 416 francs on vanilla — ^are these not excessive ? Henceforth the colonial producer would be directly interested in the maintenance of the exorbitant duties whose abatement is so desirable in the interest of the home consumer. This will explain why some of the best friends of the colonial cause (notably M. Paul Leroy-BeauUeu) • viewed with regret a reform which they believed to be undesirable. Their fear is that this first success may cause the abandonment of the movement for more general reform. But the colonists have regarded it as a prelude to new victories. They hope that their protectionist adversaries, who have beheved it best to retreat at this first attack, will not be able to resist a second attack. Aspirations towards Tariff Personality in the Colonies * Tariff PersonaHty ' is the new formula which has been put forward in recent years by the adversaries of assimilation. They have purposely avoided speaking of tariff autonomy. The abuse of tariff autonomy by the Councils-General of Reunion and of the Antilles, under the senatus-consultimoi of 1866, had left an unpleasant and disquieting impression. By demanding tariff personaUty and not autonomy, the adver- saries of the law of 1892 wished to show clearly that they were not demanding an increase of power in regard to the customs for the Councils-General, but simply the establish- ment of a special tariff regime for each colony, while leaving to the central power the function of working out the reform. The idea was formulated for the first time at the meeting of the Colonial Congress held in the month of September 1906, on the occasion of the Colonial Exposition at Marseilles. 142 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY Upon the report of M. Adrien Artaud, member of the Chamber of Commerce of Marseilles, the congress adopted the following resolution submitted to it by the third section : The Section declares : That the law of January 11, 1892, has not accomplished the desired customs unification of the mother country and the colonial territories ; that it has operated very imperfectly and has varied in its effects from colony to colony, in respect to the development of French exports to the colonies. That, for the natives as well as for Europeans, it has increased the cost of living in our possessions and has consequently injured their production. That the abolition of the customs receipts in the colonies has necessitated, in order to maintain the balance in the local budgets, increased rates of wharfage, and the establishment of direct taxes or of monopolies that have profoundly disturbed the economic life of our distant possessions. It recognizes, in regard to the free admission, partial or total, of colonial products in France, that the logical consequence of the law of January 11, 1892, estabUshing a tariff union between France and her colonies, should be total exemption, that is to say, the free exchange of products between the colonies and the mother country. It declares that export duties constitute an antiquated form of revenue collection, which checks the development of exportation, that is to say, the expansion and prosperity of the countries subject to these duties. It concludes that the best tariff regime would : 1. Renounce all unification and systematic centralization, as the experience of the application of the law of 1892 has shown that - such a policy is impracticable. 2. Abandon altogether the false principle of the economic sub- ordination of the colonies to the mother country by recognizing that the real interest of the mother country lies in the prosperity of the colonies. 3. Decree the autonomy of each colony or group of colonies, from the economic standpoint, and regulate the tariff regime of each colony or group of colonies in the way best suited to their interests, under the following essential forms and conditions : {a) The right of the colony to urge the measures and taxes judged by her to be the most favourable for the development of her wealth ; (fi) The granting of these measures by the central government. NEW TENDENCIES 143 under reser\'ation of its general interests, by a decree rendered in the form of an administrative order ; (c) The fixing of a suitable duration for the regime so established, so as to permit the measures to take full effect and to permit the parties interested to derive the greatest advantage from them ; 4. Group the small colonies in general governments, so as to permit them to escape from purely local influences in urging the measures and taxes most favourable for the development of their wealth. These resolutions of the congress of Marseilles sum up clearly the demands that the colonial party has since renewed, on every opportunity, with extraordinary insistence. In the month of August 1907 the Colonial Congress of Bordeaux, after a report by M. Milhe-Pontingon on the revision of the tariff regime, expressed the wish : * that action might be taken either by the Ministry of the Colonies, or by the French Colonial Union, or by both, together with the local administrations, the Councils-General or Local, the Chambers of Commerce or of Agriculture, and the professional associations of the colonies, towards instituting an investiga- tion of the results of the application to the colonies of the regime instituted by the law of January 11, 1892, and towards determining the basis for the tariff regime most favourable to the economic development of our colonies.* Then, * taking up again the views sustained and the resolutions adopted by the Colonial Congress of Marseilles in September 1906,' he declared : (a) That the true interest, material and moral, of the mother country lies in the prosperity of her colonies ; (6) That each colony or group of colonies should freely formulate or adopt the regime which best suits its own interests. The question was taken up a third time in the Congress of the Old Colonies held in the month of October 1909. It was the subject of a remarkable report by M. Jules Harmand. The terms employed were more urgent : The Congress : 1. Disapproves of the application to the colonies of the law of January 11, 1892, as useless and as prejudicial to the interests both of the mother country and of its possessions ; 144 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY 2. Considers, in the matter of the admission, free of duty, partial or total, of the colonial products into France, that the necessary consequence of the law of January 11, 1892, establishing a tariff union between France and her colonies, should have been total exemption, that is to say the free exchange of all products between the colonies and the mother country, 3. Utters the wish that there may be granted, to each establish- ment and to each group of establishments, the right and the means of discussing their customs tariffs with the mother country ; 4. Resolves that the special customs tariff in each colony, after ratification by the government of the Republic, be estabUshed for a period of at least twelve years ; 5. Recalls to mind, expressly, the resolutions adopted by the congress of Marseilles in 1906 and of Bordeaux in 1907 and reaffirms them.' The Congress of the Old Colonies adopted a resolution that the French Colonial Union should take the initiative of creating a grouping of the different colonial associations of the mother country and of the colonies, as well as of the different bodies formed for the purpose of representing and defending the economic interests of the colonies. The object of this grouping was to secure from the public powers the revision of the colonial tariff regime. In execution of this resolution, an Inter-Colonial Federation was formed on February 25, 1910, M. Paul Deschanel presiding. The Congress of Eastern Africa was held in Paris in October 1911. The question of the reform of the tariff regime was not the subject of a very thorough examination. The Con- gress, however, indicated its opinion ' by declaring the adherence of Madagascar ' to the reform policy. But in the Congress for the Defence and the Development of External Coromerce held in Paris in the month of June 1912, the question of the tariff regime of the colonies again gave occasion for thorough discussion. The resolutions adopted by this congress, upon the report of M. Adrien Artaud, reaffirm the resolutions adopted by the preceding congresses. As a matter of fact, the commercial centres showed them- selves no less in earnest than the colonial interests. The NEW TENDENCIES 145 Chamber of Commerce of Havre called for the abandonment of the colonial regime instituted in 1892. The Chamber of Commerce of Lyon, in a more moderate way, also pronounced in favour of a more liberal policy. The Chambers of Com- merce of Marseilles and of Paris declared themselves very distinctly in favour of tariff personality. The opinion of the Chamber of Commerce of Paris, which was especially impor- tant, was carefully drawn up and very cleariy put : ' Tariff assimilation has been as dangerous as political assimilation. . . . The regime of 1892 has checked the development of the colonies and has impoverished them.' The Chamber of Commerce of Paris concluded by demanding that the colonies be granted the initiative in the matter of their tariffs, under the control of the central government. The public powers could not remain insensible to this current of opinion. After the congress of Bordeaux, M. Milles-Lacroix, Minister of the Colonies, in a circular of January 28, 1908, ordered an inquest upon the results of the application of the law of 1892 to the colonies. A decree of February 16, 1909, instituted an extra-parliamentary com- mission to analyse the replies elicited by the inquest. This commission, which was from the first criticized in colonial circles on the ground that it was chiefly composed of officials, worked rather slowly. Finally, it drew up the terms of a new circular (of June 21, 1910), which was addressed with a pre- cise and detailed list of questions to aU the colonies and to the different groups, both in the mother country and in the colonies. But the commission, pressed to finish its work, decided to offer its conclusions without wfiiting for the results of this inquest. The reporter of the commission, M. Carriere, defended the maintenance of the principle of assimilation, and proposed only some modifications. But very soon the replies from the colonies and from the Chambers of Conunerce began to arrive. They were in complete opposition to the conclusions of the report. Thereupon the Inter-Colonial Federation 1669 as T. V 146 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY redoubled its efforts to exert influence upon the commission of customs of the Chamber of Deputies, which was deeply impressed, in spite of itself, by the whole series of reports sent to it. On April 3, 1911, M. Thiery delivered a remark- able discourse at the tribune of the Chamber, in favour of the revision of the colonial tariff regime. It has been said of this discourse that ' it broke the spell that had made men believe that the theory of protection was invulnerable '.^ On May 18, 1911, the commission of the colonial tariff regime was reconstituted on a larger plan by the Minister of the Colonies, M. Messimy. The Senate reporter of the colonial budget of 1911, M. Gervais, dwelt at length upon the necessity for a reform. The matter of greatest urgency was to come to the assis- tance of the little colony of Saint-Pierre and Miquelon, com- pletely ruined by the application of the law of January 11, 1892. A bill withdrawing this colony from the list of assimi- lated colonies, laid before the Chamber on March 27, 1911, was voted on July 3, 1911. In the Senate it became the subject of a report by M. Meline, who did not dare to oppose it, and it was adopted in the sitting of November 7, 1912. It became the law of November 11 following, making the first breach in the edifice erected twenty years before. Some weeks later the government laid before the Chamber of Deputies (sitting of December 12) an important bill relative to the establishment of the colonial tariff regime.^ This bill contained two essential provisions. The first related to the abolition of the half-duty on the secondary colonial commodities. We have seen above ^° that this provision, separated from the main project, became the law of August 5, 1913. The second provision proposed to place Gabo n and New Caledonia in the group of non-assimilated colonies. It also added to this group the islands of Kerguelen, Saint-Paul, and Amsterdam, which were not subject to any formal regulations. The provision relative to these islands offered only a very mild interest and was of a nature to raise no NEW TENDENCIES 147 difficulty. No one thought of demanding the assimilation of small islands, hardly inhabited, lost in the southern part of the Indian Ocean, whose commerce amounted to nothing. But the provision relative to Gabon and New Caledonia was very important. The government admitted that, at least so far as these two colonies were concerned, the l^slature of 1892 had taken the wrong road. The official explana- tion of the bill, while not attacking the principle of tariff assimilation, proved that it had been a mistake to apply this principle to these two colonies. It invoked the aid of geographical reasons : for New Caledonia, isolation and the remoteness of the colony ; for Gabon, the anomaly there is in including this colony among the assimilated colonies, when all the other French territories of western Africa and of Equa- torial Africa appear in the group of non-assimilated colonies. Thus, without raising the question of principle, and without taking part in the controversy which divided the supporters and adversaries of the law of 1892, the government concluded, for reasons excellent in themselves, partially to abandon the system of tariff assimilation. It is clear that it was absurd to assimilate a colony situated in the antipodes, like New Caledonia. And the development of our African empire proves incontestably that all the reasons, heretofore making impossible the assimilation of French West Africa, apply equally to Gabon : the impossibility of guarding such ex- tensive £uid ill- defined land frontiers, and the necessity of avoiding all measures that might entail the diversion of the commercial intercourse between Europe and the interior of the African continent to the ports of the neighbouring foreign colonies — an intercourse now naturally carried on by the ports of our colonies. The bill contained, moreover, certain secondary provisions having as an object the filling of various gaps, of putting an end to juridical difficulties or of doing away with illogical pro- visions. The greater part of these secondary provisions was pervaded by a liberal spirit — ^for instance, that authorizing L2 148 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY certain modifications in the principle of direct importation. A few, however, were rather of a nature to please the pro- tectionists, such as article 3, the second paragraph of which repealed article 30 of the law of May 16, 1863, relative to admission in bond." It is tru e that this bill has not yet come up for discussion. It has been delayed by the slowness, occasionally intentional, with which the commissions have worked. But, neverthe- less, the introduction of the bill constitutes an important step. It would be rash to affirm that the biU will be voted just as it stands. But it seems now, to far-seeing minds, that the force of events will lead, after a brief delay, to the dis- assimilation of Gabon. This second breach once effected, resistance will become more difficult for the defenders of the law of 1892. That is just what the protectionists fear. The Opposition and the Demands of the Protectionists The campaign in favour of Colonial tariff personality, carried on in this way by the French Colonial Union, by the Colonial Institute of Marseilles and by a whole constellation of publicists devoted to the colonial cause,^ encountered a stubborn resistance in the camp of the protectionists. The protectionists were not content to limit themselves to a negative opposition ; they took the offensive and demanded new restrictions. But these reactionary attempts have down to the present remained without success. This, how- ever, is easily understood. The advantages won by the protectionists in 1892 were so considerable that it became difficult afterwards to push them further. Nevertheless, they have tried to do so. The protectionists soon became alarmed over the com- petition with the national industry of the new industries established in the colonies. Such competition, in their eyes, is intolerable. ' In a good colonial organization,' wrote M. Melinei,^ ' colonial production should limit itself to NEW TENDENCIES 149 furnishing the mother country with raw materials, or pro- ducts not similar to those we produce. But if colonial production renounces this fimction and seeks to enter into a ruinous competition with us, it becomes a dangerous adversary.' Starting out with this idea, the protectionists demanded the establishment of a colonial licence designed to protect the European manufacturer, who bears heavy taxes and who pays very high wages, against the competition of the colonial manufacturer who has nothing to pay but some light taxes and who can find on the spot cheap native labour. This idea is developed in the official explanation of a bill laid before the Chamber of Deputies on July 9, 1900, by MM. Melinejf, Boucher and Krantz.** But the authors of this bill, realizing that this excessive demand had no chance of being granted, limited themselves to asking for two more modest reforms. First, they asked that a limit should be put upon the application of the general r^ulation according to which products of French colonies are admitted free of duty into other French colonies. This regulation should be applied,' they said, only to the products of assimilated colonies. As for the products of non-assimilated colonies, it would be logical to grant them simply most-favoured-nation treat- ment, which is what they enjoy in the national market. Exemption from duty is the result of assimilation ; the benefit of this exemption should be reserved for the colonies bearing the costs of assimilation. What the authors of the bill were really seeking was to keep the manufactured products of French India from the Indo-Chinese market. The idea that industries, established at Pondichery or at Chandemagor by foreign capitalists, could enter freely into competition, in the Indo-Chinese market, with the national industry was intolerable to them. They believed that they had found a fissure in the work created by them in 1892 ; it must be stopped up as soon as possible. They asked, in the second place, that Senegal and Guinea r \y 150 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY be classed among the assimilated colonies. The growing importance of the market of French West Africa rendered particularly desirable, in their eyes, the appUcation of the national customs tariff to this part of our colonial empire. If, in the Ivory Coast and in Dahomey, international agree- ments, constituting a veritable bondage for France, rendered assimilation impossible, at least the poUcy could be applied in the parts of West Africa where the French government had retained its liberty of action. S ince that ti me, the protectionists have formulated two other requests. They demand, first, that the ad valorem duties in operation in the colonies be replaced by specific v/^ duties. The ad valorem dLwiie^, they say, offer to the national producers a guarantee that is always insufficient, and often illusory. The invoices, according to which such duties are collected, are fictitious or at least represent heavy imder- valuations. Even when such duties are collected on a basis of official valuations, the discretion enjoyed by the colonial administration to take, as a base, prices that are too low, permits it to reduce surreptitiously the protection due to the French producer. Finally, the protectionists have demanded that the exceptions made in the national tariff in the assimilated colonies be granted, hereafter, not by a decree but by a law. M. Meline considers that this is a guarantee which must be / obtained. To require the intervention of the Chamber of Deputies and of the Senate seems to him to be the best way ' of thwarting the wishes of the colonies. The slowne ss of parliamentary procedure, the indifference of the Chambers in regard to colonial questions, would thus become trump- cards in the game of the protectionists. All these demands are found condensed in a resolution adopted on May 19, 1913, by the Association of French Industry and Agriculture,^^ the president of which, down to the present, has been M. Meline, and which has been in our coimtry the citadel of protection. This resolution is worded as follows : y NEW TENDENCIES 151 The Association of French Industry and Agriculture In view of the fact that the national production, in compensation for the burdens which it bears and for the contribution which it makes to colonial expenses, has a right in all our colonics to a generously preferential treatment ; and In view of the fact that French industry, having provided itself with equipment with the view to providing for our colonial markets, has the right to count upon a security which it cannot have so long as the regime of decrees continues, which leaves to arbitrary administrative action the power to determine the exceptions to the minimum tariff for the so-called assimilated colonies, and the power of establishing tariffs for the other colonies ; and In view of the fact that the danger of such a procedure has been recently proven by a proposed decree concerning Madagascar having a no less serious object than the lowering of the duties on cotton fabrics and on certain metallurgical products to fifty per cent of the duties of the minimum national tariff, and the suspension in addition, during five years, of all taxation upon thirty- three articles connected with mechanical constructions ; and In view of the fact that the bill relative to the establishment of a colonial tariff regime presented on December 18, 1912, by the Minister of the Colonies does not take sufficient account of the preceding considerations ; and In view of the fact that, contrary to certain assertions, the r^me of assimilation has been, on the whole, favourable to the colonies subjected to it, since the balance of trade between the mother country and the colonies runs in favour of the latter ; Resolves : 1. That no colony should be withdrawn from the existing group of assimilated colonies ; 2. That the regime of assimilation, with a maximum-minimum tariff, should, on the contrary be progressively extended to all the colonies where its application is considered possible ; 8. That, meanwhile, wherever international agreements permit, the duties on foreign merchandise on their importation into our colonies should be raised to a level capable of insuring to French industry the protection necessary. 4. That the ad valorem duties, as a permanent source of fraud, should wherever they exist be replaced by specific duties ; 5. That hereafter the legislative power alone should be com- petent to determine the exceptions to the minimum tariff and to establish all colonial customs duties. 152 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY The opposition thus inaugurated by the defenders of the regime instituted in 1892 has not as yet amounted to any- thing. Indeed, the protectionists did not in reality have great confidence in its success. No doubt, they would be satisfied if they could maintain their present position. But an important event has occurred that inflicted a serious blow upon the policy of tariff assimilation. France has extended her protection over Morocco and in this new field there could be no question of applying the national customs tariff. The Open Door in Morocco At a time when it could not be foreseen that the protec- torate of France would one day be extended over Morocco, commercial treaties were signed by the sultan of that country with several foreign powers. A first treaty was concluded with Great Britain, December 9, 1856, for a period of five years.^® Immediately after the conclusion of the treaty of peace of Tetuan (1860), in execution of article 13 of this treaty, a commercial agreement was concluded with Spain, November 20, 1861, for a period of ten years.^' Finally, on June 1, 1890, a third treaty was concluded with Germany for a period of five years.^^ Of this treaty Italy afterwards obtained the benefit. These treaties granted to the citizens of the several countries the liberty of trading in Morocco and particularly declared that the tariff duties on importation could not exceed ten per cent, and fixed the tariff of duties to be collected on exportation. All these treaties were to remain in force after the expiration of the time for which they had been concluded, until they had been revised by common accord. These international agreements had to be respected by France after the establishment of the protec- torate ; at least, if she wished to obtain modifications in them, France had to negotiate with the several treaty powers, as she had previously done in the case of Tunis. Before the establishment of the French protectorate, and NEW TENDENCIES 153 in prevision of such an event, several powers had taken their precautions. Their exactions and the readiness with which France yielded may be explained in the most natural and simplest manner. On the one hand, the foreign powers having commercial interests in Morocco dreaded the application to this country of the policy of exclusion followed by France in Algeria and in the generality of her colonies. The policy of protection adopted by our country in 1892 caused the prospect of a protectorate under France to arouse more uneasiness on this score than would the prospect of a protectorate under any other power. Even the countries that had no desire to oppose the political aims of France, held it to be essential that the market of Morocco should remain open to their products. France, on her side, considered it essential that no great power should be installed beside her in northern Africa. She was ready to do anything to prevent this result. This represented for her a political interest of the first importance. So, when the other powers demanded of her, in exchange for her political predominance in Morocco, economic liberty without any discrimination, she granted it without difficulty and without hesitation. Moreover, she was disposed, as time has shown, to make many other sacrifices. What wasl at stake for France was the retention of Algeria, and she could keep Algeria only by remaining the one great power 1 established in the north of Africa. -J The texts establishing the open door regime in Morocco are celebrated in the diplomatic history of our country. First, there is the declaration concerning Egypt and Morocco, ) ^^ signed April 8, 1904, between the English and French governments, article 4 of which reads as foUows : The two governments, being equally attached to the principle of commercial liberty in Egjrpt, as well as in Morocco, declare that they will not countenance therein any inequality, either in the establishment of customs duties or other taxes or in the establish- 154 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY ment of rates for transportation by railroad. The commerce of both nations with Morocco and with Egypt shall enjoy the same treatment in passing through the French and British possessions in Africa. An agreement between the two governments shall regulate the conditions of this transit and shall determine the points of entrance. This reciprocal engagement shall remain in force for a period of thirty years. Without express denunciation at least a year in advance, this period shall be prolonged for succeeding periods of five years. The second important text is the general act of the Inter- national Conference of Algeciras of April 7, 1906, which proclaims ' the triple principle of the sovereignty and inde- pendence of His Majesty the Sultan, of the integrity of these states and of economic liberty without any discrimination '. This act (art. 66) authorizes the temporary levy of an addi- tional tax of two and a half per cent ad valorem on importa- tion, the income of which is intended to form a special fund devoted to expenses and to the execution of public works. In chapter V, which contains the regulations relating to the customs system of the empire (art. 77 to 104), it organizes a commission for customs valuation and a permanent committee of customs, international institutions operating in Tangiers. Finally, there is the agreement concluded between France and Germany, November 4, 1911, article 4 of which repeats that the government of France, firmly attached to the principle of commercial liberty in Morocco, will permit no discriminations. The minute precautions taken by Germany in this agreement are remarkable in the suspicion they reveal. They provide against all the round- about means by which the protecting country might endea- vour to violate the principle of economic equality. But the French government accepted the principle of the open door not only in good faith, but without regrets. This is something decidedly significant, indicating an entirely new state of mind. At the sitting of the Chamber of Deputies of October 18, 1911, M. Caillaux, president of the Council, speaking of the Franco-German accord, after having called attention to the fact that the regime of the open door was nothing NEW TENDENCIES 165 new for France, since it already existed in the basin of the Congo, in the Ivory Coast, and in Dahomey, expressed his belief in the development of French commerce in Morocco. ' If to-day ', said he, ' we have a proportion of forty-five per cent in the commerce of Morocco, we shall surely maintain it when, to our economic strength, shall be added our political action.' He continued as follows : Will you permit me to express my views in full ? If so, I will say that the regime of the open door, which is the only real concession that you make, is a regime which cannot be evaded in any of the new countries that may be opened up. You must persuade yourselves that it is necessary to renounce the methods of exclusion that formerly bound the colonies of old to the mother country and closed them to foreign competition. The exigencies of modern life, which become more imperative from day to day, do not admit of such simple solutions. Will you permit me, for another thing, to call your attention to the fact that when a new country is opened up, it must not be burdened with excessive costs ? Freedom from such costs is not only in the interest of the colony but in the interest of the protecting country as well, which should seek to increase the colony's power of consuming. When the Franco-German accord came before the Senate, M. Meline, in the sitting of February 10, 1912, vainly under- took to oppose the free-trade argument of M. Caillaux. M. Meline could express merely academic regrets. The reasoning of the president of the Council prevailed. French- men are to-day persuaded that their commerce can be developed in Morocco under the regime of the open door. The example of Morocco will no doubt show, some years from now, that the development of French conunerce in the colonies is not dependent upon the application of the national tariff duties. When this truth has been demonstrated, it may well be that the system of colonial exclusion will become a thing of the past. Perhaps then a voice will be heard in France thanking the foreign powers whose foresight shall [ \/^ have contributed towards turning our colonial commerce in the direction of economic liberty. Trade between Morocco and Algeria. — ^At present the French 156 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY protectionists are concerned with eventualities less remote. The commerce carried on over the land frontier between Morocco and Algiers seems to them a danger, mider whatever system it is conducted. Importation from Morocco into Algiers is still governed by article 6 of the law of 1867. Natural or manufactured products coming from Morocco enter free of duty. Products of any other origin are subjected to the same regime as they would be if imported by sea. Under these conditions it is to be feared, the protectionists urge, that products, in reality of European origin, may be declared at the frontier as coming from Morocco. The distinction may indeed some- times be difficult to make. Textiles from Morocco may, for example, be woven from thread imported from England. In this case, the concession made to a country adjacent to Algeria would be a source of indirect advantage to the EngHsh manufacturers who are our competitors. Further- more, smuggling must be taken into consideration as some- thing always difficult to prevent upon a frontier ill defined and insufficiently guarded. Smuggling has been made more profitable and therefore more tempting, in consequence of the rise in our tariff duties in 1892. It is impossible to reach the fraud at its source, on account of the existence of the open door poUcy, forced upon us in Morocco. More- over, France cannot watch over all the maritime frontier of the Moroccan empire. The northern part of Morocco has been placed under the protectorate of Spain. Melila is a free port. There are no customs at all established on the frontiers of the French and Spanish zones. Hence there is nothing easier as a practical matter than for foreign Eiu'opean products to enter Morocco by the port of Melila, free of duty, thence to be transhipped into Algeria. Exportation from Algeria into Morocco causes no less uneasiness to the protectionists. It is long since the inhabi- tants of Morocco made purchases in Oran. It was better for them to buy European products arriving by way of NEW TENDENCIES 167 Melila or Tangiers, free, or on payment of a light duty, than to obtain them in the Algerian market where their price was considerably higher in consequence of the applica- tion of our customs duties. Even the inhabitants of the region of Oudjda, although adjacent to the frontier, pur- chased European products imported into Morocco by sea, in spite of the cost entailed in crossing the whole of Mococco. With the intention of encouraging commercial relations between Algeria and Morocco, article 15 of the finance law of April 16, 1895, empowered the administration to determine the articles of merchandise in transit through Algeria which should have the benefit of exemption from customs duties and wharfage on their entrance into Algeria. Under authority of this law, a decree of December 17, 1896, permitted sugars, coffee, tea, spices, and alcohol intended for special uses enumerated to pass through free from duties (art. 2). Numerous precautions were taken by this decree to avoid fraud. These products, admitted in transit, must enter Algeria by certain ports enumerated in article 3, and after a certain length of time their exit from the country must be established in the offices of Ain-Sefra or of Lalla-Maghnia (decree of July 30, 1900). They are conveyed to Morocco under guard, the expense of which the exporter is required to pay. But these precautions are not sufficient for the protectionists. They fear that the merchandise thus intro- duced into Morocco might return to Algeria. What a mis- fortune it would be if the inhabitants of Oran should procure cheap foreign products that had escaped the customs ! The danger appears to the protectionists all the greater because article 4 of the Franco-British treaty of April 8, 1904, stipulates that the trade of both nations with Morocco and with Egypt shall enjoy equal treatment in transit through the French and the British possessions in Africa. The insertion of this article in the Franco-British declaration seems to them due to the ignorant heedlessness of the French negotiators and to the Machiavelism of British diplomacy. 158 EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY Under the inspiration of these ideas the Association of French Industry and Agriculture, in its general convention of May 19, 1913, adopted the following resolution (No. 8) : ^^ 1. That in order to diminish the inducement offered to smuggling by the difference between the Algerian and the Moroccan duties, customs duties should be raised in Morocco sufficiently to make them comparable with those collected by France in Algeria ; 2. That a control should be exercised over the movement of merchandise from the zone of Spanish influence into the zone of French influence ; 3. That there should be established without delay, along the Algerian-Moroccan frontier, an unbroken line of customs police ; 4. That transit trade intended for Morocco by way of Algeria should be regulated so as to avoid all fraud through return shipment ; 5. That the law of 1867, granting duty exemption to Moroccan products, should be repealed, at least in so far as concerns wines and manufactured articles; 6. That if it be necessary to continue to admit free of duty into Algeria by way of land, certain natural products of Morocco, other than wines, this privilege should in all cases be limited to a quantity definitely decided upon annually, for each of such products, and on the condition that such products originate strictly within a zone adjacent to Algeria, not having contact with the Spanish zone nor access to the sea. The extreme character of these demands shows how little they are capable of realization. To establish a Chinese wall between Morocco and Algeria would be to subject the inhabitants of the region of the frontier on both sides to the most intolerable oppression. The proximity of Algeria would prevent the development of French influence in Morocco instead of favouring it. It is thus once again demonstrated that enlightened patriotism has nothing in common with economic selfishness. It is because the whole of Africa Minor constitutes one and the same country, that, by the force of events, the French have been compelled to go into Morocco.^'' The protection- ists are vainly contending with the nature of things in their endeavour to interfere with business relations between Morocco and Algeria. SECOND PART THE RESULTS OF THE COLONIAL TARIFF POUCY OF FRANCE TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Introduction . . . . . . . . .161 Chapter I. The Small Colonies 174 II. Indo-China 201 III. Madagascar and Dependencies . . . 217 IV. French Possessions in West Africa . . 225 V. French Possessions in Equatorial Africa . 236 VI. Algeria 247 VII. The Protectorates of Tunis and Morocco 268 VIII. Conclusion ...... 280 Index 308 Appendix INTRODUCTION Sources : The Statistics of the Mother Country and of the Colonies In order to measure the results of the tariff policy of France we must consult tariff statistics. Careful judgement must, however, be exercised in the utilization of these statistics. Any carelessness in the use of statistics is likely to lead to gross errors. At the outset we must draw a fundamental distinction between the tariff statistics compiled in the mother country and those compUed in the colonies. In the mother country the General Directorship of the Customs publishes every year a bulky report entitled General Table of Commerce and Navigation. These reports have been published ever since 1826. The data given, rather meagre at first, have become, with the years, more complete and more precise. Since 1896 the report has consisted of two volumes, one devoted to the conmierce of France with her colonies and foreign powers, and the other to navigation. This report usually appears toward the end of the summer of the year following that to which the report relates. It is prepared with much care, but it furnishes information only on one part of the colonial commerce. It covers the commerce of the colonies with France ; but it is silent in regard to the commerce of the colonies with one another and in regard to their com- merce with foreign countries. It is, of course, naturally the case that the national customs administration should fail to record the external commerce of the colonies other than that with France. The Statistics of the Commerce of the French Colonies, the data for which are collected by the colonial customs and 162 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY which are now published under the direction of the Colonial Office, give us, however, complete information in regard to the commerce of each colony with the mother country, with the other colonies, and with foreign countries. These colonial statistics were formerly very late in appearing. But at present they appear almost as promptly as those prepared by the national customs administration. Thus the two volumes containing the statistics for 1911 were put on sale at the end of October 1912. The Bulletin of the Colonial Office publishes also, separately, the tariff statistics of each colony as soon as they are received. Private associa- tions, like the French Colonial Union ^ and the Colonial Institute of Marseilles,^ endeavour on their own account, in the interest of trade, to obtain for themselves all informa- tion relative to the external commerce of the French colonies, and publish such information immediately. It is to be observed that the commercial statistics of the French colonies are silent in regard to the external com- merce of Algeria, of Tunis, and of Morocco. These territories are not attached to the ministry of the colonies and are not, in our administrative language, designated as colonies. There are special reports relating to these territories, to which we shall give attention farther on. / The statistics of the mother country and the colonial ' statistics should not be quoted indifferently. For certain information it is more reasonable to consult the national customs ; for other information it is proper to address oneself to the colonial customs. Above all, one should never draw conclusions from figures taken, some from the national statistics, and some from the colonial statistics. One who puts these figures together indiscriminately and uses them as a basis for argument is certain to fall into eerious error. Th e national cust oms and the colonial customsarejlis±inct adminis trations, wjjjg^'-a iii liOt iBidcr the^ sa^lmimstry. They have different traditions and follow different rules ; INTRODUCTION 163 they do not speak the s ame language and they take no cogni- zance ofeacH otheri It is to be noted at the outset that the national customs lists under exports what the colonial customs lists under imports, and vice versa. Rice shipped from Indo-China into France constitutes an export for Indo-China and an import for France. On the other hand, cotton goods, sold by French manufacturers to customers in Indo-China, constitute an export for France and an import for Indo-China. But when we have made this elementary observation, we notice at once that the figures recorded by the colonial customs in the column of exforU never correspond to those recorded the same year by the national customs in the column of imports. Similarly, the figures for colonial importation are never identical with those for the national exportation. The differences are some- times very wide. This does not at all indicate that one of the two sets of statistics is necessarily wrong ; both may indeed be absolutely exact ; yet it would be none the less impossible for them to agree. It is necessary to take account of the length of the voyage. Say that a vessel, whose cargo represents a value of several millions, leaves one port in the month of December, and arrives at another in the month of January. The cargo will figure as an export in the statistics of 1911, as an import in the statistics of 1912. The mer- chandise may not even arrive at all, as the vessel may be shipwrecked. Again, when the goods in question are ordinarily duty free, the customs administration may content itself with an approximation to the quantity, and this may not always be the same on departing and on arriving. The classifications adopted are not always the same in the colonies as in France, and they may vary from one colony to the other. Finally, and above all, the values applied in the colonies to products imported or exported are not the same as those assigned to them by the permanent Valua- tion Commission of the Customs established under the Ministry of Finances. The differences are often considerable. M 2 164 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY M. Dubief in his report on the budget of the colonies for 1904 cites typical examples : a ton of ground-nuts, valued at 110 francs in Senegal and at 220 francs in France ; vanilla, valued at 41 francs in Reunion and at 80 francs in the capital ; nickel ore, valued at 54 francs per ton on leaving New Caledonia and at 350 francs on arriving in France. Generally speaking, the figures for imports are always higher than those for the corresponding exports, since merchandise is worth more in the country where it is to be consumed than in the country where it has been produced. We should, finally, note that the fundamental distinction between general commerce and special commerce is not so strictly drawn in the colonies as in the mother country. The Indo-Chinese tariff is indeed careful to make this distinc- tion. But in many colonies it does not seem to be thought of. Doubtless it is of no great interest there. Any one who knows the strict rules observed by the national customs house in maintaining this distinction, and who understands the operation of the regulations concerning warehousing, transit, and admission in bond, wiU realize the impossibility of an agreement between the national statistics and the colonial statistics, and the uselessness of all effort that could be made to effect such agreement. The Commerce of France with her Colonies according to the National Customs Statistics The abundant information furnished on this point by the General Table of the Conunerce of France is useful only if subjected to careful analysis. One who is content with statistical aggregates can draw no serious and precise con- clusions from them. For example, what use would it be to compare the total of the exports of France to her colonies at different epochs ? The extent of the colonial domain of France has greatly changed in the course of a century, and there is no interest in making a com- INTRODUCTION 165 parison from which can be drawn only the commonplace conclusion, that the commerce of France with her colonies has increased at the same time that her colonial domain has been enlarged. The useful information furnished by the General Table of the Commerce of France is as follows : 1. The table makes possible a comparison of the colonial commerce of France with the whole of the external commerce of the nation. We may subjoin, for the sake of example, the statistics of general commerce for the year 1912 (in millions of francs) : Imports. Exports. Foreign countries . . . 9, 3 $4- 8 7,801-0 Algeria, Tunis, and colonies 938-8 1,022-9 Total 10,293-6 8,823-9 The statistics (in millions of francs) of the special com- merce for the same year, 1912, are as follows : Imports. Exports. Foreign countries .... 7,343-5 5,802-6 Algeria, Tunis, and colonies . . 887-3 910-0 Total 8,2308 6,712-6 Colonial commerce represents at present a little more than a tenth of the external commerce of France. At the end of the last century it represented not quite a tenth. Colonial commerce has increased relatively to the total commerce of France, but it still represents only a small percentage of the latter. Of course, an item which reaches nearly two billions of francs in the general commerce and 18,000 millions in the special commerce is, nevertheless, of very decided importance for our country. The Genered Table of Commerce permits us, also, to determine the rank of each of our colonies as a source of imports and as a market for exports. We subjoin an extract from the resume of statistics relative to origin of imports, in \^hich resume countries are ranked according to importance 166 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY in the French external commerce (special commerce, imports, 1912) : 6 Algeria ........ 427-3 24 Western and equatorial Africa . . . . 91-4 25 Tunis ........ 85-2 26 French Indo-China . . . . . .82-5 31 Saint-Pierre, Miquelon, and the Grand Banks . . 36-1 32 Madagascar and dependencies . . . . 35*5 37 French India . . . . . . .28-1 38 Martinique ........ 25-7 39 Guadeloupe ....... 24-4 41 Reunion ........ 23-1 47 New Caledonia and the establishments of Oceania . 14-9 50 Coast of Somaliland ...... 8-0 51 Guiana ........ 7* i The following table gives the rank of the several colonies among the comitries of destination of French -exports, 1912 : 4 Algeria ........ 568-5 10 Tunis ........ 109-5 13 Indo-China ....... 78-9 18 Western and equatorial Africa . . . .50-1 22 Madagascar and dependencies . . . . 41-2 33 Guadeloupe ....... 13-8 34 Martinique ........ 12-9 39 Reunion ........ 10-5 45 Guiana . . . . . . . . 8-7 46 New Caledonia and establishments of Oceania . . 8-7 48 Saint-Pierre, Miquelon, and the Grand Banks . . 3*7 51 Coast of Somaliland ...... 3>o 58 French India ....... 0-7 A comparison of the foregoing tables shows that all the colonies, with the exception of the establishments of little importance, such as Saint Pierre and Miquelon, India and the coast of Somaliland, occupy a better position in the figures for exports than in those of imports. As has been shown above, F rance se lls a little more to her colonies than she buys from them. ■ — — ■ " It is, moreoverpto be noted that the tables of conunerce for 1912 still include Morocco among foreign countries, doubtless because the treaty establishing the Protectorate was signed and ratified only in the course of the year.^ INTRODUCTION 167 Morocco occupies the forty-third place in the import table and the seventeenth in the export table. Imports from Morocco amounted to 19,613,000 francs and exports, having Morocco as destination, to 52,410,000 francs (special com- merce). 2. The General Table of Commerce makes it possible to estimate the part of the colonies in the importation and in the exportation of different products. In the matter of importation, it is interesting to note that almost all the oxen and sheep imported into France come from Algeria ; * that a very considerable portion of the wheat, oats, and barley imported into France likewise comes from northern Africa ; * that the greater part of the rice comes from Indo-China ; • that the colonies do not send to the mother country a tenth of the copra which it uses ; ' that about half of the ground- nuts come from the colonies ; * that the consumption of sugar from the French colonies remains, at 108,000 tons, while the home production amounts to 554,000, and foreign sugars to 181,000 ; • that the coffee and cocoa of the French colonies amount to only a very small part of what is con- sumed by the mother country ; *° that Indo-China furnishes the mother country with almost all its pepper " and a quarter of its tea ; " that the greater part of the vanilla used in France comes from the colonies of the Indian Ocean and of Oceania ; " that the French colonies furnish only 29,000 quintals of caoutchouc to the capital, while foreign countries furnish 138,000 ; that the amount of cotton coming from the French colonies for the national market is absolutely insignificant (60,000 quintals against 3,461,000) ; that Tunis furnishes three-fourths of the phosphates needed by French agriculture,** &c. These comparative results are very impor- tant : they show, on the one hand, the possibilities offered by the French market to colonial production, and, on the other hand, the importance of colonial production from the point of view of supplying the national demands. The results, suggested by the General Table of Conmierce, 168 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY on exports are no less interesting. Cotton fabrics, with exports in 1912 of 384 millions of francs, head the list. In this total, Algeria figures for 69 millions, Tunis for 8 millions and a half, Morocco for one million and a half, Indo-China for 30 millions, Madagascar and its dependencies for 20 millions. Reunion, the Antilles, and Guiana, together, for 8 millions, western Africa and Equatorial Africa for a little less than 4 millions. Al geria and the colon ies took in 1912 more than one- third of the p otion, fabrics exp orted" by I'ran ce. It would be childish to undervalue the importance of this fact. It explains the eagerness with which French manufacturers seek to reserve for themselves the colonial market. In regard to the exports of tools and metallurgical products, the part of Algeria and of the colonies is also relatively very large (47 millions out of 119). As for wines, the opening offered by the colonial market is not to be despised. In the list of articles of merchandise bought from France by each of her colonies, wines generally take a prominent place. Nevertheless, the colonies consume but little more than a tenth of the wines exported by the mother country. The foregoing statements permit one to make a precise calculation of the import ance of t he col onial market for eac h o f the nationa l industr ies in particul ar^ The national pro- ducer is not concerned witJi tinding out what tEe needs of the colonies are and what their preferences are. The national producer simply asks himself : in what quantity can the colonies absorb the products I offer for their consumption ? This is the point of view one must take if he desires to comprehendjthede^ee^^esistanceoffere^^ industry^ to the demands of the coloniaTpopuIations for reforms in the customs tariff. 3. Finally, the General Table of Commerce and of Naviga- tion throws light upon the importance of colonial commerce from the point of view of the activities of our ports and the employment of our merchant marine. A third of the INTRODUCTION Qs?. ' merchandise carried by the French ships leaving our ports is intended for Algeria, Tunis, or the colonies. A third of the merchandise brought back by these same ships comes from the colonies.** One can, therefore, understand the impor- tance attached to the colonial trade in cities such as Mar- seilles *• or Bordeaux. The development of trade with the colonies is of the greatest concern to the shipowners. That is why these centres ardently desire a more liberal economic policy, a policy that would permit the inhabitants of the j colonies to produce and to consume more. So much we may learn from the statistics presented by the national customs administration. They exhibit the importance of colonial conmierce for the nation. They explain the reasons for the respective attitudes assumed in France by the various circles interested in the question of the colonial tariff regime. But this is only one aspect of the problem. The External Commerce of the French Colonies according to the Statistics of the Colonial Customs. — ^The external com- merce of the French colonies (Algeria and Tunis not included) amounted in 1911 to a total of 1,242,000,000 francs, imports and exports taken together. This total was distributed in the following manner (in millions of francs) : Imports from France ....... 26i'3 Imports from French colonies . . . . . 16-5 Imports from foreign countries ..... 323-4 Total 601Z Exports to France ....... 2734 Exports to French colonies . . . . . .10-4 Exports to foreign countries . . . . .357*2 Total 6412 Compared with the statistics of former years, these figures show a considerable progress, remarkable for its steadiness. The external commerce of the French colonies reached an annual total of 200 millions of francs at the end of the reign of Louis Philippe. The crisis occasioned by the abolition 170 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY of slavery reduced this total to 121 millions in 1848. But little by little the figures rose. In 1866, the year in which tariff autonomy was established, the total of the external commerce of the colonies exceeded 300 millions. Up to 1883, the figures vary between 300 and 400 millions, in average years. From 1884 to 1897, the annual total varies between 400 and 500 millions. Beginning with 1888, the advances became extremely rapid. In 1901, the figure of 800 millions was exceeded. With the year 1907, the figures rise above the billion mark. This somewhat commonplace statement of the progressive development of the external commerce of the French colonies, represents practically the only useful information to be drawn from these figures. Obviously no conclusion relative to the consequences of the tariff regime instituted in 1892 can be drawn from them. In fact, in these totals, non- assimilated colonies are included along with the assimilated colonies. Moreover, since 1892, the colonial domain of France has developed and the list of assimilated colonies has varied. Under these conditions, the composite statistical results for aU the colonies can prove nothing. This impression of the futility of the statistical results is strengthened when one examines the development of the external commerce of each colony in particular. A serious diversity arises to disconcert the investigator. Statistics 1 are not compiled in the several colonies by a uniform method, lln particular, the value attributed to products imported or exported varies perceptibly from one colony to another. There are colonies whose external commerce has developed I with remarkable rapidity ; such are Indo-China and West Africa, and there are others whose progress has been much slower. In certain colonies the volume of external com- merce has remained stationary, or even decreased. The proportion of the commerce carried on with the m other country varies conside rably from colon y tn colony. There are colonies that send to France almost all the commodities INTRODUCTION 171 they produce. Such are the Antilles and Reunion. There areothers whose exports are principally consigned to foreign countries. Some make the greater part of their purchases in France, while others prefer to supply themselves in foreign markets. And the diversity of these results appears to bear no relation to the differences in the tariff regime. Among the colonies dealing largely with France we find both assimilated and non-assimilated colonies ; and both kinds of colonies are represented among those dealing chiefly with foreign nations. One who appro€M:hes the study of these tariff statistics with preconceived ideas, will find himself immediately bewildered by the diversity of the results. This situation is, however, entirely natural. The French colo nies differ widel y from one another. They do not export the same products : some export sugar, others rice, others caoutchouc, others nickel. An economic crisis seriously affec ting one of these colonies may leave other colonies u ntouched . The sugar question, for instance, which is of first importance for the Antilles, means nothing at all to West Africa. Nor do the several French colonies import the same articles of merchandise. They are inhabited by different populations, having neither the same tastes, nor the same needs, nor the same resources. Compare, for instance, the family budget of an inhabitant of Annam with that of a Creole of Reunion, of a negro of the Sudan, of a colonist of New Caledonia, or of a fisherman of Saint-Pierre and Miquelon. These people do not dress alike ; they do not consume the same food, nor the same drinks, nor are they housed in the same manner. Their luxuries and their vices likewise differ. As customers, they are absolutely unlike. Many other causes also influence the external conmierce of the colonies. The money question bears a very close re lation to that of f^xtpmnl f^mm^rff^ In Indo-China there is a problem concerning the piastre which does not appear elsewhere. On the Africa n continent, ex ternal com- merce most frequently takes the form of barter. Every- 172 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY where account must be taken of the rate of exchange. In certain colonies practically all the commerce is external ; interior conunerce hardly exists. In other colonies the trade of the interior is much the more important. There are territories where the work of colonization is, one may say, complete, and here only a restricted progress is possible. In other territories, on the other hand, the work of coloniza- tion has hardly been commenced and the future contains possibilities on which the shght progress achieved down to the present throws very little light. It is necessary, also, to take into account the area of each colony, the number of its inhabitants, and its geographical situation. There are currents of commerce controlled by relations of vicinage. If it were possible to transport New Caledonia to the Atlantic, the Antilles to the Indian Ocean, or Madagascar to the Pacific Ocean ; if Indo-China could be put into Africa, or the Congo into Asia, the external commerce of each of these countries would immediately take quite a different direction. The creation or the suppression of regular navigation service between a colony and another country results at once in the development or the abrupt checking of the trade carried on by it with that country. Granting the diversity and the multiplicity of these influences, it can well be understood that the same tariff regime does not produce, everywhere, the same results. That is what renders the uniformity aimed at by the legislators of 1892 an absurdity. Obviously, for one who wishes to reach conclusions from colonial statistics, there is only one rational course to pursue. He must study each colony separately and seek to determine the effects produced on its economic or financial situation by the different tariff regimes to which it has been subjected. This may seem to be a very tedious process, but it is the only way by which one can attain results that are useful or convincing. A due sense of proportion, however, forbids equally detailed investigation for all the colonies severally. We shall therefore group together, in a first chapter, all the INTRODUCTION 173 small colonies of no considerable importance. Each of the four large general governments (Indo-China, Madagascar, West Africa, Equatorial Africa) will be the subject of a distinct chapter. After this, we shall find opportunity to study Algeria and the protectorates of Tunis and Morocco, whose situation is in every respect different from that of the colonies. CHAPTER I THE SMALL COLONIES The Antilles} — Ma rtinique and Guadeloupe are two small colonie s that, from the economic and snnial point of vipw., are~ exa ctly m the same situation, so that whatever may be said in regard to one, can be applied without qualification to the other. Each of them is of the size of a French district. Martinique has 987 square kilometres, Guadeloupe, with its dependencies, has about 1,800. These islands are inhabited by a dense populatio n which is steadily increasing : in the census of 1911, Martmique had 184,000 inhabitants, Guade- loupe 212,000. This population includes a smaU minority of whites, of French origin, whose ancestors formerly colonized these islands, who have lost political influence, but have maintained their economic preponderance, retaining the land and wealth and directing the principal enterprises. The mass of the population consists of negroes, descendants of the slaves of former times, whose tendency has always been to pattern themselves after the whites and who hold a majority position in all the elective assemblies. In these islands, the work of colonization may be considered as com- pleted long ago. It cannot be hoped that they can make more rapid progress than that of which countries of old civilization are still capable. It should not be a matter of surprise, imder these condi- tions, that the volume of the external commerce of the Antilles presents a remarkably stationary character. When one consults the general table of the external commerce of Martinique and of Guadeloupe from 1847, the year preceding the abolition of slavery, to 1911,^ one learns that the imports and the exports together amounted, for each of these colonies, THE SMALL COLONIES 175 to some sixty millions in the good years, and to some thirty millions in the bad. The fluctuations depended chiefly on the amount of sugar made, and the price of the sugar. But while, in this long period of sixty years, there have been periods of prosperity and periods of depression, no one can say, generally speaking, that there has been, on the whole, either progress or decadence. The stationary condition of this trade may be regarded as a relative retrogression, in view of the development of international conmierce in the entire world. The e xports of the French Antilles^consist al most ent irely in colonial cons umption stapl es, almost all of which are sent to the mother coun try. In 1911, the exports of Martinique amounted to 22,582,000 francs ; those consigned to France represented 20,914,000 francs. In these totals, colonial consumption staples sent to France figure for 13,132,000 francs, and the rums sent to France, for 6,538,000 francs. The same situation holds true in Guadeloupe. The exports from Guadeloupe in 1911 amounted to 20,245,000 francs, of which 19,419,000 were consigned to the mother country. In these totals, the colonial consumption staples figure for 15,334,000 francs, and the rums sent to France for 3,611,000 francs. Again, it is worth noting that these colonial con- sumption staples consigned to France consisted almost wholly of sugar (12,037,000 francs in Martinique, 11,073,000 francs in Guadeloupe).* Accordingly, it is clear to what a degree these islands are specialized to a single product and how vital the sugar question is for fhem. The statistics of 1911, moreover, merely reflect a long- standing situation. The exports consigned to the other colonies from Martinique and Guadeloupe, amounted to some hundreds of thousands of francs.* The exports destined for foreign countries are but little more important.* This has always been the case, except during the period following the senatus-consultum of 1866, which ended in 1884. In this epoch, the exports destined for foreign countries amounted to 176 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY several millions annually ; sometimes, they even exceeded ten millions. But since the reform of 1884, in French sugar legislation, the Antilles ha ve sent the totalitv of their sugar to France. This does not mean that the Antilles are abso- lutely dependent upon France as a market for their sugar. If necessary, they could sell to the United States, as they had begun to do during the period just mentioned. But the special advantages given colonial sugars in the French market, the bonds of former business relations, and the force of habit, exert a powerful influence upon the producers of the Antilles and prevent them from seeking markets else- where than in the mother country. In imports the preponderance of the national commerce is, however, less marked. We subjoin the figures for the year 1911: Martinique. Guadeloupe. Francs. Francs. Imports from France 10,707,000 12,361,000 Imports from the colonies 773,000 430,000 Imports from foreign countries 8,374,000 6,590,000 Total .... 19,854,000 19,383,000 The proportions are about the same as obtained in 1847 ; but they have not always been the same during the inter- vening years. From 1874 to 1892, foreign imports equalled, or even surpassed, the imports from the mother country. Under the regime of tariff autonomy, the Antilles, left to themselves, naturally tended to make their purchases in the United States. Tariff assimilation has forced them to come to Europe and to pay higher prices for goods which they could have procured more cheaply. Accordingly, it is clear that the law of 1892 actually produced the change in the natural course of commerce anticipated by its authors. It forced the inhabitants of the Antilles to make certain pur- chases in France which they would otherwise have made elsewhere. Imports from foreign countries consist partly in kinds of merchandise which France cannot furnish to the colonies because she does not produce them at all, or not in THE SMALL COLONIES 177 quantities sufficient for her own consumption, and partly in food-stuffs, which it was absolutely necessary to include in the decrees of exception, under penalty of starving the poorer classes and of provoking internal disorders in these islands. The foreign country, in which the French Antilles make their most extensive purchases, is the United States. In 1911 imports from the United States amounted to 6,262,000 francs for Martinique and to 3,762,000 francs for Guadeloupe. The principal exports from the United States to the Antilles are salted meat, com, cotton-seed oil and petroleum, wood, chemical fertilizers, and coal. These articles are, for the most part, included in the decrees of exception and enter free of duty or at a reduced rate.* After the United States comes England, whose exports to the Antilles consist chiefly of rice, coal, and chemical fertilizers, amounting in 1911 to 1,503,000 francs for Martinique and to 1,550,000 francs for Guadeloupe. Imports from other countries are of small importance and, besides, arrive most frequently via the mother country. Foreign merchandise imported from France amounted in 1911 to 361,000 francs for Martinique and 679,000 francs for Guadeloupe. In order to estimate the effect of the law of 1892 upon the financial and economic situation of the Antilles, it would hardly be scientific to confine oneself to the opinions publicly formulated by the elected bodies and by the representatives of these colonies. Both find themselves in a decidedly embarrassing situation in regard to protesting against tariff assimilation. For reasons of a political and social character^ ^n w hich it is superfluous ty , dwell hpre j t he Councils-General and the depu ties of the Antilles have always loudlv demanded assimilation with the mother count ry. Accordingly, they are torced tolicc ept without protest the special consequences produced in customs matters by this policy of a ff«i"^^^«^'^", which offers, in tlieu* eyes, so many advantages in other directions. The abolition of tariff assimilation appears to them as a first breach made in a structure dear to them. 15«9-lo K 178 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY They fear that it may ultimately serve as a pretext for a whole series of reactionary measures. These considerations oblige them to put a damper on their demands. Furthermore, when the local assemblies have been called upon to formulate their wishes on the subject of commerce, they have avoided putting themselves on ground which seemed dangerous to them — ^that of tariff personality. They have limited them- selves to formulating special demands : the abolition of the half- duty on secondary colonial commodities ; the raising of the tax-abatement for distance, which appears to them insufficient to assure to their sugar a situation as favour- able as that of home production in the French national market ; ' and finally, a more effective protection for their rum against unfair competition. But the economist, who is not restrained by these considera- tions, can formulate his views with more liberty. The imme diate consequence of tariff assimil ation was to raise the price of a number of articles, which forced tJtie consumer to reduc e the amoun t nf his pnrrhAsps. As a consequence of the Taw of 1892, total impor tf^ fi^^ i^^ f^f't diminigh In a report presented to the Council-General of Guadeloupe, March 10, 1908, Governor Ballot showed that imports which amounted, from 1888 to 1892, to twenty-two millions, in average years, fell, for the years 1903 to 1907, to less than fourteen millions, in an average year. This represents a dimi- nution of forty-nine per cent in the import trade. This diminution primarily fell upon foreign commerce, which decreased by more than one-half. But what had been lost by foreign countries was far from being gained by the mother country. Analogous results present themselves in Marti- nique. But here a comparison of figures prior to 1892 with the figures which relate to the beginning of the present century leads to apparently less conclusive results, in conse- quence of the disturbance wrought in the commerce of the colony by the eruption of Mount Pelee in 1902. To the burden imposed by the cost of living on the consumer THE SMALL COLONIES 179 in the Antilles, a burden estimated by Governor Ballot at two millions for Guadeloupe alone, must be added the dis- advantages arising from the necessity of foregoing certain articles, the price of which became prohibitive. Thus, light carriages of American manufacture were excluded from these islands, where they would have been a very great convenience. Their exclusion was of no profit to French industry, which does not manufacture this kind of article. From the fiscal point of view, tariff assimilation has resulted in checking the normal development of local revenues. Since customs duties were not levied upon imports from / France, and since foreign merchandise was kept away from the colonies in consequence of the excessive character of the duties falling upon them, the customs revenues fell to an extremely low level.^ In 1911 the revenue from the customs duties amounted to 431,633 francs in Martinique, and to 627,983 francs in Guadeloupe. It is unlikely that these figures can be exceeded under the present tariff r^ime. They are much inferior to those of twenty years ago." From this situation has arisen serious embarrassment for the local budgets. In order to make these budgets balance, it has been necessary to have recoiurse to other forms of taxation which are not without many disadvantages. From both points of view, economic and financial, the Antilles have, the n^ iT]rnnt pstiL4LL COLONIES 181 The external commerce of Reunion has remained stationary like that of the Antilles.*® It has even manifested a certain tendency to diminish. For a long time this conrmierce, measured by aggregate imports and exports, has ranged between forty and sixty millions of francs annually. Be- tween 1858 and 1863 the total was about a hundred millions. On the other hand, from 1904 to 1910, it fell to thirty millions, annually, and even below that. In 1911 it suddenly mounted again to forty- eight millions." The following table shows the volume and destination of the exports from the colony : Exports to France ..... 23,897,000 francs Exports to the colonies .... 765,000 „ Exports to foreign countries 631,000 „ Total ...... 25,294,000 „ Sugar (16,631,000 francs) constituted the most important item in the exports of this colony. Almost the whole of it was sent to France (16,177,000 francs). Vanilla, essence of geraniums, rum, each of which figure in the exports for more than 1,000,000 francs, were likewise sent to France. Other local products provide only an insignificant volume of busi- ness : exports of Bourbon coffee, although so renowned, hardly exceeded 200,000 francs. Reunion has always exported almost the whole of her products to the mother country. The exports intended for other French colonies are ins ignificant, and the fact that Madagascar is to-iiay a l^Yench colony has not greatly in- creased the volume of exports to t hat islan d. Exports for foreign countries attamed to an appreciable magnitude in the period from 1861 to 1888. They then reached three or four millions annually, occasionally even five or six millions. They have since fallen again below one million francs, as formerly. In 1911 the imports into Reunion were as follows : Imports from France ..... 10,861,000 francs Imports from the colonies .... 2,641,000 „ Imports from foreign countries . . 9,425,000 „ Total 22,928,000 „ 182 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY In Reunion, as in the Antilles, the proportion of the mother country in the import trade is less than in the export trade. Imports from the mother country, which amounted to twenty millions annually at the beginning of the Second Empire, have, since 1866, oscillated around the sum of ten millions, sometimes slightly surpassing it, sometimes remaining a little below. Their absolute importance has not increased since 1892. Imports from the French colonies, rather important up to 1881, when Reunion was in the habit of bringing in rice from Pondichery for her immigrants, fell perceptibly after 1882, when inunigration was suppressed. They rose again after Madagascar became a French colony. Reunion imports from Madagascar, oxen, lard and fat. It also imports rice from Indo-China. These imports represent some millions annually. The imports of foreign merchandise ranged between ten and twenty millions in the period from 1854 to 1895. Since that time they have considerably diminished, in consequence of the application of the national customs duties.^ In the period of 1907 to 1909 they fell below two millions. The noticeable rise that took place in 1911 is perhaps only acci- dental. The foreign countries with which Reunion carries on the greatest amount of business are : England (coal), Avstralia (flour), British India, and Mauritiics. In 1911 the merchandise imported from England represented a value of 1,267,000 francs, and that from the British colonies a value of 7,927,000 francs. The share of other countries is insig- nificant. The consequences of tariff assimilation have been, in Re union, as in Lhe Antilles, in the first place, a diminution of - impoi'Ls, resulting from the rise in prices, and in the second plaue, a decrease ot revenue trom customs duties, from which the local budget has had to suffer. The imports of foreign merchandise have dunmisEed in a very great degree ; but the iiH|Mnlfi!j^"^ fH'fPTinh TY^oT/>hQTi^^i.fr^ hn^ |^rvj— fT^^T.nocori xhe consumer in Reunion has suffered, but he has not had the THE SMALL COLONIES 18S consolation of saying to himself that at least his sufferings have been a source of profit to the mother country. The revenue from unport duties iiipicseutj a I ' c euip l ^ only 300,000 francs annually, in round numbers.** It is not alone the colonial finances that suffer from this situation. The mother country, which controls the business of the railroad and of the port of Reunion, also suffers from the consequences of the diminution of the external commerce of the colony. Accordingly, we may say that tariff assimilation has pro- duced, on the whole, the same lamentable results in Reunion as in the Antilles. On account of the geographic situation of the colony, assimilation has not interfered to the same degree with the natural course of trade. There was not in the neighbourhood of Reunion a great foreign country with which this island was forbidden to carry on any business. For this reason, the opposition has been, perhaps, less marked in Reunion than in the Antilles. But it has been more freely expressed. The inhabitants of Reunion are not embarrassed, to the same degree as those of the Antilles, by the doctrines of assimilation. They have always shown themselves to be in favour of a large measure of decentralization. It has been easier for tnem, consequently, to avow their preference for tariff personality.** GuianaP — ^From the historical point of view, Guiana takes her place among our old plantation colonies. But from the economic view-point, it differs considerably from the three others. To begin with, it is at the same time much l arger and much le ss densely populated . The area is 88,240 square kilometres. The population, according to the census of 1911, is 49,000 inhabitants ; and even this figure is probably exaggerated. Outside of Cayenne, Guiana is nothing but a vast desert. The colonization of this colony, far from being complete, has, as yet, hardly begun. The production of colonial commodities amounts to almost nothing in this colony. Without the gold industry and penal colonization , the trade of Guiana would not exist. 184 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY From 1846 to 1870 the exports of Guiana amounted to one or two millions annually. From 1871 to 1883 they fell to some hundreds of thousands francs. From 1883 to 1900 they rose, and reached five or six millions. Since that time they have varied from eleven to twelve millions annually. But let us not be deceived by this fact. The increase of exports is due solely to the establishment and development of the gold industry. In the total of 11,903,000 francs which represent the whole volume of exports from Guiana for 1911, gold^gures for 10,253,000 francs. If we do not include the "J^ow metal, the exports of Guiana amounted to only 1,650,000 francs. They consist principally in dye woods (1,075,000 francs), and they are sent, for the most part, to the mother country. As for the gold itself, it went, in 1911, half to France (4,512,000 francs), and half to Switzerland (5,721,000 francs). The exports of colonial staples did not amount to 15,000 francs. Guiana exports a very little cocoa, but she imports sugar and coffee. In a word, Guiana is a dead country, which, having neither agriculture nor manufactures, has nothing to sell and, consequently, can buy nothing. Nevertheless, imports are increasing. They ranged from three to four millions at the end of the reign of Louis Philippe. From 1853 up to 1887 they amounted to between six and seven millions on an average. To-day they amount to eleven or twelve millions. The figures for 1911 are as follows : Imports from France ..... 7,469,000 francs Imports from the colonies .... 404,000 „ Imports from foreign countries . . . 3,389,000 „ Total ...... 11,263,000 „ But one should cherish no illusions as to this trade. The increase in imports is essentially a result of the development of the penal colony. The upward trend in imports began in 1854 with the opening of the penal settlement, and this trend was accelerated when the government began to send to Guiana the whole number of convicts, a great many of whom THE SMALL COLONIES 185 had formerly been sent to New Caledonia from 1867 to 1894. The presence of a more and more numerous penal population, that had to be clothed and fed, naturally exerted an influence upon the volume of imports. One who takes this fact into account will see that tariff assimilation can have had little to do with this development of trade. There was no need of applying the French tariff regime to Guiana in order to induce the penitentiary administration to make its purchases in France. In order to determine the effects of the law of 1892 in Guiana it would be necessary to ascertain what the external conunerce would be if the penal transportation system did not exist. This calculation would be difficult to make, and it is hardly worth the trouble to undertake it. The free population of Guiana comprises little more than 20,000 inhabitants, the greater part negroes or mulattoes. From a market of so little importance what gains were to be anticipated from the imposition of the national tariff rates ? T ariff assimilatio n can only hinder the development of Guiana. But it is not asserted that commerci al liberty would be suflScient to obtain prosperity for the colony! It would doubtless be reasonable to endow Guiartft With tariff personality : but if, for reasons of consistency, the colony is retained in the list of assimilated colonies, the matter is, unfortunately, of no importance. Saint-Pierre and Miquelon. — We have here the case of a tiny colony (230 square kilometres), inhabited by some thousands of French of the white race, whose only industry is fishing, for whom the regime of tariff assinulation hastjcen absolutely disastrous. The only reasonable solution of the tariff question would be to allow this little island to place upon articles of whatever origin moderate duties, sufficient for purely fiscal purposes, and to permit the inhabitants to make their purchases freely in the neighbourhood, in New- foundland, Canada, or the United States. French national industry would not have been perceptibly affected by such a policy. Instead, the French general tariff was applied in 186 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY 1892 to Saint-Pierre and Miquelon. What have been the consequences ? After 1815, Saint-Pierre and Miquelon developed slowly but surely. Its population of 2,000 inhabitants at the beginning of the nineteenth century increased to over 6,000. The external commerce of the colony likewise increased more than threefold. Before 1864 exports and imports combined did not exceed ten miUions annually. In the period from 1885 to 1890, the trade exceeded thirty miUions annually. When Saint-Pierre and Miquelon was subjected to tariff assimilation, the trad e be^an to decline and the deca d^ice w as rap id. Eventually the external commerce fell to twelve or thirteen miUions, the average of the last years. The figures for 1911 are as follows : Imports from France .... Imports from the colonies Imports from foreign countries Total Exports to France Exports to the colonies Exports to foreign countries Total . 2 ,348 000 francs 27. 000 »j 2 908, 000 »> 5 283, 000 j» 7 ,228, 000 francs 406, 000 j> 860, 000 »> 8,494,000 „ It is true that the tariff statistics of Saint-Pierre and Miquelon are not very trustworthy. Thus a brusque fall which occurred in the imports of 1904 seems to have been the result of the fact that until that year the statistics of imports had included the codfish unloaded by the fishing boats, and this increased the total by some milHons. In the export statistics the valuations are always made arbitrarily. Foreign purchases are almost all by retail. The inhabitants of New- foundland come to Saint-Pierre and carry away their pur- chases with them. No declaration is made and the customs service must Hmit itself to estimates based solely on the importation of products to be sold to English customers of the colony. But, however defective the statistics may be, the decadence THE SMALL COLONIES 187 indicated by them cannot be gainsaid. The population of Saint-Pierre diminished along with the trade. In 1902 the population was 6,500, while in 1911 it did not exceed 4,200. A good third of the population had emigrated, having no longer the opportunity to make a Uving. The number of licensed fishermen, which was 976 in 1904, had fallen to 749 in 1910. The fiscal situation of the colony became more and more critical. The era of deficits began in 1903. The deficits of 1903-1909 and 1912 amounted to 344,809 francs, and were not covered by the surplus of 124,438 francs left by the administrations of 1910 and 1911. After 1907 the reserve fimd of the colony had been exhausted. It was necessary to restore the reserve through the proceeds of the remainder of a loan of 500,000 francs, contracted in 1900. The experience of the colony has been disastrous. ' How could it be otherwise ? ' asks M. Delmont : " How can you force a country that produces nothing and that can produce nothing, which is by situation and by natural character dependent upon its external relations, to supply itself exclusively in France, 800 leagues distant, while its near neighbours could easily supply it . . . The customs duties keep away from Saint-Pierre our own boats, the fishing craft that have their ports of clearance and equipment in France. These craft arc in fact able to secure from the government warehouses in France the foreign products that they consume at sea, without having to pay duties. Hence there is every reason why they should not supply themselves at Saint- Pierre, where there is no government warehouse. Thus the French vessels have been driven to desert the port of Saint-Pierre. Further, the local fishing fleet has almost completely disappeared. The number of schooners, which was 206 in 1902, fell to 55 in 1908 and to 29 in 1913. Without doubt, tariff assimilation is not alone responsible for the dec a y ^f Saint i Pi fi rrf i m i l- iffiqurlnn Indnstrif^l progress has not been favc ^nrflh^** *^ the colony. The cod is no longer cured^nJlie-spot4ft^aint-Pierre, but is sent uncured to the steam dryers-installed in France. It is no longer customary to cure, in Saint-Pierre, any but fish of inferior 188 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY quality intended for the Antilles. The saiHng schooners have suffered severely luider the competition of the steam fishing- boats on the Banks of Newfoundland. Again, Saint-Pierre and Miquelon has been the victim of legislative measures taken by the parKament of Newfoundland, and also of the Franco-British agreement of 1904, by which our country renoimced her privilege on the French Shore. Tariff assimi- lation must none the less be considered as the chief cause for the decay of Saint-Pierre and Miquelon. The legislator has at last heard the cries of distress uttered by the colony, and has reached a belated decision to take Saint-Pierre and Miquelon out of the Hst of assimilated colonies. But the law of November 11, 1912, which autho- rizes this new regulation, has as yet given only a moral satisfaction to the colony. The decree estabUshing new tariff duties in place of the old has not yet been issued. The Chamber of Commerce of Saint-Pierre, whose requests have not been listened to, seems discouraged. The general im- pression of the colony seems to be, moreover, that the mischief has been wrought, and that it is now too late to remedy it. New Caledonia. — ^New Caledonia and Saint-Pierre and Miquelon are the colonies that have suffered most from the regime of tariff assimilation. The island of New Caledonia has a httle lUOte than 16,000 square kilometres ; together "svith its dependencies, the island of Loyalty and the Isle of the Pines, it contains a total area of more than 18,000 square kilometres. The population, which nvunbered about 50,000 inhabitants in the census of 1911, has increased since the founding of the colony (1833) ; but the proportions existing among the different elements composing it have strangely varied. This must be kept clearly in mind if one wishes to understand the development of the consuming power of the colony. New Caledonia was at first inhabited solely by poor native tribes. This native population has steadily decreased. At present it mmibers not more than 28,000 souls, more than half of whom five on the island of Loyalty. After the found- THE SMALL COLONIES 180 ing of the colony, convicts began to be transported thither. The penal element, which continued to increase until 1894, at which time it numbered about 12,000, has steadily decreased since then, in consequence of the discontinuance of penal transportation to this colony. Li 1911 the penal element numbered only 5,671 persons ; it has since decreased. The free element, on the contrary, has steadily increased. In 1877 there were only 3,000 free colonists ; in 1891 the number exceeded 9,000, and in 1911 the white population contained more than 19,000 individuals. To this number must be added more than 3,000 coloured immigrants. The essential condition for the development and for the prosperity of the colony consists in the growth of the white element of French origin. It is chiefly by the excess of births over deaths that this growth is to be obtained. Our compatriots who have gone to establish themselves in New Caledonia must be allowed to raise large families easily. For this the indispensable condition is cheap Uving. But the appUcation of the national tariff duties means a high cost of living. Tariff assimilation in New Caledonia is an essentially unin- telligent measure which has provoked keen exasperation in the colony. The exports from New Caledonia amounted at first to some hundreds of thousands of francs annually. After nickel was discovered, in 1875, they passed the million mark. At present they oscillate around the figure of ten millions, but with variations, quite noticeable, from one year to another.*' In 1911 the figure of thirteen miUions was reached ; this is the highest registered so far. The distribution of exports is as follows : Exports to France ..... 5,447,000 francs Exports to the colonies .... 18,000 „ Exports to foreign countries . . . 7,635,000 „ Total ...... 13,100,000 „ In this total, the output of the Caledonian mines figures for more than seven millions. Of these seven millions, two 190 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY came to France, five went to foreign countries. But it is worth noting that nickel ore is not one of the products for which a preferential situation in the French market is asked. Whether Caledonian nickel supphes French, English, or German metallurgy, whether the Nickel Company finds its large customers in this or in that part of the world, these are matters that have, so to speak, no connexion with tariff legislation. Outside of ores, the only articles of exportation of any importance are : preserved meat and uncured hides, which go in part to France, and in part to AustraUa ; copra, which goes to France ; coffee (1,280,000 francs), the whole of which is sent to France, where it has the benefit of the half-duty. In this connexion we may note that New Caledonia may hope for an appreciable advantage from the recent law which grants to colonial commodities free entrance into France, beginning with 1914. But this advantage would be dearly bought if it should entail for New Caledonia the renunciation of the hope of being some day withdrawn from the national tariff duties which stifle her development. The imports of New Caledonia vary, ordinarily, between ten and thirteen millions of francs. In the bad years they fall to eight or nine miUions ; twice only, in 1892 and in 1911, the figure of fourteen millions was surpassed. On the whole, it cannot be said that they have progressed. The following table gives the figure for 1911 : Imports from France ..... 7,863,000 francs Imports from the colonies .... 228,000 „ Imports from foreign countries . . . 7,063,000 ,, Total ...... 15,154,000 „ From a careful study of the general table of the commerce of New Caledonia since the year 1885 (the date when customs statistics first drew a distinction between the commerce with the mother coimtry and that with foreign countries), one receives the impression that the result of the law of 1892 has not been a perceptible growth of French imports and THE SMALL COLONIES 191 a marked diminution in foreign imports. The New Cale- donians have continued to supply themselves in Australia. But the price of the goods which they have bought has been considerably increased, to their detriment, in consequence of the raising of tariff duties.*" It could hardly be otherwise. As is stated in a report of the Chamber of Commerce of Noumea : ^* Because of its distance from the mother country, and the high cost of freight, because of her geographical position which places the colony within three days' steaming from the Australian continent, an abundant producer of all the commodities of temperate climates, and because of the considerable resources of the great Australian cities, New Caledonia is rapidly coming to supply herself in Australia with everything required, at low prices and with credit facilities which are denied her by the French trade. And no matter what new economic barriers may be erected. New Caledonia, even so, will be obliged to a very great extent to supply herself from Australia. As a fact, in the total of 7,063,000 francs which represents the amount of foreign imports, Australia alone figures for' 4,544,000 francs. The imports from Australia consist prin- cipally of farinaceous food- stuffs, sugar, and manufactured products. Great Britain, which is next in order the chief soiurce of imports for New Caledonia, comes far behind, with 693,000 francs, consisting chiefly of coal and metal products. It is to be noted that the imports from the New Hebrides (180,000 francs) are included among the foreign imports. The stationary condition of the external commerce of New Caledonia is the more remarkable because this colony is a new country, whose population and wealth should develop rapidly if not checked by artificial causes. In connexion with this colony, especially, it is pertinent to call attention to the fact that the real interest of the mother countrj^ lies in having her colonies prosperous. The more numerous the inhabitants of a colony and the better their circumstances, the more important becomes the market for the products of the mother country. It was killing the goose that laid the golden eggs to subject New Caledonia to the national customs tariff. 192; RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY The French government has come to understand this, and it submitted, at the end of 1912, a bill designed to take New Caledonia from the Hst of assimilated colonies. In the interest of the mother country itself, it is desirable that this reform be accomplished as soon as possible. French Establishments of Oceania. — ^The French estabKsh- ments of Oceania have an area of 4,000 square kilometres, and a population of 30,000 inhabitants. The greater part (about 27,000) are natives. There are scarcely more than 3,000 Europeans in the colony, almost all of whom are con- centrated in the city of Papeete. The native population remains stationary ; if anything, it shows a tendency to decrease. The external commerce of the French establishments of Oceania has, for a long time, ranged between six and eight millions of francs, half of which is for imports and half for exports. This commerce remained stationary during forty years until 1908. Since that time the progress of the colony has been noticeably rapid. Below are the figures for the last years : 1909 .... 9,664,000 francs 1910 .... 11,690,000 „ 191 1 . . . . 14,725,000 „ 1912 . . . . 16,228,000 „ Exports reached in 1912 the figure, never before attained, of 8,481,000 francs. This increase was due essentially to the rise in the prices of vanilla ^^ and of copra. Although the quantity of vanilla exported in 1912 was perceptibly less than that exported in 1911, its value was 3,316,000 francs, exceed- ing by more than 1,000,000 francs the value of the vanilla exported in the preceding year. After vanilla, the principal products exported are, copra (2,814,000 francs), mother-of- pearl (841,000 francs), and phosphates (769,000 francs), the production of which has been increasing rapidly for some years. The greater part of the products exported (4,880,000 francs) are sent to the United States, England (1,008,000 THE SMALL COLONIES 193 francs) is the next best customer for Tahiti. New Zealand, with 648,000 francs, should be grouped with England, since many products declared for New Zealand are later sent to England. France appears in the export figures for only 882,000 francs. The growth in exports has resulted in a corresponding increase in imports. The native, benefiting by the rise of prices, has bought more. Imports rose in 1912 to 7,747,000 francs. In this total, the United States appear for 3,626,000 francs. New Zealand and Austraha for 1,820,000 francs, France for 1,301,000 francs, England for nearly 500,000 francs, Germany for 182,000 francs, and the French colonies for about 20,000 francs. The relative proportions indicated above residt from natural conditions and are of long standing. It is chiefly through San Francisco that this little colony, lost in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, communicates with the remain- der of the world. It is to America that she must necessarily look for the disposal of her products. It is consequently in America that she must make the greater part of her pur- chases, for a regular maritime service between Papeete and San Francisco can operate only on condition of finding freight both for the outward-bound voyage and for the return. The trade of Tahiti with the mother country is all it can be ex- pected to be, in view of the geographical situation of this colony. The colony may congratulate itself on the fact that it was not included in 1892 in the Ust of assimilated colonies, and all that it asks is that legislation may continue to overlook it." French India. — ^French India (513 square kilometres ; 282,000 inhabitants in 1911) is an old colony whose c^ mm^r^P, like its population, might have rema ined stationary. Thanks to the hberty it h as enjoyed, this commerce has developed in a remarkable manner. In 1892 it was only nineteen milHons, of which a little nlOTfe than three miUions consisted of imports and a httle more than fifteen miUions of exports. After 1569-15 O 194 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY having decreased at the end of the last century (the lowest figure, eleven millions, was recorded in 1898) it rose in a remarkable manner after the beginning of the present century. In 1911 it reached 46,606,000 francs. The exports are distributed as follows : Exports to France ..... 19,611,000 francs Exports to the colonies .... 3,733,000 „ Exports to foreign countries . . . 14,643,000 „ Total ...... 37,988,000 „ Among the products exported are ground-nuts (22,430,000 francs), which far exceed in importance any other. These are, as a fact, shelled pea-nuts, produced in British India, and merely embarked at Pondichery. The largest part (15,700,000 francs) is sent to France ; the remainder goes to Belgium, Italy, or the EngUsh colonies. Next in importance after pea-nuts are the cotton fabrics manufactured in Pondichery (7,982,000 francs). The largest part goes to France (3,687,000) and the French colonies (1,914,000) ; the remainder goes to the English colonies. Next in order is rice, of which a value of 2,099,000 francs is exported ; it goes to Singapore or to Ceylon. We must also mention the raw silks (2,827,000 francs) that go to the French or to the English colonies. The other products exported are not important enough to be noted separately. The imports are distributed as follows : Imports from France . . . . . 545,000 francs Imports from the colonies . . . . 72,000 „ Imports from foreign countries . . . 8,000,000 „ Total ...... 8,618,000 „ Three products lead in the importation : (1) Areca nuts (1,148,000 francs) from the British colonies, chiefly from Singapore; (2) cotton thread (2,913,000 francs), which comes from British India and constitutes the material for the textile manufactures established at Pondichery ; (3) petro- leum (1,144,000 francs) from America. THE SMALL COLONIES 19S These figures explain the enormous preponderance of foreign imports. Deduction made of these three products, which French India could not obtain from the mother country, the preponderance of foreign commerce is much less accen- tuated. In regard to manufactures, the share of France and her colonies is 341,000 francs, that of foreign nations, 1,142,000 francs. The French Coast of Somaliland. — A port, Djibouti, sepa- rated from Abyssinia by the desert ; a railroad, laid through the desert, which since 1903 permits the products of Abyssinia to arrive in this port, and outside productions to enter Abys- sinia : such is the character of this colony. What the Coast of SomaUland can itself produce, or consume, counts for practically nothing. Djibouti is only an entrepot, estab- hshed in the same field as Aden, which it seeks to rival. The general conunerce of the French Coast of Somaliland has developed considerably since the end of the last century. In 1900 for the first time it exceeded ten millions. In 1903 it reached nearly twenty millions. In 1905 it rose to thirty millions. It then passed to forty-one millions in 1909, to fifty-four millions in 1910, and to seventy-eight millions in 1911. The products exported in 1911 by the port of Djibouti were distributed as follows : The raw products from the colony amount to about 18,975,000 francs. In this total, sheepskins represent 2,807,000; crude wax, 1,160,000; elephants' tusks, 2,490,000, coffee, 6,429,000. All these products come from Abyssinia. They are exported in part to the British colonies (9,964,000 francs), that is to say, to Aden, in part to England (2,687,000 francs), in part to France (3,343,000 francs). Belgium and Germany each takes about 800,000 francs of exports from the colony. The shares of the other foreign countries are much less. That of the French colonies is only 40,000 francs. The exports include, also, French merchandise for re- exportation (1,104,000 francs), sent chiefly to Arabia (977,000 o2 196 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY francs) ; they consist almost entirely of arms, powder, and munitions. Next in order is the foreign merchandise for re-exportation, consisting chiefly of coal, textiles, and arms, destined for France, the French colonies, the British colonies, and China. They represent a total of 2,600,000 francs. Finally, included in the exports are goods passing through on their way to Abyssinia. Among these, French goods amount to 6,942,000 francs. They consist chiefly of rails for finishing the railroad (2,236,000), locomotives and fire-arms. Foreign merchandise in transit for Abyssinia is represented by a figure of 15,775,000 francs. More than haK (8,973,000 francs) consists of textiles. Arms and ammunition represent a value of 3,178,000 francs. Other articles are much less important. By adding together these different items, one reaches a figure of 45,387,000 francs, which represents the total of the exports. As for the imports, their total is 32,620,000 francs. French imports reach a total of 9,140,000 francs. They consist chiefly of arms, powder and munitions (2,253,000 francs), and metal products (1,790,000 francs). The imports from the French colonies (24,000 francs) do not count for anything. The imports of foreign merchandise amoxmt to 23,255,000 francs ; they come chiefly from the British colonies (9,088,000 francs), from England (5,848,000), from Japan (2,345,000), and from Austria (1,166,000). Imports from Germany are 803,000 francs, from the United States 775,000, from Arabia 450,000. The largest items of foreign importa- tion consist in textiles from British India and from England, which represents 9,274,000 francs ; British coal (1,872,000 francs), fire-arms and ammunition from Japan (2,344,000), and cotton goods from the United States (775,000 francs). These figm-es are, however, incomplete, and are very Hkely less than they should be. The personnel of the customs at Djibouti has been, so far, altogether inadequate. Further- more, the word has been passed to the ofi&cials to close their THE SMALL COLONIES 197 eyes and to be very accommodating to the merchfints, in order to attract them to Djibouti. An official entrepot was estabUshed on the plateau of Djibouti by a decree of April 18, 1901. The warehouses estabUshed by the Messageries Mari- times on the plateau of Marabout, where there is not a single European agent to oversee the loading and unloading, con- stitute a surreptitious entrepot, running in competition with the government entrepot. Conclusion, — In concluding, we shall attempt to determine what the mother country has gained by forcing tariff assimi- lation upon"The small colonies, with the burden which this assimilation has meant for them. In order to estimate the gain realized by the French producer, it is safest to have recourse to the statistics com- piled by the national customs house. The values given by this administration to the products exported have the advantage of not changing ¥dth the colonies, and they give a reasonably accurate view of the interest of the national producers in the colonial commerce. We must compare the special export commerce for the year 1892, the year which preceded the application of the new regime, with that of the year 1912. Thus we may measure the progress realized in twenty years. The table below gives the figures in thousands of francs, for the small assimilated colonies : Reunion Martinique Guadeloupe Guiana New Caledonia Saint- Pierre and Miquelon Total . 1892. 1912. 7,058 10,478 12,858 12,894 11,758 »3»79* 6,803 8,7*4 6,242 7.4 » 5 4.778 3,661 49^97 56,964 Thus the gain achieved by French export trade in twenty years is measured by an increase of about 7,000,000 francs annually. A very small gain, and perhaps rather apparent than real. Indeed, account must be taken of the rise in 198 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY general prices. The values applied by the permanent com- mission to products exported in 1912 are, as a rule, higher than those appKed to products exported in 1892. But it remains to be proven whether, under a regime of hberty, the national exports would not have increased during this period of twenty years. In this connexion it would be interesting to establish a comparison with the progress reaHzed dm-ing the same period of twenty years in the exports to the small non-assimilated colonies. For the Coast of SomaUland the comparison is not possible, since the port of Djibouti and the railroad did not exist in 1892. The special export com- merce for French India seems to have diminished considerably. It fell from 1,095,000 in 1892 to 673,000 in 1912. But these figures prove nothing, for the year 1892 was exceptionally favourable and the year 1912 exceptionally unfavourable. The impression would be quite different if one compared the year 1891, in which the exports were only 717,000 francs, with 1911, when they were 1,298,000 francs. If the average for several years is taken, it appears that exports to French India hold up very well. There remain the exports to the French estabUshments of Oceania. These increased from 473,000 francs in 1892 to 1,242,000 francs in 1912. The comparison, which naturally forces itself upon the attention, between New Caledonia and Tahiti is not favourable to the regime of assimilation. Against the meagre results obtained by the national producers, let us place the burden laid upon the inhabitants of the small assimilated colonies. It must be noted at the outset, that, in these small countries, the relative importance of external commerce is infinitely greater than elsewhere. In great countries, internal conmierce is much more impor- tant than external — perhaps ten times as important. In coimtries like the French colonies of America, Reimion or New Caledonia, external commerce is, so to speak, every- thing. Internal commerce hardly exists. These countries bring in from outside all that they use, and they export THE SMALL COLONIES 199 all that they produce. The tariff regime is consequently a question of vital importance for them. Under th e regime of tariff assimilation, the external com- merce of the s mall colonies has remained, on the whole. stationar y, inese colonies have made no progre ss. The following table, compiled from the colonial statistics, gives in millions of francs the total imports in 1892 and in 1911 : Reunion . Blartinique Guadeloupe . Guiana New Caledonia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Total . 1892 1011 420 482 5«-4 47-4 42-8 39-6 15-2 23- » 21-6 28-2 I9'0 «3-7 192-2 During this time, the external commerce of French India rose from nineteen millions to forty-six millions, and that of the French establishments of Oceania from six millions to fourteen millions. I n the small colo nies s ubject ed to the national t ariff duties, ex ternal commerce has remamed stationary or has declined. I n those placed under a regmil^ of liberty, th e external commerce has more than doubled . Fn order to appreciate the effects of tariff assimilation on the small colonies, it is really sufficient to ask oneself what results might naturally be expected. The application of the national customs tariff may actually force the inhabitants of these colonies to procure from the mother country the pro- ducts which they would otherwise procure from a foreign country. In this case, the national producer obtains a benefit, but to the detriment of the colonial consumer, who pays dearer for what he buys, and who, consequently, buys less. It is also to the detriment of the local budget, because the revenue from the import duties diminishes. This is what has happened notably in the Antilles. Or the inhabi- tants of the colonies may continue to make their purchases in foreign countries, in spite of the increase of the customs duties. In this case the national producer does not profit ^00 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY by the tariff assimilation, the local budget does not suffer by it ; but the colonial consumer supports a crushing burden. This is what has happened in New Caledonia. From all standpoints, tariff assimilation is, for the small colonies, d eliberately devised misery. This poHcy, applied to small countries unable to defend themselves and whose attachment to the mother country is traditional, is unworthy of a great nation like France. CHAPTER U INDOCHINA The Progress of the External Commerce of Indo-China. — With its 670,000 square kilometres and its 17,000,000 inhabitants, Indo-China occupies a place of exception al importance among the French colonies. Its extern^ com- mel^ce, which to-day reaches half a billion francs, represents five-twelfths of all the external commerce of the colonies. The application to Indo-China of the national customs tariff was especially interesting to the French producer. The results of tariff assimilation in Indo-China are accord- ingly worthy of detailed study. It was in 1887 that the French general tariff was first applied to Indo-China. In the same year Annam-Tonkin, down to that time imder the administration of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Cochin-China, which, along with the protectorate of Cambodia, was attached to the Ministry of the Colonies, were consoUdated and placed under the authority of the same governor-general.^ It would not be worth while in the present study to go back to the earher epochs. We shall take as our starting-point the year 1888, when the new regime first came into general operation. In 1888 the external commerce of Indo-China was 127,000,000 of francs, imports and exports combined. In 1889 it fell to 78,000,000. Little by Httle, it rose again, and in 1894, the last year of the government of M. de Lanes- san, it sUghtly exceeded 170,000,000. It remained in the neighbourhood of this figure under the government of M. Rousseau (1895-6). The government of M. Doumer began, in 1897, with the figure of 205,000,000 and ended, in 1902, with 400,000,000. Under the government of M. Beau, 202 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY a perceptible decrease showed itself in 1903 and in 1904, but soon a new advance took place. In 1907 the half billion mark was passed, and since that time the external commerce of Indo-China has oscillated around this figure. It fell a little below (494,000,000) in 1911, an exceptionally bad year. But it seems probable that the upward movement will be resumed. In 1912 the general conunerce of Indo- China rose to more than 533,000,000 francs. Thus, in the quarter of a century from 1888 to 1912, the external commerce of Indo-China increased fourfold. So much for the facts. Did this progress take place because of tariff assimilation or in spite of it? This is the question to be answered. But, to put the matter in a proper Hght, it is necessary to take into account other factors, whose influence upon the apparent rise of the external commerce of Indo-China has been considerable. In the first place a more or less justifiable increase in the values appraised by the Indo-Chinese customs house, on imports and exports, has inflated the statistics in a purely arbitrary manner. Thus, says M. Guermeur,^ the price of cotton thread, which had been fixed at 125 francs per 100 kilograms up to 1899, was suddenly raised to 300 francs in 1900 ; also, tin, valued in 1899 at 1,300 francs per ton, was raised to 2,780 francs in 1900 ; gold was raised from 2,160 francs per kilogram to 3,500 ; tea from three to five francs ; Chinese tobacco from one to three francs. As for silk, the appraised value was increased exactly tenfold — from six francs thirty centimes it suddenly mounted to sixty-three francs. Coal was raised first from sixteen to twenty-one francs, and then to thirty-five francs. Hence we find in case of some products perceptible increases as measured by values, when in reality the quantities imported or exported are less. These continual variations in appraised valuations, which present them- selves in the guise of increased values, vitiate all our calculations. Only a relative importance can be attached to these tariff statistics. Account must be taken, in the second place, of the influence exerted by the execution of great pubHc works. It is evident, for example, that the law of December 25, 1898, INDOCHINA 203 authorizing Indo-China to borrow 200 millions in order to construct a network of railroads, must have exerted a very considerable influence on the remarkable growth of the external commerce of Indo-China at the end of the govern- ment of M. Doumer. Article 4 of this law, which determined that all material intended for the construction or equipment of the hnes, which could not be secured in the colony, should be of French production and should be transported under the French flag, contributed even more materially than the regime of tariff assimilation to increase the share of French commerce in the colonial import trade. In the third place, account must be taken of the develop- ment of the European population, which now exceeds 20,000 souls. This population does not Uve after the fashion of the natives, but imports from Europe, especially from France, the larger part of the articles necessary for their use. This represents a second influence making for an increase in imports from France — an influence which has nothing to do with tariff assimilation. Bearing the foregoing considerations in mind, we may now examine the statistics of the general commerce of Indo- China in 1911 as compared with those of 1888 (in miUions of francs) : Imports from France Imports from the colonies Imports from foreign countries . Total Exftorts to France Exports to the colonies Exports to foreign countries Total 1888 1911 11*2 85S o-o 6-9 44-7 151-2 56-0 244- 1 2'0 59-2 O-O 1-9 6g-9 i8S-9 71-0 250-1 At first glance, a comparison of these figures gives the impression of a general development in both the export and import trades with France and with foreign countries as well. But we must examine the matter in detail. What Indo-China Produces and Exports. — ^The distinction 204 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY between general commerce and special commerce is carefully drawn by the Indo-Chinese customs house. In exports, the general commerce amounts to 250 millions and the special commerce to 207 millions.^ The difference (42 milHons and a haK) is distributed in the following manner : French merchandise re-exported . . . 2-7 Foreign merchandise re-exported . . . i-6 French merchandise in transit . . . . o- 1 Foreign merchandise in transit . . . .38-0 The magnitude of the last item is explained by the impor- tance of the trade between Yunnan and Hong-Kong, by way of the valley of the Red River. Tin ore, shipped from Yimnan to Hong-Kong, represents a value of more than 24,000,000 francs. The merchandise sent from Hong-Kong to Yimnan, which consists chiefly in yam and cotton fabrics, represents a value of more than ten miUions of francs. Disregarding, then, the statistics of general commerce, let us consider those of the special commerce only. They show us what Indo-China produces and exports. The total of Indo-Chinese exports figures, in the special commerce, at 207,000,000. More than half of this total consists of the exports of rice, which, for 1911, amounted to 116 miUions of francs. France buys about 27,000,000 francs in value ; the French colonies, 1,800,000 francs; China takes 89,000,000; Japan, 13,000,000 ; the Phihppines, 17,000,000 ; the Dutch East Indies, 4,500,000 ; England and Germany each, a Kttle more than a million and a half; the remainder goes to the entrepots of Hong-Kong (41,000,000) and Singapore (6,000,000). The importance of the ri ce crop is a deci sive factor in the prosp erity of the^TOmrn^ce of Indo-Ch ina and haij ^f eat mfluence on the total exports. WheiT^Efie^ciFop^s poor, which was the case in 1911 and in 1912, the exports of rice fell to 800,000 tons. When the crop is good, they exceed one million tons ; this was the case in the years from 1907 to 1910.* The Far East, and particularly China, consumes INDOCHINA 205 the larger part of the rice exported by Cochin China and Tonkin. Here, Indo-Chinese rice finds an assured and, one may say, ahnost unlimited market. Rice is of such great importance in the Far East as an article of food, that its production may be developed without the least fear of over-supplying the market. It is interesting to note that France consumes an increasing quantity of Indo-Chinese rice. She buys to-day an average of 200,000 tons annually. Rice is more and more generally employed in agriculture for the feeding of animals. It is to be observed in this connexion that Indo-Chinese rice is protected on the French market, where it enters free of duty, by the customs duties which fall to-day on foreign rice (three francs per 100 kilo- grams on paddies, six francs on broken, and eight francs on whole rice). Maize is another product of Indo-China which profits from the high level of our tariff duties. A duty of three francs per 100 kilograms was estabhshed in 1892 on foreign maize. This duty, which in fact was of no use to French agriculture, but which seriously burdened the starch-makers, and con- sequently the manufacturers of cotton fabrics for export, had the unlooked-for result of favouring the development of maize production in Indo-China.* The exports of Indo- Chinese maize amounted in 1911 to 80,000,000 kilograms, with a value of about 10,000,000 francs ; all this maize was sold in France. We subjoin a Hst of the other items of export, which represent a value exceeding 1,000,000 francs : 1. Oxen (1,200,000), all sent to the Philippines. 2. Buffaloes (1,000,000), likewise all sent to the Philippines. 3. The hides of cattle (4,700,000), half of which are shipped to France (2,100,000), a quarter to England (1,400,000), and the remainder to the entrepots of Hong-Kong and Singapore. 4. Raw silk (2,000,000), of which three-fourths go to the entrepots of Hong-Kong and Singapore ; France and Siam divide the remaining quarter. 206 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY 5. Fresh fish (1,000,000), which is sold in China. 6. Dried fish (11,000,000), all sent to the entrepots of Hong-Kong and Singapore. 7. Fish oil (1,400,000), all sent to France. 8. Dried shrimps (1,600,000), all sent to Hong-Kong. 9. Tortoise shell (1,700,000), which goes to Hong-Kong. 10. Copra (2,200,000), all of which goes to France. 11. Pepper (3,800,000), the larger part of which is bought by France. 12. Cinnamon bark (2,200,000), which goes to Hong-Kong. 13. Tea (about 1,000,000), all of which goes to France. 14. Gutta-percha and caoutchouc (2,200,000), almost all of which is sent to France. 15. Cotton (1,700,000), almost all of which goes to Hong- Kong. 16. Cement (2,800,000), which is sold in Siam, Hong-Kong, and China. 17. Coal (5,200,000), almost the whole of which is sold in Hong-Kong and in China. 18. Silver (2,600,000), which likewise goes to China and to Hong-Kong. 19. Zinc ore (3,700,000), all bought by France and by Belgium. 20. Cotton yam (2,400,000), all sold in China. 21. Prepared skins (2,300,000), all sent to Hong-Kong. 22. Tonkin straw mats (1,700,000), all of which go to Hong-Kong. This list shows that (with the exception of rice, a product of universal utility for the white as well as for the yellow races), of the products exported by Indo-China, some go to Europe exclusively, while others go to the Far East. It is the nature of the prodtict which controls its destination. There are articles of merchandise which are bought only by the whites, and which consequently find a market only in Europe ; there are others which are consumed only in the Far East. The latter are the more numerous. Indo-China INDOCHINA 207 has adjacent to her, in China, in Japan, in the Pliilippine Islands, in the Dutch Indies, in Siam, very important customers that must be treated with consideration, for these customers buy products which the mother country would never need. The following analysis indicates the relative importance of the purchases made in Indo-China by the different countries to which she exports. The figures represent millions of francs : France. ......... 568 French colonies ........ 1-9 England . . . yy Germany ......... 1-8 Belgium ......... i-6 Other European countries . . 0'3 America . . . . . . . o-i Philippine Islands ....... 20-4 China . . . . . .13-5 Japan . . . . . • '3*3 Dutch Indies . .4-5 Siam . . . . . . . . . . I'g British India and other countries of the Far East 0-5 Entrepot of Hong-Kong . .68-3 Entrep6t of Singapore . 1 8*4 Without doubt, a part of the merchandise exported to the entrepots of Hong-Kong and of Singapore is afterwards sent to Europe. It is largely from these entrepots that England and Germany procure the rice of Indo-China. It is none the less true that the countries of the Far East absorb the greater part, about two-thirds, of the Indo- Chinese exports. What Indo-China Buys and Consumes. — In imports, the general commerce of Indo-China amounted in 1911 to 244,000,000 francs, and the special commerce to 194,000,000 francs. The difference is accounted for by the transit trade (38,000,000 francs), the entrepot trade (10,000,000), by transhipments, re-exports, and goods admitted in bond. In the imports which appear in the general commerce but not in the special commerce, the part of France is four millions ; it consists chiefly of tobacco and beverages. The 208 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY part of the other countries of Europe is three millions ; it consists chiefly in coal and petroleum. The share of the coimtries of the Far East is forty-three millions ; the greater part represents the transit traffic from Yunnan to Hong-Kong and vice versa ; this item has already been dealt with. In the special commerce, animal products amount to five millions, vegetable products to nearly fifty miUions, mineral products, twenty-two miUions, and manufactured products, one hundred and seventeen miUions. As to origin of imports, the share of France is eighty-two milHons, that of the French colonies seven millions, that of the other European countries nine miUions, that of America three millions and a half. AU of these countries combined are represented in the imports by a hundred miUions : this is hardly a half of the special import commerce. The other half is furnished by the other countries of the Far East : fifty- seven miUions worth of merchandise comes from the entrepot of Hong-Kong ; about eleven miUions from the entrepot of Singapore, eleven millions from China, seven to eight miUions from British India, two miUions from Japan, and two millions from the Dutch Indies ; the imports from Siam and from the PhiUppines are insignificant. Among the imports exceeding one miUion francs in value are foimd : milk (1,000,000), three-fourths of which come from Switzerland and one- quarter from France ; rye (3,000,000), of which one-third comes from France and two- thirds from the entrepot of Hong-Kong ; Chinese vermiceUi (1,200,000), which comes altogether from China ; areca nuts (2,600,000), which come altogether from the entrepot of Singapore ; sugar (3,500,000), half of which comes from France and the other half from the entrepots of Hong-Kong and Singapore ; tea (3,300,000), which comes chiefly from the entrepots of Hong-Kong ; tobacco (4,400,000), three- fourths of which come from Algeria; opium (5,600,000), which comes entirely from British India ; medicinal articles INDOCHINA 209 of Chinese origin (1,900,000), which come from the entrepot of Hong-Kong ; cotton (2,700,000), which Ukewise comes almost entirely from Hong-Kong ; fresh vegetables of Chinese origin, from the same entrepot ; wines (3,200,000), which come almost exclusively from France ; beer (1,400,000), which hkewise comes from France ; chalk (1,000,000), which comes from France ; petroleum (5,200,000), which comes half from the United States, half from the Dutch Indies ; gold (5,500,000), and silver (2,500,000), which come from the entrepots of Hong-Kong ; steel (1,000,000), which comes from France ; soaps (1,300,000), which come almost entirely from France ; Chinese and Japanese porcelain (3,100,000), which come from Hong-Kong or from Japan ; yam, between eight and nine miUions, the greater part of which (5,000,000) comes from the entrepots of Hong-Kong. In the supplying of this product the share of France is about eight miUions, that of French India about one million, and that of China one milUon. The importation of bags of jute, in which rice is exported, represents a figure of six millions ; two-thirds come from the entrepots of Singapore and Hong-Kong, the greater part of the remainder comes from British India. The imports of cotton fabrics amount to 23,800,000 ; in this total the share of France is 19,400,000, that of the French colonies 2,700,000 ; the share of foreign producers is only one million and a half. Woollen fabrics (1,200,000) come all from France. The importation of Chinese foulards, which arrive directly from China, or through the entrepot of Hong-Kong, represents a figure of 8,300,000. Paper for the use of Europeans (1,000,000) comes from France, Chinese paper (2,300,000) and the paper intended for ceremonial use (1,700,000) come from China or from Hong-Kong. Machines and mechanical articles (8,100,000) come chiefly from France (5,400,000). England's share (1,300,000) and that of Ger- many are much less. Cartridges (2,000,000) all come from France, fire-crackers of Chinese production (1,500,000) from Hong-Kong, automobiles (1,100,000) are furnished by France. 1S69>15 p 210 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY As for trinkets (1,200,000), half comes from France, the other haK from Annam or from Hong-Kong. This analysis of the principal articles of importation offers a suggestion identical with that given above relative to exportation. The 'place of origin of imports is controlled by th eir natur e. Franc e furnishes to Indo-China t he greater part, on e may say almost the to tahty, of thp products «>f~ European origin rnnsumpdh y^ thp pnlnny ; but Indo-China is for cedTto secure^t ^-^TT^ fKpnpiplihnnring pf^iintries of~the Far East all the prod ^i ^tfs ^^^'^^ ^^'nvnpn in inti^i j iulilti i\f fur nishing. Before French products could replace Chinese products in the native consumption, it would be necessary for the manners and the customs of the Annamites to be completely changed. This evolution could be accompUshed only at the end of a very long time ; nor would it be desirable for it to take place too quickly. It is indeed possible to observe certain changes in dress : the importa- tion of European cotton fabrics is increasing to the dis- advantage of the silk weaves of Chinese origin. But this transformation of dress has only begun. For a very long time to come, the mass of the Annamites will continue to prefer the goods which they have, for centuries, been in the habit of using. Criticisms and Conclusions. — ^The tariff regime of Indo- China has been the subject of judgements different enough in appearance, but perhaps, in reality, not so diametrically opposed to one another as it appears at first glance. The policy was very freely criticized in 1906, in the colonial congress of Marseilles (see the report of M. Gaisman).* In 1908, the elective assemblies and the administrative authori- ties of Indo-China were called upon, by the Ministry of the Colonies, to give their opinion in the matter. The opinion of the administration of the Indo-Chinese customs and of the taxes was given, in 1908, in a report of M. Boundal, and in 1910 in a report of M. Picanon. A report of the com- mercial and industrial service of the general administration INDOCHINA 211 of agriculture and commerce was submitted by M. Fetterer, October 21, 1908. The Chambers of Commerce of Haiphong, of Hanoi, and of Saigon, the Chambers of Commerce and Agriculture of Annam and of Cambodia were also called upon to formulate their opinions. The report of M. Guermeur to the Chamber of Conunerce of Hanoi (September 20, 1909), and that of M. Mettatal to the Chamber of Commerce of Saigon contain profound studies of the question. There are also available the opinions formulated by the Colonial Council of Cochin-China, by the Upper Council of Indo- China, and finally, the report of the governor-general M. Klo- bukowski.' The opinions expressed by these various per- sons and organizations seem at first sight quite divergent. On the one hand we find ardent reformers who enei^etically demand tariff autonomy (see the reports of MM. Boundal, Fetterer, and Guermeur); on the other, more timid minds, who accept the principle laid down in 1892 and who appear to find some modest and partial reforms sufficient. But, in reality, these are differences of temperament rather than divergences of opinion. The former have the courage to speak their whole thought ; the latter, anxious not to displease the central power, fearing to come into collision with the prejudices of the French parhament, consider it wiser not to formulate requests that would, they think, have no chance of being granted ; they ask only for what they beHeve they may be able to obtain. The wording of the resolution adopted by the Upper Council of Indo-China in its ordinary session of 1908, is quite characteristic of this state of mind : ' Leaving out of accoimt a system of ta riff auton omy, which would certainly be the most favourable to the ecokomic devel opment of In d o-Chin a^ Imt which the public powers in France would perhaps not he disposed actually to grant u^, the system best suited to replace tne existing*" regime could be estabhshed on the general bases which follow . . .' The opinion expressed by the highest Indo- Chinese assembly begins with these words. Does this not P2 212 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY amount to a confession that, if one asks little it is because one dares not ask much ? What may be gathered from all these reports and resolu- tions is, that Indo-China is discontented with the tariff regime instituted in 1887 and confirmed by the legislators of 1892. The complaint is sometimes loud, sometimes whispered. But the reading of these documents admits of no misunderstanding as to the inmost feeling of the colony, however lacking one may be in critical acumen and in capacity to interpret veiled suggestions. The effects produced in Indo-China by the appKcation of the national tariff regime is not, however, quite the same as those we can estabHsh in the case of the small colonies. There are shades of difference, and these are, indeed, of decided importance. In the first place, it cannot be said that the pu bh c revenue s of Indo-China have been comp romised by the ap phcation ot the national tariff regime . The revenue from import duties has not ceased to increase. In the last years of the nineteenth century, this revenue was three milHons of piastres annually. From 1901 to 1907 it exceeded each year four millions of piastres, except in 1906, when the revenue from the import duties fell to three miUion^ /srtid a half. Beginning with 1908, the figure of five milUons ajld a half was largely exceeded. In 1910, the revenue from the import duties rose to 6,137,000 piastres, the highest point attained so far.' The Indo-Chinese consuine r_ha° >'«^ ^^<^ cuff pr ffpTx^^g_rTfiA in th e cost of living . It has been argued that th g applica- tion oi the nati onal tariff regime to Indo-China tends in a certain de gree to defeat its own aim, the development of the consumption of French products in Indo-China. The high price which the tariff assures French p roducts in the Indo-Chinese mar ket renders them unattainable for th e Annamite, whose means are Umited. T q.riff assimilati on has in this way resulted in preventing the Annamite from INDOCHINA 213 adopti ng our tastes, ou r c ustoms, our moH p nf ^'v^"g, ^>y making it i mpossible for _hi m to buy th*" nrfiili 1 li^i ■ the Europeans^ The tradebetw een Indo-Cb ^'"ft n^^ F.nr/^pf* th us finds if g^^lf tiaTr^ppi-f^^ This point is valid in itself ; but we must not attribute to it an exaggerated importance. In reality, the Indo- Chine se consumer has su ffered much less than those of th e small colonies from the increase in the cost of hvirc rPsnUing from the excessive custom duties. The relative importance 6t t he external commerce is less in Indo-China than in the ^'^^ l> afore said colonies . There is, in Indo-China, a very important internal tra de. Gre at quantities oi articles produced or manuf actured in Indo-C hina are consumed in the countr y its elf, and their price is not affected by the application of the natio nal tariff. Again, because of the low value of the monetary imit, the sapeque, Indo-China has always been one of the colonies where the neces saries of life are cheap.^ For the Indo -Chinese consumer tariff assimilation is, at most^, a handicap } it is no t n snnrrp of distress. But, on the other hand, tariff as similation presents in I ndo-China a disadvantage which do ^s n^^r mftniffsr itself in the other colonies. It constitutes a handicap in the relat ions oi the colony with the o ther f ;-(>^ | n trips of the Far East. The Oriental countries that have concluded com- merdal treaties with France assert their claims to the enjoyment in the Indo-Chinese market of the advantages which have been conceded to them in the national market. Indo-China, which obtains no compensative advantages, although she might secure important benefits from the Oriental countries, complains that her interests are neglected. She would hke to have the power to negotiate with her neighbours, to obtain concessions in exchange for those which she would grant. For this she would require a tariff autonomy, distinct from the national tariff, as a basis for negotiations. She does not dispute the authority of the mother coimtry ; she recognizes perfectly that the conduct 214 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY of negotiations falls properly to the ministry of foreign affairs. But she wishes tariff personaHty. She wishes that, along with the commercial treaties concluded in the interest of the mother country, there might be others concluded in the interest of Indo-China. On the part of a country having twenty millions of inhabitants and situated at the other end of the world, the claim is natural enough. Moreover, it is difl&cult to see in what way this claim could be prejudicial to the national producer. Since it would be the French government that would negotiate with foreign coimtries, it would always have the power of refusing concessions other than those which would appear to be acceptable to the mother country. This is the principal complaint of Indo- China. The French protectionists can, without prejudice to their principles, admit the justice of the Indo-Chinese contentions, as can also the advocates of free trade. The reform would, in principle, be acceptable to every one. Another point to be noted is that the recent suppression of the French half-duty, on the secondary colonial commodities, does not constitute for Indo-China as important an advantage as for the small colonies. In the first place, this suppression is of no benefit to pepper, which, by exception, remains subject to the previous regime. As for coffee, the pro- duction of this staple does not seem to promise a very great development in Indo-China. The case is different with tea, but the progress so far accomplished shows that its pro- duction is capable of independent development without the encouragement of additional protection. Indo-China, like the other colonies, has asked for the suppression of the half- duty, but this is merely a manifestation of the spirit of colonial co-operation and of the belief that this concession would be easy to obtain. But it has only a mediocre interest for her. This concession would not turn her aside from other demands which bear upon points infinitely more important.* A reform in regard to which every one in Indo-China seems to be in accord, is the suppression of the greater part INDOCHINA 215 of the export duties and of all transit duties. The export duties amounted, up to 1908, to three or four millions of piastres each year in the general budget of Indo-China. The revenue from this source has fallen below two millions, in consequence of the abolition of a certain number of these duties. The export duties are accused of checking the development of exports and of constituting, from the com- mercial standpoint, a hindrance which is not compensated by the revenues they yield. As for the transit duties, the revenue from them is very small (they bring in hardly 200,000 piastres yearly). They are unfavourable to Indo- China because they divert from her ports merchandise intended for the country beyond. The valley of the Red River is the route naturally indicated for the merchandise intended for southern China. The transit duty turns merchandise away from this route and thus deprives Tonkin of the benefits to be derived from an important traffic movement. In Laos, the injury caused to French com- merce is still more considerable. In fact, it is practically impossible to establish an effective tariff barrier upon the very extended and scarcely occupied frontier which separates Laos from the kingdom of Siam. In consequence, the Siamese merchandise, and with it foreign merchandise passing through Siam, enter free in Laos, while that imported by way of the Indo-Chinese ports pays the whole import duty and not the transit duty alone. This situation has the effect of placing Laos in a state of economic dependence upon Siam. In order to remedy this situation, the govern- ment proposed, May 6, 1913, a law putting Laos into the free zone.*® The merchandise passing through Indo-China intended for or coming from Laos would thus be exempt from duty. The products originating in Laos would enter free of duty into the remainder of Indo-China. Only the manu- factured products of foreign origin entering by way of Laos into the other parts of Indo-China would be subjected to import duty. The need of a reform of the duties on mer- 216 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY chandise in transit through Indo-China to the hinterland shows the importance of a consideration which escaped the legislators of 1892. A continental colony such as Indo- China not only has a power of consumption of her own, but it is also a route by which products intended for the country beyond are forwarded. If it is desired that this route be preferred to others, it must be rendered as easy as possible. There remains to consider the advantages secured by the industry of the mother country through the application to Indo-China of our tariff duty. An immediate advantage is not to be denied. It is because of this p olicy of protection that French fabrics have completely supp lanted foreign Jj ^uropean labrics m tn e Indo-Chllieij^ iiiarkeL In this matter the hope of the legislators of liii)if the French. But t he colony has paid df ^prly for this gain in French tr ade. Forei gn commerc e di^apppgrpd, ?v'\ ^^"^^^ H the revenue from the custo ms duties. Import duties in 1912 brought in only 9^50,000 francs to the colony. This does not represent a thirtieth of the receipts requisite to budgetary equihbrium. And if we deduct the cost of the collection of these duties, represented by the maintenance of the personnel and outlays for material, amounting to several hundreds of thousands of francs, we shall see that the net revenue is MADAGASCAR AND DEPENDENCIES 223 insignificant. The colony, in order to cover its budgetary requirements, has been obliged to have recourse to other imposts, heavy and ill suited to its condition. To supplement the customs duties, it has been necessary to create consump- tion taxes, falling upon French products as well as upon foreign products, which increase still more the cost of Euro- pean merchandise imported into Madagascar. The natives, the colonists, and the government of the colony have all been sacrificed. A single French industry, cotton manufacture, has drawn an appreciable profit from the apphcation of the system. This profit may be calculated at approximately ten miUions in fifteen years. It was to permit this class of manufactures, important, no doubt, but narrowly limited, to gain these ten milHons, that the fortunes of a country larger than France have been compromised. The discrepancy between the advantages gained by the manufacturers and the sacrifices imposed upon the colonials is truly shocking. ^ It would have been an advantage to the colony ', some one has written, ' to have paid an indemnity of ten millions to the French textile manufactiures and thus to have recovered liberty of action in the matter of its customs duties.'^ This is, of course, not a serious proposition. It is not actually possible to discover definite textile manufacturers subsidized by the taxes paid by the inhabitants of Madagascar. Nevertheless, the colony would have made a good bargain if it could have purchased its tariff autonomy at the price of such an unearned gift to the textile manufacturers. Mayotte and Comoro. — The statistics of the external com- merce of Madagascar do not include the external commerce of Mayotte and Comoro, although since 1908 the poUtical authority of the governor-general of Madagascar extends over this archipelago. The archipelago of Comoro, the area of which sUghtly exceeds 2,000 square kilometres, and which has a population of about 100,000 inhabitants, natives for the most part, was classed in 1896 among the assimilated 224 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY colonies.* The external commerce of these islands then amounted to about half a milUon of imports and a Uttle more than one million of exports. In recent years it has risen, on an average, to one milHon of imports, and to two or three millions of exports. In 1911 the exports even approached the figure of five miUions, thanks, above all, to a visible increase in the production of vanilla and to the high price of this product. The exports of 1911 were distributed in the following manner (in millions of francs) : Exports to France . . . . . . 4*6 Exports to the colonies . . . . . o* i Exports to foreign countries . . . . o- 1 Total 4-8 The exports of the colony consist almost entirely in vanilla (3,200,000), and in sugar (600,000), all of which comes to the French market. The imports, which consist chiefly in rice and in fabrics, are distributed as follows : Imports from France . . . . • o* 5 Imports from the colonies ..... 0-4 Imports from foreign countries . . . .0-3 Total 1-3 Rice comes from the French colonies. The fabrics come chiefly from France and Fondichery. The British colonies furnish Comoro with about all that comes to them from foreign countries. There is not much to be said in defence of the application of the national tariff duties to these little islands, which can offer but an insignificant market for the products of French industry. They have been assimi- lated out of love for a principle, for reasons of symmetry. The advantages that the aboHtion of the half-duty on vanilla will give to the planters of these islands will largely compen- sate them for the inconveniences of the tariff regime that has been thrust upon them. It is, of course, not to be supposed that the natives will gain any compensating advantages for the burdens to which they are subjected. CHAPTER IV THE FRENCH POSSESSIONS IN WEST AFRICA The Progress of the External Commerce of French West Africa. — ^French West Africa is an immense territory, whose area is estimated at 3,913,250 square kilometres,^ and whose population is between ten and twelve millions. The different colonies that compose this territory were united under the authority of the same governor-general in 1895. The bond was, however, rather loose during the first years, and it has been only since the decree of October 1902 that the general government of French West Africa has become a reaUty. In an analysis of the development of the external com- merce of French West Africa since the creation of the general government, it is not worth while to draw a distinction between the different colonies of the group. French West Africa forms a unit from the economic point of view, and iti matters little whether the merchandise that enters the colony or that goes out is unloaded or embarked in one port rather than in another. To analyse separately the commercial statistics of Senegal, of Upper-Senegal Niger, of Guinea, of the Ivory Coast and of Dahomey would be a very unsatis- factory method of analysing the real economic development of these colonies. Merchandise intended for the Soudan, for example, has been included, sometimes in the statistics of Senegal, sometimes in the statistics of Upper-Senegal Niger. Down to 1911, the only merchandise credited to the account of Upper-Senegal Niger was that which passed through the customs house in Kayes. Beginning with 1911, there has been carried to the account of this colony the merchandise passing through the customs house in Saint Louis, destined to the Soudan. Hence an apparently considerable increase 1M9'15 Q 226 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY in the external commerce of Upper-Senegal Niger, whose imports suddenly pass from seven millions in 1910 to seven- teen millions in 1911, with a correlative diminution in imports to Senegal from eighty-two to seventy -four miUions. Again, since the railroad reached Kouroussa (1910), much merchan- dise that formerly took the way of Senegal passes, to-day, by way of Konakry. The statistics of Guinea thus come to be inflated by entries which disappear from the statistics of Senegal. But these variations are without bearing upon the progress of the external commerce of French West Africa. All these border colonies have a common hinterland. There is no more interest in discovering whether a lot of merchandise passes by way of Saint Louis or by way of Konakry than there would be in discovering whether another lot of mer- chandise passes by way of Marseilles or by way of Havre. We subjoin a table giving, in millions of francs, the external commerce of French West Africa since 1895 : Years Imports Exports Total 1895 468 31-9 78.7 1896 24-9 3»-7 81-2 1897 44-2 35-5 79-8 1898 53-2 45-3 98-6 1899 69>i 47-6 116-7 1900 69-0 6o-8 129-8 1 90 1 8o-8 50-6 131-4 1902 73-5 57-4 130-9 1903 899 71-8 161-8 1904 90-9 65-0 155-9 1905 968 56-2 153-0 1906 92-4 70-9 163-4 1907 97.0 8o-4 177-4 1908 105-6 84-5 193-1 1909 118-5 109-8 228-4 I9I0 1531 125-2 278-3 I9II 150-8 117-1 267-9 1912 134-7 II8-5 253-2 The rapidity of the progress is remarkable. Since 1895, imports and exports have increased more than threefold. A temporary decrease was shown in 1911 and in 1912, in consequence of the diminution of the production of pea-nuts POSSESSIONS IN WEST AFRICA 227 and of the crisis in caoutchouc; but now the results of 1913 seem to promise to exceed the magnificent results of the year 1910.' The progress affects both the trade with France and that with foreign countries. Trade with the other colonies does not increase. Imports from the colonies, chiefly the long-cloth imported from French India, amount to about three millions. Exports to the colonies are insignificant. The imports of French merchandise did not quite reach twenty miUions in 1895. Ten years later, in 1905, they ex- ceeded forty milUons. In 1910 they very nearly approached seventy miUions. Although they decreased in 1911 and 1912, the total still represented a sum three times as great as that registered in 1896. The imports of foreign merchandise were twenty-four millions in 1895. Ten years later, the fifty miUion mark was passed. In 1911 they reached eighty m illions. The paralleHsm between the development of imports of French merchandise and the development of imports of foreign merchandise is remarkable. The progress of the one was not obtained at the expense of the other. It affected both branches of trade simultaneously, and in the same pro- portion. In the export trade, the share of the mother country has always been less than in the import trade. In 1895 it was hardly fifteen milHons. From 1898 to 1905 it varied between twenty and thirty miUions. From 1906 to 1910 the progress was very rapid. In 1910 the seventy-one million mark was passed ; there was a fall to fifty -eight millions in 1911. The exports to foreign countries amounted to seventeen miUions in 1895. In 1903 they reached thirty-four miUions, having thus doubled in eight years. For some years there- after they remained stationary, but, beginning with 1909, they made a new advance : forty -four millions in 1909, fifty-three in 1910, fifty-eight in 1911. On the whole, in Q2 228 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY exportation, the trade with the mother country seems to have progressed more rapidly than the trade with foreign coimtries. From 1895 to 1905 inclusive, with the exception of the years 1900 and 1901, the exports to foreign countries exceeded those to France. Since 1906, on the contrary, the exports to France exceeded the exports to foreign countries. But, what should above all be borne in mind, the exports to foreign countries, Hke the exports to France, have almost quadrupled since 1895. In exportation, as in importation, the regime of commercial liberty has been favourable at the same time to French commerce and to foreign commerce. What French West Africa produces and exports. — ^The products exported by French West Africa are not so numerous and so varied as might be expected from the immense extent of the temtory and the diversity of the climate. Pea-nuts and caoufenotic constitute the larger part. The exportation of pea-nuts amounted in 1912 to 193,600 tons, representing a value of 42,000,000 francs. These figures are perceptibly lower than those of the year 1910 (more than 50,000,000 francs). The lack of rain and the ravages caused by a new insect pest sensibly diminished the production of this article. The pea-nut, nevertheless, represents a good third of the exports of French West Africa. Almost all the pea-nuts are produced in Senegal, and the larger part is exported to the mother country ; the other coimtries of the European con- tinent are, however, beginning to buy appreciable quantities of them. The exports of caoutchouc are noticeably lower in conse- quence of the crisis in the trade in this product. The exports of caoutchouc, which had reached thirty- seven millions in 1910, fell to twenty-nine millions in 1911 and to twenty-five millions in 1912. The chief cause of this falling off was the decline in prices resulting from the competition, which for some years has been acute, between the caoutchouc of the forest and the plantation product. The general government of French West Africa has done its best to mitigate the effects POSSESSIONS IN WEST AFRICA 229 of the crisis. It reduced the figures of average values on caoutchouc so as practically to reduce to a minimum the export duties, the abolition of which had been demanded. It endeavoured to improve the quality of the caoutchouc exported by French West Africa by requiring that the pro- duct should be put up in strips thin enough to make inspection of quality easy (decree of September 15, 1912). It seems, however, that the natives, who formeriy found an easy source of profit in the gathering of caoutchouc, wiU be forced in the future to turn their activities towards other forms of production and, above all, towards the new and varied agri- cultural products. At least, this is the enlightened advice given them by the governor-general Ponty, in his discourse before the opening session of the government, November 10, 1913. The larger part of the caoutchouc exported by French West Africa comes from Guinea. France buys more than half ; the remainder goes to England or to Germany. Another product, the exportation of which has greatly diminished, is gum-arabic, which formerly constituted the most important element in the commerce of Senegal. A serious decline in the price of this product has caused a corre- sponding decrease in the quantities exported. The exporta- tion of gum-arabic now amounts to a very small sum (less than two millions in 1911, a little more than that in 1912). On the other hand, the progress in other products is very perceptible. The exportation of palm almonds rose from twelve millions in 1910 to fifteen millions in 1911, and to about seventeen millions in 1912. The larger part is gathered in Dahomey and is sent either to Germany or to Nigeria. The exportation of palm oil represented a value of twelve millions in 1911, and of ten millions in 1912. The larger portion comes to France ; but Nigeria retains a considerable fraction of what is produced in Dahomey. The exportation of woods from the Ivory Coast and that of oxen from Upper- Senegal is represented to-day by a figure of several millions. Finally, other interesting branches of cultivation are develop- 230 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY ing and some of them begin to furnish an appreciable supply for exportation : maize, cocoa, copra, kola nuts, karite butter, rice, cotton, sesamum, offer to the natives various sources of profit whose importance will, doubtless, continue to increase. The efforts to develop the fisheries on the western coast of Africa should also be mentioned. This industry is as yet in its infancy, but the results obtained up to the present are most encouraging. French West Africa is a country so vast that it must necessarily escape from the specialization upon a single pro- duct which has been the vice of so many French colonies. It is probable that the exports of French West Africa will increase in enormous proportions in the course of the present century, and that they will be made up of the most varied products. For a market, there is the entire world ready for these products. French West Africa is not one of the colonies that could be content with selling to the mother country and that would ask no more than to find an assured market in France. Trade with the other countries of Europe is an essential element of the prosperity of French West Africa. This is a consideration that must not be lost sight of. What French West Africa buys and consumes, — ^Textiles ^ represent more than one-third of the imports — ^fifty-two millions in 1910, forty-one millions in 1911. It would be difficult to exaggerate the extent of the needs to which these imports correspond. In the immense regions whose union constitutes the general government of French West Africa, there are more than ten millions of inhabitants who, before the arrival of the European merchants, were condemned to almost a complete lack of such goods. What they ask, above all, are cotton fabrics, to protect their bodies from cold and the inclemency of the weather. But almost all of these natives are poor, and they can buy only low-priced cotton goods. Their wants are considerable, but the means of satisfying them are lacking. That is why, in the years when the natives did not make much money out of their pea-nuts POSSESSIONS IN WTST AFRICA 231 and caoutchouc, as in 1911 and in 1912, the imports of cotton goods declined extraordinarily, but regained ground as soon as the natives' power to buy was somewhat increased. Cotton goods imported into French West Africa are of several kinds. That for which the Moors of the desert have a traditional preference is the deep blue long-cloth, the colour of which excuses the lack of washing made necessary by the scarcity of water. Pondichery has always had the speciality of the manufacture of these cotton goods. French India furnishes, also, about half of the long-cloth imported into Senegal and into the Soudan. It is on account of this trade that the French colonies figure for an appreciable amount (about three millions) among the countries of origin of imports, in the commercial statistics of French West Africa. Long-cloth is also manufactured in Holland to meet the requirements of the Moors ; it represents more than a million in the import statistics. French manufacturers have likewise begun to produce this class of cotton goods, and to-day a considerable amount of long-cloth arrives from the mother country. It should be noted that England does not manu- facture this special fabric. On the other hand, England furnishes the largest part of the cotton goods, white, coloured, or printed, imported into the colony. According to the statistics of 1911, t he fabri cs of all kinds imported into Senegal and into Guinea, whence they are carried as far as the Soudan, are distributed according to the countries of origin as follows : The share of France is some ten millions, that of the French colonies two millions and a half, that of England sixteen millions, that of Holland one million and a half, that of Germany one million.* The shares of other countries are insignificant. ^TTie preponder- ance of Englishiraports is explained by the fact that only the manufacturers^ Lancashire produce in a sufficient quantity to be able to deliver the cotton goods at a very low price, within the reach of the poor native.^ The French textile manufacturers have earnestly demanded for some years, and 232 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY are on the point of obtaining, the transformation of the ad valorem duty which at the present time falls upon cotton goods into a specific duty. This is a disguised way of obtain- ing additional protection in the markets of western Africa. But the rise in the price of cotton goods which will result from an increase in the customs duty, will inevitably reduce the purchases of the natives, and the French producer will assuredly not gain what the English producer will lose. It is very plain, on the other hand, what the native consumer will lose. On the Ivory Coast and in Dahomey, where there is no additional tax on foreign products and where the natives no longer buy long-cloth, the preponderance of English trade is still more marked. The imports of English fabrics amounted, in the two colonies combined, to seven millions in 1911. The imports of French fabrics (about one million) are slightly lower than the imports of German fabrics. Among other products imported, must be mentioned : sugars and wines, that come entirely from France; kola, from Sierra Leone; coal, from England;® materials used for the construction of railroads, from France; tobacco and alcohol, of which France furnishes the largest part, &c. It would be an error to suppose that, under a regime of free competition, French commerce is fatally destined to fail in the struggle. Subtracting the fabrics referred to above, the share of France in the imports of Dahomey in 1911 was four millions, that of England one million, that of Germany two millions and a half. The same year, deducting the fabrics as before, the share of France in the imports of the Ivory Coast was five millions, that of England four millions, that of Germany two millions and a half. These figures show that the regime of absolute equality is not necessarily fatal to French industry. In Senegal, where French commerce has been established for a longer time, the share of France in the imports (not includ- ing fabrics), was in 1911 three millions, while that of England was eight millions ' and that of Germany three millions. In POSSESSIONS IN WEST AFRICA 233 Guinea, the share of France approaches seven millions, while those of Germany and of England reach hardly one million and a half each. For Upper Senegal Niger, the share of France is about six millions, while that of England is half a million and that of Germany is insignificant. It is necessary then to abandon the tradition that French commerce will necessarily be excluded from the French colonies unless it is artificially protected against foreign competition. It is especially through their own colonies that Germany and England carry on business in this part of Africa. Once in the interior, merchandise passes from foreign territory into French territory or reciprocally without always being subject to strict control. But the truth is that Africa is a market vast enough to permit aU European pro- ducers to make money there. Coiicliision. — A comparison between French West Africa and the colonies subject to the regime of tariff assimilation forces itself upon the investigator's attention. If French West Africa has become, in this respect, an immense experi- ment station, the fact is not due to the machinations of advocates of commercial liberty who skilfully chose the most favourable field for applying their principle. Rather, the fact is due to the force of events. The Portuguese, British, and German colonies in western Africa lie in the midst of the French colonies. It is almost impossible to guard the land frontiers, very extended and for a long time undefined. Not only does merchandise pass in the most natural manner from one colony to another, but even the people themselves move about with the greatest ease. The native tribes emigrate to the regions where they can live most comfortably. It is this extreme mobility of black populations that has obliged Euro- pean merchants to compete in cheapness in order to retain their custom.® International engagements have also exerted a certain influence ; but, even if they had not been entered upon, the force of events would have been sufficient to oblige France to practise a liberal economic policy in these regions. 234 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY The effect of this policy makes itself felt to-day. The external commerce of western Africa has developed with a rapidity much greater than that of the other colonies. The prosperity of the natives has improved, and their capacity for buying has increased. If merchandise were held at such prices as to be unattainable by them, they would have become discouraged. Tempted by merchandise at low prices, they have made the effort necessary to procure it for themselves, and they have developed their production. The negroes of the Soudan are certainly not more industrious than the Annamites, and their country is not more fertile than Indo-China. Nevertheless, from 1895 (the year of the creation of the general government of French West Africa) to 1911, while the exports of Indo-China increased from 100,000,000 francs to 250,000,000 francs, the exports of French West Africa increased from 32,000,000 francs to 117,000,000 francs. In the one case, an increase of 150 per cent, in the other, an increase of 350 per cent. And does one wish to know what the national commerce has gained ? The French exports to Indo-China increased from 28,000,000 francs in 1895 to 85,000,000 francs in 1911 ; they increased threefold. The French exports to French West Africa in- creased from hardly 20,000,000 francs in 1895 to 67,000,000 francs in 1911 ; they increased more than threefold. Accord- ingly, the progress of French commerce, under a regime of commercial liberty in French West Africa, has been more rapid than the progress of French commerce under a regime of protection in Indo-China. And while the assimilated colonies were groaning under excessive taxation, and found great difficulty in meeting their fiscal requirements, the financial situation of French West Africa was steadily improving. From year to year the customs receipts gave to the general budget of French West Africa an ever- increasing elasticity. In 1904, the year when it was decided that the receipts from the customs should thereafter be collected for the profit of the general govern- POSSESSIONS IN W^ST AFRICA 235 ment (decree of October 18, 1904, art. 7), the sum total of these receipts was 12,745,613 francs ; in 1911 the total had reached 23,996,600 francs. Thus, in seven years the revenue from the customs duties in western Africa almost doubled. It is true that in French West Africa, as in Indo-China and in Madagascar, allowance must be made for the influence exercised by the execution of great public works. The law of 1903, which authorized the borrowing of 65,000,000 francs, and that of 1907, which authorized the borrowing of 100,000,000 francs, gave a stimulus to imports. The new loan of 167,000,000 francs, which the French parliament authorized at the end of 1913, will permit the pushing forward of these works with new energy. But in this matter the relations of cause and effect are not easily disentangled. It is because French West Africa has become richer that she has been able to give security for more considerable loans, and she has become richer as a consequence of conunercial liberty. Thus are exhibited the indirect benefits of commercial liberty, which are not less happy than the direct effects. CHAPTER V THE FRENCH POSSESSIONS IN EQUATORIAL AFRICA What the Tariff Regime of French Equatorial Africa should be. — ^A mere glance at a map of Africa is suJB&cient to suggest what the rational tariff regime for this colony should be. Since the Franco-German agreement of November 4, 1911, French Equatorial Africa, whose population probably ranges between six and eight millions of inhabitants, includes geographically three distinct parts. The first is bounded on the north and north-east by German Kamerun, on the south-east by the River Congo, which separates it from the Belgian colony, on the south by a line which crosses the country and separates it from the Belgian Congo and from the Portuguese district of Cabinda, on the west by the Atlantic Ocean. It has an area in round numbers of 500,000 square kilometres. The German frontier extends over a length of at least 1,200 kilometres ; the Belgian frontier extends over about 700 or 800 kilometres, and the Portuguese frontier over 200.^ The second part, whose area is slightly less than 50,000 square kilometres,^ is enclosed between German Kamerun and the Belgian Congo. It is a narrow band of land extending from the mouth of the Sangha to the mouth of the Lobay. The Belgian frontier extends over 600 kilometres, the German frontier is about 800 kilometres long. The third part includes an immense territory whose area is equal to more than double that of France, which is bounded on the west by Kamenm, on the south by the Belgian Congo, on the east by the Egyptian Soudan, and whose northern frontier, ill defined, is lost in the Sahara. The German frontier is more than 1,000 kilometres in length ; the Belgian frontier may be nearly 1,500. The eastern and POSSESSIONS IN EQUATORIAL AFRICA 237 northern frontiers, supposing them to be defined, would present a length equal at least to that of the western and southern combined. It suffices to indicate these figures, purely approximate indeed, that take no account of the windings of the frontier, to show how impracticable it would be to attempt an effective surveillance over so extended a line. It is likewise impossible for the German, Belgian, and French authorities to keep up an army of customs officers along the land frontiers of their colonies. France, in particular, which does not keep up even the number of assistants necessary to assure the surveillance of the maritime frontier of Gabon, cannot organize a surveillance over the whole length of the land frontier of French Equatorial Africa. It is not difficult to imagine the facilities offered to fraud by such geographical conditions. Men and merchandise pass easily from German territory into French territory, from French territory into Belgian territory. A difference, sometimes even very slight, in the tax collected by the customs is sufficient to make merchants pass through one colony rather than through another. Without going further than Gabon, one encounters a classical example of such evasion. The northern boundary of the conventional basin ends at the port of Sette-Cama, where there are two customs houses : one in the north, in the part of Gabon subject to the system of tariff assimilation, the other in the south, in the part of Gabon included in the conventional basin. French merchandise intended for the conventional basin arrives at the northern office, where it is received free. It enters the conventional basin very soon afterwards, with the greatest ease, having thus escaped the duty which is levied without regard to country of origin at the entrance of this basin. Inversely, foreign merchandise passes through the office of the south and afterwards makes its way to the north, entering the assimilated part of Gabon without having paid the duties of the national customs tariff. The same kind of evasion 238 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY arises in the relations among the several colonies. The natives do not hesitate to go hundreds of kilometres to procure products whose importation is forbidden, or that are too heavily taxed. As a fact, one finds in French Equatorial Africa quantities of arms, ammunition, and of other products that have entered by way of Kamerun, Spanish Guinea, or the Portuguese territory of Cabinda. It is not customs duties alone that shift the course of commercial currents in this way. Internal imposts produce a like result. Thus, a decree of the governor -general of French Equatorial Africa of October 4, 1910, instituted consumption taxes on several products to take effect July 3, 1911, notably on salt, cotton fabrics, and matches. The merchants of equatorial Africa took this decree as a pretext for raising the prices of all commodities, even those not affected by the new taxation. Whereupon the natives, who had formerly descended the river to sell their fish or their manioc at Brazzaville and to make their purchases there, proceeded to transact their business in Belgian territory at Leopoldville. And in this way the greater part of the money introduced by the French into the middle Congo has passed into the Belgian Congo, where three millions of French crowns actually lie in the coffers of the bank of Kinshassa. Thus, in order to procure for the colony some tens of thousands of francs (the tax on salt brought in 51,000 francs in 1912, the tax on cotton goods 10,000 francs, and the tax on matches 16,000 francs), the natives have been turned away from the French market and a considerable profit has been lost to the trade of Brazzaville. To establish in these regions a customs and fiscal regime, identical in all the colonies, is the only means of preventing fraud and of avoiding these shiftings in traffic, which are useless in themselves and only increase the trouble that the native consumer is obliged to take in order to procure European merchandise. For this an entente is needed between France, Germany, and Belgium, an entente for POSSESSIONS IN EQUATORIAL AFRICA 239 which it would further be necessary to ask the co-operation of Spain and of Portugal. The uniform tariff regime applied to the conventional basin of the Congo is a first step in this direction, but it is necessary to go further. The civilized nations that have undertaken to colonize these regions have an evident interest in entering into a mutual agreement. This is the principal object to be attained. Without such an entente, all fiscal measures taken in these regions, whether by the French authorities or by those of other countries, can only encourage fraud and stimulate smuggling. The External Commerce of French Equatorial Africa, — ^The tariff statistics of French Equatorial Africa should be used with much caution, and it would be very imprudent to draw any conclusion whatever from the figures that indicate the value of the imports and exports. In the first place, we must take into consideration the fact that there were no statistics prior to 1892. Accordingly it is impossible, by making comparisons with the figures of former years, to determine the effects of the application of the national tariff to Gabon, or of the protocol of Lisbon in the conventional basin of the Congo. The basis of comparison is completely lacking. In the second place, we must bear in mind the importance of the smuggling trade carried on through the neighbouring colonies. In Gabon itself fraud is rampant. The number of customs officials is too small and their health is constantly impfiired by the difficult climate and defective dwelling quarters. Accordingly they can perform only a very insufficient surveillance. In this colony there is need of at least eight officials for office service, thirty for active service, and twenty native agents. But in 1913 there were in all three officials for clerical work, nineteen for active service, and eight native agents. Often an interval of several days passes between the delivery of merchandise and the custom house inspection, and during this time any kind of fraud is possible. 240 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY The values assigned to the merchandise imported or exported most frequently in no way correspond with the reality. Of this condition some striking illustrations may be offered. Before August 1, 1907, the caoutchouc exported from the conventional basin was valued at four francs per kilogram. After this date the estimates were raised to six francs per kilogram. Now caoutchouc represents the heaviest part of the exports of the conventional basin. The value of the exports was thus suddenly inflated by almost fifty per cent ; but this apparent increase corresponds to no reality. Again, okoume wood exported from Gabon had for a long time been valued at 100 francs per ton. This figure represented three or four times the real value. The present governor had it reduced to one-half. Hence a paper diminu- tion in volume of exports which is evidently merely apparent. As for imported merchandise, it must be taken into con- sideration that its value on the coast is much lower than in the interior of the country. For all these reasons, it would be very incautious to draw comparisons on the basis of the values attributed to either imports or exports in official statistics. In Equatorial Africa, in fact, the problem is not the same as elsewhere. The rivalry between French commerce and foreign commerce is of minor importance as compared with that existing between the chartered com- panies and the free traders. This is the real question at issue. Down to 1899 the French Congo had been neglected. Explorers thought only of extending the colony to the farthest possible limits. It was thought that later there would be abundant opportunity to survey the territory in detail and open up the interior for exploitation. In 1899 the government turned over the work of exploitation to privileged companies, among which almost the whole of the territory of the French Congo was divided. Since then it seems to have regretted this quasi-abdication of its powers. At the beginning of the year 1911 the rights of these com- panies were limited, and a larger field was opened for the POSSESSIONS IN EQUATORIAL AFRICA 241 activities of the free traders. In order to study the economic development of French Equatorial Africa, it is necessary, first of aU, to draw a distinction between the share of the chartered companies in the trade of the colony and the share which remains for free traders. In this connexion we may describe the situation to-day as follows. In Gabon the trade of the privileged companies represents hardly a third of the external commerce of the colony. In the middle Congo the trade of these companies is more than one-half of the external commerce of the colony. One is tempted to make a further distinction between free French trade and the free trade of foreigners. But any one who wished to study the degree in which the development of either the French or the foreign free trade has been affected by the tariff regime, would have to take account of a number of considerations the importance of which it is difficult to fix with precision. The free French trade is evidently much less important than it would be if the privileged companies did not exist, since most Frenchmen desirous of engaging in business in the Congo enter these companies. Again, the French authorities wish to avoid the diplomatic difficulties which might imder certain con- ditions arise out of the monopoly granted to the privileged companies, and have therefore exercised a regard for the free foreign trade which they have not needed to exercise in the matter of the French trade. Accordingly, because of the existence of the chartered companies, the data of the problem studied in this work are, so far as French Equatorial Africa is concerned, absolutely unreliable. Under the reservation indicated in the foregoing discussion, we may here present the most important items of information that can be drawn from the statistics of French Equatorial Africa. The external commerce of Gabon does not appear to have made a very perceptible progress. The exports amounted in 1911 to 7,800,000 francs. In this total, the share of 242 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY France (2,400,000) represented a third, the share of foreign countries (5,400,000) represented two-thirds. In order to make a comparison with preceding years, not values, but the quantities exported must be considered. We give the figures that relate to the most interesting of the products : Number of Tons exported 1907. 1908. 1909. 1910. 1911. 1912. Caoutchouc 486 286 289 314 281 306 Ivory 25 21 *5 7 6 6 Cocoa 75 98 103 92 108 73 Coffee 30 20 47 48 21 17 Wood ( Ebony excepted) 5 7, 9 9 2 67,312 40,113 58,161 101,744 95,418 An examination of this table shows that in the six years exports have been stationary except for the recent progress in export of wood. Ivory, coffee, and cocoa are, for the most part, sent to France. Of the caoutchouc, two-thirds come to France ; one-third goes to foreign countries, chiefly to England. As for wood, the largest part goes to foreign countries : the purchases of okoume wood by Germany in 1911 approached 68,370 tons, representing a value of more than three millions of francs. Imports in 1911 slightly exceeded six millions. The share of France represents a little more than one-half of this total, the share of foreign countries a little less. Fabrics are the most important article of importation. They constitute about one-third of the importation of Gabon. Two-thirds of these fabrics come from England, the other third comes from France. This is a very remarkable fact. In spite of tariff assimilation and in spite of the existence of the chartered companies, England furnishes Gabon with the larger part of the fabrics that it needs. France has a marked advantage only in beverages and metal products. The statistics of the custom house receipts for six years also show how slow is the commercial progress of Gabon : POSSESSIONS IN EQUATORIAL AFRICA 243 Import Export Consumption Registration duties. duties. duties. duties. Francs. Francs. Francs. Francs. 1907 621,965 314,668 298,875 38,683 1908 455.283 189,252 236,678 33.284 1909 38>,84o 167,807 177,809 26,199 I9I0 497.4 « 2 203,062 235.899 32.697 I9II 590.937 190,726 481, 53» 45.966 1912 585.663 346,974 904,094 42,9»7 There are in Gabon four customs offices. About half of the receipts is collected by that of Cape Lopez. At LibreviUe and at Loango the receipts are much less important. At Sette-Cama they are insignificant (the reason for this has been indicated above). All the trade of the middle Congo and of Oubanghi-Chari- Tchad goes through Brazzaville, which was up to 1910 the only station for the customs of the colony, and which remains to-day much the most important. For this colony a dis- tinction is drawn between the general trade and the special trade, something not done for Gabon. In importation the special trade of the middle Congo amounted in 1911 to eight millions and a half in round numbers ; it is divided equally between France and foreign countries. The special exportation trade amounted to eighteen millions ; in this total France was represented by one-third and foreign countries by two-thirds. The exports of caoutchouc and of ivory, which represent the heaviest part of the total exports, have remained sta- tionary for some years. NuifBEB OF Tons exported. 1907 1908 1909 1910 191 1 1912 On the other hand, the exports of copper ore have lately undergone a very interesting development. The exportation £2 vory. Caoutchouc. 131 '.357 139 i.«55 162 1.447 130 1.344 140 1,416 »32 1,416 ^44 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY of ore began in 1910 ; it was then only eight tons. It rose in 1911 to 1,900 tons and in 1912 to 1,968 tons. In importa- tion the statistics of the customs receipts offer a better indication of progress than the value attributed to the imports. These receipts amounted to 706,000 francs in 1907, 416,000 francs in 1908, 449,000 francs in 1909, 633,000 francs in 1910, 787,000 francs in 1911, and 941,000 francs in 1912. After the decrease of the years 1908 and 1909 an advance has quite recently manifested itself. Fabrics constitute the most important item of imports. In 1911 the imports of fabrics amounted to two millions in round numbers. France, England, and Belgium each figure in this total for amounts varying between 500,000 and 600,000 francs. Germany comes next with a figure of 200,000 francs, slightly above that attributed to the Belgian Congo. For other products, notably for beverages, metal work, and arms, France has a marked advantage. Taken all together, the external commerce of French Equatorial Africa is far from showing the same degree of development as that of French West Africa. There are, however, no a priori reasons why the same progress should not have taken place in the one case as in the other. Why then has not the commerce of French Equatorial Africa developed more rapidly ? The fault lies, in a certain measure, with the regime of tariff assimilation to which Gabon has been subjected. But that is only a local and special reason. The two fundamental causes for the stationary condition of the external commerce of French Equatorial Africa are : (1) the impediment which the monopoly of the privileged companies offers to the development of free trade ; and (2) the condition of neglect under which this colony for a long time suffered. Up to the present time there has not been constructed a single kilometre of railroad in French Equatorial Africa. This explains everything. It was only in 1909 that a modest loan of twenty-one millions was authorized, to the end of setting in motion the first indis- POSSESSIONS IN EQUATORIAL AFRICA 245 pensable works. The colony is at present seeking to con- tract an important loan of 1 75,000,000 francs. The execution of the great works which this loan will permit will, doubtless, bring about a new development in the economic activity of the colony. But until these works are executed, we cannot expect the commerce of French Equatorial Africa to develop rapidly. Criticism of Tariff Assimilation. — ^The tariff assimilation of Gabon was evidently a mistake on the part of the legislators of 1892. As a matter of fact, all the reasons that have opposed the inclusion of Senegal and the other colonies of the western coast of Africa among the assimilated colonies apply, with at least as much force, to Gabon. In order to avoid paying the duties of the national tariff, foreign mer- chandise intended for Gabon enters by way of Kamerun, Spanish Guinea, or the conventional basin of the Congo. This withdrawal of traffic is more injurious than anything else to the economic activity of Gabon. It reduces the revenue from import duties, encourages fraud, and dis- pleases the native, who is obliged to go farther to look for the European products that he desires. The natives in Gabon are particularly poor. The population of this colony is altogether primitive. In order to persuade them to buy European products, it is necessary to offer them at very low prices. To ' penalize the consumption ' of these articles by the application of a tariff duty created for the inhabitants of the French national domain, is a singular way of encouraging their purchase. Tariff assimilation doubles the prices of European merchan- dise in Gabon. In the first place, it increases the net price of the merchandise by the amount of the high duties collected on their entrance into the colony. Afterwards, by reducing the volume of business, it increases the margin to cover general costs that must be added to the price of each article sold. This second point is very important, practically. A com- mercial house that could cover general expenses by increasing 246 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY by ten per cent the price of its merchandise, if its sales were large, must add thirty per cent to the selling price if its sales dwindle to one-third of the volume that it could handle without increase of personnel or equipment. Thus tariff assimilation, by reducing the number of sales, renders the situation of the French merchant more difficult. But the fundamental reason why the policy of tariff assimilation in Gabon should be abandoned as soon as possible is that it constitutes an insuperabFe obstacle to the unification of tariff rates in this part of Africa. It is highly desirable for all the European nations having colonies in these regions to come to some understanding for the adoption of a uniform tariff regime. But in order that France may be able to negotiate to some purpose with the other powers, it is necessary as a preliminary for her to take Gabon out of the list of assimilated colonies. The bill submitted at the end of 1912 contained a pro- vision having this end in view. It is desirable that this reform be accomplished as soon as possible. As soon as Gabon has been endowed with tariff personality, France will be able, if it prove necessary, to make concessions in this colony to the other powers. CHAPTER VI ALGERIA I The Progress of the External Commerce of Algeria. — ^The important development of the external commerce of Algeria is a fact that immediately impresses itself upon any one studying the economic history of this country. A few figures will exhibit the importance of the progress accom- plished since the acquisition of the colony. In the first years of the reign of Louis Philippe the whole of the external commerce of Algeria did not reach ten millions of francs, imports and exports combined. The figure of 100 millions that had been reached under exceptional conditions in 1845 and 1846, was definitively passed in 1853. The 200 million mark was in turn exceeded in 1859. From 1871 the external commerce of Algeria amounted to more than 300 millions. In 1890 the half -billion mark was attained. Twenty years later, in 1910, the billion mark was passed. The progress has been still more marked in the years following. Even confining ourselves to the figures for the special com- merce, always lower than those for the general conmierce, we find that the imports and exports of Algeria, combined, reach 1,081,000,000 francs in 1911 and 1,217,000,000 francs in 1912.2 Thus the external commerce of Algeria is ten times as great as it was in the middle of the last century. It has increased a hundredfold since the date (1834) when the French government decided to remain in northern Africa. This progress, which would once have appeared fabulous, is, doubtless, not capable of exciting surprise in those who know how rapidly a new country can develop under the direction of men who have come from countries of a high 248 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY degree of civilization. It is the justification of the extended sacrifices made by France south of the Mediterranean. What we must bear in mind in the present connexion is that this development of the external conmierce would have taken place no matter what legal regime was applied. The various tariff measures adopted by the public powers of the mother country had something to do with accelerating or retarding the movement. They have, above all, had the power to change the direction of the development, and that is what they have doubtless aimed at doing. But we must look elsewhere than to public regulations for the causes determining the progress of the commerce of Algeria. 1. The first cause of the growth of the external commerce of Algeria consists in the pro gress of conquest and pacification. The entire territory of Algeria has not always been open, as to-day, to the colonizing activities of the Europeans. In the beginning the French held only the three cities of Algiers, Bone, and Oran, and their immediate environs. What was then called the external commerce of Algeria was very nearly limited to the merchandise which it was necessary to bring from France in order to assure the sub- sistence of the troops garrisoning these three cities. What could Algeria produce and export at that time ? Evidently nothing. Little by little the French extended their control, but the work required much time. The struggle against Abdel- Kader was not concluded until 1847. The great Kabilie was not conquered until 1857. Now, so long as the country was unsafe, colonists would neither venture far into the country nor invest large capital in creating important works that would have been exposed to the risks of a renewal of hostilities. Enterprises involving time were impracticable. The zone of action offered for French colonization was thus narrowly limited. As long as the government of the Second Empire lasted, it prudently discouraged the colonists from venturing beyond the narrow strip of land then constituting ALGERIA 249 the civil territory.* It has only been since the beginning of the Third Republic that a different policy has prevailed. To-day, general security is sufficiently assured everywhere and the enterprise of the colonists has ample scope in the 201,251 square kilometres that constitute northern Algeria, not to mention the immense territories of the south (304,517 square kilometres). This progressive increase in the area of Algeria fit for colonization was bound to have as a normal result a parallel development in conunerce. 2. The second cause of the development of Algerian commerce consists in the growth of the population in gener al, and the growiih of the European population m particular. At the beginning of the Second Empire, Algeria had only two millions and a half of inhabitants. In 1906 the figure of five millions was passed. The census of March 5, 1911, gives 5,563,828 inhabitants (of whom 5,069,522 are in northern Algeria). A population twice as numerous neces- sarily consumes and produces more. But from the point of view of both production and con- sumption, the quahty of the population is of still more importance than the quantity. In this connexion the development of the European population is particularly significant. It is especially this population that produces for exportation and that consumes products coming from outside. In 1872 there were not yet 250,000 Europeans in Algeria. At the census of 1911 there were 795,522. The business relations existing between this population and the rest of the civihzed world were bound to develop with its increase in nimibers. 3. The third cause rests in the development of public works and especia lly in the means of communication . At the time of the conquest, Algeria was as lacking in means of communication as a new country. Because of the geo- graphical situation of Africa Minor, which is a kind of island placed between the desert and the sea, the external com- merce of Algeria is necessarily carried on almost entirely by 250 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY sea. How could ships receive and deliver freight in unim- proved harbours ? How, lacking roads and railroads, could the products of the interior get to the ports ? But all this has changed. Important works have been constructed, although there still remains much to do. Algeria possesses at the present time 3,277 kilometres of railroad open for commercial operation, and 4,610 kilometres of national roads, without counting strategic routes and local roads. Harbour improvements have been executed, not only in the great ports hke Algiers and Oran, but also in secondary ports. All the facihties thus offered to trade could not fail to stimulate its development. 4. The fourth cause, which is a consequence of those already given, consists in the d evelopment of agricultura l industry and of mining. The cultivation of cereals has expanded considerably. The cultivation of the vine and of vegetables, which was, so to speak, non-existent in the early period, supphes to-day an important element in the export trade. The extraction of ores and phosphates used in Europe has also rnnt.rihiitg d in a large rri pasurfi tft swfill this trade. Since s he produces more, Algeria buys more. The development of these industries has forced her to import from Europe a vast quantity of machines and tools. Further, the sale of their products, steadily increasing in volume, has procured for the inhabitants resources permitting them to hve on a higher scale. Such are the chief and the essential causes for the develop- ment of the external commerce of Algeria. For the analysis of this development the most satisfactory data are furnished by the General Table of the Conomerce of France pubHshed by the National Administration of the Customs. In 1839 this pubhcation began to give, for the first time, a series of tables presenting separately, for each of the powers with which France made exchanges, the data for the various articles imported or exported. In the volume for 1839 Algiers is placed (p. 39) not among the French ALGERIA 251 colonies, but, strange to say, between Egypt and the Barbary States. Raw hides, wool in bulk, bones and horns of cattle, and tallow, constituted then the principal articles imported from Algeria into France. These articles, all of them animal products, represented three-fourths of the Algerian imports into France. Cereals appear lower in the list (3,000 hectolitres), between wax and leeches. Leeches take the seventh place in the classification of articles imported from Algeria, arranged according to value. Algeria sent to the mother country 970,000 leeches. The exports of France to Algeria consisted chiefly in fabrics, wines, sugar, and brandy, that is to say, in articles intended for clothing or for supplying the European population. The volume of French exports to Algeria is given at 1,805,000 francs. But these figures are without interest, for they are made up of official values, perceptibly different from actual values.* Never- theless, it is interesting to note that Algiers already reaches the ninth place in the classification of countries receiving imports from France. (In the classification of origin of imports into France it is only thirty-third.) In 1851 (we prefer to select for comparison the years in which the tariff legislation of Algeria was changed) the situation was already perceptibly improved. The imports from Algeria into France amounted to 16,280,000 francs (actual values). A new product, olive oil, reaches the first place, and represents a sum of more than seven millions of francs. Cereals (120,817 hectolitres) have gained ground. Tobacco and ores take high places in the table. In the classification of countries from which imports are received, Algeria rose to the twelfth place. The exports from France to Algeria reach 60,880,000 francs and place this country fourth in the classification of countries importing from France. But there is no perceptible change in the nature of the products exported to Algeria. The same, or very nearly the same, articles are in the lead. 1867, The figures are higher than in 1851 (67,590,000 252 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY francs for the exports from France into Algeria) ; but Algeria does not ascend in the table, for the development of the commerce of France with the colony is not more rapid than the development of her commerce with foreign countries. (Algeria even falls to the seventh place among countries importing from France.) But one observes a greater variety in the kinds of articles imported and exported. It is a characteristic fact that tools and metal products (2,388,000 francs) have taken an important place among the exports from France. 1884, Imports from Algeria into France rise to 102,114,000 francs ; exports from France to Algeria, to 156,713,000 francs. Among the imports from Algeria two new products appear and take an important place : wines and table fruits. The imports of cereals exceed a milhon of quintals. We have here manifest proof of the development of the agricultural production of Algeria imder the Third Republic. 191^. Imports from Algeria into France rise to 427,263,000 francs. Algeria holds the sixth place in the classification of countries of origin of imports, preceded by England, Germany, the United States, Belgium, and Russia. France has received from her 7,654,265 hectoHtres of wine, repre- senting a value of 245,994,000 francs, 2,400,000 quintals of cereals, worth more than 63,000,000 of francs, cattle to the value of 25,000,000, table fruits (13,000,000), oHve oil (7,000,000), minerals (7,000,000), hides (6,000,000), wool (6,000,000), potatoes (6,000,000), &c. Exports from France to Algeria rise to 568,488,000 francs, ranking Algeria foiuih among importing countries, after England, Belgium, and Germany. It is interesting to compare the hst of articles exported to Algeria in 1912 with that of the articles exported in 1839. Algiers buys but Uttle wine, brandy, and tobacco from the mother country ; she sells these articles. She buys from France, especially, manufactured products : cotton fabrics (69,000,000), tools and metal products (27,000,000), automobiles and bicycles (26,000,000), furniture and wood- ALGERIA 253 work (about 26,000,000), machines and parts of machines (about 21,000,000), lingerie, clothing, and ready-made articles (17,000,000), paper (17,000,000), prepared skins (13,000,000), chemical products (12,000,000). A single article of food appears among the above products : sugar (20,000,000), which Algeria does not produce. This rapid sunmiary shows what realities the French legislator had to face in the different epochs in which he drew up regulations regarding the tariff poUcy of Algeria. It is doubtless true that, in legislating, the French Chambers gave consideration to the possibihties of the future, at least, as much as to the requirements of the present. It is, never- theless, well to acquaint ourselves with the principal interests that were at stake in these different epochs. It would also be useful to exhibit the development of the commerce of Algeria with foreign countries. But here comparisons cannot be drawn on so secure a basis.* One who wishes to study the development of the foreign com- merce of Algeria from 1831 to 1850 must have recourse to a publication of the War Department, entitled Table of the French Establishments in Algeria. From 1851 commerce and navigation between Algeria and foreign countries and the French colonies was the subject of a special publication compiled from documents furnished by the Algerian customs service on the model of the statistics of the mother country. But the official valuations were retained for Algeria up to 1873. Beginning with 1874, the statistics of the commerce of Algeria with foreign countries and the colonies are pub- Ushed every year at the end of the General Table of the Commerce of France. Beginning with the same year, the antiquated official valuations were replaced by the actual valu£S applicable to similar merchandise imported into France, with the exception of some articles such as alfa, vegetable horsehair, and minerals, whose value was calculated according to the average rates indicated by the local service. It is not necessary to warn those who study these questions 254 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY against the errors to which they are exposed through mingUng and confusing the sources. We may, however, offer a striking example. Before 1894 the commerce between France and Algeria was recorded at the same time by the administration of the customs in France and by the adminis- tration of the customs in Algeria. The two sets of statistics never agreed, but this difficulty was solved by suppressing the statistics compiled in Algiers ; thereafter the Algerian custom house had nothing to note but the external commerce of Algeria with foreign countries and the French colonies. But when the decree of August 7, 1901, inspired by the ideas of decentraHzation in favour since 1898, placed the Algerian customs service under the authority of the governor- general, the administration of the Algerian customs beheved it necessary to give again, each year, a complete table of the external commerce of Algeria with the mother country, as well as with foreign countries.^ But the figures of the Algerian customs and those of the national customs inevit- ably fail to correspond. The discrepancy does not arise wholly from the circumstance that certain merchandise, leaving one country at the end of December, enters another at the beginning of January, which causes them to be assigned to different years. The discrepancy arises mainly from the fact that a decree of the governor-general of Algeria of April 18, 1902, has instituted a commission of valuation in the customs service that can adopt, for merchandise exported from Algeria and for that imported from the neighbouring countries (Tunis, Morocco),' rates of valuation other than those fixed by the commission of customs valua- tion functioning in the mother country under the Ministry of Finances. As an example of the resulting discrepancies, we may note the fact that for 1911 the ordinary wines exported from Algeria to France were valued at twenty-six francs per hectoHtre in Algeria and at thirty francs per hectoHtre in France. In some years the difference has been much greater (ten francs per hectoHtre in Algeria and fifteen ALGERIA 255 francs per hectolitre in France).* It is, then, necessary to be careful never to combine the data collected in the mother country with the data collected in Algeria. It must be added that the creation of this Algerian commission of tariff valuation throws suspicion upon all the comparisons that may be instituted between the Algerian statistics prior to 1902 and those that have been compiled since that date. Another cause for uncertainty is the perfunctory character of the declarations of exports and imports in Algeria, especially in regard to the products exported for which there are no duties to be paid. The evil is, no doubt, not pecuhar to Algeria ; but we are justified in beheving that it is pecuhariy great in this country, since the administration of the Algerian customs has felt the need of inserting at the head of its statistical documents an appeal to importers and to exporters to be more careful in drawing up their declarations. What Algeria produces and exports. — ^The geographical situation of the countries importing Algerian products is a consideration of capital importance in the matter. At the outset we shall place by themselves the exports to neigh- bouring countries (Morocco and Tunis) with which Algeria carries on business relations in a great measure by the land frontier. The commerce between Algeria on the one hand and Tunis and Morocco on the other has much similarity with that carried on between the several departments of Algeria. It is part of what a geographer might caU, not inappropriately, the internal commerce of Africa Minor. From the total of the exports of 1912 (547,100,000 francs) we may then deduct a sum of 42,558,000 francs, which represents the Algerian exports intended for the two neighbouring countries (Morocco 22,527,000 francs, Tunis 20,031,000 francs). There remains a figure of 504,542,000 francs. With this deduction made, it becomes obvious that the commerce of Algeria with the French colonies is insignificant. Were it not for the tobacco sent by Algeria into the colonies, and particularly into Indo-China, which represents about 256 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY five millions, it would, so to speak, amount to nothing. In order to simplify the argument, we may deduct from the total export trade that between Algeria and the colonies (5,602,000 francs). There will then remain an exportation of 499,000,000 francs, which is divided between France and foreign countries as follows : Millions of francs. Per cent. France ...... 400-5 801 Northern Europe . . . .68 13-6 Foreign Mediterranean countries . .26 52 America and the Far East ... 2-5 0-5 When Algeria surveys her customers, she discovers that she has one great customer, France, which alone absorbs more than four-fifths of her exports. The manufacturing nations of the north of Europe (England, Germany, Belgium, and Holland) are glad to procure from northern Africa raw materials and the products which their soil does not supply. These stand next to France, although far behind. (England 26,900,000; Belgium 15,600,000; Germany 12,700,000; Holland 7,900,000 ; Russia imports from Algeria by way of the Baltic Sea 3,200,000; Sweden 800,000; Denmark 500,000.) The commerce of Algeria with the Mediterranean countries is relatively insignificant, in spite of their proximity. These countries are essentially agricultural, and grow the same products as northern Africa. Hence they constitute for Algeria competitors, not customers. Italy (with nine millions) stands only a little in advance of the Low Countries in the list of importing countries. Spain, notwithstanding her proximity and the importance of the element of Spanish origin in the population of Algeria, stands lower in the list. Great empires like Austria-Hungary (5,300,000) and Russia (Black Sea, 1,300,000), are only unimportant customers. As for the other parts of the world, but for the United States (2,100,000) they would offer only an insignificant market for Algerian products. The foregoing analysis exhibits, in the main, the actual ALGERIA 257 condition of affairs. K it is true that the degree of regard in which the producer holds his customers is r^ulated by the importance of their purchases, it is easy to guess the inmost sentiments of the Algerian producer. There remains to be seen what these different customers buy. This will permit us to form a better judgement as to the possibility of changes in the direction of Algerian trade. Wines constitute for Algeria the chief article of exportation, representing more than half the value of the merchandise sent by Algeria to the mother country (246 millions of the 427 millions in 1912). France buys almost all the wines that Algeria exports. The purchases of wines from Algeria by England, Belgium, the Low Countries, and Germany, repre- sent only some hundreds of thousands of francs for each one of these countries. Other countries offer practically no market for Algerian wines. This situation is easily explained. Wine is a product whose consumption is limited to a rather narrow field. Our country, which is the greatest wine producer in the world, is at the same time the greatest consumer of it ; nowhere else could the Algerian wine-growers find so extensive a clientele as that afforded by France. It is accordingly a very great advantage for Algeria to have its wines admitted on a footing of equality with French wines. Not only do they not suffer from the protective tariff granted to French wines, but they profit by it. It must be added that Algerian wines are often mixed with French wines before being sold for consumption, and both are thereby improved. In the wines sold by France to foreign countries there is thus a certain proportion of Algerian wine, difficult to determine, but considerable. Thus it is an advantage to Algerian wines to pass through the French market before entering other European markets. This is why the foreigner does not buy his wine directly in Algeria. It is not that he is ignorant of the importance of the Algerian vineyards. England, Belgium, the Low Coun- tries, Germany, buy directly in Algeria the wine lees intended 1M»'15 s 258 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY for manufacturing purposes ; but as for the wine itseK, it is more convenient for the merchants of these countries to come to France to buy it. Cereals stand next in importance in the exports of Algeria. For this product, again, France is very nearly the only European customer of Algeria. The exports of cereals from Algeria to France amounted to 63,000,000 francs in 1912. The cereal exports not consigned to France go to the neigh- bouring countries, Tunis and Morocco.^ This situation is easily explained. Nowhere could the Algerian exporter find conditions so favourable as in France, where his grain, admitted free of duty, has the benefit of the rise in prices produced artificially by the high customs duties. Next in order of exports are live animals, principally sheep. The situation is the same as for the cereals, and for the same reason. The exports of live animals to France represent a figure of twenty-five millions. Exports not consigned to France go generally to Tunis or Morocco. Table fruits and early vegetables, which are the next most important articles of exportation, come almost entirely to France. The same may be said of olive oil. What does not come to France goes to Tunis (France 7,000,000, Tunis 3,000,000). In fine, the articles of alimentation that form four-fifths of the Algerian exports come almost without exception to France. What is not sent to France remains in northern Africa to be consumed on the spot or in one of the neighbour- ing countries. There is only one exception to this rule : the fish which Italian fishermen take on the coast of Algeria and which is then sent to Italy, The purchases of fish made by Italy in Algeria represented 1,328,000 francs in 1912 : it is the principal article exported by Algeria to Italy. Let us pass to the crude materials of manufacture. Here the situation is quite different. Foreign countries buy extensively from Algeria as does France, and sometimes even more extensively. The exports of raw hides amount to ten millions ; France takes two-thirds of them and foreign ALGERIA 259 countries one-third. The foreign countries of the north of Europe buy from Algeria three times as much cork as does France (seven millions and a half against two millions and a half). The largest part of the vegetable horsehair (six millions) goes to Italy, Austria, and Germany. Almost all the alfa goes to England : that country buys eight millions of francs* worth of it. The chief part of the phosphates is sent to foreign countries. Germany buys to the amount of three and a half millions, Spain buys three millions, while France buys only one million. The exports of iron ore to foreign countries amount to about fifteen millions : England takes nine millions and a half, and the Low Countries more than four millions. The exports of zinc ore to foreign countries amount to 11,800,000 francs. Belgium takes nine millions. There are also crude materials (cork in the rough, crude tartar, vegetable horsehair, raw hides, wood for cabinet work, &c.), which the United States buys from Algeria. Manufactured products hold but a very smaU place in the total of Algerian exportations. If Morocco and Tunis did not buy in Algeria fabrics and clothing, only a single product would be worth mentioning under this head, tobacco, which is the basis of an important industry in Oranie. This indus- try uses as its raw material not only tobacco produced in Algeria, but also leaf tobacco imported from foreign countries (notably from the United States). The exports of tobacco amount to about twelve millions. Hardly a quarter of this comes to France ; the remainder goes to the French colonies, England, Belgium, and the Low Countries. But we must remember that in respect to this product commercial currents are deflected by the rigour of fiscal monopolies and by the imposts levied in the several countries. What Algeria buys and consumes. — ^The share of the mother country is greater in the import trade of Algeria than in the export trade. If we deduct from the 670,995,000 francs, which represent the total imports of Algeria in 1912, the imports of Tunisian origin (7,277,000 francs) and Moroccan S2 260 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY origin (9,377,000 francs), there remain 654,331,000 francs, which are distributed as follows : Millions of francs. Per cent. France ...... 568-4 87 Northern Europe . . . • 315 4*8 Foreign Mediterranean countries . . 23-7 3*6 America and the Far East . . .21-3 4*4 Thus Algeria makes about nine-tenths of her purchases in France, an enormous proportion. In the Mediterranean regions and in northern Europe her purchases are relatively less than her sales. In the rest of the world, on the contrary, she buys more than she sells, which is accounted for quite naturally by the fact that those countries furnish commodities not produced in the Mediterranean regions. After England (16,700,000), the chief foreign exporters to Algeria are Brazil (14,500,000, chiefly coffee, 13,000,000), Spain (10,200,000), and the United States (10,000,000). Germany is far behind (5,900,000), alittle in advance of Austria-Hungary (4,000,000), Italy (2,600,000), and the Low Countries (2,300,000). That Algeria does not buy more from the Mediterranean countries whose products are similar to her own, is self-explanatory. But it is noteworthy how small a proportion of her purchases is made in the countries of northern Europe. This is evidently a result of tariff assimilation. If we examine the nature of the articles imported into Algeria, we note that they consist chiefly in manufactures, and that these manufactures come from France. And manufactures, as has been shown above, lead in the classification of merchandise exported from France. French exports to Algeria of manufactured products in 1912 exceeded 400,000,000 francs, while foreign imports into Algeria of the same products amounted only to 25,000,000 francs. Manufactures represented more than three-fourths, almost four-fifths, of the Algerian imports from France. When we examine the imports into Algeria from foreign countries we do not find a similar predominance of manu- factures. These imports are distributed as follows : ALGERIA 261 Articles of alimentation .... 37,367,000 francs Materials of manufacture .... 39,845,000 „ Manufactured articles .... 25,283,000 „ The products at the head of the list of imports from foreign countries are coffee (14,800,000), coal (11,900,000)," wood ( 1 0,400,000), machines and mechanical appliances ( 1 0,400,000 ). Next come animals (8,400,000), cereals (5,100,000), and beasts of burden (4,900,000). The animals, cereals, and beasts of burden almost all come from Morocco or from Tunis." Almost all the coffee comes from Brazil. Coal comes chiefly from England (10,000,000), and a small part from Germany (1,500,000). Woods come from Austria (3,000,000), from Sweden, from Russia, and from the United States. As for machines and mechanical appliances, they are chiefly furnished by England (3,700,000) and by the United States (2,600,000). But it is to be borne in mind that France could not undertake to furnish Algeria with wood and coal, since she is herself obliged to import these commodities. Nor could she fiumish coffee. As for machines and mechanical appliances, bought by Algeria from foreign countries, these are principally agricultural machines — a speciality of English and American manufacturers. There are still other elements in the foreign imports that represent specialities that the mother country could not furnish : petroleum from the United States (1,600,000), cheese from Switzerland and from Holland, tea from China, which occupy a position of appreciable importance in the table of Algerian imports. As for leaf tobacco from the United States, Germany, and Austria, this constitutes, as we have seen, the raw material for a flourishing industry in Algeria, whose development could give no offence to the mother country. One who devotes himself to the somewhat ungrateful task of examining minutely the figures compiled in the statistical documents bearing on the commerce of Algeria, is forced to the general conclusion, that Algeria buys from the mother 262 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY country all that the latter is capable of furnishing. ^^ One could ask no more. Tariff Assimilation and its Advantages. — ^A thoroughgoing analysis of the external commerce of Algeria leads naturally to the following conclusion : Tariff assimilation, which has inflicted so much injury upon the colonies proper, has con- stituted, on the contrary, an immense benefit for Algeria. Thanks to assimilation, four-fifths of the commerce of Algeria takes place under a regime of absolute freedom from duties. There is no other country in the world that sends four-fifths of its exports to a market which they enter without paying any customs duty. Algeria finds in France for the principal products of her agriculture — wines, cereals, animals, fruits, and early vegetables — ^a steady and certain market sufficient to absorb them. For Algeria this is an important advan- tage ; it is singularly favourable to the development of agri- cultural production. On the other hand, all the products coming from France, representing nine- tenths of the imports, enter the Algerian territory free of duty, and can be sold to the consumer without having their price raised by duties collected on their entrance into the ports of Africa. This is an appreciable advantage for the Algerian consumer. This general and reciprocal freedom from duties is, to be sure, limited by certain restrictions, rendered necessary by the existence of indirect internal taxes.^ Thus in 1912 the Algerian custom house collected duties of 4,226,000 francs on the sugars brought from the mother country. On the other hand, 317,000 francs of customs duties were collected in France on products brought from Algeria (300,000 francs on tobacco). But these exceptions to the general rule, inevitable because of the differences in fiscal regime between the two countries, reduce only to a small degree the beneficial effect of the principle of assimilation. We must take into account not only the pecuniary advan- tages proceeding from the fact that the products exchanged by France and Algeria pay no customs duties. We must ALGERIA 263 likewise bear in mind the conveniences resulting from the simplification of the formalities which is rendered possible by this reciprocal exemption. In consequence of the exemption there is less interference with trade and less loss of time. The importers thus escape the difficulties they would other- wise encounter in moving in the labyrinth of the innumerable tariff classifications and in complying with the required formalities of the customs with the exactness necessary to prevent false declarations, always disagreeable in their consequences, even when they are not intentional. The following fact shows what value commerce attaches to this question of convenience. Algerian importers who desire to bring in foreign products, often prefer to bu yT^gm in the French market, atter they have been nationalized b y the pa>'m«nl uf duties, mlh^r than loTuy the m directly in the country producmg them. Hence arises the unexpe cted result, that the customs duty pai d by these products is a source of profit to the budget ot the mother country instead of being a profit to the budget ot Algeria. Thus Algeria finds herself depnved ot a revenue estimated at a million francs annually. The administration of the Algerian customs has endeavoured to break up this inconvenient habit of the importers, by installing in Algeria a tariff museum containing specimens of the different articles of importation, arranged according to the customs classification with the rate of duties indicated. ^^ It seeks in this way to give more facilities for information to the merchant who wishes to deal directly with foreign countries. But the fact that the habit of importing through France has developed to such a point as to lead the administration to take such action, is the best proof of the importance attached by the trade to the conveniences afforded by indirect importation. T he Algerian t raders prefer to pay a little more and to havp less trnnhlp The producers and the consumers of France and of Algeria obtain thus from tariff assimilation almost all the advantages that they could derive from a complete tariff union. In the 264 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY eyes of the FreHch, the tariff assimilation of Algeria con- stitutes an advance analogous to that which the Germans view as the result of the establishment of the Zollverein. It offers them a more extended internal market, within which their products can circulate freely. At the same time, this assimi- lation has a political significance to which the national sentiment attaches very great value. The absence of tariff barriers between France and Algeria, like the use of the same postage stamps, gives to the Frenchman who puts his foot upon the soil of northern Africa the impression that he has not left his own country. We are here dealing with the matter of external symbols which exert a great influence upon public opinion, always composed of simple elements. Tariff assimilation thus appears as a powerful political bond between France and Algeria. French opinion considers the French territories south of the Mediterranean and those north of it as two parts of the same country, and it will never admit that the sea can cease to serve as a bond of union between them and become a barrier. It is true that the inhabitants of Algeria, as consumers, must submit to the high prices which the application of a very high rate of duty establishes in the French market. But they do not have to suffer more than the French con- sumers. It is not a shock to the Frenchman to find in Algeria the prices to which he was accustomed in France, and since at the south of the Mediterranean he pays less for his coffee and tobacco, he gets the impression that the cost of living is cheaper there. Then, France is the industrial country nearest to Algeria. All other things equal, the Algerian buyer of manufactures would prefer to deal in the French market. He is not in the condition of the inhabitant of the Antilles or of New Caledonia, who is irritated by being forced to bring from Europe and to pay dear for products which he could quickly and cheaply procure from a neighbouring country. The tariff assimilation of Algeria does not inter- fere with the natural course of commerce ; on the contrary, ALGERIA 265 it favours it. Under these conditions, there is nothing astonishing in the fact that a tariff regime which provokes bitter recriminations in the colonies proper, raises no protests in Algeria. The other side of the question should also be considered. The Algerian producer profits largely by the protection which our tariff duties accord to the French producer. In our home market, to which he has free access, he sells at high prices his wine, his grain, and his cattle. He has no temptation to send them to foreign coimtries, as he is persuaded that he would not find there prices equally remunerative. This is a very substantial compensation for himy^Algeria profits 'j more than she loses from our customs duties. This does not J mean that the tariff is not excessive, or that it would not be preferable for France to adopt a more liberal commercial policy. But this is an altogether different question. One may deny the expediency of our tariff regime ; but what is undeniable is that it is an advantage to Algeria to have the same tariff regime as the mother country, whatever that regime may be. Tariff assimilation has been a delusion for the colonies proper. For Algeria it is a real and material advantage. In the trade between the mother country and the assimilated colonies, the rule of free importation, which is applied without exception to French products imported into the colonies, was, down to recent times, not applied to the importation of colonial products into France under the exceptions of Table E. Even to-day, sugar, which is the staple product of these colonies, continues to be taxed on its entry into France. In the relations of France and Algeria, on the other hand, there are none of these exceptions. The rule applies, without exception, that products pass freely from the one domain to the other. One is impressed forcibly by the balanced character of the trade between France and Algeria. In an average year the products sold by Algeria to France pay very nearly for what France seUs to her. The proportion of 1 266 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY the trade of Algeria with the mother country is practically the same for exports and for imports. There is thus an actual equality which prevents recriminations from arising on either side. What regime, moreover, could be substituted for tariff assimilation, if that policy should be abandoned ? Teiriff autonomy, no doubt, for there is no practicable alternative. The advantages of tariff autonomy would be as follows : (1) Algeria could lower the customs duties levied on foreign products, which would allow her to buy them more cheaply; (2) She could levy, on French products, duties which would increase her public revenues. At present the customs duties of Algeria yield some ten millions of francs annually : (9,574,782 francs in 1911 ; 11,862,615 francs in 1912). For a country whose special import trade amoimted to more than half a billion, this is remarkably little. Tariff autonomy would permit Algeria to obtain from the levy of tariff duties on French products the revenues which she is forced to raise by internal taxation. It is, above all, on this groimd that tariff autonomy might appear to be desirable to the Algerian. But it is easy to perceive what the Algerians would lose by this. The increase in the price of French merchandise would more than balance the decrease in the prices of foreign merchandise. As a consumer, the Algerian would lose more than he would gain. As a producer, he would suffer cruelly. The mother country would be led, in retaliation, to tax Algerian products on their importation into France. The wine-growers of the south of France, especially, who even now find it hard to contain their jealousy,^* and who are silent only because they know that they would not be listened to, would hasten to demand the establishment of protective duties in order to rid themselves of the competition of Algerian wines. Next would come the turn of the cereals, cattle, olive oil, &c. The market of the mother country would be lost to the Algerian producer and one may well ask what other market ALGERIA 267 could take its place. A tariff war between the mother coun- try and her dearest daughter would be as odious as a civil war. The very idea appears intolerable to a Frenchman. And patriotic sentiment aside, it may be said that to erect a barrier where there is none, would not be serving the cause of general liberty of commerce in the world. CHAPTER VII THE PROTECTORATES OF TUNIS AND MOROCCO The External Commerce of Tunis. — ^The statistics of the external commerce of Tunis are compiled by the adminis- tration of the Tunisian customs houses. They form the subject of an annual publication entitled Statistical Docu- ments on the Commerce of Tunis. A summary of it is pub- lished in The General Statistics of Tunis which is inserted after the annual Report to the President of the Republic on the Condition of Tunis. The external commerce of Timis has begun to show a con- siderable development. In the first years of the protectorate it did not amount to fifty millions, imports and exports com- bined. The figure of 100,000,000 was exceeded in 1899, that of 200,000,000 in 1907, and that of 300,000,000 in 1912. The imports of 1912 amounted to 156,294,000 francs. The countries of origin of imports that enter into this total for sums above one million francs are the following : France . . . . . . . 802 Algeria . . . . . . .17-8 England . . . . . . .14-5 Italy 8-9 The United States 6-6 Russia . . . . . . .4-9 Germany ...... 3-4 Belgium ....... 3-2 Austria . . . . . . .2-1 Argentine Republic . . . . .1-9 Switzerland . . . . . .1-6 Turkey . . . . . . . i*6 Brazil . . . . . . .1-5 Spain . . . . . . . I'l Sweden . . . . . . .11 The share of France and of Algeria in the Tunisian imports is slightly above sixty per cent. That of England is about PROTECTORATES OF TUNIS AND MOROCCO 269 ten per cent and that of Italy is six per cent. All the other countries combined represent a little less than a quarter of the Tunisian imports. It is a remarkable fact that these proportions already obtained at the end of the last century. The imports have increased, but the proportional part of each country in the total has remained very nearly the same. Tunisian exports amounted in 1912 to 154,655,000 francs. The importing countries that figure in this total for sums above one million are the following : France ....... 67-7 Italy . . . . . . 252 England . . . . . .13-7 Belgium ....... 9-0 Algeria ....... 7-7 Tripoli ....... 7-2 Holland ... ... .5*2 Germany . . . . . .3-8 Egypt 34 Spain ....... 2-4 Malta ....... 2-3 Austria ....... 1*6 Portugal . . . . . .1-5 The share of France (forty- three per cent) is perceptibly less in exportation than in importation. It is the same with Algeria (five per cent). On the other hand, the share of Italy was sixteen per cent. That of England (about nine per cent) is almost the same as in the importation. The other coun- tries combined represent twenty-five per cent. If we go back to twenty years ago, we perceive that the proportionate share of France and of Algeria has diminished, while that of foreign countries has increased. In 1894 three-fourths of the exports from Tunis went to France or to Algeria. In 1912 France and Algeria combined absorbed a little less than one- half of the Tunisian exportations. This change is the result of the development of the mining industry in Tunis. Foreign countries buy in Tunis increasing quantities of phosphates and ore. Of the imports, cotton goods (about eighteen millions) 270 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY constitute the most interesting item. Of this branch of the trade, the part of England (six millions and a half) is slightly above that of France, which hardly reaches this figure. The part of Italy does not reach three millions. The part of Belgium is between 700,000 and 800,000 francs ; that of Germany, 300,000 francs. Spain, Switzerland, Holland, and British India figure for a smaller, but appreciable sum. Besides cotton goods we may cite among the principal articles imported wheat (ten millions), which comes chiefly from Algeria, the United States and Russia ; barley (three millions), supplied chiefly by Algeria and Russia ; maize (two millions), most of which comes from the Argentine Republic ; wheat flour, two-thirds of which come from France, and one- third from Algeria ; sugars (six millions), supplied almost exclusively by France ; coffee (one million and a half), which comes from Brazil ; leaf tobacco (1,600,000), half of which comes from the United States ; pine wood (two millions), the greater part of which comes from Austria; coal (six millions), the greater part of which comes from England ; petroleum (one million), which comes chiefly from Russia ; articles of iron and steel (five millions), which come almost entirely from France ; soaps (one million and a half), which likewise come from France ; jute bags (two millions), imported almost all from France ; agricultural machines (one million and a half), which come principally from France or from the United States ; automobiles (1,800,000 francs), which come nearly all from France ; finally, parcels by post, most of which come from France and which represent a value of more than eight millions. This examination shows that, fN Outside of cotton goods, in which England has maintained her \ former superiority, Tunis buys little from foreign countries , except the products which France does not supply, or is "^ therself obliged to import. '' Among the exports, the first place is held by the phos- phates (47,700,000), which represent almost one-third of the exports. The exports of phosphates exceeded, in 1912, PROTECTORATES OF TUNIS AND MOROCCO 271 nineteen millions of quintals. In this total the share of France is eighteen millions of francs, that of Italy, ten millions, that of England, five millions and a half ; Ger- many (3,300,000), Belgium (2,700,000), Holland (2,300,000), Portugal (1,400,000), Spain (1,000,000), Denmark (1,000,000) and Austria (1,000,000). Metallic ores occupy the second place in the exports, repre- senting a figure of more than twenty millions of francs. Iron ore (6,400,000) goes almost entirely to England and Holland ; lead (7,900,000) goes principally to Belgium, Italy and Spain ; zinc ore (5,200,000) goes nearly half to Belgium, half to France and Algeria. The exports next in importance are : cattle (5,000,000 francs), the greater part of which goes to Tripoli and Malta ; sheep (2,500,000), half of which goes to France and Algeria, and about half to Tripoli; Spanish mackerel (1,200,000), which goes almost entirely to Italy ; sponges (3,200,000), the greater part of which go to France ; wheat (4,000,000), almost the whole of which goes to France ; maize (4,800,000), of which three-fourths go to France and one-fourth to Tripoli ; oats (5,300,000), the greater part of which goes to France ; olive oil (20,000,000), of which France takes three-fourths and Italy the other fourth ; cork (1,600,000), of which three- fourths go to Algeria or to France ; alfa (4,200,000), which goes almost all to England ; wine (5,500,000), which goes almost all to France ; chechias (1,000,000), which are bought by Egypt. From this examination of the exports one discovers that the products of Tunisian agriculture are almost entirely bought either by France or by the neighbouring countries (Algeria, Tripoli). On the other hand, the greater part of the crude materials finds an outlet in foreign countries. A Frenchman may regret this ; but it is certainly not the fault of Tunis if French agriculture does not use more phosphates and if French industry does not require more ore or more alfa. The revenue from the customs duties has increased along 272 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY with the external commerce of Tunis.^ The revenue from the import duties has usually ranged in recent years between four and five millions of francs. In 1912 it rose to the unusual figure of 7,847,784 francs, in consequence of a par- ticularly large importation of cereals. The duties collected from the merchandise imported from France or from Algeria were 1,482,634 francs, and the duties collected from foreign merchandise were 6,365,149. The preceding year the duties collected from merchandise imported from France or from Algeria were 1,238,743 francs, and those collected from the merchandise imported from foreign countries, 4,873,952 francs. As for the export duties, the revenue derived from them varies considerably from one year to another. In 1911 it was only 300,356 francs. In 1912 it rose to 1,124,453 francs. The year 1911 had been exceptionally poor ; the year 1912 counts, with the years 1907 and 1908, among the best. Critical Considerations. — ^The notable development of the external commerce of Tunis during thirty years may appear, at first glance, to be the happy consequence of the tariff autonomy which the protectorate enjoys. In reality, it is chiefly a consequence of the gigantic progress of the mining industry and of the development of public works. We may ask ourselves whether this system, whose adoption would be so advantageous for the French colonies proper, does not offer more inconveniences to Tunis than advantages. The tariff autonomy of Tunis has for an inevitable result the organization of a whole fine of customs on the frontier of Algeria. That one cannot pass from Algeria into Tunis without encountering a custom house official and without being stopped by him, after thirty years of the protectorate, is an absurdity that is no longer tolerable. The fact that the protectorate of Tunis does not belong to the same ministerial department in France as Algeria cannot justify this inter- ference with trade. The trade between Tunis and Algeria, it cannot be too often repeated, presents all the characters PROTECTORATES OF TUNIS AND MOROCCO 273 of an internal commerce, and the products of the department of Constantine should be permitted to pass into Tunis as easily as into the department of Algiers. This internal customs barrier, extending over a length of 400 kilometres, from the Mediterranean as far as the Chotts, gives rise to an artificial and unnatural economic rivalry between Algeria and Tunis. Again, the tariff autonomy of Tunis constitutes a con- siderable hindrance to the trade with France. The products of the labour of the French colonists in the protectorate enjoy only the theoretical advantage of most-favoured- nation treatment, on their importation into France — an advantage actually conmion to all the foreign European States. The few products admitted into France duty free under the law of 1890 have the benefit of this favour only under reservation of a whole series of formalities and restric- tions, which constitute an embarrassment and a continual menace to the trade. On the other hand, French products arriving in Tunis are held up at the custom house. A certain number of them have, it is true, the benefit of free importa- tion, but it is no less true that others are subject to import duties, the revenue of which exceeds a miUion annuaUy. It is not so much this charge which is to be regretted, as the annoyance involved. It must not be forgotten that more than half of the Tunisian imports come from France and that two-fifths of the Tunisian exports are consigned to France. What an advantage it would be, if this trade, whose total reaches nearly fifty millions of francs, could proceed under a regime of absolute hberty ! One may ask himself, under these conditions, if the estabUshment of a complete tariff union between Algeria and Tunis would not be a considerable improvement. Algeria and Tunis would constitute, from the view-point of the tariff, a single territory surroimded by a common customs line, and the revenue of the customs duties collected at the frontiers could be divided between the two countries in the 1669.15 T 274 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY ratio of their population. The consequences of such a reform would be the following : there would be no longer any need of maintaining a whole army of customs officials, from the Mediterranean to the Sahara. The regime of tariff assimila- tion to which Tunis would thereafter find herself subjected, would have for her the same advantages as for Algeria. The French market would be opened to the products of Tunis. The cultivation of early vegetables, one of the principal sources of the wealth of Algeria, would undergo a proportionate development in Tunis. The Timisian colo- nists would no longer be menaced by the machinations of the wine-growers of the south of France, whose recriminations against them would be deprived of apparent grounds. A future, at once brilhant and assured, would open before them. Exchanges between Timis and France woidd no longer be impeded by a whole series of formaUties. The operations that attend the transportation of the merchandise from one shore of the Mediterranean to the other would be simplified and expedited. All these advantages would have, no doubt, their offsetting costs. Tunis would have to aboUsh the duties on exportation, and the revenue from import duties would visibly decrease. The Tunisian consumer would have to bear the consequences of the rise in prices resulting from the appHcation of our customs tariff. He would, without doubt, pay more for French cotton goods than he pays to-day for Enghsh goods. But these inconveniences would be largely compensated by the advantages mentioned above. From a higher point of view, it would appear to be an important moral advantage to do away with the artificial economic antagonism that purely political conditions have estabhshed. It would be a still more important moral advantage to treat the French colonists of Timis as French producers, and to give the inhabitants of the mother country the impression that exchanges with Tunis are not to be regarded as exchanges with a foreign territory. It is evident that a political PROTECTORATES OF TUNIS AND MOROCCO 275 advantage would accrue, from the view-point of the prepon- derance of the French element in the protectorate, from the more intimate relations that would be established between Tunis and France and Algeria. Considerations bearing upon a higher moral and poHtical union would of themselves justify an economic union, so desirable from the point of view of commercial advantage. There is no longer any diplomatic reason to oppose such a reform, since with the end of the year 1912 France has had the power to denounce article 2 of the arrangement of September 18, 1897, with England. The obstacle to such an arrangement is found in Tunisian particularism, which fears that such a reform might be the prelude to new attacks upon the autonomy of Tunis. It is not so much the tariff imion with Algeria that Tunis dreads, as the support that economic assimilation might later give to the movement for pohtical assimilation, which she would with reason reject. Another obstacle is foimd in the jealousy of certain French agriculturists, who consider the French colonists of Tunis as competitors to be put out of the way. But a lofty patriotism should prevail over these narrow tendencies. In order to assuage the particularism of the Tunisians, and the selfishness of the French agriculturists, and to bring about the desired entente between Algeria and Tunis, a superior common organ is needed to take the reform in hand and to bring it to a conclusion. This organ could be no other than a Ministry of Northern Africa,^ whose creation would conmiand the general attention and whose special mission would consist precisely in assuring the predominance of the general interest over local and individual interests. The External Commerce of Morocco. — The French protec- torate in the Moroccan empire was established by the treaty of March 30, 1912. The future alone can show what influ- ence the open door poUcy, which France has been obliged to accept, will exercise over the development of the external conunerce of Morocco. For the present, only the results T 2 216 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY obtained during the first year of the protectorate can be indicated. Comparison must wait for a later time. According to the Table of the General Commerce of France (of the year 1912), the exports from France to Morocco amounted to 64,823,000 francs in the general conmierce, and to 52,410,000 francs in the special commerce. These figures are much higher than those of the preceding years (thirty-five and twenty-eight millions). This sudden increase in French exports was a natural consequence of the estabhsh- ment of the protectorate. The principal articles exported from France to Morocco are: sugars (17,300,000), silk fabrics (6,100,000) and silk (9,200,000), cotton fabrics (1,500,000), tools and metal pro- ducts (1,200,000), wines (1,600,000), clothing and ready-made articles (1,500,000). These figures are for the special commerce. In the general commerce, one finds cereals (3,000,000), and tea (2,000,000) among the chief articles exported. These products, which pass through the entrepots of France, supply an important support for French commerce in Morocco. The business to which this trade gives rise, if it does not enrich the French producer, helps, at least, to enrich the French merchant. The exports from Morocco into France, according to the same document, amounted in 1912 to 24,919,000 francs in the general conmaerce and to 19,613,000 francs in the special commerce. The principal articles exported (special com- merce) are : Hides and raw peltry (5,000,000), dry vegetables (4,200,000), medicinal plants (2,700,000), wool (2,700,000), oleaginous grains and fruits (1,500,000). Cereals, which figure for hardly 900,000 francs in the special commerce, are registered for a value of 3,400,000 francs in the general commerce. The Table of the General Commerce of France likewise indicates the trade of Algeria with Morocco. The exports from Morocco to Algeria amoimted in 1912 to 10,342,975 francs (general commerce) and to 9,376,994 francs (special PROTECTORATES OF TUNIS AND MOROCCO 277 commerce). Live animals, represented in these totals by more than four millions and a half, constitute nearly one half of the exports. Cereals, clothing and ready-made articles, hides, wool, are articles of exportation next in order. Moroccan imports from Algeria amounted in 1912 to 32,649,433 francs (general commerce) and 22,527,342 francs (special commerce). Articles figuring for more than one miUion francs in the general commerce are : tobacco (4,100,000), sugar (3,700,000), cotton fabrics (2,500,000), beasts of burden (2,000,000), wines (1,700,000), clothing and ready-made articles (1,600,000), articles in skin or leather (1,400,000), tea (1,400,000), cereals (1,300,000), and coffee (1,200,000). Sugars, tea and coffee naturally figure for only very small sums in the special conunerce. Even tobacco figures for only 2,700,000 francs. But on the other hand, all the other products enumerated above are supplied almost entirely by Algeria, and represent very nearly the same sum in the general and in the special commerce. According to the customs administration of Morocco,' the general commerce of Morocco amoimted in 1912 to 227,000,000 francs, imports and exports combined, against 177,000,000 in 1911. The imports, which greatly exceed the exports, amounted to 134,000,000. The principal articles imported are : cotton goods (36,200,000), sugars (29,500,000), tea (6,800,000), wines and alcohol (4,800,000), silk goods and cloth (4,000,000), candles (3,500,000), and construction materials (3,400,000). Almost all the cotton goods are supplied by England (33,000,000 francs). France comes next, but very far behind : imports of French cotton goods, altogether, do not quite reach two miUions of francs. Ger- many and Spain come after France, the former with 300,000 francs and the latter with 200,000 francs. The greater part (about two-thirds) of the sugar imported into Morocco comes from France. But Germany (4,000,000), Austria (2,000,000), Belgium (1,000,000), and the Low Countries (1,000,000) make considerable efforts to develop this branch of their 278 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY exports to Morocco. Tea comes principally from England, wines, alcohol and silks from France, cloth from Germany. Candles, formerly bought almost entirely from France, come to-day, for the most part, from England. Building materials are supphed chiefly by England and France. In the total, the relative shares of the different countries of origin of imports are as follows : Per cent. France . . . . . .44 England ...... 32 Germany ...... 8 Spain ....... 2 Austria ...... i Exports amounted in 1912 to sixty-six miUions. The prin- cipal articles exported are : cereals (27,000,000), animal pro- ducts and skins (12,500,000), vegetable products (13,500,000) consisting chiefly of dried vegetables, wool (2,500,000) and oxen (2,000,000). The proportionate shares of the different importing coimtries are as follows : Percent. France . . . . . • 32 Germany ...... 22 England . . . . . .20 Spain ....... 10 It is noticeable that Germany and Spain buy more in Morocco than they sell. France and England, on the con- trary, sell much more than they buy. The rank of the several ports in the total trade is as follows : Casablanca 31 per cent, Saffi 14 per cent, Tangier 13 per cent, Mazagan 16 per cent, Larache 8 per cent, Mogador 9 per cent, Rababat 6 per cent, Tetouan 1 per cent. The first place is occupied in Casablanca and in Tangiers by France, in Safi& by Germany, and in the five others by England. The year 1912, to which these statistics refer, is to be regarded as a point of departure. There is no doubt that the external commerce of Morocco will develop considerably PROTECTORATES OF TUNIS AND MOROCCO 279 in the years to come. But will the proportion between the different importing and exporting countries be changed, and in what direction ? The regime of the open door will not prevent the share of France from becoming more and more preponderant, if it is true that conmierce follows the flag. CHAPTER VIII CONCLUSION When one surveys comprehensively the two classes of colonies conceived by the legislators of 1892, a preliminary observation at once forces itself upon the attention. Not o ne of the non-assimilated colonies complains of the tariff r egune to which it is subjected . There is not a single one among them that asks to be tran sferred to the class o f assimilated colonies. Legislative reforms in this direction seem to them eventualities to be dreaded. Their one desire is that the national legislator may be so good as not to occupy himself with them at all. Of the assimilated colonies, on the contrary, not one is satisfied with its lot.^ In the several colonies, the com- plaints may be more or less energetic, the grievances may vary, the recriminations may take one form or another. One colony wiU show itself more radical and will demand tariff personaUty, while another will be more diplomatic and will confine itself to petitioning compensation for the burdens of tariff assimilation. But there can be no denying the universal discontent of all these colonies. How, indeed, could it be otherwise ? The inevitable d efect of tariff assimilation is its lack of flexibiht v. How could a garment made to the measure of a man of fifty fit a whole array of men of neither the same age nor the same build ? It was nevertheless an equally unreasonable and ridiculous object that the legislators of 1892 sought to attain. They did not reahze that not only do the colo- nies not resemble the mother country, but that further they are different fundamentally among themselves. ' In France,' says M. Artaud,^ we have a tariff and we have a classification which, under the name of the ' repertoire of the tariff ' includes more than 80,000 kinds of CONCLUSION 281 merchandise. We have laboratories, experts, a definite procedure of customs appraisals, and we have bonded warehouses. Nothing at all similar exists in the colonies. Some colonies have bonded warehouses, others have none ; the articles imported into the colonies are infinitely less numerous and varied than those of our tariff ; and again, the proximity of great foreign countries and the needs of the races peopling our possessions result in the importation of articles that our tariff does not know and does not tax, although there would be no inconvenience, and there might even be advan- tages in taxing them. All this shows that mere exceptions intro- duced in a tariff created for the mother country cannot meet the needs of the colonies. . . . One cannot dignify with the name of colonial tariff regime an extension to the colonies of taxes planned exclusively for the mother country. The difficulties raised by the application to the colonies of commercial agreements, concluded by France with foreign powers, offer a startling proof of the vices of the primitive and brutal system of simply extending to the colonies the tariff regime of the mother country. Whatever tariff should be adopted, whether protectionist or hberal, the tariff per- sonahty of the colonies ought to be given rational attention. When a country Uke France has the privilege of possessing an inunense colonial empire, scattered through all parts of the globe, its parUament should take the time to study and to discuss the tftnff legislation suitable for each of the parts of this empire, with as much care as it would do for the mother country itself. K it is unwilling to do this, it ought to surrender to the local authorities and local assem- blies the function of fixing, or at least proposing, the rates to be established. The term tariff assimilation, applied to the work of the legislators of 1892, is nothing but a deceptive euphemism. When, at the end of the eighteenth century, the Convention for the first time proclaimed assimilation, it was assiuned that conmierce with the colonies was ' commerce of the nation with a part of the nation '. The object of assimilation was to abolish t he tariff barriers between F rance and her colonies, as the Constituent Assembly had abolished the 282 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY internal customs barriers that separated the provinces of France. Hie "Constituent Assembly wa s^ammated by a genero usTdeal of fettemi ty. The legislators of 1892, on the contrary, were animated by a selfish purpose. The interest of the French manufacturers was the dominant consideration. It was intended that for the future the phrase sic vos, non vobis should cease to be applicable to France as a colonizing nation. It has even been urged that, if the colonies carried on more business with foreign countries than with the mother country, our colonial policy would stand condemned. The legislators of 1892 were hypnotized by statistics which they did not take the trouble to analyse, and sought to produce a diminution in the trade of the colonies with foreign countries and an increase in the trade of the colonies with France. To attain this result, tariff assimilation appeared to be a convenient means, a taking watchword, and the legislators made use of it. They were not willing to look higher nor farther. Between assimilation thus understood and the ancient colonial policy there is only the distinction that may be drawn between protection and prohibition. The so-called assimi l ated colonies are in rea lity sy hject colorde s? The inconveniences inherent in the gen ftfftl pnlify nf p rotection are much more Aontply fplt in tViP pr^j^ni^p \\\tiw in the mother coim try. In t he mother country the no rmal eff ect of the protective duty is to compel the inhabitants to co nsume the nati r^na^ prr^/liir»tg in prpfprpy]f; e to foreign pro- du cts, and, consequently, to substitute a market nearer at h and for a market more distan t. This is the rather powerful argument which was employed by the American economist Carey in support of the protective system. This bringing together of producer and consumer makes it possible to avoid useless transportation, which represents a real cost in time and expense. But the a pplication of the national protecti ye tiiriff tn thf. jp^ench colonies aims at substitutin g French products for American products in the market of the CONCLUSION 283 Antilles, for Australian products in the market of New \ Caledonia, &c., and tends, i n consequence, to substitute / a more remote market for one npf^ yfr at liitp^ i. Thus Carey's / argument turns in this case against the system of protection. '' It is easy to imagine the state of mind this policy creates in the colonies. The colonists are forced to bring goods from a great distance and to pay very dear for them, when it would be easy to buy them at low prices in the neighbour- hood. They are forced to undergo the inconvenience of seriou s dela y in the securing of products for which they have urg ent need. This creates among them a f eeling of irritatio n against t he moth er country ; it produces a growmg mis- understanding, it finally revives the old hatreds which the ancient colonial system engendered. It is always dangerous to create an antithesis, in men's minds, between their attach- ment to the mother country and their interest.* This is to play with fire. Rival nations may be tempted to exploit this discontent and to watch the propitious moment to turn it to their advantage.* Protectionists c an hardly den y thfl^ *hp intprpsfs nf fhp ir inhfthifAnts arP R^f'rifi^*^ colonies and of their inhabi^ jt"*^? ftrp ggpr^fipAH m fhn nynfr>m j but they" allege that the superior interest of the mother country requires this sacrifice. One would infer from the statements of the protectionists that it is impossible for the national industry to face foreign competition in the colonies under the open door regime. As if the fact of political domination did not in itself constitute a considerable advan- tage for the national industry, an advantage perhaps even more important than that resulting from the application of the national tariff ! In re ality, the dangers of foreign competition have been grossly exaggerated by superficial thinkers who are contented to reason ou jjigjasig- of tota l imports ot foreign mercnandise into the colon ies, without taking the trouble to analyse the (lirferen t"^ements con- stituting this to tal. It is very eviden t that Fr ^C£_£annoi suppl y Tier colonists with the merchandise which she does -X 284 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY no t produce and whi ch she is herself forced to obtain from_ regions having special a dvantag es for producing them. Let us take, for example, the products of Chinese origin con- sumed by the Annamite population. Such purchases effected by Indo-China in the neighbouring countries of the Far East are in no way a detriment to national commerce. Those countries perform for Indo-China services which she could \ not expect from us. There is no advantage to the national industry from opposing so natural a current of trade. A large part of the foreign imports into the French colonies is made ^ up, as we have seen, of the coal of England and the petroleum of the United States. Inasmuch as the mother country is forced to import coal and petroleum for its own needs, it cannot reproach the colonies for doing the same thing. To make a just com - parison, it would be necessary to balance the imports of Pf eScF^oducts against the imports from foreign Europe an countries Trhir h Fr n nre wou l r l bo in r^n f ^ ^t ^^ n I" '-■t pply This comparison would show how exaggerated are the pro- tectionist alarms. There is, moreover, a certain disregard of facts involved in the hard-and-fast distinctions between national imports and foreign imports into the colonies. In practice the situation is much more complex. Foreign European mer- chandise often reaches the colonies by way of the entrepots of France. For the year 1911, for example, the foreign merchandise re-exported from France to the French colonies represented a value of more than nine millions of francs.* There are French merchants who make their profit by selling foreign merchandise in the French colonies, and there are French shipowners who profit by transporting them. Among the colonial imports of foreign merchandise are items repre- senting the products originating in neighbouring regions, which are carried to the ports of our colonies to be embarked for Europe. On the other hand, European products, whether French or foreign, landed in the ports of our colonies, are CONCLUSION 285 not necessarily kept for these colonies ; they are occasionally transhipped into neighbouring foreign countries. We must bear in mind the existence of the re-export and transit trade. Each of our colonies constitutes a centre of attraction and of diffusion, and the importance of its work, from the view-point of the extension of the commercial influence of France, is impossible to determine precisely.' China, for example, would consume fewer French products and more German products if Indo-China, instead of being a French colony, were under the rule of Germany. From this point of view one may regard as serious mistakes, on the part of the mother country, all measures that result in the hampering of the trade of one of its colonies with the neighbouring foreign countries. On t he whole, there is onlv o^ ip jpr^ugfry nttttiin mnn^- factu re, t hat is seriously infprPSj tp^ «'» mninfaining *ha nati onal tariff in the French mlo nips Ta riff assimilatio n has permitted this industry to conquer the m arketa-ot Madagascar and mdo-China. is it reasonable to sacrifice to the interests of a single industry, however important it may be, not only the interests of the colonies and of the colonists, but also those of the great conunercial ports, those of the State and, in general, all other interests ? Furthermore it is permissible to inquire whether this short-sighted policy is conducive to the well -conceived interest even of the cotton industry. The poor native, who is prevented from buying the coarse cotton goods of Man- chester, does not therefore buy the products of French industry ; their price is too high for him. The consequence is that the commercial current has been checked, not merely diverted. If the cost of living had been less for the native, it is possible that after having at first bought English cottons, he would have attained to a new degree of prosperity, and would have ended by buying the more expensive products of the French manufacturers. The backward peoples, whom we wish to raise to civilization and in whom we seek gradually 286 RESULTS OF COLONIAL TARIFF POLICY to inculcate our wants, have a whole series of stages to surmount. The number and wealth of the inhabitants of a colony determine its importance to the mother country. What is important for a merchant is not to be the sole provider for a limited number of customers, but to have numerous customers, and it is more worth while to have two customers than to have one. It is better to sell one quarter of what he consumes to a customer who spends 100,000 francs annually, than to be the exclusive provider for a customer who has only one thousand francs to spend. In the latter case sales amount to only 1,000 francs, in the former, to 25,000. Th e colonies are in general poor countries^ wdt h-a scattered population. T heir ^ p riportAncp ig mpflgnrprl nnt by thp > quantit y of merc h fl TidiRP wliirh liny H" !fi Ml]v i^uy, b ut by that w hich they will be able to buy laipr nn,- We must consi der the possibilities o f thp fiiturr, nftm nmrh greater tha n one imagines^ It is to the interest of the mother coimtry that the population of the colonies should become more numerous and richer. Bu t the high cost of living in the c olonies checks the development bot h of the pnpilation an d of the wealth . It d iscourages effort, «^^ tb<^ rpgnitant po verty breeds povert v. The inhAbitA nts of the colonies, fi nding it harder to live, sup por t wit h frr ea ter difficu lty^ the weight of the tax es. The colon y finds it difficult jojrocure. reven ues, and is therefore nbb'g ft d tn pnnt ];>nn p M ic | iii b ttr^ WOfK s that W O lll^ Viflvp flffnrHflrl nm T T fnniliH n ff 4rvr ^xatfe. ' Thus countries, oft en richly endowed by na tiF*^i drag pinTig _ in an anaemic condition inc omprehensible to t ho§£_jKhp do not percei ve the jn terirlepeTidenr*^ ^^^ gnpigl pViPrmmpna The develop ment of th e raIp p^ nf the mot h rr rmmtry flrj i ri i rh j above a ll, upon the prosperitv of the colonies. In short, the controlling princ iple shoul djie the i nt or^rt of t h^f^l^ni^s^ because it is no advantage to the mother cQiintiy-4.o have unhappy_colMiies.® Ancient legends have handed down the image of Jealousy CONCLUSION 287 rending herself with her own hands. The system of colonial exclusion existing between the nations has sacrificed the colonies and has aroused the distrust of foreign nations. It has multiplied in the world the germs of discord. What is more, it has compromised seriously the prospective interests of the mother country itself. It is a policy of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. NOTES TO PART I CHAPTER I 1. Levasseur, Histoire du commerce de la France, tome i, 1911. — ^Arthur Girault, Principes de colonisation et de legislation coloniale, 3rd edition, tome i, pp. 139-165. — Pierre Bonassieux, Les grandes compagnies de commerce, 1892. — Louis Pauliat, Louis XIV et la compagnie des Indes orientales de 1664, 1886, and La politique coloniale sous I'ancien regime, 1887. 2. A company of New France, founded by de Monts in 1603, secured the monopoly of the commerce of Canada. This privilege, it is true, was taken away at the end of some years in consequence of the demands of the merchants of the different maritime regions of the kingdom. See Bonas- sieux, Les grandes compagnies de commerce, pp. 345 ff. Henri IV likewise granted the privilege of the commerce of India to a company founded by Gerard de Roy. 3. Reproduced in Pauliat, La politique coloniale sous I'ancien regime, pp. 185 ff. 4. Reproduced in Petit, Droit public ou gouvemement des colonies fran^aises, tome i, p. 4. This work, published 1771, was re-edited in 1911 in the Collection des economistes et reformateurs sociaux. (The citations are from the edition of 1771, the pages of which are indicated in brackets in the edition of 1911.) 5. Reproduced in Petit, op. ciL, tome i, pp. 10 ff. 6. Reproduced in Petit, op. ciL, tome i, pp. 21 ff. 7. Reproduced in Dufresne de Francheville, Histoire de la compagnie des Indes, 1738, pp. 177 ff. 8. Cours complet d'economie politique. Part IV, chap. xxv. 9. These different pamphlets are found collected in a volume in quarto published in Paris by Desaint, in 1769. Also Dupont de Nemours, Du commerce et de la compagnie des Indes (published in the ^ph&mirides du citoyen, 1769, tomes viii, ix, and xi). 10. Recueil de reglements, edits, declarations et arrets concemant le commerce, I'administration de la justice, et la police des colonies fran9aises de I'Amerique et les engages, 2 vols., 1775. — Petit, op. cit., 1771. — ^Moreau de Saint-Mery, Lois et constitutions des colonies fran^aises de I'Amerique sous le vent jusqu'en 1785, 6 vols. — Amould, De la balance du commerce, 2 vols., 1789. — Schefer, La France moderne et le probleme colonial, chap.i. — Arthur Girault, op. cit., pp. 181 ff. — Amaune, Le commerce exterieur et les tarifs de douane, 1911, pp. 39-48. — Pallain, Les douanes fran§aises, 1913, tome i, pp. 196 et seq. — ^Tramond, Le regime commercial des Antilles fran9aises au xrvni® siecle. 11. Tomei, p. 1. NOTES 289 12. With one exception, however. An edict of September 1, 1698, granted to a royal company of Santo Domingo the exclusive privilege of carrying on for fifty years the trade of the southern coast of the island abandoned by the Spaniards (from Cape Tiberon to the river Naybe). It is interesting to note this company obtained the authority to trade directly with foreign countries. On April 2, 1720, it surrendered the concession to the king. Accordingly letters patent of the same month opened the commerce of these regions of the colony to all the subjects of the king. A decree of the Council of State, of September 10, 1720, trans- ferred to the Company of the Indies the rights of the Company of Santo Domingo, but the troubles occasioned by the claims of the Company of the Indies brought about the revocation of this privilege, which revocation was proclaimed by the Lieutenant-General, de Champm^lier, February 14, 1724. After that the Company of Santo Domingo ceased to exist. — Petit, op. cit., tome i, pp. 91-95. — Bonassieux, op. cit., pp. 412 (f. 18. These ports were those of Calais, Dieppe, Le Havre, Rouen, Honfleur, Saint-Malo, Morlaix, Brest, Nantes, La Rochelle, Bordeaux, Bayonne, and Cette. There were afterwards added Marseilles (letters patent of February, 1719), Dunkerque (letters patent of October, 1721), and Vannes (decree of the Council of December 21, 1728). Later on a decree of October 81, 1784. opened to the commerce of the colonies all the ports able to receive at average tide vessels of 150 tons. Weber, La compagnie des Indes, p. 656. 14. A declaration of the king, of May 14, 1722, interpretative of this article 26, which orders masters of these vessels to present on their arrival in France an inventory of the merchandise loaded by them in the islands, signed and certified by the Conunissioners of the Western Domain. 15. Quoted in Petit, op. cit., tome ii, p. 888. 16. Recueil de reglements . . . , p. 121. 17. Op. cit., tome ii, p. 406. On the interloping commerce carried on, especially in the bay of Monte Christo (in the north of Santo Domingo at the boundary of the French and Spanish parts of the island), see Beer, British Colonial Policy, p. 18. 18. It was the same with the transit privilege : it was first devised for the products of the French colonies (decree of the Council of State of September 28, 1684), and it is only in 1793 that one sees transit privil^es accorded to certain articles of foreign merchandise. See PtSuain, Les douanes fran^aises, 1913, p. 479. 19. Pallain, Les douanes fran^aises, tome i, p. 519. 20. This exemption had already been proclaimed by a whole series of texts in the time of Louis XIV : June 4 and November 25, 1671 ; July 15, 1673 ; December 1, 1674 ; May 10, 1677 ; and August 27, 1701. All these texts are reproduced in the Recueil de reglements. 21. Article 1 : ' Beginning with the 1st of October next and in the future, all the merchants of the kingdom shall be at liberty to bring into the ports of Dunkerque, Calais, Dieppe, Havre, Rouen, Honfleur, Saint- Malo, Nantes, La Rochelle, Bordeaux, Bayonne, Cette, and Marseilles coffees produced by the French islands of America, to be consumed in the kingdom, by paying as import duty into the offices established for such purposes (bureaux des Fermes), regardless of destination, ten livres per 1MB.16 U 290 NOTES cwt. of the coffees' gross weight. . . . ' Article 2 secured for the Company of the Indies the exclusive privilege of the importation of coffee other than that of the said islands. The decrees of the Council of State of December 18, 1836, and of April 2, 1837. All these texts are reproduced in Dufresne de Francheville, Histoire de la compagnie des Indes, 1738, pp. 527-579. 22. Memoirs of the king, of August 15, 1763 ; ordinance of March 25, 1765 ; ordinance of August 18, 1766. These different texts are analysed in Petit, op. cit., tome ii, pp. 408 and 409. 23. Petit, op. cit., tome ii, pp. 410 ff. 24. Reproduced in Pallain, Les douanes fran^aises, p. 202, note 3. 25. Reflexion d'un vieillard du pays du Medoc sur I'arret du 30 aoAt, 1784, qui permet I'admission des Strangers dans nos colonies, pamphlet in quarto, 1785. 26. Tome i, pp. 326, 327. 27. Boissonade, Saint-Domingue k la veille de la Revolution, 1906, p. 19. 28. Dernis, Recueil ou collection des titres d'arrets, edits concemant la compagnie des Indes orientales etablie au mois d'aout 1664, 4 vols, in quarto, 1755 to 1756, tome iii, p. 103. 29. Dernis, op. cit., tome iv, p. 202. 30. P. Heinrich, La Louisianne sous la compagnie des Indes, pp. 259 ff. 31. Tome i, p. 323. 32. The texts relating to the beaver trade are reproduced in Dufresne de Francheville, op. cit., pp. 388-427, and in the Recueil de reglements . . ., pp. 279 ff. 33. Treaty of April 29, 1627, for the establishment of a company of New France, art. 7. 34. See the list of Concessionaries in Dufresne de Francheville, op. cit., p. 3. 35. Decree of July 20, 1721. 36. Raynal, Histoire philosophique, tome v (quoted by Amould, op. cit., p. 321. 37. Dufresne de Francheville, op. cit. — ^Dernis, op. cit. — ^Weber, La compagnie frangaise des Indes. 38. E. Depitre, La toile peinte en France au xvii® et au xviii^ siecle, 1912. 39. Amould, op. cit., tome i, p. 276. 40. It is reproduced in Weber, op. cit, pp. 398-506. 41. Repertoire de Guyot, concerning the words Indies and Indult. 42. Op. cit., tome i, p. 287. 43. Chemin Dupontes, Les compagnies dp colonisation en Afrique occidentale sous Colbert, 1903. — Cultru, Histoire du Senegal. — Dufresne de Francheville, op. cit., pp. 427-527. 44. The texts relatmg to the Guinea trade are reproduced in the Recueil de reglements . . ., pp. 126-155. 45. Article 2. See, however, the provision of article 9 specially for Saint-Malo. 46. Op. cit., tome i, pp. 299 ff. 47. Journal officiel, doc. pari. Senat., sess. ord. 1888, p. 43 (note of M. Isaac). NOTES 291 48. Collection de m^moires sur les colonies, an X, tome i, pp. 152 ff., and tome iv, pp. 144-211. 49. Oncken Edition, pp. 425-486. 50. Journal de r agriculture, de commerce et des finances, January and May, 1776, and correspondance with the minister de Vergennes in 1782. 51 . Du commerce et du gouvemement, chaps, vii and xii. CHAPTER II 1. Lton Deschamps, Les colonies pendant la Revolution, 1898. — Pallain, op. cit., tome i, pp. 204 ff. — Amaund, op. cit., pp. 144-152. — Sch^fer, op. cit. — Levasseur, Histoire du commerce de la France, 1912, tome ii, pp. 1-22. — Magnien, Commerce des Fran9ai8 aux colonies, an IV. One can find the legislative texts cited in this chapter, by their dates, in Duvergier, Collec- tion des lois et d^rets. 2. L'Ancien regime et la Revolution, p. 274. 8. Sitting of November 80, 1790 : * I demand liberty in the sense that it shall be for the protection of the national commerce and that it shall watch over the security of our manufactures. ... I ask you to grant to commerce the liberty to exist. (Quoted by Amaun^, op. cit., p. 114.) 4. LfCS douanes fran9aises, p. 802. 5. Les douanes fran^aises, p. 266. CHAPTER III 1. De Chazelles, iStudes sur le syst^me colonial, 1860. — Sch^fer, La France modeme et le probl^me colonial, 1907. — Amaun^, op. cit., pp. 144 ff. and pp. 178-192. 2. Decree of Frimaire 25, year X, declaring that only French sailing vessels shall be permitted to carry on the commerce of Senegal. Decree of Germinal 7, year X, declaring that no duty shall be collected on French sailing-vessels on their entrance to the river country of Senegal, and establishing exp>ort duties on gum, ivory tusks, and other products of the country. Decree of Floreal 8, year X, relative to the admission to the government warehouses of blue long-cloth and other articles of merchan- dise intended for the coast of Africa. Decree of Thermidor 11, year X, and law of Floreal 8, year XI, declaring that the merchandise called de traite (of the slave-trade), although prohibited in France, may be received in transit trade. 8. Law of April 30, 1906. Decrees of August 5 and of October 2, 1910. 4. Decrees of Berlin (November 21, 1906) and of Milan (December 21, 1907). 5. Levasseur, op. cit., tome ii, p. 127. 6. De Chazelles, Etudes sur le syst^me colonial, p. 71. 7. Levasseur, op. cit., tome ii, pp. 70-93. 8. Ten per cent, on live animals, 15 fr. per 100 kilos on salt beef, 8.50 fr. per hectolitre on dry vegetables, 2 fr. per hecto. on maize, 7 fr. per kilo on cod and rice, 5 fr. per 100 kilos on salt, 7 per cent on tobacco, 4 per cent on other products. U 2 292 NOTES 9. Amaun^, op. cit., pp. 179-181. 10. Duty of 10 fr. per 100 kilos, raised to 16 fr. in 1839, and to 25 fr. in 1840. 11. Levasseur, op. cit., tome ii, p. 178. 12. Pallain, Les douanes fran9aises, tome i, pp. 169 ff. — ^Larcher, Traite el6mentaire de legislation algerienne, 2nd edition, 1911, pp. 169 ff. — Ch. Vernet, Les douanes d'Algerie. 13. The foreign flag was admitted to participation in the Franco- Algerian navigation by an ordinance of February 23, 1837 ; but this liberal regime lasted but a short time. An ordinance of December 7, 1841, re-established, less than four years afterwards, the monopoly of the flag. 14. Menerville, Dictionnaire de legislation algerienne. See ' Douanes '. 15. See the official explanation in the Moniteur of May 13, 1850, and the report of M. Ch. Dupin in the Moniteur of the 10th and 14th of December, 1850. CHAPTER IV 1. Pallain, Les douanes frangaises, pp. 687-701. 2. F. Bastiat, Cobden et la ligue. 3. See the decree of September 24, 1864, which defines the ton used in freight. 4. This article merely reproduces and confirms the provision of article 1 of a decree of October 6, 1862. 5. Report of M. Milhe Poutingon in the Colonial Congress of Bordeaux, 1907, p. 492. 6. Cass, March 11, 1885 (S. 85, 1. 425) ; June 5, 1885 (S. 90, I. 336) ; January 7, 1896 (S. 96, 1. 40) ; Cass, March 15, 1898 (Dareste, 1898, p. 73). 7. It is proper to note here, likewise, the decree of June 25, 1860, opening the southern frontier to products coming from the Sahara and the Soudan. Prior to this decree, the southern part of Algeria had been closed to all foreign importation and the native chiefs were conunissioned to prevent all infiltration of products from the south. CHAPTER V 1. Arthur Girault, Principes de colonisation et de legislation coloniale, 3rd edition, tome i, p. 58. 2. Traite de legislation coloniale, 3rd edition, tome i, p. 15. 3. Foreign sugars are subjected on their importation into Algeria to the same additional taxes as on their importation into France. 4. See the articles of M. Colin {Revue politique et parlementaire, June 1896) and of M. Morand {Revue algirienne et tunisienne, 1897, pp. 33-47). 5. Letter of M. Fehx Faure, Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, to the Presidents of the Councils-General of Martinique, Guadeloupe, and Reunion, January 24, 1884 (reproduced by De Lanessan, L'expansion coloniale de la France, 1886, p. 965). 6. Arts. 43 and 46 of the decree relating to Saint-Pierre and Miquelon ; 42 and 45 relating to New Caledonia and to the estabUshments of Oceania. NOTES 293 7. Ren^ Ferry, £tude sur le r^ime douanier de I'Indo-Chine, Thesis, Paris, 1912. 8. Ganter Collection, p. 140. 9. Collection of Lafont and Fonssagrives, ' Douanes \ 10. * The Congress, joining in principle in the wishes of the Chamber of Commerce of Saigon that the tariff regime inaugurated by the decree of September 8, 1887, and modified by that of May 9, 1889, be abolished with the least possible delay, and that the freedom of the Indo>Chinese com- merce be re-established, resolves : 1. That, while waiting for satisfaction to be given to this demand, the general tariff be replaced by a special tariff, the duties of which shall not exceed 10 per cent, and from which all French merchandise shall be exempt. 2. That the tariff formalities be rendered as simple as possible. 8. That articles passing through Indo-China be exempt from all duty.' 11. Reports of M. Thomson to the Chamber of Deputies (Journal off., doc. pari., sess. ord. 1881, pp. 877-84) and of M. Trarieux to the Senate (Journal off., doc. pari., sess. extr. 1891, p. 592). 12. Colonial Congress of Marseilles, tome ii, p. 51. 18. R. Ferry, op. cit., pp. 60-64. ^ 14. Pallain, Les douanes fran9aise8, tome i, p. 217. 15. This text is to-day replaced by the more general provision of article 38, paragraph 8, of the law of April 18, 1900. 16. For products coming from Algeria, see infra, pp. 119 If. 17. See infra, p. 149. 18. Pallain, Les douanes fran^aises, tome i, p. 226. 19. The new tariff regime of the colonies (Journal dea iconomisU*, October 1892 and November 1898), Annuaire de Initiation fran^aise, pp. 250-7. 20. Chamber of Deputies, sitting of February 22, 1910 (interpellation Gerant-Richard). Senate, sittings of March 14 and 25, 1910 (discourse of MM. Flandrin, Milles-Lacroix, and Cic^ron). 21. Annex no. 51, p. 202. 22. In 1912 the returns from sugar were 181,822,000 francs; coffee, 149,294,000 francs ; cocoa, 29,700,000 francs ; pepper, 6,040,000 francs. 28. Ferry, Le regime douanier de I'lndo-Chine, p. 99. 24. Les douanes fran^ises, tome i, p. 221. 25. Decree of March 6, 1906. This decree has re-established, for Senegal only, the ancient specific duty on longcloth which the decree of 1905 had replaceh by a tax ad valorem. This duty is 0,025 per metre, plus a surtax of 0,06 on longcloth of foreign origin. 26. In the basin of the Casamance, a region enclosed between the English Gambia and Portuguese Guinea, a decree of January 81, 1907, reduced the duties on certain products which, since the new tariff had been put into action, entered by way of foreign colonies. The traditional franchise of the island of Goree, which had no longer a reason for existing, was suppressed by a decree of August 2, 1912. 27. Since the decree of February 11, 1906. Before this date the region of Nyanga-Mayumba and that of Loango, which are situated in the conventional basin, were parts of the Middle Congo, and Gabon remained 294 NOTES altogether outside of this basin. The decree of February 11, 1906, which enlarged Gabon by connecting these two regions with it, has evidently not had the effect of modifying the economic regime to which they were subjected in virtue of the Act of Berlin. In reality, the part of Gabon situated outside of the conventional basin has an area of about 200,000 square kilometres. The remainder of French Equatorial Africa has about one million and a half square kilometres. 28. Letters exchanged in Lisbon and published in the Official Journal of the French Republic of October 29, 1906 (J ournaloffidel de la Republique frangaise). 29. Decree of June 30, 1911 ; decree of June 27, 1912. 30. Decree of the Governor, November 1, 1910. 31. Report on the situation of Tahiti in 1912 {Journal officiel de la Republique frangaise, 1913, annexed folios 105-6. 32. Law of April 14, 1904, art. 1. 33. On the condition of the New Hebrides, see the articles of M. Politi in the Revue g&nirale de droit international public, 1901, pp. 121 ff., and 230 ff., 1904, pp. 755 ff., 1907, pp. 699 ff. 34. Ferry, Le regime douanier de I'lndo-Chine, pp. 90-8. 35. For the development of this idea, I refer the reader to my Principes de colonisation et de legislation coloniale, 3rd edition, tome iii, pp. 5-8, and to a series of articles appearing in the D&piche coloniale in the month of August 1908. 36. Report of M. Gervais to the Senate on the budget of the colonies for 1911, annex no. 51, p. 196. 37. See in regard to this what has been said above on the additional warehouse taxes and of the regulations relative to navigation. See likewise what will be said farther on about commercial conventions signed by France with foreign powers. Note also that article 7 of the law of March 29, 1910, makes, in regard to the application of the revised tariff regime to the colonies and to colonial products, a reservation which in no way concerns Algeria. 38. Algeria, the colonies, French possessions and countries of Indo- China under the protectorate are covered in the following texts : decree of December 30, 1893, granting the benefit of the minimum tariff to Spain ; decree of August 16, 1895, granting the benefit of the minimum tariff to Switzerland ; decree of February 7, 1899, granting the benefit of the minimum tariff to Italy ; decree of February 11, 1910, granting the benefit of the minimum tariff to certain products of Canada. Tunis is covered also by agreements made with Salvador, January 9 ; with Costa Rica, June 7, 1901 ; with Denmark for the Danish Antilles, June 7, 1901 ; with the Independent State of the Congo, February 21, 1901 ; with Great Britain, for Zanzibar, June 27, 1901, for Seychelles, April 16, 1902, for Jamaica, August 8, 1902, for the British Indies, and for Ceylon, February 19, 1903, for the protectorates of East Africa, February 23, 1903, for the Barbadoes, January 9, 1907 ; with the Low Countries for the Dutch Indies, August 13, 1902 ; with Honduras, February 11, 1902 ; with Nicaragua, December 2, 1903. As concerns Brazil, Algeria and the colonies are covered by the law of July 17» 1900, which authorizes the government to grant the NOTES 295 minimum tariff to coffee and other colonial commodities produced by this country, but not in the decree of the same day rendered in execution of this law. There is no doubt, nevertheless, that the colonial commodities of Brazil enjoy the minimum tariff in Algeria and in the French colonies. On the other hand, there exists a whole series of agreements stipulating simply reciprocal most-favoured-nation treatment that make no mention of Algeria and the colonies. Example : the convention of February 19. 1902, with Venezuela. See likewise the agreement of September 16/29 with Russia, article 10 of which simply contemplates the possibility of an extension to Tunis resulting from a declaration exchanged between the two High Contracting Parties. In all these agreements, the extension of the minimum tariff to Algeria and to the colonies is understood. 89. This provision has already been met with in a first agreement signed previously with Bulgaria, June 4, 1897, article 12 (promulgated by decree. January 20, 1898). 40. See the report of M. Gervais, senator, upon the budget of the ministry of the colonies for the year 1911 (annex No. 151, p. 195). 41. M. Bompard, preface to The Annotated Code of Tunis. 42. Treaty of September 28, 1896. 48. Declaration of October 2, 1896. 44. Declaration of October 14, 1896. 45. Declaration of November 18, 1896. 46. Declaration of January 12, 1897. 47. Declaration of January 26, 1897. 48. Arrangement of September 18, 1897. 49. Declaration of May 5, 1897. 50. Declaration of April 8, 1897. 51. Declaration of April 19, 1898. 52. Ninth Resolution adopted by the Association of French Industry and Agriculture in the sitting of May 19, 1913 (Le Travail national of May 25-June 15, 1913, p. 166). 58. This additional tax had been established in the caidats of Sous Monastir, Mahdia, and Djemmal, by a decree of October 29, 1903, and in those of Spax and of Skira by decree of November 19, 1908. CHAPTER VI 1 . Bouchie de Belle, * Le nouveau regime douanier des colonies ' (Journal des £conomistes, October, 1892, and November, 1893). — ^Arthur Girault, ' Le nouveau regime douanier des colonies et ses rdsultats ' (Revue d'^cono- tnie politique, 1894, pp. 854 ff.). 2. Founded in 1897. 8. The Temps, in particular, supports the greater number of the demands of the colonial party. 4. Report of Harmand to the Congress of the Ancient Colonies, p. 15. 5. Report of Severe (Journal off., doc. pari.. Chamber of Deputies, sess. ord. 1903, annex 670). 6. V^conomiste frani^ais. 7. With a reservation, however ; the congress of the Ancient Colonies, 296 NOTES in which the idea of the creation of a general government for the American colonies had encountered a strong opposition, has purposely avoided reproducing the conclusion of the resolution adopted by the Congress of Marseilles. But this divergence of political opinion which caused the fourth to be suppressed indicates no economic divergence. 8. Report of the senator, M. Gervais, on the budget of the colonies for 1911. 9. Annex 2,366. 10. Pages 137 ff. 11. See above, p. 72. 12. Amaune, Le commerce exterieur et les tarifs de douane, 1911. — Also the articles of M. Fallot in the Revue politique et parlementaire (November 1912), and in the Journal des J^conomistes (March 1913), of M. Payen in the Revue ^conomigue intemationale (May 1913), of M. Paul Leroy-Beaulieu in the ^conomiste fran^ais (February 1913), of M. Franjois Bernard in the Revue d'J^conomie politique (July-August 1913). 13. See the official explanation of the bill of July 1900. 14. Annex 1837 {Journal off., doc. pari., Chamber of Deputies, sess. ord. 1900, pp. 2526-7). 15. See Le Travail national of May 25-June 15, 1913. 16. De Martens, Recueil des traites, tome 17, p. 143. 17. Reproduced in Rouard de Card, Les Relations de I'Espagne et du Maroc aux xvm« et xix« siecles, p. 203. 18. Annex 13 to the Report of M. Long (Chamber of Deputies, extra session of 1911, No. 1413). 19. See Le Travail national of May 25-June 15, 1913, pp. 164r-6. 20. See my Principes de colonisation et legislation coloniale, 3rd ed., tome iii, p. 550. NOTES TO PART II INTRODUCTION 1. See the Quinzaine coloniale {The Colonial Fortnightly). 2. Notice No. 10. The Production of the French Possessions in 1911 and in 1012. Marseilles, 1918. 3. The Protectorate treaty is of March 80, 1912 ; it was ratified by the law of July 15, 1912. 4. Foreign oxen, 2,085 cwt. ; oxen from Algeria and from the colonies, 22,985. — Foreign sheep, 201 cwt. ; sheep from Algeria and from Tunis, 807,768 cwt. 5. Foreign wheat, 5,701,602 cwt. ; wheat from Algeria and from Tunis, 1,410,289 cwt. — Oats from foreign countries, 1,417,486 cwt. ; from Algeria and from Tunis, 749,407 cwt. — Barley from foreign countries, 409,281 cwt. ; from Algeria and from Tunis, 960,168. 6. Rice in the husk : foreign, 240,784 quintals ; colonies, 841,925 quintals. 7. Copra : foreign, 481,852 quintals ; colonies, 103,212 quintals. 8. Pea-nuts in the shells : foreign, 784,116 quintals ; colonies, 1,489,785 quintals. — Shelled pea*nuts : foreign, 1,754,854 quintals ; colonies, 697,505 quintals. 9. Analytical rdsum^, table No. 29. 10. Coffee beans : foreign, 1,088,471 quintals ; colonies, 23,915 quintals. — Cocoa beans : foreign, 258,635 quintals ; colonies, 15,268 quintals. 11. 26,581 quintets in a totel of 28,292. 12. 8,420 quintels in a total of 9,671. 18. Vanilla : foreign, 18,703 kilogrammes ; colonies, 38,828. 14. Phosphates : foreign, 1,670,786 quintals ; Algeria, Tunis, and the colonies, 7,407,661 quintals. 15. Analytical r^sum^, tebles Nos. 15 and 16. 16. According to a report from the Chamber of Commerce of Marseilles, the volume of trade between the port and the colonies in 1910 was repre- sented by a sum of 819,500,000 francs, of which 580,000,000 were for Algeria and Tunis, 73,000.000 for Western Africa, 59,000,000 for Indo- China, 31,000,000 for Madagascar, and 23,000,000 for the Antilles. {Quin- zaine coloniale, December 25, 1912.) CHAPTER I 1. Colonial Congress of Marseilles of 1906, tome ii, pp. 169 ff. (report of M. F. Bourdillon). — Congress of the Ancient Colonies, 1909 passim. Intercolonial Federation : reports of M. Bougenot upon the tariff regime of Martinique and of M. Jacqueminet upon the tariff regime of Guadeloupe. 298 NOTES 2. Statistics of the Commerce of the French Colonies for 1911, tome ii, pp. 592-3 and 664-5. 3. In Martinique, the exports of cocoa (sent entirely to the mother country) amounted in 1911 to 1,046,000 francs ; the exports of coffee (21,000 francs) were insignificant. In Guadeloupe, the exports of coffee amounted in 1911 to 2,417,000 francs (of which 2,391,000 went to the mother country, and the exports of cocoa to 1,717,000 francs (sent entirely to the mother country). 4. 778,000 francs to Martinique and 569,000 francs to Guadeloupe for 1911. 5. 890,000 francs to Martinique and 255,000 francs to Guadeloupe for 1911. 6. See above, pages 98 ff. 7. While the tax abatement is only two francs twenty-five centimes, the actual expense for bringing sugar into the French market would be five francs sixty centimes. 8. The following confession is found in an official document : ' while, thanks to the customs duties, foreign merchandise is practically ousted from the local market, the local budget of the colony is becoming impoverished ; every advantage obtained by the national industry has for a corollary a diminution of local financial resources ' (Colonial statistics for 1911, tome ii, p. 662). 9. For the year 1894, the revenue from import duties amounted to 910,000 francs in the budget of Martinique, and to 550,000 francs in the budget of Guadeloupe. 10. Statistics of the conmierce of the French colonies for 1911, tome i, pp. 752, 753. 11. This increase is due essentially (1) to the increase in the quantity of sugar exported, and to the higher prices of this conunodity, which swelled to nearly eight millions the amount of the exportation ; (2) to an excep- tional importation of rice which increased by 1,800,000 francs the volume of imports. 12. 1896 8,727,000 francs 1904 5,302,000 francs 1897 6,597,000 1905 5,670,000 „ 1898 7,856,000 1906 2,865,000 „ 1899 5,131,000 1907 1,928,000 „ 1900 5,584,000 1908 1,532,000 „ 1901 7,293,000 1909 1,774,000 „ 1902 6,695,000 1910 2,728,000 „ 1903 8,130,000 13. 1906 303,848 francs 1910 296,114 francs 1907 255,900 >> 1911 . 345,861 „ 1908 343,394 >> 1912 402,025 „ 1909 210,855 ,, 14. Intercolonial Federation : Report of M. Dolabaratz upon the tariff regime of Reunion. 15. Intercolonial Federation : Report of M. Lecamu upon the tariff regime of French Guiana. NOTES 299 16. Congress of the Ancient Colonies, 1909, pp. 351 ff. 17. These errors are explained in part by the different values given by the Caledonian custom house to products exported from one year to another. In this way, nickel ore was valued at 45 francs per ton in 1905 ; 20 francs in 1909 ; 30 francs in 1911 ; and 84 francs in 1912 : chrome ore, 58 francs in 1905 ; 25 francs 50 in 1910 ; 85 francs in 1911 and in 1912 : copra was valued at 420 francs per ton in 1911 and 520 francs in 1912 (Colonial Institute of Marseilles. The Production of the French Posses- sions in 1911 and in 1912, pp. 66 and 68). One sees what an effect such differences might have on the figures of exportations. 18. The revenue from the import duties amounted in 1911 to 650,799 francs. If one considers that the free white population which alone consumes almost all the products bought from foreign countries does not reach 20,000 souls, one sees how heavy is the burden per inhabitant. It is true that the revenue procured for the local budget by the customs duties is very appreciable, but this does not compensate for the injury done to the population. 19. Congress of the Ancient Colonies, p. 874. 20. Vanilla brought 18 francs the kilogramme in 1912, while it was worth only 10 francs 50 in 1911. 21. Intercolonial Federation : Report of M. GSouzy on the tariff regime of the French establishments of Oceania. CHAPTER H 1. Decree of October 17, 1897. 2. Report of the Chamber of Commerce of Hanoi, September 20, 1909. 8. Colonial Institute of Marseilles, The Production of the French Posses- sions in 1911 and in 1912, p. 53. 4. Op. cit., pp. 55 to 56. 5. Ibid, 6. All these documents are analysed in Ferry, £tude sur le r^ime douanier de I'lndo-Chine, 1912. The larger part is found reproduced in a pamphlet in quarto published in 1910 and entitled ElnquSte faite par le comity du commerce et de Tindustrie de Tlndo-Chine sur les modifications k apporter au tarif des douanes. Report of M. M^t^tal to the Inter- colonial Federation. 7. Ferry, op. cit., p. 121. 8. Hoarau-Desruisseaux, Aux colonies. 9. See, in this connexion, the report of M. Fetterer. 10. Journal officiel. Doc. pari.. Chamber of Deputies, sess. ord. 1918. p. 491 (annex 2,699). CHAPTER III 1. Report (annual) on the Situation of Madagascar in 1912 (Journal offlciel, annex, 1912). 2. Colonial Congress of Marseilles, tome ii, p. 206 (report of M. July). — Intercolonial Federation (report of M. Buhan). National Congress for 300 NOTES the Defence and Development of the External Commerce (report of M. Pagnoud). 3. Report of M. Artaud in the Congress for the Defence and Development of the External Commerce, pp. 54, 55. 4. Mayotte had been at first placed in the class of assimilated colonies by the law of January 11, 1892. CHAPTER rV 1. Bulletin of the Colonial Office, 1908, p. 211. 2. Discourse of Governor-General Ponty, November 12, 1912 (French Africa, Colonial Information, 1912, No. 12). 3. Mathon, Le Commerce des tisstis en A.O.F. (supplement to the Bulletin of the Colonial Offioe of September, 1909). 4. There must be added about three millions of cotton goods of foreign origin that come from the entrepots of France. 5. Report of M. Seguin (The Intercolonial Federation, at the National Congress for the Defence and Development of the External Commerce, 1912, pp. 89, 90). 6. The largest part of this coal is re-exported to supply the vessels coaling at Dakar. 7. More than half of which (4,700,000) consists in coal. 8. Report of MM. Delmas and Duffart (The Intercolonial Federation, at the National Congress, «&c., 1912, p. 69). CHAPTER V 1. Rouget, L'expansion coloniale au Congo fran^ais, 1906. — Intercolonial Federation : Report of M. du Vivier de Streel. Also, the reports upon the operations of the Privileged Companies, published in 1906 and in 1909. 2. Governor- General Merlin, in his opening speech of the session of 1912 of the Council of Government, asserted 46,860 square kilometres. CHAPTER VI 1 . Delorme, Le commerce algerien, 2 vols., 1906 (Exposition of Marseilles). — Moucheront, Les douanes en Algerie, 1907. 2. See, for more details, Delorme, Le commerce algirien, tome ii, p. 447. The Table of the Commerce of Algeria with France and with Foreign Countries, year by year, from the beginning to 1905. 3. In 1870 the civil territory included only 12,793 square kilometres, about the equivalent of two French departments. 4. The true values were in general perceptibly inferior to official values ; see the speech of M. d'Eichtal at the sitting of the Chamber of Deputies of July 10, 1847 (quoted by Pallain, Les douanes frangaises, tome ii, p. 338, notes). 5. Pallain, Les douanes fran^aises, tome ii, pp. 364, 365. 6. The title of this annual publication is ' Direction des douanes de NOTES 301 TAlg^rie. Statistical documents compiled by the Administration of the duties on the conmierce of Algeria ' (Algiers, Agricultural and Commercial Printing Establishment). 7. For the products imported from the mother country or from foreign countries, other than Morocco and Tunis, the Algerian tariff is in conformity with the rates of valuation adopted by the French Commission of Tariff Values (Moucheront, Les douanes en Algerie, p. 768). 8. The figures of the Algerian customs service are in general less than those of the French. Example : in 1912 the exports for France were 400,401,000 francs, according to the Algerian customs service, while the imports from Algeria amounted to 482,497,000 francs, according to the French customs service. 9. Exportation of cereals from Algeria for foreign countries, 17,900,000 francs. In this total, the part of Tunis is 8,200,000 francs, and that of Morocco 900,000. 10. In regard to coal, the figures of the special commerce are much lower than those of the general commerce (87,700,000) ; Algeria consiunes about 500,000 tons of coal annually, and it is the value of these 500,000 tons that figure in the special conunerce ; but in addition, she receives more than one million tons, which are put in entrepdt and re-exported : this enormous quantity is taken by the vessels that put into port at Algiers to coal. 11. Morocco: cattle, 4,500,000 francs; cereals, 900,000. — ^Tunis: cattle, 700,000 ; cereals, 800,000. 12. With some exceptions, for instance, the mules that the Algerians buy from the Spaniards, who, in turn, buy them in Poitou. 18. Quinzaine coloniale. May 10, 1912. 14. See the amendment proposed by M. Brousse, deputy from the eastern Pyrenees, in the sitting of Friday, Alarch 14, 1913. CHAPTER VII 1. Statistical Documents on the Commerce of Tunis in 1912, p. xxi. 2. See the D^iche coloniale of November 21, 1911. 8. See the article of M. Ladreit de Lacharrierre in V Afrique franraise of August, 1918. — Also, Lucien Boi^eaud, L'avenir du commerce fran^ais au Maroc, 1913. CHAPTER VIII. CONCLUSION 1. We are not speaking here of the northern part of Africa, whose situation is altogether different from that of the colonies, and for which it suffices to refer to what has been said in the apposite chapters. 2. Report of the Chamber of Commerce of Marseilles upon the bill relative to the establishment of the colonial tariff regime, p. 7. 8. Op. cit., p. 7. 4. Report of M. Harmand to the Congress of the Ancient Colonies, p. 7. 302 NOTES 5. The works of the GJerman economists on the commercial regime of the French colonies are, in this connexion, particularly suggestive. See Dr. Robert Ermels, Frankreichs koloniale Handelspolitik, 1910. 6. Statistics of the commerce of the French colonies for 1911, tome i, p. 20. 7. Dubief, Report to the Chamber of Deputies upon the budget of the ministry of the colonies for 1904. 8. Artaud, op. cit., p. 9. INDEX Abyssinia, 196. Ad valorem duties, 150. Agrarian unrest, 82. Alcohol trade, 114. Algeciras Conference, 154. Algeria, 51 f., 61 ff., 78 ff., 84 ff., 119 ff., 155 ff., 162 f., 167, 247 ff. ; as affected by tariff assimilation, 262 ff. ; character of ex{x>rts, 255 ff. ; character of imports, 259 ff. ; development of com- merce, 250 ff. Amiens, peace of, 50. Ancient regime, 11 ff. Antilles, 18, 53 ff., 70 ff., 89, 104 f., 187, 141, 174 ff. ; as affected by tariff assimilation, 177 ff. Amould, 25, 27 f., 81, 38, 86. Artaud, 94, 142, 144, 280 f. Association of French Industry and Agriculture, 150 ff., 158. Bastiat, 66. Beet sugar, 9. Berlin conference, 118. Brussels anti -slavery conference, 114. Brussels convention, 108. Bulgaria, commercial treaty with France, 124. Caillaux, 154 f. Calonne, 32, 44. Canada, 24, 28 f . Caoutchouc, 240, 243. Carey, 282 f. Cayenne, 75. Chartered Companies, 11 ff. ; in Equatorial Africa, 240 f. Cochin China, 78. Coffee trade, 23, 24. Colbert, 11, 17, 80. Colonial commerce, development of, 169 ff. ; relative importance of, 10, 38, 42, 61, 70, 94, 165 ff. Colonial Congress of Bordeaux, 143 ; of Marseilles, 210. Colonial Exposition of Marseilles, 141. Colonial expansion, 88 ff. Colonial Institute of Marseilles, 148, 162. Colonial reciprocity, 57. Colonial Union, French, 144, 148. Colonies, early conception of, 37. Colonies, assimilated, 95, 104 ; non- assimilated, 95, 109 ff., 115. Colonization companies, 5. Comores, 95, 98, 228. Company of the Indies, 16, 23, 31, 85, 44. Company of the Islands of America, 12, 17 ff. Company of One Hundred Partners, 12, 28. Company of the West Indies, 18, 18, 27. Com{)ensatory duties, 104. Condillac, 41. Congo Free State, 113, 155. Congress of Elastem Africa, 144. Congress of the Old Colonies, 143 f. Constituent Assembly, 44 ff., 288. Consulate, 53. Continental blockade, 51. Convention, 48, 48, 281 f. Cotton industr>', as benefited by assimilation, 285 f. Dahomey, 117, 150, 155, 225, 229, 282. Directory, 47, 49. Dupont de Nemours, 41, 42. Exceptions, in assimilated tariffs, 100 ff. Exclusion policy, 3 f., 9, 11 ff., 36 ff., 51 ff., 69 ff. Export duties, 102 ff., 115, 128 ff., 215 f. Equatorial Africa, 112 f., 286 ff. Faure, 94. Ferry, 83, 99. First Empire, 50 ff. Forbonnais, 39. Franco-British treaty of 1904, 157. 304 INDEX Franco-German War, 82. French Colonial Union, 134, 162. Gabon, 91, 98, 103, 112, 146 f., 237 ff , ; as affected by tariff assimilation, 244 ff. Germany, attitude toward French Colonial policy, 136 f., 154. Goudard, 38, 42. Goumay, 16. Guadaloupe, 24 f., 90, 98, 104, 174 ff. Guiana, 27, 55, 74, 78, 91, 98, 103 ; as affected by tariff assimilation, 183 ff. Guinea, 33 f., Ill f., 117, 149, 225, 230. Haiti, commercial treaty with France, 123. Half duty, 106, 137, 214. Harmand, 135, 143. India, 55, 114, 116, 193. Indies, company of, 16, 23, 35, 44. Indo-China, 91 f., 98, 100, 103 f., 120, 125, 136 f., 149, 164, 167 ff., 284 f . ; as affected by tariff assimilation, 201 ff. ; character of exports, 203 ff. ; character of imports, 207 ff. Indult duty, 32, 45. Isle de France et de Bourbon, 31. Ivory Coast, 117, 150, 155, 232. Japan, commercial treaty with France, 125. Lamartine, 59. Law, John, 15. Legislative Assembly, 47. Leroy-Beaulieu, 141. London Treaty of 1906, 117. Louisiana, 24, 27, 28. Madagascar, 54, 95, 99 ff., 136, 151, 168 ; as affected by tariff assimila- tion, 217 ff. ; character of ex- ports, 219 ff. ; character of im- ports, 220 ff. Malouet, 40. Martinique, 23, 25 f., 98, 104, 174 ff. Mascarenes, 31 f., 54. Mayotte, 91, 223. Melila, 156. Meline, 150, 155. Melinet, 148. Mercantile system, 8, 37. Minimum tariff, 85, 115, 122 f., 132. Molinari, 66. Monarchy of July, 52. Montesquieu, 39 f. Morellet, 16, 42, Morocco, 80, 85, 152 ff., 166 ff., 275 ff. Napoleon I, 6, 51, 58. Napoleon III, 66 ff. Navigation restrictions, 19, 38, 49, 53, 55, 63, 69 ff., 87, 131. N^cckcr 16. New Caledonia, 78, 91, 98, 100, 103, 118 f., 146 f., 164 ; as affected by tariff assimilation, 188 ff. New Hebrides, 117. Non-assimilated colonies, 95 ff. Oceania, 141 f., 192 f. Open door, 4 f., 283 ; in Morocco, 152 ff. Paris, treaty of 1761, 24. Paris, treaty of 1763, 35. Petit, 16, 21. Physiocrats, 6, 40. Pondichery, 60. Porto Rico, commercial agreement with France, 124. Portugal, commercial treaty with France, 125. Printed calicoes, 30, 45. Privileges, abolition of, 42. Protectionism, 6, 82, 139, 148, 153, 158, 282 f. Public works, effect on trade, 202 f., 218, 244, 249 ff. Quesnay, 40, 42. Reciprocity, colonial, 57. Restoration, 51 f. Retaliation, 21. Reunion, 54, 56 f., 60, 70 f., 89 ff., 104, 137, 141 ; as affected by tariff assimilation, 180 ff. Revolution, 6, 26, 31 f., 42 f., 52. Richelieu, 11. Roscher, 13. Rumania, commercial treaty with France, 124. Saint-Pierre and Miquelon, 78, 91, 98, 146, 166 ; as affected by tariff assimilation, 185 ff. Santo-Domingo, 24 ff., 42. Say, J. B., 14. INDEX 305 Second Empire, 6, 66 ff., 81, 248. Senegal, 45, 50, 56, 74, 78.90 f., 1 1 1 f., 117, 149, 164, 225, 230. Senegal, Company of, 33 ft. Servia, commercial treaty with France, 124. Seven Years' War, 26, 28, 29, 85. Slave trade, 9, 34, 66, 174. Smith, Adam, 15. Smuggling, 14 f., 18, 1.^, 239. Society of Agriculturists, 139. Somaliland, 114, 195. Statistics, commercial, critique of, 161 ff., 202, 253 fT. Sugar trade, 26, 57 ff., 67 f., 86, 107, 171. Switzerland, commercial treaty with France, 124. Tariff of 1892, 6, 85, 93 ff., 105, 109 ff., 121, 184, 142 ff., 158, 176. Tariff assimilation, 7, 9, 43, 48, 50, 81 ff, 94 f., 104 f., 135 ff., 145 f., 176 ff., 280 ff. ; effect on Algeria, 262 ff. ; on C^abon. 24-1 ff. ; on Guiana, 183 ff. ; on Indo-China, 201 ff. ; on lesser colonies, 197 ff. ; on Madagascar, 217 ff. ; on New Caledonia, 188 ff. ; on Reunion, 180 ff. ; on Saint- Pierre and Miquelon, 185 ff. Tariff autonomy, 6, 9, 66 ff., 74, 83, 141 ; effect on Tunis, 272 ff. Tariff personalitv. 7, 184 ff., 141 £f., 145, 218 ff., 280 ff. Thiers, 88. Thierry. 145. Third Republic, 81 ff. de Tocqueville, 42. Transit duties, 108 f., 215 f. Tunis, 80, 85, 126 ff., 162, 168, 268 ff., 272 ff. Turgot, 41 f. United States, commercial treaty with France, 124. Warehouse, bonded, 21 ff. West .Africa, French, 88 f., 76 ff., 110 ff.. 186, 147, 150, 170, 225 ff. West Indies Company, 13, 18, 27. Western Dominion duties, 17. Wharfage. 73, 96, 180. Windward Islands, 25. 1M9.15 GENERAL APPENDIX PUBLICATIONS OF THE DIVISION OF ECONOMICS AND HISTORY The Conference which met at Berne in 1911, under the auspices of the Division of Eiconomics and History of the Carn^e Endowment for International Peace, appointed three Commissions to draft the questions and problems to be dealt with by competent authorities in all countries. The first Commission was entrusted with The Economic and Historical Causes and Effects of War ; the second with Armaments in Time of Peace ; the third with The Unifying Influences in International Life. Subsequently the suggestions of the three Commissions were considered and approved by the entire Conference. The questions are to be discussed scientifically, and as far as possible without prejudice either for or against war ; and their discussion may have such important consequences that the questions are pre- sented below in extenso. Report of the First Commission THE ECONOMIC AND HISTORICAL CAUSES AND EFFECTS OF WAR The Conference recommends the following researches : 1. Historical presentation of the causes of war in modern times, tracing especially the influence exercised by the striving for greater political power, by the growth of the national idea, by the political aspirations of races and by economic interests. 2. Conflicts of economic interests in the present age : (o) The influence of the growth of population and of the industrial development upon the expansion of States. (6) The protectionist policy ; its origin and basis ; its method of application and its influence upon the relations between coun- tries; bounties (open and disguised, public and private); most- favoured-nation treatment ; the attitude towards foreign goods and foreign capital ; the boycott ; discouragement of foreign iounigration. 1 GENERAL APPENDIX (c) International loans ; the policy of guarantees ; the relations of the creditor to the debtor States ; the use of loans for gaining influence over other States. (d) Rivalry among States with respect to capitalist investments in foreign countries : 1. The endeavour to obtain a privileged position in banking enterprises, in the opening and development of mines, in the letting of public contracts, in the execution of public works, in the building of railways (Siberian, Manchurian, Persian Bagdad Railway, Adriatic Railway, &c.) ; in short, the organization of larger capitalistic enterprises in foreign countries. 2. The hindering of foreign countries by convention from executing productive enterprises on their own soil, e.g. from building railways in their own countries. 3. The anti-militarist movement, considered in its religious and poUtical manifestations. (Only opposition to all military organization is here to be considered.) 4. The position of organized labour and the socialists in the various States on the questions of war and armaments. 5. Is it possible to determine a special interest of individual classes making for or against war, for or against standing armies ? 6. The influence of women and woman suffrage upon war and armaments. 7. The extension of obligatory military service in the different States, in times both of war and of peace. (a) The conditions of miUtary service ; the system of enlistment and of general obligatory service, the actual position of aUens. {b) The ratio of the persons obUged to render miUtary service to the entire population. (c) The influence of the present system of military obligation and the organization of armies upon warfare and upon its duration. 8. The economic effects of the right of capture and its influence upon the development of navies. 9. War loans provided by neutral countries ; their extent and influence on recent warfare. 10. The effects of war : (a) Financial cost of war. The methods of meeting it : Taxa- tion ; International Loans ; External Loans. (6) Losses and gains from the point of view of pubhc and private economic interests ; checks to production and the destruction of productive forces ; reduction of opportunities for business enter- 2 GENERAL APPENDIX prises ; interruption of foreign trade and of the imports of food ; the destruction of property ; shrinkage of values of property, including securities ; financial burden caused by new taxes, debts, and war indemnities ; effects upon private credit and upon savings banks ; advantages to those industries which furnish military materials ; advantages and disadvantages to neutral countries. (c) The effects of war upon the supply of the world with food and raw materials, with special reference to those States which are in large degree dependent upon other countries for such suppUes, e. g. Great Britain and Germany ; by diversion of capital from those countries which produce food and raw materials (especially the stoppage of railway building and of new investments in agriculture and other industries). {d) The condition of the victorious State : manner of levy and use of contributions and war indemnities ; influence upon industry and social life. (e) The manner in which the energy of nations is stimulated or depressed by war. 11. Loss of human life in war and as a result of war : influence upon population (birth-rate, relation between the sexes, ratio of the various ages, sanitary conditions). 12. The influence of war and of the possibility of war upon the protective policy, upon banking conditions (especially upon banks of issue), and upon monetary systems. 18. The influence of annexation upon the economic life of the annexing States, and upon the State whose territory has been annexed. 14. The annexation of half -civilized or uncivihzcd peoples, con- sidered especially from the point of view of the economic interests, which act as motive powers ; the methods through which private enterprises take root in such regions and through which they bring influence to bear upon their own governments ; the effects of such annexations upon the development of trade with the annexing State and with other countries, as well as upon the economic and social Ufe of the natives. 15. The progressive exemption of commercial and industrial activities from losses and interferences through war. 16. Influence of the open-door pohcy upon war and peace. GENERAL APPENDIX Report of the Second Commission ARMAMENTS IN TIME OF PEACE. MILITARY AND NAVAL ESTABLISH- MENTS. THE THEORY, PRACTICE, AND HISTORY OF MODERN ARMAMENTS. 1. Definition. Armaments might be described as ' the preparations made by a State either for defence or for attack '. These would include the provision of food, financial preparations, and also semi- military railways, canals, docks, &c. 2. Causes of armaments. Motives for increasing or commencing them, distinguishing the great from the small powers. 3. Rivalry and competition in armaments. Motives and conse- quences of rivalry, with the possibilities of limitation. 4. Modern history of armaments, with special fullness from 1872. To be noted as important landmarks : (a) The introduction of conscription into Germany, France, Austria, Italy, Japan, &c. (b) Modern inventions affecting war. (c) The question of privateering and private property at sea. (d) Duration of military service. (e) The traffic in arms. 5. Mihtary budgets from 1872 (distinguishing ordinary from extra- ordinary expenditures). 6. The burden of armaments in recent times. (a) The proportion of military to civil expenditure. (b) Military expenditure per capita. (c) Military expenditure from loans in time of peace, i.e. a com- parison of expenditure from taxes with expenditure from borrowed money. (d) Comparative burdens of individual taxpayers in different countries and the extent to which the differences are due to armaments. (e) Mihtary pensions. (/) It is desirable to ascertain where possible the ratio between the total income of each nation and the total expenditure on armament at various times. 7. The effects of war preparations upon the economic and social Ufe of a nation : (a) On the sustenance of the entire population of a country at war. 4 GENERAL APPENDIX (b) On railway policy. (c) On public administration and on social legislation. 8. The economic effects of withdrawing young men from industrial pursuits, into the army and navy : (a) Compulsory. (6) Of non-compulsory service (specially in the case of mercenary troops). (Allowance being made for the industrial value of military education and training.) 9. The influence of changes in the occupations of a people upon the composition and efficiency of armies, and the influence of the changes in the composition of armies on the economic life. 10. Loans for armaments (participation of domestic and foreign capital). 11. The industries of war, i.e. the various manufactures and other industries which are promoted and encouraged by military and naval estabhshments, distinguishing between : (a) Government undertakings (arsenals, dockyards. Sec.). (b) Private undertakings, including the history and working of the great armament firms, which sell to foreign customers as well as to their own governments. 12. War materials (munitions of war). Their recent development and their cost. This includes arms, ammunition, armour-plate, war- ships, guns of all kinds, military airships, &c. So far as possible the effect of recent inventions upon offensive and defensive war should be indicated. Report of the Third Commission THE UNIFYING INFLUENCES IN INTERNATIONAL LIFE 1. The Conference is of the opinion that the economic life of individual countries has definitely ceased to be self-contained ; and that, notwithstanding the barriers raised by fiscal duties, it is becom- ing in ever-increasing measiure a part of an economic life in which the whole world participates. 2. It desires that this change be studied with the object of ascer- taining to what extent the economic life of individual nations has ceased to be self-contained, and the causes which are bringing about the greater interdependence of nations. 8. Special attention should be paid to the following factors : (a) How far the growth of population is responsible for the changes that have occurred and are in progress. 6 GENERAL APPENDIX (b) The extent to which the insufficiency of the natural resources of individual countries for their own requirements has contri- buted to it. (c) Whether the increasing economic unity of the world is the cause or the result of the rising in the standard of living, and how far the increasing welfare of nations has been caused by the growing unity. (d) In what measure the need of individual countries to obtain materials of production from other lands and to find new markets for their own products is responsible for the growth of international dependence. 4. The Conference desires that investigations be made into : (a) The volume of the world's production of all the many articles of food, of the various raw materials, and of the principal manu- factures. (6) The productions of individual countries, and the extent to which they are retained for home consumption or are exported. (c) The consumption of individual countries, and the extent to which the various articles are suppUed from home productions or are imported. 5. The Conference wishes to ascertain to what extent the economy of production by large units, instead of by small units, has contributed to the international dependence of nations. 6. The development of this world-embracing economy has taken place in great measure in consequence of the investment of capital by rich countries in less developed lands. Through this there have arisen close relations and a great increase of wealth, not only for the lending and the borrowing countries, but for all nations. The Con- ference is of the opinion that researches should be made into the extent of the interdependence of the nations in the matter of capital 7. The Conference desires to institute inquiries into the inter- dependence of the financial centres of the world. 8. The Conference desires to make the unifjdng effects of inter- national trade, the building of railways, the progress of shipping, the improvement and extension of aU means of communication and the progress of inventions, the subjects of careful investigation. 9. The Conference is in favour of making a comprehensive study of the various international unions and associations, in which the social and economic interests of all classes of society are now either organized or in process of organization, through official or private action. 6 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. Jsdbedule: 25 cents onfir$t^|^^w^K^ ^3|ifebne doljaf^ivsev^hJ|jjia>^.a^ir- OCT 161947 9W0M ^^^ FEB 3 1954 LiJ /6Apr59Slf REG i- -^ JUH6 1559 5Jun6lLC| I* JOH S Bb^ LD 21-100m-12,'46(A2012sl6)4120 g3Mr'620C IN STACKS FEB 17 1962 REC^D LD jm 41962 9May'63AE| pr/TD CO nv STACKS OCT 191964 REC'D LD :3uMst\0 — fifNEBAL LIBBABy-u.c.BEl B000a'?0M4S I ^- 3G980.. ^1 h 1 J» 1. ». UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA UBRARY