FREE TRADE OR PROTECTION
Sm,—I am happy to reply to the letter of Mr. W. A. Wells, published in your issue of December loth, in regard to the deductions to be drawn from our export and re-export figures from 1929 to 1938. It is obvious that any such figures are the resultant of two trade policies: that of others and that of ourselves. For instance, to quote from my article in question: " from 1929 to 1938, the last full year before the war, the trade policy, both of ourselves and of the French Republic, succeeded in reducing our imports from France by one- quarter in value, and our exports to France by one-third in value."
On the strength of these and of similar considerations, I argued that " the world must reverse its policy of trade restrictions," and that the trade of the world would much increase, " if only the peoples would eschew " them. After all, this was only to repeat the findings of the World Economic Conference, which, as early as 1927, stated in its Report: " The time has come to put an end to the increase in tariffs, and to move in the opposite direction." Again, there were the findings of the Committee of the Seven-Power Conference, which stated, as early as t931, that "in recent years the world . . has been putting obstacles in the way of the free .movement of goods," and that there should be " a radical change in this policy of obstruction."
Accordingly, I am not in agreement with the statement of Mr. Wells that "Protection came into force on March 1st, 1932," and that 1929, 193o and 1931 were " Free Trade years." On the contrary, these years were all years of high Protection. The reason for the difference between Mr. Wells and myself is that he looks solely at ourselves, whereas I look both at ourselves and at the world. This is evidently indispensable to the correct interpretation of our export and re-export figures. During a part of the period in question, from 1929 to 1938, there was, as Mr. Wells correctly shows, somewhat of a revival in the figures of our exports and re-exports. Many economists consider that this was due to the devaluation of our currency in 1931 ; as also to trade agreements in mitigation of tariffs and other causes. But, in spite of all, or any, of these factors, there were throughout the period in question and throughout the world those severe restrictions of trade with the results shown in the figures.—Yours faithfully,
GEORGE PEEL.
Previous page
