PUBLIC RECORD
TITT
OFFICE
Reference :-
C.O. 885
6
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-
COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
sorts
14
TRADE STATISTICS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES.
As regards the practice in foreign countries in registering imports and exports, it may be stated that the subject has been very carefully considered by the International Statistical Institute at its first session at Rome in 1887, and again at the second session of the Institute at Paris in 1889.
At Rome, two reports were presented, one by Monsieur Caignon, Chef du Bureau in the Ministry of Finance at Paris, and the other by Mr. Bateman, one of our number.
Annexed to Mr. Bateman's report are certain tables which we have thought it desirable to append to our report, showing shortly in a comparative form the practice followed in the chief European countries and the United States in regard to (1) classification of articles of import and export; (2) methods of valuing imports and exports; and (3) method of registering imports and exports by country of origin or destination.
It will be observed from these tables that, owing to the prevalence of specific as compared with ad valorem duties in Europe, there is very great variety in the systems of classification, which mostly follow the Customs tariff of goods chargeable with specific duties.
Another feature in Continental classification is the usual identity of the import and export groupings as compared with our own system and that of the United States, where the imports and exports are differently grouped so as to show the most salient features of the two trades. In the discussions which took place at Rome, and subsequently at Paris, on this point, there was a general opinion in favour of an international model classification, but the difficul- ties of enforcing such uniformity were recognised so long as the Customs list of each country's imports was framed in accordance with a tariff levied specifi. cally, and consequently one which grouped articles chiefly according to their specific value. Pending the desired uniform classification, an alphabetical table in the French language has been recommended to be appended to all the trade statistics of the various countries, and the rapporteur, Mr. Bateman, has been requested to draw up a model classification for submission to the next session of the Institute, which will take place at Vienna next autumn.
Next, in regard to valuation of imports and ex- ports, the table referred to shows that the great balk of the Continental countries value their importa and exports by the aid of official calculations" and not by the declarations of the importers and exporters. As the values are in no case revised more frequently than once a year, the result is that the monthly trade accounts issued by most European Govern- ments contain values based on the prices of the previous year,
and therefore do not show changes in current prices.
The point was brought before the Institute both at Rome and Paris by Mr. Bateman, but his objections to this practice have always been met by the conten- tion that prices fixed by a committee of experts are
s
.15
more likely to be correct than the declarations of importers and exporters.
As regards the monthly trade accounts, however, a resolution was passed at the Paris meeting in favour of actual prices, though it does not yet appear to have been acted on by any Government.
The question of including values of freight and insurance in the import figures seems hardly to have received any notice at these meetings, for the reason that the practice in European countries is to include all such charges; the United States, however, fol- lowing the contrary practice by giving the imports
as valued in the markets whence imported, without including freight.
The third point discussed by the Institute is that Countries" of registering the country of origin or destination of origin and imports and exports. From the table, Appendix F., destinationg it will be seen that great divergence of practice prevails throughout European countries. Even when the country of real origin and ultimate destination is professedly shown, it is usually admitted that, in the case of land traffic, the trade is credited to the frontier country through which the goods pass, and the committee's report at Paris, to which reference has already been made and which is printed in Appendix G., practically confesses the impossibility of registering accurately the real origin and ultimate destination, even if it were desirable to do so.
On this latter point, considerable difference of opinion was manifest in the committee, some eminent. statisticians maintaining, for instance, in the case of Australian wool bought in London and then sent to Paris, that London, where the goods are bought and paid for, and not Australia, is the proper origin of the transaction to register, while others contended. that Australia, as the place where the wool was grown and packed, ought to be entered as the country of origin.
RECOMMENDATIONS.
We now proceed to submit our recommendations as to the system which we would advocate for adoption by the Colonies.
IMPORTS."
譬
I. Imports should be valued as they lie in the port of entry. This method not only has the advantage of bringing the Colonial practice into conformity with that of Great Britain, India, and most foreign countries, but it is also the most correct. For the cost of a commodity to its consumer (represented in this case by the importing country) is, for the most part, ultimately measurable by the labour expended upon it before it reaches the consumer's hands, and there can be no justification for arbitrarily excluding from the caletation that part of the labour which has been expended on the sea transit.
II. The value at the port of entry will be made up of the following items:--
́ ́(a.) Invoice value, less trade discounts wifere these
are allowed;
(b.) Freight;
c.) Insurance;
(d) Value of packages.