es.| |
-------------------------+----------+--------+--------+--------+--------
India | 84 | 58.9 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.2
Australasia | 66.6 | 28.4 | 2.6 | 1.6 | .3
South Africa | 12.7 | 10.3 | .4 | .2 | .04
North America | 24.6 | 9.2 | 11.2 | .8 | .5
West Indies | 6.4 | 2.8 | 1.9 | .05 | .1
Other British Possessions| 31.4 | 6.6 | .6 | .4 | .6
+----------+--------+--------+--------+--------
Total | 225.7 | 116.2 | 18.2 | 4.6 | 2.8
-------------------------+----------+--------+--------+--------+--------

These figures are, unfortunately, two or three years behind date, and
probably a later return would show that the proportion of British
exports to our principal Colonies had fallen off and the German
proportion somewhat increased, but this change has certainly not been
sufficiently great to affect the general aspect of the table. That table
shows that more than half of the total import trade of our Colonies is
in our hands, and that our three principal rivals together have little
more than a tenth of the whole trade. Indeed, were it not for the
inevitably big trade of the United States with Canada, our three rivals
together would only have about one-fifteenth of the trade of our
Colonies. As for Germany in particular the table shows that the amount
of the trade she has so far been able to secure is absolutely
insignificant in comparison with our figures.

THE COST TO THE COLONIES.

"But," argue the preferentialists, "German trade with our Colonies has
been growing rapidly, and may continue to grow." Possibly it may, if our
manufacturers go to sleep; but what we have here to consider is whether
it is worth while to take any political action to stop the possible
growth of a competing trade which at present is insignificant in amount.
Remember that if such action is taken by the Colonies to please us, we
shall have to pay a price for their complaisance--for their loss by the
exclusion of German or any other foreign goods would be twofold. In the
first place the Colonial consumer would suffer. He now buys certain
German goods because they suit him best, either in quality or in price.
That privilege it is proposed to take from him. His loss is therefore
certain. Secondly, there is a considerable danger of inju