54 



The National Geographic Magazine 



$160,035,563 worth, or thirty-two times 

 as much as we did. 



During the same year we sold to Si- 

 beria $2,786,664 worth. 



In other words, in 1900 we sold to 

 8,000,000 Russians in Siberia more than 

 half as much as we sold to 300,000,000 

 people under British rule in India. 



In other words, where India pur- 

 chased American products to the amount 

 of 1^ cents per capita, Siberia pur- 

 chased 35 cents per capita. If this was 

 the situation last year, what will it be 

 in the years to come, with India dor- 

 mant or dying and Siberia just stepping 

 out into new national life. 



The situation in Japan shows what 

 the United States can do in the Far 

 East in competition with other nations 

 under equal conditions. 



In 1890 Great Britain sold Japan mer- 

 chandise to the amount of 26,619,102 

 yen; the United States sold 6,874,531 

 yen ; Germany, 6,856,955 yen. 



In 1900 the respective sales to Japan 

 were: United Kingdom, 71,633,219 yen; 

 United States, 62,761,196 yen; Ger- 

 many, 29,199,605 yen. 



Our exports to Asiatic Russia have 

 been as follows for ten years past: 



1891 $161,580 



1892 120,200 



1593 145,591 



1594 163,855 



1895 204,937 



1S96 ... 568,002 



1897 413,942 



189S 618,015 



1899 1,543,126 



1900 3,050,102 



1901, 10 months 779, §39 



or, on the basis of a 3 r ear, $909,812, or 

 a loss in a single year of more than two 

 million dollars, or two-thirds of our en- 

 tire trade there since the sugar-bounty 

 decision was made by the board of ap- 

 praisers in New York. 



Our trade conditions in India should 



be a warning to us in dealing with the 

 Chinese question. 



Hon. George Curzon, in his "Prob- 

 lems of the Far East," says " that the 

 commercial supremacy of Great Britain 

 in the Far Eastern seas, though sharply 

 assailed by an ever-increasing compe- 

 tition, has not as yet been seriously 

 shaken. How vital is its maintenance, 

 not merely for the sake of our empire, 

 but for the sustenance of our people, no 

 arguments are needed to prove. It is 

 only in the East, and especially in the 

 Far East, that we may still hope to 

 keep and create open markets for British 

 manufactures. Every port, every town, 

 and even- village that passes into French 

 or Russian hands is an outlet lost to 

 Manchester, Bradford, or Bombay." 



Every word of this is literally and 

 absolutely true. It is for themselves 

 and not for us that European nations 

 seek concessions and mark out spheres 

 of influence. Each one pursues its own 

 peculiar method, but the result is alike 

 in all. 



There is no sphere of influence for us 

 there, and to look upon Manila as a 

 base for Chinese trade is like chasing 

 rainbows for a pot of gold, for commer- 

 cial bases are not established six hun- 

 dred miles at sea and where storage and 

 reshipment charges would be more than 

 the direct freight to the destined mar- 

 ket. The integrity of China cannot be 

 preserved by a protectorate of the Pow- 

 ers, and if it could the people of this 

 country would not permit our govern- 

 ment to be a partner in it. China must 

 reform herself or go to pieces speedily. 



My judgment is that her destiny is 

 slow but sure absorption by Asiatic 

 Russia, and that the world will be the 

 gainer by the change. 



Meanwhile our duty and our interest 

 is to keep on terms of peace and amity 

 with all, but to make alliances with 

 none. 



