hours, or restrictions, or ceilings and floors and controls which others. may not have, or cartels or monopolies abroad when they are not permitted at home, and we do not want them at home, or for agricultural parity or monetary manipulation abroad or infant industry or for national defense. Read the whole address. I have read it and when I read an address on foreign trade, I try to get right down carefully to see whether it is really thorough all the way through. It is nicely put, and he is emphasizing the good side of it rather than saying that it is relatively only an incident in our whole show and must be guarded.

Now, I cannot speak for him and I am not speaking for him, and they have not asked me to speak for them this year. I do not know whether they have anybody speaking for them or not.

Mr. ROBERTSON. They are going to have something to say, somebody to speak for them.

Dr. COULTER. That will be the place to get their views thoroughly

into the record.

Mr. ROBERTSON. I hope you think a little better of economists than the witness, Mr. Samuel Crowder, who spoke yesterday. He spoke of that 1,015 who protested to Mr. Hoover against the signing of the Hawley-Smoot tariff, and as I recall he said not more than about four of them know what it was all about. You do not take that position, do you?

Dr. COULTER. Well, most of the economists-there are very few colleges or universities in the United States that give separate courses on tariff or international trade-not more than ten or a dozen at the most, and of those most of the professors are teaching five or ten other subjects, money and banking, and labor problems, and all sorts of things. I doubt if there are, since Taussig's death, more than two or three who have really made a masterful study of the international exchange, trade tariff, investment field. But a lot of them teach the general thing, the general theory of competitive enterprise.

Mr. ROBERTSON. We had a statement presented yesterday signed by 1,200 economists, and in your opinion not over two or three of them would know what it is all about?

Dr. COULTER. I would say not more than two or three of them have made any detailed research in this field. I saw the list of the Freedom House group, and you

Mr. ROBERTSON. You don't take the position that the views of an economist are of no value unless he can sell them for big money, do you?

Dr. COULTER. If any of them have made a study, I will be happy to have them spend a week or two with you. If you find two or three that have made any real study.

Now, you can call in here 1,200 from B. E. W. and they will all sign that statement of three columns, but that does not mean that any of them have studied this problem like you have or I have. Mr. ROBERTSON. I called 1,200 of these economists as my silent witnesses yesterday, and Samuel Crowder said take them away; they are no good, and you say take them away; they are no good.

Dr. COULTER. I say bring them in if you think that they have anything to give you.

Mr. ROBERTSON. They are the ones who are teaching.

Dr. COULTER. Bring them in if you think that they have anything to give you.

Mr. ROBERTSON. How about the ones who taught you when you went to school? Did you learn anything under them, or all after you got out of college?

Dr. COULTER. I was very fortunate in having a professor who happened to have come from Yale, but that did not make any difference; when he got through with the teaching of the principles, he always stated to us, "Now, boys and girls, remember I have presented to you the broad principles; the broad theories of the thing. In practice and practical technical life you will find many obvious modifications which you must adjust yourselves to and adjust these principles. The correlaries may often be superior in importance to the main

theme."

Now, I think a great deal of that professor as I look back to him, even though he taught me the general theory of free trade, because he cautioned men against what to look out for.

Mr. ROBERTSON. I can understand how du Pont and the woolen manufacturers and a good many others do not think these college professors know how to correlate and to adjust their theories to the practical business of a tariff that will not let in competitive articles, and they do not rate so high with these practical business men who have been coming here since 1934 protesting against any reduction in the tariff or any program that looked to cooperation with other nations of the world. They even ridiculed the fact that you can get any goodwill out of trading with anybody, or that there can be any foundation for peace in international trade. They think that that is just tommyrot. Do you think that that is tommyrot?

Dr. COULTER. I have not gotten into the sociological aspect of trade agreements. I have not gotten into the confusion of the psychologist, and sociologist and theories of that sort, and my judgment would not be worth much. A missionary could tell you more than I could. Take a good missionary and get him in here and see what he thinks. Mr. ROBERTSON. Well, after much difficulty yesterday I got Mr. Samuel Crowder finally to agree that between 1900 and 1930 our industrial scheme of things had gradually expanded and enlarged, and then I handed him a Government chart showing that through those years our foreign trade had progressively enlarged.

Do you know what he did with that chart?

Dr. COULTER. No.

Mr. ROBERTSON. He said it was worthless, take it away. It is based on dollar values. It is worthless.

Dr. COULTER. That was from 1900 to 1940.

Mr. ROBERTSON. That was from 1900 to 1930 that our industries had expanded and at the same time our foreign trade had expanded. The chart showed it so plain that he who runs could read and a blind man could see, but the witness said "Take it away."

Dr. COULTER. Between 1900 and 1930 came in a great many items like rubber, we will say. The ladies started wearing silk stockings. Before that it was a very extraordinary thing, silk for that purpose. Tin and the canning industry, and a number of other metals, man

ganese, and so forth; there have been a number of developments since that time.

On the other hand, there have been almost if not an equal number of important items disappear from the trade.

In 1900 we were exporting a million head of live cattle, and we did not have refrigeration yet. Now we do not export any live cattle and very little even of cured meats.

So I could give you a dozen other illustrations. There have been some new types of world trade, and some of the trade that existed at that time has disappeared. The net result has been in total a substantial increase in the total of world trade and between us and the world.

Mr. ROBERTSON. I am going to give you a chart and I hope you won't treat it like Mr. Crowder did and say that it is worthless, because it does not give you the kind of answer you want. I want you to look at this chart that is adapted from charts in foreign trade of the United States published by the U. S. Department of Commerce, and this is headed "United States Foreign Trade, 1891-1942.” Look at that chart.

Dr. COULTER. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROBERTSON. Now, that is a logarithmic scale, and that chart shows percentage increases, and that chart shows the rate of growth, and you said to us that both imports and exports increased more rapidly before the trade agreements were passed than afterward, and that chart shows just the contrary.

Now, I rely on the chart, and if you want to criticize the chart, you are at liberty to do so.

Dr. COULTER. I said that the decrease had started before the act of 1930, and your chart shows very clearly that the decrease did start, both imports and exports, away back of 1930, that is before the Tariff Act was passed.

In other words, the slump was on; both quantitatively and valuewise. Then I said that the upturn started before trade agreements. Here is your bottom in 1932, and here is your trade agreements line here, and the upturn came at that time.

Now, if you do not take the war shipments of the last 2 years, you will find that the upturn before trade agreements was equal to the continued upturn afterward.

In other words, the upturn afterward was just a continuation of what started before, and I think

Mr. ROBERTSON. Could I put this chart in evidence?

The CHAIRMAN. That may be done.

(The chart referred to is as follows:)

Mr. ROBERTSON. You did not say the same thing the last time that you said the first time. I understood you said that imports and exports increased before the trade agreements were passed and not

afterward.

Dr. CoULTER. No; I did not say more rapidly; I gave the exact figures on that. On the downward trend I gave the figures that the price had gone down exactly 30 percent, and that that was just half of the total downward movement of 60 percent, so that just half of the decline had happened before July 1930, and that just as price went down 60 percent the quantity, dollar value, went down 61.5, or 62.5, so that there was a difference of only one point there between the downward trend.

Mr. ROBERTSON. So that when you referred to this study

Dr. COULTER. I make charts like that; that chart looks all right

to me.

Mr. ROBERTSON. Now, when you referred to this study of the American Tariff League, was it?

Dr. CoULTER. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROBERTSON. Did you state or just imply that that was a study of the United States Tariff Commission?

Dr. COULTER. I did not state that that was a study of the Tariff Commission. I said that all of their data were compiled in the Tariff Commission from the official records.

Mr. ROBERTSON. By private employees?

Dr. COULTER. Oh, yes.

Mr. KNUTSON. Well, if they are not correct, you can challenge them. You have got an expert behind you, a Tariff Commission expert.

Mr. ROBERTSON. I just wanted to get it clear that that was not a study of the Tariff Commission; that somebody went in the office and got the figures and made a study.

Dr. COULTER. Yes, sir; that is right. The compilation is privately done but from official figures, and I have checked them pretty carefully and I think it is authoritative.

Mr. ROBERTSON. Did you state or did you imply that the rates of duty in the United States are less prohibitive than those of the United Kingdom as shown by that report?

Dr. COULTER. I said only that the average for the United States was about 16 percent, and the average for the United Kingdom was about 18 percent before we made the recent reductions, and therefore at the present time evidently the average rate on this whole body of imports into Great Britain were higher than the average for all of those coming into the United States.

Mr. ROBERTSON. Why do you say "evidently"? Because you say when you read something you read it and know what it means, and you read in that report that the study definitely says that it does not show the height of protectionism. That is stated plainly in the report. Why do you say “evidently” after reading that?

Dr. COULTER. Are you quoting from that report, from the Tariff League report?

Mr. ROBERTSON. Well, we will not go further into that question. We will pass on.

86405-43-35