This correction would give Russia fourth instead of ninth place in the list of great buyers of American goods. This is the most striking illustration of the deceptive feature of government trade-statistics in determining the order of importance of foreign buyers of American goods, though there are other countries which suffer in the estimation of exporters for the same reason. As has been already stated, it was peculiarly unfortunate that this was so in the case of Russia, for those who, for reasons of their own, favored national retaliation against that country through mutual trade relations used United States government statistics to support their argument, and the American public naturally accepted these data at their apparent value. A final and accurate determination of the value of each foreign country as a market for American merchandise, a laborious and almost impossible task, would undoubtedly lead to interesting and unexpected results. It would not only make many changes in the list of the most important customers, but would immediately suggest possibilities of more direct trading, which would stimulate American rail, shipping, and financial interests, increase profits by cutting out the middleman, and in the end give added stimulus to American foreign trade. One of the most serious difficulties that confront the American Government in its dealings with foreign nations is the inelasticity of the American tariff laws. The most sensible and scientific tariff law which the United States could have,--allowing that the principle of tariff for revenue and protection is to prevail,--is such rate of duty as may be deemed advisable, all things considered; an arrangement whereby a surtax could be imposed upon goods from countries discriminating against American merchandise, and a trading margin for treaty-making purposes, ranging from the normal rate of duty, as set forth in the customs laws, to absolute free trade between the treaty-making powers. There is little or no hope that such a law can prevail or will be formally advocated by any political party in power; but it is a hopeful sign that it has been seriously suggested and discussed by men prominent in the councils of the nation. That tariff laws will in time be formulated on that basis is likely, but such a statement reaches further into the domain of prophecy than is apparently warranted in the present temper of actual legislation. There is a simple truth, apparently often forgotten or ignored, and it is that to give is necessary, to be able to take, in all dealings between nations, as much as between individuals. All trading is in the end a compromise, presumably mutually beneficent and equally so. It rests with the wit and ability of the trader to see that he at least comes out even. It would be interesting to know just how far the late President McKinley intended to go in his advocacy of better foreign-trade relations for the United States had not his tragic death