resented only 7,686,000 pesetas out of a total of 932,245,000 pesetas; less than 1 per cent. As already stated, it was in 1818 Spain lost its supremacy in the English wool markets, and this must have been the result of some decay in the Spanish trade, a natural consequence, perhaps, of Napoleon's wars. A decisive blow on the part of England must also have determined the decline of exports in that particular direction. Wool was admitted into England free of duty from 1787 to 1802, when a duty of 5s. 3d. per cwt. was imposed. In 1813 this duty was raised to 6s. 8d. per cwt., and in 1819 to 56s. per cwt., or about 12 cents a pound. This high rate of duty, 1 cent a pound higher than is collected on unwashed wools of the first class under the United States tariff law of 1890, was intended as a measure of protection, and must have seriously affected the imports of Spanish wool already falling away in the face of German competition.

I am unable to find any estimate of the number of sheep and lambs in Spain.

QUANTITIES AND VALUES OF WOOL AND MANUFACTURES OF WOOL IMPORTED INTO AND EXPORTED FROM SPAIN, 1866 TO 1891.

[One kilogram equals 2-20462 pounds. One peseta equals 19.3 cents.]

SWEDEN.

QUANTITIES AND VALUES of Wool and MANUFACTURES OF WOOL IMPORTED INTO SWEDEN, 1873 TO 1891.

[One kilogram equals 2-20462 pounds. One krona equals 26.8 cents.]

a From a paper on the Statistics of Agricultural Production, by Maj. P. G. Craigie, Secretary of the Central Chamber of Agriculture, 1883.

ESTIMATES OF WOOL GROWN IN THE UNITED KINGDOM IN 1893.

THE LONDON WOOL MARKET, 1887-1893.
[From the annual circulars of Helmuth Schwartze & Co.]

LONDON, January 11, 1887. The past year has witnessed such sudden, strong and contradictory fluctuations in the prices of wool as to give the course of the market an air of artificiality. Strong upward and downward movements are not foreign to the article, but when they have occurred the cause producing them has lain on the surface. The wave of prosperity that followed the war in 1870, or the excitement in Amercia 1879-'80, adequately explained in the one case the lasting, in the other the temporary rise of wool and of many other commodities. In the present case such an obvious explanation is wanting. It is possible to follow the movements with reasons only for a short way, to argue that the low level of values had stimulated consumption, that the decline had gone too far and rendered a reaction legitimate, that the decrease in the Buenos Ayres clip reported in spring produced a strenthening and the war rumors and unexpectedly large supplies of colonial wool at the end of the year a weakening effect upon the market. But there is nothing in the proportion of supply and demand, which in its entirety was perfectly normal, or in the condition of the industry, which from one end of the year to the other presented the same aspect of full, steady employment, to account for the alternate cold and hot fits to which the market has been subject. So little used was the trade to such transformations that the unexpected and, in its magnitude, unaccountable rise in the spring was in this country for some time regarded as the work of a foreign "ring." This view was not founded on fact, but it contained a germ of truth. There can be no doubt that speculation last year played a more prominent part than is commonly the case, not on the strength of the policy of a few individuals, but from a combination of circumstances which rendered an article, not as a rule lending itself easily to speculative handling, sensitive to even small influ

ences.

Between the day's requirements of the consumption and the visible supplies in the market lie the more immediate supplies represented by the stocks in the hands of the trade; stocks partly absolutely necessary, but partly speculative and elastic, large or small according to the amount of confidence entertained at the time by the owner. Even in individual cases the difference between the "large" and the "small" can be considerable; but where a whole trade is concerned, where it is swayed simultaneously in the same direction and from one extreme to the other, it may represent a rising or sinking of the demand of vast proportions. This is what happened last year. Owing to the continued downward course of the market, the trade in all its branches had come to learn that stocks meant losses, and had consequently reduced them to a minimum. The ordinary and healthy disposition, moreover, to resist