Go to National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa
Volume 35, 1902
This text is also available in PDF
(344 KB) Opens in new window
– 117 –

Art. VIII.—Remarks on the Trade and Public Debt of New Zealand.

[Read before the Auckland Institute, 18th August, 1902.]

Plates XI.-XIV.

In tables of the trade, revenue and expenditure, public debt, &c., for any country, it is usual to present the value in terms of some monetary unit—e.g., the sovereign or pound sterling. Now, the sovereign represents a fixed amount of gold, but not a fixed exchange value. The extent to which the sovereign, or any given number of sovereigns, will purchase commodities in general varies considerably from time to time. Consequently a man with a fixed income—that is, with an income of a fixed number of pounds—may be really much better or much worse off at one time than at another because of the variations in the purchasing-power of his income. The trade of a country may be progressing well and soundly during a period for which bare statistics of values may appear to indicate a sickly and declining condition of trade, and trade may be really languishing when these statistics indicate continued progress. Before we can properly compare monetary statistics of one period with those of another we must take into account the variations in the purchasing-power of money, remembering that the value of any sum of money is the amount of commodities which it will purchase at the time.

Index Numbers.

This we are enabled to do roughly by means of index numbers. We need not enter on a general description and discussion of these in this place; let it suffice to say that their purpose is to represent the average prices of commodities at different periods, the average prices being directly proportional to the index numbers, and the purchasing-power of money consequently inversely proportional to them. The following table represents Sauerbeck's index numbers for the years 1880-1900 :—

– 118 –
Index No.
1880 88
1881 85
1882 84
1883 82
1884 76
1885 72
1886 69
1887 68
1888 70
1889 72
1890 72
1891 72
1892 68
1893 68
1894 63
1895 62
1896 61
1897 62
1898 64
1899 68
1900 75

This is illustrated graphically in Plate XI.

It will be noticed that from 1880 to 1896 prices, as measured by these numbers, steadily declined, with the exception of an interruption which culminated about 1890. The decline for the whole period, as represented by the first and last of the index numbers—viz., 88 and 61—is one of nearly 31 per cent., and this is equivalent to an increase in the purchasing-power of money in the ratio of 61 to 88, or some 44 per cent. In 1896, however, there set in a rapid rise in prices and consequent fall in the purchasing-power of money, which continued to 1900.

Index numbers are calculated by different authors in various ways and from different data with different results, and no one set of index numbers can be regarded as being exact. Indeed, they are intended to represent the average prices of commodities, the very idea of which is more or less indefinite. But, though differing somewhat in the magnitudes of the changes in prices and purchasing-power of money which they indicate, it is remarkable how concordant are the index numbers of different statisticians in indicating always the same tendency to rise or fall. These remarks should be carefully borne in mind in the following application of Sauerbeck's index numbers.

Application of Index Numbers.

We propose to take the exports, imports, and public debt of New Zealand for the years 1880-1900, and to calculate their values in terms of the pound of the year 1880—i.e., to find how many pounds would have been required in the year 1880 to have the same purchasing-power as the various sums concerned in the several years. The values thus calculated we shall call the “general exchange values expressed in the pound of 1880”—(1880)£. By comparing these values we shall be able, notwithstanding the roughness of the method, to form a better idea of the course of trade and of the burden of debt than we could from the ordinary statistics, as the general exchange values thus calculated will represent the

– 119 –

general purchasing-power instead of merely the amount of gold equivalent at the time.

Exports.

The following table indicates the application of the method to the exports of New Zealand :—

Nominal Values.
£
General Exchange Values.
(1880)£
1880 6,102,300 6,102,300
1881 5,762,250 5,965,623
1882 6,253,350 6,551,128
1883 6,855,244 7,356,847
1884 6,942,486 8,038,668
1885 6,591,911 8,056,780
1886 6,386,682 8,145,334
1887 6,551,081 8,477,870
1888 7,255,128 9,120,720
1889 9,042,008 10,051,304
1890 9,428,761 11,524,040
1891 9,400,094 11,489,016
1892 9,365,868 12,120,504
1893 8,557,443 11,074,360
1894 9,085,148 12,690,392
1895 8,390,153 11,908,600
1896 9,177,336 13,239,424
1897 9,596,267 13,620,552
1898 10,324,988 14,196,864
1899 11,799,740 15,270,288
1900 13,055,249 15,318,160

This table is illustrated graphically in Plate XII.

It would appear that, though the nominal value of the exports fell off after 1884 and did not recover until 1888, the general exchange value actually increased from year to year throughout this period, though not at as rapid a rate as in the few previous years. Again, after 1890 there was another falling-off in the nominal values of the exports, and the value for 1890 was not exceeded until 1897; but during these same years there was on the average a considerable rise in the general exchange values of the exports, though this rise was not steady. In two years only—1893 and 1895—were the general exchange values substantially less than in the preceding years, and in each case the succeeding year showed a greater value than any previous year. Generally the table of general exchange values represents a far more steady progress in the values of exports than does that of the nominal values, indicating that the great unsteadiness in the latter is due chiefly to the varying exchange value of gold. The

– 120 –

progress of our export trade, then, has not really been nearly so chequered as the ordinary statistics would generally suggest.

It will further be noticed that the increase in the general exchange values of the exports during the last few years has been less rapid than that of the nominal values, which indicates that part of the increase in our exports is only apparent; increased prices and the fall in the purchasing-power of gold would diminish the amount of commodities purchasable by the exports or the credit assigned for the same.

Imports.

The following table indicates the application of the method to the imports of New Zealand :—

Nominal Values
£
General Exchange Values.
(1880)£
1880 6,162,011 6,162,011
1881 7,457,045 7,720,240
1882 8,609,270 9,019,208
1883 7,974,038 8,557,120
1884 7,663,888 8,874,008
1885 7,479,921 9,142,144
1886 6,759,013 8,620,216
1887 6,245,515 8,082,448
1888 5,941,900 7,469,792
1889 6,308,863 7,710,824
1890 6,260,525 7,651,776
1891 6,503,849 7,949,128
1892 6,943,056 8,985,152
1893 6,911,515 8,944,320
1894 6,788,020 9,481,648
1895 6,400,129 9,084,064
1896 7,137,320 10,296,440
1897 8,055,223 11,433,224
1898 8,230,600 11,317,064
1899 8,739,633 11,310,112
1900 10,646,096 12,491,424

This table is illustrated graphically in Plate XIII.

The nominal values of the imports show a considerable depression for many years after 1882. The value for that year was not exceeded until as late as 1899, while the value for 1888 was less than that for 1882 by 31 per cent.

The general exchange values of the imports, however, show a much greater approach to regularity, though not one as marked as in the case of the exports. There is a slight depression in the general exchange values between 1882 and

– 121 –

1885 (the value being the greater in the latter year), but a continuous fall did not set in until 1886, and practically the recovery was complete by 1892. Since that year the increase has been considerable in both values, but proportionally greater in the nominal value than in the general exchange value. To this difference the same remark may be made as in the case of the exports.

Public Debt.

The following table indicates the application of the method to the public debt of New Zealand :—

Nominal Value.
£
General Exchange, Value.
(1880)£
1880 28,185,711 28,185,711
1881 28,479,111 29,484,224
1882 29,445,011 30,847,150
1883 31,071,582 33,345,092
1884 32,195,422 37,278,912
1885 33,880,722 41,409,771
1886 35,741,653 45,583,560
1887 36,758,437 47,569,742
1888 38,375,050 48,242,920
1889 38,667,950 47,260,829
1890 38,830,350 47,459,313
1891 38,713,068 47,315,972
1892 39,257,840 50,804,270
1893 39,826,415 51,540,060
1894 40,386,964 56,413,544
1895 43,050,780 61,104,340
1896 44,366,618 64,004,336
1897 44,963,424 63,819,052
1898 46,938,006 64,539,761
1899 47,874,452 61,955,168
1900 49,591,245 58,187,096

This table is illustrated graphically in Plate XIV.

A comparison of the two sets of values shows that until quite recently the general exchange value of the amount of the public debt, and therefore practically the burden of the debt, has been increasing far more rapidly than the nominal value. From 1880 to 1896 the debt increased in nominal value from £28,185,711 to £44,366,618, this being an increase of over 57 per cent in sixteen years; but owing to the increased value of the sovereign, according to Sauerbeck's index numbers, the amounts of commodities in general to which these sums were equivalent were in the ratio of 28,185,711 to 64,004,336, which is equivalent to an increase of no less than 127 per cent.

– 122 –

Since 1896, however, a change has taken place through the depreciation of gold that then set in, though from the unbroken succession of annual additions the nominal value of the debt has necessarily been continually increasing. The general exchange value fell in 1897, and, though it rose again in 1898, it has fallen rapidly since that year. Thus, apart from the distribution of the burden of the debt over a greater population, the total burden of the debt has actually diminished since 1896 in spite of further borrowings.

Further remarks on these topics will be made in a paper on “The Flood of Gold.”*

[Footnote] * See next article.