From an early period it was the custom in England to base tariff duties upon official valu ations of imports and exports. A 'book of rates' containing such valuations is known to have been printed in 1545. The struggle between the first Stuarts and Parliament over questions of taxation was precipitated by the arbitrary action of James 1. in raising the official rates without the consent of Parliament. In 1642 the latter body itself issued a book of rates without the assent of the sovereign. After the Restoration a new book of rates was issued in 166S with the assent of both authorities. This enumerated as many as 212 articles for taxation 'outward' (i.e. export duties) and 1139 articles for im port duties. Official valuations continued to be the basis for tariff purposes all through the eighteenth century, and this is one circumstance which makes it difficult to estimate correctly the value of England's exports and imports dur ing that period. Another confusing practice which prevailed until as late a date as 1787 was that of assigning the proceeds from the duties on imports and exports to a variety of different purposes or `funds! As a consequence it was often very difficult even for customs officials to determine what was the aggregate rate to which a particular article was subject. Pitt's Customs Consolidation Act of 1787 did away with the separate funds by assigning all revenue from du ties to the 'consolidated fund.' In this act some 1200 articles were rated for import duties and 50 for export duties. Another important achieve ment of Pitt's Ministry was the negotiation of a commercial treaty with France (1786) which went far toward freeing trade between the two countries from the restrictions by which it had long been hampered. The struggle against Na poleon caused the abrogation of this treaty, but it is no exaggeration to describe it as the first definite step in the direction of that free trade policy which England was to adopt some sixty years later. The next simplifications of the Eng lish tariff were those effected by Huskisson in 1824 and 1825, which consolidated some 450 trade and tariff acts into eleven and reduced the rates of duty on many articles, particularly exports. One of the most important results of the long struggle for the abolition of the Corn Laws (q.v.) was to simplify still further the English tariff. From 1842 to 1846, 390 duties, including all those on exports, were abolished and 503 were reduced; in 1846, 54 were abolished and 112 were reduced; in 1853, 123 were abolished, and finally, in 1860, 371 more were abolished and virtual free trade was achieved. An important incident of the latter year was the negotiation with France of a new commercial treaty which lowered the duty on wine and placed such im portant French products as silks, gloves, etc., on the free list. For both countries the treaty marked a long step in the direction of free trade, but in the case of France the policy appears to have lacked the support of public opinion and was followed after the Franco Prussian War by a reaction toward protection. The reduction and abolition of duties continued in England after 1860, the next important change being the placing of sugar on the free list at a sacrifice of some £6,000,000 revenue in 1872. On the outbreak of the Boer War the English tariff included only nine principal items, cocoa, coffee, chicory, dried fruit, tea, tobacco, wine, beer, and spirits. The extraordinary reve nue required in connection with that struggle led to the restoration of the duty on sugar, to the imposition of an export duty on coal, and finally to the restoration of light registration duties on grain and flour (3d. and 5d. per cwt. respec tively).
In the tariff history of France the two com mercial treaties with Great Britain that have been referred to stand out as prominent features. Down to the time of the first (1786) the tariff policy of the country had been dictated by ex treme mercantilist views of trade. The importa tion of many commodities was prohibited alto gether, while others were admitted only on pay ment of high duties. Nor was the tariff confined to foreign trade. Each petty province of France had its system of duties, with the result that it was not unusual for the prices of even such com mon articles as the grains and salt to differ by 100 per cent. or more on the same day in differ
ent parts of the country. It required nothing less than the Revolution (decree of 1790) to free the land from these restrictions on internal trade. The bitter national hostilities which grew out of the Revolution and the brilliant years of Napoleon's ascendency effectually stifled the aspirations for freer trade which ushered in the period. From ISIS until the negotiation of the second commercial treaty with Great Britain in 1860, the tariff policy of France was highly protectionist. The latter treaty was one of the fruits of the Anglomania of Napoleon TH. and was followed by treaties drafted on equally lib eral lines with the more important Continental States of Europe, including the German Zoll verein (1865). These reduced the rates of duty on French imports to from 10 to 15 per cent. ad valorem. The same liberal policy was continued substantially until 1881, when an act was passed substituting specific for ad valorem duties and incidentally increasing somewhat the rates. Pro tectionist sentiment increased after 1881 and by 1892, when many of the commercial treaties negotiated at an earlier period expired, the coun try was ready for an out-and-out protectionist tariff, including not only high duties on agricul tural products and manufactures, but also mod erate bounties to producers of silk, flax, and hemp. At this time also the policy of providing maximum and minimum duties (see RECIPROC ITY) was introduced. Since 1892 there has been no perceptible abatement in the demand for protection in France, and while French duties are moderate in comparison with those of the United States, she must be included among protectionist countries.
The tariff policy of the States now forming the German Empire first assumed definite form in the German Zollrcrein (q.v.). The importance of this early federation for tariff purposes in preparing the way for the German Empire is gen erally conceded. From the point of view of tariff history it is interesting because it en abled Prussia, which was inclined toward free trade during this period, to dominate the tariff policies of her smaller neighbors. A treaty ne gotiated with Austria in 1853 reduced the duties on trade between that country and the Zoll vcrcin and the even more liberal treaty with France, already referred to, secured the same result for trade with that country in 1865. On the eve of the Franco-Prussian War the tariff of the Zollrcrein was practically a tariff for reve nue only. After the war a reaction toward protection set in. This is clearly indicated in the tariff adopted in 1879, by which the duties on both agricultural and manufactured articles were increased. The policy continued to be only moderately protective until 1902, when an act was passed which made very substantial concessions to the advocates of protection to agricultural interests. Among the most notable changes were an increase in the duties on grains (the duty on wheat was raised from 32 cents per cwt. to 90 cents) and on draught animals (the duty on horses valued at $250 or less was raised from $2,50 to $22.50).
The changes in the tariff policies of France and Germany that have been described have been paralleled pretty closely in the other countries of Continental Europe. England's example and other influences caused a movement in favor of free trade to extend all over Europe in the decade from 1860 to 1870. This was followed by a reaction toward protection in the more impor tant countries, which has gained in volume until in Germany and Russia, at least, the movement is comparable with the protectionist movement in the United States.
Outside of Europe England's free trade ex ample has been followed only by two or three of her own dependencies (e.g. India). Protective tariffs are found in Canada. in the Australian colonies, and in Cape Colony, and are well-nigh universal among the independent sovereignties. No country has, however, gone further in this direction than the United States.