Re-examining the Foreign Trade Structure of the Colonial Philippines: With Special Reference to the "Intra-Asian Trade" *

by Yoshiko NAGANOFaculty of Foreign Studies Kanagawa University, YokohamaI. Introduction II. Location of Materials on the Historical Trade Statistics of the Philippines III. The Total Amount of Philippine Foregn Trade : 1831-1940 IV. The Characteristics of Trade Statistics by Country : 1855-1940 V. Trends and Directions of Foreign Trade by Country : 1855-1940 VI. Conclusion References Table 1 Location of Materials on Philippine Trade Statistics Table 2 The Amount of Philippine Exports by Country : 1855-1940 Table 3 The Amount of Philippine Imports by Country : 1855-1940 Chart 1 The Trend of Philippine Foreign Trade, 1831-1940 Chart 2 Philippine Exports, 1855-1940 Chart 3 Philippine Imports, 1855-1940

I. IntroductionMuch has been already written on the pattern of the foreign trade of the Philippines from the late 19th century to the mid-20th century. Benito F. Legarda's dissertation entitled: "Foreign Trade, Economic Change and Entrepreneurship in the Nineteenth-Century Philippines" has served as an essential study on the Philippine foreign trade during the 19th century [Legarda:1955], while various official publications have given us basic data on its trade during the American colonial period. It has been widely accepted that the United States gradually replaced the United Kingdom as the major trade partner of the Philippines at the turn of the 20th century, and that the United States had established its position as the dominat trade partner of the Philippines by the early 1920s. However, it is very important to observe the role of Asian countries in the Philippine foreign trade from the late 19th century to the American period. At the mid-1980s, the discussion on the "intra-Asian trade" among China, Japan, Southeast Asia and India was initiated by Kaoru Sugihara and it has drawn close attention in studies on the Asian economic history in Japan and elsewhere. In 1994, a book entitled: Japanese Industrialization and the Asian Economy (eds. A.J.H. Latham and Heita Kawakatsu, London: Routledge) was published, which included a paper entitled: "The Dynamics of Intra-Asian Trade, 1868-1913: The Great Entrepots of Singapore and Hong Kong" by A. J. H. Latham[Latham: 1993]. As far as this study is concerned, the Philippines' trade with Singapore and Hongkong in the early 1910s was of only minor importance. In a recent book entitled: The Formation and Structure of the Intra-Asian Trade (in Japanese) (Tokyo: Mineruva Shobo, 1996), Kaoru Sugihara also states that the Philippines had a minor position in the "intra-Asian trade" in the first half of the 20th century, thereby being considered as an exception of Southeast Asian countries [Sugihara:1996]. However, did the Philippines really play only minor role in the "intra-Asian trade" from the mid-19th century to the American colonial period? Without examining the trade statistics of the 19th and 20th centuries carefully, we can not determine the role of the Philippines in the "intra-Asian trade." What kind of trade relations did the Philippines have with other Southeast Asian countries? Did Hongkong, Singapore, China or Japan play important roles as trade partners with the Philippines? In this paper, the trade structure of the Philippines from the mid-1850s to the American period is re-examined, focusing on its changing structure at the turn of the century.

* Paper presented at IV Congreso Internacional de la Asociacion Espanola de Estudios del Pacifico, Valladorid, Spain, November 26-29, 1997. This is an abridged version of chapter IV of the author's discussion paper entitled: "Re-examining the Foreign Trade Structure of the Colonial Philippines: With Special Reference to the 'Intra-Asian Trade'" (in Japanese) submitted to the "Asian Historical Statistics Project" of the Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, 1998. II. Location of Materials on the Historical Trade Statistics of the PhilippinesIt is well known that Philippine trade statistics during the American period are available in Report of Bureau of Customs, 1907-1940, while the statistics of the earlier period of the 20th century are available in "Historical Review: 1904," The Commercial Philippines in 1906, "Imports, Exports: 1901 to 1908" and Statistical Bulletin: 1920. On the other hand, the location of the materials on Philippine trade statistic of the late 19th century has not been extensively examined. It is Benito F. Legarda, Jr. who examined the Philippine foreign trade pattern of the late 19th century based on the original reports published in the contemporary period[Legarda: 1955]. However, he did not mention the location of these materials in his dissertation. Thus, as a part of the larger project on the "Compilation of Asian Historical Statistics" of the Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, the author conducted research on the location of the materials on Philippine foreign trade reports of the late 19th century in the Philippines and the United States in 1995-1996. In Spain, the research was conducted with the help of Miguel Luque Talavan of Universidad Complutense de Madrid in 1997. The following are the original titles of the Philippine foreign trade reports which were published in Manila in the late 19th century. (1) Balanza general del comercio de las Islas Filipinas, 1851-1855. (2) Cuadro general del comercio exterior de Filipinas con la metropoli, potencias extrageras de Europa, America, Africa, Asia y colonias de la Oceania, 1856. (3) Balanza mercantil de las Islas Filipinas, 1857-1865. (4) Estadistica mercantil del comercio exterior de las Islas Filipinas, 1866-1867,1873-1880. (5) Estadistica general del comercio exterior de las Islas Filipinas, 1881-1894. As a result of the research, the author found that all the volumes of the trade reports from 1851 to 1894, except five years from 1868 to 1872 (1), are available either in US Library of Congress and US National Archives in Washington, DC, the Philippine National Archives in Manila, the Harvard University Lamont Library or Biblioteca Nacional in Madrid. The Hitotsubashi project has obtained microfilmed copies of these materials from three institutions, the US Library of Congress, Philippine National Archives and Biblioteca Nacional (Table 1). However, for writing up this paper, the author has only used the microfilms of Balanza general del comercio de las Islas Filipinas, 1854-1855, Balanza mercantil de las Islas Filipinas, 1858-1860, 1863-1864 and Estadistica mercantil del comercio exterior de las Isals Filipinas, 1867, 1873-1874, 1876-1880 which were obtained from the Philippine National Archives in 1995. Reference is also made to Estadistica general del comercio exterior de las Islas Filipinas, 1894 which the author read in the Ateneo de Manila University Library in 1997. Microfilms for other years have recently been received and are being kept for further research.

(1) The location of the materials for these five years is unknown. Though Tavera listed the titles of the volumes for five years which were published in Manila, he did not specify their number of pages and publishers unlike the publications of other years [Tavera: 1903, 41].

III. The Total Amount of Philippine Foreign Trade: 1831-1940The most commonly used trade statistics for examining the total amount of the Philippine trade from the mid-19th century to the early 20th century are Census: 1903 and Report of the Bureau of Customs, 1907-1940. The trade statistics during the American period were compiled by the Bureau of Customs and we assume that they are reliable data. On the other hand, the statistics during the late 19th century compiled in Census: 1903 were all taken from the annual trade reports published in the late 19th century and we have to compare the date in Census: 1903 with those of the original reports. It is Legarda's disssertation which assumed the above task and even extended the coverage of the compilation of the statistics of the total amount of the Philippine foreign trade, citing the data from contemporary reports. Legarda pointed out the fact that in 1865-1871 the original figures were carried in escudos, of which there were two to a peso; however, in Census: 1903, the original data were carried as if they had been given in pesos. Thus, all foreign trade values in 1865-1871 were double in the table of Census: 1903 [Legarda: 1955, 198]. However, Legarda did not clarify the following two points in his work. First, in the 19th century trade statistics, were the transactions for gold and silver separate from those of merchandise? Second, in the annual trade reports of the 1850s, the items for re-export kept in bonded warehouses were included in the total amount of trade. Were these items also compiled in the total amount in Census: 1903? According to the author's examination of the limited number of volumes of the late 19th century trade reports, the following answer can be given to the above questions. First, examining the annual report of foreign statistics from the 1850s to the 1870s, gold and silver coins and bullion were included in the import commodities, while in the report of 1894, they were not in the import commodities. It is assumed that gold and silver coins and bullion were excluded from the import commodities, when the classification method of the import items in the annual reports of foreign statistics was finally determined in the mid-1880s. Second, it is clearly verified that in Census: 1903, the total amounts of trade in the late 19th century were calculated excluding the re-export items kept in bonded warehouses, in comparison with the statistics given in the annual trade reports in the late 19th century and Census: 1903 . Chart 1 shows the trend of the Philippine foreign trade from 1831 to 1940. The statistics of 1835, 1868-1871 and 1896-97 are taken from Legarda's dissertation and those from 1837 to 1895 are taken from Census: 1903, revising the data for 1865-1867. All the data for the American period is taken from Report of the Bureau of Customs, 1940. Chart 1 is based on the nominal amount of trade, without considering price increases from 1810 to 1940. Needless to say, the actual increase of the amount of trade can be estimated based on the price index and this work still remains to be done in the future. In spite of these limitation, Chart 1 gives us the picture of the general trend of Philippine exports and imports from 1831 to 1940. This might be divided into four periods; (1) from the 1830s to the 1860s; (2) from the 1870s to the 1890s; (3) from the 1900s to the 1910s; and (4) from the 1920s to the 1930s. In the 1830s-1860s, foreign trade grew gradually after the opening of Manila as international port. After the opening of Suez Canal in 1869, the amount of trade increased rapidly and it fluctuated largely during the period from the 1870s to the 1890s. During the Philippine revolution (1896-1902) foreign trade declined drastically before recovering in the 1900s-1910s under American rule. In the 1920s the amount of trade fluctuated rapidly after the economic boom of World War I and fell in the 1930s as a result of the world depression. In 1831 to 1940 which countries were major trade partners with the Philippines? How did trade partners change from the mid-19th century to the mid-20th century? We will discuss this issue in the next section.

IV. The Characteristics of Trade Statistics by Country: 1855-1940Table 2 and Table 3 show the exports and imports by country from 1855 to 1940. The sources of this table are Statistical Bulletin: 1920 and Report of the Bureau of Customs, 1921-1940, but the statistics in 1865-1867 are modified by the author in these tables. The amount of exports and imports in 1865-1867 were double in Statistical Bulletin: 1920, repeating the same miscalculation of Census: 1903 regarding the exchange rate between pesos and escudos. The trade statistics of the late 19th century given in Statistical Bulletin: 1920 were the data first gathered by the US Bureau of Insular Affairs and later compiled by the US Bureau of Census. It was compiled by the Bureau of Commerce and Industry of the Philippine Islands with detailed notes. In its notes regarding the classification of trade partners, it is mentioned that in 1867-1868 "China" includes "Cochin-China (French East Indies) and Japan,"while"China"includes"Hongkong and Amoy"in 1893 [Statistical Bulletin: 1920, 128]. This note on the classification of trade partners was taken from the annual trade reports of the late 19th century. Needless to say, this is a relatively minor issue on the classification of trade partners. The major problem is rather located in the"British Asian colonies"and their relationship with"China." First,"British Asian colonies"is the term which the author uses for Table 2 in this paper. Census: 1903 called them "British India"[Census: 1903, IV:568-574], while "Historical Review: 1904" referred to them as "British East Indies" ["Historical Review: 1904," 608-611]. Then, what term was used in the annual trade reports in the late 19th century? In these reports from the 1860s to 1890s, the term "Posesiones Inglesas (British possessions)" is used. Thus, "British India" in Census: 1903 or "British East Indies" in Statistical Bulletin: 1920 does not mean "India under British rule," but it means "British colonies in Asia." In examining Balanza general del comercio de las Islas Filipinas, 1854-1855 and Balanza mercantil de las Islas Filipinas, 1858-1860, the term"India Inglesa"was used instead of"Posesiones Inglesas."In Balanza general...1854-1855 and Balanza mercantil...1859-1860, Singapore was referred as "India Inglesa," while in Balanza mercantil...1858, Singapore and Calcutta were named "India Inglesa." From this observation, we may assume that "British possessions" should mainly mean Singapore in the trade statistics for the 1860s-1890s. Second, in the relationship between"British Asian colonies"and"China,"we should point out the fact that in Census: 1903,"China"included"Hongkong"in 1855-1902 [Census: 1903, IV: 568-574]. On the other hand,"Historical Review: 1904"specified that Hongkong was included in"China"in 1856-1867 and 1888-1894, while it was included in"British East Indies"in 1873-1887["Historical Review: 1904,"608-611]. Why did"Historical Review: 1904"give such a claim? This was because the amount of exports and imports of"China"and that of"British East Indies"("British Asian colonies"in Table 2) reversed at the year of 1873. While"China"accounted for the major part of trade in Asia in 1855-1867 and 1888-1894,"British East Indies"took the leading position in 1873-1887. It is assumed that the classification of Hongkong was confused because the Spanish colonial government faced difficulty in deciding whether Hongkong should be included in"China"or in"British East Indies"after it was placed under British domination in 1842["Historical Review: 1904,"605-606, 609]. If this assumption is correct, we might conclude that the note of Census: 1903 which stated that"China"included"Hongkong"in 1855-1902 is incorrect. According to Legarda's study, the major export partners in 1846 were in order of share the United Kingdom, China, United States, Spain and Australia, while in 1847 they were the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, China, Spain and Singapore. The major import partners in 1846 were in order of share China, Singapore, Spain, the United States and the United Kingdom, and those in 1847 were China, Singapore, the United Kingdom, Spain and the United States [Legarda: 1950, 240-241, 244-245]. This indicates the fact that as Asian entrepots Hongkong and Singapore played an important role in the Philippine foreign trade. In addition, the existence of Hongkong and Singapore as Asian entrepots made it difficult to grasp the precise amount of the foreign trade by country from the late 19th century to the middle of the 20th century. As Legarda discussed on the trade in the late 19th century, Hongkong was an important entrepot not only for China, but for the United States and European countries. To Singapore, on the other hand, many commodities came from the United Kingdom or other European countries and India. If these commodities reached the Philippines, the proportion of trade with these countries was understated in the statistics. Hongkong and Singapore were"termini"for shipping from Europe and the United States, while Manila was of minor importance to these countries. Therefore, a large proportion of Philippine trade with Europe and the United States was carried through Hongkong and Singapore by Spanish vessels. Foreign ships also engaged in the transshipment; however, since the importation of goods by foreign ships was subjected to the imposition of higher taxes, they preferred to enter Mania in ballast and to carry export goods from the Philippines [Legarda: 1955, 226-228]. Thus, it is most probable that the most of the commodities exported from the Philippines to Hongkong and Singapore were re-exported to China, Europe and the United States, while the most of the imported goods from Hongkong and Singapore were originally imported from China, Europe and the United States. This is a very important reason why Hongkong and Singapore which had relatively high share of Philippine foreign trade from the late 19th century to the early 20th century. In the following section, we will discuss the changing pattern of trade by examining the Philippines' major trade partners.

V. Trends and Directions of Foreign Trade by Country: 1855-1940ExportsTable 2 shows the percentage of export amounts from the Philippines to major countries, while Chart 2 indicates the trend of Philippine exports by region. During the mid-1850s and the 1860s, the United States had 20-30% of total exports (except for 1861-1862), while Europe and Asia had 30-50% and 20-35% respectively. Among European countries, the United Kingdom had approximately 20-30% and Spain had 5-10%, while"China"(mostly Hongkong) had 20-35%, accounting for almost the total share of Asia. From the 1870s to the 1890s, the percentage of the United States declined from 30-40% to 15-20%, but Europe and Asia kept almost the same level with some fluctuation. Among European countries, the United Kingdom had 25-40% (except for 1876-81 and 1886). In 1873-1887, the percentage of"British Asian colonies"(namely Hongkong and Singapore) increased to 10-30% and that of"China"went down to zero, then recovered to 15-30% in 1888-1899. From the discussion in the former section, it is assumed that Hongkong kept 10-20% or even 30% of the total exports of the Philippines during the period from the 1870s to the 1890s. To sum up, the major customers for Philippine exports in the late 19th century were the United Kingdom, the United States, Hongkong and Spain. It should be pointed out that most export commodities such as Manila hemp or sugar were re-exported from Hongkong to the United Kingdom, the United States or China. In the 20th century, exports to the United States rapidly increased. During the 1900s and 1910s the percentage share of exports to the United States jumped from 30-40% to 50-60%, while that of exports to European countries declined from 40-50% to 15-30%. Exports to the United Kingdom and Spain decreased in the above period and those to France declined from the end of the 1910s. On the other hand, exports to Asian countries were stable at 15-20% of the total except for 1910-1912. During the 1920s and 1930s the United States remained the main destination for Philippine exports, whose percentage reached 70-80% or even more except for 1921-1922. Exports to Europe declined further from 10-15% in the 1920s to 10% in the 1930s. The United Kingdom, once the main country for Philippine exports held only a several percent share in the 1930s. The percentage shares of Asian countries also declined, reflecting the diminished share of Hongkong in the 1920s and the early 1930s. However, their share remained around 10% in the late 1930s due to the increased percentage of Japan. From what has been mentioned above, it is concluded that the export structure of the Philippines in the first half of the 20th century shifted from the quadruple structure constituted by the United Kingdom, the United States, Hongkong and Spain to the structure in which the United States played the role of the predominant trade partner. It is noteworthy that the change of the export structure in this period also accompanied the secession of the Philippines from the Asian market which had been restructured under the influence of the United Kingdom. The coincidence of the decline of exports to both the United Kingdom and to Hongkong was very evident at the turn of the century. ImportsTable 3 and Chart 3 show the changing pattern of the Philippine imports from 1855 to 1940. From the middle of the 1850s to the 1860s, the percentage of imports by major regions was 40-70% for Europe and 25-55% for Asia. The United States was the minor import country, whose percentage share was only several percent. In the mid-1850s the United Kingdom and Spain were the major trade partners in Europe, but in the 1860s the United Kingdom accounted for almost the total percentage of European countries. In Asian countries,"China"(mostly Hongkong) and Cochin-China (mostly rice imports) kept the dominant positions, while"British Asian colonies"(namely Singapore) was ranked third. In the 1870s the percentage of European countries declined to 25-30%, but it recovered to 70% in some years in the early 1890s, due to the increased share of Spain. From the 1870s to the early 1890s, the percentage share of Asian countries drastically declined from 70% to 20%. The percentage of"China"(excluding Hongkong) went down to only several percent in 1874-1887 (except for 1876), while that of"British Asian colonies"(Hongkong and Singapore) remained at approximately 45-65% (except for 1884-1887). This indicates the fact that Hongkong dominated 20-50% of the total import of the Philippines from the 1870s to the 1890s. To sum up, the major sources of imports in the late 19th century were the United Kingdom, Hongkong and Spain. The most important imported commodities in this period were cotton manufactures from those three countries (or areas). Particularly after the tariff revision of 1891, in order to avoid higher import tariffs, British cotton goods were carried by Spanish vessels to the Philippines via Barcelona or some other ports in Spain. The change of percentage shares of the United Kingdom, Hongkong and Spain in the total imports in this period should be understood in the context of the above import mechanism. In the 20th century, particularly from the 1910s, imports from the United States increased drastically under the enactment of tariff acts in 1909 and 1913, which regulated the free trade arrangement between the United States and the Philippines. The percentage share of imports from the United States, approximately 10% in the 1900s, jumped to 40-60% in the 1910s and to 60-70% in the 1920s and the 1930s. The imports from Europe, around 30-40% in the 1900s, declined to less than 10% from the mid-1910s to the end of the 1930s. Asian countries had a share of 35-50% of the total imports in the 1900s, but the percentage decreased to 20-30% during the period between the 1910s and the mid-1930s and to 10% at the end of the 1930s. This rapid decline of the imports from Asian countries at the end of the 1930s was due to the drastic reduction of imports from Japan (mainly cotton goods) which had been at 10-15%. Thus, the major exporters to the Philippines were the United Kingdom, Hongkong and Spain in the late 19th century, while the Philippines imported mostly from the United States and Asian countries (China and Japan) in the first half of the 20th century. VI. ConclusionThis paper has attempted to analyze the characteristics of the Philippine trade structure from the late 19th century to the first half of the 20th century, paying attention to the recent discussion on"intra-Asian trade."Partly because of the difficulty of gaining access to the original trade statistics of the late 19th century Philippines, and partly because of the lesser importance of the Philippines in the"intra-Asian trade"in the 20th century, the Philippines has not been received keen attention in the discussion of the"intra-Asian trade." However, as has been discussed in this paper, first, it is clear that after the opening of Manila as an international port, the Philippines was incorporated within the sphere of influence of the British empire and through this process, the Philippines continued to maintain its important relationships with Asian entrepots such as Hongkong and Singapore. In the original trade statistics in the late 19th century, Hongkong was included in"China"or"British Asian colonies"and Singapore was included among"British Asian colonies."The confusion of these classifications has made it extremely difficult to depict the actual role of these entrepots in Philippine trade in the previous studies. Thus, the author has clarified this point in this paper, based on a precise examination of the original statistics. Second, trade with Hongkong and Singapore played very important role in maintaining economic connection between the Philippines and other Asian countries in the late 19th century. Through these entrepots, rice was imported from French Indochina (Cochin-China) and Thailand, while British cotton goods were imported through Hongkong. On the other hand, export crops such as Manila hemp, sugar and tobacco were shipped to the United Kingdom via Singapore (details are not given in this paper, due to space limitation). Based on these facts, we argue that the larger part of the trade between the Philippines and Hongkong or Singapore, which should be counted as the"intra-Asian trade,"might be composed of the re-export of Philippine agricultural crops to the United Kingdom and the re-import of British cotton goods to the Philippines in the late 19th century. This characterizes the fact that"intra-Asian trade"grew with the expansion of the British empire in Asia in the late 19th century. Therefore the Philippine component of"intra-Asian trade"diminished, when Philippine trade was restructured under the U.S. colonial government in the first half of the 20th century. ReferencesI Historical statistics1. Foreign trade reports during the Spanish period (comp. by Philippine Islands, Intendencia General de Hacienda) Balanza general del comercio de las Islas Filipinas, 1851-1855, Manila. Cuadro general del comercio exterior de Filipinas con la metropoli, potencias extrageras de Europa, America, Africa, Asia y colonias de la Oceania, 1856, Manila. Balanza mercantil de las Islas Filipinas, 1857-1865, Manila. Estadistica mercantil del comercio exterior de las Islas Filipinas, 1866-1867, 1873-1880, Manila. Estadistica general del comercio exterior de las Islas Filipinas, 1881-1894, Manila.2. Foreign trade reports during the American period Hitchcock, Frank, 1898. Trade of the Philippine Islands, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Philippine Islands, Bureau of Commerce and Industry, 1921. Statistical Bulletin No.3 : Philippine Islands 1920, Manila: Bureau of Printing [referred as Statistical Bulletin 1920]. Philippine Islands, Bureau of Customs, 1908-1935. Annual Report of the Insular Collector of Customs, 1907-1934, Manila: Bureau of Printing (for the years 1901/02 - 1905/06, compiled in United States, War Department, Bureau of Insular Affairs, Annual Report of the Philippine Commission, 1902-1906)[referred as Report of the Bureau of Customs, 1907-1934]. Philippine Commonwealth, Bureau of Customs, 1936-1941, Annual Report of the Insular Collector of Customs, 1935-1940, Manila: Bureau of Printing [referred as Report of the Bureau of Customs, 1935-1940]. Philippine Islands, Bureau of Internal Revenue, 1909. Imports, Exports, and Production in the Philippine Islands: 1901 to 1908. Washington, DC : Government Printing Office [referred as Import, Export: 1901 to 1908]. United States, Bureau of the Census, 1905. Census of the Philippine Islands Taken under the Direction of the Philippine Commission in the Year 1903, Vol. W, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office [referred as Census: 1903]. United States, Department of Commerce and Labor, Bureau of Statistics, 1907. The Commercial Philippines in 1906, Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. United States, War Department, Bureau of Insular Affairs, 1904."Historical Review of Philippine Commerce. Analysis of Trade under Spanish and American Occupation."Monthly Summary of Commerce of the Philippine Islands, Series 1904-1905, No.6 [referred as"Historical Review:1904"]. II Secondary sourcesHooley, Richard. 1996."A Century of Philippine Foreign Trade : A Quantitative Analysis."In Choice, Growth and Development: Essays in Honor of Jose Encarnacion, E. de Dios and R. Fabella eds., Quezon City: University of the Philippine Press. Latham, A. J. H., 1994."The Dynamics of Intra-Asian Trade, 1868-1913: The Great Entrepot of Singapore and Hongkong."In Japanese Industrialization and the Asian Economy, A. J. H. Latham and Heita Kawakatsu eds., London and New York: Routledge. Legarda, Benito F., Jr., 1955."Foreign Trade, Economic Change and Entrepreneurship in the Nineteenth-Century Philippines." Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University. Nagano, Yoshiko, 1996."Resource Guide: The Foreign Trade of the Philippines in the Latter Half of the 19th Century." Newsletter of the Asian Historical Statistics Project, No. 3 (Hitotsubashi University Institute of Economic Research). Tavera, T.H. Pardo de, 1903."Biblioteca Filipina."In Bibliography of the Philippine Islands, Library of Congress and Bureau of Insular Affairs, War Department, eds., Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Sugihara, Kaoru, 1996. The Formation and Structure of the Intra-Asian Trade(in Japanese), Tokyo: Mineruva Shobo. Table 1 Location of Materials on Philippine Trade Statistics of the Late 19th CenturyYear PNA LC USNA Harvard BN

1851ML

1852M

1853M

1854MLL

1855MLL

1856MLL

1857LM

1858MLLL

1859MLL

1860MLLLL

1861MLLL

1862LM

1863MLL

1864MLLL

1865LM

1866LM

1867MLLL

1868

1869

1870

1871

1872

1873MLL

1874MLL

1875LM

1876MLLLL

1877MLL

1878MLL

1879MLL

1880MLLL

1881MLL

1882ML

1883LLM

1884LLM

1885MLLL

1886MLLL

1887MLL

1888MLL

1889M

1890ML

1891MLL

1892MLL

1893MLL

1894ML

Legend: PNA: Philippine National Archives, Manila LC: US Library of Congress, Washington, DC. USNA: US National Archives, Washington, DC. Harvard: Lamont Library, Harvard Univ. BN: Biblioteca Nactional, Madrid L: at the above library or archives M: also stored on microfilm at the Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi Univ.

Source: Statistical Bulletin: 1902,125-135; Report of the Bureau of Customs, 1921-1940, various pages. Note: * British Asian Colonies. ** Dutch East Indies. *** French East Indies. Table 3 the Amount of Philippine Imports by Country:(in 1000 pesos,%)