The Conservative (Nebraska City, Neb.) 1898-1902, January 02, 1902, Page 6, Image 6
"Che Conservative. i THE SHAM OF RECIPROCITY. By Nornmn P. Hcssoltinc , of the Boston Bar. The national republican platform of 1896 declared as follows regarding reciprocity : ' ' Protection and reciprocity are twin measures of republican policy , and go hand in hand. Democratic rule has recklessly struck down both , and both must bo re-established. Protection for what wo produce , free admission for the necessaries of life which wo do not produce ; reciprocal agreements of mu tual interest which gain open markets for us in return for our open market to others. Protection builds up domestic industry and trade , and secures our own market for ourselves. Reciproc ity builds up foreign trade , and finds an outlet for our surplus. " In pursuance of this plank in the platform , section 4 of the Diugley Act of 1807 , partly as an antidote to its high protective features and partly as an effort to keep the party true to its pledges , gave to the president of the United States , by and with the advice and consent of the senate 8 $ fe ate , within a period of two years after the passage of the act , au thority to enter into commercial treat s- . ies with foreign countries by which our duties might bo reduced as much as 20 per cent. , and certain natural products , not of this country , might bo put upon the free list in return for compensating reductions allowed to this country. Under this section , President McKinley - Kinley appointed Hon. John A. Kas- son , who , previously on the "Ways and Means Committee , had acquired con siderable experience with tariff sched ules. Ho at ouco sot about his task , and in a short time had succeeded in formulating treaties with France , the Argentine Republic , Danish West Indies , and British West Indies. The two first named wore the most import ant. France agreed to make an aver age reduction of about 30 per cent on about 600 articles ; wo agreed to make an average reduction of 6.8 per cent on about 200 articles. France , al though a protective country , had a tariff far lower than ours ; yet she al lowed us substantial advantages , while we , having an exaggerated protective tariff , only made slight re ductions on a few schedules. The most important concession was on cot ton knit goods , which were reduced from 64 to 51 o Per cent ; cheap imita tion jewelery was reduced 5 or 10 per cent ; French silk was admitted at 55 instead of GO per cent ; and there were slight reductions in the paper schedules. To the Argentine Republic , in return for very advantageous terms vo grant ed 20 per cent reduction on wool. To the West Indies , who favored among other articles American canned goods , wo lowered _ the bars on tropi cal fruits. It was a glorious effort to increase our commerce and to gain an outlet for our surplus product. When these matters became public , there was a frightened cry from dependent - pendent protectionists. Manufactur ers assorted that the reduction on cot ton knit goods meant irreparable in jury. A paper factory in Lee , Mass. , was in an agony of despair at the pros pect of a reduction in t xo paper sched ule. The gentle shepherds from Ohio , pasturing sheep on $100 an acre land and of the Rocky Mountains , where government ranges can be had for nothing , raised a mighty shout at the enormity of 20 per cent reduction on wool. Under the Diugley [ Act the finer Andean fleeces wore practically prohibited , and the reduction would bo welcome to manufacturers. Cali fornia protested because West Indian fruits were to compete with her own. own.The The most amusing objection came from novelty factories in Providence and Attleboro , which are supported by kindly disposed customers who chari tably tax themselves some 65 per ceuf. They addressed the New England con gressmen as follows : "Should the French treaty be rati fied , the homo market will again be crowded with foreign-made goods ; and to compete with the same labor , which enters largely into the produc tion , must necessarily be the sufferer. "In 1897 we petitioned for a tariff of 75 per cent. The enactment of the Dinglcy bill , fixed the rate at 65 per cent , which does not fully reach the point of equalization. "To now infringe on that percentage even 1 per cent would be a blow at labor and the persons dependent on the jewelry industry. We earnestly appeal to you to use your utmost en deavor to have the treaty rejected. " The Home Market Club , our in dustrial Mentor , not believing that President McKinley was guilty of such heresy , until his last message to congress , began to pass resolutions. It thought that the wool reduction was an outrage , for the wool schedule was arranged after a long conference "between the growers and the manu facturers. " It is not apparent from this statement that the question of revenue or of consumer's interest was of any consequence in this matter. The organization further declared that the treaties "are not based upon the true principle of reciprocity , which is the exchange on favorable terms of dissimilar and non-compet ing products , and that , on the con trary , they are based on the principle of free trade , and will introduce a damaging , if not ruinous , competition. In addition to this , they disturb the harmony of adjustment between in dustries , which is an important char acteristic of the tariff law , and will therefore introduce such inequalities as to unfavorably affect all business. ' ' Senator Elkins.of West Virginiade clared : "I shall fight these treaties to the bitter end. They are wrong in principle and ruinous in practice. The republican party made a mistake in suggesting reciprocity in its plat form and in enacting a reciprocity law. " After a favorable report by the Sen ate Committee on Foreign Relations , Senator Aldrich , of Rhode Island ( anxious for his novelty constituents ) , moved that the matter be referred to the finance committee ; and , although Mr. Kasson secured an extension of time for ratification to save some of the treaties from defeat , they were never allowed to come to a vote , and perished before they were born. The senate adjourned , and Mr. Kasson re signed in disgust. Reciprocity is de fined in the Standard Dictionary as "mutual equality of rights and bene fits. " In modern journalism it is frequently styled "a sickly republi can twin. ' ' The foregoinc facts constitute the best evidence of the insincerity of the republican declarations regarding so- called reciprocity. The [ arguments against the treaties were fallacious excuses. The only "dissimilar and non-competing products" to use the expression of the Home Market Club in which we can trade are raw ma terials from the tropics , as coffee , chocolate , tea , and spices. The tropics include the West Indies , Mexico ice , Central America , and South America as far south "as Rio Janeiro , Malaysia , Southern India , and Central Africa. These countries are and al ways will be industrially and com mercially the poorest. The people from whom we derive our origin , the nations which furnish us the finest examples of art and science , the lands which give us the greatest incentive to industry and inventive achieve ments , and where our merchants turn to seek in friendly commercial inter course the accumulation of honest wealth , are still by republican tariffs to bo closed to traders sailing under the stars and stripes. How many of our machines can the tropics take ? How many shiploads of breadstuffs , the imports of an active metropolis , can we send to the indolent natives brtsking in the meridian heat of per petual summer ? Yet the fruit-grow ers of California beg to be saved from competition with even them. Mr.Kasson , in a letter to the Boston Merchants' Associationsaid"Instead : of contenting ourselves with the bar barian position of supplying raw ma-