The Sun.
London, England, 1865-01-17 00:00:00

crushing duties the produce of her colonies is
thus admitted into the Union without any duty at

all. Probably this would never have been done
if America had not received from other articles

of the Treaty an indemnity which she considered
adequate for so large and unusual a measure of
commercial liberality. The compensation is to be
found in those clauses which give to the American
fishermen the right of fishing in British waters, and
of landing in certain spots for the purpose of curing
and drying their fish. The coast of British North
America• being deeply indented with bays and inlets,
protected by islands, and possessing the unrivalled
fishing grounds of Newfoundland, was very superior
for the purposes of this industry to the coast of the
United States. Before the conclusion of the Recipro-

city Treaty, in 1854, the American fishermen were not
allowed to fish within 3 miles of the British shore, and
the line of exclusion was drawn from headland to
headland, so that they were not allowed to enter
bays, even though they might be more than 6 miles
wide. Under these concessions the industry of the New
England fishermen has greatly developed itself, and
the maritime colonies have in some degree conceded to
their foreign rivals the advantages which a bountiful
nature had placed in their reach. The fourth article
of the Treaty conceded to the Americans the navi-
gation of the St. Lawrence and its canals as fully
and freely as to British subjects. No doubt it was
these concessions which made the Treaty so long
tolerable to the Protectionist party in the Union.
Besides this they had really no choice, for the Treaty
was to exist for ten years certain and until either of
the contracting parties should give twelve months'
notice of its termination. The period at which that
notice could be given only arrived in June last, so
that no time has been lost in the agitation of the

question. We do not exactly underitand what are
the grounds on which it is desired to terminate this
salutag agreement. Something, no doubt, is to be
attributed to the ill-will towards this country and
to Canada which it has cost so much pains to foster
and to encourage. Something also to the jealousy of
the Protectionist party, which does not like the ad-
mission of free-trade principles, even though its real
or imaginary interest in the exclusion• of foreign
goods be very little affected by them. At any rate,
a strenuous effort has been made to put an end to
the Reciprocity Treaty. The arguments which are
employed seem to turn mainly on doctrines which
in England, at least, nobody would think it worth
his while to listen to. It is eagerly argued by the

opponents of the Treaty that under it the balance ol
trade is against the United States—that is, that the
United States import more than they export, pay-
ing the difference in money ; while the friends of
the Treaty assert with equal confidence that
the balance of trade is in favour of the
United States—that is, that their exports are
greater than their imports, the difference being
paid to them in money. It is really melan-
choly to reflect that it is now nearly a hundred
years since Adam Smith completely exploded the
mercantile system by showing that money had no
more title to be considered wealth exclusively than
any other product of human labour, and that the
goodness or badness of a trade depended not upon
the childish criterion of whether the imports which
were received in exchange for exports came in the
form of money or money's worth, but whether, in
whatever form, the exporting country was remune-
rated for its outlay, the trade yielding a good profit
to the exporter. Perhaps the theory of the balance
of trade cannot be better reduced to absurdity than
by the reflection that the wealth of a State must,
after all, be made up of the aggregate of the wealth
of individuals, and that as it is quite possible for
each individual trader to manage his affairs so well
as to obtain in exchange for his exports imports of
greater value, that is, to turn the balance of trade
against the exporting country, the result might be,
according to the American theory, that a nation was
impoverished by a trade by which every person who
carried it on was a gainer. America is just now ex-
piating many of her previous faults, but though
she has done many things more reprehensible, there
is probably none for which she will be called to a
heavier account than for her systematic disregard
and contempt of the doctrines of political economy
in an age in which they have been clearly demon-
strated, and have become the one solid and staple
point in the raging sea of political controversy. A
victim to the grossest delusions on the subject of an
inconvertible currency, and unable to extricate her-
self from the meshes -of superannuated fallacy on
the subject of the balance of trade, no wonder that
she is involving herself in difficulties from which a
tardy recurrence to sound principles, under the rueful
teaching of experience, will be unable to rescue
her. The Reciprocity Treaty, however, has found
friends from other than speculative considerations.
The strength of the Protectionist cause used to lie in
the vested interests that had grown up under it.
Happily, this kind of support is not peculiar to Pro-
tection. The feeling for vested interests is gene-
rally on behalf of something that is wrong, but
there is no reason, in the nature of things, why it
may not also be invoked on behalf of something
that is right. The fishermen of the Northern
States view with dismay the near prospect of the
termination of a treaty which opens to them,
within the dominion of a foreign nation, the best
and most remunerative field for their industry,
and they are by no means indifferent to the closing
of the market which the British colonies in general,
and the Roman Catholic population of Lower
Canada, and Newfoundland in particular, afford for
their salted fish. The easy admission of Canadian
flour has been found eminently useful in times
of scarcity, and the threatened loss of the vast
amount of timber which was sent duty free across
the St. Lawrence into the UnitediStates strikes dis-
may into the building trade, and still more into the
important interest concerned in the construction of
ships. These things are not matters of hazy specu-
lation like the balance of trade, but come straight
home to the inhabitants of the Northern States.
Upon the whole, it seems that the people of America
are waking to the conviction that there is more to lose
than to gain by cancelling the Reciprocity Treaty.
For our own part, we do not doubt that Canada is
also a great gainer by this enlightened measure, the
only loss which she sustains being the loss of a mode-
rate revenue which might fairly be collected on her
imports from America. In stating this, no doubt we
shall be considered by the American public to have
given up the whole question. Theirs is the political
economy which makes men believe that in matters
of commerce what one party gains the other must
necessarily lose. Ours is a different faith. We
conceive that no lucrative commerce can long exist
which is not beneficial to both parties ; that the
essence of commerce consists in exchanges through
the medium of money by which both sides may
profit. Ask any man of business whether he had
rather that those with whom he deals should sue-
ceed or fail, and he will tell you that the main
difficulty of commercial transactions consists in the
making bad debts, and that there is no security so
good against that risk as the fact that the business
carried on yields to the debtor a fair remunerative
profit. For the sake of Canada and for the sake of
the United States we trust the Reciprocity Treaty
may continue. Regarded from an exclusively
British point of view, it is a matter of very
little consequence. The communities immediately
interested in the Treaty do not contribute to
bear the burden of our revenue in time of peace,
and are not likely to render us assistance in
time of war. They add to the extent but not to
the strength of the empire. We wish them well,
and will do all we can, to promote their interests.
But let not America suppose that if she inflicts a
great injury on herself in order to inflict a similar
injury on the British colonies of North America, she
will either conciliate their good will or do any ap-
preciable mischief to us.
HERALD.—There is nothing to interest foreigners
in the speech in which King William I. has opened
the session of the Prussian Landtag, except in so far
as they may concern themselves with the fortunes of
Prussia herself. The promised development of the
Prussian navy threatens nobody ; it will not, make
any real difference in the fighting power of the
States of the Continent. Two years ago it would
have been a menace to Denmark and a harbinger of
war. Now it will only signify that Prussia has de-
finitively said good bye to the era of surpluses. On
the other hand, the canal to unite the North Sea
and the Baltic will be of the very smallest benefit to
Europe. Indeed, economically considered, it will be
a great loss, an almost total waste of capital and.
labour ; but it will give the Prussian navy the op-
portunity of showing itself in waters from which it
is now practically debarred, and it will secure Prus-
sian authority over the Duchies. As to the disposi-
tion of the Duchies his Majesty tells us nothing
very precise. We may read indeed between the
lines in which he promises " to secure the conquest
of the northern frontier of Germany by institutions
which shall facilitate the honourable duty of protec-
ting this frontier, and allow. the Duchies to employ
and turn to account their resources in the interest
of developing the land and sea forces of the common
country," the expression of a determination to pre-
serve the Duchies as Prussian dependencies, if his
illustrious ally will not come to an understanding
which will allow their incorporation in the monarchy ;
and the language he employs in spotaking of that
ally indicates that at present there is no coolness be-
tween the two Courts, and that the King and his
Government attach considerable importance to the
maintenance of a good understanding between them
The stories of a breach between the two Courts
which are served up to the public every other day,
in Viennese or South German newspapers, emanate
from authorities whose "is " represents only what
they desire should be. The compliments which the
King pays to his soldiers, and his elevation of a
victory like that of Duppel, and a repulse like that
of Missunde, into glorious military exploits yielding