The national Republican., 1862-06-12
.l,,,,,s,'l|Y!.,...kf;.,s.;,1l
~ J MItRTA<3H q S.tO
ssosos N WESTON. so,roa.


- rhs publication oaos OF Ne. RalsoAa
p~blsoaH il ., the northeast corner Of D ant
svsnth street, second door, over ". b. shsp
srd's stors. Dntranes o. Seventh atrsst.
ri = Tharsday, Jlas q, 1859.
m. PaKa On Tns REOIPRocTTS
.... .I!uIl qd TRAaTY. I.. .aa.u,.
Documents with rsgNrd 10 the reciprocity
treaty multiply. Those who are familiar viii
he subject know the profusion Of diplomatic
correspondence, and congressional and olhs'
reports, which hes slways. characterised ouI
treatment Of our commercial relations with ths
Provinces ever since the adoption Of the Con-
stitutiou. Jefferson, Jay, Adams and Clay, in
earlier days, and Webster, Marcy and Cushing
10 later yesrs, have oil tried their hands in ID,
discussion of the subject, and our statnts book,
are full Of epsotmsnb made 10 meet IL 10
creasing Importance and constantly changing
character.
Sinos The making Of the reciprocity treaty 10
1854, discussion has been suspended. The
country has been quietly awaiting the practics'
developnents Of the treaty, and has bsen con-
tent 10 abide the rssulta But a the tine 6xed
for its termination, at the will OF either party.
rapidly approaches, puolic attention is called
to the subject as one Of great importance to
the trade and commerce Of the country, and
measures are taken, from time to time, 10 sp.
prise the country Of its real value ~ com.
msrcisl Arrangement. A year or two since,
the Secretary Of the Treasury authorized Mr.
Hatch to examine the operations Of the first
six years Of the treaty, and be made report
which called out replies from the Chambers o.
Commerce Of Oswego and st. Paul. Since the
commencement Of the present session Of Oop
grsss, We have had report from hr. Ward, Of
the Committee on Commerce, and reply b.
Mr.. Gait, the Canadian Minister Of Finance
and now We have . speech from Mr.. Pike, Of
Maine, 10 which We call attention, - q clear
and sucoinct statement Of the causes operating
o produce the treaty, and the effect h has had
upon the interests which called II into being
We give q synopsis Of bis presentation Of the
case:
Thus far, the discussion Of this treaty. In
Congress and elsewhere, has taken II for grant
ed that II has largely increased our trade will
the provinces. At the time Of is ratification,
we were selling them about twenty -four mil
lions annually. To speak exactly, the returns
for the year ending June 80, 1854, show our
exports to have been s24,566,s $780, The friends
Of the treaty rsckoned with confidence upol
running this amount up 70 forty millions. As \
commercial arrangement, Ia great object, or
our part, was 10 increase our sales 10 our neigh
bors. II II did this, It employed our msnufac
tories to produce goods for the consumption Of
additional customers, and our shipping to carry
10 market the increased bulk Of exports. The
tendency Of the public mind was towards uu-
restricted trade, and a. Mr.. Pike says:
"This arrangement, made tn 1854, for ex.
change OF products with the provinces, was one
Of the incidents In the history Of commerce
and navigation, which was intended on our
part to mark the advanced ideas Of the time In
which II WAS made"
But the argument in favor Of free trade
always was that Il would certainly increase our
exports. Mr. Walker, in bis celebrated report,
elaborated this idea carefully and ably. The
domestic exchanges among the States, he said
were three thousand millions, and by means OF
his system, which sssimilated our foreign 10
our domestic trade, the list Of our export,
could be extended to three hundred millions.
He was very nearly right As 10 amounts,
although the increase did not come from the
quarter he predicted.
OF course, II the treaty has not accomplished
this result, It has done nothing. Had It done
this, It was still questionable whether the result
was worth what II cost us; but failing in this
It has failded utterly. There never was the
slightest obstacle to increasing our imports from
the Provinces, except those We made ourselvSE
and which was removable at our pleasure. Az.
rogste the tariff, and who doubts lsrgs influx
Of foreign goods? The problem all along has
been to arrange the tariff so ~ not u lessen
sxports while It gave Us revenue and inciden.
tai protection to manufactures. The treaty Of
1854, simply abolished all duties on the princi
pal Provincial productions. We lost revenue
by II, and We lost protection to our own pro
ductions of similar character. II brought In
provincial raw materials to take the place Of
our own, and thus largely increased our i'm
ports. All this we expected. It was result
Congress alone could have achieved by repeal.
ing our tariff. But as q compensation for this
loss, we were promised an increased demand
for our productions, and this was to come BY
virtue Of the stipulations in the treaty. ItwsS
the sole inducement, in = commercial point d
view, which was offered by the advocates d
the treaty, and unless the object has been OBJ
tanned, we have made no better bargain thai
the merchant does who sells bis ship and news,
get bis pay for her. y
Unfortunately for the treaty the following
table settles this question deanitively:
Table sho,oing the trade bet,oeen Tie United STATES
and Briii.h North America.
Year ending Im,o,,. Er,o,,. T,,.,
June 80 Ns
ls27a a.......... sA6, 900 sa,70t0 0l4 sa,14eSl,
l64c. 80 TJo<oooo o,ooL,lVo AoA,sS
1904. t........",'l o,yII ~ - ooo'oov oS4NrN
ltoD......'.''..l Io,loo,loS EyeVvyD SoVSL,Ios
1000. o.......''.' si,alVsZl 1v,VSscW Doya6yyIu