The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1865-01-21
Repeal Of the Canadian Reciprocity
Treaty.

Tns Joint resolutions ~ Con ross for The abro-
g,.ion Of the Reciprocity Treaty have bosn spprov-
ed by The President, and IL is 10 be inferred that
formal notice will be given 70 tho English Govern
mont that the treaty will expire o. tho end of
twelve months A review Of .he arguments I'D
Vsnocd IN the Congressional debate upon this sub
icct leads to tho conclusion that tho Action Of Con-
srcss has been Influenced by feelings Of recruitment
~ the sympathy manifested by The Canadians for
sho Boutheru ConfodeTscy, rather than by those
rt.tesmsnlike views which should alone pre-
vail upon o matter Of nioh Importance
Tue arguments advanced In fAvur Of repeal Of tho
Treaty wil not stand tho test Of political economy.
Il has hern urged by Mr.. sUNsER, with his usual
FEASIBILITY and eloquenee, that the treaty boro
heavily upon tie lumber interests OF New England,
and enabled tho Canadians ~ undcrs.l US in our
own markets. This argument however, overlooks
tho important fact lumber has thereby been cheap
sned TO the gres, mass Of American consumers
and the Treaty Is therefore advantageous 70 the
~hoe people. Another Argument Of the sAme
stamp Ia 10 tho effect that tho fisheries agree.
ment has worked to tho dlsAdy AntAge Of tho
New England fishermen, by opening our coast 70
tho Canadians. But this privilege IL more than
rcciproc.l. The fish NJ grounds opened 10 the
nrprise q the Now In gland fishermen more
valuable than any We can offer 81 thom IN eX-
:hange. The whole trouble arises from the fact
sha, the treaty deprives the New England fisher.
men of tho home market while the immense bene.
hs aocruing 10 the great mass Of consumers Is on
lrey overlooked his also stated that the treaty hs.
cost the people Of the United States sum Of sixteen
Of allaru wltia ha ~
scarcely amounted to half .hA, sum. Thi, argu
ment is 80 fallaoious that II is surpr sing Unitot
States senstor 81 Mr.. srSSKR's experience in poli.-
iesl life should have seriously urged 1t as an obioc
ton. Il 10 well understood maxim that the bur
den of excise and taxation falls ultimately upor
ths consumers. and In this view II 10 tho CAnAdi an
who have a right n complain. moi us. Bu, III
argument is still moro tallacious IN view OF the fac
that our imports consist almost entirely @
raw produce, while .our exports eonss, slrnos
exclusively 81 manufactured articles. whicl
have afforded employment and . profit /
the artisans and euplo'es q The Uni,oI States
Under the treaty, raw pr. luce 10 relieved from ..
duty on sther side while manufactured good
arc liable 70 customs duty under certain cond
tions Tho practical results are thu, millions {
kinds Of coarse produce have bcsn importe
nv us thus ehOSpenins the price Of oil Il q.
articles Of general eonnmpuon; at . tus whe
o."nomy and low prices matters Of prime in
por,snce 10 w. We tAks lhese raw products, IA
crease ,hsir value, and send them hsek TO C.nsd
In hs shape Of manufactured articles 10 pay &
srN"h supplies This operation ia mutually Idvs
tAgeour N the CaaAlAns and the people Of u
cn'sl stAiss, and 10 recognized M such by prac
cal puS'nets m'n- An intJrmAl opinion OF q
New York Chamtsr ot Commerce ty n, msa
CONFIRMS lhe notion Of the Congressional msJol
~ that tho Treaty is detrimental to t
United States. IL may To 20 70 {,
sIsciL New England in,.rosas that are sws
ciAnorng Tor protection and monopoly, but II
advantageous 10 the whole people. The fsct
oammercc can never loGg eIlh unlscs "A IL mat
sdvADlszeous ~ he pAr,ies enaosruAd. IT
NOcs4 rrosty has fully fulaI.el lAsSs CO