The Burlington weekly hawk-eye. [volume] (Burlington [Iowa]) 1860-1876, 1865-01-14

lakes, NIICC III iS0s v H- -, ~ Va. or v Lei
we consider the carrying trade betwee,
the United States aad British Provinces
. take the years I85, to 1862 inclusive, ane
> we shall lind that during this period TIT
: shipping Of the United States which cleared
[ for the British Provinces wos lO,IU -
, tons, and the foreign shipping which
cleared during this period was 81 ~
tons, while the shipping Of the Cnltet
! States which entered AT our custom houses
from the British Provinces was lO05b, Is
2 tons, and the foreign shipping which en-
1 tered was {, ass, $50 tons.
mention these things by way OF con
trast in comparison with these Crane
, movements. The business which We have
been able to do on the st. Lawrence seems
to be so. trivia, that It need but be cOnsid
. cred as In element IN the present discus
sion. The treaty may be seen in its bear
Fl ings in the commerce between the two
countries. This has increased Immensely
but il is difficult. 70 see how much OF this
increase is due to the treaty, and how much
is due to the natural growth OF population
. and the facility of transportation in both
countries. There are also railroads fur
, nishiny prompt aud constant means Of
COMMUNICATION which have gone into sue
, cessfu! operation since the treaty was made.
In the three years immediately preceding
the treaty. the total exports to Canada and
and other British Provinces were S4S, 2lb Dis
!
ratio Of exports to imports in the proper
ton of 100 TO IS In the 10 years OF the
treaty, the total exports TO Canada and the
British Provinces were ST., $50, 81, the to-
tai imports were $.p3, s-'1 ,2o2-according
10 the amounts the exports were IN the
proportion OF 100 to =.
The total exports 70 Canada in the three
years preceding the treaty were So, $780,
SIS. and the total imports were 1901 ga.
being the proportion 81 100 TO -, while the
whole exports 20 Canada alone. during the
ten wears of the treaty. were xl,637i ,3l!,
aad tine total imports were SOL .474, ;>4., be-
| ing the proportion CT 10 to ~. l pre-
sent these tables 70 lay before YOU the
extent and nature of the change in COM
inerce between the two countries. In the
view which take on the present occasion,
il is no. necessary TO consider the much de-
bated enquiry rs 10 the effect Of 4 differ
ence between the amount o. export and
import, involving, as II does, whole peril
Gus questions of the balance of trade The
reciprocity treaty ought not be maintained
or overturned on any principle of political
economy. come, IN the last place, to the
Influence of the treaty on the revenues of
the country, and here the Custom House
is our principal witness.
The means of determining this question
will be found in toe authentic tables pub
lished from time 10 time in reports of the
y
70 Congress at this session. which l have in
my hands. Looking AT these table, We
ind certain unanswerao.e points from an
estimate founded on the trade before that
Ii appears that if no treaty had been made
had increased in the same ratio a, before
our treaty, Canada would have paid the
n!ted States in the ten years Of the treaty
AZ least SD. 80. 500. which she has been re-
lived Of. That sum has actually been lost
20 the United States. In return, Canada
has given up $500, SO being the amount
il would have collected ii no treaty had
been made. This is a vast disproportion 10
the detriment os The [ nted States.
After further remarks on the subject.
Mr.. Sumne, then quoted from the ,eport
of the Secretary OF TIE Treasury. showing
that the treaty mad released from duty a
total sum OF Si2, So, 81 IN goods OF Canada
more than our gCOds-the products OF the
United states. From these various con-
siderations. it was clear 20 him that the
revenue of the Unised States had suffered
by this treaty, ana that in this important
particular its advantages had not be.r,
equally shared by the TWO countries.
Messrs. Ramsey anG Howe were against
the repeal OF treaty. and Messrs. Sherman
and Coiiamer spoken favor OF it.
Pending the consideration OF the reso!u-
ton the Senate adjourned.
WAsHiNGrON, Jan. l2.-SENA1E.-The
Chair LAID before the Senate message from
the President, giving information as to the
agreement between the United States and
Great Britain concerning the naval force
the the lakes, which was ordered TO be
printed.
NJ. WILSON presented the petition OF
Mrs. Jane Swishe.m asking for an increase
of pay for female clerks, which was re-
terred to the Finance COMMITTEES.
Mr.. TRIUMPH IL. from the Judiciary
luton instruting that committee to enquire
II further legislation was necessary 10 au.
thnriZe the President 20 call an extra ses-
sion OF Congress without giving six Y DAYS
notice, reported and asked 10 be dis
charged. Mr.. Trumb,ill said there could
be no law requiring the President to give
sixty days notice: 40 notice whatever VAS
required by law.
Mr.. POW ELL, from the Judiciary Com
mittee, reported back the petition OF GER
tain railroad companies asking perm:ss .ou
to build railroad bridge across the Ohio
river a Louisville. He asked tina. the Pc
tition be referred to the Commute on Post
oitces ana Post Roads, and it was so or
dered.
Mr.. DOoLITTLE called up a resolution
IN relation to the sale Of Indian lands. i'm.
ting the price Of the came, which was
passed.
On motion Of Mr. st MINER, the Senate
PROCEEDED TO the consideration Of the rpso-
luton 70 repeal the reciprocity treaty.
Mr.. HOWE took tn. floor IN opposition
to the repeal of the treaty.
AT half-past one O'Clock Mr.. Grimes in.
terrupted Mr.. Howe, by asking that the
Senate take recess oflO minutes, to al
low the members 20 pay their respects TO
Vice Admiral iarysgut, who was upon
the door.
Recess was taken, and on re-assembling
Mr.. WILSON offered The following, which
was adopted
Rcsoired, That The committee on the
Conduct OF the War be directed to INQUIRE
into the causes of the failure of the late ox-
petition to Wilmington, and report back to
the Senate.
Mr.. HOWE resumed the floor on the
reciprocity treaty.
Mr.. MORRILL, succeeded Mr.. Howe
and advocated the repeal Of treaty.
Mr.. CHANDLER favored lis repeal
The Board OF Trade OF Detroit did not
represent the people of Michigan when it
opposed the repeal Of the treaty. It repre-
sented only the interests Of the merchants,
enl me farmers OF Michigan were not in
IAvOf OF the