The Hawaiian gazette., 1874-11-04
Canadian Reciprocity.

The Hon. Mr.. Blaine Speaker Of the House
Of Representatives, has recently published let
ter and delivered several speeches in Maine, tax.
ing strong ground against the proposed Reeipro-
city Treaty between Canada and the United
States. 1t seems that the treaty proposes to
grant to Canada that her coasting feet shall be
placed on the same footing as American vessels
in the commerce of the Lakes and the Atlantic
Ocean, and also to allow them to register under
the American Rog. This naturally excites strong
opposition from those engaged in the shipping
interests. as well it may.
But aside from this Mr.. Blame and also Gen.
Butler protest against the Canadian treaty on
constitutional grounds claiming that the Senate
has no power to enact treaty which alters the
revenue laws of the country, the power to
originate all such changes having been dele
gated to the representatives of the people by the
constitution. This objection has been brought
up every time that the discussion of the. subject
of reciprocity has been introduced iuto Congress.
1t is a technical objection, and it was never in
tended by the trainers of the constitution that
reciprocity treaty should originate IN the lower
house; or that the Senate, which alone has the
power TO ratify all treaties, should be denied the
power TO make by treaty such alterations in the
revenue regulations with foreign powers, as may
promote the commerce of the two countries. As
it is evident that these influential politicians in
tend to defeat the Canadian Treaty, it may not
be amlss to reproduce the arguments on which
they rest, as stated in Mr. Baine's letter:
1.-THE treaty of Reciprocity now proposed is under
stood 10 embrace the admission of Canadian vessels
10 free American registry aud the full enjoyment of
our coasting and lake trade. Thus the ship.build-
ing and commercial interests of the United States,
reAiYng so prosperousy oflate, and just recovering
from the terrible blows dealt by Britsh-built cruis
ers during the war, again to be struck down by
giving advantages hitherto uudreamed of to the
ships of the very power that inflicted the previous
injury. And the Democratic party of Maine have
pledged themselves in their State Convention to the
policy that includes this disastrous attack.upon the
interests of our State and their candidate for Gov
ernor has fully committed himself to the extreme
doctrine announced. by the convention.
IS The form of Reciprocity proposed by the Gov
eminent Of the Dominion of Canada lacks every ee.
ment of the seductive title by which is sought to
commend it to our people. What is It? Why simply
this That # the United States will agree 10 admit
certain Canadian products, free of duty, Canada in
turn will agree TO admit certain American fabrics
free of duty But the class of men to be benefited,
and the class to be injured 10 the United States,
are entirely distinct and separate, having nothing
in common, either in locality, industry or invest
IT,,
in this way by the advancement of another has no
more element of reciprocal justice in it than for A |
to take pair of horses from B. because took pos
session of yoke of oxen belonging to D. To |
illustrate: If the United States will agree 10 ad.
nit Canadian vessels to American. Registry and the
coasting trade Canada will admit straw hats, mule |
harness and rat traps free of duty In this you will
observe Canada gets the full advantage both ways,
while the the United States for possible enafge-
nent of petty trade consents 10 subordinate and
sacrifice an interest that represents our distinctive
nationality in all cimes and upon all seas an in
crest that has given and asked less Ofthe Gov
'rnment than any other of similar magnitude an
interest more essentially American, in the highest
md best sense, than any other which falls under the
legislative power of the Government, and which
SKIS only to-day to be left where the founders of
he Republic placed it nearly century ago
Against the whole policy of adjusting revenue
questions by the treaty making policy, desire to
inter- on behalf of my constituents emphatic pro,
est. The Constitution gives TO the House ofrepre-
entatres the sole and exclusive right to originate
ills of revenue, and this great power should be kept
Ebere it be controlled By the direct vote ofthe
eople every two years. 1t may very well be that
undry articles OF Canadian product should be ad-
nitted free, or with diminished duty; it may well
e, also, that Canada would find II advantageous to
dmr certain articles from free Of duty Let each
ountry decide the question for iselfindependentIy
nd avoid the "log-rong' feature of Treaty, in /
'hich 1t will inevitably happen that certain interests
rill be sacrificed in order that others may be pro-
aOted. Let us simply place Canada on the same
ssis with other foreign commissioning her pro-
ucts, admitting them free, according TO our own
idgment ofthe interests -four revenue and the pur
nis and needs of our people, always bearingin mind
nat 10 governmental as in family matters charity
egins at home, and that be who proyidetsi not for
hose Of his own house is worse than an infideln
These arguments apply only 10 part to our
rOposed treaty. The same constitutional obiec-
ons. however, can be raised 10 the one case as
the other; bot we think it can be demon
rated much more clearly that in our case the
Inited States will secure nearly all our trade,
I'd therefore derive much greater benefits than
ON the Canadian Treaty 1t is true that
charity begins at home" and for this very rea-
'n-that it will benefit the people Of the Pacific 7
ope, and all their industrial interests meas. !
e ought to receive favor from the American
Ongress and people.
The Austrian Polar Expedition.