The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1875-04-10

would apply as well against keeping up the naval
and military establishments
Senator Booth claimed also that the treaty would be
Of no commercial value; that VIC would lose, accord
ing 10 the present production # sugar on the Islands
nearly a half million dollars Of revenue annually (;
that the treaty would cause an increase Of produc-
ton, and that We should soon lose ,en-fold that
amount
Senator Hamlln wanted &c know how We could
lose what we had not got, and What would be the in
creased effect Of the treAty.
Booth gave, in contrast TO the loss Of revenue In
creased in this way, figures showing the produce ex-
ports from the United States 10 the Sandwich Islands;
but this was answered BY Senator Jones. who said
'tIf the productions from the Islands should cease,
the imports from the United States would increase
correspondingly."
Jones and Sargent both called attention to the
character Of sixteen articles ineluded in the treaty,
to be admitted free 10 the Islands. All ct which,
such as wooden goods, watches and other mAnuiae-
tured articles, were almost exclusively valued as the
products Of labor, ana while We pay about ninety
per cent, in gold for what we import from other
countries, We pay an equal amount in these products
Of our labor for sugar and other articles imported
from the Sandwich Islands.
Jones also showed that Notwithstanding our ex-
ports of raw material 10 Holland, Belgium and
Australia were worth many times the exports 30
the andwieh Islands, yet all combined they were
net of such Importance 10 the labouring classes OF
the United States as the present exports were 60
the Islands which this treaty would increase.
Sargent said that the benefits OF this treaty were
almost wholly in The interest of the poorer classes,
and be wanted TO secure the right to buy cheap
brown sugar. which is used by the farmer at his
work and the miner in his cabin.
Booth said that the treaty would not cheaper
sugar. because the present imports from the
Islands supply only a part Of the amount con-
sumed on the Pacific Coast.
Sargent replied that Booths argument appeared
to contradict itself. Only a little while before
Booth had said that the production OF the Islands
would be Increased ten-fold by the treaty, and II
the fifteen million pounds now produced wonld
not cheaper sugar, then a hundred aud dfty million
pounds would, and he (Sargent) felt that the in
terest OF the people was al stake.
Senator Jones of Nevada, after arguing that the
political considerations involved were of themselves
sufficient to decide the question in favor Of ~rAtifea-
ton, further contended that the commercial import
ance Of this treaty had been generally overlooked, or
underestimate by its friends in the Senate. He
called attention TO the fact that the aggregate
amount of our commerce with the Sandwich Islands
country for the reason that they purchase from the
United States a class of articles the value Of which
is made up in an uncommonly large degree by the
of labor employed, and not by the cost of the
raw material. Thus, for example, these Islands i'm
port from the United States annually more than
$100.0 900 worth of wooden ware, which represents
an expenditure Of over 100000 for wages Of labor in
this country, and $4,000 worth of clothing, of
which only one-third of the value is to be credited
to raw material. As another example, of minor
Importance, he mentioned the pincbback jewelry
that we export to these Islands amounting
six thousand or eight thousand dollars per annum,
IF which eleven twelfths represent wages of labor
in its manufacture. By these and similar
Illustrations he claimed to show that the ratification
IF this treaty would afford great and beneficial
to various industries of the country, and
TO many on the Pacific Coast. Replying
also to the argument advanced by Booth, that wages
paid to the Sandwich Islanders are only twelve dol
airs per month, aud that the native inhabitants are
IF low grade, and not worth any special cultivation
If commercial relations with them. Senator Jones
lrgued that in a political point of view, this was q
yeighty reason why should endeavor TO enlarge our
rade with such people, because in exchanging pro-
lucts with them we get the value Of n months labor
# one of their producers for the cost of four days
abor of one American.
Booth objected to the treaty because the Islands
we're too far away to be of any national value, and
t would require great expenditures to establish
here a costly naval station, which ii would be
lificult to hold in time of war.
Sargent replied that the Islands were midway on
he direct line of trade between the United States
md Asia, and the possession of this point by a for
ign government would subject our commerce,
which promises to- be great in the future, to the
mercy of an adversary in war. Moreover, it would
lot be necessary TO eXpend much in establishing a
laval station. and if the Islands were taken away
rom us in time of war they would be given up
Vhen the war was over hut a foreign power would
lot have the coal. which otherwise might be seeur-
d by them. 1t was shown. also. that the native
of the Islands was decreasing so fast
unless this treaty was ratified. the Hawaiiah
would soon be compelled to offer the
of the Islands to England. But if the
realty was ratified, it would take some time to Sc
ure itsoperations, and so in all probability nine
ears would pass before its operation, during
'hieh time the now foreign powers could not get a
1othold, and at the end of that time the fruit
'ould be ripe to fall into the hands of the United
tates, while its productions would also be those
T our citizens. ~ +aF8t 81
Those who had rejected the Canadian treaty came
,rward gradually to the side of Sargent. Jones
nd Hamlin, until finally the greatest enthusiasm
resulting in one of the most emphatic
recorded in the Senate. - - ~
Cameron, who is the least ~ of Protectionists,
Iade a speech 10 favor of the treaty, in which he
aid that Capt. Cooks sailors were responsible for
1reading the disease among the Sandwich Islands.
nd the Americans were responsible and should
ytend their protection over them. c.. A. W.