The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1879-04-05

a HHA eANNNJ
me, as soon as practicable, q report embodylng
your views, and all information you can obtain.
respecting the practical operation and results OF
the treaty as affecting the interests of the United
States. l desire particularly to be Informed as To
whether sugars produced in other countries are
brought to the Hawaiian Islands and subsequently
shipped to tie United States for free entry under
the provisions Of the treaty. 1t is desirable that
such information as you may be able to obtain on
this subject shall be forwarded TO me before the
meeting Of Congress. so that it may be referred 10
JONI SHERMAN. Secretary.
DR.. JAMES SCOTT.
U. S. Consul, Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands.
REPORT OF DR.. JAMES SCOTT.
UNITED STATES CONSULATE.
Honolulu, II. l.. August 9. 1878.
My DEAR SIR - favor of June 2Sth last.
enclosing the letter of Mr.. Philo s. Shelton, of
Boston. expressing the belief that steps are al
ready being taken TO defraud the revenue under
the cover of the reciprocity treaty between the
United States and this Government, is received.
You ask me to forward yon ga report embOdy-
ing my views, and all information l can obtain
respecting the practical operations and results Of
the treaty as affecting the United States" and,
particularly. as to whether sugars produced in
other countries are brought into the Hawaiian
Islands and subsequently, shipped to the United
States for free entry under the provisions Of the
treaty."
The reciprocity treaty between the United
States and the Hawaiian Government. in its
operation and results, is a bonanza to these
Islands, especially the sugar planters and rice
growers. | wish | could say ii were so with the
United States. Instead of the benefits being recip-
rOcal between the two countries. we get nothing.
but are largely the losers, financially, as l think l
can explain TO your satisfaction by figures and
facts.
In the year ending December 81, 1877. there
were shipped from this country to the United
States
Sugar, 25, SOC, 47s pounds; average duty remit
ted on the same 2 SllN cents per pound.
Rice, a.s27, 5a5 pounds: duty remiited on the O'''-
same. ~ cents per pound. 65,6ss II
Paddy. 2,57l,9s7 pounds; duty remitted on the
Moiasses, iii ,sis gallons; duty RENTED on
same. 81 cents per aIIon.."............ $500 Is
same, OF cent per pound 1866 81
same, 10 per cent. 1,2Os 81
same, / cent per pound. GIG 16
Total duties RENTED. s3l ,2O6 81
The invoice value of the goods imported
from the United States to this country in
the year ending December 81, 1877, was. -. 81, 762. 800 50
The invoice value of goods imported from
year ending December 81, 1875, was........ 947, 2GO Al
States in 1877 over 1875. s15,455 SO
Difference between duties RENTED by the
United States and value of excess of goods
imported from the United States to this
country in 1877 over 1875 Observation-Disclosures. 1860 90
You will see by the foregoing statement that the
amount OF duties RENTED b. the United States on
Hawaiian products, under the treaty, in 1877, is
Sl5,660 93 greater than the invoice value OF the
excess OF goods imported from the United States
to this country in that year over the year 1873. the
year before the treaty went into operation or,
in other words, our country gave this country
in 1877, by virtue Of the treaty, SSl5,543 SO
worth of her products gratis and paid this country
a bonus OF Sl5,66O SO ior taking them.
OUR LOSS INCREASING.
I remember when the treaty was under con-
sideratioD, 1T was urged in favor of its adoption
that the increase of expectations from the United
States to these Islands would remunerate us for
the duty RENTED /; but, SO far, the results have
not demonstrated this theory to be correct, nor
will they in the future for, while the importa-
tions to this country frOm the United States may,
and l have no doubt will, increase TO some extent
every year during tue continuance OF the treaty,
the increase will fall lar short of the increase in
the expectation of the products Of this country to
the United States, / would not be astonished, from
the enlargement of old and the opening OF new
plantations, if the expectations of sugar. rice, and
paddy from this country would be more than
doubled in two years hence over what it was in
the year 1877.
SAID NOT To BE A LOSS TO THE UNITED STATES.
1t is said by interested parties here that it is
absurd TO claim that the United States loses the
duty on the increased impoTtations from this
country, as, without the treaty, there would have
been no increase of importations on which the
United States could levy a duty. This might APP
pear plausible were it not for the fact that, if this
country imported less of her free products under
the treaty, other countries would import more to
fill mp the deficiency and pay the duties thereon.
In this event, the United States would save the
duty. Why, in the other case. the United STATES
do not lose the duty, l cannot see.
ANOTHER REGULARITY OF THE TREATY.
Of the SLIGO, sos 81 worth of goods imported to
this country from the United States in 1877, 81
100, 642 So worth were admitted free, under the
mands in these Islands for each and all OF the
articles contained in this schedule can be fully
supplied By importations from the United States,
and that, TOO, under active c%ornpetiti' n between
importers, the consumers here, OF course, derive
all the beneGt from the remission OF duties thereon
by this Government. Not SO with the sugar.
molasses, rice, paddy. tallow, and bananas eX-
ported from this country to the United States
free" under the schedule of Article | OF the
treaty. They are only q moiety of the demand of
the United States, and sell to the consumers at
the same price as the same articles imported from
other countries duties paid, giving to the Hawai-
ian producer the full benefit OF the duty RENTED.
INCREASE OF DUTIES BY THE HAWAIIAN GOVERNMENT.
Soon after the ratification of the treaty, this
Government, by act of its Legislature, increased its
import duties on a long list OF goods, including
nearly all imported from the United States. not
exempted by the treaty, IRON 10 to IS per cent.
Notwithstanding the remission of duties under
the treaty by this Government, by this increase of
its tariff on dutiable goods. the customs revenue of
this country was increased largely over what it
was before the treaty went into operation.
always thought that this large increase of duty
on dutiable American goods on the heels of the
ratification of the treaty. which admitted nearly
all Hawaiian products free into our Country. was
in bad faith to the United States.
ENGLAND's OPINION OF THE LAW.
The British Government having intimaied to
this Government that it looked upon this increase
Of duties. levied on English goods under this law
to meet deficiencies arising in revenue from the
reciprocity treaty with the United States. as an
unfTiendly act toward her. and in violation of her
treaty stipulations with this Government, the Ha-
waiian legislature, a few days ago. repealed the
law, and placed the duties at the anti-recipro city
standard again.
1 have given you as cOncisely as l can the rela-
tive financial results of the operation of the treaty