New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-01-19
PORK AND INTERNATIONAL La W.
SIDNEY WEBSTER EXPLAINS THE TREATIES.
THE RIGHT OF REPRIsAL-sCIESCE SHOULD BE
TRIIn RFF0RF RETALIATION.


A TRIBUNE reporter called on Sidney Webster
Tuesday and inquired whetheror not there were any
treaties in force between this country and France or Ger
many which forbid either OF the twolast named countries
TO prohibit hinder the importation OF "heaithIuI
American meats. The reply was that, excepting the
Consular treaty of 1853 France and the United states
have treaties containing the ordinary stpuatons
about reciprocal commerce, the favored nation
clause The treaty OF 1900 with France did contain few
elementary clauses about trade and commerce. but has
long ago expired by Its own Limitation With North
Germany the United States have the Prussian
treaty Of 1923, which is In force II con-
tains liberal and comprehensive reciproca al COM
nercia stpuiations II declares that there shall be
"recprocal liberty of commerce." and that no other
duties shall be imposed the importation into the King
dom Of Prussia any article the produce or manufac
ture OF the United States than on the Ike article being
the produce or manufacture OF any other country" IN
der that article OF the treaty Germany II she admits
healthful meat from England or France, or any
country should not exclude "a like article" from tho
United States, hinder its importation by higher
duty Apart from treaties such exclusion or hndrance
would be unfriendly and offensive and even hostile II
persisted in by France Germany without good rea
sons OF police or selfpreservation.
But" said the reporter do not France and Germany
profess to eInlc. American meats because they
healthfulT
Eyes And therefore the diplomatic discussion turn
primarily on question OF fact The United states VIII
deny the right and duty or France or tersg 10 e
clude poisoned or poisoning meats.
PRECEDENTs SET BY THE UNITED STATES.
The latest American tariff law excludes the importation
OF obscene articles and Of Instruments drugs brought
hther for the preventing OF conception or for causing
unlawful ABORTION. The same law prohibits the I'm
poration Of neat cattle and the hides Of neat CATTLE
but provlso declares that the Secretary Of the Treasury
may suspend the prohibition TO any foreign country or
place when convinced that the importation will mot
tend to the Introduction spread Of contagious or In
fictitious diseases among the cattle OF the United States
II France Germany can prove that the exclusion by
either of American meats Is prompted solely by desire
and necessity protect France Germany against I'M
healthful American meats then either country Will oc-
cupy the position taken by the United States.
"The American porkproducing States Will claim that
their pork products healthf that not all are IN
heathful France and Germany will probably reply that
so much has been found unheahf that sepreseration
demands the exclusion OF all pork products coming from
America That issue, II is seem win be void of fact aud
If France Germany be well disposed toward us, the
effort must be to devise a method by which the clean
pork can be- separated from the uncean, and identified
II is great pity that the Western States which most
interested IN the pork trade did not long ago. by
legislation take satsacorysteps 10 thoroughly ascertain
by extensive microscopic observations, and exhibit the
real character and probable cause OF the pork
the means of prevention"
"Hut what IL IL shall turn that the French Ger
man crusade against American pork based on false pre-
tences selfish because carried In order to aid or
protect French or German pOrkproducersP
at viii probably be difficult for the American State
Department prove that diseased and poisoning pork
has ever been imported from the United States into France
or Germany be hoped that science ascer
tain definitely whether the pork hereafter offered
for sale thus diseased II European science can ascer
tain then presumably American science can; and
If the fact can be demonstrated then surely It can
in way be attested for each package shipped.
Whether not IT will be needed that the Washington
Government shall by It's Officers examine verify ana at
test the healthy condlon OF each piece OF PORK REMAINS
to be Ordinarily the trademark Of the producer
and @e 0gd 9s sSaee foT v ne law
prevent importation OF adulterated and spurious
Government a a condition OF importation. II France
Germany we're adopt legislation similar 10 that Ameri
pork what reply or criticism could we makei"
II France Is obstinate and refuses S 70 ndmt
beautiful and really is heathful; what theni'
at easy TO that France would so behave
be question about health diseas In the pork, then
il must be that France excludes 1t for fiscal reason, and
| to protect French pork-producers The French
pork producers a oc Eance az 70 snra
pork and what reply could President Arthur make If
France Germany shall simply say that American pork
the defense OF France and Germany II II Is esab
ished that perfectly heathf American pork excluded
1t cannot be that either France or Germany viii say that
American pork excluded solely on account OF hostility
to the United states. or to pork as pork" o.. III.
uonOpolsts constrain their respective Governmental
MONT of view The United states can officially only
France or Germany, aid not the individuals
THE REMEDY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW.
"Has International law Diplomacy furnished any
precedents to guide the United statesi'
Ycsl The international process Is called retorsion
de droit or amabe retaliation, which is different from
yndictive retaliation reprisal Reprsals only
permitted made by the Government when there has
been fragrant violation Of positive and perfect right
and denial OF justice but nation uses retorsion de
drot when II applies in its transactions with another
nation the same rule OF conduct by which that other Is
governed under similar circumstances
But what right is violated when a nation excludes
from entry foreign merchandise innOcuOus harmless,
simply because the nation wishes to compel the use or
consumption OF a similar domestic product
The rignt which is Of imperfect obligation, and is
called the right OF comfy International law certainly
does not forbid France close her ports to heahful
American pork nor the United states TO close
their ports to Worth gowns French
vines But such exclusion would be
violation OF international courtesy which Is called the
county nations. The remedy and the procedure for
mere Violation OF comfy Is refusal To perform similar
chandise leads 10 retaliatOry tariffs and exclusions.
Hence international comfy requires one nation 10 aid
enforcing the revenue laws OF another as In the case OF
ordinary criminal or elyll law
But now free trade Democrats or revcnue-reform
Democrats vote IN Congress to lay prOholtory duty on
French imports, not for me purpose OF collecting uu
but only retalste on France by excluding altogether
certain French pTOducisi
probably not at all under the revenue clause or the
Constitution which authorizes Congress TO lay and COLLECT
taxes. duties, ete.t for specified purpose: But
under the commercial clause, which empowers Congress
TO regulate commerce with foreign nations the power 70
exclude any foreign article is ample That clause says
nOhlnc about laying and collecting duties III order 10
dents etc The fair traders Ia England advocate levy
of duties American cereals and Hour In order 70 compel
the Tinted states admit British products lower
rafe OF duty retaatOry American legislation against
France and Germany 10 begin on account OF American
pork, no surely say TO what results II may lead
Certainly the resources OF science anu upoMAcy sHou
be first exhausted.