Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1884-12-11

Lit CffAnt@n
It is already apparent that the opPOsf-
ti0n 70 the ratification Of the commercial
treaty just concluded with spain VIII be
very strong. It is by no means certain
that it will be ratified at all. The eoun-
try does not vet fully understand II, DuE
the better the effect il viii have on our
commerce and industries il undeTstoSl
the stronger the opposition 70 il Is hAely
% become.
There is no doubt that the treaty Is
bigbIv beneficial % our merchant marine,
and 70 certain OF our industries but the
question which viii present ltseH Is
whether. all things considered i VIII mol
result in greater harm % rs than good. IL
seems 70 be generally admitted that me
treaty. will ruin our tobacco growing and
smear uIautiug interests. and may damage
SERIOUSLY our cigar manufacturers. About
harf the sugar we import comes from
Cuba. and this treaty cuts on fully 80
$1,000 Of revenue annually ron taaI
source alone. The loss Of revenue from
o.aer articles would BE- considerable. II
is estimated that the entire loss O reVe-
nue would be between 100000 and So
10000. For this what would we -alnf II
We we're permitted % m0nop0lize the trade
Of Cuba and Porto Rico II would not
amount % much more than naA "nat We
should lose in revenue.
l. j. questionable whether We would re
Darmitted 70 monop0IiZe IL. spain might
make a similar treaty with ENGLAND OF
other European countries. and we would
then not De in q much better position than
we are Tow. We made a commercial
/ treaty with Mexico which Is very favora-
/ HE 70 Is. and which is now awaiting rati-
dcation. but a great deal Of its value has
/ been destroyed by a similar treaty which
/ Mexico has made with England.
Itisa question whether sugar would he
| very much cheaper for the consumer
/ under the treaty than 1t IS az present. II
! Is probable that the cents duty now IN
/ posed would 5e divided between the plan
/ Ter in Cuba and the Iedner in this coun-
! try. TIE finer grades Of sugar are not
/ included il the treaty. It's evidently one
] purpose Of the treaty 70 secure for the
! Cuban planter a better price for MS pro
| duct. TIE sugar and sorghum growers
I i'm this country. however, would be
/ brought into competition with the sugar
/ growers Of Cuba and It is doubtful II
| they could compete successfully.
ItIooks very much a. if the Republican
us-tv were determined % preserve tl=ir
/ bfyb protective policy az the expense Of
I industries il localities where tnsir party
/ has no influence. and IS not likely 20 ac-
qufre any. By making commercial trea-
/ ties they seem 70 be aiming az reducing
/ the revenue 70 such an extent that gen
! eraI reduction OF the tariff VIII be impOs-
I siale While they nave not dared to at
] tack sugar and rice directly because they
/ could not do 50 consistently, they have al
l all times been willing % do 50, as the
I Hawaiian and Spanish treaties Indicate
/ They have been quick 70 call tariff re-
/ formers free traders. but in this policy OF
/ making commercial treaties they have
! become free traders in some things IN
Order % sustain their policy Of protection
with regard 70 others.
The sugar and rice-grOwing interests
/ ere safer in Democratic than in Repuo-
\ ican hands. because the Democratic
7 party holds that these articles are rev
/ enue articles. II all the commercial
treaties now pending and others contem-
/ plated are ratified II VIII not be possible
/ u make a general reduction Of the tarin.
! because the revenues Will not be more
than sufficient 70 meet theexPenses Of the
I government.
One Of the questions which viii pre-
sent itselft0 Congress viii be this: VIII
! the ratification Of these treaties do as
much towards opening foreign markets
/ % US as the reduction of the tariff 70 a
| point where our manufacturers can com
/ pete In those markets: This ques-
ton. Of course, does not take into con-
sheraton the harm that these treaties
viii do 70 certain Of our industries for
the benefit of others. l. seems % US that
I Congress must answer this question IN
the negative. However, the question Is
= large one, and the discussion Of it viii
bring out many points, doubtless, not
I now auuarent