Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1884-12-27
Tnv tclesr.ph 10 the Dispatch.l

Spanish Convention.
II i said that we thereby give up rev.
enue on sugar OF from twenty-five to thirty
five million dollars in return Tor reduc-
ton OF duties upon our products imported
into cuba and Porto Rico, estimated on the
basis Of existing traffic at from three to
five millions. REIMBURSEMENT OF revenue.
when for public good. is in the line OF
rational policy. Hitherto 1t was done ~
the case OF tea and coffee, which by act OF
MAY /, 1872, were placed upon the free
list without attempt TO obtain therefor any
equivalent whatever. and solely IN oOedl-
ence to the popular demand for Tree
breakfast table, By this measure the
Treasury Of the United States has lost
during the last twelve years rev.
enue of some one hundred and
GIty.Iour millions Of dollars oil coffee
alone. and besides. let us not forget that
Brazil awaited itself of the action OF
this Government to impose an export tax
upon coffee, winch deprived the people Of
This country OF the benefit OF OEr tariff re-
ducfion. Article V. OF this convention pre-
vents similar action by Spain. The treaty
now under consideration leads TO cheaper
the cost Of the nccessarics OF life by re-
ducinc the cost OF a staple OF daily consump-
tion OF which we are obliged To- import each
wear nearly Sl0),000,000 in value to make
up for The inadequate production OF our
own soil. which amounts to only IL per
ceLtum OF the whole consumption. ana al
tne same time we secure the growing
market for our products in Spanish
Antilles. coupled with the especial priyi-
leoes TO our merchant marine. IL
is also sad the importation OF free
sugar from Cuba and Porto Rico, when
added 10 our domestic production ana 10
The importation from the Sandwich Islands.
will fall short OF the quantity needed i0r
home consumption, and the price VIII be
ruled by that OF the part remaining liable
TO duty, so that the profit from the removal
Of the duty will 20 TO the CUBA ana Porto
Rico planter. and not TO the consumer in
This country. II this argument be true the
treaty will not affect the price OF sugar in
Louisiana. The price Of the commodity
i, lessened by the supply being greater than
the demand. But il is franS TO say that
other conventions have been negotiated or
are i'm process OF negotiation which VIII
provide an adequate importation from
the sugar regions. Again. the priv
iIegcd introduction OF tObaccO-reduccd
duties has been objected to a. reducing the
revenue and removing protection from the
American product aud manufacture. rs
10 this. 1t seems enough TO say that the Con-
vention leaves discrimination against the
imported articles Of from four 10 five times
the intcrpal-revenue duties on American
products. and secures market hitherto de-
MED for the special manufactures Of to-
bacco. in which We excel. and which COM
mand q profitable market wherever their
importation is permitted.
4 reduction Is urged In many quarters OF
the in,ernal.revcnue tax on the manuiac-
turc OF tobacco, aud tlii, would be loss OF
some twenty-five millions Of dollars annually
10 the public Treasury. This treaty, taken
with Others 81 the same character. stimulates
our general exports and thereby promotes
the interest Of our manufacturers.
Again. il i urged that the increased eX-
portation which these treaties NAV secure
will not equal the loss OF revenue on i'm
poltant articles. But these articles OF I'M
port are produced within our territory
splIinglv or not at all. or OF different
GRADE, not satisfying the pu3lic demand.
and II Is the essence OF wise protection 10
forcco the duties upon these and to i'm
nose them upon those manufactures
winch may be properly fostcred
by impeding foreign competition. Not
| ONLY do these conventions do these. but
| they enlarge foreign markets for our sur
| plus productions. which IL is the policy OF
protection to secure, and they stimuIlte
! our commercial operations and our carrying
| trade by re>crying 10 on: vessels the
| endowment OF privileges conceded. Again.
| your attention is drawn to Articles AA.
and XNI.. establishing such guarIn-
tee Of personal treatment as Will en-
| sure safety to the interests Of our citizens.
Another line OF adverse argument re-
mains 10 be considered. II i said that this
class OF treaties Is an infringement upon
! the constitutional rights OF Congress IN
/ shat they Change the duties prescribed by
! the laws. This argument i advanced
| against all, including the convention with
| Mexico, which having been already ratified,
awaits legislation TO carry it into effect.
| The claim that the Mexican treaty is un-
constitutional. because IL affects the revenue
ana did not originate in the House OF Rep
resentatiyes, is sngularly untenable. II
| did 80 originate. The first action OF this
| Government towards IFS negotiation was an
appropriation by Congress "for the sala-
] ries and expenses OF tae commission TO ne
| .otiate commercial treaty with Mexico a
sum not exceeding $4,000, to be expended
under the direction OF the President OF
the United States" (sundry Civil Appr0'
! priation Act, August !. lSS2.) and under
this authority General Grant and Mr..
frescOt were appointed commissioners,
and negotiated the treaty. The senate III
troduced an amendment that the legislation
! of Congress should be necessary 10 give II
force. This rule, precedent for which Is
found in previous treaties OF this character,
has been followed In a subsequent treaty.
The negotiation and steps taken thereto
have been conducted upder sanction given
by Congress 10 the general policy OF lost
! tiing intimate trade with neighooring
countries. observe that constitutional
amendment hiss been introduced IN Con.
gress that the Senate and House OF
Representatives shall be Joined TO the
Executive a. q treaty-making power. such
amendment would not avoid the necessity
Of the Executive conducting negotiations
for treaty, subject. Of course, 10 the ratih'
cation Of the coordinate branch. The pre-
rogatiye Of the House OF Representatives
has In all OF these treaties been album
dainty secured by provision that they should
not take effect until bill originating in
the House had made laws affecting the rev.
enue conform thereto. Precedents are
against the position that negotiations OF
this class are unconstitutional. From the
foundation OF the Government, beginning
with the time when the administration was
in the hands OF men who framed
the Constitution Itself, and may. therefore,
be assumed to have best understood its I'M.
| port and scope. public tre,ti.s affecting
| The revenues have been concluded by the
| President aud carried into effect BY the