New-York tribune., 1884-02-02
THE p0RE QUESTION ~ EUROPE.

Mr.. Frelnghuysen's statement concerning the
pork question in Europe appears to strengthen
the evidence on behalf of the conclusion that tie
governments which have prohibited the impOr-
tatiOn of American pork products have been in
hucnced by other than sanitary motives. Mr.. Ere
lnghuysen suggests that the United States should
20 on and demonstrate in the most conclusive
way the inn0cuous character of these food ex-
ports, and that having by a Government Com
mission secured irrefutable evidence of this
another appeal should be made to the prohibiting
governments. to be followed, in the event OF re-
lection, by recourse to treaty stipulatiOns. That
every foreign government would consent to
join in a scientific inquiry of the kind indicated
is improbable. Judging from the position taken
by Germany, which would perhaps express the
general feeling. No power is willing
to adopt course which might seem
to commit it to the acceptance of results
reached through foreign machinery. But If the
European governments viii not consent to such
a proposal it Is hardly to be expected that they
would accept as conclusive anyrcsuts obtained
by purely American commission. If sanitary
reasons were really the cause OF these prOhibi
tive measures, they would presumably be will
ing 10 accept cyculpatOry evidence. But as the
case stands diplomatic correspondence only in
dicatcs reluctance to adopt scientific
evidence which is alone compatible with
the dominance of other reasons than those pub
licly avouched. The truth is that none of these
governments can seriously maintain the sani-
tary position on the pork question, and no other
explanation can be given for their evasive at
ttude. The charge that American pork is dis
cased cannot be supported by any scientific
authority. But FOR all that it will be difficult
to obtain satisfaction if these governments
simply cling obstinately to their original posi-
ton, and refuse to examine for themselves or
to let us examine for them
As to the proposals for inspecting all Ameri-
can pork at the foreign ports of debarkation,
they look impracticable. Any effective method
Of inspection would interfere so seriously with
the export of Our pork, and diminish the profits
of the trade so greatly, as to produce many of
the worst effects of prohibitory legislation. If
prohibition is really n protective policy all at
tempts to establish such an official inspection
would haveto encounter serious resistance, and
obstacles of all sorts would be thrown in the
way. Whether rftaliatory legislation could be
adopted without in1icting injury upon some
other domestic interests remains to be proved
yet. If the free expectation of our pork pro-
ducts can be secured without recourse
to such reprisals of course it will be
preferable. And as there is plenty Of time to
hold the inquest proposed, and if it fails to re-
sort to other measures, during the present ses-
sion of Congress, it may be the best policy to
carry out Mr.. FreIinghuysen's suggestions be-
fore doing anything else, and the more especi-
ally since no change in the policy of the Europ
can governments concerned could under any
circumstances be expected for several months.