The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1885-02-25
THE HAWAIIAN TREATY.
From the Alta California. =.


disposed of, but the Hawaiian Treaty
remains. 1t is on a different. footing
from the others, or from either of
them, and the considerations that
enter into the question of its ratifica-
ton are entirely distinct from those
in the other cases. In the first place,
the Hawaiian Reciprocity Treaty is
not a new or untried thing. 1t has
been in force many years its effects
are questions Of fact, and not of specu-
lation, and there is no room for I'M
certainty regarding it. The propriety
of it's extension can be reduced to a
simple mathematical computation of
the benefits derived. If it were the
case that the United States was get
ting the worst of the bargain, it might
be the proper. thing to terminate the
treaty; but still it would be obliga-
tory to take into consideration the
interests that it has fostered and de-
| veloped, which rise almost to the dig
nifty of vested rights, and to treat
| them with the same respect that
other interests of similar origin are
usually treated by enlightened Gov
ernments. In the creation, alteration
and repeal of tariffs, for example, it is
an accepted doctrine of all schools
| that existing industries have right
| to live, and that to destroy them by
| the sudden substitution of one fiscal
| policy for another would be as unjust
| as it would be unstatesmanlike. Now,
since the Reciprocity Treaty with the
| Hawaiian Kingdom has been in force,
web of connecting interests has
| been gradually woven between the
two countries, and every one of its
strands represents some person or in
| dustry which would suffer if the
| web should be cut. The manufac-
| turing and commercial business
| of San Francisco is something
different from what it would have
been if the free exchange of products
between Honolulu and this city had
never been established, or from what
it would be if that free exchange
were interrupted. Hence, while in
the cases of the Mexican and Cuban
Treaties the United States has to cal
culate only what it would gain by es-
tablishing the new order of things
in considering the Hawaiian Treaty
it is necessary to bear in mind what
we should lose by breaking up the
existing conditions. Under the op-
Grafton of the Reciprocity Treaty the
trade with the Hawaiian Islands has
assumed such Importance that 8
hundred sailing vessels are engaged
in it under the American flag, an6
the value of exports to the Islands
amounts to $12,O0O,OO0 a year. Con
sidering the territorial insignificanct
of the Islands, compared with Other
countries equally accessible, this i:
an immense development of trade
and no one. can suppose that the
treaty has not been the main agency
in its creation. With the exception
of Great Britain, the Islands are oul
best market. But of equal import.
ance with the extent of the trade is
4
In the case of Mexico there is siren
uous opposition made to treaty O.
reciprocity because there are so many
chances for competition with the
products of this country-a state o.
affairs that does not exist with re-
pect to the Islands. They produce one
great staple which there is no hope o.
seeing produced in the United States
in quantities at all proportionate tx
the demand and it is quite the idea
sort of commerce to be able to ex.
change many products for one, since
that diversifies our own industries
and reduces foreign competition to g
minimum. The commercial position
of Great Britain is thought to be sin
gularly fortunate because she can eX'
change manufactured products fol
raw materials, and San francisco
stands in the same relation to the
Hawaiian Islands that Great Britain
does to the less advanced countrie:
with which she carries on a large
and profitable trade. Another con.
NANANA 5AONAhS OAb VI Vic lASdbE Il
the large property interests of Ameri,
cans in the Islands. They have been
all but annexed in consequence of the
commercial freedom that has existed
and the treaty could not be abrogateC
without depreciating the value O.
millions of property in the Islands
which is now in American hands
Here is another consideration thai
must be seriously thought of. 1t is true
that Americans, going to the Island:
andinvesting in sugar lands on the by
pothesis that the value they acquired
by reason of reciprocity would be per.
manent, took their chances, and i
other considerations imperatively de
manded the abrogation of the treaty
the property interests of American:
in the Islands could not be allowed
to stand in the way, because it is {
Governments first duty to protect
the properly of its citizens at home
and but a secondary one to look after