The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1886-03-20
T Fl Il
Mr.. JOHN E. SEARLES AND THE Reel
PR0CITY TREATY.

Mr.. John E. Searles is the only man
who has attacked the Hawaiian Reel
procity Treaty at Washington with sta
tistics. He was one of the United States
Commission of 1888, who visited the
Islands to report upon the alleged frauds in
the working of the treaty, it having been
stated by the San Francisco Chronicle"
and affirmed by the Eastern refners,
that our planters Systematically vio-
lated its provisions by shipping refined
sugar instead of raws to the American
market. It was likewise alleged that
sugar was imported, refined and shipped
as Hawaiian raws under the treaty.
Mr.. Searles was the representative of the
Brooklyn reiners on the Commission,
and was from first to last prejudiced.
The facts were against him, however,
and the Commission reported that the
charges OF fraud were without founda-
ton. But Mr.. Searles still kept up his
opposition, and we now find him holding
a brief against the treaty before the sub
committee of the Ways and Means Com
mittee of the House of Representatives,
to which has been assigned the duty of
investigating its working.
Mr.. Searles' argument was published
in full by the Chronicle" having evil
IDENTIFY been furnished to that journal.
Taking his objections to the treaty based
upon statistics of imports and revenue, it
is clear that this gentleman promulgates
a fallacy. He argues that the treaty was
ratified upon the understanding that the
annual export of Islands sugar to the
States under its operation would not
greatly exceed the annual export to the
same market prior toits going into effect.
This position is manifestly absurd. The
policy of the treaty was to develop the
sugar industry in the Islands by giving
re- bonus to American capital to invest
there s55sf-ssupply the American market.
elAOAS anu he =, -.
If this had notseoeeen the direct result an
ticipated from t6e 81 treaty it is ridiculous
to suppose that tbisIsAG Government would
have surrendered so large proportion
of iHRreVenue as it did, ftl RS, placing nearly
all American products andft ttli,,nuis'c'ure
on the free list, simply to theay az Bonn
mercial reciprocity with the v. eSashington
Government. According,S 10 Mr.. Searles,
the United States we-ds to forfeit 1870, 900
yearly revenue ana11 Hawaii one-third OF
its total incouSdle, without any one being
the better e FOR the sacrifice on either side.
This is bins definition OF commercial reci-
pverotlty.
- Starting out with this fallacy, Mr..
Searles goes on to demonstrate by fig
ures how this understanding between
. the Governments was taken advantage
of by Hawaiian planters, and by that
naughty American citizen, Colonel
Spreckels, to injure the United States
revenue and enrich themselves without
pooling their profits with Eastern REIN
ers. Instead of sugar production remain
ing stationary, it rapidly increased under
the encouragement of the Treaty, and
by consequence, the United States
revenue was minus the amount OF
duty a corresponding quantity of sugar
imports would have paid if Hawaiian
raws had not been on the free list.
This is simply childish talk, and can
IMPOSE upOIl llO OllC wiz uAAuCAottbiihE
anything whatever OF the reciprocal
working of the Commercial treaty be-
tween this country and the United
States The treaty did precisely what
it was intended to do. 1t stimulated
trade between the countries and opened
new and profitable fields for American
capital 1t is not pertinent to inquire on
which side the balance of advantage
lies. Upon the face of the treaty itself
the advantage is conspicuously on the
American side; but il, by reason of their
own pernicious fiscal system, American
manufacturers have not been able to
avail themselves OF their special adj
vantages, who is to blame for it but
themselves? Hawaiian planters do not
control tariff legislation in the States /;
and if American manufacturers load
themselves down with protective letters,
so that they cannot hold absolute pos
session of the Hawaiian market, although