The Portland daily press., 1886-04-05
TREATY THAT SHOULD BE AB-
ROCATED.

the terms of which RENTED the duties on
the chief products of eachnation in the ports
of the other. The treaty was to remain in
force seven years and then could be termin-
ated by either of the contracting parties by
giving twelve months notice. 1t was the
opinion of its advocates at the time of
adoption that the arrangement would prove
beneficial to the United States, and Congress
was converted to this view, largely by an
opinion submitted by the Treasury Depart
ment, wherein twas stated that the estimated
loss of revenue would be about 1000, and
as the total production of the islands could
not be largely increased, and would not
under any circumstances exceed 25,000,000
pounds per annum, that our increased ex
ports would certainly offset this amount, and
that we could afford the loss of 100000 rev.
enue which the treaty might involve.
Experience has shown, however, that the
Treasury Department was wild in its judg-
ment. In 1876, the year before the treaty
was ratified, there were exported to this
country from the Hawaiian Islands 20,97S,-
374 pounds of sugar, valued at $1,051, 1887,
and 2,074,5 pounds of rice, valued at ST.
$50, total value of $1,376,6S7. In 1885, the
exports of sugar had risen to 1886, COS
pounds, valued at $S,19s, 164, and of rice to
8,291, 1850 pounds, of the value of $404, 478
making the total value of exports that year
$s,S57, 497. The Treasury Department had
placed the limit of exports at 25,000,000
pounds in any one year, and on that basis
thought the United States could afford to
make the treaty. 1t will be seen that the
islands exported to this country more than
seven times the estimated limit last year, and
it is certain that the present year even these
figures will be considerably exceeded. Be-
fore the treaty the average annual export of
sugar from the islands to this coun-
try was 100000 pounds, and the
difference between this and 100000
600, the amount exported last
year, represents the stimulating effect of the
treaty. The Treasury Department estimat-
ed that the total annual loss of revenue by
reason of this treaty would never exceed
100000, and in that belief Congress ratified
the treaty. The amount RENTED in duties
on Hawaiian products last year was over
100000.
Now what have we received to offset this
serious loss of revenue? The expectation
was that our exports to the Islands would so
increase as to largely make amends for
our loss. Here, too, expectation has been
egregiously disappointed. For six years
prior to the treaty our exports averaged
about 100000 annually. After the treaty
was ratified they began to increase until
they reached 1858, 900 in 1883. Since then
they have been declining, and last year
amounted to only $2,700,000 But even in
1883, when they were at the maximum, they
were entirely disproportionate to the increase
of exports from the Islands to this country
From 1877 to 1885, inclusive, we have remit
ted in duties on exports from Hawaii $685.
1876, COS, while the total value of our exports to
Hawaii during the same period has been
only 22,S72,371. That is, had we made the
Hawaiians present of every dollars worth
of our exports for this time and collected
duties ON their sugar and rice we should
have been better off by over million of
dollars.
These facts and figures are admitted by
the friends of the treaty, and they undertake
to offset them in two ways 1t the first place
they say that the Hawaiian sugar plantations
are owned very largely by American citizens
and that therefore whatever benefits result
from the treaty really accrue to our own
people. In the second place they allege that
consumers in the United States have got
their sugar cheaper and that therefore the loss
in revenue has been made up indirectly to
the people. But the commission that visited
the Island in 1881 to inquire into the work
ings of the treaty after thorough examin-
alton of the matter reported that less than
one-fourth of the owners OF sugar estates and
persons engaged in the sugar business were
American citizens. With few exceptions
the business is in the hands of Germans and
English residents or natives. 80 that the
money lost to our revenue has not gone INTO
the pockets of American citizens but INTO
the pockets of aliens. The second con-
tention of the friends of the treaty is
equally false AS matter of fact since the
treaty went into effect the average price Oh
refined sugar in San Francisco has been over
two cents pound higher than in New York
where every pound has paid the full duty.
The effect of the treaty has been to create
a gigantic monopoly controlled largely by
Claus Spreckles, who has got possession of
large part Of the plantations and is working
them by coolie labor. Congress never sup
posed that these sugars would get beyond
the Pacific coast. But in 1881 6,00O,OOOs
pounds came East in 1882 $4,000, 900, the
same in 1885, in 1884 100000, and in 1885
$4,000, 900, and every pound of this sugar
which is imported free of duty enters into
direct competition with the product of the
Louisiana plantations and the duty paying
sugar of the Eastern refineries. Thus the
United States government allows Mr. Claus
Spreckles and the German and English capt.
talists resident in Hawaii to send into the
United States sugar raised by coolie labor,
the employment of which it prohibits in this
country. free of duty, to be brought into
direct competition with duty paid sugar of
the Atlantic seaboard, which is the product
of free labor. And that this privilege might
be enjoyed by these monopolists the govern
ment RENTED last year over 100000 OF
revenue, while the consumer got his sugar