Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-07-23

list has been pretty fully set forth our i'm.
mense indirect interest in the effect of
such measure upon our general foreign
trade deserves more attention than has
been given it. We invite attention to
part of that effect, such as may reasonably
be anticipated in our South American
commerce.
One reason for testing the matter
there is, that Chill and the Argentine
Republic are among the leading wool
exporting countries. A stronger reason
is, that we have the highest and most
sacred Republican and pro. ectionist
authority for maintaining, first, that an
extension of our South American trade
is highly desirable; and, secondly, that
our tariff On wool is the greatest obstacle
to that extension. The Commission ap-
pointed by President Arthur under the
act of July Z, 1884, had for its duty
Ito ascertain and report upon the
hest modes of securing more intimate
commercial relations between the United
States and the several countries of Gen.
trail and South America" In his in
structions to the Commissioners, Secre.
tary Frelinghuysen directed them to en-
deavor to negotiate reciprocity treaties as
" the means of inaugurating this ad-
vanced step in our national policy" But
not single treaty was forthcoming. In
every case the Commissioners ran against
he dead wall of our high tariff.
In their final report they admit their
entire failure, and give the reason
for it in the words: " In any con-
vention we. on our part must
or at greatly reduced rates. They are
peculiar products of those countries, X
and are precisely the two we felt we had
no authority to even consider in our me-
gotiations. More specifically, in the
report on the Argentine Repub ic, it was
said that until we were ready to admit
wool free there was no use in discussing
reciprocity treaty with that country.
The Commission certainly reported
ample testimony to bear out their con-
clusion. Take the following bit from the
statement OF an American resident in
Chill, DIR. ]. H. Trumbull, for twenty
eight years practicing physician in
that country:
@. What has been your observation as
regards American trade here? A. Since
| arrived it has grown beautifully less.
Q. What is the cause? A. think it
is the want Of a return cargo from here.
There is a desire on the part of mer-
chants and every body to bring American
goods here, but there is no way Of paying
for them. You have clapped, some years
ago, a duty on copper and wool, and the
consequence was that vessels that came
here-Hemenway's, Fitzgerald's ETC.,
from Boston and Baltimore-had to give
up this trade. Everybody wants to i'm
port American goods. All the people
say, "Why can't We go back fifteen or
sixteen years ago, when we could have
those A nerican goods ?"
Q. You have only wool that we can
take? A. That is all. You undersell
us in copper; and the hides are all used
here.
@. Can our Government do anything
except to modify the tariff? A. No, sir.
Q. How would it be to establish a
direct line OF steamers? A. Hemen-
way tried it. 1t was failure.
And Mr.. Edward A. Hopkins, for
forty years a resident of the Plate Val
ley, in the midst of his rather hysterical
calls for subsidies and the restoration of
the duty on coffee, makes it clear that
| the real trouble with our trade with the
Argentine Republic is our tariff on wool.
In his recent address before the Cham
Der of Commerce in this city, he asked
only for revision of the duty, asserting
that the result would be "a Jubilee
of enthusiasm manifested towards
us throughout the whole Argentine
land" and that ''our commerce would
| at once increase almost fabulously." He
had just before remarked eff Congress
declare for free wool, which is not to be
supposed, we have nothing more to say
on this account" We should think not,
for if simple revision would make q
Jubilee" no language would be left to
describe the effect of making wool en-
tirely free.
The Argentine Republic exported in
1885, 2S3, ,O47 900 pounds of wool, of which
We took 10, ,222, ,Sl7 pounds, or about one
twenty.eighth. Very strikingly, though
naturally, our entire trade with the Ar
gentine Republic last year was just about
one-twenty- eighth of the total foreign
| commerce of that country, or little less
than per cent. In 1860 we had much
larger proportion, about per cent. If
we had only held our own all these years
we should have had trade with the
Plate River OF more than $17 900, 900 in
1887. If we had shared in the foreign
trade of Chill in 1886 in the same proper
tion as in 1850, the amount would
have been $l0,000,000 instead of the
$4 1890, 900 it actually was. On the simple
basis, thus, of twenty-eight years ago our
glutted markets would have been eased
last year of at least So 1000, 900 worth of
products, ii we had only been in position
to take the pay Chill and the Argentines
offer US. And it ought not to be ques-
ton OF our trade merely holding its own.
Every one knows that if we had not de-
liberatey shut ourselves out of the
South American markets our old proper
ton would have become greatly enlarged.
England's trade with the Argentine Re-
public has increased as much as 46 per
cent. in single year. So with ours if, with
our commanding lead of thirty years
ago, We had kept on as an active COM
petitor In the market, willing to buy as
well as sell. So that, in estimating the
loss we have brought upon ourselves in
the restriction upon our foreign trade by
our wool tariff, we are justified, in the
case OF the two countries mentioned, in
speaking of the possibility of added ex-
ports not to the amount of $4,000 900
merely, but Of vastly mere.
AS we said at the beginning, this line
OF argument is originally and legitimate
ly prOtectionist and Republican. And it
ehould be remembered that the effort to
push our trade in South America-an eff.
fort that means, if it means ANYTHING
lowered or abolished duties-still has the
HI