The morning call., 1890-07-26
BLAINE'S REPLY,
An Answer to a Recent Letter
From Senator Frye.
Reciprocity Treaties With Latin American
Countries Again Urged.
The Tariff Bill In the SeDate-YanCe and
Mcpherson Vigorously Attack
the Measure
Special Dispatches to THE MoHSISe CALL

WASHINGTON. July Ex-senator Frye to-
day received letter from Secretary Blaine
in reply to his of recent date. Mr.. Blaine
says, in part: 'Y on ask me what assurance
| have as to Spain's willingness to enter
into reciprocal arrangements of trade with
the United States. Your question sur
prises me, for you cannot have forgotten
that only six years ago the Prime Minister
of Spain. i'll his anxiety to secure free ad-
mission to our markets for the sugar of
Cuba and Porto Rico, agreed to very ex-
tensive treaty of reciprocity with Mr.. Fos-
ter, then our Minister at Madrid. In the
year before-in 1SS4-a very admirable
treaty of reciprocity was negotiated by
General Grant and Mr.. Trescott, United
States Commissioners, with the Republic of
Mexico, as treaty well considered in all
its parts and all its details. whose results
would, l believe, have proved highly ad-
vantageous to both countries. In view of
the pending discussion it is a somewhat
singular circumstance that both Of these
treaties failed to secure the approval
of Congress, and failed for the eX-
press reason that both provided for
the free admission of sugar. Congress
would not then allow single pound of
sugar to come in free of duty under any
circumstances whatever. And now the
proposition is to open our ports free to
everybody's sugar, and to do it with such
rapidity that We are not to have mo
ments time to see if we cannot make a
better trade-a trade by which we may pay
for at least part of the sugar in the prod
ucts of American farms and shops.
Our change of opinion certainly has
been remarkable in so brief period. In
deed the only danger OF our not securing
advantageous treaties of reciprocity now is
the possible belief on the part of those
countries that we are so anxious for
free sugar that by patient waiting they
can secure all they desire without
money and without price. Fearing
that result, | sought an interview with the
eight Republican members OF the Commit
tee on Ways and Means more than five
months ago l endeayored to convince
them that it wonld be expedient and wise
to leave to the President an opportunity to
see what advantageous arrangements Of
reciprocal trade could be effected, but l was
uuduit W ptISudue tllt COuulttee W laht
my view.
at is, think, a very grave mistake to
oppose this reciprocal proposition. Far
from the fear that it may conflict in some
way with the policy of protection. the
danger is, think, wholly in the opposite
direction. The value of the sugar we an
nually consume is enormous. Shall we pay
for it all in cash or shall we seek reciprocal
arrangements by which large part of it
may be paid for in pork and beef and flour,
in lumber and in salt and iron. in shoes and
calico and furniture and thousands of other
things? l think the latter mode is the
highest form of protection and the best
way to promote trade.
When shall We enlarge our commercial
intercourse with that great continent, South
America, if we do not now make begin
ming? III we now give away the duty on
sugar, as we have already given away the
duties on coffee and hides and rubber, and
get nothing in exchange which shall be
profitable to farm and factory in the
United States, what shall be our JUS
tificati0n for that policy? You have
recently received gratulations-in which
| cordially join-on carrying the Shipping
Bill through the Senate. Do you not think
line OF ships generously aided by the
Government will have a better pros pact for
profit and permanence If we can give to
them outward cargOes from the United
States, and not confne them to inward
cargoes from Latin American