Waterbury evening Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1887-1895, 1890-07-26
Mr.. BLAINR'S LETTER
He Writes Again to Senator
Frye OH Reciprocity.
THE SUGAR PLAN EXPLAINED
Spain and Mexico Willing to Negotiate
With the United States

The Secretary Of ststa's Present Views
Given ia the Ways AID SleRRs Conn
nnittee Last February-Hs Would Like
to Try Friendly Barter when Huying
uEar--A Word About shipping.
WASHINGTON, July Ex-senator Frye
has received the following letter
from Secretary Blaine in further eluci-
dation of the reciprocity question:
BAR HARBoR. Me-. July "A, 1890.
DEAR Mr.. FRYE:-
have your reply to my letter and
am glad that the essential part of 1t
has been given to the press.
You ask me what assurance 1 have as
to Spain's Willingness to enter into re-
ciprocAl arrangements of trade with
the United States. Your ques tiou sur
prisea me, for you cannot have forgot
ten thar only six years ago the Prime
Minister of Spain, iu his anxiety to So
cure free admission to our markets for
the sugar of Cuba and Porto Rico,
agreed to q very extensive treaty of re-
ciprocity with Mr.. John w. Foster,
then our Minister at Madrid.
4 year before-in 1854 very sd-
mirable treaty IT FsOiRroeity was ne
gotiated by General Grant and MF,
William II. Trsscot, as United States
Commissioners, with the Republic of
Mexioo-a treaty well considered in all
it's parts and all its details--whOse re-
suits would. believe, have proved
highly advantageous to both countries.
In view of the pending discussion it
10 o somewhat singular cireumstaRce
that both these treaties of reciprocity
failed to secure the approval Of Con-
Hreps, and failed for the cypress reason
that both provided for the free admits
sion of sugar. Congress would not
then allow n single pound of sugar to
come in free of duty under any circum-
stances whatever.
And now the proposition is to open our
ports free to every body's sugar, and do
It with such rapidity that We are not to
have moments time to see If we can
make II better trade-a trade by which
we may pay for at least part of the
sugar in the products of American
farms and shops.
Our change of opinion has certainly
been remarkable in 50 brief a period.
Indeed the only danger of our not Sc
curing advantageous treaties of recip-
rocity now is the possible belief On
the part of those countries that we are
anxious for free sugar that by
patient waiting they can secure all
they desire without money and with
out price.
Fearing that result sought an inter.
fto" Plth INC elk1V hopuOllChn mem
bers OF the Committee on Ways and
Means more than Ave months ago--to be
exact, on the 10th day Of last February.
l sndeRvored to convince them that 1t
would be eXpedient and wise to leave to
the President, as the treaty making
power, an opportunity to see what adj
vantageous arrangements of reoipro-
cal trade could be effected. i was I'M
able to persuade the committee
circumstance ROW because it has been
charged in many quarters that the
suggestion for reciprocity came too
late. In fact, my effort was made be-
fore the Tariff bill was reported to the
House or even framed in committee.
1t Is, Think, very gravel mistake TO
oppose this reciprocal proposition
touching sugar from the fear that it
may conflict In some way with the pol
icy OF protection. The danger is, l
think, wholly in the oppo site direction.
Let US see what Is proposed. Our Gov
eminent has heretofore collected a
heavy duty from sugar-amountingo one
year, in the aggregate, to SOS, OOO, 900
and sveragi. $50, 900, 900 per annun
for Il considerable period. We wish
now to cheaper sugar by removing the
duty.
The value of the sugar We annually
consume Is enormous. Shall We pay
for it all in cash or shall we seek re-
ciprocal arrangement by which u large
part of it may be paid for in pork and
beef and flour, in lumber and salt and
iron in shoes and calico and furniture,
and II thousand other thingsi In short,
shall we pay for it all In cash or try
friendly barter in partl | think the
latter mode is the highest form of pro
lection and the best way to promote
trade.
my first, because you have taken an ac-
tive and most int ligent interest in the
increase of our trade with South Amer
lea. When shall we enlarge our com
mercial intercourse with the great
continent If we do not now make a
beginningi II 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
the farm or the factory in the United
States, what shall be our justification
tor the policyi
You have recently received oongratu-
lRtions-in which ! cordially Joined
on carrying the Shipping bill through
the Senate. Do you think that a line
of ships generously aided by the Gov
eminent will have n better prospect for
profit and permanence, if we can give
them outward cargoes from the United
States and not eonfine them to inward
cargoss from Latin Americai
am, sincerely yours,
JAMES G. BLAINE.