The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1890-06-24

occupies itself in any degree with /
political questions. We ought to
be able to expect that the mis-
statements Of fact and hollow mis-
representations which have been so
long current would finally disap-
pear and be forgotten now that
their work has been accomplished.
Bot that IS still too much to hope
Future campaigners will probably
still refer to past attempts to "sell
the country's independence" and
the Bulletin will still occasionally
expatiate on the folly of binding
ourselves not to make treaties
without the consent of the United
States.
We are of course not aware what
the policy of the present Ministry
| VIII be, On the subject of treaty re-
lations with the United States.
There is probably danger that
nothing at all will be done. We
cannot help regarding such con-
tingency as misfortune for this
country. The alarm which was
lately felt and still is felt in this
country with regard to the tariff on
sugar, is only fresh proof of the
perllous situation of country
whose fortunes all hang upon the
issue of single venture. This is a
condition of affairs which free
trade with the United States would
inevitably do much to relieve us
from. Indeed, free trade with the
United States is perhaps an indis-
pensable prerequisite to the devel-
opment of certain Industries In this
kingdom, that of small fruits for in
stance. Everyone knows what re-
ciprocity has done for the sugar
industry. There is no reason why
it should not do as much for other
industries.
The United States Government
is firmly committed to a protective
policy and while we believe that
tariff reform snd tariff reduction
are justly making progress and will
continue to do so, yet it should not
be forgotten that those movements
are not directly aimed at the pro-
tective principle, and are not likely
to affect it for. very many years to
come. It is far from certain that
the United States Senate will pass
the Mckinley bill with its free
sugar and bounty clause. If it
does not do so, there will never be
a more favorable opportunity for
pushing some treaty similar in its
provision to that already proposed,
than is offered now when all the
branches of government are con-
trolled by a party peculiarly
friendly to these islands. Our ex-
peetation would be not that these
| islands would share in bounty
but that if any such treaty already
existed with this country the prob
ability that the United States
would ever attempt to protect its
own sugar industry by bounty
would be sensibly diminished. On
the other hand there Is no hkeli.
hood that the United States will
leave their own sugar industry un-
protected so that it seems pretty
clear that with such a treaty as
that proposed, the sugar industry
of this country would be as safe as
treaties can make it.
There are persons who imagine
that the planters would be solely
or chiefly benefited by closer treaty
relations with the United States
This is an error due partly to the
want of reflection. partly to the
natural jealousy which the poor
feel toward the rich. We are not
disposed to censure this severely
The wealthy is not spotless, and il
is as true now as it was eight hun,
dred years ago that it is easier fol
a camel to go through the eye of q
needle. than for rich man to
enter into the Kindgom of Heaven
But the notion that the rich profit
solely by the treaty is very great
mistake. A blow to sugar will hit
the poor first and bit them hardest
Long before any planter has miss
ed a dollar from his dividends. the
native fruit sellers on the corners
will lose half their sales.
| We believe that the present Leg.
islature is friendly to close treaty
relations with the United States
and that majority of it would be