Gloucester County Democrat., 1891-09-17
Give us ReaI Reeinraeitx,

Our investment in reciprocity amounts
TO about $53,0O0,0O0. which is the amount
of the sugar revenue, plus the extra cost of
the domestic sugar product under the old
law, minus the sugar bounty under the Nc
Kinley act. Sugar alone is our stock 10
reciprocal trade; for it alone was pnt on the
free list and the basis of our negotiations.
This was about the only commodity sub
ject to duty which was imported in consid-
erable quantities from the countries with
special reference to which the third section
OF the Mckinley law was enacted.
When the new law was under considera-
lion its advocates protested against the
making of comparisons between the value
of our trade with European countries and
that with the countries to the south. They
said that the purpose of the comparisons
was to belittle the project. That may or
may not have been the purpose; but it was
certainly the effect. There was, however,
another, and an avowed, purpose, which
was to show that if reciprocity with South
American Indians is good thing, reciproc-
ity with European Caucasians would be a
much better thing.
These comparisons may be cruel, but
those who believe in genuine reciprocity
will probably be forgiven for making them,
inasmuch as the double purpose of reciproc-
ity is to obtain cheap supplies and to open
other markets for bushels of wheat and a
barrel of pork Last year our exports of
domestic merchandise amounted to S872,-
27O,283; and OF this Great Britain and Ire
land took about s$444, $4,000, or more than
half, while Central and South America,
Mexico and the West Indies took $67 ,0O0.-
900, or little more than 10 per cent. This
will Indicate TO any one but Knight of
Reciprocity where the American surplus
finds, and must find, a market
But the new scheme is to benefit the
farmer. 1t is necessary then to analyze the
exports. Great Britain and Ireland bought
cattle from US to the value of $2S, ,622, ,275 !;
Mexico and the West Indies took 1928, ,6S7.
OF sheep, the United Kingdom took $1O4-
855; Mexico, West Indies and South Amer
lea, $59,573 Great Britain and Ireland
took $S,167,775 in corn Mexico, South
America and the West Indies took 81 ,212,-
832. of wheat and wheat flour the United
Kingdom purchased S6l ,O63, ,s17, while we
sent TO South America, Mexico and the
West Indies S6, 756, ,042, about six-sevenths
of which went to the West Indies. Great
Britain and Ireland took of our cotton
$40, ,S63, 1888, and Mexico took 81 PSI ,972.
And so the report for last year runs as to
bacon, hams, lard and everything else pro-
duced on the farm save fresh and picked
pork, of which South America and the West
Indies took about $75O,OOO more than was
taken by the United Kingdom. As to some
of these products, we found no market
whatever in many of the reciprocity coun-
tries south of us, while Great Britain and
Ireland are shown to have purchased large
ly OF everything but live hogs. OF hogs,
however, we exported only 81, 1,145,63O to all
countries
Europe is the customer for the surplus
product of American industry. and about
the only customer for the surplus product
of the American farm and the United
Kingdom alcne takes cattle, wheat and
-four worth nearly $2,70O,O00 more than
the value of ali our exports of every sort
to Mexico, Central and South America and
the West Indies. which latter countries
produce but little that we want and want
but little that we produce. Yet free trade
with those countries is a patriotic policy,
while reasonable tax upon the things
which we take from Europe is the device
of treason. Protection weaves a tangled
web. louisville Courier Journal.