Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1891-03-19
RECIPROCITY AND PROTECTION
A Sarcastic Inquirer Obtains Some En-
1ightenment.

The author of scientigc and philosoph-
ical dictionary submitted his work to
the inspection of the late Baron Cunjar,
!ghc, opening the book at hap-hazard,
looked at the word 'crab, which the
author defined thus: ''Crab, a red colored
shell fish which walks backwardly." Said
the baron, Your definition, Monsieur, is
perfectly correct, excepting always that q
crab IS not fish, that it IS not red, and
that it does not walk backward" An
ciprocity which is about as nearly correct
as ''crab." 1t is but necessary to print his
letter to make his error patent:
How do the principle reciprocity as
enunciated by Secretary Blaine accord
witch the principles of protection as enun-
ciated by the republican platform of 1888?
1t seems to me if tariff is necessary to
save the protected industry from ruin free
competition will not be less ruinous under
the conditions CT reciprocity?
''You say tariff is necessary to protect
our wool growers, for example, from the
ruinous competition of cheap wool. Still
South America may send US free wool if
we may send free cotton goods to South
America. In other words, do you not say,
You may ruin our wool-growers if you will
allow us to ruin your cotton manufacturers.
And thus build one industry at the expense
of another.
The opening clause of the treaty of recip
rCcity between the United States and
Brazil reads thus:
WHEREAS, Persuant to section g. act of
congress, approved Oct. l, 1860, entitled
an act to reduce the revenue and equalize
duties on imports, and for other purposes,
the secretary of state of the United States
of America communicated to the United
States of Brazil the action of congress of
the United States of America with a view
to secure a reciprocal trade in declaring
the articles enumerated in said section 3,
to-wit: sugars, molasses, coffee, and hides,
to be exempt from duty upon their i'm
portation into the United States of
America
Mr. Inquirer should have observed, be-
fore writing his sarcastic letter, that wool
is mot in it, that is to say, not in the
list of articles which the United States is
to admit free of duty from Brazil in re-
turn for Brazil admitting certain United
States products free of duty, or lower
duties than heretofore have been levied.
The third clause of the treaty defines
the articles to be admitted free into Brazil,
they are these:
Schedule of Articles to be admitted
free into Brazil-W heat, wheat -four, corn
or maize and the manufacture thereof, in
Guiding corn meal and starch; rye, rye
flour, buckwheat, buckwheat -four and
barley; potatoes, beans and peas; hay and
oats pork, sailed, including picked pork
and bacon, except hams; fish, sailed, dried
or packed; cotton seed oil, coal, anthracite
II tar Itnl f,,r,
pentine; agricultural tools, implements
and machinery; mining and mechanical
tools, implements and machinery including
stationary and portable engines, and all
machinery for manufacturing and inlus-
trial purposes, except sewing machines;
instruments and books for the arts and
sciences; railway construction material
and equipments.
Cotton goods are not on the Brazilian
free list
Brazil has no manufactures of cotton,
worth speaking of, so that her factories
will not be closed by the admission of
United States cotton goods at reduction
of Is per cent. from the rates previously
existing. So Mr.. Inquirer may learn that
his crab does not walk backward.
If Mr.. Inquirer will consult Webster
Dictionary he will find that reciprocity is
not an equivalent of free trade, though the
free trade liar, who seems fond of visiting
Flint, Iowa, says that it is. Reciprocity
is defined by Webster to be ''equal rights
or benefits, to be equally yielded or en-
joyed." We ask Mr.. Inquirer's attention
to this definition.
For years we have admitted Brazil's
coffee free to the United States; taking
one year with another, we have pur-
chased three-fourths of its produc-
ton of coffee, and have not imposed
a cent of duty on it. Great Britain,
which has purchased most of the re-
naming fourth, has levied duty on
every pound imported to her shores So
that we have allowed Brazil to enjoy
certain rights and benefits as Webster
has it, but she has not yielded" any to
Us. To make things even, to establish |
reciprocity, she now consents to admit !
some of our goods duty free, and to admit |
others at lower rates than formerly. But |
VIC do not promise to admit any Brazilian
products duty free whose importation will
iDjure cur trade In wool, or in anything
else we can produce sufficiently, nor does |
Brazil promise to admit free, or at lower
duties, what would injure her home in
dustries, for such dealing would not re-
suit in "equal benefits or rights equally |
yielded or enjoyed" The free-trade
liar has again been deluding Mr..
Inquirer. We again must warn the peo-
pic of Flint, Iowa, againt the lures of this |
frequent visitant of their village.