The record-union., 1891-02-08

manufactures thereof, including corn
meal and starch, rye, rye flour, buck
Wheat, buckwheat -four, barley, potatoes,
beans, peas, hay, oats, pork (salted, in
Guiding picked pork and bacon, except
ham), fish (salted, dried or pickled) cot
ton-seed oil, coal anthracite and bitumin-
ous), resin, tar, pitch and turpentine,
agricultural tools, implements and ma
chinery, mining and mechanical tools,
implements and machinery, including
stationary and portable engines and all
machinery for manufacturing and indus
trial purposes, except sewing machines,
instruments and books for the arts and
sciences, railway construction material
and equipment.
In addition, in Brazil the duty is re-
duced Is per cent. upon the following
named articles, produced or manufactured
in the United States: Lard and substi-
tutes therefor, bacon, ham, butter and
cheese, canned and preserved meats, fish,
fruits and vegetables, manufactures of
cotton, including cotton clothing; manu-
features of iron and steel, single or mixed,
not included in the free schedule; leather
and manufactures thereof, except boots
and shoes; lumber and timber and man
ufactures of wood, including cooperage,
furniture of all kinds, wagons, carts and
carriages, and manufactures of rubber.
There are some other reciprocal conces-
sions, but the recitation of the above
serves sufficiently to illustrate the value
Of the principle.
By these reciprocal provisions Brazil
abandons in our favor Sc, 0OO, 900 of inn
port duties annually. Whereas, as we
now pay Brazil S65, 1000 annually for
goods and sell her but g, 600 worth,
the belief is that under the new arrange
ment we will receive from Brazil not less
than S25,0O0,000 in goods annually, and
this sum will steadily augment to the
highest possible maximum.
Now the lesson of this partial recip-
rocal arrangement-for it is only partial
is in the response to this question: If
such mutual concession is good for us in
dealing with the Latin States of South
America, why would it not be equally
as commendable with other nations?
What earthly difference can it make to us
what nation is the buyer of our exports,
OF from whom we purchase our imports,
so long as the exchange is to our gain?
Certain articles are either on the free
list or are rated in a low tariff schedule,
according to the Mckinley blunder, the
policy being to admit them low or free,
regardless of the relations between the
countries producing the articles and the
United States. Reciprocity, however,
takes cognizance of these relations, and
does not admit articles free without some
counterbalancing benefit, which protects
our producers and enlarges our exports.
A country producing an article of ex-
port makes all other countries into which
it goes part ofits commercial territorial
area. Wherever we can export to advant-
age in exchange for a concession in favor
of an article we do not produce to greatest
advantage, we make the country buying
of us part of our trade area. 1t is not,
therefore, genuine reciprocity to say that
these areas shall exist only in countries
speaking certain tongues or in particu-
lar locality upon the globe.
1t is not question of what nation so
much as it is one of what advantage. To
make distinction between nations in
this matter is tom-foolery, for there is no
sentimentalism in trade, and whoever
talks it or thinks it is approaching idiocy.
Nearly all countries have protective
tariffs, intended to modify the effect of
the industries of one country upon those
of another. When we make a tariff we
necessarily discriminate in favor of the
production of things we make or produce
to best advantage. We then make low
tariff or establish free list, and in that
list we should discriminate in our favor
by establishing it ON the basis of recip-
rocity. A reciprocal policy thus be-
comesa protective policy, because we are
protecting our export trade by recipro-
cal relation with nation that will give it
the best showing in its market.
Il