New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-10-17
RECIPROCITY IN EUROPE.
BASED UPON PROTECTION AND IMPOSSIBLE
UNDER FREE TRADE.


There are two questions in regard to the sys-
TEN Of protective tariffs and commercial reclproc-
inv actually in operation in the United States
which do not remember TO have seen agltated al
leost not so thoroughly as they deserve. One Is
whether the existing practice of foreign nations
is not a sufficient argument. by way of example,
AGAINST anv modification of our present system
The other is whether the existing practice of for
eirn nations ought not to prevent, from the ne
cessitics of the case, any present attempt az an
roqatinc our own system even by progressive MOD
ifcations.
The party which would do away with the pres
emit protective tariff forgets that our country Is
no longer made up Of a number of distinct COLO
MES which, by their united efforts, have gained
independence and slowly struggling into one
national existence. The Democratic party. which
truly belongs to the first era of the American ne
public. inasmuch it has since then learned MOTH
inc and FORGOTTEN nothing apparently Judges every
thing without reference to the changed STATUS OF
our country among the nations of the world 9th
r,,,ise the convention at Chicago could never have
had the patience to listen. much less to give Its
votes TO the resolution declaring it TO be funda
mental principe of the Democratic party that the
Federal Government shall have no constitutional
mower TO impose or collect tariff duties except for
Purposes of revenue only" To declare a principle
Of this kind in face of the existing practice OF
fore;cn nations is to forget that the United States
form mart of the society OF nations. IL is equiv
alent to declaring that foreign Ministers shall
20 abroad in primitive shirt-sleeves and homcspun
A constitutional limitation of this sort could
only help permanently to shut ont the United
States from their lawful part in the life of civil
lied nations. It would take away from our Gov
eminent what are practically its only weapons
Of
industries and commerce. Even Golden, who de-
sired that the laws of spontaneous competition
amsng individuals should be the only limit TO
freedom Of trade and labor. did not DENY the right
of governmental interference whenever the promo
ton Of commercial intercourse between nations was
at stake. This was plainly brought out in the
discussion which followed Lord Salisburys
Nav discourse concerning the "commonsense Pro-
lection of France and the injury resulting 10 Brit
sh commerce from lack of some similar "defen-
sive weapon" The sitting of his speech in favor
Of policy Of tariff retaliation, which would GER
tainly not be :" for the purposes of revenue only y
seems to have passed unnotced by the Democrats
in convention assembled month and half later
viii content myself with single citation from
a theoretical Free Trader. writing in The Sltur-
raw Review of July O. 1t shows what broad priv
ileses of action are considered to be the evil
dent right of Government in fpe-tradng
England at a time when the Democratic
wisdom of America is celebrating its narrow fun
damental principle wherewith to liWit the con-
stitutional power Of our own Federal Govern
ment:
If you cannot have universal Free Trade it is
as wcll tohave reciprocal Free Trade, and so Mr..
Bright thought when be suggested and Mr. Cob
den when he undertook to negotiate the Comper-
cial Treaty with France Theorettc economfsts
from Adam Smith to Mr.. Fawcett, have admitted
fl,af hef ms he eyUpdipnt M
pose retahatory duties there is nothing CONTRARY
Z economic principle in doing So Adam s, smith
said Mr. Tawcett, that if our manufactured goods
are kept out, for instance, Of the American mar
kets by heavy protective duties, there would bc
with i he view New Of Impeding the importation Of
American produce"
The testimony Of England alone should GER
tainly do away with the ridiculous and dangerous
pretention to constitutionasm Put forward by
The Democratic party in the present campaign,
and. II I mistake not, Mr. Clevelsnd's letter Of
acceptance implicitly tries 70 undo the mischief
wrought by the convention. Clearly the Amen-
can Constitution can refuse power to the Fed
eral Government which involves right to exist
ence as nation among nations
need scarcely observe that Reciprocity, under
all conditions supposes Protection to begin with,
In spite of English efforts to make 1t out
variety of, Free-Trade. At the annual meeting Of
the Golden Club, July 6, Sir Lyon Playfar read
with gusto that part Of the Democratic platform,
Just received, which denounces the Mckinley bill
Thereupon Sir Wilfred lawson with charac-
teristic attempt at humor, declared the Protec-
ZIONIST system an object Of legitimate suspicion
account of the many names under which it goes
protection, fair trade, reprsals, reciprocity com
mercial union"
Apart from all questions of powers and rights,
A. n1utio v,o1ic nod
on the American people by Mr.. Cleveland and his
party will bear careful study in the light of the
existing practice Of all nations but England. And
even England as Lord Salisbury but too plainly
indicated is not far from being forced to swing
into line with the rest Of the world. Granting
In theory that our bone industries might thrive
for a time without the present Protection, it does
not follow in practice that tariffs can safely be
reduced to the purposes Of revenue only. The
United States must be able henceforth to take
equal and independent position among the other
nations and withou, John Bull as a sponsor
Commercial reciprocity has become an essential
part Of the worlds politics 1t is foundation
stone in our present system of Protection its pres
ence is the strength Of the Triple Alliance in Cen
trail Europe and its absence is the weakness of the
Franco Russian friendship. Now the means and
the measure of commercial reciprocity are pro-
tectlve tariff which admits OF notifications az
home in return for concessions won by treaties
abroad.
To say that this use Of the natural means for
establishing and holding equality with other
nations is contrary to the policy Of the founders
of our country is vertabe sample of Bourbon
ism. That policy. as is we'll known, was to avoid
entangling the political destinies of America with
those of Europe. why" asked Washington in
bis Farewell Address, by Intervening our dcs-
tiny with that of any part Of Europe, entan9le
our peace and prosperity in the tolls of European
ambition, rivalship, interest or caprice p The
most ancepf .Jefersonian will NOT maintain that