The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1892-06-08

enlarged freedom of commercial relations be-
tween two OF the principal nations OF Europe,
had earned for himself aud was justly entitled
to the name of THE international Man" This
treaty lasted with numerous notifications and
one renewal in its course until 1882, when 1t
was allowed to expire by the term of its own
limitation Some time before this expired
Joint high commission was appointed by the
two governments TO provide means for Its con-
tinuance, or at least to extend a scheme or
principle of the same. that is, reciprocity.
This high commission sat at Paris and spent
many months in examining both rates and
wares to which the treaty related, with view
TO some mutual agreement upon tarin duties
which might suit both the high contracting
parties. But in vain. No agreement could be
reached, although it is clear enough that the
administrations then in conduct of the govern
ment both in France and England, heartily
sympathized with the object or the com mission
and desired it's success The treaty OF looO fell.
That OF Feb q, 1882, which succeeded It, pro-
vides thar the customs tariff upon goods. prod
ucts of manufactures of France and the
United Kingdom imported into either, shall
henceforth be regulated By the internal legis'
Iation of the TWO countries respectively. Ihls
was the end of the international tariff. Each
country thereafter took q separate course
Great Britain toward free trade. France toward
the most strin gent prohibitory high tariff; both
discarded reciprocity. One OF the most recent
reciprocity treaties was that between the
United States and Great Britain. This conven-
ton concerning our trade with Canada was yet
also not confined to one or two articles
like hides aud molasSes, II comprised
a very large class of commodities. BY Its terms,
as between Canada and the United States. all
food products were placed upon the free list:
AL raw materials OF every kind we're admitted
free of duty. And there considerable
list of articles designated as half manufactured
or partly manufactured which were made
free of duty also. An examination OF the pro-
visions of this treaty will sho that Is anected
q very much greater volume OF trade and con
cerned directly or indirectly much more num-
erous commercial constituencies than all the
reciprocity treaties, so called, made during this
administration. This treaty remained IN force
from its date, Sept II, 1854, until March ~
1866 when it was ended by notice
its conditions, declaring our dissatisfaction
Herewith. This Canadian convention was the
last considerable trial of the scheme OF reel
procity until the recent negotiations COM
menced under the act OF 1890.
Some Failures OF Reciprocity.
Various causes have led to the abandonment
OF reciprocity. Although the utmost care may
be taken in the provision for sush treaty, the
two countries who are parties thereto shall be
equally benefited thereby, yet the practical
effects are often not responsive. IL frequently
happens after the treaty mas D6cI IN lOICc iON
some time. that by the course OF trade, by the
change of taste, fashion or custom with respect
to the goods Affected by II, decided advantages
accrue to one country over the other, and once
begun these advantages tend to lurch over
more and more to the gaining side, and this
may not be at all the side OF the richer, or
stronger, or more populous of the two oouu-
tries. This occurred in the case OF the treaty
of reciprocity between the United States and
Canada, which was ended by notice from us
many years before IL would have expired BY
limitation, because Ii continued to operate to
our serious loss and increasing disadvantage.
Again, the two governments who are parties to
such a treaty in making the same, necessarily
subject themselves to a loss OF revenue by the
exemption of articles otherwise dutlable. Ihls
induces imposition OF duties or taxes upon
other commodities, either foreign or domestic,
which may become more necessary and salable
than those exempted by the terms OF
the reciprocity treaty, end this new and
further IMPOSITION of taxes creates irritation.
dissatisfaction, ending In the disuse and over
throw of the treaty stipulations which stand in
the way of what is deemed a proper adjust.
ment of taxation in one or the other of the two
countries. This occurred in the case OF En-
gland and France, above spoken Of. The ex.
emption of what may be perhaps called reel
procity commodities leads year after year to
a regular supply, mutual aud interchangeable.
of the same wares and products. The market
grows weary and droops under this sameness
and monotony. Consumers in both countries
get tired Of it, and this causes in time the pur-
chase OF goods and wares-even those dutlsble
and thus produces non-user and disparage-
ment of the reciprocity agreement. Again. the
manufacturer and producers OF the goods nade
free of taxes by reciprocity in the two
countries naturally control and indeed have d
monopoly of their special markets, being en-
ablsd to undersell the dealers OF other coun.
! tries. Having such privileges and no fear OF
competition. they become negligent about the
character of their wares; these are allowed "a
deteriorate, to become gradually worse and
! worse, so that to designate certain packages as
reciprocity goods comes at last TO be considered
in itself brand of infsriority. Beside this the
various commercial nations OF the world con
/ stitute a large commonwealth, in which, al
/ though the members are amendable 10 theii
/ respective municipal statutes and ordinances
yet there exist its own distinctive laws and regu
/ lations. The members of this commonwealth
/ lock somewhat awry, some what askence. upor
an arrangement between any two OF their mum
! Der diplomatic in form, international IN name
/ which can have Tor its only object the confer
| ring of special privileges upon the contractlni
| parties and the exclusion of all others. Iht
other commercial countries make their accoun
of this, by them deemed partial preference, IL
| measures of retaliation, sometimes by legis
lative, sometimes by non-legislative methods
| Trade in the merchandise affected by reel
! pTOcity is suddenly diverted by circumstances
!
New demands and fresh supplies of the SAM
| materials come into existence, so that the gen
eral prices are not much. if atall, influenced b.
the special terms only between two countries
Also such conditions and restrictions are place.
upon the trade of these two countries will
others, in other commodities, that the anticipai
ed benefits of reciprocity are more than counter
vailed by losses otherwise. These are some OF tn
reasons. very potent disclosed by study o
the actual history of treaties of this kind, VIII
they have proved transitory in their ez
istence. These defects in this scheme ar
fatal, and are not peculiar TO any form of gov
eminent to auy style of negotiation. or to an
particular species of trade. They necessarily
inhere in the subject matter aud in the partie
| to such agreements. The treaty making powe
OF this government is one heretofore not YER
frequently made use OF. Treaties having beei
once made upon ordinary subjects with the ole
established nationaiities Of the world haT
stood for the most part without change, but ii
these latter days. since the passage OF the Nc
Kinley bill in 1890. the treaty making powe
has suddenly assumed very pretentiOus pro
portions and great activity. To use languag
uttered not long since in this chamber. thu
power affords the only means of floating tn
otherwise sinking fiscal system of this admins
tratiou, and it is authoritatively stated that re
ciprocity is the only means which have enables
AZ A.rwa hnrAnU n