New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-03-12
THE WANING EXPORT TRADE.
WHAT THE PARTY IN POWER HAS Dun L.

Co>cr-Nf FPS TO PONDER lhD'N
,oss Is RussIAs GAIN.
,n, -r,rcRAPH TO THE TRIBrNEl
WASHINGTON March n-Ihat 'he Auiii''''9'0 ''O
90 confronted by a most disasreeapie u"eHnihd anu
- -, b,, a most disagreeaoe prospect, on ac-
-. - tho action OF Germany and france IN en-
N o.,car "a tile and fresh bee. and or the
GUMS ,ho, several other countries will follow
go ovamne is well known. The most II nov
49, o,,v amusing statement yet publshed III resdru
INV tliro of the Administration on this subject
- Tho, which represents that President CIeVelahu
.,s somewhat indignant at the attitude oil these
,r,ee which are favored by duties in the VIII
~ Low " and that "he feels hurt that kindness
,ould be thus repaid in injury, and hat the weak
oes Of our position caused by reduction OF tarlli
,,orues which these countries get the benefit OF,
should be taken advantage Of by them 70 Cypress
our trade A the same time. continues '"o
au,hor of this melancholy ana vet amusing state
mert The President is not disposed. II Is SAID
10 recommend any general increase OF duties 10
Congress in order to raise more revenue nor Dy
the power that is in his own hands to increase uu-
ties on those countries which have Uea'eu inns
Government so shabby
Int,nations have recently been heard. however
70 the effect that the Administration had u"ue'
serious consideration a proposition to impose q
discriminating duty OF 10 per cent ad Valorei"' "
addition 10 the duties imposed by law on h'' No.
chandse imported into the Cnited o'a'e. go. ais.
sells sailing under the flag OF couhu' 80, ,ho
eliminates against or excludes prou" cue
United states OF course this proio'' ,,,,airg
gested by the action OF German! :" .i.a.,,
,aIoor oo,,Ia and fresh beef on alleged SANITARY
yro,rds and there is no doubt that ~ mas oe'" ~
caved with considerable favor ana serousN uis
cussed by members OF the A"'"'''S'' I'm
1870 8, will result in action remains 10 be seen
The authority OF the President to take such ac'oi
rests upon provision which has stood IN the
,orin laws OF the United States for a number OF
years. and which in the existing law reads as fol-
lows
That discriminating duty Of 10 per cent "a "a
Nan ba he levied collected and paid on all
goods. wares or merchandise which sha ne I'm, I'm,
this dscrimnans duty shlll not be aRp he ,r 10
goods. warss and merchandise whCh snaH ne s
~ ,reatv or any act OF Congress TO be entered in
the ports Of the n5 S b na G1 6n roods
and merchandise imported in vessels OF the Ohi'eu
States.
The last time and, according TO the statement OF
a State Department official TO Tribune correspon-
dent to-day the Only time) that the authority TO
,mnose discriminating rates exercised was by
President Cleveland in 1886 1t applied 10 prod
nets of and articles proceeding under the Spanish
flag from the ports OF Cuba and Porto RICO. Inc
proclamation issued on October 10. 1886 TO take
effect october %, and it was revoked on OCTOBER
q. TO take effect on the same day. II was there
to be difference of opinion to whether the dis
eliminating duty would apply 10 all the products
and manufactures OF a country against which II
should be aimed. or only against such goods
wares and merchandise might be brought to
the United States IN vessels under the flag OF that
country AT the State Department the question
seems to be regarded as open or debatable one.
while Treasury officials who have had long ex
perlence In the customs service regard II rs we'll
settled They say that II the discriminating duty
should be imposed in the case OF Germany. Tor eN-
ample II would be applicable only TO such articles
as might be imported under the German flag. and
that the practical effect would be to turn over the
German carrying trade TO the United States 20
vessels under the British nag or the flag of some
other country to which the discriminating duty
would not apply.
REASONS FOR RETALIATION.
II is a werl-known fact that the removal by
Germany in 1891 OF the prohibition against the i'm
portaton OF American meat products. which had
been in force since May g. 1888. due. rot 70 any
threat on the part Of the United States or fear on
the part Of Germany that the provision already
quoted would be enforced in the prohibition
should be removed. but to other and wholly dif
ferent causes These causes were: First, the
enactment of the meat inspection law OF August
30 1890: second the enactment OF the law approved
on March 3. 1891. providing for the compulsory in
specton Of meat for expectation; and third, the
which authorized the President TO enter into recip
rocal commercial arrangements with countries pro-
ducing sugar, coffee, tea and hides. In his letter
OF AUGUST %. 1891 TO ]. W Foster, Plenipotentary
Of the United States the representa-
tive OF Germany said that in' consideration OF the
passage Of the act of March 3, 1891. and OF the
regulations hereunder. dated March % 1891. the
Imperial Government IS happy TO be able 20
nounce that there is no longer any cause for main
tanning In force the prohibition, promulgated on
sanitary grounds in 1873. OF the importation Of
hogs pork and sausages OF American origin pro-
vided that they are officially inspected according
10 the regulations of March % 1851, and accompa-
MED by the required certificate"
After saying that his Government would take the
necessary steps TO remove the prohibition
s, should be advised when the act and regla-
tons would actually take effect the representative
of Germany continued
The Imperial Government, in making this declara-
ton bases its action upon the sppostion that after
the abolition OF the aforesaid German prohibition OF
tmportatos the President Of the United
any occasion for the exerclsc.
powers conferred upon him by the List CONGRESS.
lSee Section OF the Tariff OF October l. $50 and
meat. August 80 1900 The imperial cdyernno o,
thinks that II mas the greater reason for this
States OF America the same reductions in customs
granted by ii and still are sol to Austria Hnr psg
and other States during the negotiations for the
being conducted by Germany ''d' are no"
He begged to know in conclusion whether tho
views expressed by the Imperial Government az re-
CARDS Section Of the Tariff act Of October / 1890
and Section Of the act providing for inspection
OF meat of August 90 1890" correct
THE RECIPROCITY AGREEMENT
On the same date august 22 1890 the German
representative was informed by Mr.. Foster that the
views Of the German Government were accepted bv
the tod Sfata nd hat ,ba
compulsory inspection of meat for the export trade
were already in operation and that meat so In
spected would be ready for expectation TO Germany
on or before September l. 1890
ihasmuch as Section Of the act OF August 70
i'S' "hcn was so potent factor in the settlement
on 'ausiaetory basis OF the trade relations be-
tween the United States and c.arr,a l., .,,,
force. having escaped repeal or "amendroon," ~.
the Lila Congress- 1t deserves to be renroduced
here. IL provides: N''uOe'