Goldsboro weekly argus. [volume] (Goldsboro, N.C.) 1885-1909, 1896-03-26
GoLDsBoRo. N. c.. MARCH 2e, 1885,
RECIPROCITY AN ISSUE.

protected industry to manufac-
ture a serviceable campaign issue
out of such poor raw material as
reciprocity" affords. What is
understood by this term among
those who are now collecting
opinions on the subject with q
view to future agitation, is one
of those fallacious devices for
doing a natural thing in IA arti-
fetal way, so much in favor with
a popular school of economists.
The natural way to extend
trade with foreign countries is
to relieve it of unnecessary re-
strictions and to send to those
countries the things they want,
better and cheaper than they can
get from others, in exchange for
what they can supply. That was
the old-fashion merchants way.
The politicians way is to put a
general embargo upon foreign
trade and then offer special cons
cessions to particular countries
in the hope Of inducing them to
deal in a dear market in prefer
ence to a cheaper one
This was the plan that was
tried for about three years, be-
ginning in 1891, and it should be
unnecessary to say that it proved
a failure. The statistics OF the
commerce of the United States
with the countries with which
reciprocity agreements were
made fail to show any apprecia~
BILE gain from the arrangement,
even where they do not show
oss, or any subsequent loss
traceable to it's abrogation.
Brazil is the most conspicuous
of the S~panish>American coun-
tries whose markets were to be
opened to us by reciprocity and
it was the first with which the
agreement. was made. We i'm
port a great deal of coffee from
Brazil, and our imports had been
increasing from $50, 600, 900 in
1883 to $83, 900. 900 in 1891. They
went up in the first full year of
reciprocity to $118, 600, 900, but
dropped in 1898 to $76, OoO, 900,
recovering to S7s, 900, 900 in 1894.
The reciprocity@arrangement was
then abrogated, and in 1895 the
imports from Brazil were $751;
800, 600. 1t would appear from
this that reciprocity made very
little difference in our imports
from Brazil, for the obvious rea-
son that we import from there
only those things that we need
and cannot get as well elsewhere.
But the effect, if any, upon our
exports to Brazl. is more impor-
tant. These had increased from
81, 200, 900 in 1883 to nearly $12,-
600, 900 in 1890. In 1891 they
were S14, 100, 900; in 1892 STA
POI, 900; in 1903 S12, 388, 900; in
1894 $13. 866, 900, a very decided
decrease under reciprocity. It
was not till after the general re.
duetion of our tariff on imports
and the abrogation of the recip-
rocity arrangement that our ex-
ports to Brazil increased. They
amounted to $15, 115, 900 in 1895
and for the current year they
have been on a still larger ratio.
1t is not pretended that the
commerce with Brazil exactly
represents the effect, or nom
effect. of reciprocity in all cases.
There was a temporary increase
of exports to Cuba, though the
figures are small. With respect
to Germany. there was a large
falling off, while the year fol-
lowiag the end of the agreement,
che figures remained stationary.
We had 10 reciprocity arrange
ment with Venezuela, and con-
sequently the Importation of
coffee from that country declined.
our market being supplied from
Brazil; but the figures show NO
significant change in IA exports
to Venezuela, except that this
year they will be larger than bea
fore.
All this points irresistibly to
the conclusion that commerce
cannot be made by tariffs, though
it can be unmade. When the
tariff was lowered We began to
sell more without any aid from
reciprocity" And now, if the
tariff be let alone. we are in a
fair way to build up a profitable
trade by the commercial means
nf sunplyiug q demand.