The Dalles times-mountaineer. [volume] (The Dalles, Or.) 1882-1904, 1897-04-10
RECIPROCITY is FREE TRADE

When the idea of reciprocal courte-
sizes was first INDUCED in by the United
States in it's dealings with foreign
countries, it was looked upon by many
as the key which was to unlock the
commerce of the world to- American
institutions, the system that was to re-
suit in the building up of an immense
trade for our farmers and manufacture
ers throughout the civilized world.
But it has been tried, and the facts are
beginning to down upon few at least,
that reciprocity is only another name
for free trade, and that, too, free trade
of the very worst type, since it results
in no benefit to anybody except the
importer from countries to which re-
cIprocal favors are extended. These
few have learned that the consumer of
articles that are imported free under
reciprocal treaties pays the same as he
would If duties were exacted, and that
the importer is the only one benefited.
In short, they have learned that the
government loses just whatever rev.
enue would arise from importations,
whils the price to such articles as are
imported under reciprocal arrange
ments remains the same to the con-
sumer as if regular duties were ex-
acted, and that reciprocity as at pres
ent practiced is only another of the
many forms of law we have for tho en-
couragement of trusts.
A striking illustration of the work
ings of reciprocity was given by w.
w. Baker in an address before the
Manufacturers Association at Port
land the other day, when the question
of abrogating the reciprocity treaty
With the Hawaiian islands was under
consideration. Mr.. Baker said:
SIN the first place, from a revenue
standpoint. have always been opposed
to the reciprocity treaty between this
country and the Hawaiian islands.
Commodities from all other countries
are charged with duty, while those
from the islands are permitted to come
in free. The main article imported
here experiencing this advantage is
sugar, and the profits made in conse-
quence of this privilege have certainly
gone into the hands of the man who
handles and controls the product from
the Hawaiian islands. This fact is
shown when it is considered that.
whatever price prevails in New York
for sugar that has been imported and
paid the duty, the same is asked in
San Francisco, or shade lower, in or
der that shipments cannot be made
from New York to the Pacific coast.
Experience has proven that the price
of Hawaiian island sugar keeps right
up with that of the duty-paying ar
ticle.
81 understand that most of the beet
sugar factories of California are uhder
the same control as the person mani
pulating the Island sugar. But, never
theless, if Oregon contemplates enter
ing into the beet-sugar industry. it is
very evident to my mind that our in
terests would be subserved by having
the treaty abrogated. AS citizens of
one whole country we should oppose
the treaty, as the government requires
a certain amount of revenue, and, if
sugar from the islands is brought i'll
free, the deficit created thereby must
be made up from another source"
This gives a very clear idea of the
workings of reciprocity with all coun-
tries and affecting all classes of i'm
ports. Under the workings of the re-
ciprocal treaty with Hawaii, Mr..
Spreckles is enabled to manipulate the
sugar business of the Pacific coast.
While he imports sugar from the
islands free of duty, he keeps the price
to the consumer up to an equality with
that charged by those who importfrom
countries where no reciprocal treaties
exist, and in consequence pay duty.
Thatis, Mr.. Spreckles enjoys the privi-
lege of free trade, while the govern
ment loses the revenue that would
otherwise be realized through the en-
forcement of duty charges, and the
consumer pays for what he consumes
the same price as though the article
were dutiable,