The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1897-05-12
RECIPROCITY With HAWAII.
Senator Perkins in a Dilemma on the
Sugar Treaty.
What He Says in a Letter to Presi-
dent Leonard of the City
Trustees.

A week ago the Board Of City Trus-
tees, Board of Supervisors and Cham
Der of Commerce all adopted resolu-
tons requesting the Senators and
congressman from this State to favor
the abrogation of the Hawaiian sugar
reciprocity treaty.
In response to the telegram from
President Leonard of the City Trustees
! United States Senator Perkins adj
dressed the following letter to him yes
terday:
Washington, D. c., May ), 1897.
Hon. Charles E. Leonard, President
Board Trustees, City of Sacramento,
Calmly Dear Sir: / am in receipt of
your telegram relating to the abroga-
ton of the Hawaiian reciprocity treaty
and will very gladly give it my con-
sideration. / am placed in this matter
in a very embarrassing situation by
reason of the divergent views taken
regarding reciprocity with Hawaii by
prominent citizens and commercial bo-
dies in different parts of the State. The
commercial organizations, banks and
exporters of San Francisco deem the
continuance of the treaty of vital i'm
portance to them and to the general
prosperity of the State, while from the
Interior cities and counties come APP
peals for the abrogation of the treaty.
The point on which the opposition to
the treaty is based is the beet sugar
industry of the State. No one can be
more alive to the Importance of that
industry than myself, and L hope to
see it grow and give to the State that
11rhi T &c 90
pable of producing.
But there seems to be two views
as to the effect of the continuance OF
reciprocity treaty upon this industry,
and it is these that have given rise to
the demands for its continuance and
abrogation Both views are strongly
held and both have a strong backing
| of facts, so that it is not easy to de-
termine whether one party is right and
another wrong, or whether the truth
| lies somewhere between the two opin-
| ions. Therefore, as you Will see, my
position in regard to the question at
| issue is embarrassing
We are now paying to China, the
| East Indies and other countries with
which we have no reciprocity treaties
| tens of millions of dollars each year
| for sugar on which we impose an i'm
port duty, and as long as we are com
| PEELED to purchase sugar from foreign
countries it seems but right that we
should give to those granting us reci-
| procal benefits an advantage in re-
moving the tariff from their staple
article of export. If we were not pay
| ing out such vast sums to our sugar
| producing countries there could be nc
! question that the reciprocity treaty
with Hawaii should be abrogated.
| But as long as we are unable to pro-
| duce sufficient sugar for our own con-
/ sumption it is not, to my mind, good
| policy to radically change our rela-
tions with a country with which reci-
procity has been mutually advanta-
| geous.
| l can only say that my best thought
shall be given to the matter, and that
shall be governed in my action by
| the wishes of the majority of the people
| of the State as far as / can ascertain
what they are. That they will make
| their wishes known in no uncertain
way have no reason to doubt. 1 re-
main, very truly yours,
GEORGE C. PERKINS.