Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-11-16
ABOUT RECIPR OCITY
The United States Should Hasten Slowly IL
That Direction.
Should Not Help Foreign Countries
ut Her Own Expense-What
Canada Wants.

To tie Editor of The Evening Star:
In your recent excellent editorial, "Free
Trade Prophecies Discredited,' you adyo-
cate reciprocity. and to some extent rightly
SO; but perhaps it would be well for the
United States to hasten slowly in that d.
rection for while. and by no means to
treat all foreign countries alike.
Most of us remember that a few years
ago we were happy in the possession of an
annual surplus, one so large that we be-
came the envy of our foreign enemies, but
which we voluntarily gave up in obedience
to the clamor of domestic opponents. We
have learned by bitter experience that an
annual surplus, even large one, is better
than an annual deficit accompanied by in
creased debt, endless chains, soup kitchens
and all the rest of it. But the first step
made in reducing our surplus was by en-
tering upon too great and too one-sided
reciprocity with other countries; that
step cut off the revenues which protection
had given US, and the fall in revenue be-
trade friends attributed the total fall and
subsequent deficiency to protection; and
they so beclouded the minds of a majority
of our voters that our true American policy
was reversed for four unhappy years.
Having had good dose of deficiency and
debt, We are once more on the road to
prosperity; our revenues are perceptibly
and pretty steadily increasing. and We can
well look forward to being able to pay our
way next year-but not much besides. In
Difference to the clamor alluded to, the
coming surplus has been SO carefully
guarded against that it will be far too
our national debt strengthening our ma
tional defenses. buying up railroads and
telegraphs, building an east-west and
a north-south national road, or carrying out
any other important national improve
ments; it seems pity. but the people will
have it So
And yet. small as that surplus is ever
likely to be, and now, before we have even
is already Of that reciprocity by which we
are to forego some of the advantages which
protection has already begun to give u.s.
and of help to other countries at our own
expense. There are ordinarily no favors in
business. and foreign nations are bound to
trade with us, as they are doing now and
as they have done in the past, regardless
of protection; they do SO for their own
profit Why. then, should we hasten to pay
back the advantages We are beginning to
prosper upon, even before We have at
tanned the bare Giving expenses Of the
government? If our income was at best
equal to our Outgo, or if we had any sur
plus at all. the United States might be ex-
cusable for helping the smaller, feebler
American nations to the south of us, and
Cuba when she shall be freely reducing
tam TdttS III tHelT what
adequate excuse is there for yielding our
only advantage for the sake of helping the
British West Indies and Canada, depend
encies of the country always most opposed
to us in trade, in policy and Of it dared1 in
arms?
Great Britain has three ways of accumu-
lating wealth. and she Is not solely depend
ent upon trade for her prosperity; If she
were so she would be reduced to the power
ty in which her agriculture languishes, and
the ruin in which her West Indian colonies
have been plunged by the balance against
them caused by free trade. But the United
States does not yet lend money to the world
upon usury. nor has she yet resumed seri-
ously the carrying trade of the world; we
must, therefore, rely upon protection alone
to make the balance turn In our favor,
while England can afford to lose in trade
as long as her other two schemes make I'D
the difference.
Canada has prospered fairly well, thanks
to protection. but she has just promised a
reduction Of 70 per cent in duties upon
British goods this is denied, but certainly
was the understanding of English papers
some weeks ago.. 1t is an imprudent step
for new country, and she naturally seeks
to be recouped at the expense of the United
States. Sir Wilfrid Laurier Is now In
Washington, willing to discuss terms for