New-York tribune., 1901-12-04
AS TO RECIPROCITY.

What tho President says in his Message dpou'
| reciprocity both as a general prlnclpie anu as
a particular policy TO be pursued toward cuoa'
| is brief explicit and commendaoie' iAe 10 .
accord with those who oppose dls.uroahoe VI ",
business and Impairment of prosperity through
| any general revision of the taFlh' o'1
corentiy reminds them that no such thins ~
| contemplated in the reciprocity proposals. Heci-
| nrocitv is on the contrary, consistent WIN .ie
nrpcinle of 'Iet we'll enough alone. 1t IS III
| integral mart of the existing system. anu Is
sDecialIy provided for In the present tarii Id" :.
| Certainly a policy with which the haihes Vi
| Blaine. Mckinley and Dingley nave peeh iueh-
tilted may be regarded as soundiy hepuoi''"n
| and the execution of it as not ne" uepi
rre" nor an attack upon the estaDIsheu oiaei ~
| things 1t has always seemed 10 pe pe'"a VI
| iarlv admirable feature OF our present ''i 'i
| srStar, +bat Tins various minor readjustmen's
| of customs and expansion OF tfddS aie pio, 'oe
| for without any general revision ana IT'S a'tehu
| ont dis+urhance of commerce and industry. Our
| ,o,-s mako that possible The President urges
| il as eminently desirable.
In tbe case of Cuba he regards RECIPROCITY as
more than desirable 1t is imperatveiy ue
manded by 'weighty reasons OF Ihoraii'! anu
+ national interest" Let US see what those rea-
sons are This country required OF Cuoa tii'''
bv constitutional provision she should pace
barseIf in closer international relations with 1t
than with any other country. In the ia'.
amendment" it required Cuba to pledge herseil
never to enter into any treaty or other CON-
pact with any foreign power when might tei'u
to impair Cuban independence or TO give such
foreign power a Judgement in or controi over
any part of the island. That means United
States supervision, 10 some extent. over CuDa
foreign relations. Let us imagine for moment
Cuha making a reciprocity treaty with some
European power discriminating in FAVOR OF
that power against the United States 1hat
would be regarded by this country as lhtolef-
able Yet If We deny TO Cuba full lreeuoh Vi
negotiation with other lands, are we not moraiiS
bound to give her special consideration IN our
own dealings with her? Surely we cannot close
tho markets Of other lands against Cuba ana
refuse TO open own to her
Our own national interests, too, says 'he
President demand reciprocity with tuba. II
has long been automatic that the thlted States
should have the bulk of Cuba's foreign trade
But what are.the facts that point? Cuba is
now buying S3I 100000 worth of goods year
from other lands than this, and her purchases
from such lands are rapidly increasing. while
those from the United States are decreasing.
In tbe seven months ending on January II, i9DI
as comnared with the corresponding months
year before there was a decrease OF Sl,lo4ofo
in Cuban purchases from the United States. ana
an increase of S564 512 in Cuban purchases from
Germany alone. DO the business men OF this
country want that process to continue: 'u"a
buvs Sc 900 600 worth of cotton goods year. of
which the United States supplies only SJoovVo'
ard So OOOo 900 worth of vegetables ana Vege-
table fibres of which we supply only Sli,ro'
and s. soc 600 worth Of oils, OF which only
s713OOo worth comes from this country: ana
mol rnI
ucts. of which this country contributes less than
s. 900 600 The same Is true in respect 10
wines leather goods silks. drugs and chemicals
yoolIen goods and other items. our Cuban
trade is discredtably small, and Is growing
smaller But what hope IS there of getting
better hold upon the Cuban market IL we do not
open our own market TO CubaE
1t is an open secret that the cruX OF the stu
alton is found in sugar. There Is strong oppo
siton in this country to the abolition or reduc-
ton of the tariff on Cuban sugar. The fresl-
don't does not ask for its abolition. but only for
its reduction. That is moderate request. Only
a few years ago the Republican party In the
most famous of its tariff measures, made sugar
entirely free from tariff duties. Free sugar
was the popular campaign cry of those days.
under the triumphant leadership or HARRISON
and Mckinley The duty sugar would not
have been restored by the Dingley bin had it
not been necessary to do SO in order TO exf1n-
cush the deficit In the budget which Demo
cratic administration had created. And the
restored sugar tariff was then regarded as a
Temporary measure If the general prin-
ciple of sound finance the nation could abolish
the sugar duty altogether ten years ago. and
could exult III so doing, it will require strong
arguments to prove that it should not now
make some reduction of that tariff in favor of
Cuba not only on the ground of sound fiscal
policy but also because of the imperative de
mands of national honor and of national interest.