Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1901-06-15
rs NOT RECIPROCAL.
DEFECTS OF THE SPECIAL
TRADE TREATY PLAN.
Convinsing Reasons why the Proposed
schsms of Unrestricted Reciprocity
Would Not Operate to the Advantage
of the United States.

ond lecture on Economic Aspects of
Reciprocity" delivered by Mr. John
p. Young of the San Francisco Chron-
icle, before the College of Commerce
OF the University Of California, various
phases of the practical workings of the
reciprocity plan in the United States
are presented with marked clearness
and force. The lack Of certainty in
the matter of revenue production
which attends the operation of special
trade treaties is urged as an important
objection to that process of charging
our trade with foreign countries. The
question of revenue is held constantly
in view by congress when engaged in
the enactment of a tariff law, and the
schedules are SO adjusted as to insure
with reasonable accuracy an amount
of revenue which, added to that de-
rived from internal sources, will meet
the requirements of the government.
Not so in the case of schedules altered
In miscellaneous fashion through
special commercial conventions. If.
under these treaty arrangements, the
duties on certain articles are mater1-
ally diminished. SO must be the reven-
ues. Moreover, the consequences of
this kind of tariff tinkering may
Young points out, if we reduce the
duties on Russian beet sugar to please
the exporters of American machinery,
how shall we deny similar reduction of
duties to other sugar producing coun-
tries without exciting jealousies and
retaliation? If, in order to escape this
kind of friction, we make the reduc-
ton of sugar duties uniform with all
countries, as we must in the long run,
what then becomes of the revenue
from sugar duties?
Another point of the utmost import
ance is emphasized by Mr.. Young in
this overwhelmingly, that while
tariff laws may easily be repealed or
amended at any session of any con-
gress, commercial conventions consti-
tute contracts and obligations very
difficult to retreat from and which Of
ten continue in force long after their
workings are recognized to be in
furious. At best the process of abro-
eating commercial treaties is a slow
and tedious one, and the effect is to
create rightly in a direction where
debility is highly desirable.
A reciprocity treaty is not necessar-
lily reciprocal. 1t may prove to be
quite the reverse. Mr.. Young cites the
supposititious case of wine producers
and prune growers who were promised
protection for their industry and are
as much entitled to it as are the max
ers of machinery. We enter into an
arrangement with a foreign country
which contemplates an increased pur-
chase on our part OF foreign wines
and prunes and an increased sale on
our part of machinery. This may or
may not prove to be the outcome I'M
der the arrangement. 1t is quite pos
sible that the foreigner will send us
an additional quantity of wines and
prunes without in turn taking from
us an additional quantity of machines.
The practical workings of reciprocal
trade arrangements may thus prove to
be far from reciprocal. Mr.. Young
raises the question whether it is not
an economic blunder to assist our over
grown iron concerns by means of spe-
cial trade treaties to market their
surplus product in foreign countries,
and thus prevent the creation in unde-
veloped lands of facilities which would
enable the peoples of those lands to
supply themselves with articles OF
iron, and at the same time compel the
domestic consumer in our own country
TO assist in this work of spoliation by
charging him more for what he uses
of the product thus forced out than
the foreigner is compelled to pay
Herein is suggested an aspect of the
reciprocity idea which the trust
smashers have certainly overlooked.
OF course, so thorough and deer
searching a student of cause and effect
in economics as Mr.. Young has shown
himself to be would not pass by the
pertinent point concerning the true
definition Of reciprocity as expounde6
in the national Republican platform
He directs attention to the fact thai
N their platforms the Republican:
have always insisted that true reel
procity consists in the exchange o
contemplating products. This fac
is ignored by the advocates of tariff
ttnkering by trade treaties with q per
sistency that carries 1t out of the do
main OF accident and places it In tn,
category of Intentional suppression.
Ghe favorite theory of British Cob
denftes and Free Traders that IL W,
wish to trade with foreigners we cal
only hope to do SO by buying from
them as well as selling to them is dis
posed of by Mr.. Young as scarcel,
worthy of serious consideration IL
view of the facts Of commerce as dis
closed in the statistics of our foreig,
trade in the last four years OF ade
quate protection. '-Such a conten
tion." says Mr.. Young, scarcely de
serves q serious answer. Individual
and aggregations of individuals know,
rs nations do not buy, things to pleas
the persons purchased from: they blu,
because they need the things bought