The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1902-07-17

| is not reciprocity, and never was, an
does not conform TO any definition 0
that word. A person who is for reel
procity with Cuba can only mean tina
ne is in favor of reduction OF the tarii
on articles from Cuba, and in return
reduction in Cuba on articles comin
from the United States.
president Roosevelt in his annual mes
sage to congress. which was incorporate
in his special message on reciprocity
said:
I most earnestly a.. your attention
to the wisdom. indeed 10 the vital need
of providing for substantial reduction il
the tariff duties on Cuban imports int,
the United States
This is true reciprocity-when it i
coupled with a reduction in Cuba OF
articles from the United States. All othel
plans or devices are unworthy of tn,
name of reciprocity.
True Position of Opponents.
Very few opponents in congress OF
reciprocity with Cuba have announced
that they were opposed to all Legislation
on the subject. They all claim they were
willing TO Go something for Cuba, but
they were always suggesting some other
plan than that Of trueSreciprocity. TLey
all claimed they were good friends OF
the president and were supporting him in
his efforts to afford relief to Cuba. The
nineteen senators who defeated reel
procity with Cuba at the last session OF
congress, all claimed that they were true
friends of President Roosevelt and en-
thusiastic and loyal supporters of his
administration. A person who earnestly
favors and hopes for the nomination of
President Roosevelt in 1904, will help to
make his administration success in
1902
These nineteen senators have been ex-
planning ever since they took the respon-
sibility of defeating this legislation They
all announced their allegiance to Presi-
dent Roosevelt because they knew the
great common people believed in his hon
esty. wisdom and integrity. and they did
not wish to oppose him openly at this
time
Nebraska Republican Senators.
The Nebraska senators sent long
letter of explanation to their state con-
vention. In that letter they said:
Another important measure which
should. and likely will be determined
before the adjournment Of congress, re
lates to the reciprocal trade arrange
ments with the republic of Cuba. Be
lieving something should be done to that
island. we have at all times been hear
tily in accord with the attitude of Pres
baf -rrh
ITO show how the Republicans of Ne
braska believed in the good faith Of
their senators who had been fighting rec
iprocity with Cuba all the session, the
placed the letter of the SEN
ators on file without comment, and
adopted a resolution which read as fol-
lows:
We heartily indorse the administra-
ton of President Theodore Roosevelt.
We especially commend the justice and
wisdom of his reciprocity policy with
Cuba, as embodied in his message to con
sress.'
The Republicans of Nebraska showed
hat they understand the question, as
well as the true position of their SEN
itors. They said reciprocity with Cuba
IS defined by President Roosevelt in his
Message to congress. just as the Repub-
leans of Kansas in their state conven-
ion, declared for reciprocal trade rela-
ions with Cuba as recommended by
President Roosevelt President Roose-
-elt recommended reduction of our tar
# duties on Cuban products. and no
enator or representative who has, or
loes now oppose such reductions, is In
avor of reciprocity with Cuba.
Recent Republican state conventions /
n Pennsylvania. Ohio, Indiana, Illinois /
1issouri. Kansas Nebraska and Mime Z
ota have specifically Endorsed reciproc- /
~ with Cuba as recommended by Pres /
dent Roosevelt.
Would Farmer Be Injured?
1T has also been claimed by the oppo- !
ents Of reciprocity with Cuba that the
armer would be injured by reciprocity. /
Certainly the farmer who raises wheat,
orn and cattle would not be injured if
q secures the trade of Cuba in these
roducts Would the beet farmer be in
lred? He can only be injured when he
acures a lower price for his beets at
ne factory. The factory is only warrant
4 in reducing the price of beets when
he price of sugar is reduced by this
.gislation. Would a reduction in the
uty on Cuban sugar reduce the price Of
lgar in this country when the same
,riff is maintained on sugar from othe,
1untries? 1t is admitted by all that a
eduction of so per cent or even free
agar from Cuba would not effect the
rice Of sugar in this country as long as
e are compelled to import sugar from
her countries. One-third Of the sugar
e consume is produced from beets and
lne raised IN the United States, addeG
what we obtain from Hawaii. Porte
leo and the Philippine Islands one
iird Of our consumvtion comes from
lba. and the remaining one-third comes
ON other countries and pays full tar
rates. The testimony taken in the
4arings before the Committee on Ways
I'd Means and the admissions Of tn,
'et sugar supporters. all demonstrate
at the price of sugar VIII not be affect
b VA reduction on Cuban sugar. and So
injury would come TO the beet sugar
rmer.
Why then. so much objection made by
e beet sugar Toby III Washington II
AIRED that il a reduction was made on
lban sugar the industry in that island
ight become profitable and the woney
ey hoped would be invested in beer
gar factories In the United States
1uld be invested in factories IN Cuba.
stead X was a promoters Toby thar
duced q number OF senators 10 refus.
abide by the Judgment Of a majority
their party. and so declined 70 follow
e recommendation Of President Rooso-
n ] submit that as long Is We must I