The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-12-19

|
country know that it is doubtful whether
they could successfully turn the trade
of those countries from established chan
nes. Secondly, they know that even If
they should succeed in getting that trade
they would have to wrest it from Europe
in a sharp and fierce competition. and
that the profits would probably be nomi-
nal.
Besides these considerations. Mr.. Pres
ident. the expense of adjusting old ma
chinery and purchasing new machinery
IN order to so model goods as to SUIT the
wants of those people would be consider
able For these reasons our manufactur-
ers, though proably just as thoroughly
convinced as is the Senator from Cali
fornia that they could get these markets
If they would do what he says is neces-
sary to get them, have not seen fit to do
these things. But suppose we should ne
gotiate a treaty today with the countries
of Central and South America by which
we would lie given an advantage over
our European competitors in those mar
kets of from 90 to 40 per cent. does any
man doubt that our manufacturers would
at once employ the means and incur the
expense necessary to get that trade and
that they would get it? The same is
| true with reference to Cuba. Give our
manufacturers these concessions, give
them this advantage of from 20 to 40 per
cent over their English German and
Spanish competitors, who are now getting
SO per cent Of that trade. and our mer-
chants viii at once begin diligently to
seek this trade They Will remodel their
goods TO suit the incest and most
delicate requirements necessary to do that,
and they will sell to Cuba practically
all that she BUYS from abroad.
Mr. President, one more suggestion and
viii have finished. ] have already
spoken longer than l expected. The or
ponents Of this measure tell us that this
concession to Cuba viii be bounty pure
and simple ] do not want to sickle
about words or terms. I do not know
whether or not II can be correctly and
properly described as n bounty. but l do
know that Il il he z bounty to Cuba we
vii. gel from CG0a q bounty in return.
Tie difference in the two bounties will
be against us in the beginning, but, Mr..
President, if Cuba shall fulfill the just
expectation of her friends and of intelli-
gent men throughput the world during the
next FIVE years. am inclined to think
by the end of that time the balance OF
bounty will not only be in our favor but
that il viii lie sufficiently in our favor
to overcome any difference against us in
the Beginning.
/ But this mrch is certain, that, bounty
or no bounty. it is not money taken out
of the pockets of the people of this coun-
try 1t is a mere remission of a tax
not as a gratuity, but in expectation of
compromising benefits. If this bill does
not pass. that tax VIII possibly be col
lected and go into the treasury but what
need has the treasury for it? 1t is al
ready overlooking TO the bursting point
It has already over 5000, o00, 900 more than
it has any Use for. and has only recently
deposited in the national banks of this
country over $3.50 100000 without inter
est, because there was no other way to
get that money back into circulation and
make it perform the functions for which
it was created, The treasury of the
United States does not need this tax. but
the people of the United States do need
this trade this increase of trade, which
we may reasonably expect as result of
the passage of this bill and the remis-
sion of this small tax.
Mr. President. before l take my seat
want to say that I wish certain amend
ments might be made to this bill but I
recognize the fact that if arv amendment
should now be made it would destroy the
treaty. But l do not want the opportun-
ity to escape without expressing my con
demnaticn of certain provisions of the
bill. l am going to vote for it notwith-
standing those provisions, because I think
the good in it greatly overbalances the
evils of it.
I especially object to what is known as
the 'fve-years' clause" that clause by
which we have stipulated that the Ding
ley rate of duty upon sugar shall not dur
ing the life of this treaty be reduced be-
low its present rate. If | believed that
that provision of the treaty and this blll
is legal, is constitutional would be legally
operative if l believed that it is binding
upon the treaty-making power or the law
making power of this country, | would
hesitate before voting for it. l would not
care to sanction any such precedent as
that, however great the benefits might
otherwise be.
But, Mr.. President, as lawyer / know
full well that as a legal proposition this
Congress has no right or power to bind
future Congresses that the next Congress
may reduce the rate of duty If it chooses
to do so notwithstanding this five years
clause.
But it is said that provision is a part
of the treaty and therefore part of con
tract. and being part of contract the
faith and honor of the nation is plighted
to its fulfllment and the keeping of its
spirit and its letter. That argument has
little force with me- why? Because il
is contract between Cuba and the
United States This provision was not
put in the treaty for the benefit of Cuba,
for certainly Cuba does not object to the
reduction of duties provided in our sugar
schedules on the contrary, Cuba is asking
now that they be reduced, and Cuba would
be glad to see every cent of protection
taken off sugar imported into this coun-
try.
1t would be, therefore. no violation OF
faith with Cuho to reduce the duty on
sugar, but would be just exactly what
Cuba would like to have done. If it be
said that it is the result of an understand
ing with the heet-sugar and the cane
sugar growers of this country, my answer
is that if there had to be made such an
understanding that to secure the con