The Yale expositor., 1906-11-16
A BUSINESS MATTER
RECIPROCITY CONSIDERED ALONG
PRACTICAL LINES.

Facts Regarding Our Experiment
With Cuba Tend Ia show That In
All Such Dickers the United States
Is Certain to Get the Worst of II.
In the correspondence between Thorn
as L. Egan of Cincinnati and Charles
A. Moore Of New York on the subject OF
reciprocity. as viewed from practical
business standpoint, wide divergence
OF opinion is to he observed. Both par
ties to the discussion are men of mark
ed prominence In the field of industrial
production. Both are heads of impor
tant manufacturing interests, and both
are large employers of American labor
Both. 1t may be added. are protection
lists.
Mr.. Egan, evidently impressed by
the single fact of increased exports
amounting to more than $20,000000 in
the past three years. Is warm In up
prevail of the so called reciprocity"
treaty with Cuba and urges that equal
advantages might be realized by sim
liar bargains with the countries OF
South America. Mr.. Moore, taking into
account something besides the single
fact OF increased exports, goes more
deeply into the question. He finds that
while we have in 1906 sold TO Cuba
merchandise aggregating 47,163. GSS,
as compared with sales of S27,377, 400
three years ago, we have in 1906 pur-
chased from cuba competitive products
amounting to $S4,979.S21. this being
S31 ,216, 1873 more than we sold TO Cuba
Of practically all noncompetitive prod
ucts.
But this is not all of the dark side OF
the picture. Because of the 20 per
cent reduction In our tariff rates in
favor of Cuba's exports of nearly $780,
100000 the customs revenues of the
United States have lost $15,O00000 in
1906. This, added to the adverse trade
balance of $37,21G,133 makes a total
loss OF over $50 100000 on our Cuban
! trade for the last fiscal year.
II has cost us So, 100000 to sell to
Cuba $4T. 1853. GSS worth of our products.
That does not appear to Mr.. Moore to
be sound business arrangement; GER
tainly not what could properly be call
ed an advantageous" one. Nine more
such advantageous" reciprocity deals,
says Mr.. Moore. would wipe out the
favorable trade balance Of S51T, 100000
for 1906 and leave this country heavily
In debt to Europe; for with us n large
favorable balance Is necessary to take
care of what are APPLY described as
national fixed charges" such as
freight bills of $2O0,O00,OO0 paid every
year to foreign carriers. interest and
dividends on foreign loans and invest
ments in the United States. money
spent abroad by American tourists and
money sent abroad by prosperous nat
urallzed citizens to needy relatives In
other parts of the world.
1t Is clear that In limiting his view to
the increase In our export trade with
Cuba and in failing to take note of our
huge excess of imports and our big
loss in needed revenues Mr.. Egan
shows a very imperfect perception of
the whole question of reciprocity with
Cuba. Equally clear Ii Is that In rela
ton TO reciprocity with South Amer
lean countries Mr.. Egan INDUCES him
sell i'll HOOnsulue MUSINGS ODiiNiO
of the fact that the great bulk OF our
imports from those countries are al
ready OH the free list, and hence af-
ford no basis for reciprocity dickers.
True, as Mr.. Moore points out. we
might dicker away the protection
which our agriculturists now have and
admit South American cattle. sheep,
hides, wool, wheat, etc, to free CON-
petition I'm our market In return for
lower tariff on our exports of machin.
cry, but 1t is not likely that Mr.. Egan,
albeit seller OF machinery, would IA
vor a scheme so manlfestly unfair TO
American agriculture and so certain
TO result In the complete downfall of
the system OF protection. We think II
far more likely that Mr.. Egan Will re-
wise his ideas Of reciprocity. In the
light of the solid business facts pre-
scented by Mr.. Moore II Is difficult TO
see how Mr.. Egan can avoid such re-
vlQion