New-York tribune., 1906-04-24
cERAN RECIPROCITY 4 SUCCESS.

We called attention two weeks ago to some
figures issued by the Bureau Of Statistics of
the Department of Commerce and Labor show
ing the rapid growth Of our trade with Cuba in
the two years since the Bliss-Zaldo reciprocity
treaty became effective In those two years
our Cuban trade increased in volume from $780,
100000 TO $140,000,O00-a gain of 10 per cent.
Cuba's sales to the United States increased in
value 66 per cent. Our sales to Cuba increased
in value 90 per cent. We asserted on the
strength Of this showing that the treaty had
proved a good bargain both for the Cubans and
for ourselves. and had confounded the predic-
tiOns of those who had fought il on stand pat''
grounds The American Economist" q bitter
opponent Of Cuban reciprocity and valiant
champion of ''stand-pattsm" in all its forms
now accuses us Of 'suppressing all mention OF
the figures which prove the costliness of that as
'tOnishing commercial arrangement (the Bliss
"Zaldo treaty." 1t contends that the reciproc-
ity experiment has been a losing venture 10
the United States because the balance against
us in trade with Cuba rose from $1,000 900 in
1900 when Cuba was still industraly pros
trated, 10 S34,0O0OOO in 1903, the year before
the treaty became effective and to SOL 100000
in 1906
This $51,000.000 adverse balance is seized on
as crowning evidence of the failure of reci-
procity. Yet it warrants no such pessimistic
healthier condition than 1t ever was before
and our losing balance is diminishing. rela-
lively not increasing. Cuban imports and ex-
ports for the years from 1897 TO 1902 reflect
abnormal conditions of war, RECOMMENDATION
and military occupation. In 1897 the Cuban
revolt became critical, and till 1862, when the
American occupation ended, industry and com
merce were in great part suspended. In 1895
Cuban exports TO the United States were valued
at S52,S7l 259 while our exports to Cuba were
valued at only 81, ,SO7, ,661. We bought more
than four times much as we sold. In 1895
with marked decline in the volume of trade
Cuba sold us goods valued at S40,0l7 ,O0O while
our sales TO Cuba amounted to only 81, ,53S, 600
Our ratio of purchases to sales was 54 to l.
After the evacuation this inequality began to
manifest itself once more In 1902-03 our pur-
chaseS from Cuba We're SCI, ,942, 100, and our
sales TO Cuba were only S21, ,761 63S-a ratio of
3 10 j. In 10000, six months Of that period
falling within the treaty term. our purchases
were S16,9s3,4lS, and our sales We're $27.377 900
"a ratio Of less than TO J. In the calendar
year 1905 our purchases were $95, ,S57, $50. and
our sales S44 1868, SPA ratio Of little more
than 10 i. Reciprocity is rapidly increasing
4 the volume OF commerce between the two couli-
tries, but 1t is acting as il was intended to act
( in stimulating our export trade and registering
greater relative gains in outbound than in in
; bound commerce
ii must be remembered that o,Ir chief outlay
in Cuba is for sugar. 20 per cent of cuba's
sales TO the United States being In that one
article. II did not buy that sugar from
the Cubans we should have to take similar
quantity from some other foreign producer for
cur domestic Supply does not meet domestic
demands. To say that We lose anythin. in Our
sugar raihc with Cuba except the 20 per cent