Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1909-05-07

ito secure better terms for the United
States Failing in this England was given
a curt notice that the treaty would be
abrogated. The abrogation took place in
1866.
The next reciprocity convention the
United States entered into was one with
Hawaii. negotiated by Secretary Fish.
This provided for free trade between the
ports Of the two countries. a renewal OF
this agreement was negotiated in 1884, but
was not ratified until 1887. 1t conceded to
the United States the harbor at Pearl Is
land, stipulated that the king should not
dispose of any port or territory, neither
give any special rights TO any other pow
er, nor enter into reciprocal relation with
any other country. In addition. the word
bananas was substituted for fruit
in the treaty. thus exempting California
fruits from the danger of Hawaiian COM
petition.
When the treaty was first negotiated
the New York Tribune said: "And quite
probably some of our sons of manifest
destiny believe 1t may open the way to the
ultimate annexation of the islands" II
did open the way and the Tribune was
one of the sons OF manifest destiny" who
upheld the action.
When the Wilson German law was pass
ed II abrogated the reciprocity clause OF
the Mckinley tariff, and the Republican
national convention roundly Denounced the
Democrats for that action, saying It was
national calamity. When the Dingley
tariff law was enacted reciprocity was
re-enacted with IT, and at the same time
extended to other than western hemis-
phere countries. The reciprocity of the
10 I'm 4
reciprocity because It was made to apply
almost entirely to tropical countries.
But the reciprocity of the dingley law
sought TO open the gates of Spain and
other countries TO American manufac-
lures and foodstuffs by opening our ports
to champagne. still wines, and other non
competitive products. In accordance with
the provisions OF the Dingley law, Presi-
dent Mckinley appointed John M. Kasson
and sevedal others. members of a COM
mission with power to negotiate reciproci-
ty treaties. They met with considerable
success in the negotiations with other
governments, but when they came to ne
gotiate with the United States senate it
was different story. There is as fine a
line Of reciprocity treaties slowed away
in senate pigeonholes as anyone could
wish TO see. They tell of absolute failure
, in the senate.
There are several reciprocity agreements
in existence between the United States
and other countries, and a few treaties,
but these are comparatively unimportant,
with the exception of Cuban reciprocity,
which gives Cuba 20 per cent remission of
duties on commodities coming to the
states. in exchange for a similar remission
/ of from 20 to 40 per cent on commodities
going to Cuba from the states. Never
was anything fought harder in congress
than Cuban reciprocity was fought by the
home sugar producers.
The present unpopularity of the doctrine
Of reciprocity is due to the fact that the
, advocates of protection are not willing
that reciprocity should be made to give
free or more advantageous entrance to
any product that now enjoys protection.
4 They want it to apply only to items now
on the free list or to those subject to a
revenue duty. They see in any other
proposition a stab at their favorite party
principle. They deny that Mckinley adj.
vocated anything further in his memoir
able speech at Buffalo, in which he pro-
posed to use tariff concessions as means
of extending our foreign trade. Opposed
/ by the Democrats and fought by large
portion Of the Republican party, real re-
ciprocity has always had a precarious ex-
istence.-(Copyright, 1903, by Frederic J.
Haskin).