Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-04-11
DELAYED.
CONTINUED from Page OneD

proposed reciprocity agreement with can
ada.
The treaty with England was negotiat-
ed in 1915 and indefinitely extended in 1877.
The treaties with France Italy and Ger
many, forming the basis of the importers
clam. We're put into effect by the I'resi-
dent under the tariff act of 1891. Under
the last named treaty, IN View of recip-
rocal and equivalent concessions" the rate
on whisiey from France was fixed at $l.I5
a gallon. The court holds that by its
terms the treaty is one Of mutual con-
sideration and concession.
The importers claim was that the con-
cession of the lower rate of duty to
France. was a special favor within the
purpose of the treaty with England.
Citing several German decisions by the
supreme court, the court held that the
portion of the tariff act of 1891 which gave
to the President authority to negotiate
commercial reciprocity agreements with
other nations was not in conflict with the
favored nation" clause Of the treaty
with England. This portion of the de-
cision. which was unanimous, is interpret
ed as removing one of the greatest OBJ
SIdClGS YET I6tiSth d-tl4i.L tlt+ - RbI9N'A
agreement with Canada. 1t says
Section of the tariff act OF 1891 was a
general law, it's attitude toward every ma
ton was uniform. 1t offered no special
favor to France, Germany, Italy or any
other country. 1t was equally within the
opportunity of England to negotiate Il
reciprocity treaty as it was within the OPP
portunity of France.
I'VE think that in logic or effect the ne
gotiaton of treaty upon a consideration
does no violence to that treaty provision
with England. The reciprocity treaty
with France is one founded upon mutual
considerations. This country gave con-
siderations for the considerations given
in exchange therefor by France. If this
country should concade to Great Britain
without consideration what it has con-
coded to France Tor consideration, it
would not be concedng to England IA
vor it conceded to the other country, bat
it would be conceding to England more
than it conceded to the other country, be-
cause England in such case gives no COLI
sideration for the concession for which
France gave a consideration.
"The extension of the $l.75 rate upon
spirituous liquors in this case to England
without any mutual concession therefrom,
would be conceding not what was conced-
ed France, but something more than was
conceded France, and therefore cannot
be within the purvieW of the most favored
nation clause of the treaty with his Brit
tanic Majesty, without consideration,
which has not been given.
IF the convention with England in the
particulars considered was per sc eXecut-
ing or was by legislation states, executed,
| it does not contemplate and is not con-
| travened by treaties based upon mutual
considerations such as the reciprocal con-
vention of 1898 with France. If the treaty
with England is not self-eXecutinE, or IL
it has not been executed by the legisla-
| ton of Congress noted. the question il
not one for the courts, but is political
one for the legislative and executive de-
partments of the government.
The action of the customs authorities IN
| refusing to extend the low French duty
| The principle really involved was
whether the favored nation clause in the
/ treaty with England automatically <gaVe
| to that nation the same advantages as
! were extended to France or by the reel
procity agreement of 1888. The court de-
| cided that 1t did not The same clause is
/ held to cover the situation which exists
with regard to the proposed reciprocity
agreement with Canada.