Democratic Sentinel, Volume 15, Number 45, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 27 November 1891 — RECIPROCITY ON TRIAL. [ARTICLE]

RECIPROCITY ON TRIAL.

VERY MEAGER GAINS IN THE FIRST SIX MONTHS. I Brazil’s Improved Demand Confined Prinpally to Locomotives —Wheat Exports Increase in Spite of Reciprocity and the Tariff-Who Pays the Tariff Tax? How It Works. General figures are furnished by the Bureau of Statistics for the year ending Aug. 31, by which it is ascertained that the total increase in our exports for the twelve months, as compared with the corresponding months for the preceding year, was 835,286,211 But the same report shows that the increase in agricultural products alone, in August, 1891, was $15,999,952, or pretty nearly half of the whole increase for the twelve months. All of this may seem tedious, but to an understanding of what is to follow it is desirable to lay a foundation. Some stress is laid, in the report, upon our increased export of machinery, as Indicating some advantage accruing under “the new tariff” or “reciprocity.” There is some reason for giving credit to reciprocity for whatever advance has been made under it, but it will certainly not be the effort of the friends of the “new tariff” to attribute to the now tariff the figures that show that while in August, 1890, before the new tariff or reciprocity had begun to improve business, the percentage of our exports of machinery was 25.72 in August, 1891, after reciprocity with Brazil had been in operation for five months, the percentage of exports of machinery was only 20.66.

The commercial arrangement with Brazil was proclaimed Feb. 5, and it became operative April 1, 1891. It gave free entry into Brazil of wheat and wheat flour; corn, cornmeal, and'starch, rye and rye flour; buckwheat flour; potatoes, beans, and peas: hay and oats; pork, salted, including pickled pork and bacon; fish, salted, d’ied or pickled; cottonseed oil; coal, anthracite and bituminous; resin, tar, pitch, and turpentine; machinery for manufacturing and industrial purposes, except sewing machines; instruments and books for the arts and sciences; railway construction material and equipment The articles that were to be admitted to Brazil with a reduction of 25 per cent, were lard and substitutes therefor, bacon, hams, butter and cheese, canned and preserved meats, fish, fruit, and vegetables; manufactures of cotton, including cotton clothing; manufactures of iron and steel not included in the free schedule; leather and manufactures thereof, except boots and shoes; lumber and manufactures of wood, including cooperage; furniture of all kinds, wagons, carts, andca riages; manufactures of rubber. If this reciprocity agreement made under the “new tariff” was attractive and of great advantage, it ought to be seen in the figures. This might be assumed to be so if it could bo stated that the lack of reciprocity had discouraged importations of American goods abroad. But if increase of trade be the object of reciprocity, It will, of course, be interesting to show how much our exports were increased to those countries with which we have yet made no commercial agreement on the basis of reciprocity. Chief Brock, in his October pamphlet, issued to show how reciprocity is working, states that during the five months ending Aug. 31 our exports to Brazil increased 81,169,592. He does not say how much our exports increased to other countries with which we have no reciprocal arrangement, in the same per.od, when it would have been perfectly easy to say that the increase of our exportation of wheat to the United Kingdom in August, 1891, alone, was as great as the increase of al) our exports to Brazil, “under reciprocity,” in five months. .1 ust to get at the results systematically, take up the exports by articles in the order in which they are enumerated in the proclamation of the reciprocity agreement. There is wheat. The Bureau of Statistics does not think it worth while to make a line for Brazil, but puts the figures for all of South America in one entry. That entry shows that the exports of wheat in eight months to all South America were §363,553, as compared with 8616,211 in 1890, or a loss of 8252,658, and it seems that the exports in August, 1891. “under reciprocity,” were valued at 81,574, as compared with 867,233 in August, 1890, without reciprocity, a loss of 865,659. But in the eight months ending Aug. 31, our exports of wheat to France were 820,578.241 in excess of those of the corresponding period for the preceding year, and in August. 1891, there was an increase over August, 1890, of more than 89,000,000, and that with a nation not enjoying any advantages “under reciprocity.”

There was, to be sure, an improvement made in our exports of flour to Brazil in the period named. The increase in the value of wheat flour sent to Brazil was $159,598. but the increase to other (South American countr.es, not specified, and none of them attracted by reciprocal arrangements, was about $900,000, wh le the increase in the exportation to the Un ted Kingdom in eight months was valued at more than $2,000,000. We did better with corn, for our exportat'on of corn fell off in every direction except that of South America, and in that entile continent the increase in eignt months was valued at $232,757, while the total export was decreasing more than £31,000,000. As for cornmeal, cornstarch, rye, rye flour, buckwheat flour and barley, the figures were not considered worth presenting. But how about reciprocal potatoes? They do not appear in the statistics of exports by countries at all. but as our export of all vegetables “in their natural state,” which will probably include potatoes, fell off in eight months about SIOO,OOO, it was evidently not worth while to invoke the aid of reciprocity to. explain the decrease. There was also a decrease in our exportation of beans and peas, and there is nothing to show how much of the loss was suffered through the indifference of South America to our peas and beans,even “under reciprocity. ” There was also a failing off, in every direction, of our exports of hay and oats, and the decline in South America is lost sight of in the statistics. But pork ought to show an increase. Does it? Look at the figures. For the eight months of last year ending Aug. 31, the exports were va'ued at to all “other countries in South America, ” including those with which reciprocal agreements have since been made. For the eight months ending Aug. 31, 18.(1, the value of exports of pork, salted and pickled, to “other countries in South America,” was $1’1,046, or a decrease, “under reciprocity,” of $87,283. There was no reciprocity with the United Kingdom during the two periods, yet in the eight months of 1891 the exports of pork, fresh and pickled, to that kingdom were valued at $26 ’,533 more than they were in the corresponding eight months of 1890. As for bacon, Brazil did increase her purchases of it by $113,000 “under reciprocity,” in the same time that Germany, without reciprocal arrangement, and with a prejudice against all American hog products, increased its purchases to the extent of $210,000. There was a general falling off during the period of our hog products. ■ Fish does not appear to have turned out very well. There are no figures to show, except general ones indicating a decline in exports of that character. Of cottonseed oil. South America, all of it, took less, >y $13,000, in the last eight

months, than in the eight months of equal date in last year, but reciprocity may have the credit of an increase of 86,000 in August last over August. 1890, We sent to Bouth America, all of it, In the eight months ending Aug. 31, 1890, when there was no reciprocity, coal valued at 896,107. In the last eight months the value of the coal sent to South America was 854,814. a decrease of 841,293. The value of the coal sent In Augu t, 1890, was 8968, and in August, 1891. “under reciprocity,” the value of the coal sent to South America was 816. Yet in the eight months of 1891 we sent to British North America, with which we have no reciprocal arrangement, 8600.000 worth more of coal than we did in the like period of 1890. But reciprocity provided also for increased trade in resin, tar, pitch, and turpentine. There should have been a marked increase in the demand for those articles in South America, and particularly if reciprocity was to be advantageous to the republic that had been induced to let the articles in free of duty. Well, there was an improvement. In the eight months the exports of resin, tar, turpentine, and pitch to Brazil was 869,704, and the increase in spirits of turpentine was about 85,000. But Germany in the same time increased her purchases of resin, tar, turpentine, and pitch by 8103,184, and ner importations of spirits of turpentine were increased 8282,053, without the advantages of reciprocity. Then there is a good showing for machinery. “Under reciprocity” the importations of steam engines, mostly locomotives, to Brazil, amounted to an increase of 81,423,811 in the eight months, and during the same period our exportations of machinery of all kinds to British possessions in Australia increased 8845,391. And this was regardless of any reciprocal arrangement, and in spite of the long haul to which the machinery was subject. Of the articles upon which Brazil reduced duties 25 per cent, in order to give us an increased chance to do business with the country, there was an increase in exportations of hams of about 83,000, an increase of about 88,000 in exportations of nutter to all South America, an increase of ab. ut $4,00.) In the value of our cheese exportations to all South American countries, and an Increase of about 81'1,000 in canned beef, with a decline of 8100 In the exportations in August. The reciprocal arrangement may have increased the South American demand for our fruit by $7,000, but it certainly did not increase the demand in British North America, which took, without reciprocity. 8103,615 more of fruit than in the eight months ending Aug. 31, 1890. The believers in reciprocity as a way of increasing our trade in South America will undoubtedly “point with pride” to a record that will exhibit us as increasing our exportation of manufactured cotton to that country. They will neglect to see that while we were sending the United Kingdom $21,000,000 more raw cotton than in 1890, the Brazilian demand for manufactured cotton fell 8233,740. but they will see a hopeful sign in the increase of $9,274 in August, 1891.

“During the year ending June 30, 1890,” says the Chief of the Bureau of Statistics, “our exports of domestic products to Brazil amounted to $11,902,496, and in 1891 to 814,048,273. an increase of $2,146,777.” Well, take the reports for the last eight months of our exports to the United Kingdom and see what the Increase was in a few items; IO THE UNITED KINGDOM. Increase in eight months. Agricultural implements.’ ©113,01 > Sheep 69,879 Books, maps, and lithographs 7,751 Wheat 1,206,978 Wheat flour 1,953,360 Coal, anthracite and bituminous 66.731 Copper 2,3)0,942 Cotton 21,483,752 Fruits aud nuts 80,369 Hops 122,549 Iron and steel, manufactures 0f...... 17,180 Leather, sole 51?,346 Leather, other... .■ 651,031 Mineral oil, refined 62’,214 Paraffine and paraffine wax 70\625 Beef, canned 134,922 Beef, fresh 1,8 >2,492 Fork, fresh 262,553 Sugar, refined 1,065,165 Total increaseS 8,321,453 The later figures to show the increase of trade with the West Indies are more encouraging as indicating a willingness on the part of Cuba and Puerto Rico to seize the advantage of reciprocity; but South America has been made much more of than the West Indies, and that country ought to exhibit a more keenly prompt appreciation of the reciprocal arrangement made by Mr. Blaine.—New York Times.