such commercial relations as may unite them in the bonds of a close and perpetual friendship.

These are the great purposes lying close to the hearts of the people of the United States, and the act of Congress is simply the legislative embodiment of their wishes. All other phraseology of the act is merely subsidiary to those ends. If other measures seem to be indicated in the law, on careful examination they cease to be independent, but at once merge themselves into the one grand purpose of peace between our Republics-this peace to be cemented and made perpetual by the bonds of commercial interest. In the light of this construction of the act of Congress the conduct of the United States delegation in this body, we think, becomes plain and of easy interpretation. As a member of the Arbitration Committee it will be my duty to formulate, if possible, some plan for the peaceful solution of international quarrels, in order that national energy may hereafter be directed solely to the arts of peace and individual energy, to the embellishment and happiness of the home.

As a member of the Customs Union Committee I have endeavored equally to respond to the just expectations of our Government, reflecting, as we know it does, the earnest and almost unanimous wish of the people. One of the early difficulties presented by my associates in the latter committee was properly to define the true meaning of the words "customs union." It will be seen that in my interpretation of the act of Congress this definition is quite immaterial. They who earnestly wish to attain great ends in this world must not be turned aside by mere words. The object to be attained in the language of the act is "to encourage reciprocal commercial relations."

If a customs union means something that will not and can not be made to promote such relations, then let us put it aside and turn to other means. In my construction the objectionable words do not look to absolute identity of customs duties, nor to the distribution of total revenue on any fixed and unchangeable basis of division. Such was the case even in the German Zollverein. Differential duties were there allowed for the encouragement of special

industries, the nation exercising the right of accounting therefor in the final division of the revenue. And the whole scheme was repeatedly changed and reformed.

But for the proper adjustment of different import duties and the establishment of an equitable basis of division of the revenue collected it was never anticipated that this body should take action. It is for us to lay down general principles and leave others to the work of details. Our duty will have been best peformed when we mark out the lines along which the streams of international wealth and prosperity shall hereafter flow. It is for others to build and operate those lines. And while human sagacity can not provide future contingencies, let our consolation be that each generation brings the highest wisdom to the solution of its own problems.

It was under the influence of such views that I proposed in the committee the following report, to wit:

While this Conference is not prepared to say whether a customs union between the States here represented is at this time practicable, yet in view of the great importance of such a union, if the same can be organized and established without seriously disturbing the revenue systems of our respective governments, and in view of the many intricate and difficult questions involved on the formulatio of a plan for such a union, and in the arrangement of the details necessary for its successful operation, we earnestly recommend to our governments the appointment of a commission, to be composed of able revenue experts, who shall, with the greatest care, examine all the questions involved in, or in any manner connected with, the creation and execution of such a union, and make report to the several governments interested at the earliest day practicable.

Second, this Conference has no doubt of the propriety and expediency of making great and important reductions of impost duties between the nations represented herein, and we therefore recommend to our respective governments that they proceed at once to formulate and establish treaties of reciprocity, under which the peculiar products of one nation may be admitted into the ports of others entirely free of duty, or at such reduced rates of duty as may best promote and advance the welfare of each, having due regard to the revenue systems of the governments interested, and also to their subsisting treaty stipulations with European powers.

This proposition not finding favor, I substituted another form of report, based on a compromise between my own

views and the expressea wishes of colleagues. It is not substantially different from the majority report as now made, for the form and phraseology of which we are indebted to the distinguished members of the committee from Mexico, Sr. Romero, and Sr. Valente from Brazil. I reproduce this second proposal of mine for the sole purpose of indicating and preserving in the record the views and conduct of the United States delegation on this very important subject. It is as follows:

The Committee on Customs Union has made a careful study of the questions submitted to its consideration and begs leave to report as follows, to wit:

A customs union in its generally accepted meaning is an agreement between two or more sovereign powers that in the matter of import duties territorial lines shall be disregarded; that the nations forming such union shall interchange their own commodities on a basis of free trade, adopting substantially the same tariff laws as applicable to other nations, and dividing the revenue thus collected in such proportions as may be fixed by treaty or by the judgment of an international congress representing the nations interested.

The establishment of such a union between any considerable number of the States represented in this Conference involves numerous difficulties, which, in our judgment, should be seriously considered by our respective governments before approving and accepting the system.

To place such a union upon a basis that would prove to be just and permanent might require changes in the constitutional provisions of some of the States, and would certainly require radical changes in the laws affecting their present revenue and financial systems.

A difficulty of no less serious character would be found in the constitution of a tribunal for the equitable division and distribution of the common fund collected at the ports of the several States forming the union.

But while the committee believes that such a union is at present impracticable, it is clearly of the opinion that all reasonable measures looking to the freedom of commerce between the States of the Western Hemisphere should be encouraged and commended not only by this Conference but by the States themselves.

A measure to which no valid objection can be urged on the part of any State is the creation of reciprocity treaties between such States as may desire a more liberal exchange of the products of their industries. Mutual concessions will certainly bring equivalent benefits. At first fewer articles may be exempted from duty, but as freedom of trade develops new sources of wealth and furnishes other means of revenue, additional articles may be added to the free list, until in the progress

of time substantial free trade may be accepted by a large number if not by all American States.

The committee therefore recommends to their respective governments that they proceed at the earliest day practicable to formulate and establish treaties of reciprocity between any two or more of the nations here represented, by which their products may be mutually admitted into the ports of the contracting parties either free of duty or at such reduced rates of duty as may best advance and promote the welfare of each.

While the majority report is not what I desired, it at least accepts the principle of free commercial intercourse. In that regard it responds to the act of Congress and meets the anticipation of our people. In its substance, therefore, and possibly in its exact form, it will receive our support.

And now, Mr. President, my duty would be fully performed but for the obligation to refer to some of the positions assumed by the distinguished Delegate from the Argentine (Mr. Saenz Peña) in his able and elaborate argument against this report. The encomiums bestowed by him on the institutions of his own country meet a joy. ous welcome in the hearts of all Americans. It is scarcely necessary, in the face of recent events, that we again assure the Delegates here assembled that the prosperity and growth of their republics excite no spirit of jealousy or envy with us. On the contrary, their progress is here hailed with sincere delight.

Republican government is on trial in the Western Hemisphere. Any one failure would weaken the system, while every success adds another column of support. Therefore, if nobler passions were absent, even selfish pride would step in and command our sympathy and help.

Not one word of censure have we passed on the economical systems of our sister republics. If seeming wrongs come to us at times we attribute them to their necessities. We have implicitly trusted in their good will, and we patiently await the application of their own remedies.

It therefore pains us the more that the distinguished Delegate should justify his distrust of our good faith in now offering reciprocity treaties by recalling our rejection of such treaties twenty years ago. At that time we had just emerged from the shadow of a great war—a war whose

exactions could not have been borne by any people who loved their country less. At that time (1870) we owed a debt of $2,600,000,000, borrowed from confiding creditors abroad, and commercial honor commanded its payment.

For the six years preceding this action of Mr. Fish, and inclusive of the year 1870, we had collected nearly $200,000,000 per year from customs dues, and largely over $200,000,000 per year from internal and excise taxes. This was a bitter necessity, from which there could be no escape until, by faithful payments, we could reduce the annual interest and pay a part of the debt. That has now been done. The excise taxes, which then affected almost every industry and transaction of the citizen, have been removed, except upon tobacco and fermented and distilled liquors.

Numerous articles then subject to tariff duties have been placed on the free lists, and in other cases import duties are greatly reduced. The public debt is now within $1,000,000,000, undergoing monthly reduction, bearing a low rate of interest, and capable of reduction to the lowest rate known among nations, if any of it should remain unpurchased at its maturity.

A maxim of the law no less than of good morals commands that we be not generous at the expense of justice. We can not give away that which belongs to another. Our revenue to the highest endurance of taxation belonged to our creditors. At that time almost every article of importation, from whatever source, paid duty, and we had constant struggle to pay our expenses and maintain our credit. At present there is an annual surplus revenue of over $70,000,000. This must and will be reduced, and I have believed that a wise statesmanship on the part of the Republics represented in this Conference would seek the benefit of this reduction.

In 1870 our necessities demanded one course of action. In 1890 our necessities equally demand another course of action. Tempora mutantur et nos mutamur in illis. Times change and with them we change.

The honorable Delegate tells us that commerce obeys the laws of interest and not those of affection. He then proceeds to arraign the tariff policy of the United States,