Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1893-06-30
FREE TRADE LOGIC.
IT is THE NATURAL AND PROFIT
ABLE COURSE OF TRADE.

Would Reciprocity With Canada Eyentu-
ally Lead to Free Trade With Other
Countries?-If Beneficial In One Case, It
Would Be So In All.
An international reciprocity conven-
ton" has just been held at st. Paul,
made up Of delegates from the United
States and the Dominion of Canada, the
object of which is to promote freer COM
mercial intercourse between the two
countries. The substance of it's pro-
ceedings was the adoption of resolutions
In favor of new reciprocity treaty and
the appointment Of joint committee
"to bring the matter before the Domin-
ion parliament and the Canadian author
tiles and before the congress Of the Unit
ed States and the American authorities
and before the people of both coun-
tries"
The matter has been before the legis-
lative bodies, the authorities and the
people of the two countries off and on
these many years, but the agitation is
likely to be perennial until some result
has been achieved. Freedom of COM
mercial intercourse between the United
States and Canada would be so obviously
to the advantage of both that efforts to
secure it are not likely to cease until the
barriers are overcome. The strongest
argument in favor of it is to be found in
the constant object lesson of the unques-
toned advantage of free trade between
the states of this Union. Nobody dis
putes the advantage to all the states and
to the country as whole of unrestricted
commerce between the different sections
of the Union, and nobody can show
wherein freedom Of trade between New
York and Ontario would be less bene-
fetal than between New York and Ohio,
or why unrestricted intercourse between
Minnesota and Manitoba would be less
advantageous than between Minnesota
and Illinois.
While the logic of the situation is
wholly in favor of reciprocity fuller
and more complete the better-it is the
ultimate consequences of that logic that
present the greatest obstacle to the &C
ceptance of a sound policy, since it mill
tates against what each country has for
years been pleased to regard as it's ina
tional policy" In short, the logic of
the case pressed to it's conclusions would
leave the doctrine of protection without
leg to stand upon. What the resolu-
tons Of the st. Paul convention favor is
"the free interchange of those classes Of
products, both natural and industrial,
of each one, that are most generally in
demand or usually find the readiest sale
in the markets of the other"
Obviously that is the kind Of inter
change that is most advantageous, but
it is also the kind that would naturally
take place if there were no restrictions
in the way. If it would be mutually
beneficial in the case of certain ''classes
of products" it would be so in the case
of any or all commodities to the extent
that the specified conditions existed of
a demand or ready sale in one country
or the other. If it would be mutually
beneficial in the case of Canada and the
United States, it would be so in the case
of any other countries to the extent that
the products of one were in demand Or
had a ready sale in another. In fact, the
logic is simply the logic of free trade be-
tween the states, which would have pre-
cisely the same force with reference to
trade between any nations.
But it is this very interchange of the
products of one country that are the
''most generally in demand or usually
find the readiest sale in the markets" Of
another against which the policy of pro-
lection is directed. The natural and most
profitable and advantageous course of
trade is just what it aims to prevent. Rec
iprocity is free trade within certain linn
it's, and there is no way Of arguing for
it that will not tell in favor of extending
the limits until nothing is excluded
New York Times.