The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1894-06-06

| fidence which ought to exist between the
| different parts OF Independent America.
| To the north of us, stretching for 1900 miles
| along our northern frontier is the only inn
| portant relic, with the exception of Cuba, of
| the political domination OF Europe in Amer
| lea. Politically, Canada, IL not menace,
| is at least nuisance to the United States.
| Her products, too, In further contrast to
| those OF the Spanish. American republics
are the same as our own. There is surely
no reason, political or commercial, why she
should be especially favored in our tariff
| legislation, and 1t cannot be done except to
| the great detriment of our home products
| This bill proposes, however, to discriminate
against our sister republics, which so
especially deserve our consideration and in
| favor Of o British colony which deserves it
so little, course which equally in each
case must result to the great disadvantage
| OF our own producers, especially the agri-
| cultural classes, and the permanent injury
/ of our largest national interests.
II there are any countries with which we
ought to cultivate freer trade relations,
| they are the Spanish-American republics
| We are alike isolated from the great pow
| ers of Europe; we alike have a common
| interest in the maintenance of self-govern-
ment upon the American continent and the
exclusion of foreign political power and in
| fiuence from them. AS the largest and
most powerful of the American nations, the
United States ought naturally to exercise
| preponderating influence in American af-
fairs. Her ability to do so, however, is to
a considerable degree controlled by the
| closeness of her relations and the extent of
her intercourse with her sister republics.
Reciprocity under the existing law has met
| every reasonable expectation of its friends.
Its prospects for the future were never
| brighter. And yet, in utter disregard OF
| the positive advantages thus secured to
our producers, it is proposed to throw these
advantages entirely away. 1t is proposed,
| too, to effect this change at once, and arbi.
| trarily, in a manner well calculated to
wound the sensibilites of those neighbors
with whom we ought to cultivate the most
frank, consistent and friendly relations.
| Bad as Is the reversal of the policy of COM
mercial reciprocity with the Spanish-Amer
lean countries, the time selected for its
| abandonment il even worse. Whatever
may be claimed by the friends of this bill as
to its effect upon the general prosper
ity of the country, they must admit that its
| tendency will be to diminish the value of
our own market. If it should become a
law, our people will need foreign markets as
| they have never needed them before. Under
these changed conditions they would have
availed themselves to a much greater ex-
| tent than thus far of the advantages of our
existing reciprocity agreements. AT time,
therefore, when it is proposed to compel
our producers to seek markets in other
countries by depriving them in measure
of the nearer and more advantageous mar
| kets at home, 1t is to be regretted that the
trainers and remodelers of this bill could not
have had sufficient compassion for the Amer
lean people to have left them the few adj
vantages for foreign trade which the exist
ing law gives them.
Since the act of 1890, Canada has made a
| desperate effort to build up and increase
| her direct trade with other countries, es-
| pecially Great Britain and the British West
Indian colonies. 1t made some little show
| at first, but the results demonstrate that she
cannot find any other foreign markets equal
to our own, which are the most accessible
| to her and are the richest in the world. If
our markets were not as they are, better in
| every other respect, their very nearness
would make them the best for Canadian
farm products, Her action in urging her
producers to seek other markets than ours
has been compared to that of the father
who told his boy he could not go to the cir
Gus. but if he was good he might visit his
grandmothers tomb This bill, however,
as it came to the senate, in some cases pro-
posed to remove the duty on these articles
entirely, and to reduce it upon all. The
amendments intended to be proposed by
| the senator from Arkansas make the reduce
ton less in some cases, and yet, even with
| those amendments, the reduction averages
from one-third to one-haf.
Lumber, which aggregates sone-third of
our entire importation from Canada, it is
proposed to make entirely free. The pro-
ducts of no other country have been treated
with such ELUSIVE generosity. There has
not been wanting evidence, heretofore, that
free traders and sO-called tariff reformers
were partial to British interests. This bill
| certainly abounds in partiality to those in
terests on this continent. Such tariff re-
| vision as il proposes is at the expense of our
own agricultural industries, which are
worthy OF the most thoughtful consdera-
ton of this body. 1t is at the expense too,
of large national political interests. Prior
to the reciprocity treaty Of 1854, we were
selling Canada from two and three times as
much as we were buying from her, and we
were steadily gaining in the proportion.
The year before that treaty took effect we
sold them over S26, 100000 in value and
bought less than S9,0000O0. Then they be-
gan to gain in the proportion, and at its
abrogation in 1866 were selling us nearly
double what they bought OF us. The ratio
then changed again, and this time in our
favor We soon sold them as much as we
bought and within ten years were selling
them fifty per cent more, and such was the
| proportion last year.
II such were the results OF reciprocity in
natural products, no wonder Canada halls
| with delight the advantages which 1t is pro-
posed now to voluntarily concede to her in
our markets with respect to the same prod
ucts and that our farmers on the border
are correspondingly depressed. Since the
publication of this bill the Canadian press
has been jubilant with the prospect for
selling their farm products in our markets
at prices enhanced by just the amount of
the reduction of duty.
Theories, Mr.. President, are grand and
high sounding, but the slightest practical
experience with Canadian farm products
will prove to the most confirmed theorizer
who pays the duty. Tie tariff is tax in
this case, and the Canadian farmer pays the
duty. The theorist cannot buy a horse, or
a sheep, a ton of hay, or dozen of eggs,
across the line without lean M it, or find a
Canadian farmer who will not admit it with
sorrow Why, then, should we relieve
Canada of this contribution for the support
of our government, and place an additional
burden upon our people?
do not believe in discriminating against
Canada in our tariff legislation to force her
to some desired result. l believe, however,
that our relations with her require us not to
legislate in her interest and against our
selves. Let us simply legislate for our
selves-consult our own interest as an in
divdual would in regard to what he should
produce. Let us ignore theories, so far as
the tariff on Canadian products is con-
cerned at least and have such rates fixed
by experts as shall give us the greatest
amount of revenue paid by the Canadian
producer and the least amount at the ex-