Custer weekly chronicle. [volume] (Custer City, S.D.) 1890-1931, 1897-05-29

ne new Canaulan tarlH proposes 10
discriminate against certain American
products and manufactures and In IA
vor Of British goods. The Canadians
have every right to do this provided 1t
docs not interfere with any commercial
treaty that may exist between the two
countries. This point will, OF course,
be inquired into by Congress. hut we
hardly suppose that the Canadian Gov
crEiner. IS making it's discriminating
proposition as a mere bluff and with
out knowing the ground on which 1t
stands.
Bluffs don't 60 much In this country,
so we will, therefore. assume that Can
ada can enact whatever kind OF tariff
she pleases and discriminate against
us TO her hearts content. 1t will be
we'll, however, for Canada TO remember p
that two can play at the same game. In
our tariff bill now before Congress we
have made no effort to discriminate
against Canada, but have freated her
as fairly and squarely as all other coun-
tries while desiring to afford protection
to the labor Of our own.
tiRiifditi.. ~ al Gc& ttp phlt ~
amend the Dingley tariff. Our imports
from Canada include coal, silver, fish,
lumber, logs, shingles, sheep, hides, hay,
| eggs, horses. wool. barley, beans, peas
! and wood pulp. American mines, for
ests and farms would not be injured by
our total exclusion OF all these Cana
dian products from the markets Of the
ITng,AI StafaS NhaulJ 49,. In,o, q.
be in absolute need OF any of them we
could easily let down q bar OF our pro-
lection fence and get them quickly
enough. Canada only buys our goods
because she needs them, and is M per-
feet liberty to purchase from England
should she so prefer.
But Canada must not forget that the
proposed discrimination In favor Of
British manufacturers is merely a prop
osition TO pay them the amount OF such
discrimination. They could Mt once adj
vance their prices 10 within n fraction
of the full amount OF that discrimina-
ton, which would, OF course. react to
our benefit in the trade by enabling us
to sell ut our old price and still pay the
tAlId huAl. Y AlltIt IN "a lllllt uiul-
ter concerning the Canadian railroads
and bonded privileges IN the transporta-
ton of their goods through our terri
tory. II would be an excellent oppor-
tunlty for lie 10 abolish all these UNI
American sops that have been given,
and for too long, TO the British capital
ists who own the Canadian railroads.
lNIt. xpastIl paGiIlt In lnttap h1tGinncc fnN
American railroads, which are sadly
in need of greater opportunities for be-
ing relieved of receiyerships.
Take it all in all, 1t might be a very
good thing TO have a little tariff war
with Canada and England, for this is
really an English idea with the wire
pulling manipulated by John Bull. The
Canadians are old enough to know that
their venerable ancestor, the mother
country OF which they are so proud, Is
not going to lose any OF the financial
benefits that may accrue through dis
elimination against our goods. III va
do not continue TO sell to Canada, then
England or Germany will do so at n
higher price. But will England or Ger
many buy the Canadian coal, or silver,
or fish, or lumber, or logs, or shingles,
or sheep, or hides, or hay, or eggs, or
horses, or wool, or barley, or beans, or
peas, or wood pulp that we have been
buying? Certainly not; and Canada
will have a larger surplus Of these pro-
ducts on hand, with the result that the
prices of such commodities will be
cheaper to the Canadian farmers, mine
and forest owner
We fail yet to see where Canada will
derive any great advantage from dis
eliminating against the United States
in trade matters. But let her try 1t on.
American Economist.