The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1903-01-14
Some Sample Special Interests.

When a Minnesota member Of congress-
says, as one does elsewhere In
T h g Journ to-day. that there Will
tween the United States and Canada will
be an accomplished fact, one is almost
prompted to question his incerhy when he
adds that he is in favor Of such rec
iprocity. But as the particular congress-
man who makes this statement Is we'll
known to The Journal to be a sin
cere man. we can only conclude that the
atmosphere Of Washington, SO chilling to
reform Of all kinds. so fossilizing in it's
effects on tender legislative shoots, has
filled him with it's hopelessness of change.
Only man thoroughly discouraged by his
immediate surroundings and not reached
by more remote influences could say that
the time will never come when reciprocity
will be realized between the United
States and Canada. No one who goes
down below the surface and studies and
measures the large forces that are at
work can fail to conclude that some day
we shall have free trade with Canada, If
not political union.
1t is the DOGGY of special interests that
seems to have driven dull despair into the
heart and mind of this congressman He
knows that special interests usually con-
troll votes on all tariff measures. regardless
Of general interests, and concludes that
there will always be enough special in
terests inimical to freer trade with Cana
n <o tho 40 ~ t1,o
friends of reciprocity look forward to-.
This congressman applies the special in
terests argument to the attitude Of the
Minnesota senators should reciprocity
treaty with Canada come before the SEN
ate. His remarks as to lumber are ia
niliar, and need no attention here, but
1t Is worth while to examine into the
American farmer might be hurt by free
trade in three natural products he singles
out for special mention, viz, dairy prod
ucts. eggs. and poultry.
OF eggs the United States annually pro-
duces 1,293,s1s,1S6 dozen. of total value
OF 44,2ss,15s. The entire Canadian pro-
duction Of eggs is 1879, 900, 900. Would the
addition Of this whole product to the
American affect the market at all ?. Woult
the addition Of two eggs to a per capita
supply Of 2o4 injure the American farm
er? The question deserves no more Sc.
rious answer than John Charlton gave Il
at Detroit when he remarked that the
Canadian egg crop would give one omele1
a year to each inla bitant of the United
States.
The total value Of the American poul
try "crop" is s136, s91,177. Canada ex.
ports $61,1e6 worth of poultry, and mos
OF that now comes to the United States
The DOGGY Of free trade in poultry ough
not to ruin the American farmer or
sight. ....
The value of the annual dairy produc
Of the United States is $506, 66s, 2se. TIL,
value Of the Canadian exports Of dair,
products Is about $26. 900. 900. If the who'll
Of this Canadian surplus product wer,
diverted to the United States, which nov
crease the supply by only per cent
But as Canada has a splendid marke
for her dairy products In Great Britain
which practically takes all Of them, i
Is inconceivable that more than a small
portion Of the exports would be diverte.
to the United States, the more especiaH
as the American taste with: regard t
dairy products is very different from tina
of Great Britain. Moreover, the Unite
States is an exporter Of $4,000, 900 worth Q
dairy products yearly, mostly to England
and If Canadian butter was diverted fror
the English market to enter ours, j
would simply cause SO much more of GU
butter to be sent to England. So
It is facts like these that make tn
man who is free from special interes
bogeys agree with John Charlton in hi
reference to the miserable rut,' Ameri
cans have been travelling in, rut tina
holds US to the wrong road when half
continent Is open for us to step in an
share the fruits Of its development wit
the Canadians to the mutual advantag
AZ both peoples.