The Oskaloosa herald., 1904-01-28

position to turn over 10 Cdndud thc
market that American farmers now
occupy and in exchange for the same
to give special advantages to some
American manufacturers.
Canada already gives reduction OF
! SO IL per cent on her tariff duties IN
| favor of the mother country.
What product of Iowa farmers viii
be sold in Canada under the proposed
arrangement? When we make an,
agreement with Canada the burden
should not be al thrown upon the FAR
mers' products, as is proposed by the
scheme Of free trade in natural pro
/ ducts.
Should free trade in competitive ar
4 ticles be agreed upon as against our
farmers, a policy of reciprocity which
the republican party has never looked
j upon with favor, the articles to be at
I fected should also include the things
4 which the manufacturers are also en-
gagged in producing The burden
. should not be borne alone by the far
mers. Manufacturers in New Eng
land and agricultural implement man
ufacturers in the central west should
: not insist upon sacrificing the inter-
J ests of the farmers in order to build
: up their own trade.
The farmers of the west have raw
ored and do favor protection. They
! believed in it because it has built up
home market, and because under
] protection, that home market was pre-
e served to them. They believed in 1t
!. because the market was greatly in
i creased The consumption of their
e products by the employed workmen in
y the protected industries furnishes
!. them great pecuniary interest in the
4 doctrine of protection.
e 1t is now seriously proposed to turn
large part of this advantage over 70
a Canada in consideration of concessions
l. by Canada on manufactured goods.
e. ii we should have free trade with
n Canada because she is guoo custom
is err. we have still stronger reason fol
lie free trade with Great Britain, and Ger
lie tainly he must be strong in the Cob
is den faith who would be willing to eX
lie pose our manufacturers to peril lik'
II that.
The leather goods manufacture
ty wants protected leather goods and ire
ne hides.
It. The agricultural implement deale
wishes to increase his Canadian trad
ch by surrendering the duties on the fal
it mers' products. Like Artemus Ward
,e. who was willing to send all nj
of wifes relatives to the war to pu
ee down the rebellion" some of thes
he short-sighted dealers are willing !
ID give away the advantages OF prote
se- ton so far as they mure to other
es, equations than their own.
es, I do not desire to condemn recipro
Up, ity with Canada or any other countI
with which we can make fair trad
OF but the proposition to surrender II
&C. rights of the farmers Of Iowa in ord
ac- TO help some other class of our poop
to has not one ofythe elements of repu
I'M lican reciprocity. AS the farmer III
the niece than once saved the policy
protection by his vote, he has z
ade right to be fairly considered in t
the making of schedules and treaties
the fecting his interests.
hat The old Canadian reciprocity trea
ted made in the democratic days OF Pier
% and Buchanan is we'll described
Z 80 -i Il, chapps = =,
Twenty years EARNEST lest eatboongress'.
ing. Selection of (commodities) I,
ople shown in the schedule, shows Il
ain. there was scarcely a product on
kill list which could be exported from
lerd United States without loss to
ned while the great market of the Uni
hey States was thrown open to Cana
5 of without tax or charge for nearly
heir erything which she could produce
the export. All her raw materials vi
admitted free, while our manufact
hem es were all charged heavy duty,
to market being reserved for Engl
tier merchants. The fishery question /
been used adroitly to secure from
the United States an agreement which v
the one-sided, yexatious and unprofitabl
rted The present situation is even nj
hat unfavorable in this, that Great b
lear ain has rebate of SO 1-3 per cent
dis all her duties on goods imported il
The Canada. The imports to Canada fir
of the United States in the fiscal Y,
ces. 1923 amounted to $144, 764, 375 viii
lent those of Great Britain amounted
ome SEQ, 40S, 020, notwithstanding the
igh. vantages accorded to the empire.
UNI Blaine's reciprocity has been de
ar. Jed by Hon. Charles Emory Smith
inns follows:
sist. Brazil grows coffee and makes
ast. machinery. We make machinery a
to grow no coffee. We agree to conc
any ,sions for her coffee and she agrees
With concessions for our machinery. II
lind is reciprocity"
That was not the kind of recipr
10 ity that was provided for by the der
eth cratic treaty of 1854, but was
With Buchanan idea of the subject
of McKinley's Buffalo speech has bt
I is grieyously misquoted. He in Il
900 speech defined reciprocity as "sensi
in trade arrangements which will not
'ade terrupt our home production"
Reciprocity has been defined by
the Roosevelt as the hand-maiden OF p
The tection 1t should not be made
sexton Of our industries When
we hear OF free traders agitating recipr
city ity, we may know it is not of
are "hand-maiden variety.
cen The, Boston Free Trade league is
one gagged in an agitation for treaties
ood. tending the free list to "all agriC
ices tural products any portion of VIII
our we now export.