The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-04-18
Inomic justification for thee1 800 miles
of line between Winninep. and Mono

nonic justification for thes1 800 miles
of line between Winnipeg and Mono
ton, n. B.
For many decades this portion Of
the line will not be profitable. 1t
runs thru an uninhabited, and, for
country. Yet the government pro-
poses to spend from $50, 100000 to.
500, 100000 on this line. Why?
Chiefly to make Canada a nation-to
|give it depth as well as length, to
build UP a back country, to bind the
certain Americanizing tendencies in
the west.
The influx of Americans into the
Canadian west is welcomed, but at the
same time it has aroused certain APP
prehensions. It is feared that within
decade the Americans will predomi-
nate in the west. Everything possible
must be done to make the interest of
these Americans Canadian, to cause
them to turn their longing glances
from the south. They must be made
to be satisfied with their material sur
! roundings as their new home. They
must, therefore, be provided with
markets and transportation routes of
such a nature that they will not be
! thinking wistfully of the vast markets
and the great web Of railroads in the
| United States.
Inc Irand trunk racine IS d Step
| in that direction. In the house of
commons the other day Sir Wilfrid
Laurier defended the project partly
| on the ground that it would be potent
| to prevent the Americanization of the
west.
Reciprocity.
| AS for reciprocity, there is little in
| terest in it here, except as to recipro-
city in natural products.
nov nor,c Of q
lower duty on farm machinery, but
they are not in control. There is
quite an agitation in Ontario now fol
the removal of the duty on coal. But
even in natural products reciprocity
would scarcely be welcomed except or
a long-tern basis.
Canadians complain bitterly of the
hardships they have been put to by
changes in the American tariff. The
Mckinley tariff, and, later the DingleJ
| tariff, with the lower duties of the
Wilson law in between, made no enc
of trouble.
Canadian farmers had to turn from
IAmerican to English markets ant
great confusion, annoyance and los:
resulted. Now they have adapted
themselves to new condition anc
they would not care to adjust them
I selves to another change unless i
were, to. be permanent. And yet these
products 5000 miles to market, lool
with covetous eyes upon the market!
made by the teeming millions anc
populous, cities to the south, only {
few hours away.
a Great Mistake.
"From the standpoint of continental
union" said a conservative journalist
| the Mckinley law was a colossa
blunder. If that law had given Cana
dian products a liberal preference i
would-Well, there might have beer
no Canada to-day. That was the
critical moment, and the republic tool
the wrong road. Since then a lot O.
history has been made and the foun
dations Of a Canadian nation have
been laid.
Possibly another opportunity ma.
come in the future, but 1 doubt it. Thu
wisest course for the United States tt
pursue now would be to negotiate tn
best long-term reciprocity treaty it i
possible to arrange or else adopt
maximum and minimum tariff system
that would cause American duties t.
be as low on our goods as our dutie
on American goods"
Catch EN- ON Both Sides.
) There are certain great information
4 al interests that wish to see the TART