New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-06-04

average cost of living in the United
! States is not higher than il is in Canada.
This is conclusively shown by two facts
first. that in spite Of the preference
given to English products imported int"
Canada, the duty being 33 ID per cent
less than that imposed on goods from
otlSr countries. the United States eX-
ports to Canada SD. 600GD worth ~
goods of the widest variety OF manufact-
ure, ali of these entering into the cost oil
living, while Canada, with preference III
| favor of England, imports from England
goods 10 the value of only S93.OOO.OO. In
other words. despite the protective tarln
I maintained by Canada against the
! United States Canada yet in the mat
ter of articles entering into the cost oil
| living Of her people buys two and one
half times as much from the United
! States as she does from England
Again. In our negotiations over TINS
Canadian reciprocity treaty ! directed
our commissioners to secure as great q
cut In the duties on manufactures III
Canada az they could, but they were
unable to secure any more than appears
| IN this treaty for the reason that Canada
would not expose her manufacturers 10
| the competition of United states manu-
facturers. which is a conclusive PROOF
| that the manufactured products thd'
/ enter into the cost of living are hlgher III
Canada than they are in the Unlieo
States otherwise they would not fear
the competition of United States man
! ufacturers.
But It is said that the farm land IN
Ohio, Indiana. Illinois. Iowa. Wisconsin
| end other states is much more valuable
than the land in Manitoba, Saskatchewan
and Alberta, the great Northwestern
provinces Of Canada, and that to give
! Canadian farmers free entry Of products
OF cheaper lands Will be certain TO lower
farm lands in value in this country.
Nothing could be further from the iact'
The Canadian lands are further removed
from the Minneapolis and Chicago mar
| hets than the lands OF Minnesota, WIS
consin. Iowa or Illinois. and proximity 10
market is the most important element III
the value Of farm land. Then, the natural
change in farming in this country If
! from the raising OF grain and other
cereals for export to the raising OF gra II
! for farm consumption and development
| OF the secondary products in the FORM OF
cattle and hogs. The live cattie are
bought and fattencd. The hogs are
raised and fed.
II is farming Of this kind that eX-
,lains he high value of farm lands in
! Illinois and Iowa and other states. In
! 1900 the farm land value in North "a
kota was S11 ID an acre; in South pa
kota. 50 90: in Kansas, 81 II; in Ne
! braska. $40 q. At the same time the
value of farm land in Iowa was $50 %;
in Illinois. SAG IL: in Indiana. sol I'll IN
Michigan. S2i IL; in Wisconsin, $50 al,
and in Minnesota, sd 81.
No Disastrous Effect.
II the argument as TO the disastrous
effect OF admitting the crops OF the "a
madam Northwest 20 our markets upon
tie values of our farm land is correct
then the opening of lands in Kansas
: Nebraska and the two Dakotas IN the
two decades from 1890 to 1910 should
! have had q similar effect upon the land
~ the Older states. Now, what was the
! fact What was the effect upon the
farr, lands Of the olGer states of the
! conretition of these newer states? Inc
! land in the older states became more
devoted 10 corn and cattle and hogs'
while the wheat and other cereals were
left to the new lands The effect was
that the value Of the land In the older
| farm states was In most cases more
than doubled. and the census reports OF
| 1910 show the average farm value by
the acre in Illinois to be $50: in Iowa
$50: in Indiana. SEQ: in Michigan. t3l /;
! g., Wisconsin. SAB and in Minnesota 81 1.
Tho wear book of Canada shows the
average farm values by the acre IN inc
provinces of Manitoba. saskatchewan
and Alberta TO be SO ~. 81 ~ anl
500 40. respectively I'm lEt' the al
/ ference in the value OF the acre be
! tween Manitoba and Wisconsin Is ST;
between Wisconsin and Illinois u IS 81
| bptwpen wisconsin and Iowa, II l. S4o'
and between Michigan and Indiana it
/ IS S31. It,.
These figures show incontestably that
the fear OF reduction I'm farm land
values Of this country BY letting IN
Canada's products is wholly untouhd'd.
| always feel an innpatience, perhaps
an unreasonable one. in having 10 argue
the question Of scedules with reference
TO the advantage Of the reciprocity agree
nent with Canada, because IL seems TO
/ mo that tho reasons for adopting il are
| deeper and wider than are to be found
| in comparison OF percentages and rates
with respect to special localities and spe
/ cal businesses.
! THE general conditions are these: We
have a people numbering ninety mill
| ions. occupying the best part of the
! North American continent. WIN the
widest variety of products and with an
unexcclled fertility Of soil. To the north
| Of us are a people lust Ike ourselves. In
! descent. I'm wealth per capita. In educa
ton. in traditions. in ambitions and as
pirations They have a country nearly
| equal to ours In area. not so fertile gen
orally, and certainly not so rich. In the
wide variety Of agricultural products.
There are seven millions Of people there.
With them we have a trade OF S325 600.
| 600 a year. We export TO them 500.
600 600 q year. II VIC deduct from our
! exports to Germany. which Is nearly
twice as populous as Canada. the value
~ cotton and the copper that We send
there, it Will he found that We export
more Of our manufactures and agricult-
ural products to Canada than We DO 10
Germany. and that England Is the only