The Vinita daily chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1902-1913, 1911-02-11
By Associate d Press.

Opl lnSuSiu, ILL.,, feU. 1l.-GTeSluSu
Taft defended the proposed reciproc
ity agreement with Canada in an ad
dress before the Illinois Legislature
here today as logical conclusions o.
the protection plank in the last repub
lican national platform.
He defined the protection theory as
one that should impose a tariff moi
exceeding the difference in the cost OF
production in this country and abroad
and allowing a fair margin of profit
for the home producer.
We agreed, therefore, that inasmuch
as the conditions of production from
the United States and Canada "were
substantially the same, the widest lati
tude was given Secretary Knox and
the commissioners who represented the
United States in offering Canada a
reduction of duties on goods and prod.
ucts coming into this country from
Canada in consideration of the estab.
lishment of the same duty, or freedom
from duty, on similar goods going into
Canada"
The president explained that it was
thought wiser on behalf of both gov.
ernments not to make formal treaty,
but to make an agreement between
the executives by which each should
submit the agreement in the form of
a statute to be enacted ana to go into
force on condition that similar statue
was passed by the legislature of the
other country" He said in part:
"This form of agreement makes it
one from which either country can
withdraw at win by simply changing
the statute by new legislation.
Il am protectionist. That is, be-
lieve there are certain industries in
this country which need the encourage
ing effect of tariff upon imports
from foreign countries to enable them
to pay good wages and furnish rea-
sonable profit to those who engage in
them. The difference in condition
which generally makes this tariff nee
essary is the lower price of labor in
the foreign country as compared with
the price of labor in our own.
There was time when leading re-
publicans thought there was no dan
ger of having tariff higher than nee
essary to protect any industry. 1t was
thought that if the country was made
dependent on manufactures behind the
tariff wall the competition between
the manufacturers would atimulate
the reduction in the cost of production
and thus reduce the price.
But the temptation to combine by
which the price could be controlled
and thus the excessive tariff taken ad-
vantage of, led to a modification of
the protection theory and to a declar-
alton that the protection of any indus
try ought not to exceed in the tariff
imposed, more than the difference be-
tween the cost of production abroad,
the cost of production here, and en-
ough to give a fair profit to the domes-
tic producer or manufacturer
This limitation necessarily took
away any grounds for a tariff between
this country and any country in which
the conditions of production were sub
stantially the same. The conditions
Of production and manufacture in the
United States and in Canada are sub
the same. Wages may diff
fer in one part of Canada from another
part, just as wages differ in different
states in this country, but the price
paid them per unit of work is not
less in Canada than in
his country.
'In other words, the plank in the
platform of the last republican con-
carried to its logical conclu-
sion would lead to substantial free
rade with Canada.
'In many cases where the agree
nent has been criticised for not max
ng greater reduction, we could not
ecure them because in the Judgment
# our Canadian friends the trade or
industry which they desired to foster
would suffer by greater reduction
hus with respect to meats we would |
lave been glad to put them on the
rec list. Canada objected and we OBJ
ni.od A. bona Rs........ -. ....1iu