Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1911-07-05
TAFT Defends HIS
CONTINUED from pag. ~

at the expense of the farmers, and
only in the interest of those who
would have farm products at less
price, to-wit. the wage earners of the
large cities. 1t is my own judgment
that the reciprocity agreement will
not greatly reduce the cost OF living.
if at all. 1t will. however, steady
prices by enlarging the reservoir of
supplies for those things that are
raised in both countries. and it will
NIKE more remote the possibility OF
cornering commodities and eXtOrting
excessive prices for them from the
public
1T is a mistake to say, however,
that this agreement is not in the in
telest of the farmers. Let us exam
inc the statistics and see. The free
list is made up almost entirely of ag-
ricultural products. The amounts of
expectation from this country to Can
ada at present in the articles covered
and affected by the reciprocity agree
ment was for the fiscal year ended
March 81, 1910, $4S,OO0,OOO. and the
duties paid on these articles was
something more than $7,S00,000. The
expectation of these same articles
into Canada for the year ended March
81, 1911, was $64,O00,O00, and the du.
ties levied and collected were $1O,-
100000. The increase in other words
was about $16,O00,00O last year and
the additional duties collected was
about $2,7O0,O0O. There seems little
doubt that for the current year the
United States trade covered by recip.
rocity will reach $75,0O0,00O, and the
remission of duties would be not less
than 100000 under the agreement.
What l wish to call attention to is
that of this remission of approximate.
ly 100000, which would have been
made on the imports into Canada
from the United States If the recip-
rocity agreement had been in effect,
little less than 100000 would
have been on agricultural products.
when the complaint made on be-
half of the farmer is Analysed, it
will be found to be limited to an ar.
gument that by the admission OF. free
wheat into the United States, the
price of wheat will be reduced 10
cents bushel. he answer to the
argument is that this cannot be, for
the reason that the price of wheat
In the United States and in Canada
both is ultimately fixed by the price
of wheat in the world, and that the
worlds price is adjusted and made at
Liverpool by the relation of the sup
ply Of the exported wheat to the de-
mand for it by countries which do
not raise enough to supply their
people.
1T may be that the free admission
of wheat from the United States into
Canada will increase to some extent
the price to the Canadian farmer, but
it will not decrease the price paid
to the American farmer because it
will not decrease the demand upon
the American farmer for his wheat.
The diversion from British and
European markets to the markets of !:
the United States of 10000, 600 to 49, |
100000 bushels of Canadian wheat
annually would not only strengthen |
the wheat market abroad, but would !
furnish the American mills with a
needed complement of wheat. The
effect would be to reduce the cost
OF production would enable the mills
to regain in the foreign market the
100000 to 100000 barrels of
flour sold in foreign trade annually
10 years ago, but which in recent
years has fallen to less than 10000
900 barrels.
las to barley and oats, the quality
of the Canadian products will com.
mend them to our use Their appear.
ance in the American market may
cause their substitution to some ex-
tent for our own similar products. but
such substitution would mean lust so
much elimination of, Canada's prod.
ucts from the markets of the world.
Their place needs to be filled and the
supply for this purpose would most
naturally come front he United
States, thus charging our own for.
elgn outlet for those grains. |
Farmers who have not broadly
considered TIE subject in all it's bear
lngs, have overlooked the benefits