Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1911-02-16

| Canada1 Would better trade relations
injure our producers Of pork7 Would
canadian pork injure American PORK
Canada Ia unable to produce corn as
are Americans, and corn means beef
and pork both. Can any OF these
products on a small scale compare
lively injure the same products on
this SIDE Of the international bound
airy?
But we have shipped enormous
quantities of farm products Into Can
same products brought to this country
from Canada. Would Canada take
lcss Of our farm products with closer
trade relations7 II not, how would
Canadian farm products hurt Ameri-
can farm products7
But Mr.. Bachelors claim in behalf
Of our farmers is that reciprocity does
not afford them relief. That is a diff
ferent thing from injuring their prod
ucts. but let us look at Mr.. Bachel-
dcr's claim regarding wheat. He
snys in his reply to Secretary Wilson:
You refer to the advantages to our
great milling interests OF the free ad-
mission Of Canadian wheat. How Will
this help the farmers? How will 1t
help the consumers Of our towns and
cities? Wheat Is on the free list. but
four is to be taxed so cents pc bar
rel"
Let us suppose that Canadian flour
were also on the free list and Cana
dian wheat we're ground there instead
OF here. Does Mr.. Bachelor dream
for a moment that grinding wheat in
| Canada instead Of this side of the
boundary would make -four cheaper
here? Would not the effect be the
same as in the case Of lumber? The
price would remain the same, but
Canadians instead of Americans would
do the manufacturing. and Cana
dian farmers instead Of American
| farmers would feed the millers close
OF hand.
Let us take another illustration
Here is characteristic telegram re-
ccived in Washington from the Staten
Island shipbuilding company:
Free gypsum, as proposed in your
Canadian agreement. means that VIC
viii get an order to build large fleet
OF American steel oceen-gong vessels
Of 1900 tons capacity each to trans
port the gypsum from Nova Scotia to
the manufacturers Of the Atlantic sea
loard in the event Of wer these yes
sells could he used TO transport coal to
any part o. the world"
Now II the effect OF the small duty
on certain manufactured products will
be to keep lumber mils and grist
kinds on this side Of tho Canadian
boundary, and Canadian farm prod
ucts prepared for the table cannot
come into this country free who will
feed all this Increased manufacturing
class. the Canadians or the American
| farmers?
Bear in mind that it is not the con-
troll OF prices but the con,rol of the
market itself that gives protection
the key to the situation and If oul
farmers and others Will hear this fact
in mind they will not be misled by
talk about comparative prices, bur
will realize the truth of the protec-
ton adaEe held by Blaine and Nc
Kinley that reciprocity is the hand
maiden OF protection for the Ameri-
can people, securing for us whatevei
advantage free trade in raw material,
with the reciprocating country may
offer, but retaining control of on,
markets for the benefit OF the Ameri
can producer.
Let us in closing turn briefly to the
political side of the question. VIZ
have been declaring in different State
for reciprocity. Did we mean it OF
not? II we did not believe the PEG
pie needed II why did we declare fol
II. to catch votes?
The people will not continue to be
fooled. II we neglect this opportunity
to show our sincerity AS Presden
Taft so pertinently said in his speech
before the Illinois Legislature a
Springfield.
The very existence Of the policy Col
pcotection) depends on our abolition
OF the tariff where il is not really
needed under the principle OF the las,
republican platform.
If we persist in retaining II in these
times of high prices and gradually
exhaustinK food supply. and base oui