The Sauk Centre herald. (Sauk Centre, Stearns County, Minn.) 1886-current, 1911-03-02
HE'S NOT SHOWN A FARMERS VIEW
What a IiIIer of the Soil Thinks
of Canadian Reciprocity
he OPPOSES THE IDEA
Well Known StearnS County Agri-
CHitgriSt States his Ideas on
important Subject

important Subject
Editor Herald: In one of your edi-
torials of Feb. % last, you say that
reciprocity with Canada would be a
good thing. But you neglect to tell
us why.
If you will be kind enough to pub
fish this, l will ask a few questions
and also tell The Herald readers why
| think it would be the worst thing
that ever happened to the Northwest.
To begin with, how are you going to
lessen the cost of living to the labor
ing man in the towns and cities, and
at the same time benefit the farmer,
who has built up the whole North
west, including Minneapolis, ST. Paul
and Duluth? Those three cities,
especially Minneapolis, are now work
ing hard against him. Do you think
it right to build up those cities at the
expense of all the other small towns
of the state?
Take Jim Hills preaching on reci-
procity. We are exporting about 1O%
of our wheat, and still he tells us,
Liverpool regulates the price of our
wheat. beg to differ; any man who
knows anything about the wheat
market for the past seven years, will
tell you Minneapolis has been buying
most of the time on an average of
about Sets of the Liverpool market,
and, according to the Minneapolis
Jpnrna5 Fen. oath last there was Sets
difference Chicago and Liverpool, and
it takes l5cts to ship from Chicago to
Liverpool with small margin of pro-
fit. Does that look as though Liver
pool regulates our market?
Has not the price of wheat dropped
about l2cts, mostly through the eff
fects of what congress has already
done in regard to this treaty?
Does not the farmer help to support
a protective tariff on every piece of
machinery he uses to carry on his
farm work? If protection is good for
the laboring man, is not the farmer
doing his part? Would it not be a
grand thing for the venerable Jim
Hill, if he could get this enacted into
law, so he could haul down on the
Great Northern 80 or 90 million
bushels of Canadian wheat and dump
it on the Minneapolis market, to COM
pete with the wheat of the North
western farmer; and then reload those
same cars with manufactured goods
of all kinds from Minneapolis and ST.
Paul and haul them back to Canada?
(No duty.) How much would the
smaller towns of the state get out of
this? They would get the free wheat
from Canada and duty on -four; free
cattle and duty on meat. The
farmer would be getting the short
end of the stick. Mr.. Hill and the
big manufacturers would get the
long end and part of the middle.
Did not every congressman from
Minnesota with the exception of two
from the cities go against that bill?
Still you say that Mr.. G. A. Lind
bergh did not have his ear close to
the ground, or he would not have
voted that way. But Mr.. Lindbergh
too well knows he is representing an
agricultural district, or he might
have done differently, and what will
help the farmer, will help every town
and city in this district.
Some of those great apostles of reci-
procity who have been opening their
flood gates of oratory on this subject
tell us there is difference of 10 or
l2cts. in the price of wheat between
some of the states and he says there
is no tariff between states. But he
forgets to tell us, that this is caused
by the difference in quality, and also
local demands. Hard spring wheat is