Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1911-06-05

than they now reach In many instances.
The trade will be beneficial to both the
seller and the buyer. It will not, In my
judgment. reduce the price OF wheat or
other farming products for our people in
any marked way. 1t will, however, by
charging the source of supply, prevent
undue fluctuations and IL will and ought
to prevent an exorbitant increase in the
price OF farm products which, as they
have been for the last two or three years,
have Injured greatly to the profit OF all
engaged in agriculture.
Denies Inconsistency.
1T have been attacked on the floor of
the house and elsewhere as occupying an
inconsistent position. II has been said that
1 have urged the reciprocity agreement
with the idea OF lowering the cost of living
on the one hand and then have asserted
that the farmers will not be injured by
reductions in the price at which they sell
their products On the other hand. It is
asked is II possible to reduce the cost of
living on the one hand and maintain the
present price OF farm products on the
other?
MY own impression is that the cost OF
farm products is determined by the world s
tariff or otherwise and that so long as the
movement toward manufacturing and away
from the farms continues and the supply
Of farm laborers is reduced a continuance
of high prices for farm products is In
evitable But 1 do think that reciprocity
will enlarge the reservoir or the supply OF
farm products for our people and thus
prevent undue enhancement OF prices be-
yond the present standard. II this be the
case then neither the farmer will be in
jured nor will prices increase.
The argument is made, however, that
TO give free trade to the Canadian farmer
in farm products so as to permit him tc
enjoy the markets OF the United States
is TO give him an advantage over our owr
farmers, who, living behind a high tariff
wall have to pay q great deal more for the
cost OF living than do Canadian farmers
whose protective system is not 50 prohibi
tive. With respect to this argument all
have to say is that it Is not true
Living Not Higher Here.
THE average cost of living in the United
States is not higher than it Is in Canada
This is conciusively shown by two facts
first, that in spite OF the preference giveI
To English products imported into Canada
1 eiS NHS peAhb oofe per cent less IMAM ina
imposed on goods from other countries. tn,
United States exports into Canada s226.
10000 OF goods of the widest variety o.
manufactures, all OF these entering int
the cost OF living, while Canada, will
preference In favor OF England, import
from England goods TO the value OF onll
tsS,OO0,Oo0. In other words. despite the pro
tective tariff maintained by Canada agains
the United States, yet Canada, in the mat
ter Of articles entering into the cost O
living OF its people, buys two and one-hai
times as much from the United States a
II does from England.
1t is said the farm land In Ohio, Indiana
Illinois, Iowa, Wisconsin and other State
Is much more valuable than the land Il
Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta tn
great northwestern provinces OF Canada
and that to give Canadian farmers fire.
entry OF products on cheaper lands woul,
be certain to lower farm lands in value d
this country.
Nothing could be further from the fact
The Canadian lands are farther remove,