Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-02-11

The value Of farm lands, he said, is
affected by the proximity to market
more than by any other element ana
he maintained that the American
farmer would still have the advantage
in this respect. He also predicted Il
great increase in American milling as
a result of the agreement.
1t is a mere truism,' said the
President, Ito say that the farmers
of country constitute the greatest
wealth. producing class of the country
and that it is of the greatest import
ance to conserve their welfare. When
we have had good crops. the wheels
of all industries have moved and
wealth has been stored. Anyone there
fore. who would initiate a policy to
injure the farmer has much to answer
for at the bar OF public opinion.
The greatest reason for adopting
this agreement is the fact that it is
going to unite two countries with kim
bred people and lying together across
a wide continent, in Il commercial and
social union IL the great advantage
of both Such Il result does not need
IL he justified by a nice balancing of
pecuniary profit t. each. Its undoubt-
ed general benefit will indicate those
who are responsible for it. | say this
in order that by answering the argu-
|ments directed To the detailed effect of
the agreement upon different classes
of persons, | may not be thought To
abandon the broad ground upon which
the opportunity to confirm this agree
ment ought to he seized.
Taking up first the effect of the
agreement on corn he said:
The total production of corn in the
United States in 1910 was 3.125.713.000
bushels. of which We exported 44.072,-
209 and used the rest in domestic con-
sumption. chiefly in raising cattle and
hogs Of which in live cattle and pack
ing house products we exported i'll
value S135.9S5,o12. The Canadian pro-
duct of corn was 1S.I26.000 bushels.
or six-tcnths Of one per cent. of the
total production of the United States.
We exported 100000 bushels 10
Canada Certainly in respect of corn
the American farmer is king and will
remain so. reciprocity or no reciprocity.
Indeed, the change will greatly help
him by increasing his supply of young
and thin cattle. now very scarce, for
feeding with his corn and making good
| beef.
But it is said that the farm land
of Ohio. Indiana, Illinois. Iowa, Wis
lconsn and other states is much more
valuable than the land in Manitoba
Saskatchewan. Assinaboine, and AL
berta. the four great northwestern
provinces of Canada and that to give
Canadian farmers free entry of pro-
duets raised on cheaper lands will be
certain to lower farm lands in value
in this country. Nothing could be
further from the fact. The Canadian
lands are farther removed from the
Minneapolis and Chicago markets thar
the lands of Minnesota, Wisconsin
Iowa. or Illinois and proximity to mar
ket is most important element in the
value of farm land. Then the natura
lchange in farming in this country is
from the raising of grain for export t.
the raising of grain for farm consump-
ton and development of the secondary
products in the form of cattle ani
lhogs. The live cattle are bought an6
lfattened. The hogs are raised anG
fed. 1t is farming of this kind that
IcXplains the high value of farm lands
in Illinois and Iowa.
If the argument as to the disastrous
effect of admitting the crops of the
Canadian Northwest to our markets
upon the values Of our farm lands i,
correct then the opening of lands il
KaEsas, Nebraska and the two Dako
. tas in the two decades from 1890 L
1910. should have had similar effee
| upon the land of the older states. Now
what was the fact? What was the eff
; feet upon the farm lands of the olde
states Of the competition of these new
err states The land in the older state
= o. 80 50 g. ~