Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1911-06-06

in Illinois $46.17; in Indiana $S1.6l; In
Michigan $2412; in Wisconsin $26.7l,
and in Minnesota $21.31.
eff thes argument as to the disastrous
effect of admitting the crops of Cana
dian northwest to our markets upon the
value of our farm lands is correct, then
the opening of lands in Kansas, Ne
braska and the two Dakotas in the two
decades from 1890 to 1910 should have
had a similar effect upon the land of
the older states. Now, what was the
fact? What was the effect upon the
farm lands of the older states? The
land in the older states became more
devoted to corn and cattle and hogs,
while the wheat and other cereals were
left to the new lands The effect was
that the value of the land in the older
farming states were in most cases more
than doubled and the census reports OF
1910 show the average farm value by
the acre in Illinois to be $95, in Iowa
$50: in Indiana $62, in Michigan sci.
lin wisconsin SAB, and in Minnesota $3l.
The year back of Canada shows the
average farm values by acre in the Prov
inces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan an
Alberta TO be 1884, $21.54 and $2O.46,
respectively, in 1909. The difference in
the value Of the acre between Manitoba
and wisconsin is Sc; between Wiseon-
sin and Illinois it is $50; between Wis
lconsin and Iowa it is $40 and between
Michigan and Indiana it is S31.
s'These figures show incontestibly that
the fear of a reduction in farm land
values of this country by letting in
Canadas products is wholly unfounded.
I always feel an Impotence, perhaps an
unreasonable one, in having to argue the
question of schedules with reference to
the advantages of the reciprocity agree
ment with Canada, because it seems to
me that the reasons for adopting it are
deeper and wider than are to be found
in comparison Of percentages and rates
with respect to special localities and
special businesses.
1.-THE general conditions are these:'
1--WE have a people numbering ninety
millions. occupying the best part of the
North American continent, with the wild
est variety of products and with an UNI
excelled fertility of soil. To the north of
us are a people just like ourselves in de-
scent, in wealth per capita, in educa-
ton, in traditions, in ambitions and as
pirations. They have a country nearly
equal to ours in area, not so fertile gem
orally and certainly not so rich in the
wide variety of agricultural products.
There are seven millions of people there.
With them we have a trade or 1925 900, 600
year. We export to the $2Z5 200, 900
year If we deduct from or exports
to Germany, which is nearly twice as
populous as Canada the the value of
cotton and the copper we sen there, IL
will be found that we export moreof our
manufactures and agricultural products
to Canada than we do to Germany, and
that England is the oply foreign Gus
toner we have that takes more of our
goods than this comparatively small pop
ulation of Canada.
IF that is true, and Canada continues
to grow, what may we expect to sell her
If we reduce the tariff bill, introduce as
nearly as we can free trade, and she in
creases her population from 100000 to
30, 900 900 Shall we not be flying in the
face of Providence to maintain wall
between us and such a profitable market
as she will furnish us? The conditions
between Canada and the United States
are the same in point of labor cost, in the
point of cost of living, in point of the
general conditions prevailing in both
countries. If either country has the adj
vantage the United States has it, and yet
for the opening of the markets of each
to the other is certain to introduce a
measure of prosperity that we have never
seen equaled in the trade between the
two countries.
II do not advocate this treaty in view
of its benefits to the United States alone,
but because / am sure il will be bene-
fetal to Canad also. If 1 did not think
so my earnestness and enthusiasm for