The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1911-03-27
Canadians Fear Reciprocity.

treaty that will not hold water, the |
following of-which is a fair sample:
Poultry and their products is an in !
dustry that responds very quickly to
stimulation or depression. Give the |
Canadians i've cents net more doz-
en- for their eggs and the production |
would increase tremendously BY
turning toward the more profitable
outlet offered in the States. the Ca
madam farmers would be immensely
benefited, but at whose loss? That
reciprocity means advantage to agrl-
culture in Canada is the strong argu-
ment for II ON that side of the line.
The reverse must be true on this
side.
There is no question regarding the
statement that il we should give the
Canadians five cents per dozen more
for eggs than they now get they
would increase the production. But
let us look at the facts Eggs are to-
day, and have been for some time
past, several cents higher.in Canada
than here. Our esteemed contempor-
airy could ascertain this readily by
comparing Montreal markets with
lours.
The further inference that Cana
dian agriculture was demanding this
treaty because it would benefit the
Canadian farmer is hardly water
tight, at least so far as the eastern
Canadian farmer Is concerned, and
from the trend of the Herald's argu-
ments we understand 1t is dealing
with the supposed effect of the agree
ment on the Vermont farmer Does
not the esteemed Randolph Herald
know that many of the farmers of a
section of the Province of Quebec re-
Gently met and, believing that rec-
procity would injure their agricultur-
al interests laid plans to fight it.
This group of men are buying space
In Canadian papers where they can
not get IL given them, to lay before
the farmers of eastern Canada their
belief The Standard Journal, an ex-
cellent weekly published across the
line, comes to our desk. Introducing
these articles the Journal editors
say:
"A group of men who believe that
our commercial interests are imper
lied by the recent reciprocity agree
ment have arranged for the publica-
| ton of series of articles expressing
| what in their opinion will be the aci-
ual results of reciprocity. This ar
J tlcle Is one OF series. and is receiv-
: ed by the Journal as paid matter"
Allowing the Monitor to quote from
= the article we read:
I'VE fear that the Canadian farmer
does not sufficiently appreciate his
home market-the market preserved
for him by the Canadian tariff.
III This home market is taking SO
| per cent OF his produce and at good
| prices
THE demand of the market is in
creasing and il will continue TO in
crease as the country grows.
III ut has the advantage OF nearness
stability. cheapness of transportation
and quickness OF returns.
The Canadian farmer is familiar
with its conditions and requirements
Let us remember that there are a.
least 10 times as many farmers in ths
United States as there are in Cana
da. and so while one Canadian farmer
will get entrance into the markets o
the United States 10 American far
mers will get into our home markets
They have already succeeded in sell
ing immense quantities OF farm pro
ducts in Canada in spite OF the duty
They have sold much more in Can
ada than Canadian farmers have sol,
In the United States.
with reciprocity in farm product
the 10 American farmers will crow,
the one Canadian farmer prett
closely in his own home market
1T will cost the American farme
- no more to bring his farm product
= TO Canadian towns and cities than
will cose the Canadian farmer I
carry his to the United States.
These American farm products ar
pretty we'll kept out now by I'll
An tariff wall. With this removal the
w will enter 10 to one.
IN I'VE must remember. too, that III
al Americans have the earlier seaso
~ and that their products will therefor
- be upon our markets before our pr
- ducts are saleable.
Reciprocity means to the Can
dian farmer the loss OF the CanadiG
market.
What will he get in return for q
home market which he will lose?
4, He will only get the opportunity
compete In the markets OF the Unit,
- States with the United States farm
and the ratio OF competition the
'at will be the same as II will be her
10 TO one.
The odds are always against d
.u. Canadian farmer.
icSl THE proposed arrangement is n
equally reciprocal The Canadii
farmer does not get square deal.
Does this sound as though q
=. eastern Canadian farmer was arguil
for reciprocity? As stated In an e,
torlal several weeks ago, We ha
y been so effectually cut of from Car
da we know nothing OF her conditl
today. She has changed marvellous
In the past generation or two. \
hrce only have eggs been higher In CT
rcny ada than in the United States OF Il
EN- but pork has also been higher and
times even butter brought bet
prices there than here. as has a
fS other produce raised by the VERNE
farmer.
THE Monitor. would close by ask
= again. but this time to the Her
49, specifically the question II put In
isl editorial several weeks ago and
ferred to above; With Eastern G.
adlan farm land and labor as high
49,. In Vermont how can he prod,
ave cheaper than the Vermont farmer
Barton Monitor.
- - a,>ttpr "a oes 400