Arizona republican., 1911-04-28
CANADA REFUSED THEM
Unable to Compete With Packers and Millers On This Side-President De nies Discri ina ion Against Farmers.

New York. April 27.-President Taft spoke. before the joint banquet of the American Newspaper publishers as sOciatiOn and Associated Press at tine Waldorf Astoria tonight He devoted the greater part of his address to Canadian reciprocity.
 He said: We rendered to the Ca nadian commissioners absolute free trade in all products of either cOun- try, manufactured or natural but the Canadian commissioners did not feel justified in going sO far. It is only reasonable to infer. therefore, that with respect to those articles upon which they refuse free trade to us they felt that d profitable price at which they could be sold by our manufacturers in Canada was less than the price at which their man ufacturers could afford to sell the same either tO their own people or to us.
 Hence. it follows that their refusal to agree to free trade in these articles as proposed. is the strongest kind of evidence that if We should take off the existing duty from sucn articies coming into the United States, it would not affect in the slightest de gree the price at which those articles could be furnished tO the public here
 Thus the reason why meats are not put on the free list was because Canada felt that competition with our packers would injurioUsly affect the products of their packing house. If that be true, how would it help our consumer or lower the price of meat in our markets. if we let their meats in free. while they retained the duty on our meat2
 The same thing is true of flour And yet some gentlemen insist that the farmer has been unjustly treated becatse we did not put Canadian flour and meat on the free list. And it is proposed to satisfy the supposed grievance of the farmers by now dO- ing 50 without any compensating con cessiOn from Canada.
 But if We do make concessions without any consideration on the part of Canada then We are in danger of creating an obligation against us in favor of all foreign countries with whom We have existing treaties con taining what is called the favored nation clause
 More than this, these proposed gratuitous concessions are in the ma ture of admissions that in some way or other We have done injury to a particular class by this Canadian rec iprOcity agreement. 1 deny it. It is said that it injures the farmers. 1 deny it.
 The effect is not going. in my judgment. to lower the specific prices of agricultural products in our coun- try. It is going tO steady then, and it is going to produce an interchange of products at a profit which will be beneficial to both countries.
 Another. and conclusive reason for closing the contract is the Opportun ity which it gives us to increase the supply of our natural resources which with the wastefulness of children we have wantonly exhausted.
 T am not an anti-imperialist, but I have had considerable experience in over which we have assum ed temporary control
 Tt would be invidiOus to institute a comparison between the government of Canada and that of this country but there is one part of our juris dictiOn and that of Canada that come together sufficiently close to enable Canadians and ourselves to realize that the sample of government We exhibit is not alluring. I refer tO the control of Alaska, as compared with the control by Canada of her northwest territory. The talk of an nexation is bOsh. Every one who knows anything about it realizes that it is bosh.
 'I desire to express my high appre- citation of the manner in which the present house of representatives has treated the reciprocity agreement It has not played politics. It has taken a statesmanlike course in respect to it.
 'I am hopeful that the senate will treat the agreement the same way and that no amendments will there be added to the biE''