The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1911-02-11

need to be justified by a nice balanc-
ing Of pecuniary profit to each. Its
tlndoubted general benetit viii indl-
cate those who are responsible for 1t.
y say this In order that by answering
the arguments directed to the detailed
effect of the agreement upon different
Glasses Of persons | may not be
thought to abandon this broad ground
upon which the opportunity to con-
firm this agreement ought TO be
SEIZED
Taking up the first effect of the
agreement on corn. he said;
The total production OF corn in
the United States in 1910 was $685.
$4,000 bushels. Of which We exported
~, 072.20s, and used the rest. in do
nestle consumption, chiefly in rats
Ding cattle and hogs. Of which In live
cattle and packing house products we
exported in value $1S3SssS,2t2. The
Canadian product OF corn was 1929
600 bushels, or six-tenths Of one per
cent Of the total production Of the
United States. we exported $1,000.
900 bushels to Canada. Certainly in
respect Of corn. the. Almenican farmer
is King and will remain so, reciprocity
or no reciprocity. No, indeed, the
change will greatly help him by in
creasing his supply OF young and thin
cattle, now very scarce for feeding
with his corn and making good beef.
but 1t is said that the farm land
Of Ohio, Indiana, illinois, Iowa, WIS
consin and other states is much more
valuable than the land in Manitoba,
Saskatchewan. Assinobene and Alber-
ia, the four great northwestern Prov
inces of Canada. and that to give Ca:
madam farmers free entry OF products
raised on cheaper lands will be GER
tain to lower farm lands in value in
this country. Nothing could be fur
Their from the fact The Canadian
lands are farther removed from the
Minneapolis and Chicago markets
than the lands of Minnesota, Wlscons
sin, Iowa or Illinois,, and proximity
to market is a most important ele-
ment In the value of farm lands. Then
the natural change in farming in this
country is from the raising of grain
for export to the raising of grain for
farming consumption j and develop
ment OF the secondary products in the
form of cattle and hogs. The live
cattle are bought and fattened. The
hogs are raised and fed. 1t is farming
OF this kind that explains the high
value Of farm lands in Illinois and
Iowa. "
j'If the argument as to the dlsas-
trous effect of admitting the crops
of the Canadian n6+thwest to our
markets upon the yatyes Of our farm
land is correct then the opening OF
lands in Kansas, Nebraska, and the
two Dakotas in the two decades from
1890 to 1910 should have had sim
liar 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 of the COM
petition Of these never 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 values of the land OF the
older farming states were in most
cases more than doubled.
The difference in the value-o of the
acre between Manitoba and Minnesota
is but little more than eight dollars
while the difference between Minneso-
ia and wisconsin is six dollars, be-
tween wisconsin and Illinois is SO,
between Wisconsin and Iowa Is 40,
between Michigan and Indiana is 81.
These figures show incontestably that
the fear Of reduction in farm land
values of this country by letting in
Canada's products Is wholly unEound-
ed.
THE price of wheat, less transpor-
tation and other charges for ware
house and delivery is fixed by what
all the wheat exporting countries, in
Guiding the United States and Canada,
can get for their surplus in Liverpool.
Hence, the sending of any part of
Canada's surplus through our coun-
try instead Of through Canada to be
milled or ODE exported without mill
ing, will not perceptNbiy or materially
affect the price of wheat for our far