Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1911-03-25
MEMBER OF ASSOCIATED PRESS.
q@&a&s@
That interest in the proposed re

ciprOctty agreement between the UNI
ed States and Canada is reaching
fever heat, at least in this part of the
country, is evidenced by the way the
newspapers are taking it up and the
large number of meetings that are
being planned. The state meeting
has been planned to be held at Grand
Forks and will have met and discuss
ed ways and means before the extra
session of congress is called to order.
There is great opposition to the pact
in this part of the United States and
it is not without reason. Any right
thinking man can easily see that there
! is nothing in the proposed agreement
that will work a benefit to the North
Dakota farmer and there are plenty Of
measures incorporated in the bill as
it is now proposed to be passed that
will work direct harm to the men
and women who have pioneered in
the great northwest and who have
helped to make the state what it is
today. The proposed treaty will take
away many of the things, in the way
things which 90 to make life worth
the living in the way of comforts and
luxuries. The pioneers of the state
have worked hard tor what they have
secured and should now be left to en-
Joy the profits of their labors without
having to contend with outside COM
petition.
The following is an extract from
circular which is being sent about
the state setting forth few of the
reasons why the people of the state
of North Dakota would be injured by
the passage Of the proposed recipro-
city agreement.
l. 1t is not a reciprocal agreement,
but rather business agreement bene-
fetal to the manufacturer of the Un-
tied States, and the farmer of Can
ada.
2. 1t will reduce the earning pow
er of every acre of land in this state,
reducing the value, forcing many of
our farmers to leave for Canada, and
buyers from other states will follow.
3. That if passed it will cost as
much to raise bushel of grain as it
does now and we will be forced to sell
it for less.
4. That the United States farmer
is entitled to his own home market.
5. That for several years past the
price of all grains in the United States
has been more than ten per cent high
er than at Canadian points directly
opposite.
s. That it gives US nothing except
free salt and free fish.
Z. That the proposed reduction on
salt amounts to nothing
8. That the reduction of the duty
on fish 10 not worth considering.
9. That this trade agreement
leaves for the miller, the oatmeal man.
ufacturer, the breakfast food COM
panies, the beef trust, the malt trust,
and the steel trust, either all or ap.
proximately all the protection they
have now, giving the consumer no
benefit whatever.
10. That the biggest joker in this
proposed arrangement is the free lum.
Der fake, the difference in freight
alone between the rough and planed
lumber (planed lumber still retains
the duty of $3.50 would amount to
more than the reduction of $3.50 per
thousand, and that no farmer in North
Dakota will ever buy foot of lumber
for less than he does now on account
Of this co-called reduction but the cor
poration that uses ties, piles, tele-
graph and telephone pc:es has been
taken care of in the timber schedule
rs these are admitted absolutely free.
II. That the farmers of North Da-