The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1911-02-18
PLUMLEY'S
REASONS
Congressman Tells Why He
Voted No
ON RECIPROCITY BILL
-----------
In Letter to the st. Adams Messenger.
Afraid That 1t Might Not Prove
Beneficial to Vermont
Farmers.

The St. Adams Messenger prints the
following letter from Congressman Plum
ley, explaining why he voted against
the reciprocity measure:-
Owing to the intense interest in yer-
mont over the proposed reciprocity agree.
ment with Canada, The Messenger to-
day prints a letter from Congressman
Frank f. Plumley, who was one of the
81 Republicans of the country and one
Of the eight New England congressman
who voted against The ratification of the
treaty by the House, in which he plainly
sets forth his views and makes plain his
position on the matter From the very
nature Of thinge. it is very probable
that the opponents OF the measure have
been exceedingly more active than have
its friends in urging action OF the con-
gressmen. Congressman Plumleys letter
follows;--
Il am sorry that my doubts concern
ing the effect as a whole, OF the trade
agreement proposed with Canada were
not sufficiently dispelled at the time Of
z AAhl dGAtVN w VttiAA1 Alt% " ANSN4N -
vote in the affirmative.
Il have favored reciprocity as a corol
larry TO and supplemental of protection
for more than a quarter Of century,
but the reciprocity which ! had favored
was Republican reciprocity as defined by
the lamented Mckinley in his great
speech at Buffalo, IN which he said that
he favored purchasing of our neighbors
such OF their products as we can use
without harm to our industries and la
Dor; or, in other words, such of their
products ais are not produced by our own
labor. and obtain in exchange a market
for the class of merchandise which we
desire to sell. When the trade agree
ment came to us from the president, il
was found to be of an entirely different
character, TO my surprise. J believed it
was my duty TO form an independent
Judgment after careful study OF the
facts. / desired to vote for it If ! could
do so with safety TO my constituents,
first. because it was being urged by our
president and | was in favor OF reciproc-
ity, in principle; second, because IL would
please the greater part of my friends of
the press OF Vermont. who had been
81 hlitu htNHNH " Hlt NttA ~ tiih4kSlAtf 3
and. third, because it might be Of benefit /
to the consumer. Apparently IL proposed /
to place the entire burden upon the |
farmer with no compensatory relief and |
In the short time permitted for investi- I
cation and study | was unable TO deter /
mine that it would not prove as harmful /
and as unsatisfactory as somewhat /
similar pact had proven existing from
1854 to 1865, which long before it expired /
was denounced by all Vermont and its /
removal al Washington was proposed /
bv our Morrill, Collamer and Foot. Since I
there was no claim on the part of its
opponents that it would result in any
immediate relief to the consumer, and +
as there was, therefore, no necessity for
immediate action, Of such radical char
aeter. | preferred that it be delayed
In its enactment rather than expedited
to find in the end that 1t was grieyous
mistake. The time given was too short
to permit a careful study and wise judg
ment, either by the people of Vermont,
that they might instruct with wisdom
their representative, or that he might
safely act without such instruction from
the great body of his constituents.
"This is the meaning of my vote and
later / will submit more in detail why
/ had such doubts I enclose a copy Of
a telegram from Wilder, VT, which has
a serious aspect.
again expressing my regret that my
action did not conform with your wish
and with your judgment, which do
not deny may be correct, but of which
| could not feel sure in the brief time
allotted me for consideration, and again
thanking you for your kind and courte-
Gus treatment of me in the past, re-
main, yours very truly,
Frank Plumley."
A copy Of The telegram. to which Mr..
Plumley refers, follows;-
Frank Plumley,
Care House of Representatives,
Washington:
"A great many paper mills win have
to shut down if the reciprocity bill is
passed, it will close the mills in this
section where hundreds of men own their
homes. We appeal to you to do every
thing YOU can to prevent the bill being
passed