Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-04-26
Cites RooseveIt's. Change
of Front on Reciprocity

Fourth. Mr.. Roosevelt now seeks to
take advantage Of the supposed feeling
among the farmers Of the country against
the reciprocity agreement with Canada
which I made and induced Congress to
adopt, but which Canada finally rejected
would not object to this as q legitimate
argument in a political controversy
against me and in his favor IL the fact
were not that I consulted him ten days
before I made the agreement, explained
to him in full its probable terms, stated
the arguments pro and con, especially the
enectof 1t on agricultural produces, and
asked him to confer with his colleagues Of
the Outlook as to its wisdom and public
benefit and let me know his and their
judgment. He replied approving the
agreement in the most enthusiastic terms
and complimenting me for having brought
1t forward.
I submit below our correspondence on
the subject of reciprocity:
Confidential)
Copy) The White House,
Washington. January 10, 1911.
My Dear Theodore:
-
Just at present am in the midst OF
reciprocity matters. and it would crafty
me great deal to talk over with you
IL
always been a low-tariff and downward
revision man, and the reason why ia
vored the last tariff bill and praised 1t as
the best one we had ever had was: That
the efforts Of those who defended it after
wards TO show that 1t was q downward
revision were all a concession by the re-
publican party that downward revision
was necessary, and that the rule upheld
by Shaw and Cannon and other stand
patters Of the orthodox type that no tar
III could be too high, because what you
needed was q Chinese wall, had been
departed from. Now, the probability is
enst w we shall reach an agreement with
products-cereals, lumber, dairy prod.
ucts. fruits. meats and cattle-shall en-
ter both countries free, and that we shaIf
get revision-not as heavy a one as i
equivalent certainly to the French reci-
procity treaty and probably more-on
manufactures.
The truth is that the minute that We
adopt IN convention the proposal that our
ence In the cost Of production we neces-
sariiy adopt a rule which would lead as
straight to reciprocity In natural products
with canada, because the conditions IN
me TWO countries are so similar that
there Is substantially no difference in
the cost OF production. Possibly labor is
slightly lower in some parts Of Canada
than In the United States, but 1t is also
higher In some parts, and the adoption
OF free trade would rapidly increase the
cost OF labor in those parts where 1t is
cheaper In Canada, 30 that the condi-
tons would be the same,
It might at first have a tendency to
reduce the cost Of food products some
what; 1t would certainly make the reser-
votr much greater ana prevent fiuctua-
tons. Meantime the amount of Canadian
products We would take would produce
current OF business between western
Canada and the United States that would
make Canada only an adjunct of the
United States. 1t would transfer all
their important business to Chicago and
New York. with their bank credits and
everything else. and It would increase
manufactures. ] see this Ia an argument
against reciprocity made in Canada, and
think 1t II q good one.
The proportion 10 to make an arrange
ment by which We shall present to both
houses or Congress an identical bill. and
pass It as IN agreement for joint legisaa-
ton. In this way we would avoid. the
necessity for two-thirds in the Senate,
and would secure at once the consent
OF the House, which In tariff matters is
generally regarded as necessary. at any
ton, ! presume. It will be unpopular In
New York because Of certain lumber
manufacturing interests and the dairy In
teresta. It will be unpopular In Min
nesOta because OF wheat; but on the
other hand. FREQ lumber will be popular
In some places. and as It includes free
paper and free wood pulp We may count
on the fairly good support Of the press,
This letter. OF course. must ask you to