The Washington times., 1936-09-25
.LAND0N BLAST
AT u. 5. TRADE
AGREEMENTS
Continued from Page g.

CONTINUED from Page 81
ernment with which the agree
ment Is being negotiated what
commodities are under discussion.
The little fellow, unable to
afford = foreign representative,
is the one who gets stuck. This
Is still another one of those
millstOneS that this Administra-
ton has placed around the
neCkS of our small producers.
Powers Too Wide
Another major Shortcoming of
these agreements is the use of
the unconditional, most-favored-
nation principle. This principle,
when widely followed by the
leading commercial nations, is
proper and wholesome way of pro-
noting international trade. But
today most nations have ceased
to use the principle. In conse-
quence, when we apply it we are
making a concession to foreign
nations without getting anything
in return. This is not reciprocity.
1t is charity paid for by Amer
ican producers.
One more point on the max
ing Of these agreements: This
is the question of whether it
was wise for Congress to give
to the President such sweeping
powers. Under our COnStitu-
tiOn, if these agreements are
cOmercial treaties they should
be ratified by twO-thirds
vote of the Senate. On the
other hand, if they are simply
reviSiOns of our tariff laws,
they come under the revenue
provisions of the Constitution.
In this case, they should be
approved by a majority vote
of both houses of Congress.
The present administration has
chosen to ignore both these
courses. There is no legislative
approval of the agreements before
they go into effect. They are
simply imposed upon the public.
That is not representative gov
ernment.
These policies have got to stop.
The way to trade is to trade,
and let me tell you thiS-we
Republicans are going to trade
not against but in the interest
of American producers. In too
many of the present agreements
we are the fellow who got the
blind horse.
We have got to stop destroy
ing the market of our farmers.
The Republican party is pledged
to protect the American mar
ket for the American farmer.
This does not mean that we
propose to prohibit the importa-
ton of commodities which we
cannot grow at reasonable cost
to consumers. 1t means that in
the case of farm products we will
not permit the shelves OF our
stores to be filled with foreign
commodities suited to our soil
and climate. It means we will
not permit unnecessary imports
of such products as meat, dairy
and poultry products, grains and
such fruits and vegetables as we
can grow to good advantage.
Full Crop Philosophy
We require many things which
we either do not produce or can
produce only at great cost. In
turn. we produce many products
In greater abundance than we can
use. The interchange of these two
classes of goods is essential to our
well-being.
We must not reduce farm pro-
duction in this country to the,
needs of the domestic market. This
is the doctrine of despair. 1t
would mean the abandonment OF
at least one out of every 10 acres
of our developed farm land. 1t
would mean less production to be
divideOl among an increasing farm
uopulation. In short, it would
mean a lower standard OF living
and a greatly increased relief load
in the rural districts.
The Republican party refuses to
accept this philosophy of despair.
It believes in making it possible for
the farmer to plant full crops. 1t
believes in increasing the demand
for farm products, not reducing
the supply. It believes the Amerl-
can farmer worthy of prosperity.
VOTE AME