Springfield weekly Republican. [volume], May 04, 1911, Page 4, Image 4

About Springfield weekly Republican. [volume] (Springfield, Mass.) 1851-1946

Image provided by: Boston Public Library

                
4
TAFT TO NEWSPAPER MEN.
MAKES PLEA FOR RECIPROCITY.
ANSWERS SOME CRITICISMS.
Mexican Emba**a<lor Also Talks of
Situation in His Country.
Reciprocity with Canada must be adopt
ed now or never, and must stand or fall
by its own terms. So declared President
Taft in an address at the Waldorf-Astoria
at New York Thursday at the fourth an
nus! joint banquet of the Associated Press
and the American newspaper publishers'
association. His address was the first of
a series in which he plans to evoke public
sentiment in support of bis policies, and
be appealed to the company of editors and
newspaper owners, gathered from the
length and the breadth of the land, to im
press on the. public mind that reciprocity
should stand alone and "ought not to be
affected in any regard by other amend
meftts to the tariff law." His recommen
dations wore warmly cheered.
Other speakers of the evening were
Manuel de Zamacona. Mexican embassa
dor to the United States, /who urged iu
i'’!!icont and deliberate consideration of
the forces'that hare shaped the present
insurrection. William Barton Northrop,,
king's counsel and a member of the Iho
mimam i*.iiliament.. who paid tribute t«
the power of the press; reminded it of its
iesp6BsilMUtie<i. and analyzed Canadian
sentimenL-.with reference to reciprocity;
Nicholas Murray Butler, president of Co
lumbih uuiversity. and J. F. MeKuy. pies
idefic of. tho Canadian Press, limited. Mr
Northrop- explained., that if the pending
treaty fiiiji^. oT ratification by the Cana
dian. Ratinamenf shell a stop would in t
necessarily moan defeat or even ' pollin’.’
disapproval of reciprocity. as a principle,
but onlylljat the oEP'.'-firion b»d <-v>e
pellbtl i«r wppe.il b> the people and ‘’until
Ihe ncofde- hkve spoken,he cbnylyded.
"wMdh the? Sen .onlj’ do nt the polls, no
one ran say what the voice of the m ople
of Canada in this matter really is."
Oswald Garrison Villard, proprietor of
the New York Evening Rost, said in intro
ducing the-president that'he sCemcd to
have been chosen toastmaster to testify
that, however journalists might differ
v. ith the administration in its policies, they
cherished for the president a keen per
sonal regard. He praised Mr Taft for bis
abstention from "the shorter and uglier
word" in his characterizations of those
who differed with him. and he lauded him
, for his charity of judgment and his ad
vocacy of international peace. The sign
ing of the pending treaty of arbitration
with Great Britain—to be followed, the
president has promised, by similar agree
ments with other nations—would inaugu
rate. he said, "a new era in American
history, if not of the world, with which
your name. sir. will forever be most hon
orably and indissolubly connected. Yours
is the privilege,'' he informed the presi
dent. "of telling us to our faces just what
you think is wrong with us. or of saying
what you can in our behalf to a larger
public, which sometimes has its doubts
about us and our methods.” He then pro
posed the health of the president and
Mrs Taft,, who was in the galleries, and
the toast was drunk standing.
The president smiled broadly at Mr Vil
lard's invitation to criticise the press,
but did not take advantage of it. "Mr
Chairman. Mr Toastmaster, and gentle
men of the Associated Press and of the
■ imMiShers' association,” he said. "I thank
your toastmaster for his kindly and gra-
Hous introduction. 1 thank him also for
including the real president" (Mrs Taftl “in
his toast. There lias been some sugges
tion in his remarks that perhaps I would
seise this occasion to make things a little
even, but I have no grievance. This is
the only world we have, and this is the
only ppess we have, and I am not disposed
to think that anything I could say would
change it. I am in a position where what
ever I do or whatever I say is the fair
subject of comment, criticism, approval
or condemnation: and whether that, be
fair and impartial, or unjust and some
what prejudiced, it is the price of serv
ing the public, and you golfers will under
stand me when I say it is to be treated
as a ‘rub on the green.’ ”
Reciprocity With Canada.
“Your toastmaster has been good enough
to mention as a subject upon which our
minds will meet a general arbitration
treaty With Great Britain. I believe that
the proposal for this is moving along with
as much rapidity as is consistent with care
in drafting the agreement and securing for
it as broad a scope as possible. It may
.not be inappropriate for me to refer to a
kindred subject that will indirectly stim
ulate international peace and will be a sub
stantial step in that direction, to wit. reci
procity with Canada, f am glad to have
the opportunity of speaking to a body
which fully represents the most important
agencies for the formation of public opin
i w in this country upon a question which
l.as now reached a critical point in its set
tlement. The agreement is a commercial
one. and affects the duties on imports from
meh country into the other, and. therefore,
it is difficult to say that a detailed dis
cussion of tariff schedules is not relevant
and important in considering its wisdom.
But the general commercial, economic and
social arguments in its favor are so con
vincing that I may be pardoned if I do
uot dwell on specific rates.
"The treaty provides for free trade in
all agricultural products, and in rough lum
ber down to the point of planing. It re
duces the duties on secondary food prod
ucts by a very substantial percentage,
and it makes such reductions on a num
tier of manufactured articles that those
- engaged in making them have assured us
that the reductions will substantially in
crease the already largo Canadian demand
for them. We tendered to the Canadian
commissioners absolute free trade in all
products of either country, manufactured
or natural, but the Canadian commis
sioners did not feel justified in going so
far. It is only reasonable to infer, there
fore. that with respect to those articles
upon which they refuse free trade to us
' they felt that the profitable price at which
they could be sold by our manufacturers
in Canada was less than the price at
which their manufacturers could afford to
sell the same either to their own people
or to us. Hence it follows that their re
final to agree to free trade in those ar
ticles. as we proposed, is the strongest
kind of evidence that if we should take
off the existing duty from such articles
coming into the Unite! States it would
not affect in the Slightest degree the price
at which those articles cohM be furnished
to the public here. In other words the
proposition to put on the free list for en
trance into the United States all articles
that Canada has declined to make free
in both countries would not lower the
price to the consumer here. Thus the rea
son why meats were not put on the free
list in this Canadian agreement was be
<au»» Canada felt that the competition of
our packer* would injuriously affect the
products of their packing houses. If that
be true, how would it help our consumer
nr lower the price of meat in our markets
if we let their meat in free while thev re
tained a duty on our meat? The same thing
is true of flour. They would not consent
’o free trade iu flnur because they knew
tut our flnur mills would undersell their
millers. If that was so, then how much
competition and lowering of the price of
flour could we expect from putting Cana
.linn flogr on the free Hat?
Farmer Not I njuatly Treated.
"And yet gentlemen insist that the farm
er has been unjustly treated, because we
haven't put Canadian flour and meat on
■ the free Hat. And it la proposed to satisfy
the supposed grievance of the farmers by
now doing so without any rompensuS ; ng
concession from Canada. This proi sisal
Would be legislation passed for pohticil
platform uses without establishing any real
good. In another >ts|>ect. however, the effect
of the proposal might be serious. Of course
a mere reduction of our tariff or the put
ting of any article on our free list without
insisting on a corresponding change in the
Canadian tariff will not interfere with the
contract as made with Canada. Canada
cannot object to our giving her greater
, tariff' concessions than we have agreed to
■ give her under the contract. But if we
do make such concessions without any con.
' sideration on the part of Canada, without
I any quid pro quo. so to sneak, after the
i contract has been tentatively agreed upon
Iby those authorized to make contracts
for ratification in both governments,
then wo are in danger of creating
an obligation against us in favor of all
other foreign countries with whom we
have existing treaties containing whlH is
called the ’favored nation' clause. By this
clause, we agreed to give the same com
mercial privileges to the country with
whom wo have made the treaty as we give
to any other nation. This clause has been
construed by our statesmen not to involve
us in »u obligation to extend a privilege
to all nations which we confer upon one
nation in consideration of an equally val
uable privilege received from that one na
tion.
"In other words, it has been held not to
include special bargain or contracts where
there is a consideration moving to each
side for the obligation of ths other. But
the serious question that would arise is
whether if now that the contract has been
tentatively agreed upon and is about to
be confirmed by Canada, we should grant
to Canada more than the contract re
quires. we could claim that this extra con
cession was not a pure gratuity and one
w hich was necessarily extended to all oth
er nations under the favored nation clause.
ThotO are two objections, therefore, to in
serting in the bill confirming this Cana
dian contract additions to our free list
from -Caqada. The first is that they arc
a concession that is of no value tn those
whom it is proposed to propitiate by adopt
•ing it; and the second is. that it may in
volve us indirectly in a doubtful objiga
.tion in respect to trade with other coun
tries. If we desire to put meat and flour
and other commodities on the free list for
the entire world that is one thing: we
<an do it with our eyes open and with a
knowledge of what it entails after an in
vestigation: but to put such a provision
in a Canadian treaty and then have it
operate as a free list for the entire world
is legislation necessarily ill-considered.
In Nature of nn Admission.
"More than this, these proposed gratui
tous concessions are in the nature of mi
admission that in some way or other we
have doue an injury to a particular class
by this Canadian reciprocity agreement.
I deny it. It is said that it injures the
farmers. I deny it. It is strictly in ac
cordance with the protective principle
that we should only have a protective tar
iff between us and countries in which the
conditions arc so dissimilar as to make
a difference in the cost of production. Now
it is known of all mon that the general
conditions that prevail in Canada are the
same as those which obtain in the United
States iu the matter of agricultural prod
ucts. Indeed, if there is any advantage
the advantage is largely on the side of
the United States because we have much
greater variety of product in view of the
varieties of our climate than they can
have in Canada.
"We raise cotton as no other country does;
of course they raise none in Canada. We
raise corn, and hogs and cattle fed on corn,
and with the exception of a very small part
of the acreage of Canada, in Ontario, it is
not possible to raise corn at all in the
Dominion. With respect to wheat and bar
ley and oats, conditions differ in different
parts of Canada and in different parts of
the United States. Classing them together
as on the whole, the conditions are substan
tially the same. In prices of farm land the
differences are no greater between Canada
and the United States than between the dif
ferent states in the United States; In the
matter of farm wages, they differ in differ
ent parts of Canada as they do in the Unit
ed States; but on the whole they are about
the same, higher in Canada at some places
than in the United States and less at others.
But there is no pauper class of labor in
either country and the only difference be
tween the two countries is that Canada is
farther north than the United States, a
difference which, as already said, gives the
advantage agriculturally to our side of the
border.
Beneficial to Both Countries.
“It is said that this is an agreement that
affects agricultural products more than
manufactures. That is true, but if we are
to have an interchange of products between
the two countriea of any substantial
amount, the chief part of it must neces
sarily be in agricultural products. As it
is. we export to Canada more agricultural
products than we receive from her, and so
it will be afterward. The effect is not going,
in my judgment, to lower the specific prices
of agricultural products in our country. It
is going to steady them. It is going to re
duce the rapid fluctuations and it is going
to produce an interchange of products at a
profit which will be beneficial to both coun
tries.
"If objection can be made to the treaty
on the ground that a particular class de
rived less benefit from it than other
classes, then it is the manufacturer of
the country Wlio ought to object, because
the treaty in its nattife will not enlarge
his market as much as it will that of
the fanner. I am quite aware that from
one motive or another a great deal of ef
fort and money have been spent in sending
circulars to farmers to convince them that
this Canadian treaty, -if adopted, will do
them injury. I do not know that it is
possible to allay *ueh fears by argument,
pending the conrifleration of the treaty
by the Senate. But there is one way—
and that a conclusive way--of demon
strating the fallacy and unfounded char
acter of their fears to the farmers, or any
other class that believes itself tn be uu
justiy affected by this treaty, and that
is to try it-on.
Easy to Change Back.
“There is no obligation on either nation
to continue the reciprocity arrangement
any longer than it desires, and if it bo
found by actual practice that there is an
injury, and a permanent injury, to the
farmers of this country, everybody knows
that they can sufficiently control' legisla
tion to being about a change ami a return
to the old conditions. Another, and a
very o/inelnsire. reason for Hosing the con
tract. is the opportunity which it gives us
to increase the supply of our natural re
sources which, with the wastefulness of
children, we have wantonly exhausted.
The timber resources of Canada, which
will open themselves to us inevitably under
tho operation of this agreement, are now
apparently inexhaustible. I say ‘apparent
ly inexhaustible.' for if the same priwCdure
were to be adopted tn resneet to them
that we have folionod in respect to our
own forests. I presume that they too
might be exhausted. But. fortunately for
Canada and for ns. we and they have
learned much more than we realized two
decades ago with respect to the necessity
for proper method* of forestry and of lum
ber < utting. And hence we may bo safe
in saying that under proper modern meth
ods the timber resources open to us in
Canada may he made inexhaustible. *nd
wc may derive ample supplies of timber
from Canadian sources to tho profit of
Canada and for our own benefit.
Certain Natural Resource*.
"Thore are other natural resource* which
I need not stop to enumerate, which will
become available to u* as If our own it
wo adopt and maintain commercial union
With Canada: and thi* is one of the
chief reasons that ought to commend tho
Canadian agreement to the far-«eofng
statesmanship of leaders of American pub
lic opinion. But there are other-even
broader—grounds than this that should
lead to, the adoption of this agreement.
Canada * superficial area is greater than
Hint of the I nited States between the
oceans. Of course it Ims a good deni
of waate land in the far North, but it has
enormous tract* of anoccupied land, or
land settled so sparsely as to be substan
tially unoccupied, which in the next two
THE SPRINGFIELD WEEKLY REPUBLICAN: THURSDAY. MAY 4. 1911.
or three decades will rapidly acquire a
substantial and valuable imputation. The
government is one entirely controled -by
the people, and ihe bond uniting the I)o
---in inion with the mother country is light
and almost imperceptible. There are no
restrictions upon the trade or economic
development of Canada which will inter
fere in the slightest with her carving out
her indepQpdent future. The attitude of
the people is that of affection toward
the mother country and «»f a sentimental
loyalty toward her royal head. But for '
practical purposes the control exercised j
from England by executive or Parliament I
is imponderable.
Canadians a F’ine People.
"Canada has now Iwtweeu T.OCKM wIO and '
B.MMHXN) of people. They are a hearty, i
temperate, persistent race, brave, iutelli- j
gent and enterprising, sharing or inherit
ing the good qualities of all their atiees
tors. and with a national pride in their 1
Dominion that grows with the wonderful :
success and prosperity that have attend
ed them iu the last three decades. They
are good neighbors: we could not have
bettei neighbors. It is more than TOO
years since a hostile shot was fired across
the border, and they are like us because
our conditions are similar, and because
our traditions are similar. They are more
restricted in their immigration laws than
we. and perhaps they grow less rapidly,
but they have before them a wonderful
expansion in population, in agriculture and
in business, and they offer to any nation
with whom they have sympathetic rela
tions and with whom it is profitable for
them to deal, a constantly increasing mar
ket and nn ever-increasing trade.
l-'nUncy Regarding- Trade.
"The theory that trade, is not profitable
to one party unless it is doue at a loss
to the other party, is at the bottom of a
great deal of. the economic fallacies of the
past and present. Trade is mutually ben
eficial, It is profitable to both parties,
for if it is not, it cannot and ought not to
continue. As between Canada and the
United States, the trade and the mntual
benefit from the trade will increase. It is
amusing, uud 1 am not sure that all the
buiK-omlic ami all of the exaggeration and
misrepresentation iu politics ajtd all of
the political ghosts are not confined to
dur own country, and that there has en
.lered in the discussion in Canada as a
reason for defeating the adoption of this
contract by the Canadian Parliament a
fear that we desire Io annex the Domin
ion: and the drcams of Americans with
•irri’siamsubin imagination who like to talk
of the starry flag's floating .from Panama
to the Pole, are exhibited by the opponents
of the Canadian treaty in Canada a s the
declaration of a real policy by this country
and as an annonuecmeiit of our purpose
to push political' control over our neighbor
of the North.
"I am not an anti-imperialist, but I
have had considerable experience in the
countries over which we have assumed
temporary control. I do not know where,
that control will end. but I do know that,
in respect to those countries, we have tak
en over heavy duties and obligations, the
weight of which ought to destroy any
temptation to further acquisition of terri
twy. It would be invidious to institute
a comparison between the government of
Canada and this country, but there is one
part of our jurisdiction and that of Can
ada (that come together sufficiently close
to enable the Canadians and ourselves to
realize that the sample of government
that we exhibit is not alluring. I refer
to the control of Alaska as compared with
the control by Canada of her northwest
territory. The talk of annexation is bosh.
Every one who knows anything about it
realizes that it is bosh. Canada is a
great, strong youth, anxious to test his
muscles, rejoicing, in the race he is ready
to run. The United States has all it can
attend to with the territory it is now gov
erning. and to make the possibility of the
annexation of Canada to the United States
a basis of objection to any steps toward
their greater economic and effiifWryiSl
flnioij should W treated as one of
of the platform and should not enter into
the consideration of serious men engaged
in solving a serious 1 problem.
"The Canadian eontraet has passed the .
Honse substantially as adopted, and in
such form that if adopted ill the same way
by the Senate it would go into effect as
soon as the bill now pending in the Cana
dian Parliament shall be passed by that
Parliament. I desire to express my high
appreciation of the manner in which the
present House of Representatives has
treated the recipmeitv agreement. It has
not ‘played politics.’ It has taken the
statesmanlike course in resneet to it.
Hopes for No Amendments.
"I am very hopeful that the Senate will
treat the agreement in the same way and
that no amendments there wiil be added
to the bill.- For the reasons given, I think
they are dangerous. It is not for me to
question the good faith of those who pro
pose to introduce and adopt them, but is
appropriate to say that the use of amend
ments is a very common method of de
feating legislation when the responsibili
ty for its defeat is one that the movers
of such amendments do not desire openly
to assume. It may be that the Canadian
contract does not go far enough. In mak
ing it we were limited by the relnetanc.t
of. Canada to go as far as w-e would wish
to have her go, lint the fact that it does
not go far enough is the poorest reason
for not'going as far as W e can. We were
making a contract, we wore balancing con
sideration: we were not making a general
ta !^ ' a ' v a general tariff revision.
"I appeal to this company representing as
it does the press of the United States, to
see to it that, it is made clear to the pub
lic that this contract ought to stand or :
fall by its own terms, and that its passage ;
or defeat ought not to be affected in any :
regard^ by other amendments to the tariff 1
law. Such a method is a recurrence to the ;
old way of making a tariff bill, which has j
been properly criticised and condemned, by ’
which its passage is secured not on the J
merits of particular schedules, but by the i
support that may be secured in the House
or Senate through giving a tariff on par
ticiilar products of particular localities. I
think there is a general sentiment now in
favor of revising the tariff schedule by
schedule and of making this revision de
pendent on exnet information as to each
schedule, gathered by impartial investigat
ors. To amend this Canadian contract and
to make its passage dependent on other
tariff legislation is to continue the old
method of tariff revision characterised not
without reason as a local issue.
"I have said that this was a critical
time in the solution of the question of
reciprocity. It is critical because unless
it is now- decided favorably to reciprocity
it is exceedingly probable that no such
opportunity will ever again come to the
I nited States. The forces which are at
work in England and Canada to separate
her by a Chinese wall from the United
States and to make her part of an im
perial commercial band reaching from En
gland around the world to England again
by a system of preferential tariffs will
derive an impetus from Ihe rejection of
this treaty and if we would have reci
procity niih all the advantages that I
have descrilwl and that I earnestly and
sincerely believe will foll/fw its adoption,
we must take it now or give it up for
ever. ’
Zamacona’s Address.
Manuel de Zamacona in his address
said; “I mu fully sensible of the honor
that the Associated Trees lias conferred
upon, me by inviting me to address this
assembly of distinguished representatives
of the press in the presence of the chief
guest of the evening, the honorable pres
ident of the United States. 1 most gladly
avail mi self of thia exceptional oppor
tunity to express my sincere admiration
for the American press, so powerful, with
its wonderful activity to enlighten, lend,
and shore public opinion, and at the same
time so worthy of respect nud *.impatliy
for its curuest effort in the search of
truth. Some iminbiT* of this great in
stitution have intimated to me that I
should speak to-night about Mexico, and
about nothing else, and I hope that you
will not take it amiss if I follow that
suggestion, that flatters me for the’inter
est it implies in my native land.
“Unfortunately, im-identol disturbances
have oceuiTed of lute in Mexico, but the
government has the necessary elements to
obtain a speedy settlement of these
troubles, and, further, it is worthy of no
ttce that the prejeitt crisis lias served to
demonstrate how strung is the bond that
united all Mexicans in their love for their
native Jami. Mond by this sentiment
they are rallying in a eonumm effort to
prevent any further io-s of lives, ami
damage to property. This expression of
public opinion and patriotism will un
doubtedly prevail, and it constitutes n
guaranty for the future welfare of the
country.
“The government and the people of Mex
ico consider also ,-is, an important factor
for national welfare the maintenance of
friendly, relations with the United States.
I’lio two countrjes. on account of their
geographical position and of the great dif
ference in their products have no interests
tlffit clash: on the contrary, they can
very materially benefit curb other in their
mutual development. I can express with
the greatest conviction as the hearty wish
of my fellow-qitUens that Mexico and the
I nited States.,may march toward their
great, respective destinies, ns gooil neigh
bors. united by the bonds’of-tire closest
and most cordial friendship. May the ex
cellent relations that , exist and have ex
isted for a long time-between the two
countries grow closer and more cordial
still, if possible, and may the powerful
influence of the American press continue
to the attainment of this desideratum.
treason of Mexican History.
“For this purpose it is most desirable
that the leaders <>f public opinion study
Mexico iMhiily- am! without prejudice,
not form hasty mid misleading conclusions
on noy one Incident, ’but on the logical
analysis of, the liisfon ’and condition pf
thq country. Maxi an history, gentlemen,
shows constant struggle toward the high
ideals of liberty mid civilizatifn. Aftci'
securing national independence mid emerg
ing from medieval institution^.' a heroic
struggle was necessary to accomplish the
separation of church and state,,the estab
lishment of religious liberty and the pre
dmnirtnnee of' civil government. During
the last :jh years Mexico has worked
earnestly, and I must say with wonder
ful success to improve public education
and to develop its economic resources lay
ing the fonndarions for a great and pros
perous nution. And now wo see the dawn-i
ing of a new era. with the increase nf
wealth and education the time has- come
for some important political mid soda! re
fowns Which .-ire efnbodidd iu ! thc‘program
of the present goveitnncnt: ■ ‘, y
"IVe Mexicans Ini', full irttffMw-o in
the future of our native hi nd ■ for which
ne arc laboring heart and soul and wi
appeal to yon as representative of the
great American press that you do vour
part to aid ns in our laudable ambition
and in our efforts to cement the friendship
of the two great republic of North Amer
ica.”
A Buwy Day,
Yesterday was another day ■ of activity
for T’resident Taft. Although he did not
retire until after 2 o'clock yesterday morn
ing'he attended yesterday tit New York no
less than four dinners and one Itincheou.
extending from 1 p. tm until midnight. Yet
.he had time for an automobile ride yester
day afternoon; with brief conferences with
local political leaders sandwiched between.
The luncheon was held at the residence of
Henry Ulews, the New- York banker, where
the president's- health was drunk by a
representative gatheriag as the leader of
the international-, peace movement. Last
night he attended successively the joint
dinner of the American newspaper publish
ers' association aud/the Associated Press t
a- banquet of the Methodist, social union;
a dinner of'the Aeronautical society, and
lastly, a business mqu » dinner given to .1.
Van Veqhten .Olcott. At.each gathering he
delivered an address, but was of necessity
brief of utterance as .the night wore on.
LAURIER Ig DETERMINED.
Will F'iglit for Reciprocity—May Not
Attend Coronation,
The dejermuiajjou of,f-he, Canadian gov
ernment to raUfb' 4sqiprocity was empha
sized in Parliament;.at Ottawa, OnL, Ffi
day; by the , pyjma. ; minister, Sir. Wilfrid
Laurier, who sahl'itlrat he would--not go to
England to represent 'Canada at the im
perial eouferenue-or to the coronation of
King George in i Juno. Inn would remain
at Ottawa and press the reciprocity agree
ment if * flifc (‘oiiservutive tifftidsitiou' per
sisted in ohstiwtiffg the ratification of
the pdet. The matter was brought befofa
Parliament by the opposition leader. Mr
Borden, .who asked Sir Wilfrid what his
intentions were in regard to the approach
hig events in London. "I deem it ipy
dirty to attend." replied Sir Wilfrid, “mid
engaged my passage six weeks ago, but 11
have come to the conclusion thai should
my. presence be. required in Canada, and
there is ever indication that it may ne,
it will be my duty to forego the. privilege
of attending the conference. My first duty
is to Canada.”
“As Canada is a most important pint
of the British empire,” replied Mr Bor
den, "it is obvious that in the absence of
its prime minister no very important ac
tion can he taken by tho conference, and
the absence of Sir Wilfrid Laurier on mis
• oceawion w/mid he a Wow at the continue !
existence of thi* groat factor in tho so
lution of imperial questions.” Mr Bordcii
suggested that. Parliament con hl rise for
two months to enable Sir Wilfrid to cross
the. Atlantic, and the consideration of the
reciprocity agreement could be resumed
upon his return. “So far as reciprocity is
concerned our attitude is one of uncom
promising opposition. We believe if car
ried into effect if would- be disastrous, not
only th Canaria hut to the British em
pire.” said Mr Borden.
"I entirely agfee.” said Sit' Wilfrid in
i reply, “that it would be unfortunate that j
i any of the prime ministers 'of the 'self
-1 governing British' dominions should be ab
i sent from so important an event as the
1 imperial conference, winch is held hut
once in four years. If it is not possible
I for me to go, the fault will not be mine.
i'The one thing which prevents is the posi
tion of the trade, agreement with the Unit
ed States. Mr Borden has said lie uud
his followers offer uncompromising oppo
sition to the ratification of the agrceint-m,
I may toll him that on this side wc offer
uncompromising support for the agree
ment. Ho thinks it would be a bane to
Canada and a possible danger to the em
j pire. Wo think that if’woitlfl'b'e n' boou.
to Canada and to the empire. Whou ;I
took passage to England'six weeks aco ib
never occurred to me that'lt would'hot be
possible tor me to go.
“It is well known that under the rules
of the Canadian Houm! it. is possible for
the opposition to block n measure almost
indefinitely. It has conic to us that the
opposition hive such intention. The lob
bies nave been full of such rumors. I
had not paid muol) attention or attached
importance to them, hut I have in mv
hand a report of tho speech delivered nt
the Associated Press banquet in Now
)”rk by William Northrup, member of
Parliament, one of tho most important
members of tho Canadian opposition, in
which ho stated prueih'li.lly that the op
position at. Ottawa wil] mq allow this
agreement to ho larriM mto effo< t, | dr,
not know what authority he has to speak
but I am informed that he voiced the de-’
cislon of the conservative caucus hold only
a few days ago. If such is the temper of
the opposition., I think it will bo necessarv
for mo to revise my determination to go to
England.” , ,
"I think." said Mr Borden, in conehid-'
ing the discussion, "that the prime min
ister might have regard mH only to trade
relations with' the United States but to
trade relations with the great empire to
" hioii we belong.” He enumerated the
great question* listed for discussion nt
the conference which inehwle the promo
tion of imperial trade. “Tim question
must present itself to tho prime minister."
said Mr Borden, "whether or not onr
trade uud other relations with the United
States are moru importani than our trade
and other relations with the empire of
which wo form » part. Under the. eireuui
stances. 1 trust the prime minister will re
consider the intiimition he has given and
that nt the confereneei mid the corona
tion Canada will be rept’esontod ns she
should be by the prime minister."
JOHN MITCHELL ON "UNIONISM.”
DELIVERED AT WILLIAMSTOWN.
Many Labor Men -in Large Audienee
in Jesup Hall at WiHiams Cwllca'e.
John Mitchell, the well-known leader
and advocate of organized labor, ad
dressed a meeting Friday night in Jesup
hall at Williamstown, under the auspices
of the Good Government chib of Williams
college. He was heartily greeted upon his
appearance upon the platform by a large
amliem e, consisting of students of the cdl
lege, members of the faculty and Williams
town and North Adams people, among the
hitter being a large delegation of labor
men. He Was introduced by Merrill N.
Gates, a meuibe'r of the Club, who pre
sided in the absence of President Mason.
In introducing rhe speaker Mt Gates
spoke of Ids long experience as a member
and leader of organized labor. Mr Mitchell
said iu opening that he was expected to
speak on “The philosophy, purposes and
JOHN MITCHELL.
[Labor leader who spoke st Williamstown
Friday evening.]
ideals of ihe trade union movement,"
which would, indicate an .academic dis-'
cussion pf the dabov question, but that ho
really intended to speak iq/on concrete
matters—to uddress his andience just as
if ho was addressing a body of members
of his own union.
lie related briefly the history of industrial
conditious from the.early ages, by which be
showed that in-tbe-early times it was a caAe
of each person's producing for each, while
now it hail come to a point where all pro
duced for all. He continued that the indus
trial revolution had been responsible for the
change from the simple older of things to
the complicated, since now she distribution
of production • figured in the labor questiyu.
while' in ages past it had no part. lie fol
lowed with a short history of the combina
tion of workingmen. tracing it back even
before Christ, and said that tbe modern
trades unions Were the product of modern
trade and the result of the factorv svstem,
since the Introduction of the machine had
brought in the many problems that now
confront the trades unions. He spoke of the
bewildering, mass of problems that seem to
be constantl.ii coming up within the unions
sud the manner.in which they wore regarded
by the average people, but added that the
.fiindainental .principle of trade unionism
was simple agid plain, ■ that_.it. was merely
a combination io bargain, with employers
for the sale of labor.
Mr Mitchell showed how impossible it
was for the weak individual tq drive an
equitable bargain with the powerful em
ployer for the sale of his labor and-how
the combination of labor interests was
better able, to make an ari'angcnient that
would give the wage-earner a fair com
pensation for his efforts and a reasonable
workday, and thus better the standards of
life of the masses. He added that when
a combiuatiou of labor, embracing everv
trade, was able to meet an equally strong
combination of employers, embracing every
trade, an equitable contract between em
ployes and employer could be arrived at.
He explained the minimum wage,.'the ad
vantage of the eight-hour, day, the demand
for legislation protecting women and chil
dren under age. the effort for an arrange
ment whereby the workmen would be pro
tected in cime of loss of life nr limb or
injury in ihe course of employment, the
need of sanitary and house improvements,
and lastly a constitutional guarantee of
b- v jury, free speech and A free press.
He then took up the strike, and said
that while it was the crudest and cruelest
method’adopted liy organized'labor, it was
adopted only as a last Resort, and in pri®-
ciple was merely a method of bargaining.
Ho illustrated its necessity, oftentimes,
and said that in 94 out of 100 casfes tho
strikes were organized and ' prosecuted
against the lowering of wages and the
standard of living, or for the raising of
wages or ihe iinprovement of the condi
tions of the wage-earner. He referred to
the big coal strike, of which he was the
lender, and told how there was dissension
. and. strife .between the inany bands of
Jqreigners before the strike, while after
tire strike, liad IjeeiL JnmfgiHaled all real
izea thj l Mtnpfnative, necessity, of a united
body and ap acceptance.of and in
dustrial ideals if they were tn succeed,
ami after the strike the auiniositj dis
appeared and the workers becume a united
and harmonious people.
Mr Mitchell followed with an explana
tion of how the trades unions bettered
the conditions of the workingman and his
general standard of living, and then an
swered some of the criticising that aro
heard against organized labor. In speak
ing of the .charges of violence and dis
order and of bloodshed and riot in strikes,
he said that any act of violence should
receive the general disapproval of the
a P. d added that it lie Jhlieyed that
.the. swesj'p^ the'trades unions depended
nipon apy evil act. Ijd would - not hesitate
one motnont to sever his connection with
it. But. lie said, the unions should not
be assailed because of any occasional act
of violence no more than a church should
be assailed because of ■ the occasionut i
wrongdoing of a member, or the state or
nation assailed because sofne of jts <it - !
izenh and even its servants more than
■occasionally do something wrong. He de
fended the unions against the charge that
they attempted th bring all their members
to n dead level by a fixed minimum wage
by explaining the difference between a
minimum and a maximum wage.
He spoke at some length com erning the
eight-hour day, showing how the workers
could avcompiishmore in eight' hours than
in It> and quoting seientiHe authoritiea in
support of his statement, and by showing
how the shorter day benefited the work
men's homes and the workmen themselves.
He then took up the matter of flic vn /
ployment of women and' children and
spoke strongly in relation to it. showing
how the unions were endeavoring to bet
ter the conditions that society had ac
cepted. He showed how it degraded the
home and was productive of the trump
nnd of the unemployed. He. added that it
was difficult ti> conceive anything more ab
surd or degrading then the wholesale em
ployment of children. The condition. Im
said, was a terribly indictment against
society, and it was, hard. to understand
bow it could bo dHowcd to exist in a na
tion like ours, s’rhc'tTafloti unions. ho add
ed, if they bad done nothing more than
wlint has a]rettdy boon accomplished in
bettering the conditions of the working
women and children, had justified their
existence. He dosed with a snmmnry of
what trnde unionism Ims accomplished and
then lend tile pledge that the member
takes when joining, nnd naked if any
'lmreh had a pledge that was more for
the uplifting Of the moral and intellectual
conditions of men than the trade union.
At the close qf hi* address he was given
a long and hearty ovuticu. after which
many hurried to the plutfurm to greet him.
HIGH WAGES AND IHE TARIFF.
AN ALYSIS OF THE QI ESTION
Showing the Fallacies of the High
Tariff Argument.
7’o the liditnr of The firpubHean
Iu all the discussions of the tariff ques
tion we find that the high tariff people lay
their principal stress upon the proposition
that we pay Our labor higher wages than
European countries pay for labor, and
therefore we should place a tariff upon
European maunfactnres sufficiently high to
make up for the difference in labor cost.
If workmen here do actually receive high
er wagos than are paid in othpr countries,
there might be some argument in favor of
a tariff for the protection of labor by
means of a tariff tax, but as a matter of
fact and economic law wages cannot be
materially higher in one. country than in
another if any foreign commerce what
soever is carried on.
As all trade is essentially barter, it must
follow- that where, goods are exchanged
between traders or mor^iants the value
of the goods exchanged is equal, in the
minds of the people concerned: otherwise
no trading could be done. That is to say.
if an American cotton manufacturer sells
a tea merchant in China '0 yards of cloth
and takes in payment TO pounds of rea.
each party to the transaction must think
that the thing bought is at least equal in
value to the thing sold, and as the value
of both cottdn cloth and tea is the value
of she lahnr Yequired to produce them, pins
taxek, insurance and interest, at the'place
of exchange, it-follows that the traders
or merchants are simply exchanging equiv
alent labor values. If this were not so
one of tho parties to the’transaction would
ultimately become bankrupt because of ex
changing greater for less value. Suppose
the Chinese government were to put au
export tax ilpott tea 1 sn- high that the Chi
nese trader could give but eight pounds
of tea instead of TO,in exchange for 50
yards of ^qth: there is- still an equivalent
of labdr rallies exchanged in the transac
tion.
As taxes, insurance and interest must be
paid out of tho produets of labor they must
represent a labor value added to the tea.
cotton cloth Or any other commodity traded
in. After the imposition of the export tax
the cotton manufacturer wpnld receive but
eight pounds of ten instead of TO iu ex
change for 50 yards of cotton cloth and
therefore more must be charged per potind
for tea when it is pul upon the market.
Tho cottpn weaver or spinner who, in the
past, has taken 50 yards of cloth or its
equivalent to the grocery store and has re
ceived iff eXOhafige 10 pounds of tea. can
now receive but eight pounds: therefore
an extra amount of labor, at least equal
to the Chinese export tax. must be per
forrned' by the'said weaver or spinner in
order to get the same amount of tea that
he formerly received, that is, the final con
.sumpr of tea must perform an additional
amount of labor to pay for the additional
tax on tea.
AVe fre(]ucntly hear and read from pro
tectionist orators and editors that a weaver
or other laborer in American protected in
dustries receive double the wages that like,
workmen receive in- Germany and there
fore the American manufacturer and la
borer must be projected by means of a
tariff tax against the said cheap Gorman
labor. Let its see if this can possibly he
true. Every workman is paid out of the
thing which he produces. This must lie so
or there could be no wages at all. While
a cotton or woolen operator does not re
ceive. each week, a certain number <sf
pounds of cloth for his wages, he receives
a part of the money for which the cloth
is sold and therefore must depend upon the
thing he prbduc-es for the payment of his
w ages. The money received as wages Iby
workmen must. he used by them io buy
tjie things needed for the support’of them
selves rind families, and thus one workman
exchanges his labor for the labor of an
other-workman. This is true whether the
trade is foreign or domestic.
Suppose a jniil in Germany and a mill in
America arc each producing a woolen
cloth of like grade and quality in every
particular, and suppose the statement so
often made—that an American woolen mill
pays twice the wages paid in Germany for
like work—is true: in what situation do we
find ourselves? Suppose at the end of the
week each mill has 10(1 yards of doth as
the total product of the mill for the week.
Suppose the American mill takes 40 yards
to pay the wages of its workmen and the
German mill, paying half ah much wages,
takes 20 yards, as pay its workmen, we
are then up against this situation: The
American mill having paid its help has
but 00 yards to put upon the market whilg^
the German has 80 yards. Suppose rep
resentatives from both mills meet in China.
Brazil or any other country outside of
America and Germany for the purpose of
disposing of their doth. It is manifest
that tbp American is nt a disadvantage
because. Jie has but (50 yards to offer while
the German has 80 yards and is. there
fore, in a position to offer better terms and
thus gets the market. It is dear that if
everything were equal between America
and Germany in manufacturing except that
we pay higher wagos we could do no busi
ness at all in competitive markets.
If this difference in wages really exists
and no obstacles are placed in the way
of trade th^ American cannot compete
with’the German in shy market including
our own and therefore must go out of
business er have some obstacle placed iu
the way of the German who seeks to trade
in America.. .If the American farmer can
get 80 yards of doth of a given quality
from the German for 80 bushels’of wheat
he is not going to give 80 bushels to the
American for 60 yards.
Under these circumstances what does
the American manufacturer do? He goes
to Congress, represents the situation, and
demands protection against his German
competitor. This is accorded him in the
form of a tariff tax which increases the
price of the German cloth to such »n ex
tent that 80 yards cannot possibly he ex
changed for 80 bushels of wheat, the
American farmer js forced to trade with
the American woolen manufacturer upon
the basis of 8o bushels of wheat for 60
yards of doth. This must be so upon the
hypothesis that wages itre higher here than
in Germany, such wages, being of neces
sity. the percentage of the product which
labor receives in each country.
The woolen num having demonstrated
their power to increase, by means of a
tariff tux, the price of woolen doth, the
growers of wool concluded that they ought
not be compelled to compete with the wool
growers of other countries, so they go to
Congress and get a tariff tax put on wool,
the dye and drug men do the same, the
iron and steel and lumber and glass men
ask for protection upon the materials
which cuter into the construction of the
mill on |he ground that wages are higher
in this country than they are elsewhere.
These taxes, by increasing the price of
woolen clpth, still further reduces the
quantity which the farmer can get for his
wheat and which the workmen can get for
their wages.
These additional taxes which are put
upon all the dements which enter into the
manufacture of woolen cloth make it pos
sible for the German manufacturer to get
his goods into the American market in
spite of the tariff on doth, and the Amer
ican manufacturer is compelled to go again
to Congress for an additional doth tax.
1 hit explains why woolen doth Is con
stantly imported in spite of the increase
of the tariff taxes on cloth, because the
tax on doth is counterbalanced by the tar
iff tax levied upon all the elemunts which
niter the manufacture. and also cxplulps
why tho American woolen manufacturer
cannot export woolen goods.
’I lie cotton manufacturer is in a different
position in regard to his product, owing to
the fact that flic raw material-of cotton
doth is pot taxed by a tariff and is there
fore relieved from the burdens which op
press the woolen manufacturer and thus
are enabled to compete, to a certain ex-
tent, w ith foreign mills. This competition
could not occur if wages are higher in
America than they are in Europe, as sueb
higher wages would make it’ impossible
for the American to meet the European
on equal terms in a competitive market.
I lie tact that foreign coiimierve is- ear
ned on in competitive articles in competi
tive markets is proof positive that wages,
in Ilie countries where the competitive ar
ticles are produced, , must be practically
the same, otherwise the country of lowest
wages would have a monopoly of the mar
kl;! alul competition would cease.
Ihe statement that our laborers get
uglier wages than those of other coun
tr.es is true, as far as the amount is con
cerned which the laborer receives each
week, but is not true as to the amount
received per yard, per pound, etc., is con
cerned. The illustration given aliove, as
regards German and American workmen in
woolen mills, may be true as far as one
receiving 20 yards at the end of the week
and tho other -M) yards, but as a matter
ol fact tho American mills produce fully
twice as much product as the “German
mills per operative and therefore 40 yards
taken in wages from 200 yards of product
-is no greater than 20 yards taken from 100
cards figured as a labor cost per vard.
All trade implies an equality of‘effort in
the production of the things traded in in
the minds of the traders, otherwise there
could be no trade, and any tariff or other
tux placed upon the things traded in has
the inevitable effect of reducing the amount
received in exchange for the taxed article.
To illustrate: An American trader goes
lo tho interior of Africa with 10 yards of
cotton cloth, worth in America 50 cents,
and exchanges it with a native for an ele
phant's tusk worth, in, onr market SSO
This may be a profitable trade for both
parties because each is willing to perform
the necessary labor to produce the thing#
traded in. the African desires the plow
more than he desires the tiisk because
he has no particular use for it but he has
use for the doth, be can produce a tusk by
killing an elephant, but he cannot produce
the doth at all. while the American can
easily produce the cloth but cannot produce
the tusk at all. Between the African and
American equal values have been, ex
changed iu the market where the exchange
was made.
The chief or ruler of that part of Af
rica. seeing this trade going on, concludes
that it should he taxed, and compels th*
native .trader to saw off 10 pounds from
every 50-pound tusk and give it to him:
so when the American trader conies
around again he finds that he gets .but 40
pounds ■of ivory where lie formerly got
50: he finds that ivory lias risen in’price
which ho charges up to the consumer when
he gets lo America. On the other hand,
the chief or ruler may conclude to tax
cotton doth instead of ivory, taking two
yards off every 10. When the African
trader comes around again he finds that he
can got bnt eight yards of doth for 50
poqnds of ivory instead of 10 yards; the
tariff on cotton cloth has reduced his w ages
to that extent; it lias risen in price and the
African native must hustle and get more
than 50 pounds -of ivory if he is to have his
10 yards of cloth.
If the African were the only’man whom
the eliief would allow to collect ivory in
the form of elephant’s tusks he might
raise the price of ivory so that he would
lie still able to get his 10 yards of cloth
for 50 pounds of ivory, but the labor of
gathering tusks is open freely to all the
inhabitants of the world, and laborers can
be found who will gather tusks at the rate
of ,50 pounds for eight yards of cloth.
Tins being so our African must accent the
cdiiditirtns of free trade in labor and pro
duce 50 pounds of ivory for eight yards
of vlotli or he will lose his job.
Put the American fiiannfactrirer in the
place of the African chief, the Amer
ican laboring man in the place
of the African gatherer of tusks and
Our tariff taxes in the place of the two
yards of cloth taken as a tariff tax and
we have a perfect illustration of our pro
tective tariff system. The protective tariff
must reduce wages by increasing the price
of, the things w hich the workman must
pay wheti he takes hrs wages to buy the
things which are necessary for his sup
port. I repeat that if any foreign trade is
carried on at al! it must be upon an
equality of values in the things traded in
lo tho parties to the trade, and that the
cost of labor or wages required to pro
duce the things traded in cannot be higher
in our country than in the country with
which wc trade. These are fundamental
principles and need no statistics to prove
their soundness. Joseph McDonald.
I'roiidcnec, IT 20, 1911,
MERRIAM VOTE IN CHICAGO.
To the Editor of The Republican :—
As one connected iu a small way with
the campaign for Merriam and conversant
with the local situation, may I correct the
impression of an item appearing in your
issue of the 13Th. as follows: —
Prof Merriam of Chicago was an admir
able candidate, buy he was unfortunate in
having so much support among exquisite
people wbo would not go to the pollis “iu
the drizzling rain."
By all the rules of politics, the result stated
should have followed from the wretched
weather which prevailed on election day, but
it did not. Despite the rain, the total vote
east, namely. 366.003. was unusually large
for a municipal campaign, being 86 per cent
of the total registration and not quite 12.006
less than the total vote in the city for pres
ident at the general election iu 100$.
Moreover, the vote was heaviest in the
characteristically “silk stocking" wards
with a large independent vote, like the 25th,
on the north side of the city, and the-7tb,
including Hyde Park, on the south side.
Thus in the 7th ward the total vote for
president in 1008 was 10.367, whereas the
total vote for mayor at the recent election
was 500 greater, or 10,586. In the 25th
ward the difference was even greater, the
vote for president in 100$ being 20.082 and
the recent vote for mayor 21.670. showing a
gain of almost 1600 votes. Although a por
tion of the increase can be accounted for by
the increase in population, yet after due
allowance is made for this factor, it remains
true that in the face of a driving and al
most continuous storm, the voters of these
wards in which the inertia of wealth and
leisure was to be feared went to the polls
as generally ns nt the presidential election.
The real reason for Merriam's defeat is
this, that the old-time republican ‘‘workers"
committed to the spoils theory of politics,
secyetiy disapproved of Merriam's purpose
to give an honest and efficient administra
tion in the interest of the public, free from
partisan control, and cast their votes and
influence against him at the polls. Hundreds
aud thousands of democratic votes were
registered for him. but they Were not strong
enough to turn the scale against this sinis
ter aud covert opposition from his own
party.
1 make this explanation in order that jus
tice may be done to the independent Voters
w ho rallied Io Merriam's support under try
ing conditions, and that the citizens of oth
er cities who are fighting for progress in
municipal government may not be disbeart
cned by any supposed recreancy of the men
of like mind in Chicago.
Hew P. Chasw-eb.
Chicago. 111., April 21. HHI.
APPROVED BY PRESIDENT.
Cbalriuun Hay Plan* Radical Chance*
In the Army.
l our measures drawn by Chairman Hay
of tho House military affairs committee,
making radical changes in the United
States army, were approved by President
Taft nt Washington Monday in a talk
with Mr Hay. One hill would <onsolid»tc
the qmirlermimter's, subsistence and pay
departments into one general supply
corps: number would merge the udjutant
gGterala nnd inspector-generai’s depart
ment with the general staff; the third
would increase the term of enlUtment
from tbiw to five years, and the fourth
would provide that all civilian employes
In the army be replaced by enlisted men.
The approval of the president, who was
mue secretary of war, caused Mr Hay
to believe that tho bills might be enacted
at the special session.