OCR Text |
Show " ' Washington T h r o u g h some months past, Cordell Hull, secretary secre-tary of state, has Canadian been proceeding Trade Pact cautiously and quietly in the negotiation ne-gotiation of trade agreements with foreign nations. His work has attracted at-tracted comparatively little public attention although throughout the negotiations individual economic Interests In-terests who stood to gain or lose depending de-pending upon their lines of business have made known their feelings quite emphatically. Six of these trade agreements, now called trade treaties, had been consummated In this manner. When the seventh agreement came along, however, the story was different. That was the treaty with our northern neighbor, Canada. It Is impossible here to set forth the list of commercial products encompassed in the new trade agreement with Canada. I doubt if most of the people of this country ever will know details of that treaty. By the nature of things, few persons can be interested In all of the items. But, I do not believe that It is the question of individual interest in the entire list that ought to concern us. Aside from the policy pol-icy involved in the negotiation and agreement on tariff concessions, the importance of the Canadian treaty to the average individual lies in the one or two, or half a dozen at most, Items that affect each one personally. I do not mean to say that the policy pol-icy involved Is unimportant. The contrary is decidedly true. From a political standpoint, of course, it is general policy that will be debated; from an individual standpoint it will be the direct effect that execution execu-tion of that policy has on each of us that will determine our ultimate views and to that extent determine whether we will be for or against the general policy of reducing tariffs enacted against certain kinds of imports. . The new agreement with Canada takes effect January 1 provided the Canadian par- Had liament ratifies it. Free Hand 10 sllcn ratification ratifica-tion is necessary In this country. The treaty was negotiated by Mr. Hull and President Presi-dent Roosevelt under the authority granted by congress in legislation passed a year ago which gave to the President the privilege of working work-ing out trade treaties without further fur-ther congressional sanction. That law restricted the President in only one way, namely, the requirement that an increase or reduction of tariff rates included In those trade treaties may not exceed 50 per cent of the rate fixed in the present tariff tar-iff laws. So it is seen that Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Hull had virtually virtual-ly complete authority. It will operate op-erate for three years and, as far as I have been able to discover, it will be effective after Canadian ratification ratifica-tion and there will be nothing anybody any-body can do about It, be it good or bad. In making public the agreement negotiated by Mr. Hull with Prime Minister MacKenzie King, the President Pres-ident asserted his belief that the agreement will initiate or revive a flow of commerce back and forth across our northern frontier In a manner that will be most helpful. He considered that the agreement would mean additional markets for some of our products and therefore additional work for some of our unemployed. un-employed. The Canadian prime minister was of the opinion that in this agreement a long step had been taken toward healing a breach that has existed between the two countries for 09 years. He was hopeful,, like President Roosevelt, that the channel of trade again will be filled, perhaps not to the levels of the boom days of 1!V'8 and 1920, but would against carry satisfactory sat-isfactory volume. It will be recalled that our shipments ship-ments to Canada in 1930 amounted to about $900,000,1)00. The depression depres-sion "cut those shipments to approximately ap-proximately $300,(X)0',0O0 last year. So, if the predictions of the President Presi-dent and Mr. MacKenzie King are In any way fulfilled, a considerable" traffic is due to begin upon the operation op-eration of this new treaty. Any discussion of the treaty, however, how-ever, that failed to call ntlentloil to basic conditions, In my opiuion, would be short of its goal. ... Now from the political standpoint, stand-point, examination of the treaty D .... , ""'s' :Re Into Political consideration in- Standpoint dividual Items. And how those Individual In-dividual items affect communities and economic Interests In this country. Already, we here In Wash, lngton have been deluged with the complaints of certain communities against provisions of the treaty Likewise, we have heard those provisions pro-visions praised from other sections Thus, from the political standpoint' I we see developing a fine old fight over the tariff. Tariff questions are and alwajs have been sectional questions. Industrial In-dustrial communities -ant to be protected against Inroads of foreign competition where labor is cheaper Agriculture wants to be protected against imports from bountiful producing pro-ducing lands in those countries where vast open spaces and high productivity exist at the minimum of cost. Importers and consumers of Imported products always have fought and always will fight to have low tariff rates so that the things they buy may enter this country at the lowest possible price. With reference to the Canadian treaty, these same conditions exist Early outbursts Indicate that cattle cat-tle raising communities and dairy producing sections are up in arms because the treaty reduced a tariff protection accorded against imports of cattle and cattle products and the products of the dairy. ' Lumber interests are upset It Is true that the lumber market In the United States has been In the doldrums for several years and naturally nat-urally the lumber people do not want to have Canadian shipments absorb what little market they have. These are just a few. of the complaints. com-plaints. They are offset partially at least by the praise and the hopes of some other phases of agriculture agricul-ture such as fruit and vegetable growers who feel that they can now market their products in Canada. Can-ada. Without even a careful analysis anal-ysis of the more than seven hundred hun-dred items involved In the treaty, it Is to be seen that there will be possible markets available after January 1 to a number of agricultural agricul-tural interests. Yet it remains, as I said earlier, for the passage of time to disclose exactly whether the net result will be favorable to us commercially or whether the Canadians Cana-dians have put over a fine bargain from their standpoint .... All of the discussion about the Canadian treaty, however, brings back memory. As Political a result of these Dynamite recollections. I dug back the other oth-er day Into the congressional debates de-bates of 1911 when a Canadian reciprocity reci-procity agreement was under consideration, con-sideration, backed by the late i William Wil-liam Howard Taft. After reading those debates, particularly the observations ob-servations of the late and distinguished distin-guished Champ Clark of Missouri and Representative George Norris, now a senator from Nebraska, I could not fail to realize the political dynamite embodied In the new course of international trade relations rela-tions adopted by President Roosevelt. Roose-velt. It was the Canadian reciprocity reciproc-ity proposal that defeated Mr. Taft for re-election to the Presidency. I am not predicting here that the same consequences are in store for President Roosevelt but it is fair to recall. It seems to me, that the reciprocity proposal of 1911 burned the fingers of every political leader who touched it. The cases are not exactly comparable nor analogous. Mr. Roosevelt has retained a number num-ber of tariff duties which were swept aside In the proposed Taft reciprocity arrangement. lie is therefore fortified to that extent But you may be sure that those who sponsor the present Canadian agreement are going to meet the same sort of fight that was made against the Taft proposal. Then there is In the current treaty circumstance another factor to be considered. It links back to the Champ Clark observations which were made on February 14, 1911. At that time, Mr. Clark' was expressing the view that the reciprocity reci-procity agreement constituted a step at least In the direction of universal uni-versal peace. In the debate just mentioned, Mr. Norris nsked Mr. Clark to elaborate on his view concerning con-cerning fhe value of the agreement as an instrument of peace. "I wanted to ask the gentleman a question along the line of universal univer-sal peace," said Mr. Norris. "As I understand It, the gentleman favors the bill for at least one reason-that reason-that It will have a tendency to brin" Canada Into the Union." "Yes," Mr. Clark replied. "I have no doubt about that. I do not have any doubt whatever that dav Is not far distant when Great Britain will joyfully see all of her North American Amer-ican possessions become a part of Hiis republic. That Is the wav things are now tending." So, ir the controversy over the Present Canadian tariff agreement becomes violent, I think It Is fair to expect that again we will hear the question discussed whether the United states Is seeking to , ( na, a-to make (,,,, ,., I,ilr(,'l the United stales Of O'-n-se. as far as nyi,ne ,,, tl.v. annexation ,,f Canada Is conceivable but t. Ineldout Is re I,IU''1 '"' "Imply to show how far ''''"li"K such controversy may B come. ' Western Nowapapnr Union. |