OCR Text |
Show Iff IT II mil iTifC"-'" - -- - l,Mta:ii.'llM8aaMMi Washington. T h r o u gh 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. I!y 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; we see developing a tine old fight over the tariff. Tariff questions are and always 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 tthe 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 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 und 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 par-Had liament ratifies it. Free Hand No s,)ch ratification ratifica-tion is necessary in this country. The treaty was negotiated by Mr. Hull and Presl i 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 t lie 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. j In making public the agreement negotiated by Mr. Hull with Prime I Minister MueKenzle King, the Pres ' ldent asserted his belief that the i agreement will initiate or revive a i How of commerce back and forth j across our northern frontier In a manner that will be most helpful. He considered lhat the agreement would mean additional nuukels for some of our products and therefore additional work for some of our tin employed The Canadian - prime minisler was of the opinion that in this agreement a long step had been taken toward healing a breach that lias exisled between the two countries for (ill 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 nil's and 11)20, but would against carry sat-' Isfactory volume. It will be recalled that our shipments ship-ments t Canada in 1!):;0 amounted to about $!IOII,OOO.OIM). The depres sion cut those shipments to approximately ap-proximately $:SO0.0O0.IMK) last year. So, If the predictions of the President Presi-dent and Mr. MacKenzie King are in any way fulfilled, a considerable tratlic 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 attention to basic conditions. In my opinion, would be short of its goal. Now from the political standpoint, stand-point, examination of the treaty must take Into Political consideration In-Standpoint In-Standpoint dividual Items. Anil how those In dividual Items affect commiinii les and economic interests In this country. Already, we here in Washington Wash-ington have been deluged wlih the complaints of certain communities against provisions of the treaty. Likewise, we have heard those provisions pro-visions praised from other sections, j Thus, from the political standpoint January 1 to a number or 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 Ail 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 1!(11 when a Canadian reciprocity reci-procity agreement was under consideration, con-sideration, backed by the late 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 sena lor from Nebraska, I could not fail to realize the political dynamite embodied In the new course of international trade relations rela-tions adopted by I'resident Roosevelt Roose-velt It was the Canadian reciprocity reciproc-ity proposal that defeated Mr. Taft for re-election to (he 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 11)11 burned the lingers of every political leader who touched it. The cases are not exactly comparable nor analogous. Mr. Roosevelt, lias retained a number num-ber of tarilT duties which were swept aside In the proposed Taft reciprocity arrangement. He Is therefore fortified to that extent. I!ut you may he 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, lltll. 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 asked Mr. ("lark to elaborate on his view concerning con-cerning the 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 tiie bill for at least one reason that It will have a tendency to bring Canada Into the Union." "Yes," Mr. Clark replied. "I have no doubt about that. I do not have any doubt whatever that day is no! Tar distant when Great P.rltain will joyfully see all of her North Amer lean possessions become a part of this republic. That Is the way things are now tending." So, If the controversy over the present Canadian tariff ngreemeni becomes violent. I fhlnk it Is fair to expect that again we will hear the question discussed whether the United Stales Is seeking to annex Canada to make Canada part and parcel of the United States. Of course, ns far as anyone can see today, annexation of Canada Is In conceivable, hut the Incident Is re lilted here simply to show how far reaching such controversy may come. Western Newspaper Union. I |