Address to the Members of the Canadian Houses of Parliament.

Mr. Speaker of the Senate, Mr. Speaker of the House, Mr. Prime Minister, Members of the Canadian Houses of Parliament, distinguished guests and friends:

As I begin, may I be permitted to speak a few words in my halting french to my french friends of Canada? The Prime Minister did this with great courage. I assure you I do it in abject fear.

Ici, au Canada, vous avez demonstre que les rapports entre les peuples libres ne sont pas affaiblis par des differences de langue et de facon de parler. Il dolt en etre ainsi pour toutes les nations du monde libre. Le fait que nous nous exprimons en des langues et des accents differents ne dolt pas affaiblir notre lutte pour une paix juste et durable. Une tradition tres grande et tres riche s'est etablie dans tout le Canada au service de cette tache si noble. La consecration de votre pays dans ce but a ete solide et constante. Vous avez donne un exemple a tousles hommes libres. 1

1 The following translation appears in the White House release of this address:

Here, in Canada, you have demonstrated that differences in speech and manners of expression need not impair communications among a free people. So it must be among all nations of the free world. Though we may speak in different tongues and accents, that fact does not weaken our determination to work for a just and lasting peace. All of Canada has a great and rich tradition in the service of this high purpose. Her dedication to it has been staunch and persevering. Her example encourages free men everywhere.

Mr. Prime Minister, I want you to know of my deep personal appreciation of the warmth of the welcome you have extended to me, and of the generosity of the remarks that you have just delivered concerning me. Along that same line, I should like to express my very great appreciation of the warmth of the welcome that Mrs. Eisenhower and I have experienced throughout the city, along its streets and in every meeting in which we have a part. We are truly grateful. This is my fourth visit to your beautiful capital.

I recall well when your gracious Queen came to Washington from Ottawa we spoke together of the beauty of this city and of the greatness of Canada.

It is good to return--to see old friends and to make new ones.

I came here first in 1946 to congratulate the Canadian people on the brilliant role played by the Canadian forces that you placed under my command in the World War which had then recently ended in victory.

My next visit was made as Commander of NATO forces in Europe. In 1953 I returned as President and talked in this House of some aspects of the relationship between our two countries.

I then spoke of the St. Lawrence Seaway in prospective terms. Today it is near completion and next year it will be open. This is truly a great joint accomplishment. It will open up important regions of both Canada and the United States to ocean traffic. It will ever stand as a monument to what can be achieved by the common effort of two sovereign nations.

On that same occasion I spoke of the need to devise ways to protect our North America from any surprise attack. Since then we have made great strides. The Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line has been built and placed in operation. In the process of its construction I am sure much has been learned which will contribute to the more rapid development of the northern reaches of Canada and of our new state, Alaska.

Last month an agreement was concluded between our two Governments to establish a combined air defense headquarters for this continent. We have also--both of us--striven, as we will continue to strive, for the Soviet Union's agreement to a system of inspection to protect against surprise attack through the Arctic. Recent Soviet communications have strengthened the hope that they will come to see that by such a system any basis for their professed fears of an attack across the Pole will be removed. for Canada and for the United States such a system in operation would add measurably to our security against a sudden attack. Possibly it might also pave the way for still further measures of arms control and permit some reduction of the burden and danger of modern armaments.

Both of these developments, the Seaway--a broadened, deepened road for peaceful commerce--and the strengthening of our common defense of this continent strikingly illustrate two things.

The first is that change is the law of life and of relations between nations. When two great peoples such as ours, energetic and optimistic, live side by side in all the diversity that freedom offers, change is rapid and brings in its wake problems, sometimes frictions.

The second lesson that I see in these common achievements in diverse fields is that by mutual respect, understanding and with good will we can find acceptable solutions to any problems which exist or may arise between us.

It is important to remember this. Such differences as are from time to time expressed never affect the similarity of purpose which binds our two countries together.

Of course, each of us possesses a distinctive national character and history. You won your independence by evolution, the United States by revolution.

Our forms of government--though both cast in the democratic pattern--are greatly different. Indeed, sometimes it appears that many of our misunderstandings spring from an imperfect knowledge on the part of both of us of the dissimilarities in our forms of government.

And yet, despite these dissimilarities in form, our two governments are developing, and are increasingly using effective ways to consult and act together. This we do to meet the problems that confront us in our relations with each other, and in the relations of both with all other nations of the world.

We share the basic belief that only under free institutions, with government the servant and not the master, can the individual secure his life, his liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We are both determined to frame and follow policies which safeguard the lives and homes of our people, their peace of mind, their material well being and, above all things, their ideals. True to these ideals, both of our countries, for example, are determined that the great decisions of peace and war will remain always under civilian control.

Moreover, we both recognize a design of aggressive Communist imperialism which threatens every free nation. Both of us face a military threat and political attack. Our system of free enterprise is challenged throughout the world by a state-directed, state-controlled economic system. Indeed, my friends, this could well be the area in which the competition will be most bitter and most decisive between the free world and Communist imperialism. We must never allow ourselves to become so preoccupied with any differences between our two nations that we lose sight of the transcendent importance of free world cooperation in the winning of the global struggle.

Now, acting in accordance with our common dedication, the two of us, with others, have drawn together in collective security arrangements. The most notable of these is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in which both Canada and the United States are equal partners. We are both determined to maintain what George Washington described as "a respectable military posture." We are equally determined to maintain our institutions in good repair and to insure that our own economies function well.

Thus we seek not only to meet the expanding needs of our people but also to set an example of free men's accomplishments which will encourage and attract those less fortunate. And finally we are agreed that we shall never cease striving for a just and lasting peace to be achieved by negotiation with those who challenge us. We overlook no opportunity to settle the issues which divide the world and under safeguarded conditions to reduce the burden of armaments.

Now, against this background of similarity in basic factors and policy, let me now point to some of the matters which it seems to me are troublesome between us. Among some examples are the surplus wheat disposal policies of the United States, the imbalance in our mutual trade, certain aspects of United States private investment in Canada, and Canadian fears of a trend in the United States away from forward-looking policies in the field of trade.

I am sure you agree that we should talk frankly to each other. frankness, in good spirit, is a measure of friendship. It should be the practice, I believe, on both sides so to speak, when either feels that important interests are adversely affected by actions contemplated or taken by the other. Happily, these instances are rare. Now in mentioning today specific problems on which we do not see eye to eye, I am doing so as an American, expressing an American viewpoint. I can assure you that your Prime Minister, in discussing these problems with my associates and me, most loyally and eloquently, I might add, expresses the viewpoint of Canada.

It is my conviction, which I believe he fully concurs in, that for all our present problems and all our future ones, we will find acceptable solutions. It will take understanding, common sense and a willingness to give and take on both our parts. These qualities we have always found in our dealings with Canada. I hope that you have not found them lacking in us.

First then, in some detail, I would like to comment briefly on our surplus wheat disposal policies. I think that no one can quarrel with our purpose though some of our methods may seem unorthodox by traditional standards. Simply stated, our wheat disposal program has three aspects.

In times of local famine or disaster we give wheat away. We have also bartered it for strategic materials. finally, we sell wheat for local currency to countries which cannot afford to purchase it commercially. In these cases our policy is to lend back to the Government in question most of the proceeds for local economic development. Our intent is not to damage normal commercial markets and in this I think we have been generally successful.

I know that in the past there was criticism of certain aspects of these programs and particularly of our barter arrangements. I believe that the basis of these objections has been largely removed. Increasingly close consultation between officials of our two governments has ironed out many misunderstandings respecting our surplus disposals. Your Government knows in detail what we plan. I assure you that it is our desire and intention to keep the doors of consultation always and fully open. There must never be a final word between friends.

In several respects, despite inconvenience and even occasional damage in the past, Canada stands to benefit from our moving some surplus agricultural commodities into consumption overseas. first and most evident of all, many hungry people around the world have had food which they otherwise would not have had. Secondly, had these products remained in dead storage they would have had a depressing influence on the world market and on world prices. finally, the funds which we have been enabled to make available to recipient countries should in the long run help to raise standards of living, which in turn will create enlarged markets for all of us.

I come next to the question of the imbalance of trade between our two countries. You buy more from the United States than you sell to us. This fact is of concern to many thoughtful Canadians. There are a few basic points which should be noted in this connection.

First of all, the United States and Canada are not state traders. All the products of industry manufactured in the United States and sold to customers abroad are sold through the enterprise of the private seller. These articles come to you here in Canada only because of the desire of the individual Canadian consumer to buy a particular piece of merchandise. The United States Government does not place goods in Canada as part of a state-directed program.

This aspect of our trade with each other is the natural consequence of two private enterprise economies working side by side and trading with each other.

Then, we should also remember that the free world represents a multilateral trading community. To try to balance our books once a month or once a year with every nation with which we trade would stifle rather than expand trade. I assume that Canada is as interested as we are in the expansion of world trade rather than in its artificial re-direction. Both our peoples want to buy and sell in a climate of economic vigor and expansion. An imbalance in trade with one country, in such a climate, is usually balanced or largely offset by the state of the accounts with other trading nations.

This is the case with Canadian trade. Your export deficit to the United States is offset by export surpluses to other countries and by the flow of investments to Canada. The promotion of healthy multilateral trade, as opposed to artificial bilateral balancing, is an important objective of the International Monetary fund and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, to which both Canada and the United States belong.

For a moment I want to address myself as well to the other side of the trade equation, namely your exports to the United States. Here you can rightly say that, through quotas and tariffs, our governmental policies can either expand or restrict your opportunities to sell to us. The same is of course true of actions taken by your government which can affect the volume of our exports to Canada.

Neither of our countries is a "free trader" in the classical economic sense. Each of us feels a responsibility to provide some protection to particular sectors of our economies which may be in distress or are for other reasons deserving of governmental assistance. We have taken some actions of this sort. So has Canada.

Oil imports into our country contribute a case in point. We believe that to insure adequate supplies of oil in an emergency, it is necessary that exploration to develop oil reserves be carried forward with vigor. This means a healthy oil industry to the continent. A healthy domestic oil producing industry is vital to our national security, and we recognize that our security and yours are inseparable. We have been keenly sensitive to that fact in considering the nature of the voluntary restrictions on oil imports that have been put into effect by oil companies in the United States, and have minimized their impact on your economy.

Our restrictive action with respect to oil is not in any sense reflective of a change in the fundamental trade policy of the United States. Such actions must be viewed in perspective.

For example, since the so-called "escape clause" was incorporated in our trade agreements legislation in 1951, there have come from industry in the United States a number of requests for the imposition of quotas or higher tariffs. In about a dozen cases Presidential approval for some relief has been granted. In only one of these cases was Canada directly affected as an exporter. We have always conscientiously sought to take account of your interests as well as our own in seeking the best remedy to these intricate problems. I believe that a study of the record will bear out the truth of this statement.

Next, the flow of investment funds from the United States into Canada has led to expressions of concern on your part. These funds have been attracted to your country by the business opportunities Canada has offered. Though they may raise questions in specific cases respecting control of an industry by American citizens, these industries are, of course, subject to Canadian law. Moreover, these investments have helped you to develop your resources and to expand your industrial plant at a far faster rate than could have been possible had you relied wholly on your own savings. They have thereby helped to provide employment, tax revenues and other direct benefits. These funds have also helped Canada to finance with ease its recent surplus of imports from the United States, a fact that is testified to by the premium of the Canadian dollar over the United States dollar.

I am confident that if there are some defects in this investment process, ways will be found to correct them, because this is the interest of both our countries.

One final word on the foreign trade policy of the United States. In 1934 the United States took an historic decision to embark on a positive policy of fostering trade with the launching of the Reciprocal Trade Agreements program. This policy we continue to support and to practice. The Government of the United States, after a public searching of soul at times of renewal of the Trade Agreements Act, has consistently reaffirmed this policy. Have no fear that the United States will abandon a policy so well established. The problems I have been discussing concern our economic lives. Our points of economic contact are varied and numerous, as they of necessity must be under our chosen system of private enterprise.

Our governments have a responsibility to help compose difficulties, but we must not forget that thousands of individual citizens of Canada and the United States must themselves find in their diversified activities the answers to many of these problems.

Finally, there is no cause to be surprised or disturbed to discover that occasionally differences arise between us. The distinguishing character of the peoples of the free world lies in the fact that differences between them can develop, can be expressed and then amicably resolved.

We in the United States have no more desire than you have to seek in our relations with others the silent, sullen unity that elsewhere has been purchased or imposed. The hallmark of freedom is the right to differ as well as the right to agree.

I have spoken to you in the knowledge that through you I address a nation strong in the tradition of freedom and vigilant in its defense. You and we are alike convinced, by our history, by our religious faith and our common heritage of freedom, that economic well-being and political liberty both depend upon the efforts of individuals and on their willingness to accept the responsibilities of freedom. Today, I assure you once more of the pride and of the gratification that we of the United States feel in our long and friendly association with you, our sturdy Northern neighbor.

We stand together at a pivotal point in history. All that we Canadians and Americans, and those who went before us, have built, all that we believe in, is challenged as it has never been challenged before. The new horizons of competition range from the polar areas, and extend to the infinity of outer space.

It is for us--all of us--to bring to the challenge a response worthy of ourselves and our two nations.

As we do, we shall know the satisfaction of having built, in friendship, a safer and ampler home here on the earth for this generation and those that shall come after us. I thank you for your kind attention.