The Govern

ment, the Liberal Party

II. THE GENERAL ELECTIONS.

To most of the Members of the Government, to old-time Liberals throughout the country, to the men in both parties who had been trained in a traand Reciprocity dition that Reciprocity in natural products was essentially desirable, and the Treaty period of 1854-66 the golden age of Ontario, the Agreement with the United States was at first an inspiration, a flash of political genius, a certain path to electoral success. To younger men in all parties, to business and industrial and financial interests, there was much uncertainty and doubt and, as already shown, these feelings grew and multiplied. There is no reason to believe that the Government as a whole expected such strong antagonism as developed in Parliament and the country; there is no reason to suppose that they expected defeat in the Elections which were forced by the Opposition. The first period of triumph, however, could not have lasted very long and there must have been an obvious and constant expectation of unwise or irritating speeches in Congress.

There seems little reason to doubt, also, that unless something unexpected developed they did anticipate a Western sweep, a reasonable success in Quebec, where Reciprocity would wipe out recollections of Navy complications, and the holding or winning of a sufficient rural vote in Ontario, and down by the Atlantic, to offset Conservative gains in the cities or from the manufacturers as a class. To Mr. T. C. Robinette, K.C., at a Toronto meeting on March 20, Sir Wilfrid Laurier sent this message: "We have not hurt the manufacturer and we will not do so. We have benefited the farmer and consumer. When the time comes we will sweep the country from the Atlantic to the Pacific." The comment of the Toronto Globe on this statement (Mch. 22) referred to the Premier's well-known political sagacity and continued: "It must be remembered that the strength of Liberalism is to be found largely in the rural constituencies, and rural Canada, we are firmly convinced, will stand fast to Laurier and better trade relations with the United States when the time comes."

There was much that was attractive in the policy with which Sir Wilfrid Laurier went to the country. Traditionally, it was a good thing, apparently it opened at a sweep the great and highpriced United States market, with its teeming centres of demand, to the agricultural producer of Canada, theoretically it was said to mean a new era of peace and friendship and reciprocal courtesies between two kindred peoples. It was in line with the Liberal

policy of many decades; it could be made to appear a progressive policy as against one of standing still; it could be claimed with much truth that a refusal of the United States overtures would have been extremely unpopular and, perhaps, without the succeeding discussions it would have been so; it was a policy which fitted in with the needs of British Liberalism and the wishes of those in Canada who did not particularly want closer fiscal relations with Britain; it met the demand and filled the hearts of all the earnest and sincere Free-traders who still had a place though a quiet and dormant one-in the ranks of the party; it was, nominally, a blow at extreme Protectionist theories and practices; it seemed to meet a widespread agricultural demand for contiguous markets and did not, on the surface, affect seriously any great manufacturing interest of the country; it involved the lightening of taxation to the consumer under the old-time theory that the importer pays the duty-though this was not allowed to work both ways as the agricultural exporter was also told that he would get more for his products when the United States duties were removed.

The Toronto Globe on Jan. 27th described the attitude of Parliament on Mr. Fielding's announcement as one of satisfaction upon both sides, the proposed Agreement as likely to be distinctly popular in both Canada and the United States, and the situation as a whole to mean the end of Tariff wars and the beginning of a new era of friendship. Following the presentation of the Agreement to Parliament, Government policy and principles soon found expression before the people and gradually took the form upon which the Elections were fought. To the Manufacturers' Deputation on Jan. 13th Sir Wilfrid Laurier had been non-commital except in a general promise that the industries of the country would not be interfered with; to the Fruit-Growers on Feb. 10, the Premier commented on their opinions as divided and the lateness of their appeal to Parliament; on Mch. 8th he declared that "our policy has been, is, and will be, so long as the Canadian people continue to place in us the confidence they have shown during fifteen years, to seek markets wherever markets can be found." As adjoining countries it was to the mutual interest of Canada and the United States to have a "broad and liberal trade intercourse." The Government believed that "the interests alike of the Dominion and of the Empire would be materially advanced by the establishing of such relations"; that a fair and liberal Reciprocity treaty would develop the great natural resources of Canada, enormously increase trade and commerce between the two peoples, tend to encourage friendly relations and remove many causes which had, in the past, provoked irritation and trouble; and promote kindly relations between the Empire and the Republic which would afford the best guarantee of peace and prosperity. On another point the Premier was explicit:

Sir, we have never taken part on this side of the House, we have refused to take part, in the controversy which has been long going on in England on the question of mutual preferential trade. We would not take any part in the contest between the Tariff Reformers and the Freetraders. Our policy was set forth by the Canadian Ministers at the Conference of 1902, and it was in these words: 'The Canadian Ministers state that if they could be assured that the Imperial Government would accept the principle of Preferential trade generally and particularly grant to the food products of Canada in the United Kingdom exemption from duties now levied or hereafter imposed, they (the Canadian Ministers) I would be prepared to go farther in the subject and endeavour to give to the British manufacturer some increased advantage over his foreign competitors in the market of Canada.' This is our policy in this year

1911.

A couple of months later Sir Wilfrid was in England and at a Pilgrims' Society dinner (May 22) expressed himself strongly as to United States relations. "Canada, in sharing the continent with the United States," he said, "has a double interest in the Treaty of Arbitration between the United States and the United Kingdom and," he exclaimed, "I thank God that the relations between the two peoples never were so good as they are to-day ... We believe the day will come for an alliance of all lands springing from England's loins, insuring the peace of the world for ever.' Little was said about Reciprocity in these speeches. At the Dominion Day banquet an address of eloquent loyalty was delivered. After referring to the peaceful and equal union of alien races under the Flag as "the glory of England," Sir Wilfrid said: The British Empire will be maintained on these lines so long as British institutions remain as they are... The British Empire to-day is a crowned democracy and the world will learn that under the Monarchy of England, whether it be in England, Canada, Australia, New Zealand or South Africa, there is more liberty, more justice, and more equality than in any Republic."

On his return to Canada the Premier was given an enthusiastic welcome at Quebec on July 10th. After stating that he had come back to fight the battle for Reciprocity Sir Wilfrid proceeded: "The anti-Reciprocity movement has been inspired solely by the Jingo Imperialists, both in England and in Canada, who with their narrow views would bind us to England alone, and would prevent us from trading with the United States. There could not be a more absurd conception. It is not a question of sentiment. We want to trade with England because it is our best market, but that is no reason why we should not trade with anybody else. We want to trade with all the world and, especially, with our neighbours. The English Jingoes would have the British Empire bound by restriction. We Liberals of Canada, like the Liberals of England, believe in freedom of action and in the greatest possible freedom."* A similar reception was accorded in Montreal

NOTE.-Verbatim Report in Toronto Daily Star (Lib.) on July 11.

to

on the the following day and similar views expressed as Imperialistic and Nationalistic Jingoes. At Ottawa a speech was made eulogizing the Monarchy, praising the character and achievements of the Duke of Connaught, and expressing renewed loyalty to British connection and institutions. In his Montreal speech (July 11), it may be added, Sir Wilfrid used a phrase which was afterwards much quoted by his followers: "Henry of Navarre at the Battle of Ivry said: Follow my white plume and you will find it always in the forefront of honour.' Like Henry IV., I say to you young men, 'Follow my white plume-the white hairs of sixty-nine years-and you will, I believe I can say it without boasting, find it always in the forefront of honour.'"

Passing from the Leader's expression of views and policy it may be said that on Mar. 3rd, speaking at Woodstock, Mr. Mackenzie King, Minister of Labour, declared that "the surest way to keep the people on the land is to make the business of those who live upon the land pleasurable and profitable. The surest way of making profitable the work of those who thus labour is to secure to them the widest possible market for the products which they raise. The policy of the present Administration may be described as a great social policy, which will have as its outcome the improvement of conditions for the farmer and for all those engaged in rural pursuits." At Victoria, B.C., on Mar. 20, Mr. Templeman, Minister of Mines, said: "If the Government goes to the country on its record it will win. And, with the inauguration of the Navy and the introduction of a Reciprocity Agreement with the United States, a matter that this country has been striving for during 40 years, on what ground can the average elector, even though an opponent of the Government, oppose a Liberal candidate!" In the matter of the British Preference Mr. Fielding, Minister of Finance, had already (Jan. 26) intimated that there might be a re-adjustment; on Feb. 8 his Message to Lord Strathcona contained a statement as to some slight possible revision of the Tariff in that connection; on Mar. 2nd Mr. F. B. Carvell, a prominent Liberal, spoke in the Commons of a possible increase in the Preference to 40 per cent.; in the New Brunswick Legislature the Liberal Opposition had suggested an increase in the Preference to 50 per cent.; the Resolutions of the Western Grain Growers as they came to Ottawa all contained a demand for Reciprocity, free agricultural implements and a 50 per cent. Preference.

Mr. Fielding spoke at a great Liberal meeting in Montreal on Mar. 25th. He was replying to Mr. Sifton and was urging his policy in a centre of financial and industrial strength where keen opposition had been expressed; he met with some hostility and considerable good-natured heckling but made an able speech and announced in response to interruptions that there would be an

Election a good deal sooner" than some people might like. Mr. Fisher, Minister of Agriculture, spoke for and to the farmers. Mr. Ralph Smith spoke for the West. After reviewing in his speech certain conditions, historical, political and international, Mr. Fielding proceeded as follows: "There is no question but that the farmer and the lumberman and the fisherman want this Reciprocity Agreement and I believe they are going to get it. But what about the manufacturers! Of course this Agreement shows to every intelligent manufacturer who reads it that his interests were carefully guarded. We told them (the United States Commissioners) frankly at the beginning that in the matter of natural products we could meet them on even terms but we said when it comes to manufactures we have to be more careful, we frankly admit that you, with your greater capital and your specialized organizations, you are more than the equals of us in your manufacturing power, and we are not prepared to make a treaty with you including any wide range of manufactured goods!" As to the future he asked Manufacturers to trust him and the Government; if they did not do so there would be danger ahead in the bringing of East and West into antagonism:

The danger is not to be found in Reciprocity itself, but the danger is that the manufacturing interests of this country and the allied moneyed interests which they are connected with, will array themselves in hostility against the growing feeling of the Western farmers. Don't make any mistake about it-the day is in sight of the younger men and some of those who are not so young in this audience, when there will be more people west of the Great Lakes than there are east of the Great Lakes now. The West is going some day to dominate Canada, and we who live in the East, if we are wise, may as well see it and look ahead. Suppose the manufacturers should organize to-day with their money to defeat this Agreement, I want to tell you, my brothers, that there will grow up in that Western country a dangerous feeling. Don't make any mistake about it. I beg the manufacturers of this country not to array themselves against the farmers of the West.

Mr. Sydney Fisher, after a reference to the sudden and influential agitation of the past month against Reciprocity, spoke as "a special advocate of the farmers of Canada." He pointed out the obstacles of the past in the way of obtaining limited Reciprocity. There was first the United States contention that a large measure of manufactured goods must be included; that had been abandoned. Then there was the Canadian claim that the Americans should bring their tariff down to ours; upon every item mentioned in the Agreement this had been done. Finally, Canada had to decide not to seek further favours at Washington; this Agreement had first been invited by the United States. As to the farmer the Minister of Agriculture went on to claim that he was not getting the high prices paid for food in the citiesthe middleman was getting them. Upon the products affected by this Agreement and going to or coming from the United States a