quences of Unrestricted Reciprocity with the United States, he declared that "in a few years political union would follow such a policy." They quoted the Liberal Convention Resolution of 1893 which declared that the Macdonald Government did not really want Reciprocity in any form.

Finally, Sir Wilfrid Laurier and the Toronto Globe were declared to have also changed their minds in the years following the early Nineties and to have opposed Reciprocity just as the Conservatives had done in 1891 with the Unrestricted variety and were now doing in 1911. It was pointed out that on March 21, 1899, in the House of Commons, Sir W. Laurier said: "If we know the hearts and minds of our people at present I think I am not making too wide a statement when I say that the general feeling in Canada to-day is not in favour of Reciprocity." In the General Elections of 1900 and 1904 the Liberal Leaders had practically abandoned Reciprocity and eliminated the subject from their speeches. Speaking in the Commons on July 31, 1903, the Premier had introduced his National Transcontinental Railway measure with this comment: "Heaven grant that whilst we tarry and dispute the trade of Canada is not deviated to other channels and that an ever-vigilant competitor does not take to himself the trade that properly belongs to those who acknowledge Canada as their native or their adopted land. The best and most effective way to maintain friendship with our American neighbours is to be absolutely independent of them." At the Colonial Conference (May 7) of 1907 Sir Wilfrid was quoted as saying that "there was a time when we wanted Reciprocity with the United States, but our efforts and our offers were put aside and negatived. We have said good-bye to that trade and we now put all our hopes upon the British trade." Moreover, on Oct. 2, 1902, the Toronto Globe had declared, editorially, that "nobody is worrying about Reciprocity with the United States "; on Dec. 21, 1909, it had stated that stability and continuity of Tariff policy" were essential to prosperity; in his Western tour of 1909 the nearest Sir W. Laurier would get to Reciprocity was the promise of a Royal Commission to inquire into Tariff conditions.

Such was the historical environment, in a fiscal sense, which met the revival of Reciprocity and the negotiations for a Treaty in the first month of 1911. There was, in a national sense, the further complication represented by a sort of sub-conscious resentment in many Canadian minds as to United States treatment of the Provinces and the Dominion in many and varied matters. Of these the abrogation of the 1854 Treaty was only one; the invasions of 1774 and 1812, the raids of 1837, and the sharp, shrewd treaty negotiations of other dates, were too distant to be more than unpleasant and occasional memories; the Fenian Raids, the Atlantic Fishery and Behring Sea and Alaskan boundary disputes were more recent and more irritating matters.

Reference was frequently made by the Liberal press to the past hundred years of peace on this Continent, to the absence of guns and forts on the international frontier, to the Rush-Bagot Convention by which gun-boats were to be practically excluded from the Great Lakes. It was pointed out by a part of the Conservative press in reply that the latter condition was only nominal and that in reality the United States now had nine or ten ships of more than gun-boat proportions on the Lakes and could command the situation in the event of war. As to the rest Lieut.-Col. J. P. McPherson, in the Montreal Star of Aug. 31, stated that "the Americans. have a fort at Sault Ste. Marie which commands our locks there. They are putting Fort Mackinac in repair which will block the entrance to Lake Michigan and with Fort Wayne at Detroit, will control Lakes Huron, St. Clair and Erie. They have Fort Niagara to threaten the Welland Canal. They have recently built a strong fort at Oswego to protect that entrance to the Erie Canal and dominate Lake Ontario, and have paid $100,000 for the demolition of buildings which interfered with the range of guns. They have a strong fort on Lake Champlain and large barracks at Plattsburg and Fort Ethan Allen from which they can operate against Montreal and destroy our system of canals. To offset these preparations we have not a single war vessel or a single fort."

The matter of history and environment included one other most important condition which may be indicated in the following table of statistics dealing with Canada as it was in the year after the United States abrogation of Reciprocity had helped to drive the British Provinces into Confederation; in the year 1888 when conditions of prosperity on the American side and of depression on the Canadian side had evolved the Unrestricted Reciprocity agitation which was defeated in 1891; in the year 1910 when the growth of Canada made closer trade relations not an unpleasant subject for United States consideration and when the negotiations of the succeeding year were informally initiated:

From the United States point of view there was, also, an historical environment to this question-apart from what has been already indicated. Population was growing greatly by the accession of not always desirable classes from continental Europe; 600,000 of the best elements in the community had migrated to Western Canada; capital to the extent of an estimated $400,000,000 had been put into Canadian industrial development while about 200 branches of United States industrial concerns had in recent years located in the Dominion; the import by the Republic of crude material for manufacturing had undergone a steady increase from 21.6 per cent. of its total import in 1890 to 36.4 per cent. in 1910; the growing need for new markets was obvious in the increased export of manufactures from 15.7 per cent. of the total United States product in 1890 to 292 per cent. in 1910. The struggle for existence had grown keen and the vast resources and unoccupied lands of Canada become a large and vital factor in future Continental development; while enhanced prices and the mounting cost of living had made high Protection somewhat unpopular and had lessened the prestige of Republican party policy and rule. These were the United States conditions, in brief, which led up to the events of 1911.

Reciprocity

Negotiations

Washington

The formal Reciprocity negotiations of this year really commenced in an informal way during the preat Ottawa and ceding year and in connection with the agreement as to Franco-Canadian Treaty rates which was reached at Washington on Mch. 27, 1910, between President Taft, United States Secretary P. C. Knox, and Messrs. W. S. Fielding and G. P. Graham of the Canadian Government. On Feb. 27, 1910, Mr. Bryce, British Ambassador at Washington, had intimated that the British Government would like the United States to undertake any proposed trade negotiations direct with Ottawa; on March 3-10 a United States Delegation composed of H. C. Emory and C. M. Pepper visited the Canadian capital; on Mch. 18th Mr. Fielding discussed the French Treaty entanglement with President Taft at Albany, Earl Grey, Governor-General of Canada, attended a banquet in the evening and said much of "reciprocal sympathy," while the President spoke of "friendship for mutual benefit." On the 20th Dr. J. A. Macdonald of the Toronto Globe, who had been in Washington conducting informal negotiations in a private capacity and with a view to friendly trade and tariff arrangements, made public in his paper a "message" from the President of the United States assuring the people of Canada that: "It is my deliberate purpose to promote in such ways as are open to me better trade relations between the United States and Canada than at present exist. I am profoundly convinced that these two countries, touching each other for more than 3,000 miles, have common interests in trade and require special arrangements in legislation and administration which are not

involved in the relations of the United States with countries beyond the Seas."

A week later Mr. Fielding wrote to Mr. Secretary Knox that the Agreement just come to-in the re-arrangement of Canadian duties so as to meet in a compromise way the United States demands under the French Treaty and assure to Canada the United States Minimum tariff rates-encouraged the hope for "more intimate and expanded " trade relations. He added an expression of the Canadian Government's desire to take up "the consideration of a re-adjustment of these relations upon broad and liberal lines." On Apl. 7th Mr. Bryce wrote to Lord Grey a letter of congratulation upon the settlement of the question at issue; on May 2 President Taft referred, in a speech at Pittsburg, to the "peculiar relations" existing between the United States and Canada as justifying" a different policy as to imports and exports" from that which obtained with other countries.

Formal negotiations for Reciprocity opened at Ottawa on Nov. 4th, 1910, between C. M. Pepper, Henry M. Hoyt, and J. G. Foster representing the Washington Government and Messrs. W. S. Fielding and William Paterson representing that of Canada. There were four sittings of about six hours each and on the 10th an adjournment was made to meet at Washington early in January. On the following day the Toronto Globe stated editorially that: "It is certain that Mr. Fielding and Mr. Paterson will consent to no serious lowering of Canadian duties in return for the free entry of Canadian lumber, ores, wood-pulp and similar things into the United States. The free entry of articles of that sort is almost certain to form part of any tariff measure which can become law in the United States during the next two years, and that without any reference to Canada's tariff. The Dominion is not going to pay for United States tariff reductions that would be made as a matter of course and without negotiation." In his annual Message to Congress on Dec. 6th President Taft stated that the Dominion Government had reciprocated in October his own desire for continued negotiations by a definite request to that end. Hence the Conference of November.

The Conference was resumed at Washington on Jan. 7th, 1911, amid considerable local speculation and some Canadian political interest; but with little expectation or thought in Canada of any practical result. There had been so many useless "pilgrimages to Washington" and there had grown up such a strong, confident self-reliance amongst the Canadian people that Reciprocity appeared to be a theoretical subject of discussion rather than an actual possibility. Despatches from Washington in the Canadian press, however, seemed to indicate to the political student a new state of affairs-a determination on the part of the President to do something to meet a situation in which the Democrats had obtained. control of the ensuing House of Representatives and expected to

get that of the Senate after the current Session. The border States were favourable to Reciprocity, the Democrats as a party were demanding lower duties, and many, in all parties, looked with favour upon any suggestion of removing the tariff on food products. Americans connected with the negotiations or associated with the President's plans were confident of success. Mr. C. M. Pepper, Tariff Expert of the United States Government, expressed confidence on Jan. 6th that a Treaty would result from the Conference; Mr. W. Alden Smith, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Canadian Relations, said on the same date: "I cannot express too strongly my desire for the establishment of a Reciprocity Treaty between the United States and Canada. In their national relations, as sister nations, an approximate commercial identity should be aimed at." Officials and close friends of the Taft Administration all appeared eager to have an Agreement effected and all spoke of the pending Conference with optimism. Messrs. Fielding and Paterson arrived in Washington on Jan. 7th and discussion seems to have commenced at the State Department immediately with C. M. Pepper and Chandler P. Anderson of the Treasury Department as the direct United States representatives, with Mr. Secretary Knox, who really controlled the American part of the negotiations, for, and on behalf of, the President.

The negotiations from the beginning were absolutely secret although there were many and varied speculations as to duties which might, could or would be removed or changed. It afterwards became clear that there was a practical agreement amongst the negotiators that (1) a measure of Reciprocity was desirable; that (2) the purpose of the Conference was to draw up a definite agreement which should avoid any sweeping reduction in duties on manufactured goods; that (3) a list of specified articles was ready on both sides for consideration in which were included foodstuffs, pulp-wood, agricultural machinery, paper, fish, and coal; that (4) Canadian opinion in one respect was fairly well understood at Washington and that no expectation existed of a manufacturing arrangement though there was hope of the present proposals being expanded at a later period. There was little public interest taken in the negotiations at Washington. A few politicians discussed them in interviews but the press was concerned chiefly in the obtaining of free pulp-wood for its paper mills. The details were unknown and discontent was not yet aroused while the parties and political sections did not know where they were to stand in the matter.

On Jan. 11th the Canadian Ministers called to their aid two Departmental assistants-John McDougald, Deputy Minister of Customs, and J. M. Russell of the Finance Department-and it was announced by the Toronto Globe correspondent that the United States proposals were unexpectedly broad and comprehensive. Meanwhile, Messrs. Fielding and Paterson had been joined