POLITICS AND BUTTER.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20656, 30 August 1930, Page 11

POLITICS AND BUTTER.

CANADIAN ELECTION RESULT*

NEW ZEALAND'S INFLUENCE.

FACTOR IN PARTY'S DEFEAT,

[i'EOJl OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT. ] VANCOUVER, August 6.

New Zealanders can lay the flattering unction to their souls that their country was a [actor in the defeat of the Mackenzie King Government and the election of the Conservatives with a big working majority over all other parties. Not since the patriotism of New Zealand's young men amazed tho whole world in the Turkish war scare of 1922 has His Majesty's remotest Dominion earned wide advertisement in Canada. \ •

In most of his 150 campaign speeches the new Prime Minister, Mr. Bennett, mentioned New Zealand to audiences that were vastly supplemented by invisible listeners on the radio. Mot favourably, it is true, but New Zealand should not suffer greatly from that fact. From the Atlantic to the Pacific, the Conservative leader depicted New Zealand, through her butter export trade, ruining the dairy industry of Canada, depleting herds, and generally depriving thousands of farmers of the right to live. The humour of the situation lies in. the fact that, during his campaign tour of the Dominion, Mr. Bennett, knowingly or otherwise, ate New Zealand butter at every meal, for it is served at all first-class hotels where lie stayed. New York Journal's Comment. Mr. Bennett's abuse of the New Zealand treaty, under which the butter trade was built up in five years, moved the New York Times to observe, in an editorial two days after the election: —- " Canada is in no doubt at. all about its own determination to erect, a tariff •wall around the Dominion of Canada. Over that wall it would not permit other British colonies or dominions to climb. One of the grievances much exploited in the recent Canadian political campaign was the importation of large quantities of butter from New Zealand. This was regarded as ail outrage upon Canadian dairy fanners, which must be stopped by an appropriate customs duty. This is the kind of thing which happens when a country, any country, begins to go in for a protective tariff. Once started, it must go the whole figure. Australia has already enacted a new tariff, prejudicial to British imports, and Canada will be doing the same in a few months if Mr. Bennett and the Conservative Party carry out faithfully the pledge which they made in the course of their campaign." New Zealand butter, apparently, is the only clue to solve the, mystery of why the electors of Vancouver threw out their four Conservative members and elected four Liberals. Vancouver has been a traditional stronghold of Conservatism right through its history. The expert commentators, abashed at this volte face, have eliminated every possible reason but the one that the housewives of Vancouver —determined to get New Zealand butter, which was cheaper and better than the Canadian product—had gone to the ballot box in full force and thrown all Mr. Bennett's followers into the political discard for five years. Housewives and Butter. The Vancouver Daily Province, • staunch supporter of the Australian and New Zealand treaty, remarks, in this connection, that " a good Conservative " was given the following reason why all the Greater Vancouver ridings had gone Liberal:—"New Zealand butter did it. Vancouver housewives have been buying New Zealand butter, three pounds for a dollar, for some years now, and they have come to believe they cannot get along without it. They were afraid, if the Conservatives were returned, that their supply would be cut off. So they voted Liberal, and there you are." On Tuesday morning, when it became apparent that Quebec had given Mr. Bennett a very real majority, the Province telegraphed to Montreal to find out what happened, and the answer' came back, " New Zealand butter." The Quebec farmer did not like the competition of the product of the southern Dominion, so he voted Conservative to protect himself. There were other factors, but New Zealand buttter was the dominating one. The Province's Ottawa correspondent gave substantially the same explanation and suggested that butter had been a factor in a number of Ontario constituencies, too.

The newspaper observes:—"Well, it is a poor argument, they say, that will not work two ways, and, we suppose, it is poor butter that will not grease the skids of two political parties in two different directions. Our southern cousins ought to he proud of their product. It seems to be real slippery stuff."