The New Zealand Times. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER, 25, 1911. THE CANADIAN ELECTIONS

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 7914, 25 September 1911, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER, 25, 1911. THE CANADIAN ELECTIONS

Canada has declared against reciprocity with the United States, and the political party which has been in power since as far back as 1897 has sustained a defeat so crushing that it may have to undergo complete reorganisation before it can hope to turn the tables on its opponents. An analysis of the principal returns proves that the defeat of Sir "Wilfrid Laurier has been brought about by a combination of curiously diverse interests. For once, at least, in his career Sir Wilfrid lost the support of the French-Canadian voters in Quebec, and herein may lie a possible source of future trouble for the victorious Conservatives. For the FrenchCanadian vote has hitherto always been strongly anti-imperialist. It is gener- | ally understood that Sir Wilfrid’s atti-: tude at the Imperial Conference did not meet, with approval in Quebec and : Montreal, but by voting against their quondam political hero the FrenchCanadians have, curiously enough, played into the hands of politicians whose Imperialism is of much sounder and more pronounced a character than that of the ox-Premier. Until we know exactly what is meant by tbs term “ Independents,” we cannot bo certain whether the twelve gentlemen ■ so labelled are identical with the twelve “ Nationalists ’’ returned in Quebec. If they are, we may fairly assume that they will, on questions affecting the Imperial connection and the Imperial, responsibilities of the Dominion, give the Borden Ministry a good deal of trouble. But for the time being they have assisted in strengthening the general Conservative victory, the victory of a party whose policy will, in tho long run, be even less to their liking than was that of the great leader they have deserted. The defeat of the Liberals in Ontario ■was only to be expected, and was predicted in these columns some weeks ago. Ontario is the home of Canada’s principal manufacturing industries, and most of the Canadian manufacturers are protectionists. In reciprocity .with tho United. States they believed they saw a serious menace to their interests. To them it meant the competition of rivals conducting business on a much larger scale and with much larger capital, and possessed already of an enormous home market. In the prairie States, however, the Liberals hoped to receive a block vote from the farmers, who, under reciprocity, might reasonably look to gain material advantage from the extended market opened to their produce by free admission to the United States. It is evident, however, that the anticipations of Sir Wilfrid Laurier in this direction were based upon misapprehension, for in Manitobathe Liberals only retain one seat. In Alberta and the Saskatchewan the Laurier party were more successful. The former province they carried, with the, exception of the city of Calgary, and in the latter they have a majority of four members. The reason for this is, in all probability, tjiat in Alberta and Saskatchewan are settled the great majority of the American farmers who have crossed the border from the Middle AVest and Nortb-AVestern States of the Union, carrying with them a pro-American sentiment:, and a keen desire for freedom of trade with the country they have left. During the last ten years close upon half a million immigrants have poured into Canada from the States, and their possible influence on political issues has been the subject of frequent speculation in the Dominion. In British Columbia political sentiment bas always been strongly Imperialistic in tone, and, apart from this, another factor in tho defeat sustained by the Liberals in the Pacific province has doubtless been a fear lest the fruit industry should he seriously handicapped by Californian competition.

There will, of course, be grave disappointment at AVasbington. , But if the statements made as to Mr , Taft’s enlistment of the Hearst journals to “barrack” for reciprocity in Ontario and elsewhere in the Eastern provinces can be substantiated, many Americans will look upon Mr Taft as not a little .to blame for the defeat of the scheme so enthusiastically championed by him. Canadians are very well aware that dubious electioneering methods are by no means unknown at Ottawa, hut they would naturally object to being cajoled by Mr Hearst. Canadians have always resented American interference in their polities. Mr Champ Clark’s blazing indiscretion—- “ this moans tho annexation of Canada,” or words to that effect—is blamed by many American papers as “ the cause of the defeat of reciprocity.” But at the time Mr Clark allowed his enthusiasm to triumph over his . natural common-sense, tho comments of the leading Canadian journals were ironically humorous in toho, and it is hardly likely that the speech, silly as it may have been, ever seriously affected tho voting.

British ..press comment on the defeat

of the Laurier Ministry is mainly representative of the particular party colour of the organs whoso opinions have been cabled. The “ Pall Mall Gazette,” the property of the “naturalised ” Mr Astor, ox-New Yorker, and now almost hysterically fervid in his British Imperialism, gravely asserts that “ Canada’s vengeance has fallen with terrible weight on fatuous politicians who lent themselves to a policy of subversions.” The Radical “Star” is probably much nearer the truth when it remarks that “ the BordenBourassa alliance is purely an opportunist one,” due to the opposition to reciprocity of the Canadian protectionists. The chief apostle of Tariff Reform, Air Joseph Chamberlain, with a characteristic objection to looking facts in tho face, claims tho Conservative triumph as a “ victory for preference.” Unless we are very much mistaken, the electors who rejected reciprocity with the United States are not in the least likely to pin themselves down to acceptance of a hard and fast policy of preference. The defeat, of the Laurier Ministry has plainly been due to a combination of circumstances. The discontent of the Fronch-Canadians with their bid leader; the fears of the manufacturers of'Ontario of American competition ; the inability of the Liberals to iiersuade the Manitoban farmers that reciprocity would, be to their advantage ; the unwise and impudent attempt of Mr Hearst to influence Canadian public opinion; and last, not least, a feeling that the Premier had outlived his usefulness, have all been contributing factors. Xt is premature to speculate on the immediate or future consequences of the political upheaval which Canada has just witnessed. It is probable that the Imperial tie has been rather strengthened than weakened by the defeat, of reciprocity, although we believe that the results upon Canada’s Imperialism had the agreement been sanctioned would not have been nearly so serious as some of the more timid Canadian Imperialists had imagined.