RECIPROCITY.

Timaru Herald, Volume XCIV, Issue 14363, 8 February 1911, Page 5

RECIPROCITY.

CANADA AND THE STATES. THE BRITON'S LOAF. Press Association —By Tel. —Copyright. LONDON, Feb. C. The " Daily Mail" says that the United States offers Canadian farmers 7Jd a bußhel more for their wheat than they can obtain in Canada. British preference would only amount to Sd. Clearly Britain's so-called bread tax has been definitely and finally extinguished. The sooner Unionists let their constituents know this the better. Protection of manufactured goods and the further, loworing of duties on British manufactures within the Empire would appeal strongly to Canadians and British people. An increase in the price of food in Britain was inevitable. The "Daily Chronicle" declares that if a remnant of the fiscal policy survives it will be sordid, vulgar protectionism, incapable of an exalted appeal. WILL IT OUT THE PAINTER? The "Morning Post" favours the Unionists dropping their scheme of reform of the House of Lords, and rallying to the Canadian Imperialists with the object of preventing the ratification of tho reciprocity agreement. It adds, " The United States hopes to supplant Britain as the centre of the AngloSaxon confederation, and unless Britain rouses bersolf she will lose tho fairest heritage ever entrusted to the nation."

The "Pall Mall Gazette" describes Canada as lapsing into unprogressive provincialism, and being the handmaid of American trusts, and the contributor of the fifty-first star of the flag which will rule the continent. It was the duty of Home Imperialists to strain every muscle to prevent the threatened consummation* THE STATES WANT WHEAT. LONDON, Feb. 7. Mr D. McMaster, Unionist member for Chertsey, says that there is a good deal of party politics in the proposed reciprocal agreement between Canada and America. At the same time it is all important for the United States to get new sources of food supply, and necessity would have compelled the abolition of its wheat duty. The "Westminster Gazette" says that tho fallacies of preference as a cementer of Empire are clearly shown to depend on the Canadian farmer doing something against his own interests, uhile the United States could have shattered the policy at any moment ; indeed it would have been forced to do so, not from unfriendliness, but to provide for the necessities of the growing population.