New-York tribune., 1891-05-08
THE CANADIAN DEBATE.

the mart of the Opposition, III the hedteu pOlu-
cal debate which has just been concluded in the
Canadian Parliament. The speeches OF Sir
Jobn Macdonald and Mr.. Foster for the Gov
eminent and Of Mr.. Laurier and Sir Richard
Cartwright for the Opposition were remarkable
for their cleverness and energy. TIE TRIBUNE
cannot profess to admire the Dominion Govern
mont and is able to discover nothing better
than political sagacity and persuasive ofatorS III
the addresses of its leaders. That they nave
succeeded without much loss OF Such preSuEe
rs they possess in the difficult business OF eVau-
ing the attacks of their opponents cannot oe
denied, though the credit to Which una' Ia''
entities them NAV or may not be envlable Inc
criticisms of the Opposition remain WhohS ui
onswered II was especially urged by the LID
oral sneakers that Parliament had been uncon-
stitutionally dissolved; that the prerogative OF
the Crown had been basely used by the OoV-
ernmcnt to obtain an unfair advantage thaO 'ne
country had been asked to pass upon scheihe
of reciprocity concerning whlch IL was Pei
mitted to know nothing; that the sta'ehier'S
mt into the automatic mouth OF the uoVerhoi
General concerning alleged negotiations then
onened With the United States were false ahu
misleading: and that the present proceedings
of the Government with regard to ReclprociN
Treaty with the Americans were fagraDtly IN
consistent with their declarations to the people
These points were tellingly presented, DuV ho
Governments response was made. oir Johli anu
Minister Foster contented themselves with re-
plying that they had always been IN laVor VI
Reciprocity. which their past conduct notorious
" denies. and that they were now in agleeaoie
intorcoursa with the United States, which may
mean anything or nothing.
If il is intended TO persuade the people VI
Canada to believe that any such scheme OF
Reciprocity between their country and ours IS
possiblo as was presented on the stump last
February by Sir John Macdonald and Sir ChafieS
Turner. it is highly mischlevous. 1t Is true
that they di6 not elaborate their plan win much
deliniteness The Tory campalgners were too
busy abusing America and the American people
70 occupy much time with plans for improving
trode and social relations between the two coun-
t,ios. Their harangues were full Of defamations
and deiiances not of plans for peaceful inter-
course. Sir John himself in his Amherst speech
sot the KEYNOTE for all his followers and from
tbe greatest to the least of them they Joined in
chorus of discordant malevolence. We do not
mention this in reproach of the Canadians. nor
as an argument against nelghborly relauons.
But when the suggestion of such relations ls
made 70 serve as a text for hostile and bitter
sueeches and when the very men who made
those speeches now come cheerfully forward
orofessine admiration and friendship and ask
ing for commercial favo,s, the effect upon the
minds Of Americans is somewhat confusing and
tbey cannot be blamed for inquirng why if the
| do 4hny madn n m
paign on the principle of non-intercourse Why,
if trade was what they have been wanting they
have not come and got it at any time during the
last seven years? BY what process OF logic
| they arrived at the conclusion that 1t would
promote friendly intercourse and win our grate-
ful recognition for them to denounce our sys-
fem. our morals, our social life and our political
and commercial methods? Are these the ways
to promote peace and good understanding?
OF a niece with these speeches was the aston
ishins document in which Sir John Thompson
and the younger Mr.. Tupper were permitted as
the voice of the Canadian Government, to assail
the United states before the Government OF
Great Britain. The declaration OF these respon-
sible Ministers that the new United States Tariff
| Act "is avowed to be designed to teach Canadi-
ans that they cannot avail themselves OF the
markets of the United States while they continue
their allegiance as British subjects is as amaz-
ing for its utter falsity as for its reckless in
decency. This is followed by the statements
equally false, equally injurious and equally in
decent, that the confederation of the Canadian
Provinces in 1867 has always been viewed
with unfriendly feelings by large portion of
the people Of the United States" and that the
Canadian Government has actually been taunt-
cd by the officials of the United States upon
their inability TO resist the pressure of our tariff
legislation = And these were the arguments,
officially presented by the Canadian Govern
ment to Lord KnutsfOrd, why the Newfound-
land Treaty should be disallowed. 1t is mex
plicable that so shrewd politician as Sir John
Macdonald is thought to be should have allowed
such document as this to 20 forth. Taken
with the Tory speeches of the late campaign. it
cannot fail to raise tho question here whether
or not any kind Of trade engagement with q