The daily banner. (Cambridge, Md.) 1897-2008, 1911-05-12
DEF|ED FARMERS {
WHO THREATENED
Taft Told Them to Do as Tna,
Like About Reciprocity. I
SURPRISE FOR POLITICIAN |
They Wonder II Increased Favors p'
the Ultimate Consumer Will Over
come Farmers Hostility In 1912.

come Farmers Hostility In 1912.
Washington. May 11.-Nothing that
has happened in Washington in re
cent months has caused more of Ia
stir among the politicians than he
speech made the other day to repre-
sentatives of the Grange by President
Taft.
Reduced to the language that every.
body understands, the president told
the gentlemen representing the
Grange, who called on him and told
him about the dangers of reciprocity
to the farmer, and in effect held the
club of political retaliation over his
head that if they did not like it they
could do as they pleased about it.
OF course, when a president in.
dulges in such plain speaking as this
the politicians hold up their hands
and wonder what is to come of it al
Just now they are saying that the
effect of this speech will he to bury
President Taft SO deep in ballots in
the elections Of next year that he will
not be able to get out for months. !.
AS a matter of fact, the politicians
have been talking with great frank
ness about the case of President Taft
for months. Most of them agree that
he will not be re-elected-provided
the Democrats nominate a strong can
didate. The Democratic politicians, OF
course, aver this, and most of the reg
ular politicians say the same thing
Some Of the regulars want the presi
dent to succeed himself, and Others
do not. AS for the insurgent Repubii
cans, most of them want him defeat
ed.
In a general way, this represents
the situation as it has existed for
many weeks; and the opponents OF
Taft now say that his advocacy of re.
ciprocity, and especially his virtual de
fiance of the farmers, who are against
reciprocity, greatly accentuates his
difficulties.
But there is another side to the
situation. In the first place, it is
clear that only a part of the farmers
are opposed to the Canadian agree
ment. In the second place, the ques.
ton Is raised to what extent President
Taft, by his fight for reciprocity, lie
going to rally to his support the -
mate consumers Of the United
who live in the cities and towns. Ts-e
agitation of the tariff question is dshe
to the protest of the ultimate consulh
ers against the high cost of living.
Without doubt the character of the
population OF the country is changing
The United States is becoming MA
tion in which the number of consuan
ers is growing by leaps and bounds,
while the number of producers is relh
lively diminishing.
President Taft, in his advocacy pf
reciprocity, has taken the side, it ps
generally considered, of the consuIn
ing public. This raises the question in
a political way whether the co1suIh
ers of the country are going to stand
by him. In other words, the question fs
whether the president will gain 4s
much supporter more-from the com
sumers as he is going to lose fro pr
those producing elements that oppose
reciprocity or any reduction of tariff
duties.
President Taft himself is not look
ing for anything but loss of votes
from the advocacy of reciprocity. He
did not take the matter up for the
sake of political advantage. He real