The Topeka state journal., 1911-09-22
RECTPROCITY,s DEFEAT.

1 III QeIeallnS reciprocity with 5ucn a
tremendous majority, the Canadian
voters nave incidentally held up to
further ridicule the opposition of the
Republican insurgent senators to the
plan. These senators, under the lead
ership Of LaFollette, based their op-
position to reciprocity with Canada to
the terms of the measure or so they
said. They insisted that they were in
favor Of the principle of reciprocity
where the giving and taking between
the signatory powers were on a fair
and equitable basis. But they insisted
just as strongly that the reciprocity
hill championed by President Taft
could not be 50 construed. They de-
clared that the people of the United
States would get the worst Of the bar
gain, the farmers particularly. They
almost took their oaths on the Bible
that everything in the bill was to the
advantage of the Canadians, the agri-
Culturists among then: especially.
They even went so far as to charge
that President Taft was selling out
the interests of his constituents for
the mere political prestige he might
be able to- obtain through the cham
pionship of reciprocity. which, as a
tariff reform.
It's apparent that the people of
Canada did not hold to any such view.
Had this reciprocity plan been SO dis
criminatingly In favor of Canada as
the Republican insurgent senators al
legged, does any one suppose that the
Canadians would not have jumped at
the opportunity to enter into such an
advantageous arrangement? They
would have snapped at it like hungry
fish does at a tempting bit of bait. /
The Canadian9 voted down reciprocity |
because they believed that it would |
be dfsadvanta geous to them under the |
terms proposed. Indirectly, they show |
the fallacy of the charges of the in |
surgent senators that President Taft |
was attempting to engage in a reel |
proca1 agreement with Canada that |
would be overwhelmingly to the ad- !
vantage Of that country. And thus is /
it made evident that the fnsurgent
senators were the ones who were play /
ing politics and not President Taft |
They framed their opposition to reci |
procity in a way that would bring as |
much discredit as possible on the presi-
dent, whom they look upon as being |
the big rock in the road of their fur
ther political preferment. It was pretty /
poor politics. too, that the insurgent
senators played. Even such rabidly /
Insurgent organs as Golfers Weekly |
has styled the attitude of Republican
insurgents against reciprocity as the /
biggest political b1under they could
have made
Nor can the Canadian defeat of reci-
procity be rightfuIly considered as a
blow at President Taft. The recf-
procfty plan was not of his making
alone Premier Laurier Of Canada,
and the Canadian government that
was then under his control. had an
equal hand in the framing OF the agree
nent. President Taft carried his end
IF the agreement through in brilIient
fashion, and against unreasona Bile and
IncaIed for opposition. He believed
hat the reciprocity plan as worked
Sut would be Of advantage to the peo- 4
pie of both countries. He did his best
20 bring it about, and was successful
Is far as he could be- The negative
vote Of the Canadians is a defeat for
he erstwhfIe Canadian government :
hat worked with Mr.. Taft to bring :
his reciprocity about. And it is likely {
hat it viii not be many months before
many Of tire Canadians who helped to :
oil UP such a big vote against reci-
'rocity will see the error Of their ways.