THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. SATURDAY, MAY 11, 1912. RECIPROCITY.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10633, 11 May 1912, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. SATURDAY, MAY 11, 1912. RECIPROCITY.

In view cf th:> discussion, by cable in. regard to the interest; involved in connection with. Canada and, the U>!iiited States, fh t " following, writcii by Mr Walter Lippniiuin, may be interesting:— Erom the very decided way in. which Canada turned' her back on reciprocity, most people jumped to the conclusion that the Bill was dead and done .with. 'They thought that the Taft programme had co!lap.-ed entirely f they rememly?red the gloom which fell .upon the President when, the Canadian election returns came in ; and they wasumed quite naturally that all the' ponderous debases and fat volumes 'of hearings,, statistics, arguments, and what not had gone for nothing. Then, when- President Taft vetoed the wool and cotton, bills', .people generally got the .impression thav tho extra session of Congress was just one useless tariff speech after another. So it would be interesting to find out just l How many voters knew that Congress enacted important tariff legislation which is in effect to-dav. It would be still mJore interesting -Jo find ■out just how many of them know that a; section of the Reciprocity Bill itself is law to-day.; just as if Canada, bad received us with open arms. Eor in this so-called reciprocity act there . wia.s a -section tucked away which had "iiiofch-ing to do with' reoiproeity— a' s-.-ee-it.ion which went into effect no matter what• the• Canadian Parliament had to say on the subject. Nobody seems to have taken- threat pains to explain that fatet to the American- vWters/ I don't m,rati that the news of it was suppressed. It- i.s simply that the news of it was given about as much prominence as, for example, the divorce caudal of the largest advertiser. Why didn't your favourite newspaper; which devoted ecilum'ns 'to the reciprocity fight, and took special care to show you hew inconsistent the insurgents wcire. take equal care to nhow you that part of this Reciprocity Bill

would go into oft'cct without re.'ip.i'ocal action by. Canada? 'Perhaps when 'yen cr/neatfer what tint.section did you'll be aibfe to answer without being told. What the section says is this:

There shall be no tariff on wood pulp if Canada makes no export restrictions-, and ncuo on newsprint paper valued at not mbre than tour cents- a pound. Butj, as a practical matter, what it means is ibis: The Canadian' Parliament wihioh reject-id the Eeciprooity Bill dopsn'jfc make the restrictions on fch-cse export-.. That- is done by the individual provinces. Seine of them have restrictionand <so;ne haven't. Those that haven't may send in wood pulp and' print paper valued at not more than l'cur cents a pound, 'free of duty. They are already doing .it. We -shall 1 probably have to grant t/be Ftime privileges to all cour.itries with whom we have treaties containing the "most .favoured nation" clause. Thift clause means that what favours we grant- to the most favoured Nation must be given to all the nations with whom, we have (such a treaty. The removal of a tariff onCanadian imports is a special favour. Wo shall probably have to extend the aiine favour to Sweden ; for that country and several others have eJ!ready 'protested that we should. It is hard to see 'how our Government can dodge the justide 'of that. So in. all probability we:od pulp and news-print paper will, come into this country, practicably free.