Ir is very evident from the papers received by the Djemnah, as well as from the telegram which we published yesterday morning, that the relations between Great Britain and her possessions on the North American Continent, which we call generally "Canada," are not xs smooth us they should be. Goldwin Smith, one of the most charming lecturers, while he is one of the rong-headed writers, that ever stu-is sure that the political uriis yada with the United States is Sir John Macdonald and his yg, a8 well as every Englishman who travels through Canada, are equally sure of the unswerving loyalty of the Canadians, here are two separate points of trouble the present moment. Newfoundland, does not belong tu the Dominiun of has a grievance in the French Treaty which it thinks England ought to ignore wud treat as if they did not exist; and it hus also been trying to make its own private arrangement with the Washington goverument, T' roused Sir Juhu Macdonald for Newf id had undertaken to make treaty with the States which did not include Canada, The Saturday continues As you as it was known that they were negotiating, Sir John Macdonald claimed the fulfilment of the promise, and has taken measures to enforce it by' coming into the market with offers which swamp the Newfoundlanders. No wonder their wrath, which lately blazed against the mother country only, snow turned against Canada. Everything works their harm.
In'Cunada itself the position baffles the most intrepid prophet. Sir John Macdonald has to reconcile the most incompatible interests, "He has to persuade " canadians to ask Americans for a measure of reciprocity which shall not injure Canadian manufacturers, but will leave the farmers unprotected. of itself might not be so difficult, since Cana. dian turmers export largely to the States; but then the consent of Americans must. be given to any such arrangement, and we have not only Mr Blaine's word for it, but all the pro-habilities of the case, to show that this consent will hardly be obtained. So it would appear that Sir John Macdonald is asking his countrymen to support what must needs be a futile policy. Then he has to maintain a rather nice balance between English and French, Protestant and Catholic. He has succeeded hitherto by judicious distributions of snubs and sops; but general excitement niay make it more difficult for him to maintain his footing on the slack rope. Again, the fact that, when it suited his interests to get into office in 1878 by means of a Protectionist hey, he had little scruple in damaging the interests of the mother country, must somewhat discount the Imperialist' and patriotic therefore, hyne means clear. On the other hand, there are elements in the position of the Opposition leader, Sir Richard Cartwright, which are eq) awkward. It is true that the unrestricted reciprocity with the States which he advocates is ten times more likely to prove acceptable to Americans than the very limited measure patronised by Sir John Macdonald. The maritime provinces are understood to be eager for extended intercourse with the States, and not unwilling to sacrifice the manufacturers On the other haud, these manufacturers are known to be of corruption, and this it is pretty generally willing to spend money freely for purposes
acknowledged will have an important influence on the election. It is also much a, ainst the interests of the Opposition that unrestricted reciprocity, by sweeping away the Custom Houses on the frontier, woul sacrifice a large part of the revenue of Canada. The deficit would necessarily have to be filled by direct taxation, for which all Canadians, and in particular those of the lepers province of Quebec, have the natural man's moat intelligible hatred. It will be seen, therefore, that, ws far as the election will turn upon questions of interest, the advantages of the parties are not unequally balanced. But the issues arefurthercomplicated by considerations of sentiment. It is this which gives the election its particular interest in England.
The following note from the St. Jan shows that there is something to be on the Newfoundland side of the questions, and that the action of the Members of the House in refusing to attend the Governor's summons was not altogether without cause
support, the indignant protests made by the We oon selevianl, though se gannet Newfoundland Legislature against. the' coa-duct of the Colonial Office at home, We permitted them to negotiate for Reciprocity with the United States, but we have been compelled not to ratify the Convention. The interests of Newfoundland, they say, are Veing sacrificed to those of Canada; and in the statement there is a plausible semblance of accuracy. ut for the present the Newfoundlanders must give way, until w place upon sounder footing the international rights and liabilities of our colonies. Either Wwe must relax or tighten the bonds between them and ourselves. Hither we must leave them absolutely free or invite them to become members of a real Imperial Union. The difficulty with Newfoundland, it should be noted, does not arise from jealousy of ourselves, but from rivalry with Canada. The task of adjusting relations between the mother-country und each of its individual colonies will not be more difficult than that of reconciling their intercolonial rivalries and jealousies.
The Imperial Federation people are very anxious to yet a meeting of representatives of all the self-governing colonies together, to see if some arrangement for a Custo Union of the whole empire cannot be arrived at. It. is almost impossible to formulate a Union between a free-trading mother-country and protectionist colonies many of which have intentionally adopted protection against the mother-country, not that they love her less, but. that they'love themselves more. The Times puts the difficulty very fairly There are many difficulties for which a solution must be discovered before the policy advocated by Mr. Howard Vincent and Mr. James Lowther can be put into practical operation. A mere "fishing" debate, in which the various parties interested were endeavouring to try how much the others could be induced to yield, would be likely to do harm rather than good to the cause of Imperial union. The only proposal hitherto lo is that of Mr. Hofmeyr at the conference in 1887, and this, as Sir Lyon Playfair showed, was merely one for imposing a 2 per cent. duty on all foreign imports both into the mother country and the colonies. This, however, would not constitute an Imperial Zoliverein. While it would impose on the mother country the necessity of abandoning the free trade system, repudiating commercial treaties, and engaging in a tariff war with other States, it would leave the colonists Extent provided only the producta of foreign countries were taxed fractionally higher, As Mr. Goschen put it, the most that the colonists have as yet shown " disposition to offer is '*to keep a wall 10 feet high against us, and make it 11 feet high against foreigners. There is no resemblance in this to an Imperial Zollverein, which would allow the products, natural and manufactured, to pose as freely from any part of Her Majesty's dominions to any other part as the products of the United States pass from Maine to Texas and from Connecticut to California, We acknowledge the fiscal difficulties of the colonists. We know that besides avowedly protectionist colonies, lile Canada and Victoria, there are others, like the Cape, in which the revenue can only be raised by duties levied on imports, and, inevitably, on British manufactures mainly. But, whatever may be the carse, the fact remains that hitherto the colonies have not made any movement towards accepting, the principle of an Imperial Zolivereln, which, in our opinion, is the only one that would have any chance of being seriously considered as an alternative to unrestricted Differential duties afford no practical basis of union, If we knew more about Russia, we should perhaps not think as badly of the Russian government we do, and it would be equally well if the Russians knew more about us. The celebrated '*0.K." is supposed, to be exceptionally well informed on English watters, but she can, wilfully or ignorantly, make extraordinary mistakes sometimes, as the following extract shows Madame Olga Novikoff is an intelligent lady and ought, after so many years of close acquaintance with some of our statesmen and literary men, to know something about us, But she now' and then shares the ordinary fate of the too clever and impulsive foreigner who undertakes to set us right about our own affairs. In writing on one matter she does not understand, the Home Rule question, in order to draw a moral with regard to Finland, she says, to help her argument—"* English officials in India, Thear, are bound by their oath of allegiance (0 the strictest rules of silence anti discretion in questions of local administration or Indian policy." Where Madame heard is we cannot suspect, but she must have met one of those wicked Indian officers who is studying her native language in Russia and may not have been able to resist the oppor: tunity of misleading #0 charming a political ingenue. The "'auth of allegiance " is a fine touch. To what extent it acts Mudume Novikoff might ascertain by applying to Mr, Cotton or Mr. Hume, or consulting the columns of the Pioneer. The secrets of Indian Government are almost as open ones as those of Tranby Croft.
Tranby Croft, of course, is the acone of the baccarat scandal, of which the pap contain n good deal more this week. The Saturday calls it 'a stupid story," and treats it with a superfine contempt for the middle classes, though it is difficult to see how the middle class could help being interested in a story in which their future King is concerned. The Saturday says be interested in the private affaire of its The middle class, which is snob enough to
betters, is chiefly concerned, as far as we have observed, in reports of divorce suitse—the dirtier the better. Of course, our serious friends go on it would be utterly contrary to the routine if they did not—to deplore the degeneracy of the age, of which the proof is that they not only gamble now in upper circles, but actually do it in the company of ladies—an offence of which our manlier forefathers were never guilty. Did our didactic friends ever see a not unknown work by Hogarth called The Lady's Last Stake," or hear of Faro's Daughters immortalized by Gillray, or read of the drawing-rooms of the Duchess of Bedford? But, indeed, "if tone were once set on supplying them with evidence, it would be hard to atop anywhere in the eighteenth century. The trath is that the sort of people who gamble now gambled then, more openly
sion. If they did not tolerate cigars—inly, and perhaps with more pas-which, it seems, naughty ladies do now—they not only tolerated snuff, but snuffed
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.