the world. In fact, while seventy-five million Americans spent only 35,460,000 dollars in buying Canadian goods, the six million Canadians expended 86,587,000 dollars in buying goods from the United States. Much disappointment has been expressed that during the last six months of 1898 the goods taken by Canada from England, in spite of the new tariff, increased only by 6 per cent. It must be remembered, however, that previously there had been no increase at all, but, on the contrary, a serious falling-off year after year. That tendency to decline has at once been arrested and reversed, and it is calculated that at the close of the present financial year, when the full preferential tariff will have been in force for eleven months, the imports from Great Britain will show an increase of about 3,000,000 dollars. It has been suggested both here and in Canada that Sir Wilfrid Laurier has won popularity in this country by a sort of false pretence, and that he, in fact, took away with one hand what he gave with the other. Under the new tariff when a broker goes to the customs house with two invoices for goods, of equal value, one set from Germany or America and the other from England, the collector makes his entry according to the general scale, but in the case of the goods from England he takes his pen and writes under the total 'less 25 per cent.' Thus if the duty on each set of goods is 1000 dollars, the American merchant has to pay that amount down; but his British rival, passing goods into the country of precisely the same value, has to pay only 750 dollars. That is an advantage which will take a good deal of explaining away. But it is said that in anticipation of his preferential tariff Sir Wilfrid took care to neutralise its benefits by lowering the duties on things chiefly imported from the States and raising them on goods which come from England. It is true that, in the interests of the Canadian consumer and as an approach towards freer trade, certain articles, such as corn, bindertwine and barbed wire, were placed on the free list; but, speaking generally, whenever a duty was reduced there was a gain under the new tariff to the British exporter at the expense of all his rivals. Among the articles upon which the duties were reduced were coal, coal-oil, and iron. Under the old tariff scrap iron was charged at the rate of 4 dollars a ton, thus duty was reduced to one dollar. Now see how the change worked as between a British and, say, an American rival. Under the old tariff, upon 100 tons of scrap iron each man would have to pay 400 dollars, but under the new system while the American would pay 100 dollars the Englishman would pay only 75 dollars. In other words, the American gains much but the Englishman gains more. So with the case of pig iron. Under the late Government the duty was 4 dollars, now it is 2.50 dollars. Formerly the broker would go to the customs house to pass an entry of 100 tons invoiced by an English merchant and a like amount from an American, and the duty in each case would amount to 400

dollars. Under the present tariff the duty would come to 250 dollars, but while the American has to pay that sum, the Englishman, being entitled under the preferential tariff to get 25 per cent. reduction, pays only 187.50. This is not as good as the absolute free trade which exists between all the forty-five States of the American Union, but it is an honest attempt to bring about something of the same sort between the component parts of the British Empire.

During the debate upon the address at Ottawa the Opposition speakers made much of the new duty upon linseed oil, and instanced it as a choice example of Sir Wilfrid Laurier's perfidy towards England. Seven-eighths of the linseed oil imported into Canada comes from England. The Government gave the British merchant a 25 per cent. reduction under the preferential tariff, and at the same time raised the duty by 25 per cent. The admirably, lucid reply of the Minister of Customs made it clear that, so far from having cheated the hopes of the British exporter, the new tariff did but strengthen and perpetuate his monopoly. The old duty was ad valorem and amounted to 63 cents per gallon, or about 20 per cent. A broker would go to the customs house with two invoices, each for 100 dollars worth of linseed oil, one from a New York and the other from a London firm. The duty payable on each invoice would be 20 dollars. Under the new tariff the New York firm would have to pay 25 dollars, but the London firm under the preferential tariff would pay only 18.75 dollars. So that the immediate effect of the new tariff is to discriminate against all the rivals of Britain to the extent of 6.25 per 100 dollars. At the same time, though the advantages of the preferential tariff are at once substantial and indisputable, it would be merely foolish to suppose that the 25 per cent. allowed by the Canadian Customs House to English manufacturers can put them on a level with rivals who have all the advantages of proximity and local knowledge. The handicap of distance is modified for English traders by Sir Wilfrid Laurier's tariff, but it is not removed. It is pleasant to note that the Canadian goodwill for England as shown by the preferential tariff would seem to have been more than reciprocated. Never before has the Dominion filled so large a space in the thoughts of Englishmen, and to label goods as Canadian has been the best of recommendations to customers at home. In 1892 the Canadian exports to England amounted to 64,906,000 dollars, in 1896 they were 66,689,000 dollars, in 1897 they rose suddenly to 77,227,000 dollars, and in 1898 to 104,998,000 dollars. The answer to Canada's message of goodwill was quick and decisive; and while in the twenty-three years from 1873 to 1896 the sum spent by England in buying Canadian goods increased only by 28,000,000 dollars, in the two years since the present Government came into power at Ottawa the increase has been no less than 40,000,000 dollars.

1

Among the incidental evils of Protection a foremost place must be given to the bad blood it too often breeds between peoples. Canada is so situated that she has only one neighbour, and that neighbour, not at all out of hostility, but simply out of faithfulness to the Protectionist idea, has blocked all the natural channels of traffic. Canada has suffered but survived, and now knows that she can stand alone. This new sense of independence has led to a temper which, if not aggressive, is certainly one of jealous aloofness. All the future relations of the Anglo-Saxon race depend largely upon the outcome of the labours of the International Commission over which the late Lord Herschell presided, and which it is hoped will resume its sittings in August. It is not of good omen for the successful issue of any negotiations when the men who are conducting it know that they risk nothing by failure. The Canadian Commissioners might go back to Ottawa for the last time with empty hands to-morrow, but they would certainly not be less popular, if they explained that they had preferred to take no treaty rather than a treaty which was unfair to Canada. On the other hand, from the nature of the case any successful issue to the labours of the Commission must be based upon the principle of give and take, and the minister who accepts a compromise inevitably exposes himself to the cry that he has grovelled at Washington. Happily, the position of Sir Wilfrid Laurier in the country is of such exceptional strength that he could have small temptation to subordinate the public interest to any considerations of party, and his whole career points to him as the man of all others most likely to be able to lay the foundations of a lasting peace and union between the sundered sections of the English-speaking people.

Unfortunately the difficulties in the way of a successful treaty do not lie on one side of the frontier only. The obstacle on the

American side arises from one of the anomalies which time and the course of events have developed in the working of the Constitution. The American Commissioners, however anxious to arrive at an equitable conclusion, have to think all the while, not only whether the proposed arrangement is just, but whether it is likely to command the approval of a majority of the Senate. Every treaty for its validity requires ratification by two-thirds of the Senate, but those who framed that part of the Constitution can hardly have anticipated how it would work at the end of a hundred years. Taking the figures of the last census, we find that ten States of the Union with a population of 32,106,000-half the population of the country at that date are represented by only one-fifth of the Senate. In fact, their power in the Senate is equalled by another ten States having a population of only 1,857,124. Add to them another five States with a population of 1,875,046, and we find that fifteen States with a population of 3,732,170 not only outweigh the ten great States

which have half the people of the whole Republic, but have power to place an absolute veto upon any treaty. When once trade questions come under discussion the particularist interest of each State is liable to be affected, and men representing a mere fraction of the whole people of the Union are in a position to frustrate and wreck the most carefully drawn international agreement. It is most desirable, therefore, that such questions as those relating to the Atlantic and inland fisheries, the sealing industry, and Alaskan boundary should be left apart from discussions about trade facilities on either side. It would be a grievous pity, for instance, if an agreement about the line of the Alaskan frontier were to be put in jeopardy only because certain Senators objected to the terms in which it was proposed to allow logs to be exported from Ontario. And this leads to a word about the position of Great Britain at the Conference. For the first time in the history of our colonial relations the Home Government is content to accept a subordinate part, and to the infinite contentment of Canada four Canadians and one Englishman face the five representatives of the United States. But if England is less immediately she is not less vitally interested than either the Dominion or the Republic. There are difficulties in the way of a good understanding on the side of Canada, and there are difficulties on the side of the United States, and the reconciling hand of England is needed to overcome them. And in some ways the time is singularly opportune. If ever a friendly understanding with the United States is to be reached, it ought surely to be while Sir Wilfrid Laurier and his friends are in power, and never again are the American people so likely to deal generously with Canada as now in their first warm flush of surprise at finding that in the war with Spain their English cousins were alone in the world in wishing them well.

Very much will depend upon the choice of a Commissioner to take the place left vacant by the death of Lord Herschell. Happily, if Lord Salisbury is well inspired he need not go far to seek. Lord Russell of Killowen-whether we regard the temperament of the man, or his position at home, or his reputation abroad-would seem to have unequalled qualifications for this difficult trust. England could want no stronger man to safeguard her interests, and his appointment, as the only English judge who is really known across the Atlantic, would be singularly welcome both in Canada and the United States. Certainly no pressure of other public duties, or undertaken work, ought to be allowed to stand in the way of this vital service. And whoever goes will carry with him the consciousness that upon the issue of his task, upon the success or the failure of this effort for a lasting peace between the English-speaking peoples, must depend a large part of the future happiness and welfare of mankind.

J. G. SNEAD COX.

THE ENGLISH MASQUE

THESE things are but toys,' wrote Bacon in his essay on Masques and Triumphs; yet he did not think it beneath him, as they came home to the business and bosoms, and the purses, of princes and of queens, to consider how the toys might be made beautiful. But it is to be noted that while Ben Jonson regards the masque as an imaginative solemnity,' a 'mirror of man's life which ought always to carry a mixture of profit with it no less than delight,' Bacon studies the masque solely from the external point of view, as a show or a spectacle. The costumes, the colours, the lights, the scenes, the odours, the music, the dances interest Bacon. Not one word has he to say of the poetry, and he dismisses the whole subject with the words: But enough of these toys.'

The distinction, however, of the English masque, that which in this particular province compels Renaissance Italy to yield to Renaissance England, is the lofty invention of its poets. Shakespeare in The Tempest, Beaumont and Fletcher, Chapman, Marston, Daniel, Campion, Middleton, Browne, Shirley, Carew, D'Avenant are among those who composed masques. The crowning glory of the species is that Milton wrote in Comus a poem which evades the formal laws of the courtly toy. The enchanter's rout of monsters bearing torches may be named, if we please, an antimasque; the brothers and sister at the close dance their going off;' but there is no company of masquers, no dancing the entry, no main dance, no 'taking of the ladies' or gentlemen, no revels; song and spectacle are subordinate to a noble poetical celebration of virgin chastity. And this Puritan masque is the only work of the kind which to-day is inevitably familiar to every lover of English poetry.

The conditions under which the masque existed, the circumstances which determined its character, can be easily comprehended. It was a flower of Italian culture, but grafted on an English stem of the same family. The central point of a highly complex work of art was the dance of the masquers, or rather a sequence of dancesfor in what we would term the normal type the main dance' was preceded by the entry' and was followed by the 'going off.' After the main dance—often a novelty ingeniously devised—the masquers

6