shortage of wood pulp.

It was not unnatural that the same thought came to many minds in the
United States at once. "If we had free trade, we could bring Canada's
raw products in and build up our factories here instead of in Canada,"
was the gist of the manufacturer's argument. "If we had free trade, it
would reduce the cost of living," was the gist of the city consumer's
argument. Canadian lumber, Canadian meat, Canadian wheat could be
brought across and manufactured on the American side. For the first
time the American manufacturer became a free trader. Practically there
was only one section in the United States opposed to reciprocity with
Canada; that was the American farmer, and his opposition was more
negative than positive.

It is hard to say who voiced the desire for reciprocity first.
Possibly the buyers of print paper. At all events, there was at Ottawa
a Governor-General of the Manchester School of Free Trade. There was
editing the _Toronto Globe_--the main Liberal organ--a worthy successor
of George Brown as an exponent of the Manchester School of Free Trade.
Shortly after this editor--a man of brilliant forceful character--had
met President Taft and Joe Cannon in Washington, the Governor-General
of Canada was the guest of Governor Hughes at Albany and there met
President Taft. Of the old guard of free traders, there were still a
few in Laurier's Cabinet, and Laurier himself was as profoundly and
sincerely a free trader in power as he had been out of office. Enemies
aver that the Laurier government now launched reciprocity to divert
public attention from criticism of the railroad policy, in which there
had undoubtedly been great incompetency and gross extravagance--an
extravagance more of a recklessly prosperous era than of
dishonesty--but this motive can hardly be accepted. If Laurier had