CANADA: Rotten Thing!

The hapless Herbert Clark Hoover of Ottawa is Richard Bedford Bennett, a good man, rich, pious, well-meaning, conservative and Premier. Before next autumn at the latest he must fight a Canadian election, and everyone has been saying he must lose for the same reason that Mr. Hoover inevitably lost: the people are sore. Last week Mr. Bennett decided that he would not accept defeat without trying the last refuge of statesmanship, demagoguery. Overnight the leader of Canada’s Conservative Party turned such a complete somersault that the Conservative Montreal Gazette said he had “done violence to every Conservative principle.” More friendly Canadian commentators gave the Premier credit for having ably aped President Roosevelt.

In a series of radio addresses begun last week Conservative Bennett called for “radical reform.” “There must be an end,” he declared, “to the reckless exploitation of human resources and the trafficking in the health and the happiness of Canadian citizens. There must be an end to the idea that a workman should be held to his labors throughout the daylight hours.” Since Mr. Bennett is even richer than Mr. Roosevelt and extremely close to Canada’s great Capitalists, the rest of his speech might be said to parallel exactly what has been heard from the White House.

“I raise the issue squarely. It will be interesting and instructive to see who will oppose our plan of progress. In my mind Reform means government intervention. It means the end of laissez faire. . . . You [will] agree that free competition and the open marketplace, as they were known in the old days, have lost their place in the System and that the only substitute for them in these modern times is government regulation and control.”

There was only one crumb of comfort for Conservatives—the last two sentences in the following passage: “If a man is able and willing to work, but can get no work, provision for his security must be made. I do not mean the dole. The dole is a rotten thing!” What he did mean, the Premier said, was unemployment insurance—that being the correct name in England for what is loosely called the dole.

Election prospects revolve around the Conservative Premier, his official opponent Liberal Party Leader William Lyon. MacKenzie King (now in frail health) and the unofficial opposition now rapidly crystallizing around nominal Conservative Henry Stevens, a onetime Bennett henchman who set himself up as hero of the mob with his Philippic against routine Canadian business practice (TIME, Nov. 5). This included violent denunciation of Canadian Woolworth Stores because they cut wages (later raised) at the same time as did U. S. Woolworth Stores, obeying circular orders from company headquarters in Manhattan’s Woolworth Building. This Orator Stevens has turned virtually into Treason to Canada.

Parliament convenes at Ottawa on Jan. 17. and Premier Bennett last week was obviously making a supreme effort to undercut radical criticism of his steady stewardship by out-pinking the pinks before they get a chance to shout at his Government Bench. Canadian wiseacres, though admitting that Conservative Bennett had turned his coat with fair dexterity and vast vigor, opined that “Depression cooked Bennett’s goose and he can’t uncook it now.” On the other hand Canada has been on the upgrade for at least a year. Exports are up 25%, from 1933, and by next August the Dominion may be sufficiently at ease to reflect that in the Empire there are few Premiers on tap today better than hard pressed Richard Bedford Bennett.

After nosing about London last week the Montreal Star’s breezy Correspondent M. H. Hamilton cabled: “Britain is notoriously uninterested in Canadian news, but the complete lack of interest among Press and national leaders I have interviewed over Bennett’s volta face is amazing. . . . The London Times, always friendly to Bennett, has the briefest possible outline of his speech and obviously regards it as an election measure of little importance. . . . The Manchester Guardian doesn’t mention it. … I told Wickham Steed [scholarly editor emeritus of the London Times’] that Bennett had attacked individualism in business and requested a comment. He replied, laughing, I can’t speak on things I don’t understand, and I don’t understand that.’

I telephoned Mr. Bennett’s old friend J. H. Thomas [Secretary for Dominions], who is holidaying blithely and typically at Brighton. ‘Is this more humbug?’ I ashed, in effect. … ‘I haven’t read about it and I couldn’t say anything in any case’ replied Thomas.”

Only Englishmen to get really excited were Socialist intellectuals like Lord Marley. “Bennett’s inability to make further concessions plus his obvious need to advocate some bold policy for election, makes him turn to some idea better called ‘state Capitalism’ than Fascism,” cried Marley. “This way out came natural to a man of Bennett’s mental equipment, which, though clever, completely refuses to face the real cause of the crisis and the real way out. Bennett and the forces he represents are obviously making Capitalism’s last stand.”