but it turned out, after a little conversation, that the article he mainly manufactured was not at all affected by the treaty. And there have been many such cases among those loudest in their protestations. A great deal of the indignation, too, and a great deal of the eloquence has proceeded from parties who were angry, not because their wares were included in the scheme, but because they were excluded from it.

But I am ready to meet all objections to this part of the proposed treaty on higher and broader grounds. I contend that there is not one article contained in the schedules that is a fit object of taxation; not one that ought not to be totally free of duty, either in Canada or the United States, in the interest of the public. I contend that the finance minister of Canada who-treaty or no treaty with the United States-was able to announce the repeal of all customs duties on the entire list of articles in schedules A, B and C-even though the lost revenue was but shifted to articles of luxury-would carry with him the hearty gratitude of the country. I call the attention of the senate earnestly to this fact, that nearly every article in the entire list of manufactures is either of daily consumption and necessity among all classes of our population, or an implement of trade, or enters largely into the economical prosecution of the main industries of the Dominion. Let me read to you the whole list : Agricultural implements, all kinds; axles, of all kinds; boots and shoes, of leather; boots and shoemaking machines; buffalo robes, dressed and trimmed; cotton grain bags; cotton denims; cotton jeans, unbleached; cotton drillings, unbleached; cotton plaids; cotton ticking; cottonades, unbleached; cabinet-ware and furniture, or parts thereof; carriages, carts, waggons, and other wheeled vehicles and sleighs, or parts thereof; fireengines, or parts thereof; felt covering for boilers; gutta percha belting and tubing iron-bar, hoop, pig, puddled, rod, sheet, or scrap; iron nails, spikes, bolts, tacks, brads, or springs; iron castings; india rubber belting and tubing; locomotives for railways, or parts thereof; lead, sheet or pig; leather, sole or upper; leather, harness and saddlery; mill or factory or steamboat fixed engines and machines, or parts thereof; manufactures of marble, stone, slate, or granite; manufactures of wood solely, or of wood nailed, bound, hinged, or locked with metal materials; mangles, washing machines, wringing machines, and drying machines, or parts thereof; printing paper for newspapers; paper making machines, or parts thereof; printing type, presses and folders, paper cutters, ruling machines, page numbering machines, and stereotyping and electrotyping apparatus, or parts thereof; refrigerators, or parts thereof; railroad cars, carriages, and trucks, or parts thereof; satinets of wool and cotton; steam engines, or parts thereof; steel, wrought or cast, and steel plates and rails; tin-tubes and piping; tweeds, of wool solely; water-wheel machines and apparatus, or parts thereof. These articles were selected with a triple object. The first was, as I have already stated, that they should be articles of common daily use among the people or affecting the prosecution of our leading industries; the second was that they should be of such a character as to

:

be difficult to smuggle across the lines, and easy of identification as the genuine production of Canada or the States; and the third was that they should be as far as possible the production of branches of industry natural to Canada or the United States, and in which a considerable intertraffic between the two countries might reasonably be expected. And if the list is carefully examined, I think it will be admitted that the articles fairly fulfil these three conditions. Could anything be more impolitic than the imposition of customs duties on such articles as these? Time was in Canada when the imposition of duty on any article was regarded as a misfortune, and the slightest addition to an existing duty was resented by the people. But increasing debt brought new burdens; the deceptive cry of "incidental protection" got a footing in the land; and from that the step has been easy to the bold demand now set up by a few favoured industries, that all the rest of the community ought to be, and should rejoice to be, taxed 17 per cent. to keep them in existence. And it is remarkable how small a portion of the community are concerned in the maintenance of this injustice. I hold in my hand an accurate return of the men, women and children personally employed in all the industries that could possibly have been affected either advantageously or injuriously by the treaty had it gone into operation, and it appears that the entire number is 68,813. Of these, a considerable number would practically not be affected at all, for they have no protection now and do not want any; a large number would only be affected in a small part of their business; and a very large number would be advantageously affected by the treaty. The number who could honestly declare that "ruin" to them would be the result would be small indeed. And it is not unworthy of note how very small are the contributions of the industries that might be affected by the treaty to the foreign exports of the country. In the year ending 30th of June, 1874, the exports of domestic products were as follows:

The amount of manufactures imported that year was, therefore, a little over two millions of dollars; but I hold in my hand a return of the articles that made up this amount, and I find that several hundred thousand dollars of it could not fairly be classed as manufactures at all; that more than half of the remaining amount is made up of articles not protected now; and that the contributors who are protected now and could injuriously be affected by the treaty, are few in number and very small exporters. And now let us place in contrast with this the great agricultural interest with its half

million of hardy workers, which has no protection, which feeds the whole people, and contributes besides annually to the foreign exports of the Dominion commodities to the value of thirty-four millions of dollars. I hold in my hand a return of the customs duties levied on agricultural products going into the United States; and to show the advantage that would have accrued to our farmers from the operation of the treaty, I will now read some of the items: Animals, 20 per cent.; beef, lc. per lb.; butter, 4c. per lb.; cheese, 4c. per lb.; honey, 20c. per gallon; lard, 2c. per lb.; meats smoked, &c.), 35 per cent.; pelts, 10 per cent.; pork, lc. per lb.; sheepskins, 3 per cent.; tallow, lc. per lb.; wool (worth 32c. and under), 10c. per lb. and 11 per cent.; wool (worth over 32c.), 12c. per lb. and 10 per cent.; barley, 15c. per bushel; beans, 10 per cent.; bran, 20 per cent.; flax (undressed), $5 per ton; flax (dressed), $20 per ton; flax-seed, 20c. per bushel; flour, 20 per cent.; fruit (green), 10 per cent.; hay, 20 per cent.; hops, 5c. per lb.; Indian corn, 10 per cent.; malt, 20 per cent.; maple sugar, 20 per cent.; meal (oat), c. per ib.; meal (corn), 10 per cent.; oats, 10c. per bushel; peas (seed), 20 per cent.; peas (vegetable), 10 per cent. ; peas (split), 20 per cent.; rye, 15c. per bushel; seeds, 20 per cent.; tobacco, 35c. per lb.; vegetables, 10c. per lb.; wheat, 20c. per bushel. All these duties would have been swept away, and the American market thrown freely open for all farm products. The great lumber interest, too-in which 100,000 men are said to be engaged —which has no protection, which not only supplies our home market, but sends twenty-seven millions of dollars worth of lumber annually to foreign countries, and employs a large fleet of vessels in its traffic-how would it have been affected by the operation of the treaty? Why, it would have swept away an average duty of 20 per cent. from the entire exportations to the States. And just so would it have been with our great mineral interest. Seventy-five cents per ton now levied on Cape Breton and Pictou coal would have been abolished, and the New England markets would have been freely opened to our coal trade. Twenty per cent. on iron ore and one and a half cents per lb. on lead ore would also have disappeared. The great coast fishery interest would also have been largely benefited, for the American market would have been secured to it for twenty-four years to come. On the whole, therefore, I think it will be safe to come to the conclusion that however a portion of our manufacturing interests might have been affected by the treaty, the result on the large industries of the Dominion could not have failed to be beneficial.

I come now to the objections which have been urged against the treaty from such quarters as entitle them to a formal answer. The first of these is the allegation that the treaty discriminated against Great Britain in favour of the United States. Nothing could be more unfounded than this. It was perfectly understood from the opening of the negotiations that no article could be free from duty in regard to the United States that was not also free with regard to Great Britain, and nothing else was ever contemplated for a moment.

The other objections which have been made I find so clearly formulated in a memorial of the Dominion Board of Trade, and clothed in such unusually temperate language, that I shall answer them seriatim. And I venture to believe that a very cursory examination will show how very little force is contained in the whole of them.

The first objection of the board is in regard to what has been styled "the sliding scale," and about which we have heard a very great deal for many months past. In the first place, then, I have to say that the gradual reduction of the existing customs duties was not part of the treaty, but merely a mode of putting the treaty in operation as easily as possible for all parties concerned. It was suggested merely as a means of overcoming two difficulties found to exist, not only in the United States but in Canada as well. It was supposed to be not undesirable to give manufacturers some time of preparation for the change by gradually reducing the existing duties on foreign goods. Moreover, had the duties gone off in one day the revenues of both countries would have been seriously affected, and the simultaneous imposition of new taxes to replace the loss of revenue might have been a difficult task. But, in truth, the importance of this matter has been absurdly exaggerated. It has been totally ignored that though the duties of the United States on fine manufactured goods are enormously high, on the articles we send them the average is only about 24 per cent. Now, one-third of this coming off would have made their rate for the first year 16 per cent. while ours would have been nearly 12, and for the second year their rate would have been 8 per cent. against our 6; and at the end of the second year all the duty would have come off in both countries. Moreover, the important fact seems to have been forgotten or concealed, that we would have had some compensation for that small sliding scale disadvantage, in the fact that the coasting trade and ship registry clauses would have gone at once into operation, while the enlargement of our canals could not have become available before 1880. And to sum up the matter, it is by no means certain that the sliding scale might not have been dispensed with altogether; for in the Customs Acts giving effect to the treaty, clauses would no doubt have been inserted giving the two governments power by proclamation to put the whole treaty in force at any earlier moment they might mutually find convenient.

The second objection of the Board of Trade is the danger they see in a promise to complete the canal works by 1880. I dare say the Canadian government carefully considered this matter before they committed themselves to it, and had the best advice upon the point that skilled engineers could afford them; and I venture to believe that my honourable friend in the other chamber, who so admirably presides over the public works department, was as competent to judge of what was fitting to be done in the premises as any man in Canada.

The third objection is that in the opinion of the Board of Trade the entire ocean coasting trade of the United States should have been conceded

to Canada. No doubt; but probably the other party had something to say to that.

The fourth objection of the board is that the right of obtaining United States registry for Canadian ships cannot be regarded as a valuable concession, seeing that Canadians, instead of keeping their ships and sailing them, might be seduced into selling them, and thereby transfer to the Americans the great profits of the carrying trade. I venture to think this objection is not worthy of a reply.

The fifth objection of the board is, that the Caughnawaga Canal should not have been stipulated to be built until the construction of the Whitehall Canal was absolutely secured. The Canadian government thought otherwise, and I venture to believe they were right in what they did. The chief interest of the United States may be "in the opening up of a new route to the ocean;" but a very important interest in Canada is to open up a new water route from New England to the West.

The sixth objection of the board is, that the right of re-entry of goods into the country of their production should have been provided for, but was not. All goods placed in bond can now be re-entered in the country from whence they came. Surely the board cannot mean that broken packages of goods should be returned?

The seventh objection of the board is, that it cannot tell whether goods manufactured in either country must be composed entirely of native materials. Certainly not.

The eighth and last objection is, that all consular fees and certificates should have been abolished by the treaty, but were not. It is by no means clear that this would have been an advantage.

With regard to the recent action of the United States senate on the draft treaty, and its return to the president with the advice that it was inexpedient to proceed with it, I may state he explained that the proceedings of the senate were taken in executive session, and therefore strictly secret, but the probability is that no full discussion of the matter had taken place in consequence of the shortness of the session, the absorbing interests of the questions now agitated, and the large financial deficit that had to be met by the imposition of new taxes. The fate of the negotiation is, however, settled for the present, but the agreement that resulted from it is on record, and no doubt will yet make its appearance again, and form the basis of a new and more successful negotiation. It took six years to conclude the negotiation for the treaty of 1854, and not a few delays and rejections occurred in that time. I totally misconstrue the present temper of the American public mind if a great change on the subject of protection and finance and foreign trade is not approaching; and when that day arrives, the large and practical scheme embraced in the draft treaty will hardly be forgotten. But be that as it may, it is not for the people of Canada to be influenced by any such anticipation. They have shown their