vr. ,.«»,. e^x^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 2^ ^A o 1.0 I.I IA£12.8 ■ 50 ^^* ^ tiS. 12.0 |Z5 ■ 2.2 1.8 1^ 111= IIIM - 6" V] 71 V' .<»* ^;; 'Vic -" V /A Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 145S0 (716) •72-4503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHIVI/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques \ \ > Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibllographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D D D D D D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pelliculde I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g6ographiques en couleur □ Coloured init (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bieue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont pas dtd filmdes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires: L'Instltut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la methods normale de fiimage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ □ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es Pages restored and/oi Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages d6color6es, tachetdes ou piqudes Pages detached/ Pages d^tachdes Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Quality indgale de I'impression Includes supplementary materii Comprend du matdriel suppldmentaire I I Pages damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ rp\ Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ FTi' Pages detached/ r^ Showthrough/ r^ Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totaiement ou partieliement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 fiimies d nouveau de fagon d obtenir la meiileure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est fiimd au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X SOX y 12X 16X 20X 24X 7BX 32X aire } details |ues du t modifier ger une e filmage The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Thomas Fiiher Rare Book Library, University of Toronto Library The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. / u6es L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grAce A la gAnArosit6 de: Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, University of Toronto Library Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la netteti de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimis sont fiim^s en commenpant psi le premier plat et en terminant soit par la derniire page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iliustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film^s en commenp ant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iliustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contair. the symbol —»• (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — *• signifie "A SUiVRE". le symbols V signifie "FIN". aire Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely inc!jded in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre fiimis d des taux de reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, it est filmd d partir de I'angle sup^rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en has, en prenant le nombre d'images nicessaire. Les diagrammes suivants iliustrent la m^thode. by errata led to ent une pelure, Fapon d 1 2 3 32X 1 2 3 4 5 6 IV Mnn^t of Commons Betiatts FIFTH SESSION-SEVENTH PARLIAMENT Sr»EECH OP HON. W. H. MONTAGUE, MP. ON THE BUDGET OTTAWA, WEDNESDAY, 29Tn MAY, 1895. :Mr. MONTAGUE. Mr. Speaker, the de- , bate to which the House has been listening for the past number of days has taken a very wide range, and the House will there- fore pardon mo if I take somewhat longer time than is usual dc this particular stage of the debate to refer to the different points which have been raised. Hon. geutlomou opposite, from the hon. member for South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartwright) to the humblest member who has spoken from that side of the House, have evidently been endea- vouring to make their campaign for the coming election ; and, in order to do that, they have been urging this House to believe that they possess certain virtues in all ihe lines in which public men should be virtuous. ' And in order that I may answer them this afternoon, I wish to consider the claims which have been urged by hon. gentlemen opposite undei' four different heads : First, their ability to govern this country ; next, their purity as administrators ; next, their economy as administrators, and last, the ex- cellence of the trade policy which they have presented to the country. Speaking a very short time ago in the city of Montreal, the leader of the Opposition saw fit to declare his hope, for the huudreth time, that they vrere about to come into power ; and on what was his hope based ? Only on this, that the great chieftain of the Conservative party had gone, and that in conseiinence tlie olemonti which followed hitn were dissolving ;ind scattering. Well, Sir, it is true the old chief- tain is gone, and that willing hands are erect- ing monuments in his honour is evidence of the great work he did for Canada, notwith- standing the abuse of hon gentlemen oppo- site for many years. Succeeding him feli tliat ()tl)or great man Sir John Abbott, whoso worli is also recognized most thoroughly by Canadians now of every class ; and succeed- ing hiiu and abused as was his predecessoi-s. Sir John Thoini)son now sleeps in the soil of his nativo province, notwithstanding tlie abus(> of hon. gentlemen opposite through successive years, wrapped in tlie robes of a ration's honour and embalmed in the bit- terness of a nation's tears. Though those men are gone, tliough we mourn them, though their colleagues and old supporters mourn them, though we are glad to know that Canadians mourn them because while they niouni them it is a testimony to the work and wortli of the Conservative party as well. 1 want to tell the hon. leader of the Opposition that the Conservative party of this country Is not built on men, but is built (m principles, and though tliose leaders have gone the prin- ciples live, and when It appeals to the elec- tors, as we must do very soon, he will find the same old vitality and the same old strengtli put forth in the campaign, and that the same old victories will percli upon our banners as of yore. This fact he should have consider- ed, that since Sir John Macdonald's deatli we have won from them, no less than IS seats ; hon. gentlemen opposite have won from us 4 seats. If the hon, gentleman can take any comfort out of that, instead of hav- ing bec-n educated at a Scotch school, as he told :?) > people in the province of Ontario, was the ca^e, it seems to me he must have been educated at Dean Swift's Academy at Lagado, where they learned the science of extracting sunbeams from cucumbers. I want to say to my hon. friend tliat I was somewhat astonished to hear the charge tliat wo were afraid to go to the elections. A few months ago when it was thought we wore going to the contest, what was the cry V The cry then was in column after column of the Toronto " Globe," that we ought not to go, and His Excellency was advised in column after column in that newsjtaper not to permit us a dissolution because we had no right to a])ptal to the country ; apparently hon. gentlemen were then not spoiling for the fray. And the hon. gentleman who sits for Boihwell (Mr. Mill.s). who is the leading constitutional authority upon the other side of the House, discovered a new constitutianal reason which he urged before the people why the Government should not dissolve Parliament and appeal to the country, and what was that reason ? That there was too much snow upon the ground and elections could not be advantageously held. It was n(»t the snow that was upon the groiuid, but tho. ^iiow that was to fall that distui'l)ed the peace of hon. gentlemen opposite when ti.ey thought they had to face the elector.?. I want to say to hon. gentlemen opposite that the Coasor- vatives of this country are not afraid of the people. We have appealed to them in the past and have not had very much reason to complain. We are wlillug to abide by the judgment of the people ; hon. gentlemen opi)()site seem never willing to abide by the Judgment of the peoi)le. The hon. member for South (Jxford (Sir Richard Cartwright) has constantly expressed his want of con- lidence in the people ; but the people are even with hi-a, for tliey have voted their want of contidence repeatedly in that hon. gentleman. Sir, the debate has taken this line : an attack upon the members of the Government, an attack particularly upon a want of ability, it is said, that has been de- monstrated by my hon. friend the Finance Minister, who leads this House so ably, and who is no unworthy successor of the distinguished men who have occupied dur- ing so many years the place in whicli he sits in the rarliament of Canada. I wish to say to the hon. member for Soutli Oxford that while members of the Government may not have the confidence of their opponents, we do enjoy the contidence of our friends ; and, thank God, no member of this Govern- ment has had to go back to his constituency to light with his friends to get the party nomination with which to go to the people. Sir, the hon. member of South Oxford cannot say that. For many years that hon. gentleman was wande'ing up and down the province of Ontario and at last secured a resting place. I took occjision some years ago in the course of a speech in this House to say that that resting place would tire of him, and my pi-ophecy came ti'ue only fi few inoi.ths ago wlien the hon. gentleman was seeking ronomination in the constituency of South Oxford. Wliat did they say there ? He was wrathy and he abused them with- out stint ; and when he found it was difli- cult to get the nomination— I do not know to whom he referred— when lie found men conspiring against him— ho rofoi-rod to some one on his right or left or behind him, when he said this in the convention : But he would ask, if It was true that the men be worthy of confldence, who, while pretending to he friendly, were plotting against a colleague. Fair fighting is one thing and assassination is another. While you may call for the head of an enemy, it is not fair warfare to stab a friend under the fifth rib. And, Sir, it was not a more local matter, for it was i)ublished witli the very greatest care by the Toronto "Globe" in order that all and simdry. to use tlie idiomatic oxprc's- sion of the hon. gentleman opposite, might know exactly wliat ho meant. Tlioro caiiio a time, however, when the matter wj.s settled. That time was when a gentleman in Toronto wrote a letter into the riding, a gentltman who had recently been organizer of the Liberal party, stating : That, In view of the active canvas being made for the Liberal nomination, It might not be un- interesting to Mr. Jackson (to whom he was writ- ing) to know that, when it was decided by the ^ it be to sue. IS of end lit e a led. nto uan the lade un- Brrit- the M*»> party leaders, subsequent to tha general elections of 1887, that an early appeal should be made to friends of the party for substantial assistance, so as to make the necessary preparations for the next general elections, the only Liberal In To- ronto who was asked to subscribe, and positively refused, was Mr. S. H. Janes. He told a friend and mys3lf, when presented with the subscrip- tion book, that he had no funds for party pur- poses. Well, Sir, Immediately that was heard, and immediately that letter was sent abroad, i tliese purists in Soutli Ox lord decided that Mr. .lanes was uuwoithy of the nomination of the Liberal party, and my hon, friend from South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartwripht) was selected as a candidate once more ; due to the fact evidently that lie had been more lilKM-al in the aWmiX of substantial aid. Mr. Speaker, this is a new phrase we have. ^Ve have hcird it In times past called " Bis Push " ; we have heard it called " human devices " ; we have beard it called " putting tlown bribery and corruption " ; we have heard it called " mesmerism " ; we have heard it called " relief for the poor " ; but here is a new phrase in the vocabulary of puritv : " Substantial aid," and to my mind it expresses it better than any of the other terras. I understand now— and here is an- other evidence that api^ears to me as if my hon. friend from South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartwrisht) is being stabbed under the fifth ril) by some of his friends— I understand tliat the Liberal party of Toronto are ad- vertisuff for a new campaign song, l^.vi- dentlv the old song he sings seems to have been 'played out in the minds of gentlemen In Toronto, because they are asking for a new campaign song. I would suggest to my hon. friend from West Ontario (Mr. Edgar), and wlio is tlie poet of ids party, who It is said is competing for the prize, that be should compose a poem in which he should employ his genius in settling in pi-oper background, before the electorate of tiiis country, these beautiful gems whicli are evidence of Liberal purity. But, after the hon. gentleman (Sir Richard Cartwright) had his nomination, L^ was not even then safe, and )iis ribs wer ^^t'll in danger, be- cause my hon. friend i. that there is a Liberal paper publishe. '"he town of Aylnier, in the province of c^ e .vie, and that Liberal paper had something to say in re- gard to my hon. friend from South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartwright), and here Is what it said. Nothing ever so hard was said of him by any hon, gentleman on this side of the House : An enthusiastic Liberal of Montreal said the ether day : If the Lord would only lay Sir Rich- ard Cartwright ou i bed of sickness for the next six months, nothing in the Dominion or out of it could prevent the Liberal party getting into power. That, Sir, is how my hon. friend (Sir Richard Cartwright) seems to be appreciated among HON w H M 1^ the very gentlemen who he says are so en- thusiastically united against the Conser- vative party of this country. Now, Mr. Speaker, wlic are the gentlemen wlio are asliing the electors of this country to dis- miss this Government, and to place them in pftwer ? Tliey are gentlemen who hav«j always claimed (ilectoral purity and wiio have always practised electoral corruption. riiey aie tlie men who, in 1874, passed an .\ct forbidding corruption at elections, and yet in the next election no less tlian thirty of these were sliown to have purcliased tlieir seats ; and since tlie introduction of that law, eighty-three Liberal purists liave fallen, to 48 Conservatives. Eight purist Liberals liave been disqualified to one Conservative. They are the gentlemen who have always claimed that they were the party of righteous legislation in regard to election matters, and yet I remember when they were in power, that every one of these gentlemen voted for a Bill to take a Liberal township, a Liberal stronghold, from a constituency in which it had done its duty for a Liberal candidate at the general election, and to place it over into another constituency where it might do double duty in a by-election. Every one of tJie Liberals, Sir, voted for it under the guise of righteous legislation. They are the gentlemen who claim to be the party of low taxation, but I challenge hon. gentle- men opposite in this House, as I have chal- lengea them In the country, to name one single Item In all their five years of power— except the one Item of coal oil, and then they took off an excise duty on coal oil and put a customs tax on tea to make up the loss— on whic^h they reduced taxation. I say that in all these five years of power, they never reduced one single dollar of taxation on tlie people of this country, but on the contrary, they constantly added 'taxation on their shoulders, in all adding a cus- toms taxation of three million dollars. Not only that, Sir, but they tell us : 'fhey are men who want to take office for the public good. I have their campaign sheet here which says " All they want la office for the public good." Look at them, Mr. Speaker, see the hungry look in their faces and see if it is the public good they are after, AVhen they went) into power on Just the same cry before, only three or four years elapsed when eight of their Cabinet Ministers " who went into power for the public good," .slipped Into ofllce for their pri- vate good," and one Cabinet Minister who went into otflce " for the public good," or rather for his family's good, put fifteen of his relatives as pensioners in the public treasury of this country. Sir, the fact is, as I shall show, that in five years of office these Liberals made such a record of blundering stupidity and incapacity, that they were hurled from power by an Indignant electorate and so long as the electors of this country remember that they ever were In powor, tliolr chancoa nro very blun for ever jrettlnu into powor atjalu. Well, Mr. Spcjiker, let me ask : Wby am I discussing tlieao matters ? Mr. DAVIES (P.E.I.) Hoar, hoar. Mr. MONTAGUE. I will tell my ' hon. friend In a moment. My hou. friend (Mr. Davio.s) Is smillnff, but it Is a smile of the lil)s and he will know it before I m-t thron;;h. Wliy do I discuss these matters ? I discuss them because my hon. friend from Queen's (Mr. Davies) last nlj^ht said : When we get into power, we will do just the same as we did when we were In power before. My h(m. friend will know that there is very little chance of my making any comparison with the future record of the Ijlberal party. That is away in the dim and distant future, and the House will therefore pardon me if I say som^thlnj; this afternoon as to their past record, more particularly as we have the certificate of my hon. friend from Queen's (Mr. Davies), that when he {?ets into power : " He will do the same as they did before." I want to say. Sir, in the first plac e : that standinjr here to-day, twenty-seven years from confederation, the records of this coun- try show that hon. gentlemen opposite as a party have been wrong on every great pub- lic question upon which they ever declared a policy. In all the history of our years as a Dominion, these men have never propound- ed a policy that subsequent events had shown to be a proper one. Why, Sir, let me in the light of the present, read the announcement of their great leader in 1871, as to a great public enterprise In this coun- try. Mr. Mackenzie on page 072 of the i " Hansard " of 1871, says as follows, as re- i gards the Canadian Pacific Railway :— men opposite of the gi-eat us a A\ater Mr. LAUPvIEl:, from ? What are you quoting Mr. 1871. MONTAGUE. The "Hansard" of Sir, that was the policy of the Liboiul party. Looking back now, was it right or wrong ? Looking back now, is there a man who will say it is right ? Mr. Mcmullen. Yes. It was right. Mr. INIONTAGUE. My hon. friend from Wellington (Mr. McMulIen) says that it is right. Well, he has always be(Mi a narrow- gauge politician, but no Canadian having an atom of regard for publh,' opinion of his Judgment will say as he says. 1 am old enough to remember, and old enough parlia- mentarian to know, that hon. gentle- opposed the con.structlon Sault Canal which gives way Independent of th(> people of the United States. ^ly hon. friend, the leader of tlie Opposition, last year could not refrain from expressing his pride at the construction of that great work, and thus admitted that he was wrong with regard to It when he oppo.sed it. Wliy, Sir, let me just read a few extracts, because they are matters of history and the people of this country ought to know them, as to what these gentlemen opposite thought of the Canadian Pacific Railway. Here Is Mhat my friend the member for Queen's. P.E.I. (Mr. Davies) says : This was a contrac;. from which there was no escape politically or commercially, excepting one, and that 's annexation to the United States. It is escape that no politician likes to talk nbout, but it will come one day, and, when it comes, we must take our chance and make the best bar- gain we can. Mr. DAVIES (P.E.I.) Where is the hon. gentleman reading from ? Mr. MONTAGUE. I am reu-Hng from a report of a speech delivered in Charlotie- town in the year 1880. (PE.I.) Wh(>re is the !'e- Mr. LAURIER. Tiiere was no " Hansard " in 1871. Mr. MONTAGUE. There is a " Hansard " in tlie Library made from " Globe " reports of the debates of that year. Mr. LISTER. There was no " Hansard " then. Mr. MONTAGU^:. My hon. friend is taking refuge behind a very slim willow. I want my hou. friends from the west to listen to what Mr. Mackenzie said" then, an 1 I want hon. gentlemen opposite to take a mental note of it, too, and to say what they think of their policy. Mr. Mackenzie said : He would recommend a cheap narrow-gauge rail way, with steamers on the lakes, instead of a costly broad-gauge road, for the North-west and British Columbia, and the railway across the prairies need not be constructed for many years. Mr. DAVIES port ? Mr. MONTAGUE. I will show tlie report to my hon. friend. Does ht deny the utter- ance ? Mr. DAVIES (P.E.I.) From wliat paper V Mr. MONTAGUE. My hou. friend has a custom of denying statements in this House Some hou. MEMBERS. Order, order. Mr. MONTAGUE. I will show to-day that my hou. friend denies tliem sometimes Mr. DAVIES (P.E.I.) The hon. gentleman knows, if he will allow me Mr MONTAGUE. Mr. Speaker, some days ago I asked a question of hon. gentlemen opposite, and you ruled, very strongly in- deed, and very peremptorily 1 thought, that 1 !'0- I was declck'iUy out of order. I now ask for yoiii" niliiii:. Uioiiu'li I !isk for uo pity from hon. gontloniL'U oi^toslte. Mr. SPEAKER. My rullns, as f stilted tlion—ll" my nilin« Is c-alled lu tiuestlor., of course It iiiny be iippciiled aj^iiiiist— is that no hon. nii-mbor is pormlltod to iutt')-- rnpt an hon. member who has the tloor, ex- cept OH a qucsllon of order. Mr. LAUItlEU. I ask your rulinj?, Mr. Speaker, on this point. The lion, ^eutlemjin stated that uiy h(»n. friend beside me has the habit of denyinj; stiilenients madt; by him. I ask If that Is In order ? Mr. fcJPEAKEU. I doubt very much If 1 can bo called upon to rule upon that. If tlie hon. Secretary of State states that the hon. member for Queen's is in the habit of deny- inj; statements made by him on the Uooi' of this House, then it certainly is not in order. Some lion. MEM15EIIS (to Mr. Laurier). Hear, hear ; takt? it back. Mr. MONTAGUE. My hon. friend, I think, entirely misunderstood me. for the very I'eason tliat lie would not allow me to pro- ceed with my sentence. I said that my hon. friend was in the habit of denyiuv; state- ments which were attributed to him in this House, and I was al>out to say immediately afterwards that I intended to deal witli some of those statements a little lat.er on in my speech. If there is any question of order in the point raised l)y the lion, leader of the Opposition, 1 shall be Very glad. Mr. Speaker, as I. always am, to submit to }'our ruling. Now, Mr. Speaker, I ask the a; Men- tion of the House to this fact, that liistea west. So luueli with regard to tlio opposition whicli theao hon. >.'eiitleiiieu displayed ajjaiiist I lie Cana- dian I'aelllo Kailway in its early days. Now, Sir, there was a tiino when the (pu^stiou was how imioli of the railway should iie oon- strueted. Hon. >:entleiiien opposite said that the lino around ilio Nortli Shon; of lialvo Sup- perlor was no >:ood, and they opi)osed it wltli nii^ht and main. I want to ask this IIoiiso now of wiiat uao tlio Canadian I'acillc Hall- way would be to Canada if we liad uol this great connect in;; link— how much of a na- tional work it wouhl ho V Were w(i riplit or wore they rl^ht '' Thoy wore wrong. In a thousand ways they have be(;n compoUod to admit .since. Then there camo a tiiuo when tho (Canadian I'acllic Hallway Com- pany was in distress, a tliiK! when danger threatened tliem, and when tlii'y caim? to tills IIouso and asked for aid ; and if that aid had not been glVen, tho Canadian Paolllc hallway would have l)eon bankrupt, and It' the f^anadlan rai-itic Uailway iiad become bankrupt, the credit and progress of this country would liavo been destroyed for tiie next half century. Wliere did these men stand then? They wore still. Sir, on the narrow-gauge policy ; they were still unabit' to appreciate tlio opportunil'es and posslltill- tlos of this country. Hero ^'as tlioir policy, j as laid down by the nieml)er for West Huron, Mr. M. C. Cameron, who is not now In this House, to be found on i)age 2GHJ of " Hansard " of 1885 : I say the name of any Parliament, In the face | of these facts, that would ratify these resolu- I tions, will stink In the nostrils of every honest j man, and the names of Its members will po down j to future generations as political time-servers and slaves, who for the third time, at the bidding j of an unscrupulous and corrupt Government, sold | this country to this corporation. Were we right or were we wrong ? Hon. I gentlemen opposite know that they were wrong ; they know now, in the light of i history, that the Conservative party were not time-servers and slaves, but patriotic men, willing to stake the credit of this | country, because they knew that in staking I its credit they were going to build up the ' credit and the future of the Dominion. I That money loaned at that time was paid back. We lost not a dollar, but we | averted a national calamity. Well, Sir, { I now come down to more recent j times. I come to the great trade fight of I 1891, when hon. gentlemen opposite asked j us to adopt the policy of ■ unrestricted reci- ! procity or commercial union. Were they i right or were they wrong ? Once more. Sir, I they were wrong, and so wrong that they are now ashamed of it themselves ; so wrong that they now deny that thoy ever sui)portod it ; so wrong that not a Canadian with inv'stinonts In this country but Irenildes when lu> thinks liow near Canada camo to accei»tlng that sham policy that wotiid have l)een destructive to the Do- minion in tiiiii'S of dan;;»'r. So niucli. Sir, for tlio points of lilstory in rogaid to ilio con.liict of hon. gentlemen opposite upon «real public (|iirsilons. Now, they ai'e cMlliny for eco- Moniy. Well. Sir. it is an old cry, I ho cry of economy, with hon. gentlemen oiiposlle. ,My hon. fihmd the inemhei' for North Norfolk, when ho spoke to tho I'atroiis, declared it to l>o a time-honoured rule of tlie l.il)eral party,— and la* nilKht liave observed that It was a rule more honoured in tho broiich than in tlio observance, as I think I shall \h> aide to show when I deal with that jtart of the subject. Sir, 1 want for a few moments to speak as to some of tlio economies of hon. gentlemen opjiosite. We hiive heard a great deal In tids House about tho (piestlon of superannuation, Hon. geiiilcmen opposite, when they were coming Into j)ower- before tliey were in power— cried out for pconomy In our iniiter- annuation. Just as they are crying out now ; ■Miiil yet. when they won; in pitwer. thoy increased the vote necessary for that ser- vice 100 per cent in five year.s, and sui»er- amiuated many a man that still wtilks tho streets of Ottawa and olsewliero — supei"an- nnat(>d them ostensibly because their health was prior, but really because thoy wantorc'olonlal eontrlhuto .$.1,- 001) a y<'nr to the treasury of (\-inada. the lion, jjentleiiian from (Jueen's (Mr. Davles) ex,'iiin and see what we ean do In rei^.ird to tlie Interco- lonial. And remember this. Sir, that the man- aKt'UK^'id was then In tlie hands of a geiitle- miiu who said that ho had to sit ou tho trea- surv with a ;;uii in (jrder to keep his frit'iids behind hliu out of that treasury. Tim Minister of Railways has dune a ^roat service to tho country In conuoctiou with tho Intercolonial. The past two yi'ars have boon most trying' years upon railway man- aKoniont. Our Canadian railway coniiianies have '>een compelled to present most dis- couni m,' showluKS. and In the United States tho j;i at railway corporations have been In the di listresa. In the whole Uepu'ilic, with n crease nilleaKo of 1,000 miles, tlio oarni; > 's compared with the previous year, leli ;' .$.'{0,000,000. One-third of all their railway mlleaKo went into the hands of receivers, roads with a capital of $70,i)li4,- 000 wen; sold by tho sherilf, while in the receivers hands railway property worth $1,.^)00,000,000 were placed. In the face of these facts the raauaKoment of the Minister of Railways cannot be too highly compli- mented. Ask any great railway man in Canada as to the management of that road under him and they will tell you it is splen- didly run, and hou. gentlemen in attacking it are but showing their hypocrisy and de- termination to find fault. What he did last year, Sii*, he is doing again this year, viz., bringing It out witliout loss. How is he doing it ? Tho trade has been less upon It as upon other lines. He is doing it by care- ful business management, and business man- ageuKmt that is fully appreciated in the country. Then, Sir, I want to speak with regard to another matter. Hon. gentlemen opposite claim that they are economists as regards the number of Ministers of the Crown. Why, that is as familiar as the voice of the hon. member for South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartwright). It was an old cry in 1873 and 1874. And wliat did they do when in power ? They said that the salaries were too large. Possibly, for they ought to have known their own worth, and were their own judges. The salaries were too big and the number was too great, they said. But what followed ? They filled every place, drew every cent of salary, and added one gentleman to the Cabinet without portfolio— In defiance of their professions previous to the elections upon that point. Perhaps I should say, however, that they dl Introduco a Hill to do away wltli one of the iilsterlai places. Tliey introduced a Hill to away wit I the Receiver ralHhlp ; but In order that one of the gentlemen who " took otHco for the pul)llc good only " should not be dl»- pensed wltl' altogether, they made fir- htm another otHce, and called it the Att /rn«y (iencnilslilp. When tlie Hill creating lat ollice wi'iit to the Senate ainl the Senate threw it out. Hie <'»Yect of that rejection was to reduce the (Cabinet liy one, but. Sir, tliat did not suit them. So they withdrew the Hill, all of course " for the public good." Wo hear a great deal from lion, gentlemen opposite with regard to the sala- ries of tlie Civil Service. 1 am not liere to defend the (Mvil Service. 1 am here to say that we on this side, all agree that when a man is In the (Jivil Service, he ought to earn every dollar the country i);iys him, and that Is the policy of this Government. Hut hou. gentlemen opiiosite should not say anything with regard to the salaries of the Civil Ser- vice. History and the record of public do- cuments sometimes tell tales. Here is a Bill I wish to sh:)W the House, iuu'^duced by the hou. member for South Ox- ford tSir Richard Cartwright) ou the 8th March, 187'), In relation to the Civil Service of this country. And wh;it does that Bill I)rovide ? Second-class clerks, under his Hill, would have had from .$800 to $l,r,o() lier year. Under the present law, their .salaries are $1,100 to $1,400. First-class clerks, under Ills Bill, $1,000 to $2,000 per. vear ; under our Hill, $1,400 to $1,800. Chief clerks, under ills Hill, from $2,000 to $2,800 ; under our Bill, $1,800 to $2,400. Messengers, under his Bill, $400 to $(500 : under our Bill. $300 to $.")00. Temporary clerks, under his Bill, not to exceed $730 per annum ; under our Bill, not to exceed $400 per annum. Extra work of civil servants, under his Bill, 50 cents per hour ; under our BllL the payment of a single cent of extra money to these gentlemen is strictly forbidd»!n, unless voted by Parliament. Hon. gentle- men opposite may take all the comfort they like out of this record upon Civil Service salaries. Now, then, I shall take up one raoit> question, and I do this partly in defence of my lion, friend ',he Min- ister of Railways and partly because It Is a matter on which the people have a right to know the minds of hon. gentlemen opposite. Somewhere in the western part of On- tario, my hon. friend (Mr. Haggart) Is said to have declared that the leader of the Opposition had agreed to the Interprovln- cial Conference resolutions. My hon. friend from East Huron (Mr. Macdonald) brought the matter up and made a great ado about it. He (Mr. Macdonald) made a speech In which he declared that if the Minister of Railways did make such a statement, he should have the manliness to repeat It here, so that the leader of the Op- position might have the opportunity of contrndlr'tlnj? tlioso false stntcnipntH rnndo on puhllc plntforiiiM ln'fdfc tin' clocdtrnto of tills coiinfry. 'I'liat is vit.v plain. TIumi li»> (Mr. Mnctloiialil) went on to nioiiiUzc n|ioii tlu> ovil practice of making Hlatcn><>ntH not con-ect. Sir, let liltu take liLs lesson home to hlms(>lf. Now, I iini liere to jrlv(> an ojjpoi- tinilty to the leader of Die <)i»posltlon of denying that slatenioiit of tlie Mlidster of ItalhvayH. I Huy hero that the hon. leader of the npp(isllli)n did ayree to the terms of the Inteiprovlnclai iloiiference. I say to tl;e iioii. meia!)er f(»r Kast Huron (Mr. Macdonald) that wiien he charKed the Minister of !{all\vays wllli liavin« made a false sfatiMiient. It was he him.self and not the Aliidster of Hallways who was RUllty. I say still further tliat that ajrreoment of the leader of the Opposition to support the Intel-provincial Confereneo resoliillons is In the ptiltlic records of tliis country. You will fitid, ill tlie s|)eech of an hon. gentleman who fornu'rly represented L'Islet (.Mr. Des- Jardlus). n. conversation across the floor bo- twei n tlie leader of tlie ()pj)osltion and Mr. Dosjardins. .Mr. Desjjirdlns said : I have the right to ask the leader of the Oppo- ■itlon, If It is true tliat he pledged hiniaolf to Mr. Meivler to Increase the subsidies to the pro- vinces and to carry out the resolutions of tho Interprovinclal Conference, if ho got into power. And the leader of the Opposition thus re- died : I am sorry that the hon. gentleman, who is so versed In political matters, has not done me tlie honour to read my speeches during the last three or four years. I have spoken on that question in Toronto and Quebec, and have always asserted that I was in favour of the Interprovinclal Con- ference resolutions. The hon. member for East Huron (Mr. Mac- donald) and the hon. member for North Wel- llnfrton (Mr. McMulleu) have been tellinp the people of Ontario that the Minister of Railways spoke falsely when he charged the leader of the Oppo.sitlon with being In favour of those resolutions. I now ask the leader of the Opposition to rise up— like tho gentleman that he is— and say that we were not tellin)? falsehoods, but speaking from the public records of tlie country upon a grave and serious matter, and *''at the gentlemen behind him did not know the mind of their own leader on rhat great question. Sir, the loader of the Opposition will not rise, and he dare not deny the re- cord I read. I say that this Is a matter of public concern, because here are his lieu- tenants in Ontario saying that he will not support those resolutions. But against their statement, here is his public declaration in the Parliament of Canada saying that he does supjiort those resolutions. He made a similar declaration in answer to the hon. member for Nortli Simcoe (Mr. McCarthy). I say now. in the light of Parliament, that he did make such a declaration, and I say still ('iirlher tliat that will add .IJl.TiMMMH) to the pulilic e.xpendltiiit' of lliirt coun- try, and the hon. gitntieman knows it just Jis well UN I do, and tlie men behind htm ought to know il . loo. So much with regard to their ei-oiioiny ; now I want to say a word or two nu to tlieir purity. Sir, they liad iii>t been In (lower a year when th(\v wrote a letter to the suiieriniendeiit of one of the canals of thl8 eounlry telling him to inirehase hu|»- plies. from whom do yon think V I'roni a ^'cntleman who sat beliiml them In iIiIh House of Commons, sii[tpoitliig their A property : and then, In order to help the men who wanted to .sell, they appointed as Goveni- mei.t agent, to assist thenn in the pur- (;lias(«. a lawyer, one of the very men who owned the property. And the result was that they paid ^.500 an acre for land which ought to have lieen bought at $75 an acre, and they paid for improvements against the purchase of which even these partisan valuators had reported to the Gov- ernment, they paid thousands of dollars, notwithstanding that they had not even the aflidavit >f the men who spent the w tl fj II f tl M 11 tl ol tl to Ik c;i 111 li( 11 1" i w# money. In tMn whole tmnwrtlon, tlio ovl- tloin'c of wlilcli \h iipoii roconl In otir puli- lli; itts, t!i«> foiiritry lost ii hiimlnMl (iKiiis.'iihl (Idlliii-s. It WHS ii|H'ii mill bnit'- fiici'd pItM'c of corniptloii. Now, Sir, let in(» ri'l'cr to miotiier cnst'. My liou. frloiKl from Kiist Huron— nixl I di'ul witli tlilh ii.iw partly In niiswcr to my lion, friend fron. So\itl; Oxford— snid : Wo only Incri'iiHcd tiip dolit by r«'iison of tlu> fact that wv \r(M'o ("((mix-llcMl to carry out tho oltliirations left by tlu> Tory i»arty wli^n they wont out of olllco. lie thou rofcrreil to tho Wt'lhind canal contracts. I toll the hon. Kcntlonnin, I hoy wen* not obllucd to carry (»ut tho olillKailons of the 'I'ory jyarty tmless It was a uood work and In tlie puh- Ih; Interests, and I tell him further that If they had c.'irried out ih" ohliKatlons and practices of the (lonservatlve party, they would h.'ive save neted upon, hon. ^jentleiuen opposite came into power. And what did thoy (h» V Tliey wrote a letter to the eii>;lneer askinj; whether there was n(»t some informality with rejrard to these tenders. And there was som(» Informality of course ! I have tho letter here. Sir. If hon. gentlemen dispute what I say. And the conse- quence was that these tenders were laitl aside, and other tenders were called for. And I am here with the evidence afforded by tlie public records to };ive my hon. friend the result of that second call for tenders. On se(!tlon 2 of the Welland Canal the lowest of the llrst tenders which were called t'ov and received by the Conservative Covcrninent. was ijia'il.OOO. In the secx)nd c.'illinK 0>r tenders the lowest was ijsr^DCOttO. And tho contract was let to the lowest tenderer. In section 3 there was only a difference of .^(30,000 between the lowest of the first tenders, and the amount at which the contract was let. On section 5 the low- est tender on the first call was $2t!n,()()0, and on the second call, $312,000 ; and tho contract was let to the fifth lowest tender- er at .$3."2,000. On section 14. the lowest tender on the first call was $292,000, and the work w;is let for !i>32l.OOO. notwlthstand- Inj; that upon the second calliuj? for tenders there was a tender i)ut in for .$292,000. On se(;tl(>n 12, the l()we.st tender on the first cjiU was $:'.02.0()0, and on the second call. $327,- 000. and tlie worls. was let for r.jol.OOO. On section 7, first call, lowest tender, $251,000 ; second call, lowest tender, $283,000 ; and the worlv was let by these i)urity and economy- lovlnst gentlemen at $327,000. On section 13, the lowest of the first tenders was $270,000 ; the lowest of the second tenders, $313,000 ; and the work was let for $82B,- <»(M>. It will be Hcen, Sir. llrst, that the prices at which the Conservative (Jovernnient would have nn\ iiio work done was much ilie lowest, and si>cond, that the lowest tenders were paswed o\ er by these Kcntle- luen. .Vow. Just a wr;d as to the method of ar>,'urnent pursued by my ii<»n. friend from Kast Huron. Taklnj; a certain num- ber of years, he said that the average of contracts to the lowest tenderer In the time of ."^ir .lolin Macdomild, was 3r» per cent, while In the time of Mr. Macken/.le It wa8 8-1 per cent. I'^'oi* his comparison he took the years 1N74. 1875, and iH7 ('vidence of their ability to do the work, and lliere was no e.xcuse for neglectliiK them. SI ill furl her. Ilie lion. K«'"'h'nian omitted to lake the ye.ir 1S77 into his calculation. Had he done so, he would have found this pti'- ceuta^e suffer material damage, because. In 1S77, this economy and purlly-lovlng [larty gave forty-two contracts, nil told, of which seventeen were let to the second, third, fourtii. or fifth lowest tenderers. I want now to discuss nnollier point that came up in the siieech of my hon. friend from East Huron, and afterwards to dlti cuss the general trader iiolicy of the coun- try. In tiie first pl.'ice. It seems to me that the effoit of hon. gentlemen opposite has been mainly to prove that they have not changed their views ujion the trade ques- tion. I am not going to discuss the queS' tlon whether they have changed their policy or not. Surely it Is patent enough to the people of tills country ; surely It has be- come notorious that !"miiuuit among the crew of hou. gen- tlemen opposite, and the Liberal ship was drifting for the purpose of catch- ing a breeze that would take them into ottice, but always threatening and meaning the destruction of the platform of assistance and encouragement to the Indus- tries of Canada. Sir, wiiat is the fact ? The hon. member for West Durham (Mr. Blake) saw that It was a will-o'-the-wisp that the hon. gentlemen were pur&uing, and decided to abandon it. He got control for a moment, but the lion, member for South Oxford very soon supplanted him again. I want hon. gentlemen to remember that, because I want them to remember that the hon. member for South Oxford is still ia control. He is the real leader, he says so himself. The hon. member for Quebec East (Mr. Laurier) is the titual leader ; but I want this House to know what the real leader, and the dominant spirit, and ''on- - 11 * t . ] trolling influence of hon. gentlemen oppo- site, says on tills question, and to see how mucli weiglit tliey are to attacii to tlie oliy and airy notliings that have been put before this country as an excuse for their trade policy. Now, just one word more. I am dealing now with specific deninls made in this debate. The hon. member for Yarmoutli (Mr. Flint), 1 thiulv, made a specific denial that no gentleman on the other side of the House, or belonging to that party, had ever supported free trade Ijetween Canada and the United States. Tliat is what he said, and here are his words : I mean to say, In answer to the Inquiry from me, that no hon. gentleman on that side of the House can point out one line in which the Lib- eral party have ever aclvocated the abolition of duties upon articles imported into this country from the United States, through any system of reciprocity. Great heavens ! Mr. Speaker, has it come to this, that in this Parliament, and within easy reach of the library of Parliament, hon. gen- tlemen will so far forget themselves as to mnlve sucli a statement as that V I do not mean to say tliat tlie hon. gentleman did it intentionaiiy. The hon. gentleman did not thinli that his party had ever adopted any such foolish policy. He never gave them credit for having so little sense. Sir, he had not judged them properly ; I will not read now from the speech of my hon. friend at Boston, which was read last night, whicli advocated such a policy as absolute free trade, but I will read the resolution that was moved in this House by the hon. member for South Oxford him- self in 1889, and I want my hon. friend from Yarmouth to insert this in his speech when he sends it to his constituents, just after his staiement that they had never ad- vocated any such policy. Here is the re- solution, and every Liberal in the House voted for it, including the leader upon that side : That it Is highly desirable that the largest pos- sible freedom of commercial intercourse shall obtain between the Dominion of Canada and the United States, and that It is expedient that all articles manufactured in, or the natural products of either of said countries should be admitted free into the other. Now, I want to show the position In which hon. gentlemen are. Either the hon. gentle- man was absolutely misr^oresenting— but I do not believe that, he is not that liind of a gentleman,— or he! was passing judgment by imputation when he says that surely no liberal ever could have been so silly, could have been so lacliing in judgment, as to have sui)ported any such policy as that. Sir, I ask him to look down to the front benches and see the gentleman who moved it, and to look down still further on the front benches to the hon. leader of the Opposition, who, time and time again, In bis beautiful words, declared with great sentiment that he was willing to stand by it, to live by It, and to die by It, if necessary. Sir, I ask my hon. friend from Yarmouth not to forget this when he goes to speak to his constituents, but, in the meantime, to make a moral resolve never to trust to the hon. gentleman's opinions on the trade question before lie has carefully looked up the re- cord in the library of this Parliament. Then, once more my lion, friend from Yarmouth made another specific denial, and that spe- cific denial was that no gentleman on the other side had ever supported commercial union. I said at tlie time, " Oh, yes, the hon. member for Queeu'^ (Mr. Davies)," and the hon. member for Queen's said : " Oh, no." The lion, member for Queen's said : " I have denied it time and again in this House." Well, I will tell you what the hon. member for Queen's denied. He denied a speech which he made at the Charlotte- town Board of Trade, and the reason he gave for denying that speech was because, he &aid, it wa-s not correctly reported, that it was reported in an Opposition paper which iiad done him injustice, and he tliere- I'ore denied and repudiated it. Did the lion, gentleman ever make any other speeches on commercial union ? The hon. gentleman is silent. The hon. gentleman did malce another speech on that subject— and I am not saying now that I do not always accept the hon. gentleman's denial. Mr. DAVIES (P.E.I.) No, you do not. You would not allow me to explain a moment ago. Mr. MONTAGUE. I always accept the hon. gentleman's denial, but I want to give the House the grounds on which he makes the denial, because, surely, that is fair to the hon. gentleman. There Is a paper pub- lished in (jharlottetown called the " Patriot." I think the hon. gentleman is connected with the publishing company, in- deed, I believe, he is president. That journal published a speech delivered by the hon. gentleman on 21st August, 1887, on the subject of political union, and here is what he said at Cape Traverse, P.B.I. : Commercial union would also settle the nasty questions arising respecting our fisheries. The Idea that we would be disloyal to the British flag under commercial union was humbug. He wanted to live under the flag as well as any one, but he wanted a flag under which he could live. The keynote should be struck in the banner pro- vince. Commercial union means a uniform tariff from the North Pole to the Gulf of Mexico. The reciprocity treaty of 1854 he was prepared to ac- cept, but he was afraid the Americans were un- v.illing to concede It. As commercial union seemed to be more easily attainable, he was pre- pared to support it, because he believed it would secure to us wealth, peace and happiness. This report was not published In an Oppo- sition paper, but In the " Patriot," of Char- lottetown, and the hon. gentleman was or is the president of the company. Hon. gen- tlemen opposite say they have not recently 12 chanfjofl thoir trade policy. I am not dis- posed to quarrel very much with that state- ment, indeed, I sun i)rei)are(l to accept it in a very large measure, because I want to bo fair to lion, gentlemen opposite. I desire to note the resolution moved at the convention Jield in Ottawa, in 1893. In that resolution hon. gentlemen called foi^ certain things, for a reduction of taxation, for freer trade, for a return to a tariff that would raise revenue ; but I defy hon. gentlemen opposite to sliow a line in which they declared for tai-iff for revenue only. True, there is nothing ^in that resolution which declares tariff 'for revenue only, but I fancy the resolution ought to be i-ead In the light of the speeches which were made at that convention, because the hon. member for Queen's (Mr. Davies) last night claimed that we are divorcing sentence from sen- tence, and T proposi* uniting sentence to sentence and sentences to the resolution in order that hon. gentlemen may have a fair presentation of their case. In those speeches at the convention as I shall show the cry was for free trade as it is in England, though the resolution was vague and 'nde- nuite, the speeches v.'ere definite Indeed. I do say this though that the hon. gentlemen opposite while they have not, as I admit, changed their policy very recently, they have changed the name of it, Just as they did in 1889 and 1890. They supported commercial union. The member for West Ontario wrote a letter in which he said it was unwise to call it commercial union, so they called it unre- stricted recipi'ocity, on the ground that " a rose by any other name would smell as SA'eet" ; and so instead of calling the policy now free trade as they have it in England, hon. gentlemen call It a tariff for revenue only, which being interpreted means the system they have in England just as sure as we are standing here to-day. In the resolution now proposed hon. gentlemen say : The existing tariff should be modified so that It be made a tariff for lu.onue only. No protection there — every vestige of pro- tection is to be removed ; there is to be no incidental protection, because If such had been their intention it woul^' have been stated. We must accept what hon. gentle- men opposite say, and what they say is that they are not in favour of protection in the slightest degree, but favour a tariff for revenue only. What does that mean ? Con- sult any of the works upon political eco- nomy. It means. Sir, the system in vogue in England. Some hon. gentlemen opposite have attempted to conceal that fact ; they have been saying, we are in favour of a tariff of incidental protection. Did the hon, member for South Oxford ever say that ? Has any one ever heard that hon. gentle- tran say a word about incidental protec- tion ? What was the speech to, which thia resolution was the conclusion ? Half of it was the bitterest kind of attack on any kind of protection, and tho other half was a do- fence of the English system of taxation. I want to read the resolution of my hon. friend in the light of the speeches that were made before it, and in the light of speeches n\ade after It, lud I will leave this House and the country to draw their conclusion. Here are some of the specclies made before it. The leader of the Opposition said at Newmarket : Not a vestige of protection shall be allowed to remain. ; At St. Thomas, he said : Our policy is the antipodes of theirs. ^ At Winnipeg : It was a system of bondage and slavory. \ Surely hon. gentlemen opposite will not leave a trace of slavery. At St. Thomas the hon. gentleman said : i Protection is a fraud. We want the policy of j Britain, the policy which has made England the i greatest nation In the world. Free trade as It ! exists in Britain Is the goal which henceforth the ! Liberal party of Canada will struggle to attain. I Mr, GILLMOR. Hear, hear. I Mr. MONTAGUE. The hon. member for j Charlotte says " hear, hear." I will Just in I a moment mention how delighted my hon. friend who is a free trader was when his ! friends adopted this policy at the convention, and he patted them on tho back and said : That is right, boys, I believe in that policy. But that compliment to them is death to i the contention they are now making, that ' they are not for free trade as it is in Eng- land. At the Ottawa convention tho leader of the Opposition said : I submit to your judgment that the servile copy of the American system which has been I brought amongst us by the leaders of the Con- I servatives, is, like its prototype, a fraud and a robbery. I call upon you, one and all, to pro- I uounce at once and give your emphatic support to the proposition that we shall never rest until j we have wiped away from our system that fraud j and robbery under which Canadians suffer. Again, the hon. gentleman said : i My loyalty does not ooze from the pores of my body. I I never knew that charge to be made against the hon. gentleman. But he said further : I do want to go for an example to the mother country, and not to the United States, much aa I respect and love the people on the other side of the line. ' And once more : j I preach to you the gospel of absolute destruc- ; tion to protection. Not a vestige shall remain. Once more : We shall never rest until it is wiped out en- tirely. 13 I Ard once more, at Montreal, the hon. gentle- man said : Our object was the destruction of protectioa ; there can be no compromise. We stand here against protection, a system of protection ihas been the bane and curse of Canada. The Lib- eral party believes in free trade on the broad lines that exist In Great Britain. In the county of Peel, he said : I propose we shall follow England's ex- ample, and open our ports to the products of the world. Is there any incidental protection there ? Not by any means, but it is free trade, If Iho hon. gentleman understood what he was talliinff about. Now, let me say that we have hoard in this House during the present debate an lion, gentleman opposite state : That the leader of the Opposition at any time in his life has not gone back on any great trade policy which he had advocated for Canada, and put before the people. Well, Sir, he has not changed possibly ; but. Sir, he has renamed his policy of free trade as they have it in Eug- hind in order that the pill might go down better with the Canadian people. I have another geutlcinau to road from. I do not nood to name that hon. gentleman because tho extracts boar his ear-marks and are scif-announceful of their author : These men and their bonused manufacturers are scoundrels great and scoundrels small. Again : It la the most villainous system to be found on earth. Again : It is thievery, villainy and highway robbery. And so on. Again : The condition of the people was like a house on fire. The Liberal party were coming to the rescue. Surely not to put it half out. Again, from the hon. member (Sir Richard Cartwright) : The National Policy was worse than war, pesti- lence and famine. Surely these things are not to be only par- tially wiped out. And now we come to my | lion, friend from Prince Edward Island (Mr. | Da vies), as to how he interprets it, and this i is what he says : It is a system accursed of God and man. What did the hou. gentleman propose ? Did lie ever propose " free trade as it was In England " ? My hon. friend (Mr. Davles) looks dubious now, as to whether he should answer or not ; but for his information I will tell him tliat he did. I will tell him so from a speech which he scattered broadcast in the provinces by the sea ; a spee«h which is said to be " A great deliverance of the Hen. L. H. Davles at Middleton. A masterly discussion of the Trade Question." Now, I want to read what that hon, gentleman pro- posed, and T ant not to divorce that speech I from the resolution which calls for a tariff I for revenue only ; but I want to unite them, I as they should be united in their life, and as they will be united in death. Here is what I he says : To-day the people of Canada stand face to face j with such an issue. And the next contest in this j country is to be one between free trade and pro- I tcction. i Did the hon. member (Mr. Daries) n.ean I just the same kind of fight as they had in j England ? My hon. friend is still dubious, : but for his information I had bet or read on : ! That great Issue j What great issue. Sir ? The word " that " is an important word there : I — That great Issue, (the issue between free trade I and protection,) was faced years ago by our fathers at home. Free trade won, and has ever since been the policy of Great Britain. I My hon. friend (Mr. Davies) smiles, but I he does not deny his utterance. My hon. j friend. the leader of the Opposition, I is not alone, because the hon. gentleman from ; Queen's (Mr. Davies) presented the same [ policy down by the sea, as the loader of the I Opposition (Mr. Laurier) presented In the I convention, and also throughout the country. I And now, Mr. Speaker, as to how other I people understood it besides the Conserva- I tivos. How did my hon. friend from Ohar- j lotte (Mr. Gillmor) understand it ? He did not misjudge his leader surely. He said I " hear, hear," when I said " free trade " a I few moments ago. He was pleased. His I speech is found on page 53 of the conven- i tion report, a document issued officially by j the Liberal party, and here is what the hon. I gentleman from Charlotte (Mr. Gillmor) said: 1 Our leaders propose to follow the example of 1 England in trade matters. You cannot find so I good an example In all the world. i The hon. member (Mr. Gillmor) said that ' after he had heard the speeches. I England has fought many of the best battles In tho world, but the best battle shi ever fought was the battle of free trade. Free trade is good enough for me. Talk about conditions ; condi- tions do not affect it at all. Acd, Mr. Speaker, that announcement of the lion, member (Mr. Gillmor) was met by cheers on the part of the gentlemen who had come together for the purpose of making a policy for hon. gentlemen opposite to put before the country. Reai ; that resolution of the member for South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartwright), and reading those speeches, I ask any man in this Hou.se, or any man in this country, what could they possibly be understood to mean but the English system of tariff ; the English system as it wp.s ex- plained by the leader of the Opposb,ion ? But what have we heard since ? The nar- row-gauge member from North Wellington (Mr. McMullen) has declared : That what the people want Is to be severely let alone. 14 That Is the laissez faire system of England ; that is tho free trade system of England. He said further : The Government Is trying to fool the farmers when they tell them that protection on pork is any good for them. It is something that no in- telligent and well-informed farmer will ever be- lieve. Ihe member for Russell (Mr. Edwards) ad- vocates th'j removal of beef duties and ho wants free trade in beef. On page 1174 of *' Hansard," he says : The statement Is made that farmers are pro- tected. I deny that most emphatically. The member for Wellington (Mr. McMuUen) says : It is audacity to say that the duties placed on agricultural products are of any value. The member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charl- ton) says : I deny In toto that the farmer requires protec- tion. Again, he says : I contend that the free and untrammelled ad- mission of grains under the tariff of 1878 was in any degree detrimental to the agricultural inter- ests. Again, he says : The importation of Indian corn was advantage- ous for Canada. And I did not see the member for Kent (Mr. Campbell) cheer when he made that statement And once more the member for North Norfolk says : The duty on pork is absolutely useless. Just here let me say this Government differs most emphatically with these gentlemen upon the question of agricultural protection. We say to the people of the United States : If you will give us your marliets wo will reciprocate, but we won't yield up ours with- out something in return. Every man in this House ought to stand by that policy. Look, Sir just at the pork protection upon wliicb the member for Xorth Norl'olk said wo got no advantage. In 1889, we discover- ed that American prices were so low that taey could pay the small duty we had against tiiem and come in here and under- sell our farmers in their own market. We sent up the duty. Sir, and this table shows the results, both as to imports and exports, the exports being increased by reason of the industry being encouraged by the protection of the home market : L.ARD, HAM, SHOULDER BACON AND PORK. Imports— Lbs. 1889 27,000,000 1891 14,000,000 1892 11,000,000 1893 4,000,000 Exports — Lba. 1889 4,000,000 1891 7,000,000 1802 12,000,000 1893 20,000,000 So mucii. Sir, as 'to the hon. gentleman's opinion upon pork. Now, Sir, reading these statements with the statements made previ- ous to the resolution ; reading these state- ments with the resolution passed, 1 want to ask the House what these gentlemen could expect us to understand their policy to be ? Certainly the country understood it. Cer- tainly every man in tills House who applied a fair judgment to it. understood as the member for Queen's (Mr. Davies) declared : That their next fight would be upon the ques- tion of free trade and protection. I wish now, Sir, to refer to a matter to I which I have briefly alluded several time.s in my address. Who is to be the maker of the new tariff ? Hon. gentlemen opposite may talk as to a half-way system, but who is to be the maker of the tai'iff of hon. gen- tlemen opposite ? Well, we have the an- nouncement, and the hon. gentleman from South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartwright) has given notice, that he is to be the Finance Minister when hon. gentlemen opposite get into power. He has made the statement a long while in advance, and so he is safe. But he is to be the Finance Minister when they come into power, and now I want to read into that resolution what the coming Finance Minister says as to his position on this question. At Ingersoll, he said this : There are some people of the Liberal party who are there for their flesh-pots and their stock of cotton or some other stock, who did him the justice to believe that he would do what he promised, and that he would not be satisfied I with half measures. Once more, at Montreal, he (Sir Richard Cartwright) said : There Is no Canadian manufacturer who need be afraid to face the competition of the world. Our policy is death to protection. You see, Sir, there is no mistaking what tliat means. And once more he says, with ri'gard to the fight in the United States, and the defeat of the Democratic party there : There are two lessons which I think the Re- formers of Canada ought to learn. One is pre- sented for our warning and example in the fa<:e which has befallen the Democratic party in thii United States. It shows to all who choose to read the signs of the times, that when a party Is placed at the head of a great popular movement, if that party is hh. -hearted in tho prosecution of its aim, it will be deservedly swept out of power by the very people who have sustained and advanced it. And he says then : When we get into power, there will be no half measures. We will destroy this policy, root and branch. Now, Sir, in the light of all these announce- ments I ask hon. gentlemen opposite, what is this House to understand ? They are to 15 understand one of two things : Either that hon. Rentlemen opposite will destroy pro- tection root and branch and go to free trade ; or tlmt tlicy are niisleadiug the people of tliis country. Let them take eithen horn of the \ dilemma that they like, because they certainly , must except either one position or the | otl'er. No half measure ; no hrlf way- , house ; destructive root and branch is ; to be the policy of hon. gentlemen opposite ; and I give notice to the i men who have invested their money in the i industries of this country, and to the toil- j ing thousands who are supplying tlioir ; wives and children with bread, that if j ever these hon. gentlemen get into power, ; the hand of tho spoiler will be up on them, ' and that spoiler will be the hon. member for South Oxford, tUe coming Finance Minister in any Liberal Government that may be formed. And now let me tell hon. gentle- men what is thought of tlieir policy in trade circles. Here is what the " Trade Bulletin," of Montreal, of 15th February, 1895, says in substance, in the course of a long article : If It were not for the momentous consequences that we fear hang upon the reversal of our present trade policy at this juncture, we would unhesita- tingly advocate a change of Government, as too long tenure of ofBce often leads to an abuse of power. The commercial life of a nation is passing through a critical period, and it should be remem- bered that any radical change in our fiscal system might result in upheavals as disastrous as those which have occurred in Australia and the Ar- gentine Republic, and which have shook the United States to its foundation. The introduc- tion of a policy based on the broad lines of Bri- tish free trade would be a fatal mistake, and might hurl us into a commercial pitfall from which it would take us years to emerge. It la too well known that if our protective barricade, which insures a home market for our manufac- tures, were removed, or even lowered to any great extent, the Americans would at once mon- i opolize the home trade. j I have now given the statements of lion, gentleiiipn opposite ; I have given the in- terpretation of their policy by their own friends ; I have given its interpretation by independent trade journals ; and I say to them that they are either on the broad lines of free trade, or else they have been hum- luisjriug the people of this country— hum- ■iniy;iiiisr some classes by a cry of free trade and humbug otliers by other means— send- ing circulars around possibly to the manu- facturers and others who liave invested their capital, telling them that they need not be afraid. But tlie hon. member for South Oxford will control, and he says there will be no half measures when he gets into power. An hon. MEMBER. When ? Mr. MONTAGUE. When ? Earl> in the next century, some time, It Is said, but cer- tainly not in this. Now, I want to say a word or two about my hon. friend's grow- ing funny at my expense In connection with protection in Great Britain. I am delighted to have caused the hon. member for South Oxford a smile. He has been fishing so long with such a melancholy bait, and with such disastrous bad fortune, tiiat tlie smile that was said to have been a German silver smile, which he wore In days gone by, has gradually changed into that bluish hue with which artists have always painted that space that lies be- tween abandoned hope and absolute des- pair. Well, Sir, I am glad to cause even a smile at my own expense, and I do not be- grudge him the pleasure. What did I say In the country ? 1 said this, that England, after four or live centuries of protection, took down her bprriers and bade defiance to the world. That is what I said, and the hon. gentleman proceeded to prove It. The hon. gentleman read a Tariff Act passed In England some hundreds of years ago ; and his only answer to my assertion that the only country which hxd adopted the policy he had been advocating had done so only after centuries of protection, was to cause this House to smile at the absurd wording of that Tariff Act. Some of the hon. gen- tleman's newspapers alleged that I had not told the truth when I said that Eng- land had been a protective country for centui'ies ; and I am here now to say to my hon. friend from South Brant (Mr. Paterson), who paid me great attention in connection with this subject In tl.e coun- try, that I did not state one word that was untrue. I said that tlie woollen industry, the cotton industry, the iron Industry, and every ^^her great Industry of England had been built up under a system of protection ; and I now say, further, that no country has ever grown gi-oat that has not grown great by protection. Do hon. gentlemen deny It V Some hon. MEMBERS. Yes. Mr. MUiNTAGUE. The hon. member for Oueeii'.s, r.E.L, (Mr. Davies) smiles and (ieiiies. Why. Sir. it is the sfitement of my hon. friend the member for North Nor- folk, made iu 1878. I am quoting it liter- ally. Tliese gentlemen are like the old bal- lad. " Tlie Hunting of the Snark." You re- member the story. When the butcher and the beaver did not agree very well, the butcher contrived to make a sejiarate sally ; l)ut in a short time he found himself aloug- .'^ide tlie beaver again. Then the ballad con- tinues : Neither betrayed by a word or a look The disgust that appeared In his face, But the valley grew narrow and narrower still, And the evening grew darker and colder ; Until from sheer nervousness, not from good will, They marched along, shoulder to shoulder. Now. the statement has been made, and It has been made constantly In this debate, ^'^^:„MM^ 16 that England was brought to the verge of ruin by protection. Mr. GIIiLMOR. Hear, hear. Mr. MONTAGUE. My hon. friend says, " hear, hear." I was sure my hon. friend would siiy that, and he has had evidence of it from the opinions of hon. Kentlenieu oppo- site. Here is a work of a free trade histor- iaiu who was patronized by John Bright, and who wrote his boolss at the bidding of the Cobdeu Club. Here is what this author, Avigustus .Mongredien, says on page 133 of his book : This adoption of free trade principles was not the result of pressure from adverse circumstan- ces. The country was flourishing, trade was I^rosperous, the revenue showed a surplus, rail- ways were being constructed with unexampled rapidity, the working classes were fully and re- muneratively employed, the Imperial average of wheat for the week ending June 28th was 47s. lid. per quarter, and bread was cheaper than it had been for many years. The prevai'ing con- vergence towards free trade principles: simply proceeded from a conscientious recognii'on of economic truths. My hon. friend smiles. No doubt he has read it. My hon. friend states that he is above the authority of the historians of the Cobben Club ; but I prefer to take their opinion, even to thut of the hon. member for Charlotte (Mr. Gillmor), or that of the hon. member for Quebec East (Mr. Lange- lier). Mr. GILLMOR. lie says it was an im- moral practice. Mr. MONTAGUE. Well, I am not deal- ing with morals or with immorality. That is not in my department ; it belongs to the department of the hon. member for North Norfolk. What I stated was this, that England grew prosperous by protection, and I have proven it out of the mouth of a free-trade Cobden Club historian who, I think, will be accepted by this House. I have quoted him for this reason, that when I made some such statement in the country, the Toronto " Globe," whose representative is here, said that I had misquoted Mon- gredien ; and if tne " Globe " reporter wants this copy of the book, he can have it in order that he may retract that misstate- { meut of his paper. I quote it because I i wish to say to this House and to the couu- , try that neither in this House nor on a pub- j lie platform have I ever stated what I be- ' lieved to be untrue, or stated a fact as | to which I had not made all the inquiries in my power to substantiate its truth. Now, what has been the history of Eng- . land on the trade question ? Why did she | adopt free trade ? " ' Mr. LAURIER. What is the title V | Mr. MONTAGUE. Here it is, I will pass ' it over— History of the free trade movement In Englanr" by Augustus Mongredien. Mr. GIBSON. What about the proclama- tion to the Indians ? Mr. MONTAGUE. Hon gentlemen oppo- site iue in a Itad way. Now, I want to dis- cuss why Eng'and adopted free trade and what her previous policy was. Uon. gentle- men opposite know that Mr. Cobden made a prophecy. What was the prophecy ? It was that in ten years every country under the sun would adopt the sjimo metluHl and the same tarift. That is why England ad- opted free trade— largely to get the markets of the world. Did she got them V .Just let me give tlie hon. gentleman some examples. The duty levied against Manchester goods by the French in 18(50, was VZVz per cent ; in 1882. it rose to 1(5 per cent ; and in 1882, it was 42 per cent. The duty in France on Leeds go(Mls in 18(!0 was 10 i)er cent ; in 1SS2. 32 per cent ; and in 1802, 50'/L> per cent, in other words, France is a sample of just what tlie uatious of tlie world are doing, namely, shutting their mar- kets to England. And Enghind, as I shall .sliow from English resolutions and from the English " Hansard," is beginning very severely to feel that effect hei'self. She had enjoyed protection for 400 years. The hon. member for South Oxford taunted me with having gone back 400 years and he said, that is the spirit which dictates the policy of h-n. gentlemen opposite. I want to show <'\t the spirit of modern times is the sauio and a good deal stronger than was the spirit then. Austria adopted pro- tection in 1870 ; Russia increased lier tariff in 1877 and 1881. Germany put up liers higher in 1879 ; France incrt-ased her tariff in 1882 for purely j)rotective pnii)oses ; Spain did tlie same in 1887 and 1888 : Greece ad- opted a high protective tariff in 1889 ; Switzerland took the same coui'se in thi» s;une year. Sweden and Norway also fol- lowed suit, Jind Italy began protection to her agriculture last year— and so on throi7i;h the whole list of European countries. "'.Vhat I want to show to the hon. gentlemen and the people of this country is that the policy which the Opposition propound is one which every other country has rejected, and I put this que.stion to the people. There are two teachers befo'-e them. The one is the teacher of history and experience, cool, calm and un- biassed, that gives its warning. The other teacher is hon. gentlemen opposite who are anxious to get into power— for the public good, tliey say themselves— for the pleasure and profits of office, we know veiy well from their history. I ask the people oi' this coun- ti-y : Are tliey going to accept the teaching of history and experience ? or are they going to accept the teaching of hou. gentlemen opposite, who in tive years liave adopted Ave policies, and each time declared that the policy they then adopted was the true and only policy for the redemption and sal- vation of Canada ? Just a word or two with regard to the United States. I remem- 4 17 i ber saying In 1803, In this House, that the United States had not adopted free trade, that they would not very materially reduce their tariff, and that if their Government did so, the Democratic party would be de- feated and turned out of power. The hon, le9.der of the Opposition and the hon. mem- ber for Bothwell (Mr. Mills) shook tiieir he&ds and smiled an incredulous smile, and said : You do not know anything about it. We are now In the course of the year 1895, and events have proved that I was right. An hon. MEMBER. No. Mr. MONTAGUE. No, the Democratic party were not defeated in the United States and the tariff reform did not get a death blow in the United States ! Surely the hon. gentleman does not ajssert that ? Mr. LAURIER. Tariff reform and the Democratic party are two things. Mr. MONTAGUE. My hon. friend says that tariff reform jind the Democratic party are two things. So also. Sir, honest tariff reform and hon. gentlemen op- posite are two things. The Democratic party in the United States have pur- sued just about the same policy of turn- ing and twisting on the trade question as hon. gentlemen opposite have, and the fate of the Democratic party In the United States will be the fate of hon. gentlemen opposite in the coming campaign. What caused the (iel'eat of the Democratic party in the United States ? The hon. member for South Oxford declares that they did not go half far enough, and that was the reason they were defeated, and he proposed to go still further in this country. .Tust a word or two concerning the condition of England ; and I do this because of the constant refer- ence which has been made to the glowing oouditiou of England by hon. gentlemen opposite who have spoken from time to time. I have here,— and I must here pay the highest compliment to my hon. friend from East Hastings (Mr. Northrup) who dis- cussed this question so thoroughly— a report to show just the condition of agriculture in England at present The commissioners ap- pointed to Inquire into the agricultural de- pression have obtained reliable data, and In their report of 15th March, 1895, they state as follows : — Laat year we imported agricultural product* to the value of £142,000,000, £18,000,000 of which could have been raised upon the fields of Great Britain, had foreign competition not been al- lowed to prevail. Here is a message sent to Canada by a gentleman from the county of Simcoe, and who has written to the Orillla "Packet." Here Is what that gentleman says : Things are bad in England among the farmera. Everything comes from abroad. Cassells are even now Issuing a book printed In Holland. The Bibles from the Oxford press have a little note to show that they were printed In Germany. However well free trade may sound In theory, practically It is a failure, and I sincerely trust that Canada will never adopt It, England gets her egga from Holland, her butter from Den- mark, her cheese from America, and her beef and mutton from Australia. In the meantime the Essex farmers are going through the Bankruptcy Courts at the rate of 300 a year. Just one word more. An agricultural society in England recently passed a reso- lution. What was that resolution ? It was that the difficulty with English farmers was that no matter how bad the harvest they never had a good market or Increased prices. That contains a lesson for us. We have had a high protective duty on wheat. Hon. gen- tlemen opposite have said that It never did us any good. The time has come now when the National Policy is doing us good now on wheat Mr, CHARLTON. Why ? Mr. MONTAGUE. Because It is 15 cents lower in the United States than it is in Canada, and because we have a high tariff against tlie Unked States. Hon. gentlemen opposite say : But there is a corner in wheat I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon. I have taken pains to find out what this duty means now to the Canadian farmers. I have wired to various sections Mr. CHARLTON. V. 9 fanner's hands. There is no wt-^at in The gross value of land in the United Kingdom | has fallen in the last thirteen years by £13,400,000 \ and rents have been reduced from 5 to 75 per I cent. j The wheat crop, which averaged £31.000,000 from 1870 to 1875, has fallen In 1894 to £7.600,000. ] Every kind of crops in regard to which the English farmers looked for profit, has fallen In | price. I And the " Field," an agricultural joiimal, ■ says : 1 HON W H M 2 Mr. MONTAGUE. My hon. friend Is alway.s wrong, I am afraid. If he had allowed me to show that circular be- fore he asked for It, he would have saved himself some confusion, and If he had allowed me to read telegrams from men whose opinions he will not dis- pute, he would have saved himself some confusion and some regret I have tele- grams from every section, the facts con- cerning which I read. I v/Ill pass them ^^^''T*fv.*^®.'^**°' ^ntleman if he wishes, and I think he will accept as conclusive the one I shall read at the end. At Seaforth ""Lo^^^r^^^lJ*"^ '"^' 4,000 bushels of w-beat have been marketed at the higher price and 15,000 bushels are still held by the farmers. In St. Mary's, according to my informant, 5,000 bushels have been 18 r.mrkpted at the higher price, and 20,000 IniHhels are still ho'.d. At Dunnvllle, 5,000 busluHa sold, and 40,000 buMbels still held. At Hrainpton, 2,500 sold, and 20,000 bushels an» to ho found in half the county. At Mitchell, 1,000 bushels sold, and 20,000 bnsliels held by the farmers. At Lucan, only 'iOO bushels sold, but 25,000 bushels still held by the farmers. At Hagers- vllle. 5,000 bushels sold, within the last montli, and 15,000 still hold. At Exeter, 10,000 bushels sold, and some farmers, my infoi-niant aays, ore holding from 300 to 800 bushels, many thousands of bushels beiii« held In the township, am. uiany farm- ers around this village are holding two and three years' crops. The unfortunate down-trodden farmers whom my hon. friend has been talking about have been able to hold three years' crops of wheat Now, this is the report from Mr. W. W. Ogllvle. of Montreal, who knows, perhaps. Just as much about the wheat question as ray hon. friend from North Norfolk. Hy telegram, datey tho far- mers of this country who not only wanted their home market for themselves, but who had the broad and proper idea that the crea- tion of a varied industry extended the home market and gave them a better opportunity to sell their products, i have not to go out- side the ranks of hon. gentieinon opposite for ivldenco of what I have said, becanso in a speech recently delivered by tlio hon. member for South Oxford (Sir Richard Cart- wright), he admitted that ^he d'.'tcat of the Liberal narty In 1878 was aided by the votes of 30.000 Liberal farmers who left the LI1> eral ranks to join the Conservatives in put- ing these gentlemen out of ofHce. And why? Because they had refused to keep the home i m i 19 1 I I market for the Cauadlan farmer. Some of my hon. friends smllo at that. Well, I sup- poHo they put no faith whatever in the state- ment of the hon. gentleman from South Oxford (Sir Richard Oartwrlght), but I aiu quoting him literally. Now, Sir, ' rot only has England failed In regard to securing the markets of other countries, but England Is to-day— and I say It In the light of evidence which I have In my possession— Er.gland Is to-day in many respects growing very weary of the policy which was adopted then ; and not only that, but as I shall prove to this House, to the absoiute sutis- fncticn of hon. gentlemen opposite. England In the very highest places Is beginning to r(!verso the policy of free trade which she adopted some years ago. Sir, I thought no truer word was ever spoken than was spoken by th(! lion, inenibcr for North Weilliigton (Mr. McMullen) the other day when ho de- cl.nred to this House tliat England was the slaughter market for creation. No people have appreciated that fact better than the eapltallsts, and the artisans, and tlie agrleui- turists of that country. English boards of triide, trades unions, consuls abroad, agri- cultural societies, as I can prove by the evi- dence of tlie olilcial debates in the' English House of Commons, are now moving In the direction of a defensive tariff, and the Eng- lish Parliament Itself has practically, In one sense, abandoned the free trade policy and adopted In one respect a protective policy. My hon. friend from Botliwell (Mr. Mills) dissents, but I will prove to my hon. friend that I am absolutely right. I suppose ho (Mr. Mills) will not controvert me In this statement : That the Ideal policy that Eng- land had in view was, that the cheaper she could buy the products for her people, no nuitter where they came from, the better It was. That was the ideal policy In Great Britain, and I can show the hon. gentleman rel!;ner or the speculator who are to be found preying upon the disasters of commmerce. The closure of tl.e reflnertos or Messrs. Heap, Jaeger Bros, has now been followed by the Bto*>- uage of Messrs. I^eitch & Co.'s works. Outside Liverpool tho results are worse. Bristol uaa practically ceased to refine, there are only a few Clyde refineriea continuing the struggle, and the London sugar refineries will certainly not boost of being prosperous, tho well-known Oriii of Martineuu having stopped their works tempor- arily. My hon. friend (Mr. Laurler) wants to apply tho same policy to Canada, becausu the sugar Industry Is one of tho Industries lu which tho hon. gentlenmn has tho knife up to tho hilt, and when ho spoko lu Montreal he •iiiUl : Let the people ol! Canada buy their - lutlon. Man after man was challeuKed to say a word axalnst It, and did not do so. Tiiat resolution— and mark Its wordlut?— was a^s foUowa :— That, iri the opinion of this House, tt ig Incum- bent upon Her Majesty's aovernmeat, ia the In- turestH of the InduBtrlal clusaos of the United Kingdom, to restrict the Importatloa of goods luade in forelRn prisons by the forced labour of oonvlcts und felons. Some hon. MEM REUS. Oh, oh. Mr. MONTAGUE. .My hou. friends smile ; but what difference does It nialie where the goods are made, so lon« as th^; people yet them eheaj) ? My hou. friend says thai had nothing to do with the (juestlou of free tiud,' or protection. Let me tell him what a great member of tho British House of Commons Bald with regard to that question, and thon we shall see at whom he was sneering when he said it did not mean protection. Hero Is what Mr. Joseph Chamberlain said : He {thyi President of the Board of Trade) does not come to the consideration of this question biassed in any way by those eternal principles which were Ir.id down the other day by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and which teach us that the lower the price of commodltleu thu better it Is for the nation. He has flung aside those proposals as though they were the pro- posals of belated philosophers. Speaking thus of the speech of the president of the English Board of Trade, who sup- ported that resolution, on which there was a discussion occupying 44 columns of " Hansard," and not a single man to be found to raise his voice against it. What was the reason of that ? The reason was that tho brush industry of England has been ruined by the competition of foreign prison- made good? coming from Germany. What matters it whether the goods are made in prison or anywhere else, so far as the principle is concerned ? The brushes were good, tho prices were low. Then why are they to bo shut out of England ? Because their importation has ruined the British brush industry and left British brushmakers without labour. If that is not protecion, Sir, I do not know what is. England has begun In that resolution the protection of her own industrial classes. Not only that, but let me tell hon. gentlemen that Mr. Chamber- lain, speaking recently on the question which hon. gentlemen say is dead In Great Britain, declared : I am Inclined to think that in our staple trades — for instance, In the coal trade. In the Iron trade, in the cotton trade, and, above all, in the great- est of all our trades, the trade o< agriculture — the margin of profit has entirely disappeared. (Jp to the present time wages have not fallen at ail in proportion, but if the present state of things continues it la simply Inevitable either that Wfigea will have to he considerably reduced ur that workH will be closed, land will Ho idle, anl the numbers of the unemployed will bo largely Iricroasod. • • • I find that thero are a num- ber of people, and I think an Innreaaing number, vho unior the prtmont conditions of trade are coining to tho conclusion that our free trade pol- icy has been a failure, and who would therefore be ready to go back In tho direction of protection. When she opened her markt;ts to the world, she had a monopoly of two things. First, of iho wiirld's markets, and second, of skilled labour and the most Improved machinery. Tho time has come when slu- ha^ lost both monopcdles, and not only that but her mar- kets at homo largely. Not many years hence, we may look for a reversal to some ceti- slderable ext(>nt at least, of her policy of tradt>. That is my convlctU)n, and it Ib borne out by tho signs of the times. Now, Sir. I want to speak for a few moments as tt; tho result of the elections recently htdd In the United States, and to draw a comparison between that country and Canada in regard to tho recent depression. Whilo tho depres- sion was wide-spread, thero ciin be no doubt that tho depression in the United States was IntenBlfied and multiplied a hundred- fold by the uncertainty which existed in re- gard to the tariff of that country. That is certainly In accordance with hou. geutle- nieu's knowledge ; they know It as well as I know It. The very first scare was that the protective policy would be entirely de- stroyed. Capital ceased to be invested ; the product of the factories began to be shorten- ed ; labour was lessened also— people were thrown out of employment and tholr families out of bread. The second cause of that de- pression was that there was a largely in- creased Importation In consequence of the tariff reductions which were made. Though they were nothing so radical as the hon. gen- tleman from South Oxford professes here, these Importations lessened the employment of home labour, of coursa Let us take an extract from the Dublin " Evening Tele- gram " of February 2nd, 1804, when the ^ tariff Bill was going through United States Senate. It spoke as follows :— There is at present going through the United States Senate a measure which ought to be of vast importance to Irish industries, especially io the woollen and linen Industry of this country. The time to take the field is not after the new tariff has been in operation tor some time, but on the day it comes into operation. And, suiting the action to the word, in tho city of New York on the day the tariff went into operation 1,908,274 pounds of English and Irish woollen cloth and 7,822,829 square yards of dress goods were waiting to be en- tered at the customs house of New Yorlc to compete with the product of the labouring people of the United States themselves, while from September, 1893, to Ist March, 1894, there were Imported Into the United States, .;€. Ji (if ninnuftictiirod woollous, cottouii. Hllks, (lux iiikI liciii|> KootlH. .1(44,o WHS liniMtrU'd lj;7H. iiiiikliiK of wlilrh was takcii awiiy from tho Aiut'rlnin pcoplf Jiiul kIvou io HritlHh pcoitk". Thai was ^ood for the Hrltlsh pcoph'. hut It waH had for tho pooplo of tli(! Uiiltt'd Statt'8. Aud, Sir, tha. wouhl ho Just the roHUlt of tho destruction of our tariff here, as lion. Reutleincu know very well. They know that the reductions wiik'h were niado In tho United States tariff did not brlnjf It down to the present heluhl of our tariff ; they know that the United States tariff is hLIU lil^htM- than ours ; and yet the hou. nieniher for South Oxford de- rlares that they did not ko half far enough and tliat wlien he gets Into power there will l)e no lialf measures. Now, as to tlm de- j>re8slon which existed In this country be- tween 1874 and 1878, had the lmi)ortallon of foreljrn Roods anyl.hlnj,' to do wltli It V I thl'k I K> Ml bo able to prove thai the Im- portation i)f forel>,'n poods had BontethiuK to do with It. What evidenci! do lion, gentle- men opposite want ? Surely nothing bett».'r than the hon. Kentlemen themselves. I can l>roduce here the speech of my hon. friend from South Brant (Mr. Taterson), saylnp that there was disastrous competition from the United States ; the speech of tho hon. member for North Norfolk, say- hiK that there was competition aud that It ought to be done away with ; tho speech of Mr. Jones, of Halifax, saying that our sugar reflncrs were being ruined and praying to Heaven and tho Finance Minister to do something for those sugar refiners when ho refused tho clamour, as my bou. friend from Queen's would say, for aid to our industries. I will prove it not only by these gentlemen but by tho ofllcial circular Issued by Mr. Burpee, then Minister of Customs, who advised his collectors all over the country that American goods wero being imported, at slaughter prices in our markets, and that they had better look out Sharply for the value of goods as they came In. If that is not sufficient, I have the re- port of the American counsul at Toronto, in 1877, who, writing to his home Govern- ment, said in effect : We have accomplish- ed It at last ; we have killed the In- dustries of Ontario. Your export of goods Is growing from year to year, and we have fixed the Oanadian Industries so that they never shall revive again. Is not this an evldenco that the importation of these goods had something to do with regard to the depression which then existed ? I want to call the attention of the House to this fact, that the policy of hon. gentlemen op- posite, as explained at present, is a policy which getu nothing and gives everything. Unrestricted reciprocity had its faults, and they were great and serious ; but under unrestricted roclprority, thotitfh we gare I'verythlng to tli«> IJnllctl StatfS we got soinclhlng, however small It might h.ire I'l'cn, in rt'lin'M. Itnl in-tlay II' .vnu follow • lit the jiolicy pronounced upon favouraiily l>y hon. gt'ntlt'iiit'n opixisile, wc ulvc I'vcry- thlng to every country In the- world and we get nothing from any country In return. As to the question of dcpn'sslou, have wo felt tho dcpntssion of these last few years tc nnythltig like tli" same extent na we felt the dejiression from 1H74 to 1878 V Why one 'Inandal paper says that Canada stands as a clihni cy In a buiiit factory compared with other countries of the* world, and tho Loi'don " I'lnanclal N(nv," says ihat Oanad.i seenjs to Ix* the only country doing well In these times of distress, speaking t)f the way In which ('anada wt?ath(>red the storm. The " Canadian .lonrnal of Commerce," speaking on tho same subjc^ct, says : Tbe tnanfactureru there (In the United Slates) have BtockH on hand which are unHaleable. They are in great need of ready cash, and If Canada's market ware now unprotected, there would tie such an influx of American goods as would drown out the industries of this country like one burst from a reservoir. The calamity would bring the manu- facturers of Canada Into a worse financial and lndu.strlal plight than that, In which the Ameri- cans are. The tariff, with all Its faults, Is de- monstrating at this time more than It has ever done tbe value and the necessity of guarding our industries from slaughtering operations. That Is tho opinion of tho commercial world voiced by the mouthpiece of commercial Institutions, which treats of coinmei-cial matters free from any political bias. Now, I have a word to say as to tho temper Into which tho hon. member for South Oxford worked himself over the free list. Ico was free, ho said, and leeches wero free. I only stop to ask this House whether It is worthy of any public man pretending to have states- manlike views, to enter into such pettifog- ging criticism at a time when his utterances on tho policy of his party are being looked to with great Interest, aud when people look to him Instead to propound a policy which would bo of some utility to tho country. As to tho free list, the hon. gentleman said that It contained only throe articles which went into general consumption, and that everything else was for the purpose of aid- ing the manufacturers. Well, I have no hesi- tation In saying that tho policy of the Gov- ernment Is a policy of free raw materials as much as possible, for the manufacturing Industries of Canada, because such a policy must result in giving cheaper goods to the consumers and at the same time give em- ployment to Canadians engaged In the manu- factures Into which these raw materials en- ter, and by giving employment to them an enlarged home market to the agricultur- ists. The hon. gentleman has found fault with our tariff as regards raw materials, but what was the policy of i i the hon. gentlenian himifilf, In 1878, whpn In power V He found a few thluKH on th« frco llHt for tlm b«(noflt of the iPiuiufufturlnK IntorostH and ho put his knifo In to tliini at onco. llo added nothing to the froo llHt, but tho Jlrst net of tho hon. jjontlo- niun wan by Chap. »», Victoria l\7, 1874, to put 10 por (HMit on oaoh of Uio foliowlnw nrtich'H. wliifli woro on tlio frco llHt, niid«r Ills prt'dcocHHor, in ordor to destroy. If pos- Biblo, the InduHtries of tho country :— Cotton nettinx for rubb«*r ataoea. Cotton warp. PMiHh for hatters' uae. Felt foi hats and boots. Prunella. Silk twist for sewInK hata and boots. Machinery for mills and factories, not mado In Canada. FTas t.h(« hon. jji'ntloman's policy chauKt'd V Wo will now cotno to tho titular leader of tho Opposition, who mado a speech In Win- nipeg ft short tliuo ago. Ho said this : We rthiill attempt to get this money which will bo lost, If wo tako off some of the present taxa- tion, and to make up the deficit which will arise, It will 1)0 necessary to get an addition from some othor sources. This will be attempted to be done In this manner : In the first place, thero will hi a differonco made In the present tax im- posed upon raw material which Is to be used for manufioturlnK articles. Did tho hon. pentleman mean that as a tax upon raw material ? If I understand tho Enwllah lau>,'ia«o that Is what ho meant, and nIthoUKh tho Toronto " Globe " has been api^loKl/.luK ever since, th«» hon. Koutlo- num has never y(;t taken It back, so that his policy remains at that at present Not only did hon. yeutlemen opposite thus tax the.se small articles, but they put 50 per cent upon raw su^ur. 40 per cent on reflned, and the result was that every refinery In Canad. was clo.sed uotwithsttndlng. the protests o.. Mr. Jones, of Halifax, and other Liberals Interested, ai\d wo were eonsumiu;: lon'ijjn sUKnr, while our own people were idle. Another fallacy to which I want to call tho attention of tho House Is the char^o by the hon. raemt)er for South Oxford that because ho had taken off some tax«'s and declared that by so dolus? he had re- ceived the burdens of the people that therefrro the Flnanre Minister admitted that the National Policy was a tax on tho people. Was over assertion more ridiculous ? What l,es of imlicy. Sir, I am bound to admit there has been |(|,..i eoinmou to all tho schemes and that Idea has been to destroy the Industries of the country. If any- tliinK were ever wantluB to show rhat tho policy of hon. «eiitlemeii opposite Is absolutely to destroy tho Industries of (Canada, that want was supplied by the spe«'ch of the hon. member for South Ojford as well as tho speeches of tho hon. Kcnlleman who succeeded him. I'or. from liegiuiilnj,' to end, It was an at- tack upon tlie industries of Canada. I have liere. Sir, tlie campaign hook of the Liberal party. An lion. .MFMHKU. The new leaves are ever green. Im- agine, .Mr. .Speaker, that sort of description applied to my hon. friend from Soutli Ox- ford, a gentleiium whose leaves of liop,. are (»ver green. Kut tlie Liberal party not only lives ui)on the princli)Ies that are opposed to it, but if I am not mistaken, the on'y way in which It wishes to live is l)v the decay of the industries of the country ;" for nothing gives the hon. gentlemen greater pleasure than to find a vacant shop or a silent fac- tory. They rejoice over an Individual being out of work as if they had even returned to power Itself. Now, Just to show how anxious hon. genth^men are that our indus- tries should not prosper, I want fo say a few words, which I may address to 'the leader of the Opposition. The hon. gentle- man went down to Montreal and made a speech there, telling the people of .Mon- treal : You have Increased In population from 1881 to 1891 by 39 per cent, wlille from 1871 to 1881 you Increased :u per cent —a miserable 8 per ceht 'mprovemeiif uncier this great National Policy. But the hon. getitleinan forgot to include a part of rlie county of Hochelaga. into wliieli the city of Montreal has grown by her artisans tak- ing up their residence there. Instead of the miserable increase of which the hou. gentleman spoke, he should have given aii Increase of 102,000 between 1881 and 1891, as against an increase of 02,000 between 1871 and 1881. But, Sir, after the hon. gen- tleman had spoken in Montreal, and told tliem there that the National Policy was do- ing them no good, he went to Winnipeg. He had attacked us in Montreal for not creating industries in Montreal. But what was the policy he pursued In Winnipeg ? Speaking to the people of Manitoba, what did he 24 I encourage them to do ? Did he encourage them to trade with other parte of Canada, to help to build up an interprovlncial trade In order that we might be mutually Inter- dependent and mutually prosperous ? Did he encourage thena to help build up Montreiil V No ; he told them that there proper places to trade with were St. Paul, Minneapolis aud Chicago, The hon. gentleman did not re peat these sentiments at Montreal. But he got compliments upon that speech. Not from Canada — he never gets compliments from the Canadian people ; the policy of these hon. gentlemen draws compliments from abroad. The Conservative party are always opposed by outside elements. Whai we ask for is the support of the Canadian people themselves. Here Is a compliment to the hon. gentleman's speech from the Minneapolis " Tribune " : During toe thirteen years that we had the Canadian markets, up to 186«, trade with the North-west provinces of Canada was very large and profitable. Our Jobbers In all common lines and our manufacturers of flour, lumber, furniture and farm Implements all testify to desirable Man- itoba trade, which Mr. Laurler's policy would again make possible for them. Sir, the hon. gentleman is welcome to the congratulations of the Minneapolis press, but the congratulations of the Minneapolis press will never carry him into power in this Canadian country. The hon. gentleman seems always to talk for American applaus* and I am bound to say that h« succeeds in getting it Now, Sir, just a word or two at- to the industries of Canada. We have had specific charges In this House as to oui industries, and now I have some specific information, I will not give in detail thf figures as to raw materials, aa they bare often been given In the House. Here are. however, some of them and they Indicate tli» Increased employment given to our people ; IMPORTED. 1893, Lbs. 10.503.64; 1,245,208 9,720,708 40,263,33? $ 90,536 1,901 974 Foundries and machine shops — Hands, Wages. 1891 12,808 1381 7,788 Rolling mills— 1891 ,, 2,006 1881 699 Smelting works — 1891 1881 Agricultural Implements — 1891 4,543 1881 3.656 Carriages and wagon-making — 1891 9,056 2.999,572 1S81 8,713 2,275,290 Rolling stock — 1891 5,018 2.235,524 1881 8.154 1.295,841 Tin and sheet-iron working were arated. 5,152,157 2,724,898 843,500 255.020 851.980 279,449 1.812,050 1,241,279 Capital. 16.736.703 7,675,311 2,307,540 697,500 4,159,481 2,172,100 8,624,803 3,995,782 8,029.621 3,798.861 2,592,984 1,630,598 not sep- 1891 ^.. 1881 ..,. By comparison they stand thus Wages. CapltaL Output. $1,729,680 $4,557,578 $6,749,056 9.53,736 1,993.054 3,738,246 RAW MATERIALS 1871. Lbs. Wool 2,061,576 Cotton 1879. Lbs. 4,976,758 9,720,708 $ 133,214 35,556 199,179 Lbs. 22,000,000 $ 862.113 206,471 1,115,134 Lbs. 343,000,000 Gutta percha. . , Silk Hemp Lbs, Sugar 21,000,000 But I want to say a word or two as to our cotton and sugar and some other Industries generally, and then I shall go on to some specific points. Here Is a table which shows what we have been doing. Hands. Wages. Capital. Cotton — 1891 8,502 $2,102,603 $13,208,f2l 1881 3,527 714,250 3,476,500 Woollen — 1891 7,156 1,884,483 9,357.658 1881 6.877 1,382,859 5.272.376 1 In 1S78, we had 2,200 looms in our cotton mills ; in 1895, we have 12,- 104. We had 111,000 spindles in 1878 ; to-day we have 49L000. In 1878, these miUs employed 1,310 men, women and children ; now they employ 8.216. At that time they paid $276,000 in wages: to-day they are paying ?2,102,330. And, notwithstanding the contentions of hon. gentlemen opposite, it has been demonstrated In a masterly way by my hon. friend from North Bruce (Mr. McNeill) that cotton waa being sold here, quality considered, just as cheap as in the markets In England. My hon. friend from Bothwell (Mr. Mills) still doubts. He would doubt no matter what sort of evidence I brought forward, so I need not pursue the subject In detail. Then, Sir, as to sugar 'refineries. In 1878, tJiere were four re- fineries. How many men did they employ and what wages did they pay V Not a single hand did they employ and not a single dollar of wages was paid. In 1891, they employed 1.927 hands and their product was $17,127,000. It is the policy of the Crovemment to maintain these industrios rather than bring in the product of foreign Uibour from the Unlte^l States, or from any other country, more particularlv as, within the walls of that protective iariff, we have produce a competition which has given prices to which no Canadian can object I take the town from which my hon. friend from South Brant (Mr. Pater- son) comes, I am sorry my hon. friend is not here. He haa admitted that flie Na- tional Policy has made him rich, I think I have seen the question in the "Globe " : " Has the National Policy made you rich ?" The National Policy has made the hon, gen- tleman from South Brant rich, and I am s. 57 98 00 20 80 49 50 79 Capital. 16,736,703 7.675,311 2,307,540 697,500 4,159,481 2,172.100 8,624,803 3,995,782 8.029.621 3.798,861 25 24 2,592.984 41 1.630,598 ere not sep- And tlius : Output. $6,749,056 3,738,246 ms In our have 12,- ■8 in 1878; , these mills id children ; it time they y they are [withstanding en opposite, lasterly way Brnce (Mr. ? sold here, ip as in the friend from . He would evidence I pursue the L8 to sugar re four ve- :hey employ 7 V Not a and not a d. In 1891, lieir product licy of the ( industries t of foreign s, or from Icularly as, ctive tnriff, I which has nadian can which my (Mr. Pater- Q. friend is lat fbe Na- . I thinli I I "Globe " : you rich ?" le hon. gen- and I am glad it has. But the hon. member says that is not tlie question ; has it done any- thing for you ? I tell my hon. friend that he could not grow rich without affording opportunities for labour to hundreds and tliousands of peo])le through all these years ; and. as he has grown rich he has. I have no douW, paid his people a fair day's wage for a fair day's work, I am glad to know that the men who work for him have been l)uying their houses and growing rich as well. Well, Sir, Mr. Pater- sou's con/'ectiouei'j' works, according to the commercial reports, were rated in 1S78 at fi'om .$0,000 to $10,000. In 1895 it was mted at from .$7.5,000 to $150,000. Then as to other industries there : Buck's stove works, '-i 1S78, were rated at from $50,000 to $75,000 ; to-day they are rated at from $200,000 to $300,000. Harris, Son & Co.. agricultural works, were rated, in 1878. at from $30,000 to $50.0(X), and to-day their works are asse'ssed at $135,000. The Water- ous engine works have risen from $150,000 to $200,000 or $.300,000. And only the other day, when the Waterous Company proposed to leave the city of Brantford, the city granted them a largo bonus, which is, per- haps, the most expensive protection we can possibly have, and if the hon. member for South Brant were here I would challenge him to deny that he had voted for tliat bonus, because he was anxious to keep those pooi)le in the city of Brantford, for the reason that, as the paper supporting liim declared, it was better to kt^p them there if they could, not only to give strength and prosi)erity to the city, but to afford a nrarket to tlie fai-mers around tlie city. But my lion, friend from Brant has been making a public utterance as to his own business under the National Policy. He ad- mits that he prospered, but he says it is not due to the National Policy. Speaking last fall he said as follows :— He would make the comparison with 1893. The National Policy was to keep the Canadian mar- ket for the Canadian manufacturers. Well, in 1878. $88,000 worth of candies came Into Canada ; In 1893, $86,000 worth came In. It kept out $2,000 worth — only $2,000 worth all over the Dominion. In biscuits, Canada Imported i 1878, $24,000 worth, and in 1893 we Imported $32,000 worth. What chance had Mr. Paterson to be rich with that ? In 1878 $97,646 worth of pickles came Into the country, and In 1893 It had risen to $109,580 worth. Those figures did not bear out the assertion that> the National Policy had made him rich. In that Is a very ingenious statement. But Avliat has become of the greatly increased consumption ? It is true that the imports are about the same. Had it not been for the National Policy they would have been much larger and we should have been using the products of foreign labour. The way to measure the fourth of tlie business in which he is engaged is to look at the evidence of HON w H M 3 these figures. As to pickle-making and bakers and confectioners : PJckle-maklng — Establishments 3 17 Hands employed 25 89 Wages $ 4.200 $ 20.090 Output 24,000 119.000 Bakeries and confectioneries — EstablLshments- 1,180 1.836 Hands employed 3,963 7.043 Wafies $1,1 22.266 $2,283,553 Output 9,476,975 15,43n 10)? It will thus be seen, Sir, that the mark as grown immensely, and that Canadian lab- our has been supplying it. This fact the member for Brant did not mention. Just a word or two as to the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton). You remem- ber, Mr. Speaker, that last year when the question of canned tomatoes came up in this House, my hon. friend was extremely solicitous about a cent being taken off canned tomatoes. Mr. CHARLTON. Peaches. Mr. MONTAGUE. Peaches, yes ; but tomatoes as well. Peaches and tomatoes were the especial object of my hon. friend's solicitude then, just as wrecking privileges were the especial object of his solicitude in other days. Well, Sir, what Is the reason that he is so anxious about canned tomatoes and canned peaches ? I find that in 1881 there were four canning factoi'ies in North and South Norfolk , I do not think there were any before 1878. I find that the capital invested wag $13,- 000 ; that the number of hands employed was 91 ; and that the value of the ])ro- duce was $34,000. I find that in 1891, un- der this iniquitous policy which my hon. friend denounces from platform to plat- form, the number had not increased, but that the capital had risen from $13,000 to $144,000, that the number of hands had risen from 91 to 409, and that the value of products had risen from $34,000 to $273,000. TJiese figures are for the county of Norfolk alone. This explains the .anxiet.v of my hon. friend that these canning men should have a special advantage. Well, he was anxious for them, but he was anxious for the farmers of the county of Norfolk who liave devoted their fields to raising the articles which are used in these canning factories, and out of which the farmers are making more money than they possibly could in any other line from the same soil. Taking the country over, in animal and vegetable goods, canned and cured, in 1881 the wages paid were $4,432,000 ; in 1891 the wages were $8,408,992. And how have prices ruled ? 1 sent down to Mr. Kavanagh's grocery, in Sparks Street, Ottawa, to get the prices, and I found out that before the National 26 f Policy came in, these canned tomatoes foi* which my hon. friend lias so great a soiici tude, wore worth $2 per dozen ; while last fall they were selling at 98 and 99 cents per dozen. And yet the lion, gentlenuui says that the dnty Is always added to tlic price. Which is best, Sir, that we shoidd consume American canned goods put up by American labour, fed by American farmei-s, or consume our own vegetables, raised by our own farmers, put up by Canadian men and women who are fed by the Canadian farmer ? "Well, let me speak of some other points whicli I, in company with my col- leagues, visited. I am only now dealing with small points. There is no point as to the industries of the cities. Hon. gentlemen admit that point. I went to Chatham, and discovered that these National Policy industi'ies were not all existing within the great cities. My hon. friend from Kent (Mr, Campbell) will be able to tell me whether there was a great wagon industry before 1S78 ; or whether there was a great fanning mill industry in Chatham before 1878. Mr. CAMPBELIi. Yes. Mr. MONTAGUE. My hon. friend says, yes ; but I have telegrams hero from proprietors and other men, and from the mayor of Chatham. The hon. gentleman will admit that Mr. Manson Campbell, mayor of Chatham, is a reputable ma-i : and Mr. Manson Campbell's telegrams states that : In 1878 there were less than 50 wagons a year built In Chatham. The Chatham Wagon Com- pany was established In 18S2 ; It maJves 2,000 wagons this year, and other factories make 600 or SOO in the town of Chatham. In fanning mills, Mr. Campbell himself made 300 in 1878. In the last three years he made 0,000 mills each year, and the price of these same fanning mills to the farmers have gone down one-fourth. .,ly hon. friend from Kent seems to have blun- dered. Would he like to see this wagon factory destroyed ? His policy will do it. Now, as to the town of Wingham, from which my hon. friend from Huron (Mr. Mac- donald) comes. We held a meeting at Wingham, and we found new factories there ; we found a furniture factory winch did not exist previous to 1878. Mr. MACDONALD. The town of Wing- ham gave large sums of money for the pur- pose of helping this Industry. Mr. MONTAGUE. And my hon. friend voted for those sums, my hon. friend voted for those bonuses, my hon. fi-iend voted to place a direct tax on every man in the town of Wingham for the purpose of start- ing an industry in that town, and yet he supports a policy which will destroy the industries of Canada. I can tell him that industries in the town of Wingham did not nmount to much before 1878. I have the telegrams here if he wants to .see them. And I will tell him that the chair factory Mr. MACDONALD. i,l)e town of Wingham 1872 to 1878. but from increased 217. The population of Increjised 1.500 from 1881 to 1891 it only Mr. MONTAGUE. I population ligures. It .M.re like the circular letter facturers which my hon. about. But I want to tell chair factory was want to tell him have not got the may bo that they to the in.'inu- friend spoke him that the established in 1888. I tlia,t a large furniture factory was established in 1887 and that its capacity was largely Increased in 1888. I want to tell him that when I went to the town of Wingham they said to me about my hon. friend from East Huron, " He makes long speeches, but we believe with tlie liondon " Advertiser," that one smoke- stack is worth a ten-acre field of men that talk, and talk, and talk." I want now to say that we visited the town of Gait, tlie Man- chester of Canada. The lights were in the factory windows at night, tlie factories were working overtime, and the worliiugmen came to mj'' hon. friend the Minister of Finance, and said : " Don't change this policy, but let us earn our liv- ing on Cjiiiadiau soil." Tlio I'armers came to us and said : " We have got the very best home market that is to be found on tliis continent." We went to the town of Peterboro', and we did not find a Liberal who was in I'avour of tlie ti-ade policy of hon. gentlemen opposite. When you men- tioned it to them tiiey denied it, and they said they were for protection, and tliey would not alloAV the hon. gentlemen oppo- site, if they got into power, to give anj'- rhhig el.io. Wo went to Listowel. and wo found a piano industry. They said to us, " Keep up the duty on pianos, we want the industry to prosper." We went to the town of Bowmanville, and Ave found that tliey had recently, by vote of 444 to 4, paid a big bonus to keep an industry in that their own people, and to market for the farmei'S. tell the hon. member for -Mills) who lives in London, groAvn so jolly of late, that town to employ furnish a home Now, I want to Bothwell (Mr. and who has new industries have started in London. Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). No. Mr. MONTAGUE. I must accept the statement of my hon. friend, but my hon. friend must accept the proof wL.ch I give him of my statement in reply. I want to tell him that previous lo 1895 not a pound of iron enamelled ware was made in London. I want to tell the hon. gentleman that the ware that was consumed in Canada was brought from Germany and the United States. I desire to Inform him further that 4 27 the manufacture of that ware was begun this year by the McLary Company, of Lon- dan. who have Invested $150,000 in the business, and wlio are turning out a weekly product of $1,500, and they wire me that in a few weeiis tliey will be doubling their output and supplying a large part of the market of Canada. Hon. gentlemen oppo- site say that is not a new industry, that it existed in Loudon before. The hon. gen- tleman knows it did not, just as well as I know it at the present time. Mr. MI[iLS (Bothwell). I tan tell the hon. gentleman that Elliott's factory was a very large one in 1878, that it is dead and went into banlvruptcy. The Globe Manufacturing Company also went into bankruptcy. The london Manufacturing Company— two of them— also went into bankruptcy. Mr. MONTAGUE. The hon, gentleman has not substantiated his statement The buildings once occupied by these industries are now occupied by others. The hon. gen- tleman has gone out of a very small hole. I stated that new industries were being estab- lished in London, and the hon. gentleman said, no. I have established my point, and the hon. gentleman has gone around by a circuitous route to answer me. I want to say not only that, but further that we are not only ostablisliiug, and, indeed, have established sugar industries, cotton indus- tries, agricultural industries, but we are be- ginning to estiiblish a groat iron industry. Mr. CHARLTON. Hear, hear. Mr. MONTAGUE, "--le hon. member for North Norfolk says, " Hear, hear." The hon. meud)er for Queen's, P.B.I., also smiles. Mr. DAVIES (P.E.L) I beg the hon. gentleman's pardon. Mr. MONTAGUE. The hon. gentleman seems to think this is purely an Ontario ])olicy. " I tell him there is no reason why New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island should not be manufactur- lug just as well as Ontario." Does the hon. gentleman deny it ? Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). The hon. mem- ber for Hastings showed that the union Itself was a calamity. Mr. MONTAGUE. My hon. friend from Bothwell grows dubious again. Let me tell him for his comfort that I am quoting the member for Brant in a speech he made in 1870, in this House, in which he said he de- sired protection for all Canada, not for any particular part of it, and tliat the eastern provinces should be better off than even On- tario under it Hon. gentlemen oppo- site certainly have declared that they will destroy any hope of an iron industry being established in this coun- try. To-day, a great iron industry is aliout to be established In Kingston. These will cover the construction and operation of a blast furnace, steel plant, blooming mill, and rolling mill. The works are to cost $000,000 ; daily capacity of furnace will be 250,000 pounds of pig iron ; the capacity of steel plant will be 30,000 pound of steel blooms ; capacity of blooming mill, 80,000 pounds of steel or iron bars ; hands re- quired, 300 to 500. Kingston is to provide $250,000, secured by a first mortgage. Where lire the return.' expected from at tirst to recoup Kingston ? Largely from the boimbies given by this Government and not only by tliis Government, but by the Government of Sir Oliver Mowat While lion, gentlemen opposite are standing here railing against the policy of encouraging Canadian industries, their leader in the pro- vince of Ontario has done what ? He has passed a statute under which he gives $125,- 000 a year, or $1 per ton over what the Dominion Government gives for every ton of pig iron produced in Ontario. Not only is this industry being established at Kings- ton, but at Hamilton, as well as an iron industry is being started. I received a tele- gram yesterday from prominent Hamilton people. Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). Hear, hear. Mr. MONTAGUE. My hon. friend doubts again. Hon. gentlemen opposite said that this enterprise was on paper merely. I tell them now that the cost of the smelt- ing plant will be $400,000 ; that all the foundations are laid ; that all stacks and smelting arrangements and casting house are erected ; that everything is on the ground except engines, boilers, and con- nections ; that the cost of steel plant will be $200,000 more ; that the company will employ 100 hands in the iron department, and 200 or more in the steel department I asii hon. gentlemen opposite are they going foi- ever to al)audon the idea of establishing an Iron IndustTy in Canada ? They ought surely to give the House an answer to that question, because they say they will de- troy protection to that industry at once. They say tbat that industry can be estab- lished with this market. In reply, I say that the same statements were put forward when the attempt was first made to es- tablish an iron industry in Great Britain, and the same statement was made in re- gard to the iron industry of the United States. And what is the result ? In the United States, by the system of protection and bounties given they are producing iron, which is being sold in the markets of Great Britain cheaper than it can be produced in Great Britain itself. Do hon. gentlemen accept that statement ? Mr. LAURIER. I do not deny it Mr. MONTAGUE. The hon. gentleman had better not deny it I have here the English " Hansard," because some of the journals supporting the hon. gentleman did deny it I have a letter, moreover, from 28 the manager of the Alabama Iron Works giving figures with respect to iron protluc- tlon and prices, and I have speeches de- livered in the House of Commons in which the attention of the president of tlie Eng- lish board of trade is called to the fact that iron fi'om Alabama is being laid down at Liverpool cheaper than it can possibly be produced at Cleveland, which is the centre of the black district of England. Sir, there is no use in multiplying illustrations. It is child's play. Everywhere in all the lines of industry cxipital is being invested and in- creasing numbers of our people are being employed. Hon. gentlemen know it and dread it, but the people of Canada appre- ciate it. One or two words more as to our industries, and then I shall close. Hon. gen- tlemen opposite have made a very strong attack on our census— they have attacked trifling points in it. They are dealing in small figures and attacking little points which in any census are peculiar. This, Sir, is not the business of statesmen. It it trifling with the House and the counti-y. Where 4s the real and great increase of our industries .shown ? It is shown in the industries where the output is over the value of $50,000 per annum. Indus- tries having a yearly output under $2,000 only represent 6'7 per cent of the whole and only increased 55*6 per cent. On the other band, industries having a yearly oat- put of $50,000 and over, formed 54-8 per cent of the whole, and increased 60 '6 per cent during the decade. Not only so, but hon. gentlemen opposite assert that the manufacturers have grown rich and the labourers have grown poor. Take the fifth group of industries, with an output of $50,000 and over, and lion, gentlemen oppo- site will find that these establishments in 1891. took $155,460,492 of raw material and worked It up into $200,795,190 of finished product, the added value being $105,334,698. Labour received of this, $46,842,040, or 44-5 per cent ; while capital received $58,492,- 050, or 55-5 per cent. In 1881, $90,301,536 of raw mater" Is was worked up into a finished product of $153,767,771, the added value being $57,462,235. Of this, labour re- ceived 41-8 per cent, and capital 58-20 per cent. So tho artisan is better off Individually under the prosf'nt policy than ho was under tho policy adopted by hon. gentlemen opposite wlule the number employed is very largely increasing. I liave shown, I think, from start to finish not only by the facts I have adduced, but by the very sneers which I have produced from hon. gentlemen opposite, that no matter what they may name their policy it has had one central and leading idea, namely, that industries should not be established in , this country, and that tho Liberal party would destroy every item of encourage- ment for those industries, should the party get into power. That is the policy they have supported, and that is the policy whicii hon. members on this side of the House cannot and will not accept. We are pi'oud to say we have encouraged industries ; we are proud to believe we liave to o very large extent increased the home market ; we are proud to know that home competition has produced its legitimate effect, namely, low prices ; we are proud to Icnow we have done some thing towards making a better, a greater, a more harmonious and more inde- pendent national life, because you cannot have a successful national life without you have the various industrial classes, without you have the warp as well as the woof, the industries and the farmers to supply the wants of the artisans who are engaged in those industries.