Ifl IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) /. ,.* sr ^% ^ 1.0 I.I 1.25 |5n 323 13.2 u CUUl. i-- i2-2 1.4 12.0 1.6 ^# vl .^^/ '■V' ^;^. z;^ A O 7 Photpgraphic Saences CorDoration 23 WEST MAIN STREET W»STER,N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4S03 CiHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CtHM/ICMH Cotlection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notos techniques at bibliographiques Thi to The Snstitutn has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographiceliy uniquci, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checkeii below. n Coloured covers/ Couverture 6tt couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagie □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pellicul6e □ Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverfjre manqua I I Coloured maps/ Cartes giographiques en couleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) D D D D D Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other matebial/ Relid avec d'autres documents Titfht binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr6e 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 appuraissent dans le taxte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont ^as 6ti filrr Aes. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires; L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'ii lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui soit peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qu peuvent modifier un9 image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger una modification dans la mdthode normale de fiimage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. j I Coloured pages/ I I Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicuides I — I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ n Pages d6co!crees. tachet6es ou piqudes Pages detached/ Pages ddtachdes I i Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Oualitd indgaie de I'impression I I Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppldmentaire 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 totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, una pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmAes it nouveau de fapon A obtenir le mbiSleure image possible. Th po of filr Or be th( sic oti fin sic or Th ih Til wl M) dif en be ng re< m( This item is filmad at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmi au taux de reduction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X aox J 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X Ills iu ilf'iei ina age The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada 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 spocifications. L'exemplaire filmd fut reprcduit grdce h la Q6ri6rosit6 de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada Les images suivantes ont 6te reproduites avec le plu» grand soin, compto tenu de la condition et de la nettet6 de I'axemplaire filmd, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. 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. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim6e sont filmds en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par Is second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — •► (meaning "CON- TINUED"}, or the symbol V (meaning "END "), whichever applies. Un lies symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ^ signifie "A SUtVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames es required. The folio ving diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds d des taux de reduction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour §tre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmd d partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gcuche d droite, et de haut en bas, un prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagramn>es suivants illustrent la mdthode. rata elure. J 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 / -I' THE BUDGET DEBATE. SPKECH OF MR. THOS. WHITE, M. P. FOR CARDWELL, ON THE 3Sr^vTIO]S'^L POLICY Delivered in the House of CommoDS on Tuesday 22rd March, 1880. After routine business on Tuesday, the 23rd March, 1880, Mr. White, M. P. for Cardwell, who had moved the adjournment of the debate, delivered the following speech : — Mr. Speaker, before entering upon the discussion of the subject . which has chiefly engaged the attention of the House during this debate, that is, the National Policy, as it is called, the policy adopted by this Pai'liament last session, and the effect it has produced upon the country, I desire to refer for a moment to the financial statements pre- sented by the hon. member for Centre Huron (Sir Eichard J. Cartwright) and by the hon. the Finance Minister. I think it is well that at the close of this the first year of a new xidministration, that we should have an opportunity of contrasting the poli< y of the hon. gentlemen opposite with the policy of the present Administration. J think it is especially well that we should judge by the record of hon. gentlemen opposite as to their right to assume the tone which the hon. member for Centre Huron assumed the other evening in reply to the hon. the Minister of Finance. Sir, what was the financial record of the late Administra- tion ? How did they conduct the financial affairs of this Dominion ? The hon. member for Centre Huron in the first budget speech he delivered in this House, imposed upwards of $3,000,000 additional , taxation upor. the people. He declared at that time that it w^ wi*ong, as undoubtedly It is wrong, to permit continued deficits to occur, between the revenue and the expenditure of a country like this ; and in imposing this additional taxation he took the ground that he would be able, by means of an economical administration of the affairs of the country, and by means of the additional revenue which h^ would i \ , } ■\ :{ ■■t ■ J ■■i \ ■' i 't f J: \ ^ 2 derive from the new measures which he had iniroduced, to carry ou the affairs of the country in the. future without in any way causing deficits between revenue and expenditure, and would be able, generally speaking, to show a surplus. Well, sir, in the next year, in 1875, speaking within five months of the close of the then current j'car, he said : " I have every reason to believe that we shall have a reasonable surplus upon the estimates of the current year." What was the result ? Within theshorttime of a year afterthis promise was made to Parliament and the country that there should be no deficits, he opened his speech with a wail of disappointment, acknowledging the utter failure of his estimates. (Hear, hear.) He admitted that in the matter of customs duties alone he was nearly two million dollars lower than he anticipated. Well, in 1876, further changes ere made in the tariff with the view of again closing the balance between revenue and expenditure. In making i:is speech, he estimated that for 1876-77 the revenue would be 023,250,000 as against an " expenditure of somewhat less than that amount." One would imagine that with the experience of the two previous yeai-s that hon. gentleman ought at least to have acquired some degree of wisdom, that he ought to have had some ' knowledge of the probable revenue resources of the country ; but what do we find ? In 1877, referring to 1876, he used these words : — ** The "net result is this: that whereas our expenditure during the year " amounted to no less than $24,483,000 in round numbers, our total " receipts fell to about 622,587,000; being a total deficit of no less than " $1,900,000." (Hear, hear.) After the imposition for the second time of additional duties, in order to secure the required revenue, the expenditures of that year exceeded the estimates which he had submit- ted to Parliament by- upwai-ds of a quarter of a million dollars ; so that he had not only not succeeded in estimating correctly the revenues he was to receive, but he had, as was shown by the result of the y eaj*'s transactions, been reckless in the expenditure as well. Well, sir, he was then speaking within a few months of the end of the year ; he was speaking as one supposed to have a fair knowledge of what was likely to be the results of the year 1877, in which that speech was delivered, and he claimed that for that year there would again be a small sui-plus of revenue over expenditui-e ; and yet, in the speech of 1878, coming to deal with the previous year, he had to acknowledge another disap- pointment, and another deficit of 81,446,000. (Hear, hear.) Those were the last three yeans of the administration of the hon. gentleman, and during them were these differences between estimated and actual revenue. He had in 1875-76 estimated a revenue of $26,250,000 ; the ^ actual revenue was $22,58t,587. For 1816-17 he had estiiuated a revenue of ^23,250,000 ; ho had an actual revenue of $22,059,174. For 1877-78 he had estimated a revenue of 823,400,000 ; he had an actual revenue of $22,275,000. So that the hon. gentleman who ventured now to lecture the hon. the Finance Minister upon the diHappointment which may have occurred in connection with his estimates, is the same who, during three years, had estimated his revenue at an aggregate of $7b',210,872, and had received an actual revenue of only $71,100,006— a diiforence of nearly $5,000,000, or an average annual difference between estimated revenue and actual revenue of no less than $1,626,- 042 (cheers). Now, I. would ask whether, after a record of that kind, it ought not to become the hon. gentleman to be somewhat more modest, at any rute, in his censures and criticisms upon the hon. the present Finance Minister? Well, what was the record in relation to THE DEFICITS OF THOSE YEARS ? The hon. gentleman assumed office by proposing an increased revenue, with the view of preventing deficits. He made the declaration that it was little less than criminrtl for a Finance Minister to go on from year to year with steadily recurring deficits. And what do we find ? In spite of two changes in the tariff, one realizing, or expected to realize, some- where about $3,000,000, and another over $1,000,000, we found in 1875-76 a deficit of $1,900,785; in 1876-77 a deficit of $1,460,027; in 1877-78, $1,128,146; in 1878-79, $1,948,009 ; or, in all, deficits which are not and can not be disputed — which are established by the records of Parliament — amounting to $6,436,967. While this is quite clear, as established by the statements of the Finance Minister and by what every one Iftiows in relation to the affairs of those years, all are equally aware that the last deficit would have been very much greater but for the changes made in the tariff last session. The estimate of the Finance Minister has not been impugned by hon. gentlemen opposite, so it is very evident that, but for the recent changes, there would have been an increased deficit fi-om customs of $700,000 and from excise of •$600,000, making in all an increased deficit of $1,300,000. So that the actual deficits, instead of being the amount I have named, would, but for those changes, have reached about $8,126,968, or not less than an average of $2,031,742. I omitted from this amount another item which, as was clearly established by the hon. member for Cumberland (Sir Charles Tupperj, ought to have been added, $390,000, which was charged to capital and renewal account in connection with the Inter- colonial Railway, and which, properly speaking, and according to Mr. Tims, the auditor of that voad, ought to have been charged to OTdiuaiy expenditure. Then as to THE ORDINARY EXPENDITURE under the hon. gentlemen opposite. I believe, Mr, Speaker, that we must, in the nature of things, look forward to a somewhat increased expenditure almost every year. We are a growing community ; new interests are springing up and new obligations must necessarily fall upon us, which will, in the very nature of things, involve a larger expenditure. But that was not the view taken by hon. gentlemen opposite when they formerly sat on that side of the House. Their charge agairjst the Conservative Government and party was that they were extravagant, reckless ; that, if careful in the administration of public affairs, they might largely reduce the annual expenditure. We have, therefore, a right to hold them responsible and judge them now by their own standard. What do we find ? In 1873-74 hon. gentlemen opposite made it appear by the Public Accounts that the expenditure foi' that year was $23,316,316. But I think I may say that the argu- ment of the hon. member for Cumberland (Sir Charles Tupper), when sitting on the other side of the House, in relation to the expenditure of that year, relating to the item^ charged to ordinary expendHure which ought to have been chai-ged to capital account, has never been impugned, much less answered. Of items included in the ordinary expenditure of that year, in order to afford basis of comparision, I venture to think, with other years, and enable hon. gentlemen opposite to make an exhibit more favorable to themselves with subsequent expenditures, we hnd no less a sum than $1,022,823^ made up of $69,330 refunds made by hon. gentlemen opposite on the eve of the general elections, to an important railway corporation in this country, and which, certainly, was not fairly chargeable to the expenditure of that year; $545,625 in connection with the- Intercolonial Eailway, which had never been before, and was not properly chargeable to ordinary expenditure ; and $407,868 spent in connection with the Dawson route, while similar expenditure afterwards, under the administration of the hon. gentlemen opposite^ was always charged to capital account. So the actual expenditure of that year, instead of being $23,000,000 odd, was but $22,493,423 (hear,, hear). Did those hon. gentlemen reduce, that expenditure, or so act as to justify the confidonce they claimed from the country as strict economists in relation to public expenditure? They did not. In 1874-5 they increased the expenditui-e over the highest of the previous administration by $1,417,678; in 1875-6, by $2,152,179; in 1876-7, by $1,223,908; in 1877-8, by $1,203,156; in 1878-9 they increased it by $2,155,381, or an aggregate increase of expenditure in those five years, over what they themselves had declared to be aA extravagrnt expen- diture on the part of their predecessors, of $8,153,092, to which must again be added $390,000 which Mr. Tims declared properly belonged to the ordinary expenditure of the country, when we have no less than an average of $1,708,618 a year expended by the hon. gentlemea opposite in excess of the highest expenditure of the extravagant Government that preceded them. (Cheers). So much for the financial administration for the late Government. So much for the taunt of the hon. gentlemen opposite that hon. gentlemen on this side of the House display a want of skill and ability and carefulness in the administra- tion of the affairs of the country. Now I come to the broader question which has been engaging the attention of this House; and if the House will permit me before I enter into particular details in reference to it, I desire to refer for a moment to purely personal matter. MR. white's record AS A PROTECTIONIST. I sat for two or three sessions in the gallery where those gentlemen are industriously employed in reporting the debates of the House, and I was compelled to listen to hon. gentlemen who considered my opinions, although I was not a public man, of sufficient importance to make them the subject of quotation and discussion on the floor of Par- liament. Last year, although I did not happen to hear it, one hon. gentleman, an ex-Minister, did me the honor to refer to those opinions also. The same hon. gentleman, in a quiet, genial, joking way last night, suggested to me, when I told him I did not propose to answer everything said on the clher side, that perhaps I would consent to answer what I myself had said in former years. Now I propose to take up the time of this House for a few moments in dealing with these charges, once for all. I do not introduce this personal matter out of ahy consideration to myself, because I think my course has been a consistent one ; but I know how these things are used for the purpose of influencing public sentiment outside, and it is for that reason I propose to refer to this matter. It is charged that while a member of the Dominion Board of Trade I expressed fi-ee trade of opinions, that I was a pronounced free trader. In support of this hon. gentlemen have quoted from the proceedings of that Board. When I went into the library to get the volume containing that report, I found every- where ink marks emphasizing particular phrases and words in my 6 Hpeoch which has hoon so frcquontl}- quoted, and 1 think I can hear hon. gentlemen as they came to these precise words giving them the desired emphasis, having prepared the emphasis in advance, in order tb convince the House and the countiy that I formerly held freo trade views. It would have been honest on the part of hon. gentlemen if they had read the first sentence of tho speech from which they have so often quoted against me. What is the difference to-day between the two parties in this House? What was the issue successfully fought by hon. gentleman who now control the majority of this Parliament? It was this, that it was the duty of the Government in certain conditions of the country, to adopt such fiscal legislation as would promote the prosperity and well-being of the country, as would give life and energy to its industries, and as would promote itti commercial prosperity. What is the view I took in 1873 ? How did I define my position ? Hei'e are the first words of the speech from which hon. gentlemen have quoted. I will read them and ask hon. gentlemen to say if they do not embody the issue presented to the people at the last election as between this party and that. I said : — " I wish to adduce some reasons for voting against the resolution which has been proposed by Mr. Wilkes, and why I think the Board ought to accept the amendment I have placed in your hands. I have no hesitation in saying that I am a Protectionist to this extent : — I believe it is possible for the (lovornment, by the adoption of a fiscal policy, to nurture, protect and promote the industries of the country. The free trade principle, on the contrary, is that just in proportion as it does interfere, it injures gather than benefits the manufacturing interests. From this doctrine I entirely dissent. It is quite possible for the Government to promote the manufacturing interests of a countiy ; and especially in & new country like this, where there is not much accumulated wealth, where manufactures must be started on a very small scale, and where the market is limited, it is the duty of the Govern- ment to do what it can to promote them, by the adoption of a fiscal policy on the principle of incidental protection." These, sir, wero the initial words of the speech the hon. gentlemen have referred to, and what was the appreciation of it at the time ? Let me give Mr. Wilkes' reply. He spoke immediately after me, and you will see what was the impression that my remarks made upon him. Mr. Wilkes said : — " The end of all such systems as Mr. White advocates is ' protection all round.' One man wants his ' raw material ' free of duty ; but his raw material is the ' manu- factured article ' of some other person, therefore there must be protection all round." That was the answer of the gentleman with whom I was discussing the question. It followed immediately aiter the 8pe«ch I had made^ nnd he deciared that he regarded it as a protectionist speech, and one which involved protection all round. It was, therefore, certainly not open to the charge hon. gentlemen have since made in relation to it. I have nothing to recall in connection with the ground I took on that occasion. I warned protectionists, protectionist as I was myself, that in the then condition of the country, any attempt to get a higher duty than 15 per cent, would cause public agitation on the subject of in- creased taxation, and result in a want of permanence and a danger of reaction ; and that a reduction back to or below 15 per cent, would do more harm than an increased duty would do good. (Hear, hear.) What, Mr. Speaker, was the position of the country in 1873 ? We had had large revenues and a series of surpluses ; upwards of 010,000,000, saved out of the revenue of the country, had gone into public works, or, in other words, in the reduction of the public debt. We were in a condition of prosperity so great that the hon. member for Centre Huron declared that wq mistook inflation for prosperity. Every industry in the country was flourishing, every branch of com- merce was flourishing, and every man in the country who was willing to work had the opportunity of working ; and the argument I used then was that at that time, under those circumstances, it would not be desirable to have an increase of duty. More than that, the influence of competition from our friends on the other side of the line had not yet commenced to develop itself: they had not got over the efl'ects of their terrible fratricidal war. A large amount of smuggled goods went into that country out of this ; tourists every year took back with them, by the underground railway, enough to do them for the rest of the year, and saved in the difference of price the cost of their trip. That was the position in which we stood at that time ; and if that speech is examined, it will be found by any man who knows anything of the commercial condition then, and the change which has taken place since, that the argument which had force in ISTS could have no force in 1878. Will any one pretend to say that the conditions were in any way the same at the two periods ; in 1878 we found every industry in a state of prostration — we found every commercial intorest in such a state of depression as was never seen before. The proposition I laid down in opening that speech was that, being in the power of the Government, it was their duty to adopt such a fiscal policy as would improve the industries and enhance the prosperity of the country at large. That was the doctrine that was cai'ried oat in 1879, and that was the doctrine I advanced in 1873. There was no inconsistency ; there was no going back on one's self, even supposing a going back on one's self would 8 have been a crime. (Cheers.) What do wo find in Canada ? Many- men who were strong fiee-traders in 1873, men who were Cobdeni^es of the Cobdenites, who looke(i upon free trade as an axiom, as adc^raa, that could not be departed from without committing sacrilege, we find such men as those in 1878 and 1879 coining into line as protectionists. Before the hard practical facts of our position, all their theories of free trade had to be cast to the winds ; and wo find these men, convinced and constrained by solid facts, giving in their adhesion to the hon. gentlemen who now occupy the Treasury Benches. But it is a curious fact that at the same meeting of the Board of Trade at which I am accused of having advanced strong free trade views, Mr. Harty, of Kingston, brought up the question of the ten per cent, differential duties upon tea, and what I said then was this : « Mr. White opposed the resolution, and pointed out that the Government had done a very generous thing by the trade in repealing the duty at all ; it was rather a Jt-ard thing now to ask the Government to discriminate in favour of New York importers against our own importers." Is not that p'-ecisely the same argument as has been used by me ever since ? But for the fact that the statements to which I have beon replying, have been used to the prejudice of my political friends, — I am inditferont to them m /self — 1 would not have troubled the House by referring to them. And now, Mi% Speaker, has been THE RESULT OF THE NATIONAL POLICY for the last year? It is premature to attempt to judge of the full effects of such a radical change after the few months of its operation. If we were unable to point to a single specific case of great advantage I'csulting from it, I venture to say that all sensible men would ndmit that it should have a fair opportunity of develop- ing, whatever the result. But what has been the result ? Fortu- nately, this policy has acted almost with magical influence in changing the position of things in relation to a large number of industries. At first there were diflftculties in connection with it, in connection with the working of the details in the Custom House. It was a radical change ; it involved at the beginning certain difficulties in the making out of invoices and entries, in all those practical opera- tions connected with the passing of goods through the custom-houses of the country ; and there is no doubt that at the outset some difficul- ties had to be encountered. There may have been some importers, there k-iay be some still, who regaM it as a nuisance, just as all men 9 may be supposed to regard all custom houses as a nuihanco. There is scarcely a traveller who has his luggage overhauled and tossed about who does not regard custom-houses as a nuisance. But, notwithstand- ing these difficulties, I venture to say that the feeling in favor of the policy to-day will be found as strong, nay, strongar, after the expe- rience of those months of its working, than the proposition to adopt it was in 1878. There are one or two subjects that 1 desire to refer to apecially, ag these proved to be important topics of discussion, and pai'ticularly one subject on which some most extravagant statements have been made by the gentlemen on the other side of ♦he House. I allude to the effect of THE DUTIES ON SUGAR. The hon. member for Lambton (Mr. Macken?;ie) said the othei day that the effect of thfise duties was to add from a cent to a cent and a half a pound to the price of £,ugar to the Canadian consumer, and the hon. the ex-Minister of Finance went so far as to sa^' it had increased the price from three to three and a quarter cents per pound. There is nothing like going it strong when one is at it ; and the hon. gentlemen understand that maxim perfectly. But what are the facts ? The hon. member for Centre Huron (Sir Richard Cartwright) should be the last man to attack us on this side for having adopted these duties. They are not a whit more protective than the policy he himself introduced in 1874; scarcely more protective than the order-in-council by which he tried to protect the sugar refiners in F ntreal. And it was only ■when, having tried to do so then, and on his failing to do it, not having the knowledge that he was trying to do what he was not legally per- mitted to, it was only after that, that he became so bitter against xhe " legalized robbery " about which we have heard so much. But, I repeat, what are the facts with regard to this alleged increase in the prices of sugar? I have the prices of granulated sugar in Canada, and so that there can be no doubt about it, I will hand the complete state meut to the reporter, so that everyone can verify it for themselves. The fact is that the average price of granulated sugar in 1876 was $9.50; the average price in 1877 was $10.66; the average price in 1878 was $9.34 ; and the average- price in 1879 was $9. Here are the figures, 80 that hon. gentlemen can verify them if they please :— i 10 "Wholesale trade prices of granulated sugar for the last four years in montreal. Year. Datkb. January . . , February. . March April May June July August. . . . September. October November December. . Average . 1876. 1st to 5th. 9 H 1 3th to 16th 8| H n 8^ 9'i lOf 10 9| IH 11 2bih to 31st. 8| 8| 81 8* lOj^ m H lOj Aver- age. 8| n 8| &| 8^ 8| 91 lOf 10 H 11 11 9^ 1877. Ist to 5th. 10| lOf 11 lOf lOf 111 11} 10 10' 13th to 16th. 11 10^ 11 m lU lU 10^ 10} 10| 9f 2Sthto 31 St Aver- age. lOf 11 10| 11 lit IH 11 10 lOf lOi n loi lu| loi 10| Hi lOA lol- lop H _H 10? Year. iiS. January . , , February . . March April May June July August. . . , September. October November , December . Average . 1878. 1st to 5th. 9f n 9} H H 9J 9f H H 9 1 ,?th to ISth. 28th to 3 Ist. 9| H n H H H H 9 9 9} n H H H H H H H H 9 H Aver- age. 9J 9} 9} H H 9 9 9} H 9 9 H 1879. Ist to 5th. H L 3th to 16th H 8| 81 ' ' si 8f H H H H 8* 8| 9 10 II H 9 28th to 3 Ist. Si 8J 8 8| 8| IH lOf Aver- age. s| H 9 10^ 10| 9 Tho average price of sugu* was, then, lower in 1879 than in any of the three preceding yearti. Tho hon. gentleman, the member for Lanabton, will thus see that instead of an increase we have had an actual dcciewie in the price of sugar. 11 m H si Mr. Mackenzie— Will the hon. gentleman allow me ? What I said was this, that the tariff had the effect of raising tht; price of sugar from half a cent to over a cent a pound more than it would have been under the old tariff. Mr. White — I know a .'lat the hon. gentleman said ; I know the hon. gentIor:ian's argument ; and I have not ventured to address thi» House without being fully prepared to meet it. These are the prices of the wholesale dealers. I will repeat them: $9.50 in 1876; S10.6G in 1877; $9.34 in 1878; and «9.00 in 1879 ; it became down to $9 after this "legalized robberj'' " came into opomtion, after we had taken to " washing our own sugar," which is the highest conception that the hon. member for Centre Huron has of the business of sugar refining.* (Cheers.) In 1879, after the adoption of this pOiicy, the refinery in Montreal reopened its doors to the great joy aud delight of many workingmen who had been hoping against hope that the time would come when they would be earning a fair day's wages for an honest day's work. The first effect was to lov/er the price of sugar. It was argued that t'-is was owing to the large amount of sugar in store, which had been brought into the country in anticipation of the new t&riff". The refinei'ies were then blamed for dropping the price one cent a pound. But another effect was produced. Not only was the price last year less than it wa'' three years ago, but in times of scarcity and speculative excitemciit in regard to svgar, the homo industry has kept down prices. In November last, a faco which will probably answer the hon. member for Lambton (Mr. Mackenzie), sugar was quoted in New York at $8 per 100 pounds, net cash in bond after the drawback was deducted. Under the tariff of hon. gentlemen opposite the cost in New York would have been $8, adding to which 25 per cent, and one cent duty, and freight and the other charges, would have made the total cost of the •NoTK.— The following, which appears in the report on ths adulteration of food, issued by the Inland Revenue Department, from Dr. J. Baker Edwards, the Public Analyst at Montreal, will show that not only has the price of sugar been cheapei to the poopV^ of Canada in conse- quence of the re-opening of the sugar vcfineryt but that its quality hn« been better. ■ " The eramiaation of several samples of moist sugar of American make, during last winter, proved that a gradual deterioration in the quality of sugar imported was observed. On f^e other hand, the new stocks produced from the Mo.iv I refinery, examined in May last, sho a largi average amount of crystalline cane sugar and a timall amount of moisture and organic impurities., the avLi u.ge of six samples being thus stated :— Average. " Crystalliied cane sugar 90*33 "muoose 5-00 " Moisture and impurity 4*66 99-95) " These are superior to the average qualities both of the American and Scotch sugars recently sold in the Montreal marke^ 12 sugar in Canada 811.35 per 100 pounds. The highest price reached in Canada last year was $10.33, and that, I think, is a sufficient answer to the hon. gentleman. (Cheers). Then I have another illustration to give. In June, IStY, when there was no refinery in Canada, a sharp rise took place in sugar. In New York at that time granulated sugar was quoted at $7.84, net cash in bond, and the price in Canada, under the tariff of hon. gentlemen opposite, rose to $11.62 per 100 pounds. Last year, however, when the price in New York went up to $8, the price in Canada was only $10.73. (Hear, hear). The fact, therefore, is that the people of Canada, instead cf having their sugar increased in price, have got it cheaper than they would have done had not the present tariff come into operation. But there is another view. The price is higher than it was a few months^ ago, but it has gone up in sympathy with the increase in the cost of raw sugar. Here are the facts. Between Aprii and November last year raw sugar advanced 49^ per cent, in New York, and refined 31 per cont, while refined in Canada only advanced 27J per cent. (Cheers.) The facts I have given are not mere suppositions, not mere deductions from assumed conditions, but literal facts, and hon. gentlemen opposite cannot shut their eyes to their true significance. I am aware that you will see in the Globe and other organs of hon. gentlemen opposite, from time to time, figures to show that there there has been a large increase in the price of sugar, figures comparing things which are dissimilar, refiners' prices in New York, with merchants' prices in •Canada; but the facts I have submitted are not based on calculations or suppositions, or mere estimates based upon some form of argument, but are actual facts showing that we have lost nothing but gained A/astly in consequence of the establisment of the refinery.* And, that * NoTK.— It is ii common method with the Opposition speakers and newspapers to cite the refiuers' price of sugar in Now York, and adding duty, under the Cartwright tariff, and charges, compare it with merchants' prices in Canada, to prove that prices have gone up in consequenca of the changes in the tariiT. We had three or four years without a refinery in Canada, and if this argument is of any value, the Canadian consumer should have been getting his sugar at the New York prices in bond, with duty, under the Cartwrigh', tariff, and charges added. What wps the fact? In 1876, the average price in New York was $().16, to which add duty and charges, under old tariff, $2.84, and the price of sugar in Canada should have been nine dollars. As a matter of fact, it was $9.50. In 1877, the price in New York averaged $7.02, to which add duty and charges, $3.05i,and the average price should have been $10 07i. It was in fact $10.66. In 1878 the average price was $i\M, adding duty and charges, $2,803, making $8,833, while the actual price averaged $9.34. Here, for convenience of reiorence, is the price which sugar ought to have been sold for in Canada in 1876, 1877 and 1878 respectively, according to the argument now used) and the price at which it was actually sold ati with the excess :— 1876 $9.00 $9.50 excess, 50 cents. 1S77 10.07i 10.66 " 58* " 1878 8.83| 9.34 " 50} " Or an average of fifty-three cents above the Now York price, with duty and charges added. inc inc st CO(j rec is fri< th< I 13 being the case, let us ask if the country has been benefited in other respects by the establishment of this industry. The hen. member for Centre Huron talked about the 300 people engaged in the refinery. Now, there are 400 male adults employed therein. The emploj'^s are not, as in some industries, boys, children and young women, but male adults, many of them being heads of families. And there are other industries connecting with the sugar refinery. There is the stave industry, and I may state that a large market has been opened for staves in consequence of the re-opening of the refinery. Then the coopers who make the barrels are benefited, and the coal-owners receive no small amount of benefit ; since for every ton of sugar that is made, about a ton of coal is consumed. That fact should encourage our friends from Nova Scotia. But above allj a trade is being established with the West Indies, which will certainly assume large proportions. One peculiarity of this industry is that it not only employs the people of the country, but it tends to establish a foreign trade of the best and most valuable kind. Last year I quoted from the American apostle of free trade, Mr. Wells, T will not repeat the quotation, but will simply remind hon. gentlemen that that gentleman, whose opinions ought to be accepted by them as gospel, whose opinions are of such importance that when the Depression Committee met some years ago the first evidence taken was a letter from Mr. Wells, states that the sugar industry, from the point of view of developing and building up a foreign trade, ought always to be maintained and promoted. (Hear, hear.) It will be admitted that anj'^thing that developes the shipping interest of Montreal is a matter of Dominion concern. That will be admitted by all parties, and I am sure, therefore, that the House will be glad to iearn that this policy has had an important influence in that direction. I quote from the report of the Chairman of the Harbor Trust of Montreal as follows: — " It may not be out of place here to ray that in looking whence the increaee in revenue was derived, the first large item was from sugar. The imports of this article were, via the St. Lawrence, in IS'iS, over twelve million pounds, say . .12,289,843 lbs., and in 18t9 64,37C,656 lbs., an increase of 52,085,813 lbs., and which yielded to the revenue $7,800 more than the previous ytar. " To bring this quantity ot sugar to our wharves there were employed ^besides partial cargoes) no less than 45 vessels laden with sugar, aggregating 20,731 tons, and whose tonnage dues yielded to the harbor a revenue of $4,552, while it may be safely estimated that the outward wharfage dues paid on these vessels was not less than $6,000 more. 14 "Coal is another large item of increase, the imports wia the harbor for 1879 being 189,231 tons und for the previous year 142,754 " The o'lantity from the Maritime Provinces last year 55,917 tons 4ind this year 117,256 " ■an increase of 61,339 tons " The additional revenue derivable from this source is on coal, $4,600, and the increase of tonnage and the wharfage ortward will make this item at least as c^uch wore." That is one of the results oi' the adoption of the National Policy, and everyone must admit that it has been beneficial to the shipping interests of the St. Lawrence, I saw a petition of the Board of Trade of the city of St, Catharines the other day, which referred to the prac. tical benefits to internal navigation which would result from cheapening the charges on shipping at Montreal. Then there is the question of THE WEST INDIA TRADE, the great importance of which may bo inferred from the fact that hon. gentlemen opposite were negotiating to give a direct money subsidy to a steamship company to carry the mails to those islands, and thus pro- mote the trade with them. I think that was a wise policy, for I regard the West India trade as perhaps the most important feature in connec- tion with the development of the foreign trade of this country. (Hear, hear.) We have just had laid on the table a return of the imports for the six months ending 31st December in 1878 and 18t9 respectively. Taking sugar of all sorts for the sake of my argument, I find that the imports from Great Britain in 1878 amounted to 19,038,564 lbs. In 1879 they were about 9,961,195 lbs. The imports from the United States in 1878 were 36,635,630 lbs., but last year they were reduced to 8,227,462 lbs. The imports from the British and Spanish West Indies were 4,517,857 lbs. in 1878, and last year they were increased to 56,030,051 lbs. (Cheers.) Thus from Great Britain we imported a little more than over half as many pounds as we had imported the lcd : — " That tlie renewal of reciprocal trade between the United States and the Do- minion of Canada and other British Provinces of North Aniori';a, will be of great benefit to the people of this Commonwealth ; and this Legislature desires that Con- gress may provide for a competent commission to co-operate with the State Depart- ment under such regulations as shall be de'jmed expedient, with a view of applying principles of reciprocity to so much of the trade betweeon the two countries as may promote their mutual interests. " And His Excellency, the Governor, is hereby requested to transmit a copy of this resolution to each of our Senators and Representatives in Congress for their earnest consideration.'' That, sir, iS the resolution paseed only last week in the Protectionist House of Eeprosontatives of the Protectionist State of Ma.ssachusett8, showing that far from there being any disposition to retaliate, there is a disposition to draw nearer and closer the bonds of commercial con- nection between the two countries, with a view of vbringing about that free interchar.ge of such article-s as may fairly be interchanged between the two countries without injury to either, but on the contrary to their great mutual advantage (cheers.) So I think we ma}^ say that as to these particular predictions they have not up to the present time been realized. But there are some objections which hon. gentlemen have urged to this policy. They tell us that PRICES HAVE GONE UP J they tell us the poor man has to pay much more for everything he pur- chases, and that he gets no more for his labor. "Well, Si"_ I might satisfy myself on this point by saying that the testimony of hon. g'^n- tlcmen opposite is that increased prosperity invariably brings hlghei prices (hear, hear). I might refer to the fact that the hon. member for Centre Huron, in his speech only the other night, admitted that he trusted to increased prices in his last budget speech, for ar increase of revenue which would enable him to bring the revenue and expenditure to an equilibrium. (Hear, hear.) Here, from the (speech ot the hon. gentleman, is what he said : — " We ha.-c been blamed for not imposing further taxes in 1876. What was our position then ? ,We had recently imposed heavy taxes. We knew that we were very close to the true effective limits of indirect taxation, and also thai a slight revi^ vol in the price of ordinary staple articles ^ould suffice to restore our revenue, and therefore we determined that it was our duty to practir-e the strictest economy, and to exhaust all reasonable means before adding any further to the burden of the people " So t\ >t that hon. gentleman himself actually based his hopes of a restoration of the equilibrium between revenue and expenditure upoa r: I'l I I 24 the coming better times, and the coming of better prices as the conse- quence of those better times, which he looked forward to in the early future. Not only that, but ho also said, accounting for sveh pjposperity as he ad.nits we are now enjoying : — <' The facts are that while we have been blessed with a remarkably good harvest, there uas been a great scarcity, amounUng to positive famine, existing through a large portion of Europe ; that prices and wages have gone up ii^ the United State?, and, as a consequence, there is an improvement in that country — an improvement which gives js better sales for our lumber, and, in certain cases, better rates of trans- port for our transportation companies.'' Thus we have the hon. gentleman, who only the other night tc Id us that higher prices are evidences of increased prosperity, at the same time telling us that higher prices are a curse to the people of ^'ns coun- try. But I happen to liave here another authority — a couple of ex- tracts from the leading organ of the Opposition, to the same effect. On February 3rd the Toronto Globe was iirging the importance of the im- mediate construction of the Ontario & Quebec Eailway, and concluded its argument in these wovda : — " It is unnecessary to add tiiat now is the time to proceed with the business. We are on the eve of a revival of business all the world over. With (he revival will come a general rite in the price of material and labour, by means of which the cost of railroad-building will soon be almost doubled. At present labor is to be had in cny quantity for very little money ; but if time is lost, and the work of grading, and so forth, only entered upon when the good times come, the Company will be competing for labour in an understocked m^rkct, and the great opportunity now presented will have passed away." Then again in a later article on the conduct of the Finance Minis- tor in adopting to some extent speeitic instead of ad valorem duties in his tariff, the same authority said : " All these undesirable features are, in Sir Leonard's eyes, ofr^et by the capacity of specific duties to prevent the revenue from /ailing in hard times, when the value of forrifjn merchandise is falling, and thus to avoid the necessity of the Government en- teriujj upon the same course of economy which circumstances have forced upon the people." That is a statement that hard times mean falling prices. (Hoar, hear.; The writer then points out the necessity for the Government auupiing a course of economy, and proceeds : " His specific duties will yield him no more because ol4lie very great increase of values of the importation which has taken place and is ftill proceeding. Fortunately for the revenue, he has left a portion of his tax'is in the ad valorem shape, and conse- quently he has not entirely thrown away the increased revenue to be obtained from rising values. But he has dono enough in this direction entirely to vitiate any con- clusion that the increase of revenue will accompany the increased value of importa- 26 tions as it formerly did. As we a:-e now undoubtedly in the presence of a rising tide, •the grand effect of the N. P. on the revenue is seen to be that it will again prevent us from reaping benefits which we should have reaped if the tariff had been Itft alone." There is a statement that the prices of importations are increasing and that the inoi'ease is still proceeding — not because of the National Policj'', but because of the restoration of better times. A id what is the charge that is made against the hon. the Finarce Minister ? That while prices are going up in consequence of better times, the hon. gentleman is not going to tax the people additional on the ad valorem principle, on these higher prices, but he is going to leave their taxation at the same rate as before the increase took place (hear, hear). That is the argument used against the hon. gentleman. Then we are toid that there have been a great many FAILURES UNDER THIS SYSTEM. Well, unfortunately I believe there will always be failures in com- mercial transactions. I heard a merchant of wide experience in commercial aflFairs say that of all the men who entered business not more than ten per cent, succeeded. But, sir, whether that is true or not, what are the actual facts with regard to the failures of last year? Are they due in any way to the National Policy ? Are they not on the contrary due in the first instance to the fact that men who had been hoping against hope, who had been struggling under the policy of the hon. gentlemen opposite, were compelled at last to give up. {Hear, hear,) And in addition to that, the announcement made in this House last year that the Insolvency Act would bo repealed within « year, induced manj men who had doubts about their position to go through the Insolvency Court in order that they might start afresh with the revival of trade. The hon. member for North Perth (Mr. Hesson) made a statement the other night, which it is worth repeating, that of the failures of 1879 nearly fort}^ per cent, occurred before the National Policy was adopted at all, (Hear, hear.) Surely it will not be pretended that the National Policy was responsible for those failures. During the last quarter of the year, when it may be fairly assumed the National Policy had commenced to have some influence on the trade ^f the country, only sixteen per cent, of all the failures of the year took place. Yet these hon. gentlemen aggregate the figures and throw them broadcast through the Dominion, in order, if possible, to show that there had been no revival in the commercial condition of the country. Now 1 t me give you as a proof that the i r 11 26 knowledge of the fact that we wei'e goiug to repeal the insolvency law had something to do with the number of failures, the experience of our friends on the other side. I find that in 1818, when, as eveiy one knows, times were beginning to bo better in the Uuited States, there were a larger number of failures than had ever taken place in one year in the United States. I find in thrt year ihere were 10,478 failures, and that the aggregate sum involved in those failures amounted to i$234,383,132. What is the remark made by the compiler of the work from which I quote, Mr. Spoffr"d, the Librarian of Congress, in relation to those figures? He says: "The larger proportional numbci* " of failures in 1878 is attributable to the repeal of the National " Bankrupt law takii.g efl'ect September 1, 1878, and availed of by " many seeking a discharge from their obllgstions." That, sir, ie precisely the same experience as has taken place here. A statement was made by one of the hon. gentlemen opposite giving some specific facts in regard to the failures that had taken place. When hon. gentlemen. deal in generalities it is hard to meet them; but when they come down to specific facts as they did on the sugar question, in regard to which I think I have successfully met them, they are readily answered. SOME CASES OP FAILURE. The hon. member for West Elgin (Mr. Casey) undertook to go into some specific facts in relation to the National policy. His speech was in reply to the speech of the hon, member for Lincoln (Mr. Eykert) and the hon. member for Lincoln took the trouble, as any hon. gentlemen should do when the merchants, business men and manufacturers of his constituency are traduced as those were by hon. gentlemen opposite, to enquire into their statements, and he has been kind enough to give me the result of his enquiries in the replies of those gentlemen. Now, sir, what do we find ? The hon. gentleman said tnat Yale & Co. had failed as the result of the National policy. And yet we find that the attach- ment -n insolvency was issued in 1877. (Cheers.) He stated that the Dolphin Manufacturing Co. w.as in the hands of an assignee ; and yet, sir, we find that the attachment was "asued in April, 1878, when the hon. gentlemen opposite, to the great misfortune of this country, still occupied seats on this side of the House. (Cheers.) Then we are told that Simpson's ship yard had been closed as the result of the National policy. The attachment was issued in 1877, when the hon. gentlemen opposite were still in power. (Cheers.) Then we are told that E. H. Smith & Co.'s saw works had applied for exemption from taxation for five years, that so oppressed were they that they were m 27 ii- compelled to apply for some little modicum oi" relief from the National policy in exemption from municij)al taxation. Now here is a telegram from Mr. Smith. He says : "March 22, 1880. « J. C. Eykert, M.P. :— " Letter received. Have employed one-fourth more men last six months than game period in five years. Exemption was agreement in eighteen seventy-three for ten years, when new shop started. Worked over-time this winter. Believe N. P. a good thing. "R. H. SMITH & 00." (Cheers.) Then we are told that Collinson, Burch & Co. had a mon- opoly, and were, therefore, making a living in spite of the National policy. Here is their statement : '< March 22. " We have been benefitted very much by the National policy ; have increased our capacity nearly double, and are employing a larger number of hands. " COLLINSON, BURCH & CO." (Cheers.) Then we are told that the Cotton Batting Co. were going out of business, and that one man only was employed. Here is their statement: « March 22. " Tell tii3 members of the House of Commons that the St. Catharines Cotton Batting Co. would not be in Canada to-day had it not been for the National policy, and if the duty is taken off they will take the machinery back to the other side, as we can get co'.ton cheaper and save freight, which is quite a consideration. Americans are tryibg to rtm us out of Canada by selling lower than the real cost of the goods, and*i^ they shut us up will raise the price in twenty-four hours. We are able to judg^ as we sell more cotton batting in this part of Canada than all the factories combined. We would ask for a further increase of duty. " GEORGE L. TOWERS, '• St. Catharines Cotton Batting Company." These men who were destroyed by the increase actually want a further increase. It cannot, therefore, be said that the high duties have injured them. (Cheers.) The next statement is in reference to Oilc's foundry. I know Mr. Gile very well, and used to meet him in connection with the Board of Trade. He was a pretty sound protectionist, and a good sound clear grit. We were told by the hon. gentleman from West Elgin that he used to emploj' 60 men in 1878. and that he only employed 10 now. Well, here is Mr. Oile's statemen i, which I suppose the hon. gentleman opposite will accept: — «' March 23. "Beptembor, 1878, nineteen men employed ; September, 1879, seventeen; now until May next, thirty-seven I "GEORGE N. OILE." ii 28 We wore next told that the St. Catharines Stove Works were for sale; but Mr. Merritt, who is interested in this concern, says : '' March 2.3. « National Policy had nothing to dc with stove works closing. The directors felt the policy was decidedly beneficial to their business. "THOS. R. MERRITT." (Cheers.) We were alsr told that the St. Catharines Wheel Works were closed vind that 80 men formerly employed there now owe their want of emploj'ment to the terrible burden of the National policy. Well, what we find is this, in a letter from a gentleman connected with the works : "March 22. " Dear Sib, — The closing of the wheel works here arises solely from the fact that, owing to the death of one of the partners (the one who attuuded to the business), and the inability of the other, from pr«>s8 of other business, to attend to it, the partnership had to be wound up. The business is upon a much healthier lootins; than it was two years ago, and to any one who will attend to it and run it, it will pay a very handsome return, thanks to the market that the P. N. has now secured for it. Had the Mac- kenzie Goverqment remained in power and adhered to their same policy, the winding up of this busine(>a would not have been solely contingent on the death of the managing partner. " Yours truly, «WM. CHAPLIN, " For John Drbw & Co." (Cheers.) Then the Welland Vale Works, we are told, did not employ half the men formerly employed there. Here is the reply fo that statement : — « St. Catharinks, Ont., March 22nd, 1880. " Dear Sir, — I am in receipt of your letter of the 19th instant, informing me that ' Mr. Casey and others have asserted in the House that the National policy has < injured us severely, that the number of men employed has decreased, that we only ' ran about half time,' and requesting me to state in reply what effjct the N. P. has had on our business. " I suppose wc should be grateful to Mr. Casey and our other free trade frieads for the great intereet they now manifest in our welfare ; but when we remember ho.v they treated us during the time they had the power of practically demonstrating the genuineness of that interest, we do not take much stock in their expressions of sym- pathy. You may, however, safely assure them that we can endure a good deal of such injury as the N. P. is doing us without any «^reat ■)utcry on our part. You may also venture to say on our behalf that we are employing 50 per cent more men now than we did during the last year of the existence of the Mackenzie Government, and would and eould employ a still greater number if we could now get them. It was during the days of the late Governmenr that we ran half or part time. You may still further say, and no doubt this will be news to Mr. Casey and the others, that notwithstanding the exclusion of American scythes, forks and hoes to a very 29 great extent, thcBe goods are being sold by Canadian manufactmois at Icbs price* than the manufacturers in the United States are getting in their own unirkct. '■ Yours truly, " WM. CHAPLIN, " Manager." (Cheers.) Then, sir, we were told Mr. Sullivan's machine shop Avas in the hands of an assignee. Mr. Sullivan writes that this was due to losses sustained in other respects, and he gives strong testimony in favor of the National policy. Then we have the statement that the Lybster Cotton Mills had been shut down for three months, and that the wages were reduced 10 per cent. The answer to that is— " Merhiton, March 23. "The National policy our only salvation. September. 18Y8, employed one hun- dred and eighty-five hands (185), fortnightly wages sixteen hundred dollars (|1600) ; September, 1879, two hundred hands (200), wages seventeen hundred dollars ($1700) ; xMarch, 1880, two nundred and ten hands (210), wages seventeen hundred and fifty dollars ($1750). "JAMES PEIOR." 1 think now we may fairly say that where these gentlemen enter iipon particulars and challenge us to give them evidence of increased pros- perity, we can answer them as soon as the telegraj^h can bring the information. (Cheers.) CANADIAN EMIGRATION. Another argument which is used is that a great many people are moving from the different provinces into the Western Status, and many into our own Northwest, and we are told that this is the result of the National Policy. Those gentlemen, however, know that the exodus from the different parts of old Canada is in no way due to the National Policy. It is largely due to the fact that the farmers have become involved, that their families are growing up about them, and thct they see no prospect of getting for their boys and girls farms in their imme- diate vicinity. Consequently they go off to the Western States or our own Northwest, where they have better chances of beginning over again. This exodus is the result of years of depression. But there is another fact to which it is also due, viz : that on this continent there is a restless migratory spirit which induces the people to move from one part of the country to another. We find that hosts of people who had settled within the last decade in Kansas and Texas have moved to other '^lortions of the Union, and the same process is and has been going on on this side of the line, as has been going on on the other side of the line. Take the census of the United States for 18*71 ; and what do we find ? Canada at that time had lost a half a million of her popula- te,! i w 30 tion; that is, half a million of CaiiadianH were found in the United States, or nearly 14 per cent, of the Canadian population were on the other Bide of the lines. Eut we find this fact, that twelve States of the Union had each lost a larger proportion of its population than had Canada. (Hear, hear.) The same migratory spirit existed there as existed here. The ten States east and south of Lake i*]rie, all were prosperous and all looked upon as most important ; yet these had lost 27 per cent, of their native born population. They had lost ])opulation that had gone into other parts of the Union. New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania were all prosperous States, and yet from the State of Now York over a million of the nafve born population of the State had left, or ?! per cent. ; from Ohio 800,000 people had left, or 30 per cent. ; and Pennsylvania lost 690,000 of its native born population or 19 per cent. In fact it is well icnown that the Western States absorbed the whole of this exodus, and have been largely built up by it. We had then practi- ally no North-west. We had up to within a year or so, no means of ingress to that country, so that people preferred to go into the Western States of America. But I believe that this story of emigra- tion to the Western States of America, — which is one of the most marvellous stories in the history of the movements of populations, — 1 believe that that same story will be repeatc^ on this side of the line in those Western territories of ours. (Cheers.) How have the Western States developed themselves in tht last half century ? By the last census in the Western States, including the State of Michigan, there were 12,298,381 people, and the statement is made that now the population of those States is 18,000,000. Fifty yeiu's ago only tive of these Western States appeared in the census returns, namely: Michigan, Indiana, Missouri, Arkansas and Wisconsin, and these had only a population of 702,958. Forty years ago. two more States — Wisconsin and Iowa — had been added, and the aggregate population of the seven States had reached 1,929,589. Thirty years ago four more States had been added — Minnesota, California, Oregon and Texas, the favorite State of the hon. member for Lambton. There were in that year 3,951,31r() people in those eleven States. Minnesota, which to-day has 800,000, had at that time only 6,000 people. Twenty years ago, all the 14 States had 8,241,341, and 10 years ago the popu- lation of those Slates had increased to about 12,398,381. If you take sojne special examples of increase in population on that side, we may fairly anticipate what may be uone on (his side of the line. Kansas, in 1870, had a population of 364,399 ; in 1879 it had 849,978, or an increase of 133 per cent. In 1870 Nebraska had 122,993; in 1879 it had 386,410, or an increase in nine years of 2U per cent. Minnesota had in 1870 a popu- lation of 439,706 ; in 1875 597,407, an increase in live years of 36 per cent. What are the lessons this enormous increase teaches us? They leach us that if we arc true to ourselves in connection with the