A ^: IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) V {/ ^<. {anchc>s aioMtAaa lors dune restauration apparaissent dari9 la tf/xta, mais. lorsque ci la Atait possible, cas pages r. ont pat At* film^as. n Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommag^es D Pagtfs restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculies B Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages dAcolordes, tachetaes ou piquees I I Pages detached/ D Pages datachees Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of prir Quality inigale de I'imprassion I I Showthrough/ I I Quality of print varies/ □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du mstirial supplimantaire nOnly edition available/ Seule future, as In tlu' past, is dosiroiiH of cultivating and extcrdlng lra provid- ed that during Ihe contlntuuicc of any such arrangenuMit tlu! coasting Iraile of Jornada and of the United HtalcM nIioiiIiI be thrown Opi^n to vcHselsof both conntrlcM on ti foot! tig or complete reelpioeal ci|uallly, imd that ves- sels of all kinds built. In the Unlied Htates or Canada may be own il an«l salh>d by the cltlKons of theothf^r and bo entitled to registry In eltlier country and to all thebenetlls there- to appertain l.ig. Mil Tun-Kii (Pietou).— T was somewimt »urpris<>d, Mr. Spt alter, tiiis afternoon, after a htutctucnt miulc with such asiuuan.'e and with such exult.ontleman who has led the otiier side in this debate, that from the maritime provinces especially should come a wail for unrestricted recip- rocity. I was somewhat surprised, I say, Mr. Speaker, under those circum.stauces that when a question said to be exciting such an amount of interest among the business people of the Maritime provinces was brought before us by a gentleman old in politics, a gentleman well acquainted with political strategy, a member representing liis party from tlie province of Nova Ucotia, to see him travelling back to the dusty journals of this House for 18H7, in order to attempt to bring arguments to bear against the Liberal-Conservative party on a charge of having been at one time diKloyal to the interests of tlie empire. It struck me as a curious commentary upon the boasted strength of ♦heir principles, initiated iu bringing tlu! main resolution Ixifore this house, that an hon. gentleman holding the position that the hon. gentleman fnun Hali- fax (Mr. .fones) the senior member from his county, does, tiiat he thought it necessary, and thought it wise, to hibor, and hopelessly laboi for sonu' minutes before the parlia- ment of (^aiuula with an argument so puor- iW and so weak. The hon. gentleman de- voted some Mine to calling the attention of the house to wliat his conttuition actually was, that contention i)cing that the langimgo which he quoted from the mouth of Lord Elgin, re|)resonting the crown in this count- ry, conv(!yed sentiments traitorous to the crown and sentiments at »Hriance to the sentiment which brought about tho con- nection of tids country with tho mother country, and which servos to this day to maintain that connoctitm. It spomH strange to mc that the hon. gentleman had not rexi a little more diligently tho journals of 1867. since ho turned his attention to old and /Vl I i*. W--^> KL-^UJ ancient literature, because on page 248 of theBame volume he would have found that that parliament by him thought to be so disloyal, by him thought to be so in favor of sentiments of independence from the mother coimtry, had resolved : "That In the opinion of this house the in- terests as well of the British empire as of the Dominion and of tlie several provinces ot wS It Is composed will be best promoted bv the mnlntenanco and consolidation ot tne existing union, and thut this houne confident- ly trusts that due attention to the interests of the people of the whole Dominion and a wise and Judicious course of legislation will result lu the general acceptance of the union by tlie inhabitants of the Dcmlulon and conJuce to the well being and harmony of the whole countrv." In support of that resolution he would have found the names of gentlemen whom I hope it is not unparliamentary to mention by name, and which I do for convenience sake, the nmes of Cartwright, Mackenzie and Mills— landmarks Uiat perhaps might have induced him to steer cleor of a point such as tho one he had raised I think the lion, gentlemen in this house will be amazed when they reflect that before six o'clock the arguments of tlie hon. member for Halifax (Mr. Jones) .'.'re so few, that the arguments of the hon. gentleman were so weak, that up to that time he had liardly readied the rc- solutioi), and hon. gentlemen will be just as surprised that a tiiiitleman occupying the prominent i)ositi()n tliat he does in meroiu- tile business in the province of Nova Scotia, and dealing as he said himself every day in the lish marky him in publico in his own prov- ince, and in this house, and in the chamber of commerce of Ihe.it.v hv repirsents. Ho knew, and tlierefore feared that those utter- ances would be brought against him, and ho pretended to go over the wliole ot them, stating some of them, and endeavoring to follipw his l.-a(h'r l.y spuming and treating with contempt any charge of inconsistency. Ihit it did amuse, Mr. Siieakcr, and it somewhat pleiis.d me as a Canadian, to hear the lion, gentl.niiin, who, within this house, last sesHion, indignantly deni.ul that he was a Canadian in anv other sense than by an act of Parliiiincnt whi.h he abused and whi.h lie vilified, declare to-night, after his leader Ironi yueens. Prince Edward Island (Mr, Uavies) that ho was going to follow the M M banner that had upon it the inscription ^'Let us consider the interests of Canada, first," and not only so, Mr. Speaker, but I re- member that this hon. gentleman fought under a banner only a year ago — hardly a year ago— which had inscribsd upon it "Nova Scotia for the Nova Scotians against Canada for the Canadians" ; under a banner upon which was inscribed the words " Don't forget that r(-peal means reciprocity ; only by repeal can we get reciprocity," and yet he adds to this new banner which he flaunts in the air to-day the words " reciprocity or re- peal," thus reversing all of the mottoes and every old standard in'that respect. No one can blame him. His leader in this debate, the member for South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartwright) has boldly announced that there is a complete change of front, and that his party are a unit upon the principle to which they were diametrically opposed a short time ago. I ask you Mr. Speaker, in all earnestness, and I ask through you the peo- ple of this country, whether hon. gentlemen in this house representing the interests of Canada, representing the interests of ,heir constituents, can so glibly go behind a re- cord? I ask you, Mr. Speaker, if it is mere- ly a charge of inconsistency with which they are now met V In my opinion the position of the Liberal party, as announced in tills iiousc and in this debate, 's of more serious character tliau which they suppose. They cannot go be- hind the "record in that mantKir. They cannot say that what tliey tbought a few years agoor a year ago can be all iipsci now. The hon. memher for South Oxford said he would nut waste time over charges of incon- sistency. I say that the charges standing against liiiu to-day, lirought in tliis debate and still unanswen^d. an! cliarges of a gross breach of faith on tli.- part of the great poli- tical party lor which he speaks— charges of A violation of distinct and emphatic pledges made by the leaches of his pariy all over the country more than a year ago to capital and labor, which have embarked so much in this com. try under those pledges. I'rom 18C7 almost down to .R87 every capitalist and laborer in Cunadu, from the Atlantic to the I'aciac, had the right to believe that both political parties in the coimlry were pledged to reciprocity in the natural products of the two couutries, and no other. Not (Uily by the statementH of thdr leader at Malvern, but by resolutions moved in this house, it is dear that both parlies in this Parliament had pledged to the manufacturing interests that their monov wur safe. a far that An hon. member — No. Mr. TuppEB (Pictou)— An hon. gentleman says " no," but he in his position is bound to say " no " to any proposition propounded by us in this debate. Hon. gentlemen op- puaitf^ are in a desperate position, and they are safe to say "no " when their late leader is on the other side of the ocean. Bat that leader, when he said he spoke not only for himself, but for the party he represented, and especially for Sir Richard Cartwright — for he named him— that leader pledged his party not to play the bull in the China shop if they were returned to power at the last election ; but you have never seen more furious bulls than the hon. gentlemen who have attacked the manufacturers and the vested interests of his country. They speak as if these men alone are guilt> of these norrible combinations in trade, although they know that guilds have invaded other countries than Canada, even England, the mother of froe trade. But it is a serious charge which I bring against these hon. g(!nt'emen, and it cannot be answered in a flil)pant manner, but must be squarely met ; and I will ask the house to listen to some proofs which I will adduce in suppoit of it. \Ve had ini admitted organ of the Liberal party in 1880 using this language; "What is tlic main promise of those who wlFh todctacli th- Dominion from (Jreat Brit- ain In orilcr to make the iMtuntry a prewu-yo lor Yankee niiMHitaeturers, who are totally unal)le toeoiupeie with Hritlsh inanuraclur- ers on lair terms? That the prodneers ot our raw exports irniv piln free admission to a market of r)'t,oo(l,(»oo people. 'I'lie Inlerenco which It Is hoped that Ignorant people will draw Is that the wlioU" .Viuerlean peoplo would siraighlway wish to purchase ( ana- dlanproduc<' il'a /ollverelii were eslal)llshed. Hut tree adiulssion (o the markets of Oalllor- nla, Oregon, Nevada, Idaho, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Kansas. Missouri, Kentucky, Arkansas, and dozens of other Htat(>H wou d eausi- iihoni as mueli Canadian i)roduee o bo sold there as could be sold lo the Inhabitants oflhenionn. Of the r.tt,0(IO,(M)(l people iis- Numed io(>xlsl In ilie ITiilted Slates how many live in a hcallty to trade with (anada? I'ailsof the hair dozen stales ly nu; east of ioniflltuile tlOj mid l)et\veen parallelsol lall- tltiidc'tOo and l">o <'onlalii the people wttli whnm we are asked to form a eommere al union, taUin«lheirmanufa,cliir.'s at exori)!- lani prices, one little corner oi Mu' 'market oi .--.n.noa.ouop-ople' is oilerd to Canadians as the price of flielr iiatloniil exIliK^flon! Men who M(lvo<'ale a base Kurri'nder ol their count- ry for inoni'y do not cease lo l)e i»lH«UHttng tiioiurli they l)eco?'ie also rldli-ul is when it Is evMeni ihey are duped »iy thel .wu Hordld lnia«inatlon." T am readiiiB from the Toronto (Jtobi: Again on . f line H, that paper said; " Wiio can name any great slapio that do not command as hlKlitt price lu En«laud I in the United States? The American farmer gets no more for his grain than his Canadian competitor, as is evident from the fact that both send their produce to tlio English mark- et. It may be said that Canadian barley Tfouldrlseln price if admitted free to the American market. How long wou d the en- hanced price be continued ? Only till a great- er breadth of Canadian soil was devoted to raising the grain." Then, again, the same paper said : "The average yearly value of fish exports from Canada during the seven years between the termination of tiio Reciprocity Treaty and the fiscal operation of the Treaty otAJ ashing- ton,froml8(i7 to 18715, was $4,00^,375, of ■which 3,1 ,i;^7,SH9 worth was imported into the United States, and $2,805,535 worth was absorbed by other markets. Thus, under a tariflmeanttobe prohil)itive, 28 per cent, was marketed in the Unitrd States, and 73 per cent, in other countries. In the six years which have trauhpl red since the removal of duties under tie Washington Treatv. from 1871 to 187ii, these exports have averaged $5,971,887, of' which .$1,720,150 worth was imported Into the United States, and $4,251,7ai worth found other markets. The precentiige to the United States was a trifle over 28, and toother countries was a fraction over 71. Whilst tlie animal increase offish trade during this latter i)eriod average $1,958,512, only $5S2.;n7 worth reprcseiit^s exportsto theUnited States, the business with other markets having increased to the extent of $l,;i80,190 yearly average. It went on to show that the Americans paid any duty wliicli they placed on Canadian fish. That was llie position tishermen of the Miiritime provinces. Again he is reported, in his own organ, the Halifax Chronicle^ to have said : " Hmi. A. (1. .Tones said hohadoomo to lis- ten rather than tolakep"'*' tn the discussion, hut thought II was well.lo he carelul h.ny wo r,-(.cecdcd In this matter. The cause might l)(' Inlured 1)V lielug too strong in expression. Theiv was an old adagi' that It was iiol well to iM' loo anxious for a l.argaln. No pi'rson be- licvcd In reciprocity m questions ot '•ocipiocity with tl Tl li^fi,! States But the chang^■ of bane v.-,if.v i.-, suddan. It comes after 9 ge.. ;.■ > elertioh, \'hen thu*; party, defieiati -.n, ar: now hunt- a policy, at.d almosu daily pro- V oni'. " ^or v'l-s ihat are dark and tricks that are vam tiiat party lias proved ".tself most pccr.liar. The hon. gentleman tells us to-niglu he did not be- lieve in commercial union. He read from his scrap book what he said to some gentle- men who visited him in his store at Halifax. That hon. gentbiman, as we all know, has a cuiisidcialile influeii' with the Halifax Morning Chronicle, which is supposed to be the exponent of his views. He has told us ; " I do not believe in commercial union, and ne"hcr party would, 1 believe, agree to it "; bi. .lis organ, the Halifax Chronicle, did not hesitate, time and again, to use language wliich 1 would not like to use in reference to the hon. gentleman, when it said that " the Canadian wlio opposes commercitil union it: a natural-born sneak and coward." We know, and I niust mention it in justice to the writer of tliese lines in the Chnntirle, that an hon. gentleman on the back benches had the temerity, was plucky enough, to in- troduce a resolution, going the whole length of the opinions of an lion, member who is more pliable, tiie hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Chariton), a resolution gt)ing Btraight for commercial union. How did ,hon. gentlemen opposite treat this man, v.ri"cn t" .".?g f'dii, .or posing who, according to the Halifax Chronicle, was not a natural-born sneak and coward. They told him to withdraw his resolution and go in for that sentiment which the organ of the senior member for Halifax has characterised as that of a natura'-born sneak and coward. Language of that kind from the friends of hon. gentlemen opposite is, I think, unfair, and on their behalf I repudiate it I I do not think it is fair criticism 1 Now, we had a very important utterance from the hon. mem- ber for Queen's (Mr. Davies), who spoke at some length on reciprocity the other day, and who indulged in many arguments which are quite tenable by hon. members on this side, in vindicating the old reciprocity treaty and dilating on the advantages which the people of the island derived under it of send- ing their potatoes and other articles where they pleased. That hon. gentleman repre- senting the maritime contingent in 1885 in this house, on the Liberal side, moulded to- gether all these expressions of opinion, blended together these different views from the different chambers of commerce through- out Canada in favor of the old reciprocity treaty, and I would bring before the house the language the hon. gentleman used h. support of the point I am endeavoring to make. He alluded to the resolution of the Chamber of Commerce which I have read, spoke of the desirability of a renewal of the treaty of 1854, and strongly fuvorod making the fisheries a basis and meisure for further commercial relations, concluding an inter- esting speech and able argument with the following resolution : — " In view of the early termination of the llshorlcK articles of the Treaty of Washington, this House Is of opinion that negotiations should b(^ opened witli the United State.^ of America, as well lor the renewal of reciprocal relations accorded by that treaty of American citizens and IJritlsh subjects respectively, as for the opening up of additional reeiprocal trade relations between Canada and the United Slates, and that In th(' conduct of such ne(70- tlatlons Canada should be directly represent- ed." He cited, as I have said, the strong opinion in the Maritime provinces in favor of a re- newal of the old Ueciprocity treaty ; and later on, the ex-leadf r of hon. gontlemen op- posite, speaki: g fortlie whole jiarty^ stated that tiie policy of his party was the policy of a tariff for r(!vcnue purpoKcs (mly. He (h)i.- teiided that he was consistent, inasmuch la it was no new departure, because the Gov- ernment, through its extravagance, bad made it necessary tc raise a certain sum per year, and ho could not see for tlio life of him, huv- ing studied the matter in every aspect, how that tariff could be materially interfered with, aLd he pledged his party at Malvern, as strongly as any statement of his could pledge it, that even if his party came mto power, he would not play the bull in the China shop, but would respect vested interests and only abolish the duty on coal and cornmeal. I ask again, how is it, after these pledges to the people, after this declaration of policy, not only from the mouths of the statesmen of that party, but by their resolutions in this house, they should propose now this entirely new de- parture, as it is declared to be by the senior member for Halifax. The question of the tariff and of :eciprocity was threshed out, ah many others in this debate have been threshed out, bv the people at the polls ; and they understood, no matter how loudly demagogues may rant, that we could stand by the National Policy and at the same time ^tand by the interests of those concerned in the natural products of the country, and ttat we could, with the consent of the peo- ple and with their desire, as soon as pos- sible, obtain reciprocity in natural products with the United States. As a Canadian, I blushed to hear the hon. gentleman who opened this debate take the position, in sup- port of his resolution, to induce the people of this country to favor unrestricted reci- procity, that this country was in a sta'e of retrogression, and that our position wai. not Batisfactory. He told us, it is true, that great economic changes had tnken place. Ho attempted to justify this change of base, not by argument, but by tho statomont that it was due to great economic changes, and that, therefore, the charge of inconsistency was a weak one ; but he alluded to tho economic changes which took place between 18G7 and 1887 ; he alluded to none, he could cite no such changes between 1887 and 1888, and 1887 is the time when these pledges were put solemnly befo.i the people. Unlike Mr. Wiman and Mr. Kutterworth, who have shown much more skill in managing this question, and who are endeavoring to per- suade some of our countrymen to get into the position into which tlie American manu- fncturers wish tli.m to get, he argued by the hour to show tliat we wen! going metapliori- cnlly to tlie ou not have thought that any hon, gentlemaik who uned that language, must have gone bo- hind tiio hon. member tor North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) and must be advocating, as he is, some scheme different from that of the leader. Allusion had been made to an- other gentleman, the Minister of Educatioa- 4i 4.^ of the. Province of Ontario, a well-informed man, an able man, a man who is proud of his country, a man with Canadian pluck and Canadian vim. and a man who is enabled to look at Canadian affairs with hope and to take a good ,'icw of what has taken place in thfc past and of what is probable for the future. That hon. gentleman, whom I had the pleasure of meeting a short time ago, uttered then the same sentiments as those which I quote. They have been alluded to before, but I am bringing forward the words of gentlemen who occupy a position in this c mntry which I have not, gentlemen whose words cannot be confuted by hon. gentlemen opposite. The hon. gentleman, who sat for a long time in the Honse of Commons, and who is now m an important position in the Government of Ontario, was called face to face with Mr Chamberlain during the short stay which that gentleman made in Canada, and like all Canadians who are proud of their country, he was able to make a good showing for Canada, and was able to tell that distin- guished gentleman from England thatr— "It is Canadian enterprise tliat has made this country. It is a great deal to have done that. Hud ho seen it fifty .or forty, or, per- haps, thirty-five ycar.s airo, or tiiirty years ago, wlieuour forests were unbroken, when our Industries were undeveloped, and when we had scarcely a mile of railway, he would have said that not even tiie most enthusiastic and sanguine expectations could have hoped for a conditionol" national prosperity such as we have in Canada to-day. He also said : " There Is abroad a spirit " Is it a spirit of despair, as the hon. gentle- man would tell us. a loss of national hope and a feeling of dependency upon our neigh- bors? Not so. Ho says: " There is abroad a spirit of enterprise wijlch only awaits the natural growth '^"fVV.'X?., Pr^ ment of ordinary opportunities and time .to produce results which we can ^'ircoly date oven to imagine in case we s' .uld be chaiged with exaggeration or perliap.- somotlUng worse. There are $174,000,000 in our swings bank, and of paid-up capital ot our 'ajways there are ,H0U;i,OO0,0OO. We possess ail the ad- vantages of civilization, and aro surrounded by all those Influenees whicli tend to '"ake up a peaceful, happy and contented people. I am gl'id he luvs s." n these tilings, for It has some- times struck Intelligent Canadians, when they have be.«n visiting the old (country that among Kuglishmen-tliough not ol c<>"if'. among those of Birmingliam, naught 'r)- there exist very erronccnis Ideas with ngard to the civlilzation and comforts and liapplness of the Canadian people." And that is the language used in 1888, by a •ftder among the gentlemen who stand up here and sing, as the hon. gentlemanl^who' spoke last sang, monruful ditties in refer- ence to the condition of our people! So in advocating this commercial union, or unre- stricted reciprocity, or anything which may gei our necks under the yoke of American manufacturers, Canada is referred to by the gentleman who has promoted it so much, in a pamphlet which is called Commercial Pamphlet No. 4, in which he takes issue with these hon. gentleman : " By a uniform tariflf against all nations, dlxe has shown her real and complete commercial independence, and under the condition has made a progress and attained a position or which every Canadian has good reason to bo proud." Now, why do they not, like men, come and face the isue and discuss it on the merits, and not occupy the time of this Chamber and the time of this country by abusing this country, by minimising its resources, by tell- ing us everything has gone wrong ? Why do they not come up like men, as Mr. Wyman has done, and as I believe, as fai as I have seen, Mr. Butterworth has done, and tell us plainly that the reason why we should join our destiny with that of the United States is not on account of our poverty but on account of our strength, and that, as enterprising men who have built up industries here, as Mr. Wiman iays, and have built up a positi( n which should bring pride to every Canadian heart, we will be benefited '.by joining our destinies with theirs, and marching on in the same line with them, of united prosperity. I could respect the arguments of the Liberal party in that line, but, instead of that, they take up the whole time by keeping as far away from that resolution, as far away from the particulars of that resolution; as far Bway from the t.ariff that would be framed under that resolution, as Tur away from the condi- tion of the revenue which would result under that resolution as possible, and by talking to us about our miserable and wretched state. They know, Mr. Speaker, that iheir position is unsound, and is oppopf>'' to the latest utterances of uny of them whei. peak- ing without strong feeling of partizanship. Now, I have cited some evidence ; and I would recall, too, the eloquent language of tlie late hinder of that party, a gentleman now regaining health, I liope, on the other side of tlie world. That hon. gentleman was able to si)eak in the most eloquent langu- age at Edinburgh, when he met an old colleague of Mr. Clianiberlains. He told Mr. Oladstoue, and was able to boast in Edin- -Ti 8 burgh, of the magnificent strides in the path of progress made by his native province of Ontario. He used language thf>-t I wish to God we could hear oftener from him and from his colleagues in this house. It is the language used on this side of the house, it is language that would give hope to the young men of thjs country, and would spur us on to greater endeavors in the future. The hou. gentleman who leade in this debate, on the other side of the house, when he went to England to borrow money, when he asked the English capitalists to invest their money in this country, did not harangue them in the style, or upon the facts or matter, that he has done on this occasion. Every hon. gen- tlem; i ie familiar with the bright side of the shield that was shown then, and the honest side, as Avell. I have given you, Mr. Speakc some testimony that I "^hink ought to carry weight as to the condition of affairs in this country, and to prove that the position tikcn by the hon. gentleman is unsound. I wish to quote, also, the language of the hon. mem- ber for South Oxford when he sat on this side of the house in 1878, on an occasion when he visited the Maritime provinces. I am not no^. dealing v, "ih the childish charge of inr:»nsistency. In citing language pre- viouf.ly used by the hon. gentlemen opposite incorisi.">tent with the language used by them in this debate, I cite it for the purpose of the argument contained therein, and I cite it for the purpose of proving the insin- cerity of the movement. At Halifax, on August 11), 1878, when, as every one knows, and as no one has denied, the condition of affairs in Canada was far worse than it is to- duy, when hon gentlemen were apologising, 80 to speak, all over the country for the con- dition of affairs, this hon. gentleiuaii, who now tells us that there is retrogreshion .md that the country is netting into a frightful condition, used this language : " That men who tell you that It ih impo.ssi- ble to exist as a eonmoreial people unless you have reeioroeitv iriKht as "/ell tell the Uniteil States that if they want to drive vou into tlie Union all tlu y have to d,> is to reliiso you re- ciprocity lor a certain miniber ol' years longer, which i.s the very best way thivt can be adopt- ed of inducing the American people to enter Intocoinniereial relations with u^. For my part I will deny that we are dependent upon them in one way or anotlier. No Canadian statesmau can do a worse service than to (spread that idea among a great number of his fellow-eountrymen." What is the hon. gentleman doing now, Mr. Speaker ? Driven, as I say, desperati; by the serious reversals which he has met with at the hands of tlie people, kept out of oifice for so long a time, after having changed his political faith in order to obtain office, that hon. gentleman is now pursuing a course which he said no Canadian statesman worthy of the name would pursue,and so affect a por- tion of his fellow-countrymen. "Well, we were particularly refer icd to the Maritime prov- inces. The hon. gentleman seemed doubt- ful whether he could conviroe the splendid yeonianvy of this piovince, of whom I now speak, with whom I have had the pleasure of conversing, and whose condition I have ex- amined, he seemed doubtful whether he could convince them that they were in this dependent, this abjeci, this poverty-stricken condition. But with that contempt for the Maritime provinces which seems, in this debate, to have characterized the utterances to which I am about to allude, he ti:rned around and said he expected to hear some- thing from the Maritime prov"' ""«!. He ex- pected to hear a wail of woe sounded from that quarter. Yet I will do my hon. friend the senior member for Halifax (Mr. Jones) the credit for saying that ho rather turned the table on his leader for the nonce. He told him that down in the Maritime prov- inces the farmers — if I do not misrepresent his language — were not so badly oft'; it "/as the mortgaged-ridden farmers of Ontario who were suft'"ring, and so his leader might turn his attention to hi.j neighbors and not treat the Maritime provinces with contempt. I think I can fancy the reason of the sincerity of the hon. member for Halifax. I think I knrw why he did not talk about the drying up of the cities by the sea. That is a great phrase in the mouths of the Ileform leaders in the east, that Ave are d: ying up in the Maritime provinces, that we arc not as rich as we used to be, that red' property has gone down, that assessment is low, etc. 1 think I know why the hon. gen- tleman drove slowly over the ground ; I think he had read the words put into the mouth of His Honor the Lieutenant-Gov- ernor of Nova Scotia at the opening oi the present session, wherein his own allies in Nova Wcotia politics, now snugly ensconced in office, stated that they were happy down by the sea, and that things were not going wrong. This is the language of the hon. gentleman's friend and ally, Mr. Fielding, put into the mouth of His flonor on the 23rd of February, 1888 :— '•1. In welcoming von to the HCi'no of your legislative duties, 1 am glad to be able to con- gratulate you on the fair measure of pro,sporlty enjoyed by our province during tlio past yoar. 4 i While in some quarters exceptional conditions have operatea unvavorably, as a rule the labors f'our people, in the various branches of in- dustry, liave been remunerative and there has been an improvement in business which, it is hoped, will f'ontinue. '^2. I have particular pkasure in calling at- tention to the activity that prevailed in min- ing, an industry of great importance vat only because of the capital iind l«')or engaged in it, but also because of its valu^ as a contributor to our provincial revenues." The hon. gentlemen touched a little on an- | other subje'jt, the etfect of reciprocity on the | coai trade, that branch of trade which brings j to the coffers of the Pioviuoial t.easury such j a large pxopoition of its reveni'.e. The hon. ; gentleman knows that there are members in , this house from the coal regions of Nova Scotia [ that could meet him upon any ground such i as that which he took, only for the moment, from Mr. Lith^ow. Am) en pasmnt I may | say that I was surprised, I was amazed, at ; that hon. gentleman'^ attempting such a ; weak thing, at his laying himself open to j the emplr tic answer that he did Why, sir, | the hon. genth^man who formerly represent- j ed Digby in thit; house Mr. Vail) read thii. old letter of 1879 from Air. Lithgow, and ; yet he was answered in this liouse, and the hon. gentleman must have known what the answer was, that Mr. Lithgow took it ail back after experionce. M.'. Lithgow prophe- sied that the duty on coal '"ould bo of no advantage, he wrote as the hon. gentleman K.aid he did, but he was honorable enough and sensible tuough, after experience, to take back every word that he penned in that letter ; and iie sent it to the press, but that is not kept in the scrap book of the hon. gentleman opposite. They do not keep the bright side of the shield now-a-days, thej- have turned that away in hopes that it will rust. Now, the hon. gentleman ought to know that the statistics of hi • province are ag:iinst him, if he attempted to stand up heie and asperse too heavily the fair fame and commercial position oi the Province of Nova ;;cotia. He knows well enough that i he and I had to pay, as t^ixpayers, for the publicat'on of a document issued after the so-called repeal victory, when these men— 1 wen't say demagogues ; perhaps it is not fair — but the word might be justifiable wht^i these men had the hardihood to go all over the province from one end to tlu; other, anil talk about Nova Scotia as Ontarit) members here have not hesitated to talk about On- tario. These hon. g(;nllemen when they found themH(!lves in ies()ousibh' i)ositions holdi'.ig the seals of officr, ambitious for a good rcord and a goinl sh«>wing while pub- lie affairs were under their control, publish- ed at the expense of the people of Nova Scotia an officii document to be circulated broadcast in ihe British Isles. And what did they tell us of the condition of that coun- try long years after the abrogation of recipro- city, twenty yeirs after Confederation, twenty years after the time when we were threatened with commercial anriihilation ? These so-called anti-Jonfe':iei-ates, these so- called repealers, tlicgeso-'^^^alled secessionists, these so-called annexationists, were induced to confess to the world tlsat everything in the Province of Novi. Scotia was lovely, that any man who had bruins, that any farmer who had industry could obiaif- in a short time a livelihood, impossible lo gel, where ? In vae mother country alone ? No, but in tiiC Am- erii unioi. as well. They issued i ilocu- moL •■opy of which I h(>ld in my hand ; it wa. . ,.-i«.r, taker i l)art of the colors of our party, and pat uoid j uit a new Hag at this time of the day I w).!. j to (|uote from this document also to b- o 'x I what 1 iuive said. At pagr IG wea.v; void :— " There are plenty of farms already under c'lltivatiou, \w\\\v\\ may be bought at very reasonable rates, and any practical larmer with a small capital may at once possess a good and comfort able h(mie." Some hon. members — Hear, liear. Mr. Tri'i'KH (Pictou)— I am glad the hon. gentleman is pleased. •' And by energy, industry and eiucrpris.; mav make lor himself a fortune am. posli.ou in NiAaHcothi in a few years, .sucli as lie could not obtain in a lifetime in Great Uritain." Here we come to the poor workingman thai hon. genti ;'men opposite are so fond of com- miserating, and 1 suppose the fisherman is included. The leportsays '• he gets very well paid in Nova Scotia,"— and thi^ is twenty I years after th(! abrogation of reciprocity, and several years after tlie introduction of I the accuised National Policy to which I the hon. gentleman has s') eloquently re- I icrred. On page iiT- 1 like to stick to the ' record, and especially to the record of the j hon. gentleman— tliis is the statement :— 1 ■' Hv moderate Industry tlie owner of si.eh a ! place I'un rear \\\y family on better food prob- i fibiy than lie could give tliem l» *;»t?'"''^ j'|'' ! tlie same expenditure ot capital and labor. Ai)d that Is about all the average Nova Heoi.a farm<'r attempts. He does uot^-nuckle down to his work in the severely conUuuous style 10 II that 18 practically compulsory In England and Scotland." The hon. gentleman tells ur the farmer barely lives ; but he does live, and when the hon. gentleman's friends were clothed with the responsibility of office they did not hesitate to say that the farmer does not knuckle down to work as the farmers in other countries do. The report continues :— " If he had a reasonable rent to pay, as well as a living tn earn, he would bo compelled to work harder, to cultivate less superficially, to loiter less around the country store, to do less riding In his buggy, to get his women folk to make more butter and less pastry, and, In short, by dint of having to make a struggle to escapj eviction and bankruptcy he would of- ttm land himself into a state of comparative affluence. But there is not much hope ot any such result from the average Nova Scotia lar- mer." The Government add that this description is furnished by Mr. Imrie ; they add the fol- lowing foot note : — "M . Irmie'H description of tiio average Nova Scotian farmer is pretty nearly correct, bu» in every county in the province there are farmers who are pretty considerably above the average, who liave pliicod themselves and tlielr families in more than comlortat)lecir- cumstanct's, and have by ihelr industry and attention to business acquired considerable wealth. Such men are second to none In in- telligence and standing In the province." "What condition of affairs does ray lion, friend now expect ? Is he looking for some Utopia where a farmer can obtain more than that, where by honest, and industry he can obtain more than a (.•omfortable living in Nova Scotia ? Is he to roll in wealth with- out working ; or what is the condition of affairs to which the hon. gentleman would prefer we should bring the people of the country? Next, as regards shipping. The hon. gentleman attempted to teach me, as one of the inhabitants of Nova Scotia, some years ago, by his long speeches, that Ameri- can shi!)ping under t lie tariff t)f the United States and under tluiir shipping rcgulatii>ns was being swept off tlie sea, the condition of trade in the United States a-id the condition of labor there was fright- ful to behold. But the Govern mont of the day in Nova Scotia, in syrapatliv with, pfuhaps in council with the 'hon. gentleman, but at all events the Government of the Liberal party in Nova Scotia, said in IHCt!, in this report at page 17 : " Nova Hcotia owns inort> shipping In pro- portion to the populallou than any ot n'r countr.v.anti »»ur voHsels do a larger ur<»portlon of the carrying trade ot the world.' Mr. WictHU — When is that 7 Mr. Tui'i'Kii (Plutou) —In IHOfl. Mr. Welsh — How is it now ? Mr. Tppper (Pictou). " Tliey may be found In «very port of the habitable globe, loading and discharging car- goes on our own and foreign account." I knew that the hon. gentleman would con- tradict me, but I did hope he would not con- tradict the official organs and publications of his own party. Well, then, it is not unrea- sonable for me to suppose that the hon. gen- tleman had some reason for passing lightly over the condition of affairs in Nova Scotia in supporting the re»;olution of the hon. member for South Oxford. I wish to com- plain of a habit in which the non. member for South Oxford (Sir Richard Cartw right), indulges as a representative statesman of this country. The comparison which the hon. gentleman makes between the condition of affairs in Canada and the United States is unfair to Canada and unworthy of him. I say that no (lomparison he has made has been fair — he has never acted as any reasonable man would expect him to act, when making a comparison. He com- pares our condition with the condition of the United States when they have sixty millions of people, at a time when they have startled the world by the leajjs and bounds by which they have gone forward in the }>ath of pro- gress, at a time when they have reduced their national debt almost one-half, at a time when everything in that country so far as matters alfcct us are definitely settled. He compares our condition at a time when in the States all secession is gone, not at a time when, as in Canada, timall politicians are en- deavoring to set Province against Province. I Si. • if the hon. gentleman were fair, if he had tlieu8e then something different to what he tells it now. He told the house that these were not alarm- ing features, although the volume of trade was being reduced. When lie made his finance statemeiii in 1875 he did not hesitate to say: "It Ignot necesfiiry fo" mo to spend any furtiier time In reviewing of (hat ii country llkoours Is rotrc-i.Tradlng In any way hocauHu llu-re Is atauu-k t<> tho exports. Many i autluirltleHWho are ontltUul to great reHpect lUi' Inclined to think Hint we have ratherover- | Nteppud t;.o nuirk In our progress In Inls dl- i rectum." | Now, Mr. Speaker, this shows the incon- 1 sistency and insincerity of the hon. gentle- 1 man advancing an argument like that as I compared with what he advances to-day. I shali ask the iioiise to bear with me while 1 vindicate tlie positior* of oiu- country as coHiparod with the United Btatcs. 1 com- pare the totrtl trade, the volume of trade, as the hon. gentleman calls it, of the United Httttes, when they had a pop\ilation of 1 7,000,- 000, with the condition of alTairs, and the I ^^ A I.. i.~ /1.«..'l.. u.l.x.1. tatsM ItMVtt TOiuni" o: liauc m vrttitrilnj -• " 4,000.000. In 1840 the aggregate trade of the United States r mounted to $239,000,000, oi- about $14 per head of the population. In IS.'^o it still amounted to $14 per head of the irhabitants, who numbered then 23,000,000. ■\;^''e have seen that, in Canada, during the year 1887, when the hon. gentleman says the vol- ume of trade has decreased so alarmingly, that it amonnts to $202,000,000 on the figures which he gives, and that this represents $40 per head lor every Canadian in this country from one end of it to another. I say the purpose seems to me suspicious when an hon. gentleman of that gentleman's ability stoops to an argument so unfair, and an ar- gument so directed against the position and against the reputation of his own country. Then about the exodus. How he delighted, and how every year he seems to delight, over the exodus which he sayr is taking place from the older provinces to the west or to the Western States. And he thinks that those features are alarming. Well, Mr. Speaker, we have his colleagues on record with utterances on this point which will give us hope. V/e have, for instance, the senior member for Halifax (Mr. Jones), when it was his business — it was his pleasure, I hope— to sound a different note in Canada, and when he did not think it was necessary to rouse sectional feeling, and to talk about the desire of the pro- vinces to get away from Confed- eration. He came as Minister of Militia to Halifax in 1878 to render an account of his stewardship ; ho came and he admitted the exodus from Canada, which is julniitted by all sides and cannot bo gainsaid, at a time when ihe people were leaving the country in large numbers. The Minister of Militia said : — " Why, we llnd thoHe very people clamoring to get back to Canada. What Is the reasoi; for thlsV It lHbecauH(» thosi! men, attract*«d for a time bv the high wages '>ll\jrwl In the Htnt.'s now llix' thomHulves utterly without t>u nu iniH of support and aredeslrous to ootne I back to this country of (!anadar~ this wroteh- I ed country of Canada." Wo have, fortunately, statistics giving the I condition of our friends on the other side of I the line. Taking the Stattis of Maine, New i Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Cou- nectictit and Rhode Island, and comparing them with the oldc^r Trovlnco of Canadii Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward lKlttnd--tho statin- tlcB show that according to the census of 1830-31 there was a population of 1,963,717 ; in 1881 4/J10/iU(l; iihowing an increaiie iu 60 .>-y 12 years of 2,056.309 ; whereas the figures for the older Provinces of Canada show, in 1830 and 1831 l,06r),25r) ; under the last lensus 4,141,424, showing an inc'rease of 3,070,200, as against 2,000,0(iO in the States I have men- tioned. Now, Mr. Speaker, oiic is almost forced when the argument, fif« far as tlie statistics are concerned, shows different re- sults, to tliink that the flgares have heen made to suit a purpose It re- minds me of the story of the judge long ago, who, in dealing with a case hetore him, asked the counsel to cxi)lain where this land was situated in reference to which there was a dispute. One counsel said : " My Lord, we lie on this side" (pointing to one hand), and the other counsel said: "And we, my lord, lie on this," and the judge wanted to know what on earth he could do in tlie matter. The dehate has shown that figures can be; used in reference to the condi- tion of the country in very false lights. For at purpose did these gentlemen ransack ... ir hrains and devote their ingenuity in a most unfair manner to try and show tliut a deplorahle state of things exists in fevor ofa country vhich we all ought to try and ad- vance in every way possible. Now, the hon. gentlen/an came to the condition of affairs, and there is nothing to complain ol in that 'J'he hon. gentlemen want tbe money from the United States and the hon. member from Halifax says they can get it. Then he tells us that this trade, which he is forced t.. admit does exist, is not a natural trade, but a trade foneundatitly proved durJnii this win r when all tbo sugar for Montreal. In- k\ . u .V being landed her.-, as »f;->"toUms Us. bV Mu- unwise and narrow I';'H^y « l^'' J^ minbm (Jovtrnnient. ben diverted to New York." I call tin' attention of the house to hla parti- cular reference to the rates on sugar and coal ; _____ „ " Tbc I ntrrTolonlal was built to P'«>""'\'; '"\!^ ucconiniodale tbe Industries o« tbe <"«>»'/>• udt<. laellllalelhe interM'ommunleat m at he l„wst rales. It was never •"' >•»,"',/, puv as an Investment un.v ""'" , ": L i •m.aiKoi ibe west . xp.Mt.M <;',p';y I '•;,". .'! tbeir eosl-andmy complaint Is that thVy"';';*' have always been loo '•'«''. 'V''l,''j!?ii, fc puilmeul bavenol. carried out the objwi lor which tbe roiul was conslrueloU. He says again ; " I roneat my c-onieiitlon, therefore, that tho rates of HUKar'are, and always have been, t<»o hiBh, "".u' lor Ibe 'Montreal reltners and for u» as well." Th • rate waH then IH eentB— "I am iiol dlNpoMcd to Mnd lauM with th" Un^erimient for making this retluel Ion In poMlbTs our publW- work's should be ...lule thf A ^X' 13 haud-mald of commerce, and on the (jame grounds the rates on tne Intercolonial railway should be very considerably reduced, so that the ofcject for which the road was construe ed may be carried out and all Pa^tsof therom- Inion receive the advantages ot It In tnat way." Could inconsistency go further ? Now, on the question of fish, the hon. gentleman, as was natural, dilated. He endeavored to per- suade the house— and he based the state- ment on his reputation as a dealer in that article— that we pay the duty on fish, ar.d from that argument the house was called to follow him through the rest of his argument to show that wo pay the duties on the other articles we export to tho United Stiites. Well, sir, the day was when the hon. gentleman would have spurned that proposition, incon sistent as it is with the teaching of every teacher of free trade. The day was when he did advocate a very diff"erent theory— the true free trade theory— that the AmerH{vn8 paid the duty on what they bought frotn us. In August, 1878, when the senior member for Halifax was not the free lance lie is now, ready to fire a shot at his own allies if by it he can gain an advant^ige in the Lower Provinces, when he was not ready to join any movement in tlie hojx' of getting his party into power— that lion, gentleman, holding an official position, at a time when ids utter- ances wore weighed more carefully than they are now, did not hesitatt; to tell an audience in Halifax that : •' KlHh are sent to the United States and the West Indies, and are not atn oted n t,be r yti- lue In any way by any regu ath \ thi.t nui> ix' Imposed here or elsewlK^re." 1 might go on (pioting from the l.inguage of the hon. gentleman. Time was wlieii lie found It necessary to oppose a nn-asure ot koclprocity with the United States— to op- poHo the (Jovernment for obt^iining the coti- cessi;)!! of free (Isli from tlie United States, To-night we hear a great deal from him about th(! atlvantag(>s of free fish in the Ameri(;an market ; we are told that tlie i)oor fishermen pay the duty to the American (Jov- ornment, ar-d what a boom it would he to them to have It taken otf. Hut the lion, gen- tleman opposed a measure to take the duty olVin 1H72, when he belittled the wIh.Ic Washington treaty and all the advantages that (Canada was gaining »tid(»r it, as many members of the opposite party liave done, ir^ the hon. member for North Nortolk did n late as 187H, when his own friends wore cluiigoil with not havlng^ilone much '«'♦•)'*♦ dtrretion. Tho soninr mcinbPi {?r Hh!«!*.'£ at that time said : " He had found that under the reciprocity treaty, only 7 per cent, more of our fish went to the United States than when the duty was imposed," and he said the paltry amount given to Canada only amounted, in the year which he took for the computation, to the small sum of $94,000 on the quantity exported. But an hon. gentleman in this house, who holds Rcrhaps a more important positiou in his party, who does not fight them in his own proving or abuse or vilify them when he turns his back on them and leaves Ottawa —the hon. member for Queen's, who is an authority on fish, who played an important part in the negotiations at Halifax and there obtained some knowledge that he should now impart to the minds of those hon. gen- tlemen who are so fierce about the advan- tages of free fish — that lion, gentleman, in my hearing a few years ago, when speaking on another subject, sail : " I am not going Into the great question of who pays the duty on the mackere , the oon- .sumer or the producer. The general question lias bein debated very often In this house, and The r the American manufacturers, and 11 w.. Hibii.t their iilcHS of what they consider u beneficial for the Ameiican manufacturers, then we will go in and enjoy the benefits of this union, which some call commercial union and others unrestricted recipro- city ; we will adopt some change or any change, so long as it will ex- cite a popular fooling which will bring hon. gentlemen from that side of the house to this. The real design of our American friends is shown by the language of the ad- vocate to which allusion lias often been made. What did Mr. Butterworth say in the United States? Did he go through that country like a demagogue, telling tliem they wore all going to ruin, that protection had ruined tho'r shijtping and their farming in- dustry, and that trade combinations all over that country necessitated a radical change ? No, and this is, indeed, a curious coalition which has been forced between Mr. Butter- worth, an out-and-out protectionist, and these men who have boon har.inguiug ail over the country in favor of fioe trade. Mr. Butterworth is consistent. He declares himself to be a protectionist, he soys he is always an American, and not one of those mjun who one day talks of tariii" for revenue only and another about free trade, and again hold out the policy of unrestricted recipro- city. He sayK, I believe in protectiou ; I ' believe the time is not ripe when we can safely meet tlio manu- facturers of Groat Britain in a-iother mar- ket ; I believe if we cun gain tlio Caiuuiian market we can sell there our surplus pro- ducts and manufactures, and we can relievo the congesttid Ht»ite of our markets at the expense of the Canadians. (,)f course this is my language. An hon. Mkmiiku — Hear, hear. Mr. TcpiKU — If the hon. gentleman wishes 1 will givv' him Mr. Hutterworth's own words. In a 'ett<"' which lie addresses to all the nKsmbers of toiigioss, he uses the following language with reference to Can- ada :— " The location of her Ki'cat hlKhways ol traf- fic, hikf'H, (MinalH, rivcrN, lullwuys, upon up to UH at onee an cxhuUMlloHH Nuppl.v <>t raw ma- terial, and a cons! ant ly Ki'owlnw niarkft lor our nianulacturcd Hurplus." Does the hon. gentleman doubt the state- ment that 1 nuide ? We are to hit a Hiaughter market for the surplus nuinufaituieK ol the United HUites— " While eorrootlnn the IniMiuallllcM In our tarlfT, wo can, at thi' same time, remove from the trade and commerce of our people every rflHtrlntlnn and 1)11 rdonrionio tax vvlileli is not ONmntlal to tlu< proper protection oi o»ir fiomo Industries, ornecessary for the collection of needed public revenue.'' "I see it stated in some of the public Jour- nals that in case the proposed aii-angemunt is consummated,foreign goods will pour through Canada into the United States. Whettier goods were entered at a Canadian port, or in the United 8tates,would be of no consequonce, since the tariff would be the same on both sides of the line." My hon. friend says he knows they will in- sist on that, but that is not contemplated in the motion. What he said at Charlottetown, he contends, is all right, but he was rafer- ring to a tariff, as against other countries oth(!r than the United States, being at our will and pleasure, and to expect they would have unrestricted reciprocity with us under this state of affairs was to suppose the A.meri- caus were arrant fools. But Mr. Butter- worth is no arrant fool. He says that the Americans shall hold our market in the hol- low of their hands and slaughter their goods as they please, from one end of Canada to the othfer. Our people have had a sample al- ready of the slaughtering business that wont on before 1878, and it will take more than the arguments and ingenuity of hon. gentle- men opposite to make them forget how our trade then suffered. Mr. Butterworth pro- ceeds to give his record : " I am a protectionist; but we will agree that proteeClou properly deals with the un- equal conditions which exist in the field of coinp "tltlon as between our manufactures and those of the old world. Those eoiidltlous, re- lating in the main to the cost of labor, and be- ing so largely in favor of the plants of Europe, manuftu!turers there are in certain lines of trade enabled. In the absence of the Influences of our protective system, to control the mar- ket at our vcM-y doors. Uut thin reason has no possible application to competition with Canada; and tlie reason ceasing, the rule ceases with It." Not contempt, mark you, when they talk of conipetitiou with the manufac- tures of Ureat Britain. No, they fear ••(tmpetition with the manufacturea of (heat Britain, but they only feel (contempt when speaking of competition with Caiuuiian manufactures. That is their opin- ion of the stage at which our industries have advanced ; they have no fear of com- pe'iti'in with us. \re hon. gentleman op- posite i)reiiar«^l,V, that \w should bo subjected to one tluit invests its capital in Canada rather than be one which expends all its means in a foreign country. Hon. gentlemen oppusito liavt^ tried to bring be- foro tho huuso an issue which has l)een fought out long ago, and which has nothing to do with the question under discussion, the issue of the National Policy. That is beside the question, iu my opinion, entirely. Hon. gentlemen opposite ought to know that at one time the great Paisley works of Scotland helJ the monopoly of the thread trade in the United States. The Americans placed a duty on thread, the consequence of which was that the Paisleys were compelled to start works of the same chara(!ter as their works in ^:cotland, in the United States, in-_ volving the investment of a large amount of capital in the State of New Jersey, in order to retain control of the Americar trade, and the result was that the Americans got their thread cheaper than they ever did before, and American labor was solely employed in its manufacture. The same cause has had the same effect in this country in other arti- cles. The tobacco duty killed a New York monopoly which had control of our trade. Tlie McAlpin manufactory had a large amount of capitttl invested in New York in the manufacture af tobacco which they sold in our market. Tho duties were raised. 'J'he result was a transfer of half of the establishment with some 500 hands, who are now busy in the city of To- ronto. Does any hon, g carry out that idea, and what was the answer'? Not that they were not then authorized, but a distinct, uno- (Hiivoc'd refusal. 1 hvv. hon. gentlemen shaking their heads ; perhups 1 do not un- 'vuiprrte!itiariefr niHu"- an offer v hich was refused by the Canadian commissioners. Mr. Thompson — The hon. gentleman has been told time and again that the whole question in relation to trade was now on the table of the house, and the paper which the hon. member for Pictou has just read is to this effect : while renewing our proposals of such a date we decline to consider any trade negotiations relating to the tisheries. Mr. Laurier — Surely the hon. gentleman does not mean to say that we have the pro- posals of the American commissioners? Wa have the proposals of the British rommis- sioners and uothing more. Mr. Thompson — I mean to say that the hon. gentleman was told time and again that Sir Charles Tupper had asked the con- sent of the American plenipotentiaries and of Sir Lionel West, to lay on the table of the house everything relating to proposals look- ing for trade relations between the two coun- tries, and he has done so ; and it is disin- genuous then to contend that the proposal that is referred to here, but which is not be- fore the house, has any relation to trade at all. Mr. Tupper— I am glad I brought this subject up. I am glad now to know upon what material the hon. gentleman is acting when he makes this sudden change of base upon an entire supposition that has no foun- dation in fact. If he does not take the statement made by the Canadian represen- tative, perhaps he may be able to believe Mr. Angell, on of the American commission- ers, wlio makes a statement in entire accord- ance witli tlu; stutement just made, that that propositien was refused absolutely. If my lion, friend had allowed me to continue, I think I could have satisliod iiim that no luaMer what tlieory might exist in loference to tliat proposal tliere was nothing in it of I be nature tbe hon. gentleman imagines. The reasons that would prevent Mr I lyard or any represt-ntative of tke American Exe- cutive f:om making such a proposal ab is contemplated. Now, what a;e the words :— " While contluuluK lliel lore Hubmltfod—on the ;- ulllnio,— and fully Kharlnu tiie ilesiroDf Her Hrltauule MiiJOBiy'H plenlpotentlarU'H to remove- all causeH ofdllTcr- enee ill connection with the llHlierloN : the AMerloan plonlpotontlarleH are eonMtialntHl, arierearofiu ooiiHldernllon, to deellneto ask Irom the IVosldeiit auttiorliy r -(luislle to ejni- slder the proposal eoiiveyod to them on the -tra Inst, as a means to the desired end. because theirreat^T .'ro(Hlom ot commercial IntercourHa ioploposud wouiv! iu--:rS3itat^r an mljisatmeut t^SMsi 18 of the pret^ent tariff of the United States by OongreBBional action ; wh ch «^.>"stment the Amirican plenipotentiaries consider to he manifestly fmpracticable of accomplishment trough the medium of a treaty under the circumstances now existing.' And with a reason like that, can my hon. friend eeriously press this theory, that m de- fiance of that rule, such a pi-oposal was ever made or conceived ? But if a further an- swer were necessary, we have it in the American plenipotentiari'- declining to ad- mit ; — "That such a mutual arrangement as is pro- posed by Her Majesty's plentpotentiaries could be accepted as constituting a suitable basis of negotiation concerning the rights and privileges claimed for American fishing ves- sels. It still appears to the American pleni- potentiaries to b3 possible to find an adjust- ment of diflterences by agreeing to the inter- pretation or modification of thetreaty of 1818, which will be honorable to both parties, and remove the present causes of complaint, to which end they now-as they have been from the beginning of thi^i conference— ready to de- vote themselves." Well, Mr. Speaker, has it not heen stated by hon. gentlemen opposite that the fixed and stated policy of Congress is now, and toi some time has been, not to permit any such arrangements to be made by the executive ? Is not the position taken in this debate that no authority outside of Congress can inter- fere with fiscal matters ? If *. it position be correct, how can he suppose that, on the contrary, such a proposal as is suggested, could have been made, or was ever contem- plated ? I will not weary the hcuse by read- ing, as I could, a resolution from Congress, illustrative of that. It has beer admitted on the other side. The Judicial 'Committer :* the House of Representatives, ii 1886, solemnly decided that no treaty could be made by the executive «)f the American Government which in any way interfered with the fiscal matters of the people of the United Statos.that all changes in the tarift' were to be discussed openly in Congress ; and tliat lias been the reason, as everyone knows, why, since the treaty of Washington, no such arrangement has been entered into by any country in the worhl by the United States, and that was a long time ago. Tr(!aiicB had been nuvde, btit no treaty touching fiscal matters has been ratified by Congress since that day. Therefore, it is un- necessary (o argue furtlujr to show how ut- terly impracticable istlie step that the other •ide ask us to take. I I'avc gone on to show the sinister object underlying their policy. -n.-x T ...!..t. x^ ...^:«^ r.«if *r\ niitiiii til. fllllt. nuv 1 TTinil UJ JTViijv '...'-I -•- — : — -- thuHU ■•.teps taken by hon. gentlemen in this debate, the attitudo adopted by them, are, ac- cording to their own opinion, calculated to- prevent our receiving the benefit of a certain amount of reciprocal trade with the United! States, and why? Everyone who knows that this party, the Government represent- ing this party, is the only party that ever obtained trade advantages from the United: States. They negotiated and obtained the Washington treaty. The negotiations for- the reciprocity treaty in old Can- ada, were made by the Conserva- tives. We have the cause of irrita- tion in reference to the fishery ques- tion so far removed that we have identified ourselves, our country, with the interests of a powerful and growing party in the United States. We now see a measure introduced into Congress in which nearly every article which we desire to be put on the free list — a great many of the articles of the treaty of 1854— are put on the free list, and when we are moving in this direction, is it wise, is it statesmanlike, is it worthy the Canadian people, that we should fall down and worship the Americans and tell them that if we fall short in this matter, we are left in a state of dire extremity ? If there is any way, and I have the opinion of hon. geutlement oppo- site to back me up, by which we might be excluded from the advantages of reciprocal trade, it is that pursued by hon. gentlemen opposite, which tends to drive us into an- nexation with the American Union. I was not astonished— some things did surprise me —that the financial exponent of the Opposi- tion should taVe special care not to give any details, or any scheme, or any definite state- ment as to the way in which this un- restricted panacea business would work, be- cause that hon. gentleman years ago, used to make a financial propl'ocy, he used to conae down to the house and, in the same emphatic and loud manner, tell Parliament and the country that they could mark his words,, and tliat the imposition of certain duties would give a surplus of so much, whereas tlio general result was a deficiency. At Halifax, however, die hon. gentleman went further. Ho came there to en- lighten the people by tlie sea, for whom he has expressed luuiualifiod contempt that embolden(!d him to use languagi! which I was sorry to hoar from the lips t»f any man in the Canadian House of Commons. The hon. gentleman camt^ to Halifax, as Minister of Finance, to endeavor to rally his party in that provinc 1. He talked a little about di- rect taxtttjon then. He tells us now, in biii -, .. #. 19 opinion now, that there is no danger of di- rect taxation, but, even if there is, it would be a very good thing for the people. He went on to show it was the correct way of taxing the people, that it would rnakt them more careful as to how the money was spent, and for a long time he argued in its favor. How- ever, in 1878, the hon. gentlemen, knowing then a good deal more, perhaps, of finance and the working of the revenue than he does no\7, because he has been long out of office, said: " If you deprive yourselves of your present customs tariff (17^ per cent.) you will have to resort to some method of direct taxation, and that of a very formidable kind." I ask that hon. gentleman now, how is it that in 1878 it was a dangerous thing to interfere with the 17} per cent, tariff for fear of being met with direct taxation of a most formidable kind, when now, as we well know, wh in the needs are such that a larger amount Oi" revenue is required, he tells us, he does nu. hesitate to say that though you interfere with the 25 per cent, tariif, as it has been called all round, there is no dan- ger of our having to resort the direct taxa- tion? Tlie hon. gentleman cannot explain this I feel confident. But he was more de- finite. He weut into figures and, knowing how he has failed to accomplish the results he predicted formerly, I am not surprised that he comes to such a conclusion now. In that summer, as reported in the Halifax Chronicle, the hon. aontlemaA said ; " The National Policy was a loss of ten mil- lion of Customs duties which would have to be made up by direct taxation, equal to an In- come tax of 20 per cent." I always telt a certain amount of comfort in the hon. gentleman's propheoies of gloom. I stated on a previous occasion to this house that, having studied the hon. gentleman's career with some interest, I had come to the conclusion that when he declared the con- dition of affairs in the country were very much down, they would be very much up, and 1 find as T live and grow older— and the hon. gentleman reminded me hist year that I was very young — I have good joason to hold that opinion ..f Jiirn. Tlie hon. gentleman told UH then that, with the slightest interference with the existing trade of that day, direct taxation Rtarod I's in the face ; and the hon. gentleman who sits behind him, who sat quietly in his seat while his province was maligned, said that if there was the slightest chance of • ihe trans- action known as the "Act for better Terms." He charged that, as the Torouta CHobe charges it, as a bribe paid to Nova Scotia to kfep her in GonfederatioUv and naturally he thinks that the men who- gave that bribe are worthy of condemnation. He indicted them, he charged not only the- men who gave the money as bribers, but the province generally as being bribed, and he declared that it was that reason alone thati kept Nova Scotia in Confederation. Will he be surprised to learn that, on the hustings at Halifax, the leader of the secessionists, the leader of one wing of the party in this house, said to the people that he was the man to whom the people of Nova Scotia owed the credit of the bribe, that he was the man most instrumental in obtaining better terms for Nova Scotia. Ho boasted of it ; yet ho sits quietly and takes that frightful slap over the face from his leader without utter- ing a single word. I have something more to say in regard to it, because there is no hon. "gentleman who could keep quiet on such a subject. The hon. gentleman hoard, the hon. member for South Oxford asperse and malign a leader under whom they wore at one time proud to serve. Instead of our being guilty of the bribery — the party to wliich I have the honor to belong— what would the hon. member for South Oxford think of this? If he believes the statement made bv the senior member for Malifax (Mr. Jones) under his own hand, in a letter ho wrote to the press in 1872, when the subject was much discusBed— and then I thought it was discussed for the last ■>-/ 20 time — the hon. gentleman who follows his leader tells him that he was the person who proffered and gave him the bribe. The senior member for Halifax said : — "What Blake and Mackenzie wanted was that the increase to our subsidy should be made as on the basis of our debt and public works, and had their advice been followed we should have had $240,000 per annum for ever instead of $100,000 as at present, $85,000 of that being only for ten years, five of which already expired." Is the Liberal Conservative party to be charged with being guilty of high r<-imes, misdemeanors, and corruption, because that party offers only one-half the amount with which hon. gentlemen opposite would have bribed the province ? But then the hon. member for South Oxford and the senior member for Halifax are accustomed to hold up their hands in holy horror in regard to bribes in the shape of subsidies. The rail- way subsidy they declare to be a corrupt expenditure ; and I would remind the house that we have been told over and over again by hon. gentlemen opposite the same old story, that the granting of such large bonuses would inevitably leau to direct tiixation. The senior member for Halifax de- nies that that they would cut off the subsidies. That is too dear to him ; it is not the policy that he desires ; but I am afraid his influence is on the wane when he has to sit and listen to attacks made on Nova Scotia by his allies, and stiinds up and assails the interests of OntJirio and Quebec as he has done this evening. But the hon. member for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) says that this retrenchment is to be based upon the stoppage of all the railway sub- sidies. "We can save," says tlie hon. mem- ber, " the railway subsidies and avoid any repetition of such little scenes as occurred in No. 8 a few years ago; we can save by putting an end to the system of bribery in giving grants to railway lines of $3,2000 a mile; we can cut oft' the whole thing with advantage to our Treasury, advantiige to our i.'iukets, advantage to our country, advan- tage to our hopes in tl'e future, not only in thi,>- world but in the ^\orld to come.' Now, will tlie lion, gentlemai resign his future in tht wo hi to come for the sake of getting on those Treasury benches? We liavo had a tusf.e of th(! qualities of the hon. gentleman from Halifax (Mr. Jones) ; wo have heard his spei-ches in Opposition, and wo have heurd his speeches when in power. Why, ther« was not a more liberal, !.trge=minded riittu when ho was in power in his profes- sions as to what he would spend if he got hold of the public money. When he was in power the same hon. gentleman who ad- vises 'etrenchmeot to-day (it is not permis- sible, I know, to allude to a past debate, but some of the hon. gentleman's most earnest addresses have lately been in refer- ence to the advocacy of an increase of ex- penditure rather than to the decrease), in 1878, when running tor f,n office, or run- ning an election, at any rate, in the city of Halifax, there claimed credit not only for the agitation for better terms, but when a min- ist ;r of the Crown this mild and subservient follower of the hon. gentleman who has de- famed and villified both his province and mine, villified him and myself and every man from that province; this hon. gentleman Wont down to Halifax as a minister of the Crown in August, 1878, and as a reason for support claimed ol the public hustings "that the present Government," that is, the Liberal Government, " have expended $1,- 250,000 in Nova Scotia, during five years, more than the late Government expended in seven." But now it is a terrible thing for a Liberal-Conservative candidate to make promises. You must not say, according to the new code of morals laid dovrn that when you get to Parliament you will advocate the granting of a subsidy for a railv/ay in your county, ncr should you advocate the expen- diture of public money upon post offices 1 Post ofticcs and public works generally were alluded to as having been promised the electors in Prince Edward county. This is a terrible thing, but now we see that, in 1878, a minister of the Crown and the Minister of Militia of that day, the senior member for Halifax of to-day, said to the electors from the hust- ings at a political election : " That if he were elected he would use his influence to get the Government to extend tlie Intercolonial railway to Wert's wharf. " It is wrong for us to promise Uiat the Governmrnt will spend money upon public works, but it is all right for the hon. gentlemen opposite. It is all right for them to talk about re- trenchment when in Opponition, but it was quite a difterent tiling for them to practii;e it wlien tliey held the public purse. The same hon. gentleman furfher said, on this question of public expenditt'-e : " That during the time the late aovornmont were In power"—'— " The late Government" was the extravagant and the corrupt Goverumout now iu power — " they had only spent on an average three 21 millions a year on public works, but during the time the present Government" Those hen. gentlemen who preached re- trenchment and reform from 1867 down to 1874— "they have spent on an average of six mil- lions a year. That is the best evidence of the way the money is being expended by this Ad- ministration." They gloried in the expenditure then, and of course my hon. friend would not go back upon the policy of aid- mg railways and local subsidies, be- cause he knows that having regard to this question of bribery, he knows that he claimed the Government ought to do more than it has done in that province of Njva Scotia. He knows that he and his party have wrung the changes from one end of Nova Scotia to the other, to the effect that we have been neglected since Confederation in regard to railway expenditure, and that the Government ought to have built those rail- ways long ago which they promised to build, and I say they are carrying out their promise in this respect as they have in all others. I thought the question of bribery was settled last year, when the late leader of the Oppo- sition discussed the matter with the present Minister of Finance, and when the present Minister of Finance was able to read the lan- guage of that gentleman and that party's lieutenant in Nova Scotia, when he came down to a public meeting and promised there a far larger expenditure on railways to the province of Nova Scotia if they would only support the Liberal party. I thought that matter was threshed out then. It does seem extraordinary that this hon. gentleman's Jlies down in the province should have blamed us at public meetings for not .--pend- ing enough money, and then formulate an indictment against us in the house for having cpeut soraucii. I think, Mr. Speaker, that this discussion will not be fruitful ; that it will not aid us, at least wi^h the United States, to obtain unrestricted reciprocity by wash- ing this dirty linen of Nova Scotia,which the hon. gentleman has brought before the House of Commons of Canada, and which will bring neither credit to him nor to the people wliosert him here. Now we have the record of the speech delivered by the hon. member for Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) Ho took up a large portion of the time of this house by telling us the other nightabout the effect this duty had upon otir barley, and about our dependence upon the American market and that we had to pay a duty on all the products which we send into that mar- ket. When the late Government was in power, that Governmert which spent their money with such a lavish hand— when they occupied the treasury benches, when also the late George Brown had failed to nego- tiate a reciprocity treaty with the United States, the hon. gentleman's opinion was of another kind. At Simcoe in February, 1878, he made a speech, and I ask the attention of the house to this, for the argument an- swers the very weak and disingenuous argu- ment he addressed on the other side of the question during this debate. The hon. gen- tleman said :- - " It may be claimed that the agricultural interest has been interested by the abrogation of the reciprocity treaty. With one single ex- ception the average prices we have received since the abrogation of that treaty have been hleher than they were when the treaty was in force! In 1875 we exported 5,t°"'".°}ino"h.^si' of barlcv.and Imported less than 5,000 bush- els. Our business is in the exportation of barley ; it may be that the American du.y re- duced Ihe amount exported somewhat but, of course, we cannot help that as we do not make that treaty and cannot reduce it, but that state of things will not continue longer We have opened up a great export trade of barley with England, and England will take our whole crov. We can say to th^ UnUed States : If you pay us the same price for this barley less the cos^t of transportation which England pays, you may have it. He continued to point out that in reference to peas, beans, and other articles, it was the American that paid the duty, and not the Canadian. Now, then, Mr. Speaker, coming again to that speech that was addressed to us to-night by the hon. member for Halifax, (Mr Jones), I would like to call the atten- tion to the authority he has brought before the house on the question of the assessment of property in Nova Scotia. I think the hon. ge;.'-man is bold. I think the hon. gentleman proved his boldness by quoting, in support of his argument on the coal trade, a letter qu^ed by the hon. the late member for Digby, which was answered by that gentleman's own let- ter ; but he is a far bolder man when he quotes this statement of James Thomson, of the city of Halifax, in reference to stJitistics. Mr Thomson is the man that came, in 1878, under the lash of the hon. member for Hali- fax (Mr Jones). That hon. gentleman held thi« same James Thomson up to ridicule i i tiic city of Halifax ; that hon. gentleman amused his audience by picturing this man as a comical statittican and that hon. gentle- man christened him "Baron Statistics. Now « Baron Statistics" is the hon. gentle- . 1 "5^^0!C^' 22 man's authority to-night. James Thomson, when he wrote this article was against the hon. gentleman ; he has turned no doubt to his side, and having turned and made a somersault on unrestricted reciprocity the hon. gentlemon takes him up and quotes his statistics. On that occasion the hon. gentleman — uud it would a help to our side of the discussion if he had repeated his argu- ment — was also reported to have said : " He went into the question thoroughly showing that the benefits of protection would be for the manufacturers of Ontario and Quebec." ^ "_:; j ^i -v i -**- *^'' Does the' hon. gentleman repudiate that argument now ? Does he say that protection is not a benefit for the provinces oi Ontario and Quebec ? As to Mr. Thomson, here is one extract from the Chronicle : " Mr. James Thomson was dealt with in a manner that would have stirred the people to indlgnailou against him, If they had not been overcome by the ludicrous aspect of the case." They ridiculed him as a candidate for a judgeship; they ridiculed him for the mr tier in which he handled figures and called him « Baron Statistics" ; and yet the hon. gentle- man asks the House to take his statements as to assessments. My hon. friei:d knows well, that in reference to that statement of Mr. Thomson's, two things can be sa 1 If it be true, according to the assessment rolls of Nova Scctia, that property hap/ons to have had a lower value in 1884 than it had in 1868, the hon: gentleman knows that the burning question in local politics in' that Province is, how to got a fair and rational end sensible assessment, how to get the pro- perty assessed at its proper and true value ; and ho knows that that argument is puerile and weak, whether it came from "Baron Sta- tistics" or any oilier baron. He knows that property in Nova Scotia reached a boom value immediately after Confederation. He knows that the promises which lie held up to ridicule as deluding the people as to the wonf'erful prosperity that was going to oome to them, raised the value of property to an abnormal value in 1868, and the value has no doubt since gone down to its proper and normal level. But the hon. gentleman knowa that the statistics I read to-night from the authorised publications of the repeal Govern- ment give a full and complete answer as to whether the province is poorer or richer than it was before. Now. I have tak; n up considerable time, Mr. Speaker. I bive car- ried my remar'- d further than I intended ; but young as I am, and mindful of the re- buke I received in this house a session ago that when a member, authorised by the people of Nova Scotia, should speak, and when he should not, should be guaged by the years of that member, and yet remem- bering the liberal sentiment which pervades this house, I felt justified in taking up some time in (juoting from the mouths of these hon. gentlemen and their friends throughont the country, to show that this movement, first of commercial union, now of unrestricted reciprocity, vague, indefinite, meaningless, about which hon. gentlemen on the other side are now squabbling and disagreeing among themselves, was nothing more nor loss than a small and petty dodge of a very desperate and hopelessly beaten political party in the Dominion of Canada. These hon. gentlemen have made specious promises before ; but I will tell them in all these pol- itical wiles, as someone has said : " You can fool some of the people all the time, you can fool all the people mme of the time, but you cannot fool a majority of the people all the time." Mr. RiNPRET moved the adjournment of the debate. Motion agreed to, and debate adjoi'.raed. Sir Hector Langevin moved the adjourn- ment of the House. Motion agreed to, and 11.45 p i!.. "Touse adjourned at "^ 9