IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 1^ 12.5 .....2.2 1.8 U ill 1.6 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical Notes / Notes techniques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Physical features of this copy which may alter any of the images in the reproduction are checked below. D Coloured covers/ Couvertures de couleur L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Certains difauts susceptibles de nuire d la quality de la reproduction sont notis ci-dessous. D Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur D Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur D Coloured plates/ Planches en couleur 1 f ii Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcolor^es, tachetdes ou piqu6es D Show through/ Transparence D Tight binding (may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin)/ Reliure serr6 (peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le !ong de la marge int6rieure) D Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes u b f D Additional r;omments/ Commentaires suppldmentaires Bibliographic Notes / Notes bibiiographiques n Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponibie Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents D D Pagination incorrect/ Erreurs de pagination Pages missing/ Des pages manquent D Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque D Maps missing/ Des cartes gdographiques manquent n Plates missing/ Des planches manquent D Additional comments/ Commentaires suppldmentaires The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compto tenu de la condition et de la nettetl de I'exemplalre filmi, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de fllmage. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -^(meaning CONTINUED"), or the symbol y (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles sulvants apparattra sur la der- nidre image de chaque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole —^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". The original copy was borrowed from, and filmed with, the kind consent of the following institution: Library of the Public Archives of Canada Maps or plates 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 as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grdce d la g6n6rosit6 de I'dtablissement prdteur suivant : La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du Canada Les cartes ou les planches trop grandes pour dtre reproduites en un seul cliche sont filmdes it partir de Tangle supdrieure gauche, de gauche d droite et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n^cessaire. Le diagramme suivant illustre la m^thode : 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 i.. € #* »>!*W*4.|'- f" i "^* I, '^■ * -.v.r'. 4 * A SPEECH UPON -*' -#t. THE BUDGET ■•■r' *r; BY y ■ij' PROF. G. E. FOSTER, M P. 'X Foe King's County, New Brunswick, ^.■:.J;i.,,'V.; ,-. ' /. /■:>J, ^^:^;■f^^ ' IN THE CANADIAN HOUSE OF COMMONS, ON THURSDAY, . ■ -'■/'■■ *•"!?*?»'»;)» - ■'" - ,• ■■■• ;■■■■ . ■ ':''.« W'- ''■''■" ,; .-.v...;.,,- ■ ■ ■ -'■'-■'''■'-■ ■ y; i/; "' ■ -' ■•.^^. i. ■f % •-• r.'.iiiaaifflfii'rMr , Tar..." i-J INDEX. Page. The condition of tlie country 3 The fallacy of Opposition reasoning 5 Our financial condition 4 Comparison of debt 5 The increase in the public debt 6 The expenditure column 7 The method of criticism 1 Some details of expenditure 8 The taxation column 8 The relation of Government to the people. 9 The policy of the Opposition 10 The weakness of Liberal criticism 10 An apt illustration The duty of Government The unpatriotic policy Criticism by insinuation ...... , The immigration expenditure . . The commerce of the country . . Our shipping interests Result of the National Policy . . Comparison with United States. A Liberal on Protection The principles of the Tariff Canada's future PAGt. .. V. ... 1^ .. 12 .. 13 .. 13 .. 15 . . 16 .. 16 .. 17 .. 17 .. 18 . . 18 hi tt re to ba tb< I It€ ine tae her aft( thiE U^ I 81 pre4 fori Pari er7[ an Go^ be in and agal am f othj wor, II an not! wh/ whS the) mu4 upc this wha natd thef bavl conf circl aref rh« hav PACtt. ... 11 ... 1^. ... 12 ... 13 ... li< ... 15 .. . 16 ,... 16 .... 17 .... n .... 18 18 THE BUDGET DEBATE. SPEECH BY PROF. G E. FOSTER, MP. The rollowiiij; In n full ropnrt of the speech delivered In the HoiiNe of Commons on ThurMlay evening April 5th, 1S83» by Mr. FWNTKIt, Member for Hin^^'N Connty, New RrnnNuiok. Mr. Sprakbb, — If the hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat bad occasion to >i8k ttie kind indulgence of this House for the remarks which he, an old member, proposed to address to it, on the ground that the de- bate wan well worn, and that the patience of tbe House had been somewhat taxed, I think I may be oardoned if I ask a still greater measure of indulgence, on the ground ot my inexperience in dealing with such matters as taese, on account of my being a new mem- ber, and of having to follow in this debate after the very able speeches delivered on this side, and the lengthy criticisms which have been given on that side of the House. I suppose that as long as we maintain our present political system we shall be obliged, for a time at least, to conduct our affairs in Parliament by what is known as the machin- ery of party Government. It is, perhaps, an evil incident, but not essential to party Government, that the country nust be divided into two hostile camps, a .d that in Parliament we must have the generals and leaders of those two hostile camps pitted against each other — often more anxious, I am afraid, to gain an advantage over each other than to be strictly careful as to the work which is necessary to be done. I acknowledge, too, that the functions of an Opposition are rather difficult. It will not do for them too much to agree with what has been done by the Government to which they are opposed. Necessarily to their position they must fir ^ fault, they must criticise, and after y has passed upon year, it is not to be w . ered at that this fault finding spirit comes to be some- what chronic, and those who are so fortu- nate as for a long period of time to sit upon the Government side of the House ought to have, I think, a great deal of charity and consideration for those in the unfortunate circumstances I have mentioned, and which are incident to a long service in Opposition. The members on the Opposition benches have, as I stated, necessarily to criticise ahd find fault. I roust say that I was some- what puzzled to know how they would proceed, or «vhat they would find fault about, after the very excellent setting forth of the financial afiairs of this country by the hon. Finance Minister, and after the very lucid explanation which be gave of the fiaures which had appeared In the Public Accounts. After having looked carefully over those Public Accounts, and knowing fairly well TUB CONDITION OF THH COUNTRY, I confess that it was difficult for me to imagine what particular grounds the Oppo- sition would take. I have noticed the fiudget debates in the British Parliament ; I have noticed the Budget debates in the Congress of the United States, and I have found that some great mistake in public policy, some defeat of armies, some disaster which had befallen the country either at home or abroad, or some question of imminent fiscal change, is the matter which is chiefly brought up and re- lied ui on with reference to a criticism of the speech from the representative First Minis- ter Bnt, sir, in this country we have none of these Our country is at peace. All over it, from British Columbia to Cape Breton, a peaceful feeling seems dominant and upper- most. Nova 8«otia is perfectly happy, enjoying herself upon the proceeds of the better terms which were arained in 1869, and has ceased to grumble. Prince Edward Island is quiet, and the only disturbance upon Its political horizon in the contested election in the cele- brated King's County case. New Brunswick, as usual, is good-tempered and steady. On- tario, as the critic of the hon . Finance Min- ister's speech has stated, is prosperous, and the war cloud which arose there not many months ago, and grew to be, at least, as large as a man's tiand, and which was materialized, I think, probably for political purposes, has again been dissipated and no longer appears to view. Manitoba, which raised, or rather '!l- ,.,-...•■„. JC, - - r i w i ff ii wwMwi i mfti 1^ . i i tfc .■> .Ill I'll" -- IT # re-ecfaoed, the feeble war cry insucd from the Toronto Olobe office, and which reverberated along the distant hit Ih of the Turtle Mouu- tain Diutrict, baa grown peacefully calm ; the «cho has passed away and in completely over- borne in the tread of the hundreds and thou- sands of settlers and the hum of the steadiiy increasing business in that province. BritlHh Columbia, which, as I know from luading the debates, used to come down here and talk about its being so badly used, now seems to be (ibittictly quiet, and its able members are philosophically contemplating the prob- lem of the extinction of the Chinese. Even Quebec, that new France, or rather that old France upon new soil, seems to be quite con- tented, with the exception that just now its serenity may be a little rnffl -d by the slight flutter of the Orange and the Green. Our trade has increased in volume, our manufac- tures are st adily growing, our labor is at a premium, our wages are given more liberally and more steadily, and, taking it through and through, this is a prosperous year, and this is a prosperous time in the Dominion of Cana- da, and it is difficult to conceive how hon. gen- tlemen opposite can find fault in this respect. Again, with regard to the position of our country abroad. I suppose Canada never was better known to the world as a place where crowded peoples may find a large outlet and where immigrants may find a happy and prosperous home. Entering iutj relations of cordiality and sympathetic co-operation with the Mother Country closer than ever before, with her credit good and her position in the money market better than in any pre- ceding year of her history, her position abroad seems to b'l all that we can desire. And when we think that at home we have no deficits, but that surplus is king — and long may he be crowned as king, say I — when we recollect that, for the firrit time in the history of the country for eleven years, and for the second time since Confederation, we have made a reduction of the put>lic debt— this time by about $1,700,000 ; when we recollect that our revenue shows no sign of decided decrease, that our ordinary expen- ditures are met and our liabilities as they mature are redeemed, and all this without finding it necessary to float a foreign loan, it seems te me that the condition of the country is such that it will be very difficult indeed for hon. gentlemen to find fault with it. The gentlemen opposite have peculiar methods of dealing with the finances of the country and with its fiscal policy . I thinks as the line of attack has ko far been very largely directed against this side of the House, that it will be well for us now to make a counter movement and direct some attention to them ; and I propose, with the kind permission and indulgence of the House, to criticize, very modestly and very humbly, some of the attitudes which have been taken on the financial question by these gentlemen. First, then, with respect to OOR FINANCIAL CONDITION. The method that has been puroued by the party orKans througti the country, and has been fallowed up in this House by the lead- ers of the party, has been this. They have tliree columns of figures, and they are these, viz : Year. Debt. Exnonditure. Receipts- 1867 S 75,728,(541 $l3,48t),()il2 S13,()87,n28 1868 75,757,134 14,038,084 14,370,174 1869 7".,859,31<) 14,345,509 15,512,225 1870 78,2f)i),742 15.623,081 19,335,960 1871 77,706,517 17,589,468 20,714,813 1872 82,187,072 19,147.047 20,813,469 1873 99,848,461 213 316,.316 24,205,092 1874 108,324,964 23,713,071 24,648,715 1875 116,008,378 24,488,372 22,587,587 1876 124,551,514 23,519,301 .">,059,274 1877 133,235,309 23'503,]58 .'2,375,011 1878 140,3(i2,01 29,6^5,297 1881 155,395,780 27,067,103 33,383,455 1882 153,661,650 OneiHacolumuoldebtfrom 1868 tol882 That is kept constantly ready to do service as occa- sion muy require in the papers and in Parlia- ment Then, again, they have a column of ex- p6uditure6,runni[jg in the same way.from Con- federation up to the present time ; and they have ali-o a column of revenue which shows, as they say, the burden of taxation which is placed upon the people of the Dominion. The fault 1 have to find with the method of the Opposition in the country and in Parlia- ment is that it is their object to keep those three columns of figures, debt, expenditure and revenue which they say shows the taxa- tion wrung from the people, constantly be- fore 'the people and Parliament, without giving alongside of thete columns what we have to show for our debt, for our expendi- ture, and what we have, in the elasticity and ef pansion of our trade, to show as re- ceipta. which do not bear heavily on the people, and so cannot be called a burden of taxation. In 1867 the debt of Canada was $75,728,- 641 ; in 1874, $108,324,974 ; in 1879, $142,- 990,187 ; in 1882, $153,661,650. Now, I wish this to be borne in mind, and I think it cannot be too prominently kept before the country, oven though it be patent to hou. members of thiu House, that the item of $75,728,641 is not a debt which is due to, or -"': '!>:• .jM 18 now to irect some loae, with ice of the BBtly and des which ,1 question lUert by the jT, and has y the lead- Tt)ey have y are these, Receipts- ■ U,37i»,m 15,512,225 19,335,960 20,714,813 20,813,469 24,205,092 24,648,716 22,587,587 ,"?,059,274 .'2,375,011 22,517,382 23,307,406 29,635,297 • 33,383,455 tol882. That vice as occa- id in Parlia- olumnof ex- iy.from Con- e ; and they rhich shows, ion which is Donainion . le method of ad in Parlia- keep those expenditure >w8 the taxa- 3n8tantly be- )Qt, without QDH what we our expendi- he elasticity show as re- ivilv on the a burden of was $75,728,. 1879, $142,- 50. Now, I iud I think it pt before the itent to hou. the item of is due to, or which was created by this Dominion as a Dominion. It wns simply a tran^-ference of debt which, before that time, existed in the several provincrts, and which at the time of €onfederation was placed in one Consoli- dated Fund, where it could be better managed and at a lower rate of Interest. The impression often obtains abroad and through this couutry that the seventy-flve millioDS odd somehow or other came to us because of Confederation. Suppose for a moment we were to adopt the method pursued by hon. gentlemen opposit':', that the increase of debt must be held to show the extravagance and incapa> city of the Government. What conclusion would we arrive at by adopting this method of reasoning ? The increase of debt from 1867 to 1874, under Liberal-Conservative adminiatration, was $32,596,323, that from 1874 to 1879, under the Liberal Government, was $34,665,223— the former representing seven years, while the latter represented oily five years; and that between 1879 and ^882, under the Liberal-Conservative ad- ministration, was $10,671,463. Now, taking an ftrerage — recollecting that during the period the whole debt has been incurred the Conservative party has been in power ten years to the other party's five years, and (hat even, though each party had increased the debt at the same ratio, a larger portioi would appear against the Liberal Conserva- tive Government than against the Liberal Goverament — we find that the amount added during the ten years by the Conservative Government on t'ie same basis as that added by tie Reform Government (which during five years added $34,665,223 to the public debt) would have been $69,330,440 instead of $43,267,786. THE FALLACY OF OPPOSITION RKA80NING. I say fiat is according to the reasoning which prevails among hon. gentlemen op- posite ; but It is fallacious reasoning, and should never be used as a proper and legiti- mate criticism with respect to the liuances of the country. The fallacy which under- lies such reasoning is that an increa'"^ of debt is necessarily blameworthy, uusta «- manlike, and an index of coming disas; I say that this is a fallacy ; it will not bear dissection, or the light of investigation. Suppose we were to mike a business ap- plication af it. Hare is a man wifi three sons. The man owns a farm, and his sons own each a farm; they are all mortgtged. Same fiae day the father and sons come to the conclusion to merge their farms into one, to lift ttie small mortgages existing and go into partnership. They see near them a large piece of country, which promises to be excellent grass land, and they say : "We will buy it, because through it we will add to the resources and to the productive power of what we already possess." Then they say : " A portion of our land needs trench- ing and tiling; we must put up a barn here and an out-house there," and so looking around them, they get capital and buy and make these improvements. Now, what I mean is that, if in that expenditure of capi- tal, they had increased their resources, and put all these different pieces of land into a condition by which a greater return would be brought to them than before it would be no argument against them to foot up the ex- penses which they have incurred, and say that they are wasteful and extravagant, and going to ruin . This very extrnvagance, so called, is simply judicious investment, and the amount capitally expended and the amount of ordinary expenditure, is a wise axpenditure, because it is the guarantee and condition of a return which is to come by- and-bye. Now, Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask the hon. members of this House if that is not a fair application of a business principle ; and also if the very same business principle does not apply to countries as well. I take issue entirely with the hon. gentleman who has last spoken, when he intimates that it is fie sole function of a Gjvdrnment to ad- minister the affairs of a country . I say that a Government is uaworthy of baing at the head of a country if it is simply to sit down and do nothing but administer the routine; business thereof ; but that Government must be sagacious and long-sighted, and must have business principles, and put them into execution, and that it must reach for- ward, and look to what would be best for the development and future growth ot the coun- try. Like a business min, a Government must set to work, and expend, and bring its undeveloped resources into a condition where wealth can be realized ; and that you will fiud, Mr. Speaker, as the House well knows, is the method pursued now among all younger countries. COMPABISON OF DIBT. I hold in my hand a table with reference to the Australian colonies; New South Wales, with a population of 781,000, has a debt of £18,924,019 sterling; Victoria, with a population of 882,000, has a debt ot £22,- 944,602 sterling ; New Zsaland, with a popu- lation of 500,000, has a debt of £29,946,711 sterling ; South Australia, with a population of 293,000, has a debt of £12,481,800 eter- ling ; Queeneland, with a population of 227,- 000, has a debt of £13,126,000 Bterling ; Tasmania, with a population of 119,000, hab a debt ot X2,003,000 sterling ; West Aastralia, with a population of 32,000, has a debt of £500,000 ; and all these Australian colonies, with a populatioL of 2,844,000, have a debt of £99,925,482 B'erllng. Now, the other fact that I wish to couple with that is this : That in 1860 the debt of all these colonies was only £10,000,000 sterling, and twenty- two years afterwards it is £99,000,000 ster- ling ; that is, there has been an increase of over 900 per cent, in their debt, which is £34 Bterling per head, or about $170. Now, if the hon. gentlemen who crHised the financial address had only had the good fortune to be leading the Opposition in the Confederation of the Australian colonies and could point to a debt which had increased 900 per cent, in twenty years, I think, Mr. Speaker, he could have drawn a picture before which the dark and gloomy outline foreshadowed by him here, would be only in comparison, as the sombre shadows of Milton's Faradise Lost in contrast with the lurid and ghastly scenes of Dante's Inferno. And what do we find in reference to the Australian Colonies 7 That this immense expenditure of money has been en public works, and that they are already getting in a very large return for it, and that their credit stands high, as we will see, upon the English money markets Now, what are the reasons for this? I think they are easily seen. Coun- tries do not grow now asthey did one thousand years ago. It may have been all very well for a country in an age, and situated as Qreat Britain was, to take fifteen hundred jrears in which to grow from her wildness and bar- barism np to the great country which she is to-day ; but a new country which, in this age, hopes to progress by that purely natural method, will remain unknown and undirvel- oped, while other countries about it will measure themselves with it and vastly sur- pass it in the race of national development and of substantial growth. Things are different now to what they were in the olden time. There is now competition, and what are you going to do with a new country ? It has no people ; it has no wealth, and it has very large re- sources, and before the older countries will look at it or send immigrants thither, you have to put capital into that country ; and as capital is not in the country itself, you must perforce borrow that capital and expend it upon the country ; and I hold, Mr. Speaker, and I think it cannot be successfully contra- / dieted, that taking into account this change of affairs, and the competition which takes place between the lands now seeking for immigration from the older countries, that a judicious and wise capital expenditure of money, making the debt for the new coun- try, is not an index of incapacity and coming disaster, but a sign of business-like qualities, an index of sound statesmanship, and a guar, antee fur the best prosperity in the future for that country. Now, then, with reference to THB INCREASE IN THE PUBLIC DEBT and in the public debt. I wish the House to especially think of what has been noticeable all the way through this debate ; that there was not a single item of all that public cap- ital expenditure which was taken exception to by the members from the other side of the UouBe ; all they did was simply to poiiit to an aggregation of figures ; the debt wbh so much tbis year, and BO much greater next year ; and the debt was BO much in 1882 ; that was the sole com- ment which they made upon it, and that was what they meant to be an argument against the Oovernment and the policy of the Gov- ernment, as supported by this party. I hold that such an argument is altogether incon- sequential, and has no force, and that it cannot be used against the Oovernment un- less it jan be supported by this, viz. :— That the items upon which this capital expendi- ture was made were items whii h ought not to be defended, and which, therefore, show waste and extravagance on the part of those who made them. What do we find r-ith re- ference to tbis? '-Tas the debt been in- creased? ^eb, it has; but what has been done with this increase ? We have dealt liberally with the different Provinces of the Dominion ; and would it have been a good thing for the future pros- perity, for the future unity of this growing country, that after the Dominion bad taken very largely the great sources of income from the Provinces, it should keep them ground down under debt, and conBtantly in disquiet, and that tbis should be a perman- ent source of anxiety to tbem? And tbis Parliament said that that was not the policy, and so it agreed to treat the Provinces liberally, and 1 wish you to think with me that the Liberal Con. servative administrat'ious, of all that increase of debt with which they are charged, assumed debts of the Provinces from 1869 to 1870 to the amount of $23,099,096. That is caused by the aggregation of Provincial debts, but it has not added one cent to the indebted- ( i DeBB ot the country ; it has simply taken off the heavy burdens from the different parts of the country where they would nay larger in- terest, where they would not \b so easily managed, and massed them in Me aggregate where it can be more easily managed, and where the rate of interest will be decreased — where it can be met by the great revenues which come in as an offset to them. We have also built the Intercolonial Rail- way. Na one has appeared in this House to find fault with that expenditure, yet the Conservative Governments of these different periods expended no less than $21,180,054 on Capital Account ot the lutercolonial Bail- way. Then, again, we have built canals and public works, and on miscellaneous public works by the same party during their dif- ferent periods of power, there has been added to the debt of the country $9,750,226. Upon the Canadian Pacific Railway there has been spent on Capital Account $14,933,000. On North-West Territories — the purchase of the territory and the amount expended from capital for Dominion lands — we have the sum of $3,766,563, making altogether, added to the $77,600,000 assumed at first, $150,289,663. What I say is this: that until the Opposition can fiod fault with, and charge as extravagent, these different items, it is altogether inconsequential, and it is, I might say, absurd, to run up this long list of figures without giving the purposes for which they were expended, and the resources we have on handtobalaace that expenditure. THE KXPBNDITDBK COLUMN. The same method is adopted with refer- ence to the expenditure. The expenditure in 1868 was $13,486,092. In 1882, it was $27,067,183. The rate of expenditure was small in the period from 1874 to 1879 while the opposite party were in power. They are entitled to all the credit which they can get, and which we and the country cheerfully accord to them for that lessened expenditure, and they will get a larger meed of our praise and of the praises of the country if it can be shown that in that lesser expenditure they did not at the same time starve the public works of the country, re- trench where retrenchment could not be properly made, and which afterwards would cause an increased hunger of these public works, and add more than if they had been kept up steadily from one year to another. This is the method which they take of show- ing an increase of expenditure. If you read carefully, as I have no doubt every true Liberal-CjDservative does, the columns of he Globe, yon will see that a stereotyped set of figures called the expenditure of the Do- mion comes out in a column by itself every now and then, but the other side is not put down alongside of it. That same method has been THB METHOD OF ORITIOIBH during this debate. The fallacy that under- lies this argument is that the increase of expenditure necessarily me^ns extravagance. Is that true ? Let us make an application of it as a common business principle. Here is a man who sends out a person to another country to sell on commission. The mer- chant conducts thii year a business of about $5,000, we will say, and incurs an expendi- ture of $1,000 or $2,000 for carrying on that basiness. The commission merchant sees that he can do better, and the second year after consulting the person who has sent him there he enlarges the business, he opens out on a new line of goods, he sends one agent here, and another there, and so goes on with the business. The person who established the agency sends out a man to look after the business, and at the end of the second year, after looking in- to the business he reports: Why, the expenses last year were only $1,000 or $2,000 ; they have risen this year to $3,000 or $4,000 ; you had better recall that man. Do not you see that he is extravagant ; the expenditures are going right up ? What re- ply would the other man make ? He would say : Before I recall him, I want you to give me something besides a mere list of expendi- tures ; I want you to give me a list of the returns from that expenditure, and if it can be shown that the returns are adequate to, and follow closely after the expenditure, I will say that it is an evidenje of busiaess capacity and not of extravagance. Is not that a fair business principle, and should not the same principle be applied to the country as to the individual ? Is it not just as un- fair simply to run up a long list of expendi- tures w thout giving the extra returns and the receipts in the case of the nation as in the case of the individual ? I think we may lay it down as a fair theory that no one here will dissent from, that if money is spent without any adequate return, we may call it waste. If money is spent in the way of capital expenditure with a return equal to a fair interest on the amount expended, and if the ordinary expenditures give back an equivalent in the shape of a return to the expenditure made, we must call those expenditures judicious investments, and those investments will be judicious in proportion as the degree of the return which comes trom that 8 ! I expenditure amoants pari pattu to the ex- penditure made. Are not those fair bueineHH propositions? Let us apply them to the ex- penditure of the Dominion of Canada. It is true that the expenditure has increased, and it is also true that the returns and the receipts have increased as well. SOMK DBTAILS OF BXPBNDITURB8. Let ns take for instance the single item of the Post Office. In 1868 the percentaKe of expenditure over receipts was ITperceit. In 1874 it was 67 per cent. — a large increase. In 1879 it was 43 per cent.— a small de. crease ; but in 1882 it has dropped to GJ per cent. Now, from the year 18G8to 1882 the Post Office expenditure over receipts has de- creased from 17 pet cent, to 6| per cent., while taking the middle period it has de- creased from 5 7 to 6 1 per cent ; and on the busi- ness principle we have laid down, the Post Office expenditure cannot be criticised simply on the ground of increased expenditure, be- cause the receipts have been steadily creep- ing up and within a few years at this rate they will have overtaken them, aud I hope the Post Office will before long come to be a source of revenue instead of a cause of ex- penditure. Let us look again at the question of reve- nue and expenditure. From 1867 to 1874 the receipts or the revenue increased 76 per cent, ; the expenditure had increased 73 per cent. From 1874 to 1879 the receipts de- creased 7 per cent, and the expenditure in- creased 5 per cent. From 1879 to 1882 the receipts increaMed 48 per cent, and the expenditure increased only 10 per cent. Between 1868 and 1882 the receipts increased 143 per cent, while the expenditures incrtased only 100 per cent., there again showing that the t-x- penditures have diminished while the receipts are constantly increasing and justifying tbe rule we have laid down. Let us take again the question of Customs. From 1867 to 1874, the increase in the recttipts was 67 per cent., while the increase in the cost ot collec- tion was only 37 per cent. From 1874 to 1879 there was that ominous decrease in the receipts of 10 per cent., but an increase in the cost of collection of 9 per cent. From 1879 to 1882 there was an increase in the re- ceipts of 66 per cent., and an increase in the cost of collection of only | per cent In 1868 the annual percentage of expenditure for the collection of revenue was 6-99 ; in 1874 it was 4-55 ; In 1879 it rose to 5 • 66, and in 1882 it fell to 3-33. pie wo laid down has every one of thece The business princi' been lived up to in instances : and so I say that, although the txpen- diture has increased, yet we find that, along with that increase, we have had oi(jm than a correspondiuK increase in receipts, ^here has been an increase in public works and public services given to the people of Canada, and we have felt the bene- ficial result of this expenditure all over the coutitry ; and unless the OppoHition find fault with the items of the expenditure, I think it cannot be controverted that the expenditure has been incurred on bueiness principles, and that there has been kept up with it an accre- tion of receipts largely preponderating over the augmentation of the expenditure. THB TAXATION COLUMN. I wish to refer to another of these columns. There are three columns, a sort of a trinity of figure lines. There is a debt column, an ex- penditure column, and what is called a taxa- tion column. The taxation column, t-ane- lated into plain English, means nothing more than this — that it is a column of the receipts of revenue from all sources, and to that is ap- plied the name of taxation. Our revenue, fortunately, has l)een almost always on the up grade, and if you saddle that with the name of taxation, it is easy to prove that tho taxation of this couutry is continually in- creasing. In 1878, we are told, the revenut> was $22,375,011, and in 1882 $33,383,- 452, an increase of $1 1,008, i41. Hun. gentlemea opposite point to that increase, and thtxatioa e people ? id deliver consider money we there is a taxation. instance, nness. It y it on. letters in and psys )loaBe, the The next year his business requires the writing of dou- ble the number of letters, and ho he pays $30 in postage instead of $1 5. He has paid dou- ble, but he has rec«.ived service for every one of the letters carried. So I want to make this poiut— that of that $1 1,008,441 in- crease of revenue, there is a large snare which is not to be attributed to the tariff, but simply to the growth and expansion of the revenue, due to the increased business and the increased services in the country. For instance, from 1878 to 1882, there has been an increase in the Post Office revenue of $380,098. Is that wrung out of the people ? There has been an increase in Excise of $962 812 ; has the tarifl aaytking to do with the Excise? There has been an increase in public works dues of $676,661, but this has been from tolls and railway freights and these have not been heightened but rather lowered. That must show yon that this in- creased revenue is not taxation in the proper sense of the word, but that for every cent of it a service has been rendered, the country rendering service to the people, and getting pay from the people in return for it. Now, hon. gentlemen opposite are persistently drilling into the minds of thn people that the whole increase of the Customs duties from 1878 to 1882 has been due to the in- crease iu the Tariff. I remember a summer or two ago, when I was in the city of Fred- ericton, having the pleasure of listening t) the hon. leader of the Opposition. It was on the occasion of that celebrated tour that he made to the Alaritime Provinces, in which be gained a great many acquaintances and made a great many friends, even though ho did not sec ire a very large increase ot votes I had the pleasure of listening to that hon. gentleman, and to the farmers who were all about him looking up into his face ; be used this argument : — "Now, said he, when you farmers go into a store and buy a num- ber of yards of shirting, I want you to recol- lect that you must cut off so many yards, and send them up to the Qovernment at Ottawa ;" and in my simple-mindedness I hei^an to imagine what an astounding wardrobe the hon. Finance filinister must have, and what a plethoric larder these members of the Qoverniaeni must keep. THE RELATION OF GOVBRNMBNT TO THB PEOPLB. Now, there are two ideas in that that are er- roneous. The first is this, and although it may not appear ot much importance to some, I think it is very important, and the principle underlying it is vtry important. I say there should not be any notion of anta- gonism raised between the Government and the country. It should never be represent- ed that the payments which come from the country in the shape of revenue are going into the hands of another and totally distinct party, the Oovernment of the country. But the Oovernment of the country is a part of it, doing its business for the individual in the aggregate, and that kind of representa- tion has just this intiuenct^, that it produces an antagonism between the people and the Government. The people are led to look upon the Oovernment as something foreign to themtielves, and hence arises tho jealous idea that the Goveru.uent are using the peo- ple's money for their own purposes, while in reality the expenditure by the Oovernment is only the expenditure of the people's money Dy pursnns who are selected to do that business for them. Then there is the sup- presiio veri — the keoping back of the truth. They tell the people that when they buy so many yards of shirting they have to cat of) some and send it to the Oovernment at Ot- tawa. But the people a^'e never told that under the former regime, if they bought so many yards they had to cut any off. They were led to believe that all they were obliged to cut off was due to the National Policy. But what do we find when we examine into the ques- tion? We find thar. in 1878, $91,199,677 worth of goods were entered for home con- sumption, and that the duty paid was $12,- 796,693. In 1882, $112,648,927 worth of goods were imported, on which $21,708,837 duty was paid, being an increase of duty of $8,913,144. Now, all that duty was not due to the Tariff which was brought in with the National Policy. If we look at 1878, we find that the average duty was 14 per cent., and if we look at 1882 we find that the average was 19 per cent. ; so that the Tariff simply caused an extra collection of 6 per cent. If we apply that, we will find that 14 percent, of the home consumption entries of 1882 would amount to $16,770,849, the differ- ence net ween that amount and what was col- lected ot3ing$5,937,988— that is, there was an expansion of trade, and if the dutv had only been 14 per cent, for the year 1882, there would have been still several million dollars more collected than was collected in 1878, because the volume of imports was greater. Therefore, when we come to look at the whole revenue of $33,383,452, and contrast its increase over that of 1878, we must not look at it in the light of more taxes on im- portation, but we have to show that such was the expansion of business and prosperity, that a very large accumulation to our revenue resulted. 10 I I Mr. Fattbrbon — Hear, hear. Mr. FosTiR — Hon. gentlemen opposite say << Hear, bear," because they think 1 have very effectually stated an argument of their own, that if there had been no extra duty put on at all in 1878, the natural expansion and growth ,of the business of the country and the revenue conpequent on that growth, would have given ns sufficient to carry on the whole affairs of the country. I do not make that statement, but I state two con- siderations which go to disprove it. First, I do not believe this growth and expansion would have taken place to any great de- gree if it had not been for the impetus given to the business of this country by the policy of the Government. I think that tho effect of the National Policy, and the effect of what arose out of that in the increase of manu- factures and consequent increase of importa- tion of machinery and r-w material and other goods, and the greater ability of the people to buy, through the wa^es paid — of all these things and others I might mention, has been the expansion of the revenue to a greater degree than it would otherwise have been. The other point I want to make is this, that the legitimate expenses of this country, as 1 have explained before, have increased, and we require more revenue in order to meet them. Mr. Pattrrbon — The National Policy was designed to decrease imports and to restrict trade. Mr. McCallum — Hear, hear. Mr. Pattebson — The hou. Finance Minis- ter said BO. Mr. Foster — Who has the floor? The next point I wish to make is this : I want to bind the Opposition down to the position which they have made inevitable to them- selves. THS POLICY OF THH OPPOBITIOM. What is their whole argument ? It is this : Here is this trinity of figures — the increase of debt, the increase in expenditure, the in- crease in taxation. All these increases show, or ought to show, the incapacity of the present Government, and their unworthiness of the confidence of the country — that they ought to be put out and that we should be put in. Is not that the argument, if there is any truth or honesty or candor in the Op- position, and there is ? Here is the inevit- able position into which they are forced. It to-day we could go back wardm and put them at the beginning, if they are true to this argument which they make, they would not increase the debt or the expenditure of the country. In what condition then would we be ? We would be stagnant and stiitionary. Where would have been our public improTe- ments which could not be carried on without increased expenditure? Where would hara been our consequent increase of revenue ? The inevitable position tbey are driven to is tbis, that if they had been in power they would not have incurred this expenditure or incurred it in a vastly less degree. And so all the great lines of public policy which have been inaugurated and carried out, and which have made Canada hs great as it is, and given it such a future, would not hare been for this country and for this people. I want to know if such a position as that, and such an alternative as that, if put to Hbe people of the country, would not stamp any party as inefficient and incapable ? If the people believe — and the people has reason to believe, and it is a just and legitimate belief — that for a new country like Canada, with such iuimense resources, so few people, such comparatively small wealth, it is of prime necessity that great ex- penditures should take place in the way of public works and means of intercommunica- tion in order that settlers may avail them- selues to the greatest degree of the heritage which we have. I have stated that there has been no serious criticism with reference to the items of the debt or the expenditure. At first sight it may seem that tbis is a rash statement to make after the long hours of speeches by the ablest critics on the Oppoai- tion benches, and yet I leave it to the good sense of the House if, from the time this de- bate opened until now, there baB been any- thing brought up on the other side to im- pugn one single item of the capital expendi- ture which goes into our public debt. THE WIAENKBB OF LIBERAL GRITICISU. I leava it to any competent person to de- cide whether in any of the talk which we have heard about increased expenditures, there has been one serious effort made to get down to the bottom of any large ex- penditure, and eay that it is extravagant, un- warranted or uncalled for. The critic of the speech of the hpn. Finance Minister dis- tinctly approved of a number of expendi- tures, he slightly touched with no great re- probation one or two others, and then swiftly descended into the region of cab hire and contingencies — two items which, I think, might very well come up for criticism when the Estimates comt bef*re the House, but the quick resort to which proved to me that there could not have been much to criticize in the great items of expenditure. Now, the hon. member for South Brant knew well 11 enough that that was not a legitimate way to criticize the financial policy of this Honee, and he admitted as much. His conscience, I judge from his courteous disposition and his pleasant manner, is still tender, and it rather pricked him at first. He stated what the hon. member for North Norfolk has stated to.day, but in a little different way : he said tbe Finance Minister went into ex- planations. He was bound to admit that many of the ezplanat'ons had weight, but did not the people of the country kuow, and were not the Public AccouHtg before the people ? And that was all that was neces- sary. The people had the figures in the Public Accounts, and they did not want any explanations. Anl yet for days and hours before that same hon. gentleman looked anxiously and longingly for the time to come when the Finance Minister, notwithstanding that these Public Accounts had been before this House almost from the first of tbe ses- sion, should come down and make the neces- sary and needed explanation of those Public Accounts to the people. Why are they not needed ? Mr. Speaker, every young member in this House who gets the ponderous t'^me which my hon. friend the Minister of Cus- toms issues each year, and sits down to his table to look that over and pick out some figures which will just suit himself, knows that there is almost a technical edu- cation needed to get at the bot- tom of even the beet regulated Public Accounts, and that to give that volume simply to a man who is not used to tbe Public Accounts is almost like putting so much Greek and Latin before him. And so it is uecesRary that explanations should be given. But the hon. member for South Brant said that these explanations were not neces- sary ; he was not going to give them their weight ; he was simply going to take the items of expenditure in the Public Accounts. He knew it was not tbe proper method of criticism, and he simply justified himself on the ground th&t others did it. Here is wnat he said : • • , • " The hon. gentleman knew thit the Public Accounts were in the bands of members; he knew tliey showed that tliere had been a very great Increase of "-spendlture ; and he did what It WHS only natural be should do, be Bought to break the force of that, by attempt- ing to explalnand justify each item, in order, if possible, to save himself and the adminis- tration of which he Is one of the ablest mem- bers, from blame and censure In that regard. • * • • Iwlll be able to charge back upon those hon. gentlemen, and it will not be for them to resent anything in this direction, they themselves having adopted that Hue of Itioism when they occupied this side of tbe ©use." Now, all 1 have to say is, that if, when this Government occupied the Opposition benches, they took that wrong method of criticising the Public Accounts, then when the Government then in power took the Op- position benches and became a better and purer party, it ought to have left its old and wrong methods buried in oblivion, and to have taken its stand upon higher grounds and a proper method of criticism When the hon. member for South Brant went through with his criticism, he impugned no items of the debt or expenditure, but struck away upon the National Policy. I wish to say one word with reference to his criticism of the National Policy. If I recollect aright, the elections were carried on and ended in the autumn of 1878. Parliament met here in 1879, it got through with its operations in April or May, and this policy went into operation, I believe, about the first day of May, 1879. The Public Accounts closed on the last day of June, 1879, and yet the hon. member for South Brant criticised the Na- tional Policy because in a month or a month and a-half, it did not do that which its ex- ponents said that in the course of time it would do; I put it to the hon. member if he considers that is a fair method of criti- cism. Mr. Patbrson— I did not say so. Mr. Foster — I think if the hon. gentle- man will refresh his memory, he will find that he took the ground that the National Policy, in 1879, bad not done that which Its friends and supporters had claimed that it would do, and began to talk about a long list of bank failures, and read a long column of prices, in one of which he stated that oats had fallen from 28c to 31c, and I think that it is in the memory of this House. Mr. Patbrson — What month, June or Sep- tember? One yfir after the Mackenzie Ad- miuistration, or one month ? Mr. FoBTBR— The unfairness is there all the same. AN APT ILLnSTBATION . Suppose that a man has been sick for a month, and a physician is called in to pre- scribe for him ; after a long time the physi- cian strikes tbe seat of thM disease, he diag- noses the complaint exactly, aud supplies a remedy on a certain date. You go in three weeks afterwards, and find that the man is still confined to th«^ lounge, that be in not walking around, that he 1.4 not strong and able to do his work — do you say that that physician's skill has been useless, and that he has not touched the disease and viitually bealed it ? No ; but you eay, as any reason- able man would the man has been ill 111 I 12 I 'll flick, the disease has only just lately been diagnosed ; it will take months for him to recuperate and get back to his normal po- sition. We must give him time. It is ex- actly the same with reference to this Na- tional Policy. I never heard the hon. First Minister :itate that if the National Policy were adopted and this aew line were cairied out, that immediately, like waving of the wand of the magician, all these good things would spring up and flourish. That state- ment has been made by the Opposition. They put up a man of straw in order that they might amuse themselves in knocking it down. Mr. Patkbson— The hon. Prime Minister said it. Mr. BowBLL — I do not think the hon. Prime Minister ever said any such thing. Mr. Patbrson — Yes, he will tell you so Mr. FosTBB — I would like to see yoti bring to me anything containiug any such statement — Mr. Pathbson — Well, he will not deny it. Mr. Foster— And I have yet to find out that any such statement was made. The Government by any policy which it intro- duces, brings down and inaugurates, and by this National Policy which it brought down, never promised to build tatitories, never promised to put up tall chiminies, to establish refineries, while t'^e peopM sat idly by with their capitU in their pockets, or in their banks. Qovernmeut does not do that thing any more than it makes the rain fall or takes the place of Provi- dence, as the hon. gentleman opposite is in the habit of representing. THB DUTY OF GOVBRMMBNT. But the Government does not take, and should not take, the oppouite ex- treme that they are nothing more than a fly on the wheel, and no matter what the posi- tion of the country is, or what are its re- quirements, all the Government can do is to go on iidminiistering the Post Office and col- let Jng taxes, and is powerless to aid indus- tries by legislation. This statement has been made oft^u and often with respect to the growth of our exports and with respect to our great prosperity, A simile occurrs to me, and I think it is a true one. Government cannot create the water that flows in the mighty river, but the Government caa lead the water out of the mighty river and by ap- pliances and machinery can carry it through acres and acres of arid soil, and by a proper system of irrigation, can make the desert om like a rose, and cover the sands with fertility and an abundant harvest. There is this distinction ; that which causes fertility is the gift of Nature, but the duty of utilizing it rests ^^ith man, and it is the same thing with thj prosperity of u country. The great river in a country's pro^^perity is that which comes out of the soil, the sea, the mine ; but that is powerless to do whttt it may do unless the Government provide proper conditions and unless they foeter and care for and direct the energies to be applied to it. That is the distiuLtion I would make, and it is one which, if carried in our minds would very much lighten up that ofcen muddling and perplexing assertion tbal the Government cannot make good crops and cannot cause the fish to multiply in the Sba. THB ONPATBIOTIC POLICY. Well, the hon. member for South Brant, finding he bad not any chance of criticising the items of capital expenditure and ordinary expenditure, after a time forgets the calm way in which he commenced and iaunch^s out. into hyperbole. He says that t-.is (Government has embarked on au era of extravagance. Did he prove it ? He simply read a long list of figares. He says they have put a blight upon Manitoba. Manitoba still exists and is wonderfully prosperous, so tar as 1 can hear. Be states that the people there hive been bound band and f')Ot. I have heard of no manacles or ohitins being sent to that coun- try. This is extravai^ant language — language which, coming from the prudpootive Finance Minister of this country, m«kus people pause and think whether or not they should entrust such important affairs to a man wiio will make use of such intemperate language when he is speaking aooac his own country. 1 am sorry that this language has bee u used I am sorry he has thus copimi the ex-Fi nance Minister who formerly criticised the Budget Speech in this House, and wno utated upon one occasion that Canada was a country to which no person could go, and in whici no person could move without meeting at every turn the usurer and tax collector. These statements are not for the health of the country ; they are are not true state- ments ; they go abroad and affect our im- migration ; they are caught up by those with whom we are competing, and they are made to do duty to keep people away from this country .The hon. member for South Brant seeing how weak and comparatively futile his criticism of the public finances have been, got up a rolling fire of light artillery under which he retreated into safe and sure cover. He talked about the Finance Minis- ter acting la the place of Providence, about 13 rhere is fertility itilizing le thing he great it which ae ; but ,o unless nditions ad direct lat is the t is one lid very ling and rernment ot cause th Brant, riticising I ordinary calm way '8 out. into vurnment kvagance. li long list ; a blight ists and is can hear. i