^^^^ V^ ^% IMAGE EVALUATION TEST I ARGET (MT-3) ^ 1.0 I.I 1^ M i^2.0 1^ 1^ M^ iJ4 Sdencjes Corporation ^ 23 WBT MAIN STRIIT WI«TIR,N.Y. KSM (71«)t7a-4S03 Km CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CSHIVI/ICIVIH Collection de microfiches. Cenadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions ^ Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Is TechnicAl and Bibliographic Notaa/Notat tachnlquaa at bibliographiquaa Tha Inatituta Itaa att«>mptad to obtain tha baat originai copy availabia for filming. Faaturaa of thia copy w'iiich may ba bibliographieaily uniquu, which may altar any of tha Imagaa in tha raproduction, or which may algnificantiy changa tha usual mathod of filming, ara chacicad ba!aw. D D n n Colourad covara/ Couvartura da coulaur Covara clamagad/ Couvartura andommagte Covara raatorad and/or laminatad/ Couvartura raataur6a at/ou palilcul6a Covar titia missing/ la titra da couvartura manqua Colourad maps/ Cartaa gtegraphiquas an coulaur Coiourod inic (i.a. othar than blua or black)/ Encra da couiaur (i.a. autra qua biaua ou noirai □ Colourad platas and/or illustrations/ ' Planchaa at/ou illustrations an coulaur D D D D Bound with othtir matarial/ Rail* avac d'autras documanta Tight bindinq may causa shadows or distortion along intariur margin/ La reliura sarr«a paut causar da I'ombra ou da la distortion la long da (a marga int«riaura Blank laavas addad during rattoration may appaar within tha taxt. Whanavar possibia, thasa havft baan omittad from filming/ II sa paut qua cartainaa pagas blanchas aJout*M lars d'uns rastauration apparaiaaant dans la taxta, mais, lorsqua cala «tait possibia. cas pagas n'ont pas At* filmAas. Additional commants:/ Commantairas supplAmantairas; L'Institut a microfiimd la mailiaur axampfairo qu'il lui a it* poaaibia da aa procurar. Las ditaiis da cat axamplaira qui sont paut-Ctra unk, jas du point da vua bibliographiqua, qui pauvant modifiar una imaga raproduita, ou qui pauvant axigar una modification dans la mithoda normala da fiimaga sont indiquis ci-daaaous. I I Colourad pagaa/ Pagas da coulaur Pagaa damagad/ Pagas andommagias Pagas raatorad and/oi Pagas rastaurtea at/ou paiiiculAaa I I Pagaa damagad/ I I Pagas raatorad and/or laminated/ Pagaa discolourad, stainad or foxad/ Pagaa dicoioriaa, tachatiaa ou ptquias rif Pagas datachad/ LlJ Pagas d^tachiaa □ Showthrough/ Transparanca □ Quality of print varias/ Quality inijaia (i» I'improasion □ includas supplamantary matarial/ Comprand du material aupplimantaira □ Only adition availabia/ Sauia Mition diaponibla □ Pagas wholly or partially obscured by arrata allps, tissuas, ate. hava baan rafilmad to ansuia tha baat possiblo imaga/ Laa pagaa totalamant ou partiallaman; obscurclas par un faiiiilat d'arrata, una palura, ate, ont AtA filmias i nouvaau da fa^on A obtanir la maillaura Imuga possibia. This itam is fil;nad at tha laduction ratio chackad balow/ Ca documant »st filmi au taux da reduction indiqu* ci-dassous. 10X 14X lax 22X J 12X lex aox MX asx 30X n 2fX 32X ham • du lodiftor r une Imago >alure, lit 3 nx The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanka to the guneroaity of: Library of the Pubiic Archivea of Canada The iniagea appearing here are the beat quelity poasibie conaidering the condition end legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract apecificatlona. Original copiea in printed paper covera are filmed beginning with the front c'>ver and ending on the iaat page with a printed or iiluatrated Imprea- sion. or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on ;he first page with a printed or liluatrBted impres- sion, and ending on the Iaat page with a printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -^ (meaning "CON^ 1INUED"), or the symbol 7 (maening "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may ba filmed at different reduction ratioa. Thoao too large to be entirely included in one erposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, aa many frames aa required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: 1 2 3 L'exemplaire film* f ut reproduit grAce A la g*n*ro8it6 de: la bibiiothAque des Archives pubiiques du Canada Las images suivantes ont M6 reproduites avec le plua grand soin. compte tenu de la condition et de la nettet« de l'exemplaire film*, et en conformity avec iea conditions du contrat de fiimage. Lea exempiaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est ImprlmAe aont fiimte en commandant par le premier plat et eri i arminant soit par la derniftre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'iiiustration, soit par le second plat, aelon le cas. I'ous las autres exempiaires originaux aont filmte en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impreasion ou d'iiiustration et en terminant par la dernlAre page qui comporte una telle empreinte. Un dea symbtilee auivants apparaltra sur la derniAre image de cheque microfiche, selon le caa: le s/mbole — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Lea cai:es, pienches, tableaux, etc., peuvent Atre fllmte A dea taux de reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtra reproduit en un seul ciich«, 11 est f ilm« A partir de I'angle aupArieur gauche, de geuche A droite, et de haut en baa, en prenant le nombre d'images nAcesssiie. Les diagrammes auivants illustrent la mAthoda. 1 2 3 / 4 5 6 y -i,^ flc / THE NATIONAL POLICY, INDEX TO SUBJECTS REFERRED TO. k /I Public Debt American aud Canadian Debts Burden of Taxation \ Public Ebcpenditure ,, The Militia Department Expenditure on Indians Post Office Expenditure Eailway do Better Times The Export Trade » , Clothing, Hats and Caps ..,. , Boots and Shoes •.• , ,' , 3 4 4 4 5 8 9 9 Bier and Tobacco lo Summary of Export Argument 10 Ifx^orts as a test of Prosperity 11 The Sugar Question 1 1 Advantage of Sugar Eefining 12 'Opposition Misrepresentations 13 M|» Blake and the Redpath Museum 13 ■ f^r "Richard Cartwright 14 The Opposition Blunder 15 'Converts to the N. P 15 Conclusion 1 5 THE BUDGET 'DEBATE. SPEECH OF MR. THOS. Vv'HITE, M.P.^^^^ Delivered, in the House of Commons on Tuesdau Evening, Feb. 22. I ^ ^ '^^ The public debt and expendltnre— The 3iati4»niil Policy— Ttic export qnes> tlon— Review of vnrlons ludiitttries — The Hiitfnr duties— Holiey or the 4»ppo« sltlon. M". White (Cavdwell) — I do not propose, ■v "^r. Speaker, to follow the hon. gentleman in i-iS introductory remarks. I am quite satis- fied thftt when he ccmes to read the report of that portion of his speech which had the hon. member for Niagara as it? subject, he will himself regret very much what he has said. But, sir, on the general question which the hon. gentleman has discussed, I desire to offer a few remarks. I agree with the hon. gentleman that a national debt is not a small matter, and that we ought not to under-estimate its importance ; but I think hon. gentlemen in this House, and the pub- lic outside, will agree with me ivhen I say that a national debt in itself is a less evil than the perpetual disposition on the part of hon. gentlemen opposite to exaggerate that debt, and to make unfair comparisons of it with the debts of other countries (hear, hear). The hon. gentleman has told us — evidently with ths object of exciting the alarm of the people of this country — that the national debt has doubled since Confederation. CHARACTER OP THE PUBLIC DEBT. He has told us that the debt to-day is $156,000,000, whereas at the time of the con- federation ot the Provinces it was only $75,- 000,000. Well, sir, if the hon. gentleman had stated to this House and the coimtry that we have assets to show for that increase ; assets which are worth to our country direct- ly and indirectly far more than the increase of the debt, he would at least have been doing an act of simple justice to his coun- try. What is the tact? Of the in- crease in the debt during that time nearly $45,000,000 is due to the Intercolonial Railway. Apart from ihe question as to whether that railway is mak- ing any return to us for the capital invested in it, apart altogether from the question as to whether it is even paying all its running expenses, 1 venture to say thnt there is no one who fairly appreciates the interests of this Dominion vvho will not admit that, in the development of the country in the improve- ment (if the districts through which the rail- way pusses, in the advancement of the trade of the country, and in all those incidental ad- vantages which an important line of commu- nication of that kind gives to the country, that expenditure has well repaid the people of Canada. (Hear, hear.) Of that iucrease, about $17,000,000 was expended on the Pa- cific Railway. Hon. gentlemen opposite are at least responsible for that expenditure. It was made in accordance witii their policy, and not in accordance particularly with the policy of gentlemen on this side of the House. It was an expenditure absolutely essential to the development of the country, and which, in its effects on the welfare of the country, will return us infiuitely more than the mere interest upon that $17,000,000. Then up- wards of $13,000,000 or $14,000,000 of that increase was simply a transference of the burden, and I am not going to discuss that question — on which I believe therti is some difference of opinion among gentlemen oa the other side of the House — from the Pro- vinces to the Dominion, and is, therefore, so far as the people are concerned, not an in- crease of burden at all, but simply a trans- ference from one account to another account. (Hear, hear.) There is another portion of the debt which, I admit, is a serious portion, and that is about $7,000,000 of deficits, which hon. gentlemen opposite had while in office. (Hear, hear.) That is an addition to the debt which we have reason deeply to re- gret. When the debt of this country goes on increasing in consequence ot the expenditure being in excess of the re- venue year alter year, then I think everyone will admit that we are on the downward path, and that for the extent of the increase of the debt cavised by that fact, we have serious reason for alarm. But happily the day for that kind of debt is past, and infitead of having eras of deficits, we are entering, I '■ trust, on eras of sul)stantial surpluses. (Ap- plause.) What is the record of the two par- j ties in that respect ? About $10,000,000 ot I revenue in excess of the expenditure was ex- \ pended on public works in this country on ■ capital account by the Conservative party , when they were in power before. When ; hon. gentlemen opposite came in, instead ot money being expended out of the revenue on capital account, we had year after year a sys- tem of deficits, which hon. gentlemen could only justify or explain by declaring that if you deducted the sinking fund upon the public debt — a payment which we are bound to make to the public creditor (>ut of the public I e venues — after all, the deficit was not a very large one. AMERICAN AXD CANADIAN DEBTS. But the hon. gentleman followed a course , which I am sorry to see is followed too often i by hon. gentlemen who think with him, ! namely, that of comparing our debt with that j of the United States, and then, telling us of i the great burden that debt was on the people of the United States, suggesting, lather than boldly stating, that the conditions of this country are, in re^pect to debt, as bad as those of our American neighbours. Will the hon. gentlemen tell me that a debt expended in works of public iraprovements, ot material development, works calculated to promote the commercial and industrial wealth of the country, is to be compared with a debt caused by war, entailing the destruction of property and not the enhancement of its value, destitution and not prosperity? If this debt ot the United States, of which the hon. gentlemen are so fond of speaking, had been all incurred in works of material develop- ment, as the debt of this country has been incurred, I venture to say the people of the United States, prosperous as they are to-day, would be in a vastly different position from what they are in. It is, therefore, no fair state- ment of the case to compare a debt for every dollar of which we have material assets to show, with a debt incurred, as that of the Uni- ted States unfortunately was, in consequence of a great war which lasted four years in that country. But the hon. gentleman might also have told this House and the country that although the bald statement that tb« debt to-day is $156,000,000, whereas at Con- federation it was only about $75,000,000, may be true, it does not represent fairly the in- creased burden of the people of this country. He should at least have told them that, whereas in 18G7 we were paying an average iriterest of 5-55 per cent, to-day we are pay- ing an average interest of 4 45 per cent, or one and one-tenth per cent less than we were paying then, a very material fact in estimat- ing till burden of our debt, which is th-s question we are now dealing with. (Hear, hear). THE Bt'RDE.S OF TAXATION. The hon. gentleman, not satisfied with tell- ing us that our debt is so serious a matter as to be a cause of great alarm to the people, and a great burden on them, told us that the taxes imposed were very serious, and he drew a picture ot a bead of a family, a labor- ing man, earning his dollar a day, or $320 a year, who as he sits down to his daily meal contemplates the fact that twenty per cent of his earnings goes into the public treasury, equal to $60 a year (laughter). Did the hon. gentleman stop to consider what that would amount to in the aggregate? Three hun- dred dollars a year is not certainly the aver- age income of families in this country. Let us be thankful for that at any rate. But if it were, what would the tax amount to ? It is not too much to sa) that there are 800,000 families in Canada, so that we should have a contribution on Customs alone, for it was to the Customs duties the hon. member referred, of $48,000,000 to the public treasury, in order to justify the statement of the hon. gentle- man (applause). That statement was not made for a patriotic motive, for he told us in his conclr.ding words that whoever was in oittce it would be almost impoggible to re- duce materially the taxation ; and, therefore, he could not hold out any hope to this unfor- tunate head of a family, earning $:J00 a year, that he would be able to get off with less payment if the hon. gentlemen opposite were on this side of the House. The state- ment was simply made to alarm any man who might think of Canada as a place for settlement, and who, when he came to think of what would be his position in this new country, might turn up the speech of the hon. member for West Middlesex, and learn from it that, after all, when he came here twenty per cent of his earnings would have t» go into the public treasury ; and he would naturally seek some other country where he believed so large a portion of his earnings would not be absorbed in taxes. (Hear, hear.) THE PUBLIC EXPENDITURE. Then the hon. gentleman dealt with the question of our expenditure. He told us that under a Conservative Administration tlie ex- penditure in this country liad increaHod from 18G7 to 1874 not less than $9,ono,000. Wt-ll, I am not going to analyse that statement as to the precise figures ; let us say that it is $9,000,000, Was that a fair t^tatement for the hon. gentleman to make? Did he not know that during those seven years we got in Prince Edward Island, purchastd the Nortliwest Territories, and liad to un- dertake the government of them ; that we got in British Columbia and had to undertake the government of that province ; that we increased the suhsidies to tlie different provinces and assumed debts which were before paid by the different pro- vinces ? (Hear, hear.) All of these are a fair and reasonable justification for that increase of debt, and if the hon. gentleman wants an authority to confirm the statement I have just made, 1 will refer him to the circular issued in England by the latij Minister of Finance, in which he saiil that every increase of ex- penditure was an increase made for the de- velopment of the country in works of general utility, which would give an adequate return for the expenditure in the enhanced prosper- ity they would create ^applause). The hon. gentleman entered into a comparison of the expenditure of the late Government and the expenditure of this. I do not propose to deal at length with that question, because as the Estimates go through committee we shall have explanations on every item, and there will be an abundant opportunity to discuss the principle or the policy of any increase that may have been made, or any charges that may have been imposed on the public Treasury. But what is the fact ? In the first year in which hon. gentlemen opposite had complete control of the affairs of tlie country, that oi 1874-5, they managed to spend for civil government, §909,- 265.73. Last year the present ex- travagant Government, Avith all the accnmu- laiiuns of expenditure with which the\ have been charged, managed to got on wit)- SB'.tS,- 605.16. (Hear, hear.) Then I find that the ordinary expenditure in 1874-5 was S7,868,- 676; in 1875-6 it was $8,569,774. and last year, with the enormous increase made by this extravagant Government, amonnted to $6,963,852. (Hear, hear.) That was the posi- tion on the general question of ordinary ex- penditure. On the ordinary expenditure of charges on revenue, I find, and I take these figures from the same statement wliich the hon. gentleman has quoted, that in 18 75-G they amounted to $4,796,238, in which was not included the Intercolonial Railway ex- penditure. In 1876-1 the charges on reve- nue amounted to $.'),194,896; in 1877-8 they amounted to $5,301,124; last year this ex- travagant Government expende>l only $5,- [ 227, 11 3. (Hear, hear ) With regard ti) pub- i lie works 1 find that the expenditure in con- ' nection with their management in 1876-7 ; amounted to$2, 352,832; in 1877-8 to$2,471,- j 437 ; and in 1880 to$2,329,626. (Hear, hear.) ! That was the position under the extravagant ' Government for whose advantage lectures I have been given by hon. gentlemen opposite ; in relation to the importance of economy. I (Hear, hear.) THE MILITIA DEPARTMENT. The hon. gentleni.m then came down to some details. He referred first to our mili- tia. He told us that the United States man- 1 aged to get on with 25,000 men, and it was ' absurd we should have so large a militia I as we have. Did the hon. gentleman I not know that those 25,000 men were i 25.000 regular soldiers in the regular pay of I the United States; that many of them, un- ! fortunately for themselves and their country, j were engaged in the Western territory quel- ling Indian troubles and other diffiriilties ; that we in Canada have of the same class of I men only the "A'' and '"B" Batteries, con- sisting of 240 men. (Hear, hear.) Why did j the hon. gentleman make such a statement I to the country and the people outside of the I country, and which would lead intending i settlers to believe that we actually kept up a larger army than the great nation to the I south .^f us? Why, sir, he knows well enough, and in frankness ought to have j stated it, that the 25,000 men of whom he 1 speaks were 25,000 act'ial poldiers enlisted I regularly in the service of the United States. I But the hon. gentleman tells us he is very I much opposed ti> the manner in which the , militia exjionditure trikes place. 1 am not j sure I should not agree with him on some ; points, but surely when he comes to deal with tills m.'ittfr of the enormous proportion : of the expenditure on the stall', he might at i least have remembered that he and his { friends are responsible for that kind i of thing. Who was it that first j introduced the system of brigade-majors I into this country ? It is a remarkable fact, I it was the Liberal Government of the late I Sandfield Macdonald in 1863. Curiously enough they were appointed by that Gov- ernment after the previous Conservative Government had been deieated on a Militia bill proposing a diflferent sj'Mtem. (Hear, | hear.) To whom are we indebted for the Mujor-(ieu»!ral ! To the Government of the ■member for Lambton, before whose time we never heard of a Major-Genenil, with his aide-de-camp, to whom reference was made by the hon. gentleman (Mr. Ross), us if, in this connection, some crime had l)een com- mitted by hon. gentlemen on the Ministerial fiide. Hien tlie whole .system of an exten- sive stalf — and I have always thought that the expenditure as compared with tiie ex- penditure on the volunteers has been too high — which the hon. gentlemen condemn- ed, his own friends brought into being, and he him.self supported them in that policy. (Applause ) One of the points made by the hon. gentleman was that there is an increase in the estimates. Let us see what it is. I lind there is a decrease in the salaries of tlie military branch, the district stati', of $1,700, and a decrease for the brigade majors' sala- iies transp >rt, &c., $3,000; decrease on military schools and drill instructors in colleges of $8,000 ; decrease in the pay and maintenance of the guard at Rideau Hall, $5,000 ; decrease in the matter of Dis- trict Deputy Adjutant-Geneials, $1,200, and as to allowances to them of $500. These are reductions all in the direction in which the hon. gentleman says they should take place. I Pnd that the only substantial in- crease in connection with the militia esti- mate is for drill pay and all incidental ex- penses connected with the drill and train- ing of the militia, $75,000. (Applause). So that the policy of this Government is pre- cisely in the direction which the hon. gen- tleman opposite has been advocating. They propose to give more money for the drill of the men, more encouragement to the men who give their time in order to fit them- Belves if occasion shoulJ require, for the ser- vice of their country, and less to the staff ■which he has been condemning. Perhaps at some future time, and I hope it is not very remote, we ni ly be able i:till further to re- duce the staft. I am bound to confess my agreement with the hon. gentleman that a Major-General is altogether an unnecessary appendage to our militia staff. No doubt if war broke out, the militia of the country must be under an Imperial officer. But I do not think this office promotes the interests of the militia, or adds to the good feeling of that body. I am speaking of the great mass of the militia, not of the few officers who act as satellites round the Major-General — in reg-^rd to whom I must say that I believe that they do not wish an Imperihl officer with the grand sounling title of a Major- GentTil, with his Aide-whether these facts do not ab' jdantly an- swer the statement of the hon member for South Brant (Mr. Paterson) that we have sorely injured this country by the National Policy, because as to certain -.rticles of manufacture the export trade has been de- creased. (Hear, hear.) EXPORTS AS A TEST OF PROSPERITY. The hon. Minister of Finance, in his state- ment the other night, made the remark that the decrease in the exports might be a mat- ter of advantage to the country, and hon. .gentlemen opposite were disposed to sneer at that statement. The ex-Minister of Finance was especially emphatic in his sn^'er p.t the statement. He declared it was one which he •could not understand But if the hon. gen- tlemai. would only look at the matter he would admit this : that up to a certain point .the extent of +>^ exports of manufactures is uo test of prosperity. The tiome market, 6very one will admit, is more valuable than .the foreign market. And if factories are .running full time, the capital invested in them being fully occupied, and the product not more than sufficient for local demand, then the absence of exports is no evidenc3 of want of prosperity. (Hear, hear.) It iy •only after we have fully supplied the home market that the question of exportation becomes an important question. Then it is a matter of importance to enable the manu- facturers to enlarge their sphere of opera- tions, to increase their capital and premises ; and in that sense it is a matter of exceeding- Jy great importance. But at the start of manufactories, and we are only practically .starting them in this country, p.nd only now getting into a condition for the thorough development of our manufacturing in- dustries, and until wo have sup- plied the home market, the question of exportation does not enter at all into t\\^^ question of the prosperity of these muiiu- ■factures. In England the case is vastly differenc. There, the manufacturing in- dustries are so fully developed that the home market will not begin to consume what .the mills running on lull time will supply, and therefore the t'^st Is to be found in the value of their exports. But in this country. until our manufaclures are in a condition to supply fully our home market, the question of exports does not enter into the calcuhilion. Mr. Patkrson (Brant) — Why do we export any manufactures at all if the home market is not supplied? Mr. White — If the hon. gentleman cannot answer his own question, I am sorry for it. I am not here to answer conundrums. Mr. Patbrson — Will you please answer it. If we cannot supply our own market, why do we need to export? That is a conundrum. Ml. White — One of the troubles of hon. gentlemen opposite is this : One of the things that have got them into their difli- culties with the people — and into difficulties with the people they have got —is, that they have been throwing such conundrums as this at the heads of the people. If vou caa manufacture and sell more cheaply in Can- ada under a 30 per cent tariff than you could under a 10 per cent tariff, what is the use of a 30 per cent tariff? But the people have been learning by experience that under a 30 per cent tariff tb« larger production enables them to sell at a loss price than they could under a 10 per cent taiiff, if the article was manufactured outside. <^near, hear.) THE 8DGAR DUTIES AND THE PRICE OP SUGAR. There is another question, and only one, to which I desire to refer, and that is a subject which has been discussed here so frequently in this House and out of it, that I might al- most be pardoned if I left it alone altogeth- er. I refer to the question of fhe sugar du- ties, as an illustration of how the p*^ople of this country have been burdened by thin tariff. My hon. friend the Finance Minister, in his statement the other day, gave us the average prices of sugar in this country during the last year, and the price in New York with the old duties and the charge of 35 cents per hundred added, and as a result he found that the price in Canada was about twenty-five cents a hundred, or one-quarter of a cent per pound more on granulated su- gar than it would be it imported under the old tariff' on that method of calculation. lu dealing witn this question, so far as the price of this sugar is concerned, 'C are fortunately dealing with a question outside of ih»i realm of speculation altogether, and can come down to a matter of mathematical proof. We had three years' experience without a re- finery, when all the granulated sugar con- sumed in this country had to be imported, chifefly from the United States; and we are thereby enabled to learn, by comparing the 12 prices in gold in bond, which prevailed dur- ing those three years in New York, which is the market from which oomparisons are taken, with the prices obtained in this country, whether the propo- sition made by the hon. Finance Minister, regarding this particular industry, is a fair one or not. Now, in 1876, taking the prico ot sugar in New York, and adding the duty under, what I may call for conrenience, the Cartwright tariff, and the charge of 35 cts. per 100 lbs., the price should have been in this country $9.05. I am speaking of the average for the whole year, and that average has been obtained by taking the price on three days in each month, which hon. gentlemen must admit is a fair method- As a matter of fact the average price in Canada during that time was $9.50 — 45 cents a hundred, or nearly half a cent a pound more than it should have been on the principle stated by the hon. Finance Minister. (Hear, hear.) In 1877 the average price, by the same method, should have been $10.15; the actual average was $10.66 — 51 cents a hundred, or one-half a cent a pound more than the consumer should have paid. In 1878, under the old tariff, the average price oughc to have bpen $8.89, whereas the actual average price was $9.33, a difference of 44 cents a hund- red. The difference botween the average price on this method and actual price during those three years was no less thf.n 46f cents a hundred, or very nearly one-half a cent a pound. (Applause.") On the same method, we have during the past year been paying one- fonrth of a cent a pound more, not one-half; so that instead of our paying more in conse- quence of this industry being promoted in Canada, we have been paying one-quarter of a cent less, ind that method of calculation, which cannot be gainsaid, ^ut is open to en- quiry by any hon. tentleman, is certainly as fair in reference to the three years when we had no refinery as to the one y?ar when we had a refinery. (Hear, hear.) There is an- anotber point with reference to that one- quarter of a cent. With the duty of 30 per cent, instead of 25 per cent, on sugars under No. 14, notwithstanding the advantage which is given to the refiner of a rebate on the duty on packages on direct importations, the extra duty just about makes up the one- quarter cent more which he has to pay. The percentage of duty paid on packages imported in 1880 was 46.49; on the same packages unde^ the old tariff it would have been 44.7. The difference amounts to about 2.42 per cent, between the actual payment and the payment under the old tariff, and' that is as nearlj' as possible the one-quarter cent extra referred to by the Hon. Finance Minister. ADVANTAGE OF SUCAR REFINING. But one cannot look at this matter as a mere question of the price of sugar. It is not a question after all whether the people of this country get their sugar at a little higher or a little lower price in consequence of the establishment of a refinery at Montreal, at Moncton or at Halifax, and I am glad to know that there are going to be refintries in different parts of the country to compete with each other and give the advantages of that industry to different parts of the coun- try ; but it is a question as to the general interests of the trrde of Ca- nada. I had the honor, two years ago,, from my place in th5s House, of quot- ing, in relation to this sugar industry, the opinion of a leading free- trader of the United States, a gentleman whose opinions had been^ quoted very often by hon. gentlemen oppo- site, the Hon. David A. Wells. He took it out altogether, it will be remembered, from the ordinary list of articles upon which he deprecated protection ; he held it was an article so exceptional in its character, and in the advantages which it offered to the coun- try, that it ought to be dealt with differently, and ought to be protected. Now, what do we find ? Take our West India trade. I find by the report of the Montreal Har- bour Trust that the imports of sugar into that port in 1878 were 12,289,843 lbs.; in 1879 the imports were 64,375,656 lbs.; and in 1880 they reached 74.952,000 lbs, (Hear,, hear). Will any hon. gentleman tell me that it was not to the advantage of this coun- try that this large quantity of sugar should be rarried in vessels from the West Indies, to Canadian ports, rather than have the re- fined sugar imported into the country over American railroads, (Hear, hear). The ar- rivals of West Indian vessels in the port of Montreal were as follows: In 1875, ves- isels, with a total of 3,689 tons; in 1876, 3 vessels, 553 tons; in 18.77, 3 vessels, 665 tons; in 1878, 7 vessels, 1,216 tons; in 1879^ 33 vessels, 16,587 tons ; in 1880, 45 vessels, 17,657 tons. (Hear, hear). Will any hon. gentleman pretend to say that the trade of the Dominion has not been greatly benefit- ted by this great tonnage between the two countries? The hon. Finance Minister, re- ferring to the expenditure made by refiners in Canada in the carrying on of their busi- L3 875, 9 ves- tiess, said that it benefited tlie Dominicu to An amount equivalent to the difference of •duty between that received now and that re- ceived under the late tariff. Sir Leonard Tillky — I said it was more than the amount of the duty, but I see the report makes me say the former. Mr. White — Upwards of $800,000 have been expended by the two refineries of the city of Montreal, and the expenditure will 'be largely increased when the refineries in Halifax are in good working order. OPPOSITION MISREPRESENTATIONS ON THIS QUESTION. There is an eiitraordinary attempt to ex- •cite the feelings of the country against this particular feature of the Tariff. The hon. member for Centre Huron, in a speech which he made in Centre Huron last year, talked of 3i^c being added to the cost. Mr. Anglin — He did not say that. Mr. White — I am going to read the hon. gentleman's explanation. The hon. gentle- man need not be alarmed. I do not propose to mis-state his arguments in any way what- ever. He stated that the Tariff' added three and one-half cents per pound to the cost of 'the sugar to every consumer in Canada. There was not a gentleman whe read that speech, even the hon. Finance Minister who read it and referred to it in Toronto, who did not take away the impression that the hon. gentleman intended to convey the idea that the change in the tariff" had added three and one-half cents per pound to the cost of sugar. I would venture to say there was not a gentleman in the audience who did not come to that conclusion. If he did not mean that, what was the object of referring to the three and ono-half cent? at ail? (Hear, hear.) It he I'.idaduty on sugar,which I will showyou he had in its practical operation on the con- sumer, as oneions a>< the present duty, why did he refer to the three and one-half cents unless for the purpose of exciting teeling against it ? The hon. gentleman, the other night, explained his statamentin this way : — "So in making his other statement that I had declareri that each family i-i Canada hsd latterly to pay three cents per po And more for Its sugar, surely the hon. gentleman, who had evidently that statement before him — because he declares In another part of his speech that I knew the total Importation was about 116,- 000,000 ?bs— must have known that when I de- fined the loss as $1,177,000, it was quite impos- sible that could represent more than one cent per lb. He appears to be unabl«) to distinguish between thess two simple propositions; that the loss to the people of Canada over and above .the money that goes into the Treasury is one cent per lb., and that the duty fixed on the sugar consumed by the people of Canada Is 3 cents to Si cen«s per lb. These are not dlfllcult things to distinguish." But surely the hon. member for Centre Huron coald not expect the audience to bear in their minds these different calculations, and give to his statement a meaning which it did not bear on its face. What is the fact? In 1877, taking the price of sugar here and the prices in New York in bond and making a calculation, the people of Canada paid, under the tariff of the hon. gentleman, in consequence of the duty and hflndling, over New York prices, $3.64 per 100 lbs, while in 1880 they pay but $3.23 per 100 lbs over New York prices (applause). What was the object of the hon. gentleman in referring to this matter ot the 3 cents or 3^ cents at all, if it was not to create the im- pression that by the act of this Government that enormous burden had been imposed on the people (hear, hear). MR. blare's attack OF THE REDPATH MCSEUM. Not only has there been an attempt in this way to create a prejudice against this indus- try, but we had an hon. gentleman, from whom better things should have been ex- pected, endeavoring in Toronto to excite public antipathy against a sugar refinery in Montreal, because the head of that refinery had made a great gift to a university. That hon. gentleman, a chancellor of a university, did not hesitate, in the city of Toronto, before a large public assembly, to make it a crime on the pait of the head of that establish- ment because he had given $50,000 towards the establishment of a museum in connection with McGill University. We have not many wealthv men in Canada who are willing to deVote their money to objects of this kind. We have many institutions which require sucii assistance from the wealthy men of the country, and it is -ertainly not calculated to promote that kind of benevolence, when hon. gentlemen occupying high positions, such as the hon, member for West Durham, make it a point in a public assembly against the Redpath refinery that Mr. Peter Redpath had given $50,000 towards a public insti- tution, stating that the amount was wrung from the earnings of the people through the higher prices which they had to pay for their sugar. Does the hon. gentleman know that in the city of Toronto the Hon. Wm. McMaster recently erected a church ? (Hear, hear.) Who complains of that ? Who does not honor him for it ? What would be said of the man who before a public audience, would TT say : " Sir, you took that out of the earnings of the people ; you might have Bold them your cottons and dry goods at so much less ; you might have given that enormous profit to your customers throughout the country ; but, instead of that, you took from them every dollar you could get, and now you seek to pacify your conscience by building a church." (Hear, hear.) Mr. Jos. Mackay, in Montreal, who is not f> manufacturer but an importer, has recently (iistinguished himself, as I would be glad to .see many merchants and wealthy men of Canada, distinguish themselves, by building an asylum for deaf- mutes in Montreal. What would be said of the man who would charge him with having robbed the people by making them pay too much for his goods, "and now wanting to make atonement? It was an unworthy at- tack for the hon. gentleman to make. He, of all men in this country, occupying the po- sition of head of one of its leading universi- ties, instead of discouraging the wealthy from giving donations to institutions of this kind, ought rattier to have applauded the ac- tion andacknowledged the honorable motives that prompted it. (Applause.) SIR RICHARD CARTWRIGHT'S MORTGAGE STATE- MENT. But the ex-Finance Mini.ster, the other night, told us that this tariff was equivalent to a mortgage of $10 upon every acre of land in the country. Just look at that statement. An ordinary farm would be about 200 acres, which, at $10 an acre, would produce a mortgage of $2,000 ; and that, at seven per cent, would compel a farmer to pay $140. The increase on the present tariff for which hon. gentlemen on the Ministerial side are I'e- sponsible, is four per cent, but let us be lib- eral and say five per cent. That gives mar- gin enough. That would amount to a store bill, because it is only on store bills that taxes are paid by farmers, of $2,800. (Ap- plause.) Now, I see my old friend, the hon. member for South Wentworth looking at me, and I would ask him how many farmers in this country with 200 acres, run up a store bill of $2,800 ? It is statements of this kind that. I venture to say, are doing the hon. gentlemen opposite a very great deal of harm. If we listened to them, our people would appear much poorer than they are — in fact, in a state of abject poverty. While one hon. gentleman tells us that every farmer is mortgaged to the extent of $10 an acre through this tariff, another tells us that $G0 out of $300, or 20 per cent of all the earning of the unfortunate- poor man, goes to the tax collector. Under these circumstances, one would imagine that our people were in wretched ciicumstances. TF .5 SAVINGS BANKS DEPOSITS. One or two tests will apply to these state- ments. Take, for instance, the Post Office Savings Banks — a pretty good test, because I believe the average deposits are small, that the office will not take over $1,000 fiOm any depositor, and will not allow a family to divide itself so as to put in a larger amount — the object being not to encourage with- drawals from the banks and the ordinary business of tlie country. On the 30th Sep- tf>mber, 1878 — I do not refer to it for the pur- pose of hurting the feelings of hon. gentle- men opposite, but because it is a good date for tba purpose of the comparison — the num- ber of open accounts was 26,097, and the amount on deposit, $2,798,310.66. In 1880, same date, the number of open accounts was 32,804, and the total deposits, $4,226,723 86. What is still more extraordin- ary is the fact that in the four months since that time up to the 31 st January last, the number of open accounts had increased to 36,361, raising the total deposits to $5,125,- 135.11. That, sir, lam bound to say, is a very considerable indication that the people of this country, after they had mortgaged their farms for $10 an acre and paid their 20 per cent of all earnings to the tax-gatherer, appeared to have a good deal of money left on deposit in the savings banks. (Applause.) Then, I find that the number of deposits made in January last in the Post Office Sav- ings Banks was 7,014, and the amount depo- sited in small sums of on an average of about $50 each, reached $462,889. The only month in the whole history of the Post Office Savings Banks in which there was anything like so large a number of deposits and so large an amount deposited, was in August, 1879,wheu the Consolidated Bank failed and the Ex- change Bank closed its doors and there was a general panic throughout the country ; and in consequence people sought the Post Office - Bank rather than the savings banks de- partment of the chartered banks. In that month there was 6,022 depositors, who djeposited $409,027. In January, 1879, there were 3,970 persons opened accounts in the Post Office Bank, to the amount of $219,462. I take now another institution which may be said to of- fer a very fair test of the circumstances of the people — the City and District Savings IS a Bank if Montreal, which is perhaps the largest savings bank in the Dominion. On the Ist of Ocuber, 1878, it had 17,793 open accounts, wiLh deposits amounting to $3,- 424,239, and on Ist of October, 1880, the open accounts numbered 20,668, with an amount of $4,379,662. I would like to know whether under these circumstances, it can be said that the people of this country are a poor people ? THE OPPOSITION BLUNDER ON THE TARIFF QUES- TION. Hon. gentlemen opposite may rely on this that there is nothing which the Conserva- tive party at any rate more desire than that they should pursue on this question thwir present course. We saw only the other day in Montreal papers a letter from a gentle- man who is a Liberal and has done good ser- vice in the Liberal cause, whose influence and power in connection with elections in that city I personally have very good reason to know something about — I mean Mr. L. O. David. The other day he published a letter declaring iuat the Liberal party had abandoned al! idea of going back on the National Policy or return- ing to their old policy, because that they, as wise men, having regard to the public sen- timent of the country and to the industries built up under the influence of this tariff, had resolved to maintain it in its integrity. It was stated, also, that the member for West Durham and an hon. gentleman in Quebec, who may be said to be a leader of the Liberal party, actually, although not nominally, Mr. Mercier, had given assurances to this effect. Parliament happily being in sest-iou, we have had the statements of hon. gen- tlemen opposite on the subject. They are doing their best. I do not, for one, regret it, because I believe that, apart from the National Policy, having regard to the general interests of this coun- try and to its development, improvement and advancement, it is important that they should not be in office — to create the impression in the mind of every man in Canada, who has a dollar invested in busi- ness, that his interests and the interests of the country depend upon those hon. gentle- men being kept in Opposition. (Applause.) They choose to take that course. They choose to say, to-day, that they are willing to oppose this National Policy, that they regard it as injurious, while every man outside Par- liament believes it to be the reverse. Whork we find that such men as a gentleman in Montreal, who is well known as au active politician in that city, whose influence as a Liberal I kave good reason to know some- thing of — I mean Mr. William Clendinneng — when we find such gentlemen as he is wri- ting to the newspapers and declaring that notwithstanding what hon. gentlemen may say, the fact remains that thinsfs are more prosperous, that the boom is upon us, that every industry is prospering, and attributing the change to the policy of the (Jovernment, I say if these hon. gentlemen choose to ig- nore these indications of public sentiment outside, then upon their own heads be the consequences of it. (Hear, hear.) Only yesterday morning, in the city of Montreal, I met a manufacturer on the street. I asked him how business was prospering with him. He replied that it was booming. I said " That is due to the National Policy.'" He replied "Yes." I said " You did not believe in it not long ago." His reply was, " Well^ I did not believe that you were sincere in advocating it. I did not believe that your party would have the courage to bring down such a policy as we now have, else I would have taken a different course in your election in the city of Montreal." (Hear, hear.) Thai gentleman is simply a type of many gentlemen in this Dominion who have come to realize that the welfare of Canada is bound up in the party which looks to the development of the coun- try ih its broadest sense — which looks to the development, not only of the industries of the country, but of every interest in the coun- try, as this Government has done since it has been in office. (Applau.se.) I am satisfied that when this question of the National Policy comes up for review by the court of last appeal — the people — in 1883, hon. gen- tlemen opposite will be glad, if they can, to hark back trom some of the statementa they are making to-day and to declare that^ although they opposed the National Policy in the first instance, they are not now going to go back upon it, and they will be anxious to sneak — if I may use the expression — back to the Treasury benches under cover of the Policy which they have done so much to des- troy. Happily, however, they are now mak- ing a record which will render it difficult for them to take such a course, and 1, for one, do not regret that they are making that record. The hon. gentleman rehumed his seat amid loud applause. ^