V) 
 
 v: 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 /A 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-S) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 l^y|8 12.5 
 
 1^ Bii 12.2 
 
 £f 144 ™^ 
 ^ li£ 12.0 
 
 UU'. 
 
 1.8 
 
 11.25 iu 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 
 Corporation 
 
 /. 
 
 
 * 
 
 iV 
 
 4t>^ 
 
 
 \ 
 
 \ 
 
 [V 
 
 
 
 <«^ 
 
 '<l) 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
 Is 
 
 vV 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly chang : 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 n 
 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 
 n 
 n 
 
 n 
 
 n 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 Covers damaged/ 
 Couverture endommagde 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur^e et/ou pelliculde 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gdographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured init (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re liure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge intdrieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration m.'iy 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es 
 lors d'une restauration apr araissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6t6 filmdes. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppl6mentaires: 
 
 L'lnstitut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a dt6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage 
 sont indiquds ci-dessous. 
 
 □ Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 □ Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul6es 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages ddcolor^es, tachetdes ou piqudes 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages ddtachdes 
 
 D 
 
 Pages ddtachdes 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Quality indgale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary materif 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 Only edition jvailable/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 r~~| Showthrough/ 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 I I Only edition jvailable/ 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6t6 film^es d nouveau de fa^on d 
 obtenir la meilleuri) image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 26X 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 y 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 l3X 
 
 32X 
 
The copy fflmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 La Bibliothdque de la Viile de Montreal 
 
 L'exemplaire filmi fut reproduit grAce A la 
 gAnArositi de: 
 
 La Bibiiothdque de la Villa de Montreal 
 
 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, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire film6, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 The last recoroed frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol —^(meaning "CON- 
 TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprim6e sont film6s en commen^ant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration. soit par le second 
 plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres sxsmplaires 
 originaux sont film4s en commen^ant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impressiL.. ju d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE". le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc.. may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The following diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc.. peuvent dtre 
 filmds A des taux de reduction diffirents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre 
 reproduit en un seul clichd. il est filmd A partir 
 de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche A droite. 
 et de haut en bas. en prenant le nombre 
 d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mAthode. 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 t 
 
 ^ i 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 

 ^- f 
 
 f. 
 
 c 
 
 fymiSig 
 
 REMARKS 
 
 OF 
 
 Gen. Tames H. Wilson, 
 
 IN 
 
 JOINT DEBATE WITH 
 
 ERASTUS WIMAN, ESQ. 
 
 Before the Board of Trade and the Citizen.s of Wilmington, Delaware, 
 
 ^K- 
 
 
 .J" 
 
 
 ON 
 
 'Our Relations with the 1 dominion of Canada. • 
 
 December 13, 1889. 
 
 
 WILMINGTON, DEL. : 
 
 DELAWARE PRINTING COMPANY, 
 
 1890. . 
 
 I I 
 
 
! 
 
 C 
 
 Beft 
 
 OURR 
 
 Th 
 cendent 
 paramoi 
 at least 
 ^laws of 
 General 
 agitate 
 give it t 
 but ev( 
 Englam 
 
 Mr. 
 by birtl 
 believe 
 ful atten 
 pamphl< 
 
I 
 
 REMARKS 
 
 OP 
 
 Gen. JAMES H. WILSON, 
 
 IN JOINT DEBATE WITH 
 
 ERASTUS WIMAN, ESQ., 
 
 Before the Board of Trade and the Citizens of Wilmington, Delav;are. 
 
 ON 
 
 OUR REIvATlON WITH THE DOMINION OF CANADA. 
 
 The question to be discussed this evening is one of trans- 
 cendent importance. It closely affects our permanent and 
 paramount interests. It is not for to-day but for all time, or 
 at least till it is settled in accordance with the fundamental 
 ^laws of human progress. It is, in the words of Attorney 
 General Longley one of the greatest questions " that can 
 agitate the minds of a great people," and I am sure you will 
 give it the most serious consideration. It is no new question, 
 but ever since the first colonies were planted in New 
 England, it has confronted the English speaking race. 
 
 Mr. Wiman, who is also to address you, is a Canadian 
 by birth, for many years a resident of New York, though I 
 believe he is still a British subject. He has n^ven most care- 
 ful attention to the subject, and as he has clearly shown, by the 
 pamphlet which he has sent to many of you, he is thoroughly 
 
acquainted with the resources of the Dominion of Canada, 
 with the character of its population and with the operation 
 of its system of Goverment. His statements of fact are entitled 
 to your undoubting credence Indeed, he is an expert on all 
 Canadian matters, and 1 am sure you will cordially join me 
 in returning thanks to him, not only for the information he 
 has given us, but for the candor and clearness with which he 
 states his views. Whatever your conclusions may be in 
 regard to their feasibility and soundness, you can have no 
 doubt as to the earnestness and ability with which he puts 
 them forth. 
 
 He contends that the best possible results can be 
 obtained for both Canada and the United States by the 
 establishment of a Customs Union or Zollverein, similar to 
 that suggested by Prussia in 1818 and afterwards joined by all 
 the German States except Austria. Obviously, the immediate 
 results of this measure would be to abolish all the custom- 
 houses on the frontier and to remove them to the sea coast, or 
 to the maritime cities. The tariff would be, necessarily the 
 same for both countries, the revenue theretrom would be 
 pooled, and then divided, pro-rata according to population, 
 between the two governments. But above all, and this is 
 the principal end aimed at by the proposition, absolute free 
 trade would prevail between all the provinces of the 
 Dominion on the one side, and all the States of the Union -. 
 on the other, just as it prevails at present between all the 
 States themselves, while a common protective tariff would 
 be maintained and enforced against all the World besides, 
 including the British Empire of course. It is also worthy of 
 observation that Mr. Wiman in submitting this proposition 
 expresses the belief, notwithstanding the prejudice against it 
 •on the part of the Canadian Government, that the Canadian 
 people can be brought to support it. It does not become me 
 to gainsay this opinion for it may possibly be true. Cer- 
 tainly from my point of view, it would be greatly to the 
 interest of the Canadians at least, and they would be untrue 
 
 
to their reputation for shrewdness, if they did not so consider 
 it. He also expresses the belief that Her Majesty's Gover- 
 nient, would consent to the arrangement, but in view of the 
 fact that the chief aim of that Goverment has been for 
 the last two hundred years to maintain the commercial 
 supremacy of England, and the integrity of the Empire, 
 and that in all this tijne no British statesman has ever 
 for a moment l^een false to that policy, it may well be 
 doiibted, if Her Majesty's Goverment could be bought 
 in a case of so much importance as this, to forego, the 
 exercise of its constitutional right of veto. I do not in- 
 tend to delay my argument to discuss this aspect of the case 
 for after all, the real question for us to consider is, will 
 commercial union solve the problem before us, rather than 
 can its adoption be secured. Our object should be, to dis- 
 cover what is the best policy for the Dominion of Canada and 
 the United States, and having agreed as to that, our further 
 object should be to devise the means of carrying that policy 
 into effect, without let or hindrance from any other power in 
 the World. 
 
 And here let me say, that while I admit the great 
 interest of the entire British Empire in this question of 
 policy, I contend in the words used by Mr. Everett, while 
 Secretary of State, (in considering the joint proposition sub- 
 mitted by the Earl of Malmsbury and Mr. Turgot, that our 
 government should join the governments of England and 
 France, in guaranteeing the perpetual sovereignity of Spain 
 over the Island of Cuba,) that we have an interest all our 
 own, and "greater than that of any other nation in that 
 question." I contend in this case as in that, that it is 
 mainly an American question, and hope to show that how- 
 ever great be the interest of Her Majesty's Government in 
 the policy and possession of the Dominion of Canada, our 
 own interests though widely different, are even greater 
 than hers — greater by the fact that we are neighbors, whose 
 possessions adjoin, and whose boundaries are coterminous 
 with each other for over four thousand miles, while the 
 
M 
 
 Dominion is separated from England and the rest of tTie 
 British Empire on either hand, by the width of the Atlantic 
 and Pacific Oceans — greater by the fact that we have many 
 interests of the first magnitude and inii)ortance in common, 
 and which no human power but our own can divide or 
 separate, while Canada and England have but few, and they 
 mostly sentimental interests, to bind Jiem together. 
 
 I will not say that Canada and the ITnited States in the 
 words of Mr. Canning — referring lo Mexico and the Ignited 
 States — *'are too neighborly to be friends," but I do say that 
 they are too neighborly not to be better friends. 
 
 While Mr Wiman, and perhaps many others, believe in 
 the scheme of a Commercial or Customs Union, and in its 
 capacity to rciuove friction, promote a friendly and neigh- 
 borly feeling, and to add greatly to the security and perma- 
 nence of peace, I .shall endeavor to show that they are 
 sincerely mi.staken that such a union is impracticable and 
 visionary, and that even if consummated it would not settle 
 our relations on a fair or satisfactory basis; that while it 
 might remove certain commercial questions of minor import- 
 ance from the field of contention, it would certainly leave 
 other and much graver questions entirely unsettled, and as 
 liable as they are now to embroil us in war, not with Canada 
 alone, but with the whole British Empire of which Canada 
 forms such an important part. 
 
 The area of Canada is 3,500,000 square miles, it has 
 300,000 square miles of wheat growing lands, 130,000 square 
 miles of coal lands, the richest iron mines, and nearly one- 
 half of all the fresh water in the world. We learn elsewhere 
 that it has 2,300,000 square miles suitable for the production 
 of grasses and coarser grains, including 500,000 square miles 
 suitable for growing indian corn. The value of the land is 
 practically without limit. Its productiveness is remarkable, 
 and yet after one hundred and twenty-eight years of British 
 rule, and an area greater than our own, it contains a popula- 
 tion of less than 5,000,000 souls, over one-quarter of which 
 
are of French descent. Why has its projjress been so slow ? 
 vSurely not becanse of bad government, nor an inhospitable 
 climate. Surely not because the labor of the husbandman is 
 not amply requited by nature. We must look further for an 
 answer, and the answer is found in tlie fact, that the door of 
 our market has been closed by our protective system aj^ainst 
 its citizens, while that of its Pairopean market, lies beyond 
 seas three thousand miles away ! Its younj^ men emigrate to 
 the States; and those who come to it from Europe will not 
 abide v/ithin its borders. ICven Mr Wiman has left the 
 Dominion, and if report does not misrepresent him, has 
 prospered too, in a way that fully justifies the step he has 
 taken. He has come to a region — "almost a world itself" — 
 given- up wholly inside to free trade — to a Customs Union 
 under the Constitution of the United States, greater than any 
 ever before known and seeing how that union has been pro- 
 tected, that it has grown and flourished as no other ever 
 grew, and how it must continue to grow, he asks that 
 Canada and the ?.djacent Islands shall be admitted into it, 
 without bearing any of the political burdens which are 
 imposed upon its constituent members, and merely because 
 he thinks it would benefit the commerce of Canada, and the 
 United States to the same extent. It is a trite saying that 
 we miss a great many good things in this world by not 
 asking for them. There is not only no harm in asking, for 
 "unless ye ask ye shall not receive," but in this case I am 
 confident it would not be wise for us to give. We are under 
 no obligation to give, and equally, it i" no offence if we 
 decline to give. 
 
 The information given by Mr. Wiman throws a flood of 
 light upon the question under consideration, but it does not 
 go far enough to enable us to arrive at a just understanding 
 of the case, or at a proper solution of the great questions in- 
 volved. Let me endeavor to supply the deficiency. 
 
 Those who are familiar with the history of North America 
 
8 
 
 will recall the fact that even before the settlenient o 
 Plymouth and Jamestown, the French had settled Acedia 
 and Canada, and that with incredible resolution they carried 
 the French flajj^ throuj^h the St. Lawrence and the Oreat 
 Lakes to the Northwest, the Mississippi and the (Uilf of 
 Mexico. Those who have read Parkman's thrilling histories 
 will recall the Christian work and darinj^ explorations of 
 Marquette, Joliet and the vSieur de la Salle, as well as the 
 heroi.sm of Champlain, Frontenac, and Montcalm. While 
 the Enj^lish colonies were struggling into existence between 
 the Atlantic Seaboard, and the Alleghauies, a French 
 PvUipire was growing up on the banks of the St. Lawrence, 
 and of the Mississippi. Border disputes, intrigues and 
 encroachments in times of peace, alternating with numerous 
 and protracted wars, for a period of almost a hundred 
 and fifty years, retarded the occupation and influenced 
 the destinies of the American Continent. The great dis- 
 putants were France and England — the French Canadians 
 .stirred up the savage Indians to rapine and murder; 
 die English Colonists fought with the fury of unrelenting 
 hate. France based her claims to the interior of the continent 
 upon colonization and discovery, England on the rights of 
 her colonies to own indefinitely westward. Every school 
 boy is familiar with the atrocities of the French and Indian 
 wars ; with the story of Sir William Phipps' capture of Port 
 Royal in Acadia, with Winthrop's expedition against Quebec 
 with de Rouville's sack and massacre of Deerfield and 
 Haverhill, with General Hill's subjugation of Acadia, and its 
 reappearance in history as Nova Scotia, with the capture of 
 Phillipsburg and the island of Cape Breton by the sailors 
 and militia of Massachusetts under Colonel Pepperell, with 
 its restoration to the French by England to the great 
 dissatisfaction of the men who had captured it, and finally, 
 with the fact that over a hundred years of almost constant 
 war, ended, with each side holding only its own. The 
 decisive struggle for the possession of North America began 
 in 1753. Lousiana had now grown to be a wealthy self- 
 
sustaining colony. The missionary posts which connected 
 it with Canada had been converted into irtilitary posts — 
 whil'. Knj^lish tradinj^ companies were seekinj^ to push their 
 operuticms into the (treat West. 
 
 (ieorjre VVashinjjfton made his first expedition to the 
 Ohio, in 1754, to spy out tlie land about Port du Que.sne ; 
 Braddock's expedition and defeat followed soon after. Nova 
 Scotia was again captured in 1755. The Rattle of Crown 
 Point was fouj.;^ht the .same year ; Montcalm appeared upon 
 the scene and captured Oswego, in 1756. lH)rt William 
 Henry and Fort Edward fell into his hands in 1757. So far 
 the advantages were all with the French and consternation 
 had spread througliout the land. The aged Col. Pepperell 
 was made Lieut. General and placed at the head of 20,000 
 Ma.ssachu.setts Militia. The situation was one of great con- 
 cern. 
 
 A meeting of delegates from all the colonies was held at 
 Albany, and a plan of union for the common defense was 
 drawn up by Franklin and unanimously adopted — but it was 
 rejected by the Ministry at home because it was deemed to 
 be more dangerous to the domination of Kngland over her 
 own colonies, than to their French am" Indian antagonists, 
 The elder Pitt was now Prime Ministci and with the grasp 
 and foresight of a great statesman put forth every effort 
 to rescue the imperilled colonies. Abercrombie was sent 
 to command in America. His forces, mostly colonists, 
 amounted to 50,000 men, while the entire French population 
 in America could not at that time have exceeded 75,000 
 souls. Louisburg in the East, and Fort du Quesne in the 
 West, were captured. Oswego in the centre, was retaken, 
 but in spite of every effort to dislodge them, the French still 
 held Lake Champlain and Ticonderoga. Another and a 
 greater effort was necessary, and at this juncture Pitt sent 
 Wolfe with reinforcements to take Quebec. This great 
 and dcisive movement was made at the suggestion of 
 Dr. Franklin, and as you all know it resulted in a com- 
 plete victory for the English and Colonial arm.s. Both 
 Montcalm and Wolfe were killed, but the power of France 
 
lO 
 
 mmm 
 
 was broken forever by the victory on the Heights of Abra- 
 ham. ' * 
 
 This signal event took place on September 13, 1759, but 
 the peace of Paris was not made till 1762 — at which time it 
 will be remembered that France ceded to England all of 
 her possessions east of the Mississippi, except the island and 
 City of New Orleans, while frankly confessing that she could 
 no longer defend them. She ceded New Orleans together 
 with the vast territory west of the Mississippi, by England's 
 permission, to Spain, as a buffer to the colonial dependencies 
 of the next greatest European power in America. 
 
 For the first time since tlie colonies were planted they 
 had secured a stable peace, because for the first time both the 
 English colonies and Canada, their implacable enemy, had 
 been brought under the domination of the British Crown. 
 Curious as it may appear, however, England was to a great 
 extent ignorant of, or indifferent to, the great prize she 
 had won, and more thari one of her statesmen were in 
 favor of restoring Canada to the hands of the French, 
 as the best possible means of keeping tiie colonies from 
 growing too fast. But for William Pitt and the help 
 of Dr. Franklin's celebrated pamphlet, which put the 
 case in its true light before the Engli.sh people, Canada 
 might have been exchanged for the insignificant island 
 of Gaudaloupe. In that pamphlet, issued one hundred and 
 twenty-eight years ago, the proper doctiine was plainly 
 laid down — not alone for the English Government but for all 
 mankind. It was confidently asserted that the security of a 
 dominion is a justifiable and prudent ground upon which to 
 demand territorial cessions from the enemy, that although 
 Canada might have but little value for the French, it made 
 no difference if it had great value to us — that it had been 
 used as a base of operations for both French and Indian 
 operations against us, and that its possession by the English 
 Crown would afford the best possible security to us. He jus- 
 tified his advice, by appealing to the almost unbi-oken usage 
 of nations ''in this situation." He contended "that the 
 
II 
 
 security and quiet of provinces and states have always been 
 deemed sufficient reasons, when supported by power for 
 disposing of rights, and that sucli disposition had never 
 been looked upon as indicating a want of moderation." 
 Finally, he asserted, ''If the French remain in Canada ai i 
 Louisiana you may fix the boundaries as you will, you will 
 always be neighbors and can never have peace ! " The pos- 
 session of Canada, he urged, "implies every security and it 
 ought to be had while in our power," and on this irrefraga- 
 ble argument it was held and has been held ever since by 
 Great Britain. 
 
 It is worthy of remark, that when the Revolution broke 
 out a few years later Dr. Franklin was sent to induce the 
 Canadians to join us, but in spite of his best efforts he failed, 
 though he always claimed that his failure was due to the ig- 
 norance of the Canadian people, rather than to any feeling 
 of loyalty to the English Governinen!. In alluding to 
 the matter afterwards he laughingly declared, that 'the nejit 
 mission to Canada should be one of schoolmasters," though 
 it must not be forgotten that the Canadians were Catholic 
 French and had always regarded the Protestant Yankees as 
 their hereditary enemies. It is an interesting circumstance 
 that Dr. Franklin was one of the commissioners of the United 
 States to negotiate the Treaty of Peace and partition with 
 England, and that when Mr. Oswald, the gentleman who 
 first acted as the agCiit of the Earl of Shelbourne and the 
 English (Tovernment spoke of "reconciliation," the wise 
 ?.nd watchful Doctor adroitly suggested the cession of Canada 
 to us, as the best and most acceptable reparation England 
 could make, and at the same time as the best prevention 
 of future wars. It would lead me too far from the subject 
 of discussion, to follow the course of the negotiations and to 
 explain how England cheated New England out of a large 
 part of Canada in 1763, or how France hoping that chance 
 would enable her some day to recover it, and Spain fearing 
 that if the United States got it they would also soon get 
 
12 
 
 Touisiana and her other American Colonies, United in play- 
 ing into England's hand and thus kept Canada out of our 
 possession in 1783.* 
 
 I cannot forbear remarking however, that the principles so 
 clearly laid down by Dr. Franklin in justification of the 
 transfer of Canada to the English, have never been lost sight 
 of. And it is certain that the British cabinet hoped by 
 retaining it in their control that the now independent, but 
 scarcely united States might be induced to gravitate toward it 
 and resume their alligiance to the mother country, and that 
 in the event of future war it would serve as a sate base 
 of operations against us, as it did to our alraoFt infinite cost 
 and humiliation, in the war of 181 2. 
 
 From the foregoing statement it will be seen that 
 England's title to Canada is based solely upon the right 
 of conquest, obtained by — 
 
 "The good old rule * * the simple plan, 
 That they should take who have the power, 
 And they should keep who can." 
 
 It Is also evident that the Colonists assisted right 
 valiantly in applying that rule ; they did a large share 
 of the fighting, and bore more than their share of the suf- 
 fering and expense, but to this day, their just share of the 
 great conquest has been withheld from them. In making 
 this assertion, I am not unmindful of the fact, that the Treaty 
 of Peace acknowledged our right to participate in the 
 fisheries, which went with Canada, Nova Scotia and New- 
 foundland, but a separate question has grown out of this 
 right and I shall refer to it further on. 
 
 My point now is, that England, although taking to her- 
 self, in the original cession all that New England ever- 
 
 * For many interestii statemenls connected with the events of that period, 
 reference is made to thi I^ife of Franklin, to Lecky's Hisiory of England in the 
 18th Century, and to co-temperaneous French memories and .Sta'e papers. 
 
13 
 
 claimed, failed to give us the share of Canada, to which we 
 we felt ourselves entitled by joint conquest, and 
 that although she has withheld it from us for over a hun- 
 dred years, she can hardly blame us for claiming it when- 
 ever it becomes essential for the protection of our para- 
 mount national interests. 
 
 If I have read the story aright, it fixes a taint 
 upon the character of England's title, which might 
 become fatal, if we should find our pennanent and 
 paramount interests impelling us towards the acqiiisition 
 of her American dependencies. Doctor Franklin's doctrine 
 was good enough for England, and under similar circumstan- 
 ces ought to be good enough for us. Besides the law of our 
 national growth seems to be : "Accretion not colonization " — 
 accretion by purchase, as in the case of Louisiana, Florida, 
 Arizona and Alaska ; by treaty and mutual agreement, as in 
 the case of Texas, or by conquest, as in the case of Cali- 
 fornia.* The doctrine of manifest destiny has thus an- 
 nounced itself to every thoughtful student of history. It has 
 not ceased to work for the glory of the American name and can- 
 not cease, or be defeated of its ends till the American flag 
 floats over every foot of the North American continent. It 
 is as impossible to suspend this law as it is to make the waters 
 of the St. Lawrence and Lake Ontario«flow backwards over 
 the Falls of Niagara ! It is as immutable and as constant as 
 the law of gravitation. It lies at the very base of Amer- 
 ican progress, and although donnant at times it is never 
 absent. It may work slowly, as men measure time, but it 
 works as steadily and irresistibly as fate itself. Whether it 
 require one year or a hundred, or even a thousand to com- 
 plete its task, can make but little difference in the end. No 
 policy on our part, or on the part of the Canadians, or even 
 on the part of a federated British Empire, can abrogate or 
 annul this law, and yet the question of policy is an import- 
 ant one to this generation, for policy may hasten or delay the 
 fulfillment of our destiny, though it can not defeat it. 
 
 *vSee Wharton's Digest' for a more extended statement of this law. 
 
fil 
 
 14 
 
 My friend Mr. Winiaii urges the Americau people on 
 both sides of the dividing line, to adopt the plan of a Customs 
 or Commercial Union, because he believes that that plan will 
 facilitate and increase trade between them, and that unre- 
 stricted trade will ultimately lead to a political union. I 
 oppose that plan because it is opposed to the law of our 
 national development, and to the "American system" ; be- 
 cause I cannot regard commerce as a solidarity — because we 
 have not the same interest in Canada and the Canadians that 
 we have in America and the Americans. I am willing to 
 admit that unrestricted free trade with us" would be a good 
 thing for the Canadians, and that it might be beneficial to 
 us in a commercial sense, but I believe also inlthe old doc- 
 trine that charity should begin at home — and that we should 
 first con.sider, how a Custom's Union would affect us in 
 another and a higher sense ; how it would operate upon our 
 great political and permanent interests. In considering this 
 plan we should not lose sight of the fact that we had (partial) 
 free trade under the reciprocity treaty from 1853 to 1865 — we 
 should not forget that the trade between the two countries 
 increased rapidly, till it became greater than [^ the trade 
 between Canada and England. Neither should^ we forget 
 that although the arrangement was altogether one sided 
 and favorable to the Canadians, it utteily failed to draw us 
 ■ closer together. Tlie Canadians got all the profit from it 
 they could ; they fattened upon it and grew arrogant and 
 truculent. But instead of growinj^ more friendly to us, 
 immediately after the outbreak of the great rebellion, they 
 took the side of the South, and from that day forth they and 
 the majority of their kinsmen beyond sea, became the stead- 
 fast friends of the Confederates, and did all they dared do 
 to promote their success. They seized upon the Trent affair 
 in 1861, to organize a volunteer army of nearly fifty thousand 
 men, and backed by the Jingo element in England, began 
 an agitation in favor c^ the federation of the British Colonies 
 in North America, as a step in the federation of the British 
 
15 
 
 Empire. It is true that this measure was not consummated 
 till after the close of the rebellion, and the accession of the 
 Jingo ministry under Disraeli, but it is notorious that it was 
 conceived and carried throuj^h in a spirit of hostility to us. 
 Conscious of the injury they had done us, and would have 
 done us, during our struggle for national existence, they and 
 their British suzerain'^ adopted the measure at last, as the 
 most efficient means of defending themselves from the wrath 
 of the neighbor they had so outrageoush wronged. Hut 
 their guilty consciences exaggerated the danger. Exulting 
 in the reestablishment of the Union and rejoicing in the 
 return of blessed peace we hastened to our homes forgiving 
 all mankind. It is true, that we warned the French allies 
 of Maximilian from Mexico while we were disbanding our 
 armies and beating oui swords intc pruning hooks, but neither 
 statesmen nor generals gave adequate consideration to a set- 
 tlement with England Both Senator Sumner and (General 
 Grant had a correct Jdea of what should be done, but, in the 
 political confusion which followed the assassination of 
 Lincoln and the accession of Johnsoi to the Presidency the^ 
 failed to give proper expression to it and so our great oppor- 
 tunity slipped by unimproved if not entirely unheedeed. 
 I cannot withhold the reflection, that if we had, immediately 
 after the close of the great rebellion, turned our victorious 
 columns northward, calling the gallant confederates to our 
 assistance, we should have taken Canada in sixty days, and 
 forever banished the British flag from the North American 
 Continent. That would have been a settlement of the 
 Alabama claims after the "high Roman fashion," and History 
 would have said we did right. We could have set in the 
 field at that time five hundred thousand of the best infantry 
 and fifty thousand of the best cavalry the world had ever 
 seen. We had then the best navy in existence, and such 
 an enterprise would have received the approval and arrested 
 the admiration of mankind, and it would have moved the 
 hand of time forward for us h\ a centurv at least. 
 
i6 
 
 lii 
 
 But returning to the question under consideration, 
 permit me to add, that I oppose the po'icy of Commercial 
 Union, because it is inadequate, as well as unjust. It does 
 not cover the whole ground of our relations with the 
 Dominion of Canada. For the sake of argument, I may 
 admit, that it would settle our comipercial relations, on a 
 satisfactory and even an advantageous basis — but there are 
 other questions than questions of trade; other relations than 
 those of commerce, and I know I shall be pa^'doned for 
 saying, that those other relations, are in the life and destiny 
 of a great people, of far more importance than matters of 
 mere trade and barter. There are other questions and 
 interests which even now claim our thoughtful attention, 
 and in reference to which we must adopt a broad, compre- 
 hensive, and national policy. 
 I refer of course — 
 
 1. To the fisheries question. 
 
 2. To the Behring's sea question. • 
 
 3. To the collection of impost duties at the frontier; 
 and to the faithful execution of the Exclusion Act. 
 
 4. To the free navigation of the St. Lawrence, and of 
 the canals connected with it, and with the Great Lakes. 
 
 5. To the regulation of the Transit Trade. 
 
 6. To the enforcement of the Interstate Commerce Act. 
 
 7. To the proper protection oi our own transporting 
 interests. 
 
 8. To the great dut)- of looking to the National 
 defence. 
 
 9. And finally, to the unimpeded operation of the law 
 of our national growth and development. 
 
 I am not unmindful of the fact, that it is proposed by 
 Mr. Wiman and his friends, to allow us equal rights in the 
 fisheries, accompanied by the transportation of our catch 
 through Canada, in bond free of duty, as a concession for 
 the free trade which tJ ey would secure by a Commercial 
 Union, and that this would settle the fisheries question so 
 
17 
 
 1v 
 
 longf as the Commercial Union existed. But we should scorn 
 to accept such a settlement. The fisheries regulations of the 
 Dominion are at best a relic of barbarism, and an usurpa- 
 tion of sovereignty over the waters of the sea which should 
 not be permitted for a day. Sea fishing s^iould as a matter 
 of right, be open to all mankind, and inasmuch as it is 
 commerce, it should be regulated both on shore and at sea 
 in accordance with the humane principles, which regulate all 
 other commerce. Resides, the fisheries question was one 
 which arose two hundred years ago, and became from time 
 to time an actuating cause of war between the English and 
 French colonists. It was first settled by the joint conquest 
 of Canada and its dependencies in 1761, and ren;ained settled 
 till the treaty of 18 18. As before stated, we contributed 
 more than our share to that conquest — and without reference 
 to the broader and more humane principles tv which I have 
 just alluded, we are entitled by the same right of conquest 
 to every privilege the Canadians themselves enjoy — and no 
 other settlement of the question can ever be permanent or satis- 
 factory to the Aiiierican fisherman, or consonant with the feel- 
 ings and interests of the country at large. To ' 'settle' ' it by the 
 establishment of a Zollverein or Custom's Union, is to further 
 complicate it. In short, the proposed measure does not 
 "settle" it at all, l^ut defers the real issue, to the vague and 
 indefinite future. 
 
 The collection of duties at the frontier, would no longer 
 be necessary if the Custom's Union were established — but 
 the boundary line would still exist, for all other purposes, 
 and especially for the exclusion of the Chinese, who are now 
 admitted into Canada by the payment of a head tax of fifty 
 dollars, and as soon as they are inside, proceed to steal across 
 the borders into the States. If they are caught and taken 
 back, the Canadian officials will not let them re-enter their 
 country unless they pay another fifty dollars. It may be 
 answered, that Canada could be induced under the Custom's 
 Union to change its laws on this subject and to adopt ours — 
 
i8 
 
 and that we could depend upon Canadian officials to enforce 
 the new laws. To this I reply, we can depend upon nobody, 
 and should depend upon nobody but our own officials, in re- 
 j^ard to matters of such importance. 
 
 The uavijj^ation of the St. Lawrence and its canals, and 
 of the Great Lakes and the rivers and canals connectinj^ 
 them, free from let or hindrance, and from tolls which dis- 
 criminate ajj^ainst our commerce, is a matter of the gravest 
 importance. Kngland has never admitted us to such 
 priv'leges as a matter of right. She contends and has always 
 contended, that a »State lying on both sides of a navigable 
 river next to the sea, has a right in accordance with the 
 unbroken practice of nations, to prohibit States lying above 
 them from using the river at all, if it has the power to 
 enforce its prohibition. In pursuance of this contention .she 
 has permitted us to use the St. Lawrence only in accordance 
 with treaty stipulations, and while those stipulations, have 
 generally been fair and liberal — indeed 1 may say — strictly 
 reciprocal iu terms, it is a matter of notoriety that Canada 
 has continually discriminated against commerce intended for 
 American cities and ports, and in favor of that intended for 
 Canadian cities and ports. And to make the matter worse, 
 Sir John A. McDonald, the Canadian Premier contends that 
 there is no injustice in such di.scriniiuation. 
 
 When it became known in 1802 that Spain had retroceded 
 Louisiana to France and thereby given to the latter power, the 
 control of the Mississippi River, and the ability to cancel our 
 right of deposit at New Orleans, Mr. Jefferson who was then 
 President, wrote a remarkable letter to Chancellor Livingston 
 our minister to France, in which he set forth in clear and 
 unmistakable terms, that the transfer of that vast region and 
 its great river, from a weak power, such as Spain then was, 
 to a strong one such as F'rance was then becoming, if persisted 
 in, must be regarded by us as an event which would "com- 
 pletely reverse all the political relations of the United States, ' ' 
 and form "a new epoch in our political affairs." He pointed 
 
 II 
 
19 
 
 
 out that it threatened our right of deposit at New Orleans, and 
 to the free navigation o( the Mississippi, and must he re- 
 garded as putting France in an attitude of defiance towards 
 us. He impressively added: 
 
 "The day that I'Vance takes pojsession of New Orleans fixes the 
 sentence which is to retain her forever within hei low- water mark. It 
 seals the nnion of two nations who, in conjunction, can maintain exclu- 
 sive possession of the ocean. From that moment we must marry onr- 
 selves to the Hritish fleet and nation We must turn all our attention 
 to a maritime force, for which cur reso'irces place us on very high 
 ground, and having formed a. i connected together a power which may 
 render reinforcement of her settlements here impossible to France, 
 make the first cannon which shall be fired in Ivurope the signal for 
 the tearing up of an^' settlement she may have made, and for holding 
 the two continents of America in sequestration for the common pur- 
 poses of the United liritish and American nations. 
 
 This is not a state cf things we seek or desire. It is one which 
 this measure, if adopted b\- F' ranee, forces on us as necessarily as any 
 other cause, l\v the laws of nature, brings on its necessary effect." 
 
 The .substance of this letter was by direction of the 
 President communicated to the First Consul, and produced 
 a profound impression upon him. No one who reads the 
 very able and exhaustive " History of the United States of 
 America during the First Administration of Thomas Jeffer- 
 ron, by Henry Adams," (Vols. I and H,) can doubt that it 
 was at this time the intention of Bonaparte, acting by the 
 •advice of Talleyrand, to take possession of Louisiana under 
 the treaty of retrocession, and make it the basis for the re- 
 establi.shment of the French Colonial system, or that this in- 
 tention was defeated primarily, by the revolution of Tous.saint 
 Lonverture and his sucses.sors, and secondarily by the fright- 
 ful disasters which overtook Leclerc, Rochambeau and the 
 forty thousand soldiers who lost their lives in the gallant but 
 futile effort to» re-establish the authority of F^rance in San 
 Domingo. Thoroughly discouraged by these losses and the 
 expense they entailed, and fearing that the alliance between 
 America and England, which Mr. Jeiferson had threatened, 
 
T 
 
 I] 
 
 20 
 
 would, if entered into, put an effectual end to his preten- 
 sions, not only in America, but in Europe, Bonaparte made 
 haste to sell us both, Louisiana and the Mississippi, and thus 
 remove them forever from the realm of hostile contention. 
 
 The doctrine laid down by Mr. Jefferson has recenth- 
 been reannounced by Mr. Edward Dicey, an English writer 
 of distinction, in a paper discussing the tendency of large 
 and powerful nations to absorb smaller or weaker ones, and 
 justifying such absorptit)n when made under the pressure of 
 '' permanent and paramount interests." History teaches us 
 by numberless examples that an appeal to this rule is gener- 
 ally followed by war, which since the world began has been 
 the last argument of Republics as well as of Kings. F^ortun- 
 ately we were not required to act under it in tiie case of the 
 Missis.sippi and Louisiana territory, and I hope we shall not 
 be required to apply it in the case of the St Lawrence and 
 the Dominion of Canada ! 
 
 But no one — certainly no .\merican — denies that Mr. 
 Jefferson was justified in announcing it to the First Consul in 
 terms which could not be misunderstood. .^t that time our 
 entire population did not exceed 6,ooo,cxdo souls. We had 
 but a few scattered settlements and a population of less 
 than 500,000, on the Mississippi and its tributaries and 
 all their commerce, indeed, nearly all their movable pos- 
 sessions could have been carried in a hundred flat-boats, 
 but the principles and arguments were clearly applicable 
 then and they are applicable now, that our population has 
 grown to more than 60,000,000, over 20,000,000 of which live 
 in States and Territories bordering on* the St. Lawrence and 
 Great Lakes, and send their commerce to market ty the 
 numberless vessels which navigate them, or by the railroads 
 which traverse the country bordering upon theiq. It is said that 
 the tonnage passing through the canals of the Sault Ste. Marie, 
 and of the St. Clair flats, now exceeds that of the Suez Canal, 
 and no one can doubt that it is a thousand-fold greater than 
 the tonnage of the Mississippi in 1803, and several times. 
 
T 
 
 ii 
 
 31 
 
 jjreater than that of the Mississippi at the present time. 
 To permit that tonnage to be discriminated against in 
 any manner whatever by the Dominion of Canada, is en- 
 tirely inadmissible, and it is certain that no administration 
 conld stand a day againt the clamor of the American people 
 should that discrimination become serious. Hut what would 
 be the outcry — what would be the result if Great Britain 
 should for any reason tmdertakc to stop our commerce on 
 the St. lyawrence altogether? It is useless t» say there is no 
 danger of this, for there is danger so long as war is possible, 
 and war is possible so long as Canada remains a part of the 
 British Empire. It is ju.st as possible now that the Canadians 
 occupy one side and we the other, as it was one hundred and 
 twenty-eight years ago with the French Colonists on one side 
 and the English on the other. The greatest difference at pre- 
 ,sent, is thai the boundary line is over 35cxd miles long^, not 
 counting that between Alaska and the Northwest territory, 
 with our people pressing np against it at every poiat from 
 Maine to Washington, while at the time of the peace of Paris, 
 it was less than looo miles long and lay mostly in an unin- 
 habited wilderness. No Commercial Union can adequately 
 meet the difficulties of this boundary line, nor remove the 
 dangers inseparable from arbitrary ioreig^n control of the St. 
 Lawrence river or of the country adjacent to it. Such a union 
 may defer or minimize those difflcullies and dangers, but ulti- 
 mately they must reappear to plague us, till they are settled 
 by the only practicable and safe method — the annexation of 
 Canada. 
 
 Since the introduction of railroads, dinAparri-passu^ with 
 their extension from the Atlantic seaboard into the Great 
 West and across the continent, a new factor has appeared 
 in our problem of transportation. As a matter of con- 
 venience to our own people, and of profit to the Canadians, it 
 has gradually come to be a custom to permit the transporta- 
 tion of goods, wares and merchandise, in bond and duty free 
 from points in the United States, by rail, through Canada, to 
 
22 
 
 Dthcr j)()ints in the UniU'd States, imcler siieli rejfulations 
 as the ^overnieiits of Canada and tlie United vState might 
 prescribe. It has also come to he the cnstom that either 
 conntry may export or import goods, wares and merchandise 
 throngh the other free of dnty, and these jmictices constitnte 
 what is commonly known as the Transit Trade. This trade 
 was at first carried on nnder laws enacted i)y the Canadian 
 Parliament and the .\merican Congress and later under 
 certain provisions of the treaty of Washington entered into in 
 1S71. And the laws, regulations anil practice, were intended 
 to be reciprocal, but partly from the nature of the case, 
 and partly by the superior watchfulness of the Cauadains, 
 neither the laws, regulations, nor practice are reciprocal. The 
 Canadians have a great advantage in all this, and derive 
 a great profit fiom it, while we get <mly the petty advan- 
 tage of two more competing railway lines " acro.ss lots," be- 
 tween the seaboard and thf northwest. 
 
 Commercial l^nion would, of course, continue and extend 
 this trade, but in doing so would perj)etuate a grevious 
 wrong against our own transporting interests. Kver since 
 the establishment of our (Tovernment under the present Con- 
 stitution it has been the well .settled policy of our legislation 
 to reserve our domestic carrying trade for the profit of our 
 own people. Almost the first law Congress ever passed was 
 the Navigation act, which in terms, provides that no ship 
 bearing a foreign register or having a foreign ownership shall 
 ever engage in our coasting trade, and this has been our 
 unbroken rule on the sea coast from that day to this. It was 
 also our rule on the Great Lakes, till the treaty of Washing- 
 ton, made an exception in favor of vessels carrying the flag 
 of Her Britannic Majesty, and forming transportation routes, 
 which should be continued by rail through the Dominion 
 of Canada. An interesting story has been told of how 
 this extraordinary provision was smuggled into the treaty by 
 the free use of champagne, but we cannot stop here to 
 incjuire into the truth of this story. Suffice it to say, that our 
 
23 
 
 Lake carryiiij;- tnult* was speedily ruined by the practice 
 which at once sprung up under the treaty, auil that this 
 caused such an outcry from American citizens ownin^^ ships 
 on the (ireat lyakes, that President Arthur terminated that 
 part of the treaty, by proclamation, at the earliest j)()ssible 
 day allowec; l)y its terms. Hut under another article of the 
 treaty, and by the Revised vStatutesthe trade is still carried on 
 extensively by three Canadian railroads, and what makes the 
 matter worse, is the fact, that two of these railroads, the 
 (irand Trunk and the Canadian Pacific, were built, or j^reatly 
 aided, by subsidies j^iven to them in pursuance of the com- 
 mercial and political policy of the (rovermnent of (ireat 
 Britain. And it is worth while to note that a writer in the 
 Westminster Review for Februar\\ iS8S, frankly declares 
 that the "Confederal Union" (between the Hritish Colonies 
 in North America) "would not be worth the paper upon 
 which it was written but for the Canadian Pacific Railroad ! " 
 In view of the fact that our own railroads have been still 
 further hampered by the Interstate Commerce Law, and espe- 
 cially by that provision of the law known as the "lonjj^ and 
 short haul clause," (the nature of which you all understand), 
 while the Canadian railroads are necessarily left entirely free 
 from its penalties and provisions, it would seem to be not only 
 fair but obligatory that we should repeal all laws and abrogate 
 all treaties which permit such spoliation ard injustice. Hav- 
 ing bound the hands of our railroad managers, common 
 justice, if not a decent regard for the fundamental principles 
 of American polity should induce us, not only, not to extend 
 the practice by establishing a Commercial Union with Canada 
 but to put an end to it by repealing all laws and regula- 
 tions which have been construed to allow it. We should in 
 all fairness shut the Canadian roads out of the transit trade 
 along our northern borders just as we have shut all foreign 
 ships out of our maritime coasting trade. We can do this all 
 the more readily, because our own railroads are ample for the 
 accommodation of our traffic, and their rates are regulated by 
 
24 
 
 competition between themselves, by the water routes through 
 the great lakes and the canals, and finally by the stringent 
 provisions of the Interstate Commerce Law, itself. 
 ' In discussing other points, I have already touched upon 
 the great duty of the government to look to the national 
 defence. Neither Mr. Winian nor any other friend of his 
 measure, has set up the pretence that a Commercial Union 
 would provide adequately foi the protection of our northern 
 frontier in case of war with England. If Canada were 
 an independent power or the Millennium had come, such 
 a union might do much to render war improbable, and hence 
 to defer the work and expense of protecting our borders from 
 invasion, but the Millennium is not yet at hand and Canada is 
 not an independent power. She cannot even enter into 
 a Commercial Union without the express permission of the 
 suzerain nation which controls her. She would not dare 
 understake it against the veto of Her Britannic Majesty's 
 (Government! Canada alone, or even Canada aided by the 
 entire confederation of which she is a part, can give us but 
 little concern for our safety or progress, but tlie Dominion of 
 Canada, as an integral part of the world -encircling British 
 Empire — the richest, the most aggressive and most grasping 
 empire that has ever existed, is altogether a different and 
 a greater thing. War with the latter is always possible. It 
 may break out any day, even without the agency, concurrence 
 or permission of any British dependency and it behooves us to 
 make timely preparation against that danger and its conse- 
 quences. When it is remembered that in every great 
 emergency which has overtaken us since the peace of Paris 
 was signed in 1763, the arbitrary will, the crafty diplomacy, 
 the bottomless purse, or the mailed hand of Great Britain 
 has made itself felt, if it has not turned the scale against 
 us, no sensible reflecting man can contend that Commercial 
 Union could properly provide for the safety of our exposed 
 and defenceless borders. Its most striking effect would 
 be to increase the wealth and population and strengthen the 
 
 ii 
 
 , 
 
25 
 
 it 
 
 hands of the country which would necessarily be used as a 
 base of operation against us. 
 
 As I have stated before, the law of our national growth 
 is by accretion, not colonization; by annexation, under the 
 Constitution, not by commercial contract; in short, it is by 
 political union always, and never by customs union! Every 
 page of our history has this law plainly written in it. Even 
 the story of the great rebellion inculcates this lesson. It 
 teaches not only union but political union, uuder the Con- 
 stitution and the law of the land, where all are equal, and 
 where absolute free trade prev^ails, but it also teaches that 
 higher law, that whatever is necessary to the preservation of 
 the national life, and the protection of its permanent and 
 paramount interests, is justifiable and will in the fullness of 
 time most surely come to pass. 
 
 In view of all this, and much more that might be said, 
 it seems to me that Commercial Union with the Dominion of 
 Canada is incompatible with our paramount national interests 
 and with the law of our national growth, and cannot therefore 
 become the policy of the American people or any considerable, 
 number of them ; that such a policy is fanciful and inadequate 
 and, did I not believe in the honesty of those who have brought 
 it forward I should be tempted to say that they cannot be sin- 
 cere in advocating it, and that there must be a tremendous job 
 concealed in it somewhere, or that they are advocating it for the 
 purpose of delaying rather than promoting that political 
 Union, essential to permanent peace and to the realization of 
 our manifest destiny. 
 
 I cannot admit that such a policy is favored by the lead- 
 ing politicians of the Dominion of 'Canada much less, by the 
 Statesmen of England and indeed we know from nu- 
 merous interviews with both, published by the New 
 York Sun during the past year, it is certain that they 
 are not, and almost as certain that they can not be brought 
 to support such a measure so long as England continues her 
 commercial and imperial policy. I feel sure that it is not for 
 
26 
 
 the best interests of the masses of Canadian people, because its 
 immediate effect would be to defer the entry of the Canadian 
 provinces into the American Union. I believe that this would 
 be the result, because it would give to the Canadians free trade 
 with us, the only thing that all classes concur in saying they 
 want from us. If this were granted it is obvious that so long 
 as (jreat Britiau should continue to build their forts, sub- 
 sidizes their railroads, canals and steamship lines, fight 
 their battles, guarantee their public debts, flatter their pride, 
 and bestow hereditary titles upon their great men, sprung 
 mostly from the humbler walks of life, so long would they 
 .strive to maintain their position in the British Empire. 
 
 Aft jr careful consideration, I do not hesitate to express 
 the opinion that our true policy is to invite all the British 
 Provinces in North America to come into our glorious union, 
 as states and territories, on the assurance that our government 
 will assume the public debt of the Dominion and of the 
 independent provinces. This could not fail to give them ev- 
 ery privilege and blessing they now enjoy, except such as are 
 connected with hereditary titles, and it would give them in 
 addition the inestimable boon of absolute self-government, 
 accompanied by free ...id unrestricted trade, with sixty 
 millions of the most enlightened, the most progressive, and 
 the most wealthy people in the world. Their waste lands, 
 are, or soon will be required by us, and would therefore be 
 speedily taken up for cultivation ; their mines of precious 
 metals, coal and iron, would be opened and worked, their 
 forests would be utilized, and every resource would be de- 
 veloped to their inhnite enrichment, and to the promotion of 
 our common peace, safety and glory. 
 
 Should they fail to accept this generous offer, and decide 
 to adhere to their British allegiance, they can not regard it 
 as at all unkind or unneighborly in us, if, instead of con- 
 senting to a Commercial or Customs Union, we at once repeal 
 the laws and abrogate the treaty under which the Transit 
 Tirade is conducted; insist upon our full share of the fisheries; 
 
 
27 
 
 S 
 
 our equal right to the navigation of the St. Lawrence and the 
 Great Lakes and the rivers connecting them, without 
 hindrance or discrimination; the rigid enforcement of our 
 customs laws over ever\- foot of the international boundarv 
 line; the execution of our Chinese Exclusion Act without 
 •evasion; a due respect to our riglu of national defence; and 
 finally upon the unimpeded operation of the law of our 
 national growth, with all that the law in its fullest sense can 
 be con.strued to mean. The American people did not make 
 the boundary line, and cannot be blamed if they look upon 
 it as separating them from a foreign and frequently a hostile 
 nation. It became a necessity by the will of Great Britian. 
 The North American Continent is a unit, and it became 
 peopled almost exclusively by the Anglo Saxon race, through 
 the operation of natural laws. No earthly arrangement can 
 defeat the destiny, intended for either, but it becomes us as 
 good citizens to strive to discover what that destiny is to be, 
 and to do our part manfully to hasten its consummation. 
 
 Permit me to say in conclusion, that I think I see clearly 
 the road on which we are compelled, perhaps all uncon- 
 sciously, to travel. It lies fair and broad before us, and leads 
 straight forward without crook or turn to a continental 
 republic, extending from the tropics to the north polar sea, 
 and bounded on all sides by the ocean which encircles the 
 world. The people within it, as well as the separate States 
 which govern their local affairs are free and equal, and sub- 
 ject only to that written Constitution, which the wisest of 
 English Statesman has pronounced to be the grandest 
 instrument of Government ever framed at a single epoch by 
 a single set of men !