^ IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) Y / O :/ d? <^j 1.0 I.I 1.25 ■^ ilM •^ lilU li ;!f iM 12.0 1.8 1.4 ill 1.6 # /^ / o ^1 5-9fi. 1894-9.5. Increase- Customs Excise Miscellaneous.. . ;•; cts. l'.t,8,-«,279 4S 7,U26,IHI5 SU 'J,so9,:w5 30 S cts, 17,()40,46ti 00 7,805,7,32 71 .S,.t31,',i3I) 70 $ nts. 2,192,813 48 120,273 23 327,;!74 S4 Total 36,01S,.')90 72 33,978,129 47 2,(540,461 25 The total revenue of $36,618,590 fell short of the estimate made by my predecessor in his financial statement of 31st January, 1896, to the extent of some $370,000. Now, tak- ing the report of my hon. friend the Con- troller of Customs as my authority, it will be found that on nearly all the general lines of imports we have received Increased re- venue over the year 1894-93. The following, however, are the main items of Increase, sugar, of course, being the principal :— Grain of all kinds $ 42.902 Flour and meal of all kinds 38,361 Carriages ^^^'I?I Coal and coke 56,222 Cotton, manufactures of 111,794 Drugs, dyes, chemicals and medicines... 21,786 Flax, hemp and Jute, manufactures of... 41,297 Fruits and nuts, dried 17,915 Fruits and nuta, green 11,549 Hats, caps and bonnets 13,472 Iron and steel, and manufactures of 223,123 Leather, manufuctures of 11,683 Oils, coal, kcrdsene, and products of 18,597 Oils, all other 14,377 Paints and colours 10,024 Provisions, viz., buttsr, cheese, lard and meats 17,059 Seeds and roots 14,608 Silk, manufactures of 97,527 Soap of all kinds 10,351 Spirits and wines 84,754 Sugar of all kinds 894,428 Wood, and manufactures of 21,033 Wool, and manufactures of 231,569 Of the comparatively few classes of goods on which the customs revenue declined, the following may be cited : Arrowroot, biscuit, rice, macaroni, &c... ) 38,395 Fancy goods 14,131 Glass, and manufactures of 18,485 Gutta percha and India-rubber, manufac- tures of 20,265 The second principal source of taxation, ex- cise, shows an advance In the receipts from this Important branch of our service. Of the different items Included under this head- ing, tobacco and snuff proved the only cases In which the revenue fell behind that of the previous year. The following statement will exhibit the quantities taken for con- sumption, and the duties accrued thereon, of the several excisable Items :— the per capita consumption for the years 1805 and 180U ;- To- Sptrlts. Deer. Wine, bacco. Oaili. Galls. Galls. Lbs. Average from 1867... 1037 2'900 -131 2-170 do 1894-95. -Oee 3 471 -090 2 163 do 1895-96. -623 3'528 '070 2'120 From the miscellaneous sources of revenue the most Important Increases occurred lu I est ollice, $171,22n..3l) ; Interest on luvest- inonts, !|!33,0f;3.02 ; and casual, $121,412.32. On the whole, therefore, the revenue In 1895-0(5 showed a buoyancy and expanhlon lu marlied contrast to the year 1894-05 EXPENDITURE. Iliiviug so far given our attention to what was received Into the treasury, let us now turn to the other side of the account, the expenditure. My predecessor estimated tliiit the outlay for 1895-OG would amount in round numbers to $37,000,000, and that I the receipts and expenditure would about balance. The actual expenditure was with- in $50,000 of the estimate and amounted to $30,049,142.03, but as tiie revenue foil short ' of expectations, Instead of both sides of the account balancing there has again occurred i a dellcit amounting this time to $330,551.31. : Compared with the expenditure of 1894-95, Article, Spirits, galls Malt, lbs Cigars, No Cigarettes, No Tooacco and snuff, lbs Qu.iiitity. l,S!i.5. 2,545,0.54 5(i.(;5!l,(!27 10(),13l,2!H Gti,(;L'8,44() y,5t)«,437 (Juantity. Duty. Duty. 1890. 2,344,707 51,0il0,2r8 10H,2!l(),20(i 8(),4(il,!lO() (1,392,487 1895. .?3,H70,752 75it,!)2i) 035,028 !)!),943 2,207,738 1890. .'?3,073,.^()0 775,354 048,4()2 120,092 2,228,097 Incrcise. 1890. li>2,548 15,425 13,434 20,749 Showing a decrease in tobacco and snuff of $39,041. It is worth noting at this point that ac- cording to the report of the hon. Controller of Inland Revenue the per capita consump- tion of spirits and wines in 1896 reached the lowest point since confederation. The per capita consumption of spirits being •023 gallons ; and of wines, 070 gallons against an average of 1'037 gallons of the former and -ISl gallon of the latter. The following statement gives the average per capita consumption from 1867 to 189C, and the year that elapsed on 30th June last, waa remarkable for a distinct decrease in the public outlay, a decrease amounting to $1,- 182,803.02. The decreases were pretty gen- erally spread throughout the various ser- vices, but the following are the most Im- portant heads :— Premium, Discount and Exchange f 34,099 Civil Government 25,599 Legislation 36,882 Penitentiaries 64,372 Immigration 75,453 Militia 437,300 Mounted Police 113,111 Public Works, Consolidated Fund 442,548 Railway! and Canali. Coniolldated Fund 126,272 Ocean and River Service •■■• ♦23.840 Indians 7*.»95 CustomH 21,298 As ngalnst these reductions the followlnf? lucrenses must be noted :— Interest on public debt ' 'S'i^e Sinking funds 52,976 Superannuation „5'olo Mall subsldlea and steamship subventions 21,648 Government of North-west Territories. . . 27,076 Post Office Jl'lnl Railways and Canals, collection lii.WJ Notwithstanding the contraction of tho expenditure the uet outcome of the your was a deficit in the ordinary running expeuHos of the country as above stated of $330,551.31. The deficit for the year 1894-95, you will re- member, was $4,153,875.58. THE CURRENT YEAR, 1896-97. Having reviewed the main features of the accounts of the Dominion for the year ended 30th June, 189t), I must now ask your atten- tion to the condition of affairs of the pre- sent fiscal year of which nearly ten mouths have elapsed. First, let me give you as briefly as I can, my estimate cf the result of the year's operations, taliing the actual figures for the period elapsed, and adding thereto the figures appertaining to tho period from 20th April to 30th June of the previous year, making such allowances as the altered circumstances prompt. Taking up the revenue side ftrst I find that up to the 20th April— that is up to last Tuesday night— we received as ordinary re- venue $30,254,403.74. Adding to this for the purposes of estimate, the actual receipts between 20th April and 30th June of last year $7,892,251.81 would give us probable receipts to the amount of $38,146,655.55. But this I consider beyond the mark for this reason. The Income from excise has been unduly swollen by reason of duties paid In anticipation of tariff changes, that must necessarily affect the revenue for the balance of the year, and in our customs receipts there has been a development in the last couple of months that must like- wise affect materially the year's results. I am convinced, therefore, that to arrive at a safo and reasonable estimate I must cop $850,000 from the $38,146,655, given above. In round numbers, therefore, our income to 30th June next will, I expect, reach $37,- 800,000. Let us deal now with the ex- penditure in a fdmllar manner. Up to the 20th April, Instant, wo have expend- ed $25,403,830.05. In the period from the 20th April to the 30th June, 189«3, we I'xpL'udt'd !t;i2,;!93,949.;{7. Summing these two up, wo have the estimated expenditure to the 30th June next as $37,857,779.40 ; or say in round numbers, i!;37,850,(X)0. I have just estimatod the revenue to be $37,300,- iHio ; so tluit you will see, Mr. Speaker, that if I were to take those figures as being ex- act, we might expect to close the present year with a deficit of not a very large sum. CAUSE OP INCREASED EXPENDITURE. As I have already stated, the actual ex- penditure for the year 1895-90 was $30,949,- 142, or In round numbers $37,000,000 ; so that the anticipated result of this year's ex- penditure will be greater than that of last year by $850,000. Now, I think It will not be out of place at this point to state the reason for this Increase. Taking the detail- ed services, I find the responsible Increases to have taken place on : Interest on Public Debt, Legislation, Militia, Public Works and Post Office. What are the reasons for the Increase In each of these services ? Mr. FOSTER. Will my hon. friend permit me. Do I understand him to say that he estimates the deficit to be $850,000 ? The MINISTER OF FINANCE. No. If I were to accept the figures that I have given as exac, they would lead me to ex- pect that we might reach the end of th6 year with a deficit of perhaps $500,000 or $000,000. I wish to say further that that might be too sanguine a view, and I would not wish to be bound closely by it. I think we will have to make further allowance for the uncertainties of our trade during the two remaining months. I shall not be far astray if I say we will come out of the year with a deficit well within a million dollars, and I shall not be surprised If it does not exceed $600,000. In the case of the Interest on Public Debt we had to discount additional treasury bills to the extent of £600,000, necessary to meet liabilities Incurred previous to the present Ministry coming Into power. In Legislation, you will remember, we had an extra session of Parliament last August. 8 '/ In ^tllttln. owltiff to tl I undoubted desire on the pnrt of tlu> Into G ivprnment to make a show of rotroncliinonj, the usiinl mllltia cnnips for 18».')-i)rt wore omitted, makiug It nil the more necegsury In the following year that this important service nhould receive the more attontion. In Public Works, the appropriations were cut down below what was needed for works actually In proRress, with tlie result that we have hnd to pay during the current year for work done In 1895-1)0. In the case of the Post Office, a similar cause produces a similar effect. Accounts for 1805-00, for work done chargeable to that year, were held over and not paid until the present year. This current fiscal year, Mr. Speaker, Is the one In which we enter fully Into posses- sion of the legacies left us by our predeces- sors In office, and may I repeat what I have already stated on the floor of this House, In some observations which I had the privi- lege 01' addressing during the summer ses- sion. I then said : It win not be until this fiscal year is complet- ed, until wc have paid the debt., of the hon. gen- tlemen opposite, and entered upon a new year for which we shall prepare the Estimates our- seives and have full and complete control of them, that we shall be in a position to make comparisons. My hon. friend who leads the Opposition declared lu some remarks on the closing day of oui- summer session, that this coun- try was face to face with a deficit in the first year of the present Ministry of not less than something like $3,000,000. I ventured to say to my hon. friend then, that I thought he was playing the part of an alarmist. Notwithstanding the legacies that have been left us by hon. gentlemen opposite we aspect to keep within their leader's estimate, and to go below It, to the extent of $2,000,000 or $2,500,000, TEMPORARY LOANS. While on the subject of the current year's affairs, I may rafer to the extent of our temporary Indebtedness. On the first of July last treasury bills to the extent of £400,000 sterling were negotiated by our predecessors in office. These were renew- ed on the 1st of January last, and to meet the requirements of the country a further sum of £600,000 in treasury bills was issued ; so that to-day our temporary loans amount to £1,000,000 Hterltnff, maturlnjr on the l«t of July. In the course of some remarks at the clof.e of last session, niy hon. friend (Mr. Foster) who preceded me as Finance Min- ister, stated his belief that before this year was out I would have to borrow on the nmrket at least SIO.OOO.OOO to make things s(iuare, and that the money so borrowed, would In the main, go, not for capital ex- I)endlture, but actimlly to meet our dally needs. The position of my hon. friend (Mr. Foster) as an ex-Finance Minister entitled that prophecy to consideration, but I hope lie will l)e pleased to know that he was very far astray. Instead of iiaving to borrow as he anticipated $10,()0(),(X)0 to meet cur- rent expenditure, he may be pleased to be assured, thai: all we have had to borrow is i:(J(K),()<)0 sterling, and that that sum was necessary, not for one service only, but to l)ut us in funds for all the charges against both capital and ordinary expenditure. DEBT AND CAPITAL EXPENuITURB. So far, sir, I have dealt with the expendi- ture chargeable to con:.olldated fund. I ■ now turn to the debt and capital expendl- I ture of 1895-00 and 1890-07. The capital ex- penditure for 1805-06 was incurred under the j following heads :— Railways and Canals $2,f)l9,174 51 i Public Worlds 114,825 58 Dominion Lauds 82,184 15 Militia 1,000,000 00 Total $3,716,184 24 We also paid to the Canadian Pacific Rall- I way, $08,600.49, and on railway subsidies, I $884,745.49 ; making a total of altogether, I $4,010,509.22. I To arrive at the Increas in our debt for ! tlie year, we have to add the following Items that affect the debt : Quebec railway subsidy, shown first as liability In 1895-96, $2,394,000 ; deficit of 1895-96, $380,551.81 ; sundry amounts chargeable to consolidated fund, $137,185.19 ; making In all, $7,481,- 335.72. From this, however, we must deduct the expenditure for sinking fund, and a small refund of $542.52 on account of the North- west rebellion expenditure, making $2,055,- 830.04. Taking this from the $7,481,335.72, above mentioned, we have $5,425,505.68, which represents our Increase of debt for the year 1895-96, and that debt stood— that m I i Is thft net debt— .in the 80tli June last stood, at 1258,407,432.77. Mr. rOSTKU. Is my hon. friend going to mttki' nny furtlu'i- oxplaniitlon with refer- enro to tlu> Qu-liec debt of *L',m)4,0()<) V The MINISTER OP FINANCE. I do not know that any explanation Is called for. My recollection of the fact Is that the amoiiut was orl(,'liially placed to the credit of the province of Quebec aud they were entitled to draw the Interest. It was grant- ed to them, If my memory serves me, as practleally a refund of railway HUb.sldleH, and I thluk there was much to be said In favour of treating It as a railway subsidy, and pliU'lng It li< the Tubllc Accouuts along with other railway subsidies. Very possibly that was not the view, and at all events It was not done ; but upon a subsequent oc- casion—the hon. member will perhaps re- member the year— au Act was pas-sed where- by the capital sum was placed to tlie credit of the province of Quebec, and that pro- vince was free to withdraw that capital sum whenever It so desired. If that was the fact, it properly became on obligation of the Dominion, and should have appeared in the debt account. Mr. FOSTER. But my hon. friend will agree with me that that was not a liability which was Incurred In ISO.'-'.Hi. In reality. It belongs to 1883-84. It is simply a change of book-keeping. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. I quite agree that it is not a new liability. It Is an old Item, which 1 think my hon. friend should hav; Included lu the debt account some years ago. Mr. FOSTER, for argument. Tliat Is a fair question The MINISTER OF FINANCE. I do not wish to convey the Idea that It Is a new liability. It Is, as the hon. gentleman says, a mere matter of book-keeping, if it was an obligation of the Dominion, I think it ghould imve appeared in the debt account. Mr. FOSTER. But my hon. friend will remember that a change took place unuer legislation which was passed the year be- fore last, lu this House and In the Quebec House, which was the only reason for mak- ing a change In book-keeping. The MINISTER OF FINANCE, Passlnf to the current llscal year, our expenditure for capital purposco, which up to the 20th Ai»rll reached !|i2,S:i;{,U7.S, will probably, by the end of .lune next, be In the neighbour- hood of .1i:!,4:i.'J,0()U. To arrive at the probable effect of the whole year's operations on the net debt, we will have to add to this the probable deficit, which nniy perhtti»s be placed as low as !ti.">.")(i,(M)0, though I hesitate to conmilt my- self to an amount so low. But If we take that figure as correct, we would then have to charge against capital account ?;i,07.'5,O0O. Hut as this Includes the amount of our In- vest hkmiIs for sinking funds, which, while Ml exi)enillture on one hand, must be re- garded on the other as an asset, we must de- duct the estimated Investments to the IJOth of .Tune, $2,214,000, leaving an anticipated net increase' of the d<>bt of. In round num- bers, $l,7r)0,000. In all the foregoing I have kept well wlth'n the limit of fair estimate, aud any marived Improvement In our re- venue between this and the 30th of June next, win of course ameliorate to that ex- tent my estimated deficit, aud Increase of debt. THE FISCAL YE.\U 1897-98. Having, Sir, occupied so much time with the two preceding years, I now turn to the year lSi)7-!)8. With regard to the expendi- ture of 1897-08, my expectation is that, while undoubtedly supplementary Estimates will be brought down, the savings In the Estimates— that Is, unexpended balances which always arise owing to expenditures aot being carried out as proposed, and to amounts being carried over by re-votes and otherwise— will be considerable. At this moment we are not, of course, in a position to state wluit the amount of our supple- mentary Estimates will be, but I hope they will not be large. If we take into account the savings to be made in the way I have indicated, I think they will nearly represent the outlay under the supplementary items ; aud It would not be far astray to estimate for the year an expenditure of about $38,- 2::o,()0(t. On the basis of the present tariff, and looking at the probable results of the pre- seut fiscal year, it would appear as if the revenue for 1897-98 would be in the 10 i neighbourhood of $37,500,000, which would on its face leave a deficit of $750,000. It is of course neither desirable nor desired that there should be any deficit. We have had deficits now for three years In suc- Ctssion, and we all agree that we shoulf", If possible, avoid a continuation of such an unsatisfactory condition of affairs. Before I conclude, I will show T-.-i.at steps we pro- po",e to take to make up the c ; and, in ad- dition to that, :ilthough it has been said that they we-e not settled up:)n by the Govern- ment aud were not presented to the House, there were supplementary Estimates to be brought down, of which we have heard something in past debates. I know that my hot!, friend has desired it to be understood that those Estimate;^ had not received the sanction of the Go\ ernment in all respects, and he has not been willing to be held re- Boonsible for them ; but at all events he wdl, I am sure, admit that a considerable portion of those Estimates had become public property, inasmuch as hon. gentle- men who had the confidence of the Gov- ernment thought proper to assure their friends in difl'ereut parts of the Dominion tliat the expenditures contemplated under those Estimates were to be made. When we came into office, we found large esti- mates prepared in the departments, and we cannot suppose that they were prepared without any intention of their forming part of the expenditures of tlie year. If we add to the main estimate of $38,300,000 above given the nrobable amount that wouhl have been asked for in supplementary Estimates for 18!}fi-97, it will bo found that the ex- penditure asked fo'' by me next year, say .$38,2.^)0,000, is much less than the probable sum that would have been asked for had hon. gentlemen opposite remained in power. Mr. FOSTER. Rather speculative. Tlie MINISTER OF FINANCE. My hon. friend says that is rather speculative, and he laughs at the idea that those supplemen- tary Estimates represented expenditures. I regret that he does so, because he laughs at his friends who on every hustings tliroughout the Dominion represented that those expenditures were to be made ; and, as many of those gentlem3 are about to tuio away from the policy which I regard as a mis- taken one, we shall do well to make some reference to that policy and to the circumstances under which it came into existence. I suppose it will not be ques- tioned that at the time of the union of the provinces, one of the most serious obstacles which the promoters of that groat move- ment encountered was the difticalty on the tariff question. The lower provinces were firm believers in the policy of free trade, as the words were understood ; at all events, in favour of the policy of a low tariff. The upper provinces— 01(1 Canada— had a tariff Mhich the maxntiii;e people regarded as tomew^hat high, though I am bound to ad mit that, in comparison with tariffs of later years, it was very moderate. But I am sure the hon. leader of the Opposition (Sir Charles Tupper), who was intimately and prominently connected with tiie move- ment for confederation, will bear me out when I say that tlie tariff question was one of the great causes of difficulty in bringing about the union of the provinces. The hon. geutlomeu who d-jsired to promote that movement found it necessary to five to the people of the maritime provinces the most sacred and solemn assurance that If this union could be accomplished, the maritime provinces would not 1 avo to assume the burden and responsibility of a high tariff. True, you will not And tliat in the British North America Act. but I venture to say it ^\as an unwritten treaty between ilie pro- moters of the union and their friends in the maritime provinces. It is but fair to say that. In the beginning, that treaty was obse<.'ved. The first tariff of confederation was a moderate tariff, and although a year or two later it became necessary to change the duties somewhat in the intei'ests of ro- \enue. there was no substantial departure from tlie' terms of what I have described as the unwritten treaty witli tlie lower pro- vinces. It was not indeed until 1876, or abcat that time, that the question of a high tariff gravely occupied the attention of this House. True, in 1870 the ques- tion of protection had been mooted, and a policy of protection, as respects a lim- ited list of articles, had been adopted, but that policy was abandoned in 1871, and from that time down to the moment at which the Government of the late Sir John Macdonald retired from office, no further movement was made in the direction of what was called a protective tariff. It was not until the Government of Sir John Mac- donald had been defeated and Mr. Mac- kenzie was in power, it was not until a period of great depression had come upon the country— not upon Canada alone, but the world at large— it was not until there were conditions well calculated to make people anxious in Canada, as well as elsewhere, as to tlie business prospects of the country, that any serious movement took place in Canada for the establishment of a protective tariff'. It is well known that the manufacturers came to Mr. Mac; kenzie between 1874 and 1878, and proposed jto him that he should increase the tariff. ' No doubt they thought that they were cor- [ rect ; no doubt they believed that prosperity I would result from the adoption of a protec- ; live system, and, therefore, desired that Mv. i Mackenzie should yield to their views. But j we all know that Mr. Mackenzie refused to 'do so. Now, I believe that Sir John Mac- I donald was up to that time as good i a free trader as Mr. Mackenzie. I I have seen no evidence that he ever [ deliberately adopted the policy of pro- ' tectlon with the intention of adhering to it as the fixed policy and principle, of the j Conservative party. On the contrary, I be- lieve that he was tempted to yield to it ' for the moment by the clamour that was ; raised by the protectionists, and the belief that he miglit be returned to power. But if we lefer back to the discussions of these days, we will find that in the resolutions submitted and the speeches made by Sir John Macdonald and his followers, the v,-hol3 question of protection was treated in I a very tender way indeed, and the reso- lutions for which the Conservative party j voted at that time weie resolutions Avhich ; might mean almost anything. They were '. protectionist, it is true, but the platform V as one which enabled a Minister of the Crown to go down to the maritime provinces j and offer himself for election on it as the " champion free trader." I mention this to show that the policy of protection was not deliberately adopted even by the Conserva- 12 tive party, but was the outgrowth of political ditficultles In which the leaders of the Con- servative party, I thinli erroneously, per- mitted themselves to be led away from the old f'xith ; and I venture to say now that, In the light of history, many Conservatives of this country looli baclv upon tliat depart- ure with regret. Thougn they supported the National Policy believing it would be instrumental in developing the best interests of the country, they will admit to-day tliat It wa^ a policy of disappointment, and that, in all probability, Canada would have pi'os- pered more if she had adhered to the policy of a low tariflf. "SVHAT PROTECTION WAS EXPECTED TO DO. I have pointed out that the Conservative party adopted the policy of protection at a time of considerable depression, wiiou there was too much disposition, I am afraid, on the part of the people to talte up any nostrum which seemed to give promise of a better state of things. But we may well ask ourselves to-day, what were the induce- ments tliat were held out to the people to accept that policy ? I shall not detain the House by going through all the predictions which were made and the expectations which were created, but some of the things which occurred at that time may well be meuticued. One of the most important and one of the most common arguments used was that a protective tariff, though pro- bably not a very good thing in itself as a permanent policy, would be a good policy to adopt temporarily. If you will give, they said, these infant industries protection, they will, in a very short time, become strong and vigorous and be able to stand alone without protection. Well, Mr. Si)ealier, we are able to deal with that argument to- day in the light of experience. We liavo had eighteen years of pretty high protec- tion, carried into effect under couditions as favourable as could be wished for in Can- ada, and wiiat has been the result ? Tliese infant industries have grown bigger and their voice stronger, but their voice still cries out chat if the nursing bottle be taljeu from them, they will immediately perish from the face of the earth. And so we find that the argument then used, thnt tlic policy of protection was only intended to encourage Infant Industries, and that for a short time, has not proved correct. Then we had another strong temptation lo adopt the National Policy. There was a very strong desire among the people for a reciprocity treaty yith the United States, and hon. gentlemen opposite thought they could do nothing better than use the recipro- city cry to help them to make the National Policy acceptable. The hon. leader of the Opposition (Sir Charles Tupper) went down to the maritime provinces, where the idea of reciprocity was very agreeable to the I people, and gave the electors there the as- ! surance, with all the vigour we know he is capable of, that if they would accept the National Policy, he would undertake to to bring about reciprocity with the United States within two years. On another occasion, later on, my hon. friend extended the time one year— he only wanted tliree years to bring about a reciprocity treaty. Well, we have j had eighteen years of the National Policy ■ and I am sure my hon. friend will not dis- sent wlien I say that in the last year of the Conservative term of oftice, they were far- : ther away from reciprocity than they ever I were during any previous year of their ex- istence. THE TEST OF POPULATION. I tliink tliat the National Policy may very properly be tested to-day in the light of all these promises. But there was another promise made which was of greater im- portance. I tliiuk tliat the strongest argu- U'cnt used by my Conservative friends in I advocating the National Policy was that ! it would increase the population of our j country. I think that this test of popula- i tion, which has so often been applied be- ; fore, may well be applied for a few mo- ments again, because I think the lesson is full of importance and cannot be applied too often. The policy which was inaugur- ated in 1879, and wliich liad been previously known in 1870, for a short time, as the National Policy, told the people in very glowing terms what it would accomplish and lead to. It was to remove distress whetlier in agriculture or manufacturing,— and distress did exist, as had to be acknow- ledged, during the period that Mr. Mackenzie Was in power , 1 it was to lead to great prosperity and 'le rapid up-buildlng of the 13 t that for a set. temptation ["here was a )eople for a Ited States, lought they the reeipro- he National ader of the went down re the idea ible to the lere the as- know he is accept the idertalie to the United ler occasion, ed the time >ars to bring II, we have Glial Policy vill not dls- year of the y were far- 1 they ever of their ex- nON. ?olicy may the light of ras another greater im- ngest argu- friends in ' was that ion of our of popula- applied be- a few mo- le lesson is be applied as inaugur- 1 previously me, as the le In very accomplish vc distress facturing,— be acknow- . Mackenzie id to great Jlng of the country. Immigrants were to flow in and ] employment was to be furnished for all. ! The present leader of the Opposition (Sir Charles Tupper) said that this was the ! supreme test of prosperity : | If we are to have a country at all, | said he, as reported in the " Hansard " of t 1877, page 167- i —it must be by bringing people Into it. It is our policy to bring people into our country and to furnish employment for them when here, and that is the only policy by which Canada can hope to attain any position of importance In the world. We must have a large and extended immigra- tion and give work to people when they come here. Taking population as the test of pros- perity, the results of the census of 1891, the last official figures to haiid, were cer- tainly disappointing. I have here the ofii- cial figures. In the province of Ontario, in ! 1871 the population was 1.(520,851. In 1881 I it had increased to 1,92(!,!)22, an increase of \ lS-0 per cent. In 1801 the population had | grown to 2,114,'!21, an increase of 9-73 per j cent, as compared with 18-(5 per cent in the 1 previous ten years. In the province of Que- bec the increase of population from 1871 to 18«1 was 14 per cent, and from 1881 to 1891, j 9'53 per cent. In the province of Nova ; Seotia the increase in the first period was } 13-() per cent, and in tlie second it was 2-28 j per cent. In the province of New Bruns- wick, from 1871 to 1881. the population in- oreuf^nd 12-4 per cent, and in the next ten years it increased per cent. In the pro- vince of Manitoba the increase from 1871 to 1881, was. of course, very large, as this w.TS in the early history of that province. The increase in tliose years was 2-17 per cent. In the next ten years the increase was 144 per cent. Of course, I do not think the same force would attach to this compari- son, because the country having just been opened up. the rush of poi)ul)ition would naturally l)e somewhat larger tliau after- wards. But I am sure that even in regard to Manitoba the census returns must have been sadly disaiipointing. The province of British Columbhi Increased in a larger degree from 1881 to 1891, than in the pre- vious decade, tlie increase for the earlier period being ;i0-4 per cent, and for the later, 98-49 per cent, a large increase in tliat pro- vince, as we should acknowledge. In Prince Edward Island, the increase from 1871 to 1881 was 15-8 per cent, and from 1881 to 1891, It was 0-17 per cent. In the Territories the comparison is not given so closely, and I cannot give the percentages. The increase disclosed by the census of 1881 for the wliole Dominion was 18-97 per cent, and by the count of 1891 it was 11*76 per cent, a decrease in progress of a little over 7 per cent. The growth of the coun- try, therefore, in point of population was much slower under the National Policy than it was during the period before that policy was put in operation. Eliminating the new portions of the Dominion, and considering the provinces of old Canada, which include the whole population except about 400,000, the results are still more disappointing. Ac- cording to the census figures that I have given the increase in these provinces was exceedingly small. In point of population the growth of the older provinces from 1871 till 1881 was more than three times as great as it was during the decade spent wholly under Conservative rule and wholly under a protective tariff. The population of the maritime provinces in 1871 was 707,- 000, and in 1881 it was 870,000, an increase of 103,000. In 1891 the population of those provinces was 880,000, an increase of only 10.000 people in ten years. At the rate of 2 per cent per annum, the natural increase of S70.0OO persons would be 174,000, instead of the actual increase which we find. In other words, the increase for ten years In the maritime provinces was less than the natural increase for one year. The aggre- gate population of the three chief cities of tlie maritime provinces, Halifax, St. John and Charlottetown. in 1881, was 73.712. In 1891 it was 74113, an increase of 400 souls in ten years. This National Policy was to do great things for the farmer. The number of farmers and farmer's sons en- gaged in farming, by the census of 1881, was (>."fi.712, and, by the census of 1891, it was (UO-'iiX), a tlecrease of 7,20(i. The num- bers increased in British Columbia and the North-west Territories, but the old provinces show a decrease in the number of farmers, during this ten year period under the National Policy, of 3(3.042. The decrease of farmers in Ontario was 2 '5 per cent, in Quebec 4-(5 per cent, in Nova Scotia 15-9 per cent, in New Bruusuiek X'jS per cent and in Prince Edward Island 1*3 per cent u The rate of natural Increase which can I/ioperly be credited to a country lilie Can- ada is about 2 per cent per annum, or 20 per cent in ten years. So, by adding one- fifth to the population of 1881, and by add- ing also the immigrants, we get the popu- lation thai should have been found here in 1891. The natural increase on the whole population of 1881 is 80.").000, and the num- ber of immigrants officially certified as en- tering the country during the decennial period ending 1891, was 880.000, maliing a totf," increase of population of 1,751,000. But the actual increase found by the enu- merators was only 509,429, thus showing a loss of 1,241,000. If the anticipations of the promoters of the National Policy had boon realized our own people would have remained with us and all these Immigrants as well. So that, estimating the loss of population as compared with the gain we would have had if predictions had been ful- filled—it might fairly be claimed that the natural increase of those who went away should also be talien into account, but even omitting this— that loss amounted to about one and a quarter millions of souls. The total foreign-born population In 1881 was 609,348, or 14-3 per cent of the total popu- lation. In 1891 the total was 045,507, a little less than 14 per cent, the increase In numbers being 36,159. The number of im- migrants already stated as arriving in the country in the ten years from 1881 to 1891, was 886,000. So, the loss of immigrants was 8.50,000. These general results are borne out by the details. The census found fewer Irish and Scotch in Canada than ten years ago. The Scotch decreased by 8,000, and the Irish by 36,000. During the samp period no less than 655,000 immigrants left Ireland and went to the United States. The immigration into Manitoba and the North- west from 1881 to 1890, both inclusive, num- bered, according to the blue-books, 258,814. The population in 1881 was 118,706, whicli ! with the 258,814 of official immigrants, should ! have enabled the enumerators to And at i least 377,520 residents in the Territories and j Manitoba ; all they did find was 254,164, ! a loss of over 122,000 settlers. As the De- : partment of Agriculture reclioned each set- i tier as having a value to the country of ' «pl,000, there is a loss to the country of 122 millions, If we are to accept those figures. I The following are some of the places in On- tario where there was not only a failure to retain the natural Increase, but an actual decline in numbers : Cobourg, Goderleh, Dundas, Bowmanville, Amherstburg, St. Catharines, Port Hope, Ingersoll, Napanee, Strathroy, Paris, Prescott, Whitby, Kincar- dine, Mitchell, Port Perry, Thorold, Dunville, Harriston and Fergus. Most of these had a steady growth from 1871 to 1881 ; and if the predictions of the National Policy had been even partially fulfilled, all these towns, among the most thriving in On- tario, would have prospered exceedingly and furnished the home mariiet to the farmers that they were led to expect. Dundas was a prosperous manufacturing town, and in- creased by several hundreds up to 1881 ; but that growth was stopped and it de- clined in population until, in 1891, there was some two hundred less than In 1881. Now, I believe these census returns are of the utmost importance, and they are a proper subject of discussion, because it was claimed that the National Policy was to be the Instrument whereby the population was to be increased, whereby our young people would be prevented from going away, where- by immigrants would be brought to the country ; yet from these figures, which, as I have shown, are official, I fall to see how any thoughtful man could doubt, from the moment those returns were pub- lished, that the National Policy had failed to accomplish Its purpose. Prior to the pub- lication of those returns, many intelligent people who had not given the subject serious consideration were no doubt convinced in their own minds, partly through party zeal I and partly, I suppose, from reading the pub- lic press, that the National Policy was fill- ing up the country ; but when these census returns were brought down, then every thoughtful man in the country must have understood that the National Policy had been a very great failure, and Indeed a bit- ter disappointment to every man who had honestly supported It. My hon, friend who leads the Opposition was High Commis- sioner in London at the time ; and In his official report. In 1892, he felt obliged to make this sad statement : I need hardly say that the returns of the cen- siia in Can.ada ^-ore received hero (in Lou- don) with a certain amount of disappointment as It was quite expected that the population 16 Maces In On- ly a failure lut an actual g, Goderleh, rstburg, St. )11, Napanee, tby, Klncar- ild, Dunvllle, )f these had . to 1881 ; le National fulfilled, aU •iving In On- jedingly and the farmers Dundas was svn, and In- ip to 1881 ; and It de- 1891, there an In 1881. returns are they are a ause it was f was to be lulation was oung people way, where- ght to the res, which, , I fall to ould doubt, were pub- had failed to the pub- Intelligent )ject serious )nvlnced in party zeal ng the pub- cy was fill- hese census ;hen every must have Policy had ideed a blt- n who had friend who li Commis- and In his obliged to ' of the cen- (in liou- ippolntment, 1 population would exceed five ralUlona. What effect this may I It has decreaaed the value of farm and other have ou immigration, I am not prepared at this i lauded property moment to say. I am afraid, ^ Sir, that it had a very serious effect on Immigration, because we know that the immigration returns for re- cent years have been far from satisfactory. I had a conversation recently on this sub- It has oppressed the masses to the enrichment of a few ; It has checked Immigration ; It has caused great loss ot population ; It has Impeded commerce ; It has discriminated against Oreat Britain ; In these, and in many other ways, it has oc- casioned great public and private Injury, all of which evils must continue to grow in intensity ject, Mr. Spealier, with a very prominent j as long as the present tariff system remains in member of the Conservative party, who is ; ^°''^^- the head of one of the great manufactur- 1 Mr. FOSTER. Here endeth" the second Ing enterprises in Canada. I do not imagine ! lesson. for a moment that he was less loyal than The MINISTER OF FINANCE. There he had been to his party ; at all events, are some excellent lessons yet to come. I knew him as a Conservative then, and That the highest interests of Canada demand a I believe he is a Conservative stiU. But removal of this obstacle to our country's pro- X i^ uc.c ... gress, by the adoption of a sound fiscal policy, that gentleman. In discussing the subject, | which, while not doing injustice to any class, said to me : " The returns of the census were ' will promote domestic and foreign trade, and , ,^^ ,. , . i -nr i I hasten the return of prosperity to our people ; to me a bitter disappointment. We cannot ^hat to that end the tariff should be reduced stand," he said, "another census in Canada to the needs of honest, economical and efficient like that. If we should find as a result ; of the next census that there is no better showing, then I shall lose all faith in the future of Canada, and I shall have to look to some other country as a field for my capital and my enterprise." We hope and believe that by a change of policy the census returns of the present decade will not show such a bad result, and we hope and believe that when the .second census is taken, and when we shall have an opportunity of comparing ten years of Conservative rule with ten years of Libe- ral rule, the results will not be such that any one of our leading Liberal manufactur- ers or capitalists will have to say that he Is losing faith In the country. THE LIBERAL TARIFF PLATFORM. Now, Mr. Speaker, as to the manner in which this tarifiC revision should be brought about, I want to read to you, not that It government That it should be so adjusted as to make free, or bear as lightly as possible upon, the neces- saries of life, and should be so arranged as to promote free trade with the whole world, more particularly with Great Britain and the United States ; We believe that the results of the protective system has grievously disappointed thousands of persons who honestly supported It, and that the country, in the light of experience, is now pre- pared to declare for a sound fiscal policy. The issue between the two political parties is now clearly defined. The Government admit the failure of their fiscal policy, and now profess their willingness to make some changes ; but they say that such changes must be based on the principle of pro- tection. We denounce the principle of protection as rad- ically unsound, and unju.st to the masses of the people, and we declare our conviction that any tariff changes based on that principle must fail to afford any substantial relief from the burdens under which the country labours. This issue we unhesitatingly accept, and upon it we await with the fullest confidence the ver- dict of the electors of Canada. Mr. Speaker, the electors of Canada, in due course, gave their verdict upon that and upon has any element of novelty, but because it | other issues, and subject to such changes properly fits in at this stage of my speech, the platform adopted by the Liberal party in the great convention held in the city of Ottawa in 1893 : We, the Liberal i/arty of Canada, in convention assembled, declare. — That the cust"r » tariff of the Dominion should be based, not a" . .'a now, upon the protective principle, but upon .iie re^quirementa of the public service ; That the existing tariff, founded upon an un- sound principle, and used as it has been by the Government, as a corrupting agency wherewSiu to keep themselves in oflice, has developed mon- opolies, trusts and combinations ; as changing circumstances may require, and as to which I shall have something to say as I proceed, we accept the Liberal platform of Ottawa as the declaration of principles which we are bound to follow in oi^r tariff reform. It being Six o'clock, the Speaker left the Chair. After Recess. The MINISTER OF FINANCE (Mr. Fielding). I'r. Speaker, when you left the 16 Chair at six o'clock, I had just flnlshed reading the Liberal platform adopted at the Ottawa convention, In which the party placed ou record Its desire for tariff re- form. It has been a common complaint of our opponents that the policy of the Liberal party on the tariff and in the direction of tariff reform was a policy that was adverse to the Interest of the manufacturing in- dustries of the country. We have in times past protested against this view, and we still protest against It. We do not admit that a high protectionist tariff is necessary for the development of manufacturing in- dustries in Canada. One would almost thinli from the manner In which this argu- ment is so frequently used by our oppon- ents tiiat there were no manufacturing In- dustries in Canada before the days of the National Policy. The fact, I thinli. Is that while perhaps we had not so many large industries as we have to-day. we had on the whole a more healtliy and satisfactory condition of manufacturing Industry before the days of the higli tariff than we have had since. That. Sir, I think has been the experience of many of the communities of Canada. THE GROWTH OP MANUFACTURES. It is true that we have changed our methods of dealing with manufacturers, and the, change, I thinlc. has not been for the better. We developed manufacturing In the good old days in the good old-fashion- ed way. An honest workman opened his modest shop in a growing town. He made the things which the community wanted. He made honest goods and earned a reputation for the articles he produced. He had the good sense not to attempt to make things not suited for tlie market and which, with his limited equipment and the small area of the market, could not be made to advantage. But he made the things which for the moment served the com- munity, and as days rolled on the com- r^'mity grew and his shop grew with it. He enlarged the field of operations ; his repu- tation for making honest goods at fair prices helped to build up his industry. By and by sons came to him and joined him In the factory, and their youth and energy en- larged the scope of its operations. The shop was enlarged ; new machinery was Intro- j duced ; more help was added, and so, grow- I ing with the growth of the community, there I were built up successful manufacturing in- I dustrles in many parts of .Canada. That i was the development of manufactures In a I legitimate way. And now the times have changed. We have had another way of developing manu- factures, and it will not be unprofitable for us If we look at what the results have been In many cases. The old fashion workman never dreamed of asking bonuses, exemp- tions, or favours or anything of that kind ; he expected to pay his way like a man and to earn every cent he got. But now under the high tariff policy the first step in the direction of a new factory is to have the bonus hunter set out on his way. He ex- pects to receive as a matter of course ex- I emption from the taxation which every i other citizen expects to pay as a matter of I course. Not content with having an Act of j Parliament to license him to charge high I prices for his goods, he thinks the city, I town or village must give him further help by way of a site for his factory or by some grant of tliat kind ; and if perchance the people of the town shake their lieads and do not think they should help him in that particular way. he will remind them that there are other towns quite ready to do so and he will intimate that if they do not grant the bonus, the rival town not far away will grant it. And so this system of protection, always selfish, always greedy, sets these two towns by the ears to bid against one another, to be rivals and jeal- I ous of eacli other, instead of cultivating I those friendly relations which should exist. I Tlipu the factory is built in one town or I the other. If it is fortunate enough to have I a market for its products, if the business ; has not been overdone, undoubtedly for a short time this factory will prosper, and it will take advantage, I am sure, of the liigli tariff and charge the consumer every . penny the law will permit. For a little ' while this will go on, and tlien we will roach the next stage of the protective move- : ment ; then we will reach the stage at . wliich excessive competition comes, tlie com- petition which result?) from over-production at home. After a short struggle it will be discovered tliat tliis factory, heralded with , such a flourish of trumpets, can no longer 17 d so, grow- iinlty, there lotiirlng In- lada. That ctures in a iged. We 3ing manu- ofltable for have been I workman es, exeinp- that kind ; a man and now under tep in the ) have the y. He ex- conrse ex- hlch every matter of an Act of large high the city, irther help )r by some chance the heads and ini in that them that 5^ to do so ey do not i'n not far system of 's greedy, irs to bid and jeal- niltivating nild exist. > town or rh to have ! business dly for a sper, and re, of the ner every ir a little I we will :ive move- stage at , tlie com- n-oduction it will be Idt'tl with no longer find work for Its people or a market for Its goods ; so the factory closes up, and the worklngmen In whose interest we were told the National Policy was framed may go abroad and find work as best they can. manufactured. Nature Is to a certain ex- tent a protectionist, because she has placed advantages in the way of the home manu- facturer. In the first place, he has the ad- vantage of what I may call convenience. Has not that been the history of many a ' It is more convenient to buy things at home National Policy factory In Canada ? Some hon. MEMBERS. Hear, hear. Some hon. MEMBERS. No, no. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. Then we pass on and reach the next stage, which In- evitably follows the stage of over-production. Then the big manufacturer comes in and buys up the little factory for a song. The than to send abroad for them, and, other things being equal, any one In Canada would prefer to buy them at home. Then he has the advantage which I will call the pro- tection of transportation. It costs not only time but money to bring things from abroad, and when you consider freight, insurance and other expenditures connected with the handling of goods, that particular element stockholders, many of whom often are^ffords a large measure of protection for people of small means, have to suffer the the manufacturer of the country. There loss of their investment, and the factory, 's another advantage, which I will describe after a sheriff's sale, passes into the ' as the protection of patriotism, a desire hands of some wealthy manufacturer, who ^'I'ch ought to exist, and I hope if it does will be willing to pay therefor in order that ^ not exist now It soon will among the Cana- he may control the market with the pro- d'an people, to encourage home industry ducts of his larger factory. We have had lr» eve.-y legitimate manner. I do not forget that development, and all over Canada we , that at several tariff hearings we were have had complaints of that condition of : informed by gentlemen who came before affairs, which was referred to In the Liberal «8 "I'S'ng ^^^ retention of a high tariff, platform as the "development of monopo- 1 tliat one of the great difficulties under lies trusts and combines." i which they laboured was that the people I submit that the development of the olden I of Canada would not buy Canadian goods, times, if it was slow, was a more whole- '■ that the people of Canada had prejudices some developmenl, and that there is a bet- ! against Canadian goods and actually ter chance for the development of manuf ac- pi'eferred to buy foreign articles. I turing enterprises in the end under a tope. Sir, it is not true. I am unwilling moderate tariff than there is in the end to believe that it is true, but I give it to the under the high tariff policy. The big fish ; House as I received it on the testimony of will eat up the little ones. Under the the protected manufacturers of tliis country National Policy the small manufacturers ^'lio came before our tariff commission, were driven to the wall ; the large ones may : Well, Sir, if that han been the result of the hold on for a while, but even for them in i National Policy, I can hardly imagine a most instances tlie end comes, because the i more severe arraignment of that policy. If whole business rests on an artificial basis. ! after eighteen years of encouraging manu- I say, therefore, that the manufacturing interests of Canada sliould not be misled by the cry that they are identified neces- sarily with the success of a high tariff policy, and I believe many a manufacturer has now made up his mind that it would be better for him if we had a very moderate revenue tariff than the artificial condition brought about by the National Policy. LEGITIMATE PROTECTION. Let US remember, Sir, that the protection- ist had more than the advantage of the rate of duty Imposed on the articles he factures by all the methods that were known to the ingenious Finance Ministers of the Conservative Government ; if after eighteen years of boasting that this was in- deed the golden era of Canadian patriotism; if we have to recognize it as a fact that the people of Canada to-day have no faith in Canadian goods and have a prejudice against them, and actually prefer the goods of foreign nations, then I say, it is a start- ling result of the National Policy. It is just possible that if the people could not be in- duced to buy Canadian goods under a high tariff policy, perhaps we may Induce them to 18 buy Onnndlan goods under a policy n'hloh looks to moving In the direction of a lower tariff. I feel that we have every reason to hope that that woui, who are not tind who are of tlie Ijibi-ral itleiueu kindly sw of this, that duty to bring pon free trade. ! name of the rer announced step to adopt to that extent, id motherland, 1th the same down to the h tliey reached lave an oi)por- esses on this t immediately U, the London J on this ques- unrea.Sdiiable lould suppose, ilian elections lie immediate After some the "Times" >va up to man- The conditions own, anj Mr. I much if, by i, it can bring u of much that Mr. Laurler's ling, it means sslble, the way le fiscal system shall have be- he community. 10 a tolerably s of English plied to any ly quote an- even more e trade prln- ", whose free uestloned by Bt Lord Far- e at any rate, se duties can protective, wishes to see bP"5n in force lea of various a single blow, and unwise, ch more mod- They wish to see the colonies abandon protec- tion as a theory, and gradually reduce the most obnoxious of their present protective duties. This would probably, by Increasing Importation itself. Increase revenue, and make further reductions possible. Gradually the colonies would thus ap- proach, and ultimately attain, the state of things which obtains In the United Kingdom, without undue sacrifice of revenue, and without Injustice to existing Interests. But it Is out of the ques- tion *" do this except cautiously and by degrees, as ii ileed It was done In this country. This Is what we may hope for under the new regime In Canada. " VESTED RIGHTS." These views have a practical bearing on the question of how far we may go in the direc- tion of tariff reform. I have sometimes beard the expression used, thn.t the manufacturers had vested rights In these matters. I wish to protest against such an expression. No manufacturer has any vested right tinder the National Policy. Every man who Invested a dollar imder the National Policy did so with his eyes wide open to certain import- ant facts. He was well aware that from the beginning down to the end, the National Policy was condemned by one of the great political parties In Canada. He was well aware that every effort had to be put forth by governmental inflaeuce. and such influ- ences as the manufacturers themselves are well aware of, In order to obtain from the public an apparent endorsement of that policy. I would be jus+lfled In saying that at no time from the beginning of this ques- tion to the present day, has there ever been a substantial ma.iorlty of the ]:!eople of Can- ada, looking at the question on its merits, who believed in the principle of high pro- tection. Accidental circumstances doubtless brought about the election of a majority of members who supported that polic.v, but at all events I can say, that from the beginning of the discus.sion to the end, the Liberal party of Canada— always a great party, nearly always one-half the people, and in more recent days very much more than one- half the people — placed themselves upon record as condemning the principles of the National Policy, Now, the manufacturers. knew of this, and they must have known that when they put their money into these factories they were taking their risks. There was a speculative element In this whole National Policy busi- ness, and the men who play the game and gather in the wiunincrs ought 1 j be prepared, 2ya ! when the turn of the tide con-es, to pay the ; losses and try to look pleasant. Therefore, i I say, if It suited the people of Canada, as j represented by t'lis Parliament and by this j Government, to strike out of the fiscal policy ' of Canada to-day every vestige of protec- tion, the protected Interests would have no right to complain. They took their risk, and they should be prepared to abide the conse- quences. But, Sir, while that would be I stern Justice, fortunately there is no disposi- I tion on the part of this Government to de- j stroy I Some hon. MEMBERS. Hear, hear. Mr. FOSTER, scoundrels small. Scoundrels great and The MINISTER OF FINANCE. My hon. friends opposite are in such an amiable frame of mind that they venture to applaud before I have finished the sentence. They are very happy in being able to anticipate what we think. I say there is no disposition on the part of this Government to deal with I the manufacturing and protected classes in 1 that spirit, although I do submit that If it suited the view of the majority of the peo- ple of Canada to adopt a policy which i would simply reverse the principle of pro- I tection and establish free trade, while it might be and would be a dangerous thing I if done at once, so far as the protected in- I terests are concerned they would have no i right whatever to complain. But, Sir, we [ are dealing with more than the protected Interests of the manufacturers. The evil I of protection, like most other evils, is wide- I reaching in its influences, and it has be- : come so blended and interwoven with the J business of Canada that if we should at- I tempt to strike it down to-day, we should do harm not only to the protected interests, '■ which have no claim upon us, but to other interests which are not directly connected with the protected interests. It would be folly not to remember that we are dealing not with the protected manufac- turers only, but that the interests of labour have to be considered as well as the in- terests of capital. We have to remember that the trade of the country is so permeated by this system that, in the matter of bank- in" alone, there are vast interests associated with this question. I hesitate not to say that if we should to-day, by some rash 20 Btep, do thnt wlileh noino hoii. Kontloiuen record In the clearest and most emphatic say we aio bound to do, but which Intelll- ^^ay our desire, as representing a great gent men know we are not bound to do, party In Canada, to carry out a policy of and would not do, we woulil not only break tariff reform, and particularly to extend, down the manufacturln)* Intorosts of the if possible, our trade relations with the country, but we would deal a blow to other i neighbouring republic. If they were disposed Interests of a wider and more serious char- ^ to reciprocate. There was more than the acter. i action of the Democratic party to encourage Mr. FOSTEU. Oh, come to the point-you ' ^"^ '" ^^^ ^^"'^'' ""^* ^oniL'thing could bo dom: make us tired. i *" *^"^^ direction. Before that time the Ke- I publican party, who were in power, pledged Sonje hon. MEMBERS. Order, order. j „« they wtre in the main to a high protec- Mr. McMillan. Do not let tills moment ! t'^'* V^Ucy, had qualllicd their adhesion to of weakness put you into such a rage. protection by a declaration In favour of n^h^ Arrx-Tt-'i.nr. «r-, t-„n>4v./>,^ ,. r reciprocity treaties; and we had reason to Ihe MIMbTER OF FLNANCE If I were ,^,,,,.„ „,„ ,,,, ^^ ^,^^ ^^^^ ^^,^,^ w iL ?,'■ T . ' : "" "r- "'""''• «eP»blican party In power It would have «^,1 " T m'"' I ,""'"•, '''" ""' I ^^^^ P°««'ble to obtain a reciprocity treaty sure that I would no be pleased to gratify i ^j^h the United States If steps had been nL'iJfhnHct nZ I , "'• . '" ^^:- taken In a proper way to secure such a treaty, pnasizo the tact, tliat It ha.s never been the tt ^ i.u i. , ,. , „„,,,.„ . .. , T IV. 1 ^ J , , . However that may be, we were d sposed to policy of the Liberal party, as declared bv i,«n„„-, +1, * *!, i . ^ ,. , . nnv ,r,n„.u^r. ^f ti,„ T .1 „ 1 . =^'"'«" "i believe that the day was close at hand when any member of the Liberal nartv occunv nir ~ « ■ n . ^, , , . n ,.„.„„,.!, 1 M " 1 "'.V uLiupiuii, moro frlcudly rclatloHS wou M bc establishcd a respon.sil)le position, f t lev came ut,) . ,. ., , „ ., , / . -^ '"'"between the peop e of the groat renubllc to power, to destroy at one movement all tlie ^i *i * , .u , ^^'"""^ •■" ^„.,„f„ f • 11 * . . '"^ the south of us and the people of Canada, manutacturing iudustr es, or to so chanire tt 1,110.^1 . ,, '^""'"'»' xt, ,, r ■ ^, i-"Huj,i Unhappily, Sir, the present lud cations are the policy as to place them u peril. We are i*v * A, * . , -^^ '""'^"^'^'""» '"t- .11. / , . , , . , i'^'^"- ""^"'^ that the American people— if we mav 1ud"e willing to be tried by the pol cy of the Lib- , ^-i 41 <. ^, . tt "»^ '"".> J""«e eral party as plainly nnLJooa.Tutll':f'''V\''T!!T"^ are not willing to be tried by the LIbemi t'^es-have changed their m nds on that policy as expounded by hon. gentlemen on ^"!fr„ " ^\'T '''''//''' '^^Vre.sion the other side of the House. i °f *^f ^°T!,''^ ^^'"« "^ '^'' *^-^I'««ition of ' the views of the American people, speaking not with reference to any particular article lof the tarilf, but speaking generally, the --„.,, ^ people of the United States appear now dis- Now, Sir, I have referred to-day to cer- : posed to adhere to the policv of protectio'u tain conditions which have altered, and I ; i believe that some of us 'in Canada make wish to speak briefly of these. The con- \ the mistake of imagining that our neighbours ventiou of the Liberal party was held in j f,auie their taril¥ chiefly with reference to the city of Ottawa in the month of .Tune, how Canada will act and what effect it will 1893. At that time we had every reas.ui to : have on Canada. It may be very flatterin- believe that tiie people of the neighbouring ^ to Canada to think tliat ; but I rather think republic had resolved to outer ui)on a more , that they frame their tariff witii reference liberal trade policy. A few mouths before to tlie world at large, and that a very mo- that date a presidential election had taken \ derate part of their attention Is directed to place in the United States, in which the | what is taking place in Canada. Though I lfi,sue of tariff reform was prominent ; and, | believe that some parts of the Dingley Bill wiiatever may be said of tlie mattei- [n view ' were made to suit the interests of certain TRADE RELATIONS WITH THE UNITED STATES. of later events, in the liglit of that day it did seem clear tluit tiie people of the United people who feared Canadian competition, I do not think we T)ught to assume that it is States liad resolved to enter upon a policy [ simply a measure of lioslility towards the of tariff reform. Tiu' Democratic party, people of Canada. I think it only fair to wliieh had just entered upon power, were at that very time engaged in propounding their mention that leading public men in the United States have intimated to men on this policy of tiiriff riforiii. We tliouglit the j side of the iine that while the Republican moment was opportune for us to place on ' party feel bound to uphold the Dingley Bill, 21 08t emphatic ting a great : a policy of Y to extend, us with the vere dlflposed ore thnn the to encourage joultl be dout; time the Ke- wer, pledged high protec- adheslou to n favour of ad reason to veu with the would have roclty treaty ps had been such a treaty. e disposed to t hand when e established t republic to ? of Canada, lleations are e Juay Judjje Ilt'presenta- ids on that e expression exposition of :)lt', speaking ic'ular article jnerally, the ear now dis- protectio'n. Canada mairal party to fulfil that pledge. And II the events across the bor- der have taken such a course as to Justify us In withholding action In relation to our trade with that country, that Is no reason why we should not proceed to deal with tariff reform In Its relation to those coun- tries which are prepared to deal with us. We are prepared to declare to this House and the world, that we will trade with those people, whoever they may be, who are will- ing to trade with us. We do It as individ- uals with our neighbours ; we would buy from the neighbour who Is willing to buy from us. What Is a nation but a combina- tion of many thousand Individuals ? And if an individual would be justified In dealing with the neighbour who .vants to trade with him, why should not the nation be justified in adopting the same principle V We re- cognize the fact that if the Dingley Bill becomes law, it will have some effect on our trade. We do not complain of It ; we I have no right to complain of It. The Am- I erlcan people have an undoubted right to frame their tariff policy with a single eye to their own Interests, and we must recog- i nlze that without murmur ; but they are an I intelligent people, and intelligent enough to : recognize the fact that If they have the right to frame their policy with a single eye I to their own Interests, we have the right I to frame our policy with a single eye to what we believe to be our interests. There- 1 fore, while we say to our American breth- ' rou that we will not yield to this spirit of ! retaliation which is in the air, and for which ! there is, perhaps, very considerable justl- ! tication, while we are not willing to put up the barbed wire fence which already 22 I i exists three or four strands higher, there to Invite your attention to the general tariff ; Is no particular reason why we shoukl and In doing so, I wish It to be distinctly take It down to-day, understood that, au I have already explain- ed, the (liitles are eoiiHldcrably higher than A DOUnLE TAniFP. y^^ intend they Hhnll Ih«, as applied to coun- Thls leads to the conclusion that wo *'■'*'» whlcii luv wlllliiK' to tradu with us. must be prepared to deal with tills quos- And If, as I read the Itenis, hon. gentlemen tlon from the point of view of having think that the rate upon any of them Is too one tariff for the countries which are •''*?'•- I I't'K them to believe that before 1 willing to trade with us and a different ^^'lose I shall have something to say which tariff for tlio countries which are not. Sc far will show that In reHi)ect of our relations as our tniiif has relation to those countries with (treat IJritalu and In respect of our which have no particular desire to trade I'elatlous with any other country that Is wlU- with us, we recognize that there are In It 'ng to meet us on equal terms, we shall be some items of sufHclent Importance to Justify prepared to offer a measure of tariff reform us in niai, .-m apply to Great Britain and hon. gent emen opposite favour. We pro- a^y other c..nnt'-y which is ;.revKared to ac- ZLT T''^\ a general tariff, and then we eept th. , ., V.t.ou. that that tariff imposes. ?J.ri% t^l "" fr'^'/"''^ ^^"'°^ '"- Let me say. Sir. that the classiflcation of ference to the countries which are desirous goods that we have in this tariff does not of trading with us ; and as a matter of u^aterially differ from the form of the tariff course, not by the express words of the ■Speaker, having thus stated the guidirg principles in the matter, I propose perhaps, and perhaps some disadvantage tariff. Un- 23 ueral tariff ; >e distinctly idy explulc- higher thau led to coun- lu with us. 1. Rentlemen thcin 1h too nt before 1 Buy which ur reliitloDH )ect of our that l8 win- we shall be [irlff reform n* wlilch In hich I am "bservatlon^ iMoD to the I If. y I take the (Mr. Field- ic last sen- IE. I am it myself, les Tupper) i point was ion. gentle- f, which. I 3 the House I thank ng me. I 11 about to f, but that repared to ) a special $ritalu and ired to ac- ff imposes, iflcatlon of t does not •f the tariff say, where ds into one thought It )llow that advantage ladvantage :ar!ff. Un- doubtedly, 4f one were beginning from the iH'iilmiliig, 111' would iiiiiKc a tiirllT that would he much Blmi>l«T than the present one. As one of our uowspapcr writers very hav)plly said, a man who uudtu-lakes to remodel a house win not lliid It so easy and Hfltis- factoi"y a Job an it' lu> had tlw opiMU'tuuity to build from thu foundation. We have to adapt ourselves to our cnndltlons. 1 think it would be an advantage In one way to have fewer Items In the tariff. But the evil of luultlpllcity of items Is not so great if you t-iiii avoid a multliillcity of rates ; and we hope that on Investigation of our tariff It will appear that we have, to a certain extent, removed this dltHculfy by gatliorlug a uuiiilicr of it(>iiis of a lik(> character and orluging them under one rate. Probably there Is room for Improvement In tills direction, but wo lio])o something has been done t < make the tariff more con- venient and more simple. The tlrst item Is : Ale, beer mul porter, when Imported In casks or otherwise than In bottles, 10 cents per gal- lon. The duty on this remains unchanged. And I think I should say that, If I am not to weary the House with details, I will only mention those duties that have been changed There are no chauges until we come to the duty on spirits, which ar^ increased by 15 cents a gallon— I would remind hon. members that I am dealing with the customs duties now. Mr. FOSTER. The hon. gentleman will have to read the items to get them in " Han- sard." The MINISTER OF FINANCE- Ale, beer any per cent of their duly. It is alleged that when a miller has sold cora meal for human food, he Is not in a position to follow it throngli the country and guarantee that it is always used for hum.in food. The same thing has recurred with regard to seed corn. Seed corn was admitted free, and it is alleged that that privilege has also l)eeu abused. We simplify the matter by putting corn on the free list, except in the case of corn for the purpose of di.stillation which, under regula- tions to be made by the Government, Is still to pay the sanie duty of 71/0 cents. There is also one other item in that large class to which I ought to refer. At present the duty on uncleaued rice Is three-tenths of a cent per pound, and V/4, cents per pound on cleaned rice. It is the duty on the cleaned rice which affects the price in Canada ; our peopl i do not eat uncleancd rice. We make j no change in the duty en the cleaned rice. ! but we do make a change In the duty on the jraw material. We say that instead of re- jceiviug the raw maier.il at three-tenths of 'a cent, they should pay % of a cent. The ! fact is that while the duty on cleaned rioe i remains the same, although the price will j not be Increased 10 the consumer, the manu- [ facturer will have to pay a larger price for ; his raw dnaterial, and that increase will go i into the public treasury, I Mr. nOSTER. But you do not cheapen the Tood. j The MINISTER OF FINANCE. Well, we cheapen a good many things in this tariff, ^ but v. e have to have a little regard for the i revenue in order to meet the obligations of my i)rtdecessor. We pass on to the class of articles known as fish and Qsh products ; i and as these remain substantially the same, I will not detain the House by reading them. : Illuminating oil, brings us to the item of : coal oil. There is no item in the tariff which has been more discussed in the House, I think there is a very strong de- sire in the House to have a very cousider- able reduction made in this item, and it I has been our desire to grant a reduction. I We are frejp to say that in view of the re- 1 presentations made that we are not dispos- ed, or do not feel wari'anted in going in tliat direction so far as we would like to do. We reduce the duty on coal oil one cent. Crude petroleum for fuel wliicli is now 3 cents will be 21/0 cents. Barrels con- taining petroleum remain at the same rate 20 per cent. We propose to make another change, which Is especially sought by the trade, and tliat is to abolish tlie restrictions that now exist in regard to sale from tank vessels. If the trade desire to use tank vessels, there is no reason why dealers should not be permitted to do so. Lubricrt- Ing oils remain unchanged, at 20 per cent. Olive oil, now 80 per cent, is reduced to 20 per cent. In regard to bituminous coal, we do not propose at this stage of the tariff measure to make any reductions In the duties on coal. Reference was made some time ago in this House to certain observations I made in Montreal in replying to a deputation re- presenting the coal interest. It was re- garded by many hon. members in this Ice. We make B cleaned rice. he duty on the Instead of re- three-tenths of f a cent. The n cleaned rioe the price will uer, the uianu- irger price for crease will go I not cheapen CE. Well, we in this tariff, regard for the obligations of 1 to the class flsh products ; ially the same, reading them, to the item of in the tariff cussed in the ery strong dc- very consider- item, and it t a reduction, lew of the re- ire not dispo.s- 1 in going In would lilic to coal oil one fuel which is Barrels con- the same rate make another sought by the lie restrictions ale from tank to use tank why dealers so. Lubrif"t- t 20 per cent, reduced to 20 fil, we do not nriff measure the duties on ;ie time ago in itlons I made ieputatlon re- It was re- ibers in this 25 House sitting opposite as an exceptional ! course to adopt that I should, in anticipa- tion of the Budget, make a statement on j that subject, not exactly a statement per- haps as to the amount of duty to be im- posed, but a statement sufficiently plain to indicate the lines on which we would pro- ceed. I do not require to enter fully into the circumstances under which I made that statement. I quite realized at the moment that I must submit to some misunderstand- ing prevailing as to my action, but we feel assured that the wisdom of the policy pur- sued by the Government will be In due course vindicated before the House. I be- lieve it was in the interest of all concerned that certain doubts and misunderstandings which existed at Washington in regard to the position of Canada on the coal question cibould be removed. MEMBER. Particularly Mr. An hon. Whitney. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. I be- lieve that statement served a useful pur- pose in removing doubts and misunder- standings. Sir CHARLES TUPPER. In Nova Scotia. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. I must , say that I am surprised the hon. leader of j the Opposition should have the courage to : mention Nova Scotia. I was disposed to be , oxcoodingly good, nice and gracious in the matter, and never mention the words. Now that the hon. gentleman has called attention to the subject, I suppose it will be in order to say that something happened in Nova Scotia two or three days ago. The hon. gentleman is not so proud of Nova Scotia as he used to be in the old days. But so far as the interruption imputes that my re marks In Montreal were made with any re- gard to Nova Scotia elections, or after any communication had with the Nova Scotia Government, I have already stated, and if it is iinporlant 1 will repeat it, that there is no foundation whatever for any state- ment of that Idnd. However that may be, I believe and the Government believe that a good purpose was served not only as re- gards the interests of Nova Scotia but in regard to all interests by having that state- ment made in Montreal in anticipation of the Budget speecli. Sir CHARLES TUPPER. And the Nova Scotia elections, which had been postponed for the purpose. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. The Nova Scotia elections, we are told by the hon. gentleman were postponed for a pur- pose, 1 do not know the source of his in- formation. I think the hon. gentleman does not know the people of Nova Scotia so well as he imagines he does ; but one thing is certain, that Nova Scotia knows a good deal about the hon. gentleman, and voted accord- ingly. I was about to say. Sir, that the pur- pose for which my statement was made was a purpose having in view the best In- terests of the Dominion, as time will show, I believe that American public men are at this moment reconsidering their action In inward to the duty on coal, and whatever they may do in relation to their general policy, there is reasonable probability that they wi:i reconsider their action on this point. 1 have strong hope, amounting to expectation, tha. in the end they will re- duce the duty proposed in the Diugley Bill to 40 cents per ton, which is the duty In the American tariff to-day. I stated in Montreal, and 1 repeat now, that it is the i desire of the Government to reduce the iduty on coal. I stated at that time that if i the American Government would leave the ' duty at 40 cents per ton, instead of iucreas- ; ingit to -.-> cents as proposed in the Ding- '' ley Bill, our Government were prepared to ' meet them on that line and reduce our duty to meet their duty. 1 repeat that state- ^ ment now. I have strong hopes that the Americans will eventually settle their duty ar 40 cents per ton. It l^laced at 40 cents, I undertake to move that our duty be made 4U cents per ton. and 1 have strong ^^pectations that this will be the end of ' tlie matter. But I tliiuk in the interest of t!!e coal trade of the Dominion we should not act to-day on the assumption that the elinnge will be made, and so. having clearly ami distinctly stated that we are ready to r Mluce our duty to 40 cents if the American duly n>inains at tliat ligur(>, we prop'se to defer action and see what they are going to do about it. I quite realize the possibility that the Americans will not be in a position to deal with the tiuestion, or at all events may not <- al with it. before uur tariff I'ill 1 goes through the House. If that should 26 prove to be the fact, we would be prepared to come dowu to the House aud make a further statomeut in rehition to the coal duties. Mr. HUGHES. I should like to ask why, on the same principle, the hou. gentleman does not maintain the dutj- on corn, so as to hold it as a set-off later to balance the duty on barley ? The MINISTER OF FINANCE. I cannot argue that question ; there is good and suffl- cicnt reason for pursuing a different policy. Mr. WALLACE. I understood the Min- ister of Finance to announce that he pro- posed to reduce the duty on olive oil from 30 per cent to 20 per cent. A large quantity of it. however, is at present free. Mr. FOSTER. The item at present reads 30 per cent for olive oil prepared for salad purposes, all other olive oil is free. Is the same wording used in regard to the propos- ed duty of 20 per cent. The CONTROLLER OF CUSTOMS (Mr. Paterson). The item is n.e.s. 20 per cent Instead of 30. Mr. FOSTER. If my hon. friend reads it that way he 'nill add 20 per cent to the duly . because olive oil n.e.s. is free. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. I think! my hon. friend is mistaken because such is I not our intention. It has been represented to us with rpgard to cement that the bar- rels of cement are not always equal in weight, aud that it is better to have the duty at so much per hundred pounds. We have therefore placed the duty at 12% cents per 100 pounds. My hon. friend the Controller of Customs has offered to r^ad for me. and if the House has no objection ho \vill do so. coal but to impose a duty on anthracite as well. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. My hou. friend ^Sir Charles Tupper) has possibly not correctly understood the declaration at -Montreal. However, without debating that. I will answer his question : that under these circumstances it would be the inten- tion of the Governmrnt to carry out my deelaraiion at Montreal. , Sir CHARLES TUPPER. Aud impose a duty on anthracite coal. The .MINISTER OF FINANCE. And im- pose a duty on anthracite coal. i The CONTROLLER OF CUSTOMS. At the request of my hon. friend I will con- tinue reading. , Mr. .McNeill. Before the hon. gentle- I man passes away from these items would he kindly say what the 12yo cents per 100 ; pounds on cement would amount to on a I barrel ? The CONTROLLER OF CUSTOMS. The barrels vary in Aveight and if a barrel con- tained .n2.") pounds it would be something about 40 cents. The hon. gentleman can figure that out for himself. Mr. McNeill. The hon. the Controller knows there has been considerable dispute about the barrels. Mr. FOSTER. None at all. Sir CHARLES TUPPER. Before the lion, gentleman's colleague takes up the consider- ation of tlH>se items, would he allow me to ask him. wlietlier I understand, that In case the Americ.'in tariff should be retained at 75 cents on coal as passed by the House of Rei)resentatives, that the hon. the Fi- nance Minister intends to carry out his de- claration at Montreal, not only to retain the present duty of 00 cents on bituminous Tlie CONTROLLER OF CUSTOMS. In the new item it is provided that whether the cement comes in bags or in l)arrels. the packages shall be included in the weiglit for duty. With regard to the iron duties. I regret that my hon. friend— who you can imagine has had a very great deal of work lately, and whose strength has almost given out to-night— is not able to explain these changes as he would have done it much better than I cau. But, in short, I may say that the policy of the Uovernniont is this. They have felt that pig-iron, wrougiit-iron and scrap-iron, being the base of so many im- portant, manufactures in the country, It was desirable, in the interest not only of the manufacturers, but of the consuming public, that tliere .^.lould be some reduction in the duties. Thougli iron comes from our friends across th(> border, avo bave made the reduc- tions in our OAA'n Interest, and not to pro- athracite as E. My hou. [)osslbly not laratlon at t debating : that under 3 the inten- •ry out my d impose a i3. And im- :OMS. At I will con- ion, gentle- ems would Qts per 100 tit to on a 'OMS. The barrel con- something leman can Controller ble dispute 'OMS. In It whether larrels, the weight for 3. I regret in imagine ork lately, given out se changes )etler than y that the is. They t-iron and many im- try, it was ily of the lug public, ion in the nir friends the reduc- ot to pro- 27 mote any Interest of theirs. While we have thought that our duty as a Government and as prudent business men, required us to lower those duties which will give relief from a heavy burden to many of our manu- facturers, at the same time, in order that the industries engaged in the business of manufacturing iron may be enabled to go on, we offer them, not what they bad be- fore, but we propose in a measure to com- pensate for the withdrawal of the share of protection Involved in the high duties, by giving them someivhat larger bounties than they had before. Some hon. MEMBERS. Hear, hear. The CONTROLLER OF CUSTOMS. Hon. gentlemen are somewhat amused at that, but I cannot help that. I have simply told you the truth. We combine Items 286 and 227 the first of which was at 22y2 per cent and the other at 30 per cent, and make a uniform duty of 30 per cent. This includes builder's hardware, cabinet makers, upholsterers, carriage hardwares, including buts, hinges, locks, curry combs or curry cards, horse boots, harness and saddlery, n.e.s. This is one of those items several of which we have arranged, that will make the work at the Custom-house very much simpler than It I has hitherto been, and I trust will remove I a great deal of friction that has existed | among so many varied and different rates j on articles which might be interpreted by ! one custom's appraiser to come under one head, and by another to come under another head. Item 277 of the old tariff bore a duty of 25 per cent ad valorem, while Item 345 bore 3.^ per cent. I may say that many of the articles enumerated in this list caused great difficulty In the matter of appraising and It has been represented that different appraisements took place at different ports, which, any gentleman can understand is a most undesirable thing. We think we are warranted In combining those two classes which the .iudgmeut of the House hereto- fore thought should be divided, one bearing 25 per cent and the other 35 per cent duties. We combine them to effect the great pur- pose we have and we make a uniform duty of 30 per cent. This Item includes, gener- ally, cutlery, Including carver knives, and forks of steel, butcher and table steels, oyster, bread, kitchen, cook's, butchers, shoe, farrier, putty, hacking, and glazier's knives, cigar knives, spatulas, or palette knives, razors, erasers or office knives, pen, pocket, pruning, sportsman and hunter's knives, manicure flies, scissors, trimmer's, barber's, tailor's, and lamp-shears, horse, and toilet clippers, and all like cutlery, plat- ed or not, n.o.p. For additional simplifica- tion we provide that If any of the articles are imported in cases or cabinet, the cases or cabinets shall be dutiable at the same rate as their contents. In many cases It was found that a merchant would pay one rate of duty on what was In the case and another rate of duty on the case Itself. We thought It better to have a uniform rate of 30 per cent. In Item 283 there Is a considerable reduc- tion. It comprises axes, scythes, sickles, reaping hooks, hay and straw knives, hoes, wringers, forks, post diggers and other agri- cultural implements. These are implements used upon the farm, and have been hitherto at 35 per cent ; we have reduced them to 25 per cent. Item 357 was electric light car- bons, or carbon points of all kinds, the duty on which was 2-50 specific per 1,000 ; we have abolished this specific duty and estab- lished an ad valorem duty of 35 per cent. Then we have an item which might be con- sidered a new Item. There are some very large carbons that are being used now by miners and others, and there is a very im- portant Industry, having a rapid develop- ment, in our country. It was difficult under th* i)ld tariff to determine what the rate of duty should be. I think they have come largely into use since the tariff was fraiued. Recognizing that, therefore, we have taken I tliem 'from the list of electric light carbons, I and on all carbons over six Indies In cir- i cumference. and with a view to the use j which is made of them, we have reduced i the duty 15 per cent ad valorem. We combine tariff Items 401 and 402.whlch reads " cotton fabrics, white or gray, bleach- ed or unbleached." Item 401 under the old law was dutiable at 22^! per cent and item 402 was 25 per cent, and we make them both dutiable at 25 per cent. Mr, MILLS. Hear, hear, legalized rob- i bery. I 28 ! il The CONTROLLER OF CUSTOMS. Mr. Speaker, I take the cheers of hon. gentlemen opposite as an indication that I read that item In a sufficiently loud tone to be heard by them. It is perhaps well to bear In mind what effect will be had unon that article when another schedule is brought before ihe attention of hon. gentlemen op- posite, and which I suppose they will be delighted to hear read after the cheers which they have given. Here is item 403. I may as well prepare the hon. gentlemen opposite to be ready for another cheer. This item reads cotton fabrics, printed, dyed or coloured, which under the old tariff was 30 per cent, is now 35 per cent. Some hon. MEMBERS. Hear, hear. The CONTROLLER OF CUSTOMS. Hon. gentlemen opposite will also bear in mind that a future announcement will have an Im- portant bearing on that article. Items 424 and 425, which were dutiable at 25 per cent, are now made uniform and put at 30 per cent ad valorem. Mr. FOSTER. That is an increase. The CONTROLLER OF CUSTOMS. Yea, but we must have revenue from something,' and we are trying to get It in as fair a way as we can in the Interests of the coun- try. Tariff items in the old tariff 414 and 408 are combined. One was 30 per cent ad valorem and the other 321/2 per cent ad valorem, and we make them both 35 per cent ad valorem. I might explain, as the hon. geatleman will readily see, that this has been done as in many other cases, for the purpose of simplifying the tariff very much, and regard is also had to the fact that they are articles upon which it was thought, taking them generally, they might bear a duty. Item 413, jeans, sateens and coutlles, was 25 per cent, and Is now 30 per cent. Items 404 and 405 have been combinotl. They were under speclfle and ad valorem duties which were very high, and which would run probably up to 50 or (!0 per cent, and we have reduced them to an ad valorem basis. We have given them the highest rate of duty, 1 think, that we maintain in the tariff and we have them at a uniform rate of 35 per cent ad valorem. The next item to which I invite the nt- teution of hon. members is the old tariff I Item 437 : " Yarns, composed wholly or In I part of wool, worsted, the hair of the I alpaca, goat or other like animal, costing I 20 cents per pound and under, 5 cents per I pound and 20 per cent ad valorem." We , have for reasons which we thought good and In the interest of the country reduced jthat duty to 15 per cent ad valorem. I j suppose the combined duties before would probably amount to over 30 per cent. The reasons for this change wiU no doubt be given when the item comes up for dis- ieussion. I think, however, that this Is a reduction in which a very large number of umuufacturers in this country are concern- ed ; and if there are some whose Interests are different, we have placed in the free list an article on which I think they will re- i celve some compensating advantajies for I this reduction, which I frankly admit is a j large cut, but which has been made in the Interest both of the manufacturers of the country and the consuming public. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. I have to express my thanks to my hon. colleague (Mr. Paterson) for having so kindly re- lievi^d me and to the House for having per- mitted him to continue the reading of the tariff, and thus relieve me from what would j otherwise have been a very great burden, j and I shall take up the list where my hon friend left off. I In Item 420, of the old tariff which relates j to binder twine I have an announcement to make which, I am sure, will be received with satisfaction by the House. We pro- I pose that binder twine, which Is now 12% j per cent shall be immediately reduced to ' 10 per cent. ! Some hon. MEMBERS. Oh, oh. j The MINISTER OF FINANCE. My hon. [friends had better not laugh too quickly; ' he laughs best who laughs last. The duty : on binder twine Is reduced from 12% per cent to 10 per cent at once, and dating from the 1st of January, 1898, binder twine shall be on the free list, and all the articles enter- ing into the manufacture of binder twine shall also be placed on the free list for the purposes of manufacturing. I come now to the items of sugars, syrups, and molasses, and in that connection I may associate tea. In dealing with a large class of the items to which I referred in a general way. I made no mention of tea. '"• >*f^-«''-'ae»«f*iW=q'<.* ■J 9 I wholly or In J hair of the nimal, costing !r, 5 cents per alorem." We thought good untry reduced d valorem. I before would per cent. The no doubt be i up for dls- hat this is a ge number of ' are concei'n- hose Interests n the free list they will re- ivantajies for ly admit is a I made in the turers of the ubllc, S'f'E. I have ion. colleague 10 liindly re- T having per- vading of the a what would ?reat burden, here my hon. which relates ouncoment to be received e. We pro- Is now 12% ' reduced to oh. )E. My hon. too quieljly ; It. The duty ■om 12% per dating from r twine shall rticles enter- )in(ler twine ! list for the ?ars, syrups, !ction I may th a large efeired in a ition of tea. There is a 10 per cent discrimination in tea with regard to importations not being di- rect. That 10 per cent remains. I linow there has been a popular iil''a that the Gov- (-rnnicut would have to impose a duty on tea. Well, I have the pleasure of announc- hit: that we do not propose to do so. , With regard to sugar, I find also that the ! same general Idea prevails in the minds of ! oortniu people, who liuow all about the Gov- ernment's policy, that there was to be a high duty on sugar. The duty on raw sugar now. used for refining purposes, Is %'ceut per pound, and on the reflucl it is i?l.U per 100 pounds, the difference being (',4 cents i)er 100 pounds. We propose that the duty on raw sugar shall remain as it : is to-dav because the revenue is derived from raw sugar. That means that we shall get the same amount of revenue. But the price to the consumer is regulated by the duty on the refined article, and that is to- dav $1.14 for 100 pounds. We propose to re- duce that to $1 per 100 pounds, so that tlie duty shall hereafter stand at 50 cents per 100 pounds for the raw sugar and 50 cents additional for the protection, if you care to use that word, to the refiner, as against 64 cents in the present tariff. By this step we do not tai^e a dollar from the public revenue, but we give to the people clicaper sugar to the extent of iF400,000 per annum. The duty on glucose or grape sugar, item 398 of the old tariff, is now 1% cents per pound. Repre- sentations were made to us that satisfied us i that that duty was an excessive one. Wc propose to reduce the duty on glucose to % cents per pound. It may be mentioned that the manufacturer of glucose will get some compensation in the form of free corn. The duty on sugar candy, now i/j cent per pound and 35 pei ^ent ad valorem, we propose to make 35 per cent ad valorem. Item 4(in of • the present tariff, cigars and cigarettes, the weight of cigarettes to include tlie weight of the paper covering has now a duty of Y- per pound and 25 per cent ad valorem. We increase the rate of duty on cigarettes to $3 per pound and 25 per cent ad valorem. The duty on cut tobacco. Item 4(i4 of the old tariff is 45 cents per pound and 12yo per cent ml valorem. We increase that duty to GO cents per pound with r2Vi per cent, an increase o'f 5 cents a pound. Manufactured tobacco, n.e.s.. and snuff, item 40r> of the old tariff, the old duty is 3.". cents per pound and 121/2 per cent We make it 45 cents and 121/2 per cent. Mr. FOSTER. What increase does the hon. Minister expect to get from that change ? FINANCE. I shall tlie hon. gentleman The MINISTER OF be glad to present to in a little while a general statement of ex- pected revenue, so I trust lie will excuse me if I do not mention tliat item now. I sliall not detain the House by giving the free list. It will 1)0 enough to say, in general terms, that we do not make any material change, except for the purpose of placing certain things on the free list to which reference has been made. Speaking generally, and subject to correction, the free list remains the same. Unenumerated articles, as in the present tariff, will stand at 20 per cent. Mr. TAYLOR. I would ask the hon. gentle- man what he has done with item 320 of the old tariff : " Corset clasps, spoon clasps, or busks," &c. ? The MINISTER OF FINANCE. I think my hon. friend will find that is included with others. The CONTROLI-ER OF CUSTOMS (Mr. Faterson). Items 320 and 321 were cut out altogether. The articles named in them will take their rating among the different classes of goods to which they belong. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. The usual provisions are made with regard to classes of prohibited goods. I am sure the House will be glad to have me deal with the ques- tion put to me at an earlier stage by the hon. leader of the Opposition as to the me- thod by which we propose to establish a different tarift' for those countries that are ■ disposed to deal with us. Mr. WOOD (Hamilton). Would the hon. I Finance Minister say if he leaves the free I list exactly as it is now ? i The MINISTER OF FINANCE. Not ex- \ actly. ! :Mr. WOOD (Hamilton). There are certain items on the free list providing that where ofio.ds are imported by nmnufacturers they j shall come in free; but if imported by a 30 merchant to sell to a manufacturer duty must be paid. I think this is class legisla- tion that should not be allowed to exist in any country. The smaller manufacturer is placed at a disadvantage Some hon. MEMBERS. Order. Mr. WOOD (Hamilton). If I am not in order, I will not continue Tlie small manu- facturer who is not able to import these goods may l)uy tliem from a merchant who imports tliem, and so he has to pay the duty, while the lar^o manufacturer wlio can afford to import tlio goods in large quantities Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER. I thinli the hon. gentleman is out of order. Mr. WOOD (Hamilton). I am simply put- ting a question in shape for the hon. Min- ister to give an answer Some hon. MEMBERS. Chair, chair. Mr. WOOD (Hamilton). The large manu- facturer can import these goods free while the smaller manufacturer must pay the duty. Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER. Order. Mr. WOOD (Hamilton). I aslced the hoa. Minister if he would answer the question, end he said that he would. The MINISTER OP FINANCE. I sym- pathize to a considerable extent with the feeling of the hon. gentleman as to the em- barrassment that arises from having a duty so arranged that an article comes in at one rate for one purpose and at another rate, or perhaps free, for another purpose. I will only say that I think in some cases it will be found we have removed these anomalies; but I frankly confess that a number of them remain as we did not find ourselves with sufBcient time to deal with them as we would desire. A time when we are re- ducing the duty on manufactured goods, and thus, perhaps, giving the manufacturer much anxiety. Is not the best time to take away from him any privileges he had In the way of concessions on his raw ma- terial. So we are disposed to allow these things to remain at present, though I con- fess I do not like them any better than ray hon. friend (Mr. Wood, Hamilton) does. Mr. DUGAS. Did I understand the hon. Minister to say there was a duty on raw leaf tobacco ? I THE RECIPROCAL TARIFF. 1 The MINISTER OF FINANCE. I think that, so far, no mention has been made of j that, but I may liave occasion to mention it 1 before I sit down. I propose now to read I one of a series of resolutions dealing with I the particular subject of the reciprocal tariff. Of course a number of tlie resolutions are of a purely formal character, and 1 shall not detain the House with them; but one. or two are of special importance, and one i is of paramount importance, as follows :— That when the customs tariff of any country admits the products of Canada on terms •which, on the whole, are as favourable to Canada as the terms of the reciprocal tariff, herein referred to, are to the countries to which It may apply, articles which are the growth, produce, or manu- ^ facture of such country, when imported direct i therefrom may then be imported direct into Can- ! ada or taken out of warehouso for consumption '■ therein at the reduced rates of duty provided In the reciprocal tariff set forth in Schedule " D." That any question that may arise as to the countries entitled to the benefits of the reciprocal tarif? shall he decided by the Controller of Cus- toms, subject to the authority of the Governor General in Council. That the Controller nf Customs may make such regulations as are necessary for carrying out the intentions of the two preceding sections. We propose to mention the articles on which we do not intend to grant the special concession, and that all the other articles, not being so euunierated, shall be entitled to the benefit of that concession. Our proposal is that as respects all the articles not excepted in the way I have just mentioned, there shall be a reduc- tion, not all at once, but in two steps, one part of the reduction taking effect In- stantly, and the second part taking effect a year later ; and with these two steps we propose there shall be a reduction of one- fourth as respects the duties upon all articles imported from Great Britain, or from any other country which will deal favourably with us. Sir CHARLES TUPPER. From the state- ment of the hon. gentleman, I do not quite understand what he means by " dealing favourably with us." It appears to me very Important that we should understand what the hon. gentleman means. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. Perhaps the resolution which I h.id tho privilege of reading my hon. friend did not catch as fully as I desired. It reads as follows :— 31 That when the Customs tariff of any country admits the products of Canada on terms which, on the whole • I wish to empbaslze that, because we may find that they admit our products at one point on favourable terms and that at another point on terms which we may re- gard as unfavourable. They might admit , one article at a 'fair rate, and some other article at a high rate. Therefore we want to average the tiling and say that if their tariff is favourable to us on the whole, then we propose to regard them as coming under this privilege. i are as favourable to Canada as the terms of the reciprocal tariff, herein referred to, are to the countries to which It may apply, articles which are the growth, produce, or manufacture of such country, when Imported direct therefrom, may then be imported direct into Canada, or tali'en out of warehouse tor consumption therein at the reduced rates of duty provided In the re- ciprocal tariff set forth In Schedule " D.' I hope I have answered my hon. friend. Sir CHARLES TTTPER. I suppose it ia owing to my obtusenoss. but I do not yet understand the hon. gentleman. As I understand him, suppose a country receives the products of Canada upon the same terms as it receives the products of the United States and Germany, 's that country re- garded as receiving the products of Can- ada upon tbo same favourable terms as the reduction that the hon. gentleman proposes will be extended to it ? Tte MINISTER OP FINANCE. The question will be whether, on the whole, the terms are as favourable as we ourselves offer in our reciprocal tariff. Now, I beg, with your permission, to read the terms of schedule " D " referred to in the enacting clause : On all the products of countries entitled to the benefits of this reciprocal tariff under the pro- visions of section Left blank. Thf number will have to be filled in corresponding to section 15 : the duties mentioned In Schedule " A " shall be reduced as follows :— On and after the 23rd day of April, 1897, and until the 30th day of June, 1898, Inclusive, the reduction shall. In every case be one-eighth of the duty mention- ed In Schedule " A," and the duty to be levied, collected and paid shall be seven-eighths of the duty mentioned In Schedule "A." On and after the Ist of July, 1898, the reduction shall in Rverv case be one-fourth of the duty men- ironed in Schedule "A," and the duty to oe levied, collected and paid shall be three-quarters of the duty mentioned In Schedule A ; pro- vided, however, that these reductions shall not apply to any of the following articles, but such artioles shall In all cases be subject to the duties mentioned in Schedule " A," namely ; ales, beers, wines and liquors ; sugar, molasses and syrups of all kinds, the product of the sugar cane or beet root ; tobacco, cigars and cigarettes. These are Items which are large producers of revenue, and we think it is not desirable that there should be two rates of duty as respects these articles. With the exception of these articles mentioned, and they are very few, this preferential rate will apply to all the products of Great Britain and to all the products of any other country which is willing to put Itself on the same terms as Great Britain, or on terms which will be regarded by the Government of Canada as coming within the privilege designed by this resolution. I liave anotlier resolution that I desire to read. Tlie Lil)cml platform from which I read an extract to-night, de- clared that a protective tariff had fostered monopolies, trusts and combin<>s. These combines, I am afraid, have not wholly been destroyed. I think there are some of theia in Canada now ; and I propose to give them a certain notice that they may govern tliem- selves accordiugly. Therefore, we propose ii resolution which we hope will be useful. I kuow how (lltiicult it is to reach the combines. I know how ingenious they are, and there is the l)arest possibility that they will be able to climb over this resolution. But tliat is I no reason why we should not make an effort ' to deal with what is regarded as a great evil in the community. 1 propose this reso- lution ; PROVISION AGAINST COMBINES. That whenever it shall appear to the sati«- faction of the Governor In Council that, as re- spects any article of commerce, there exists any trust, combination, association, or agreement of any l^ind among the manufacturers of such article, or the dealers therein, or any portion of them, to enhance the price of such article or In any other way to unduly promote the advantage of such manufacturers or dealers at the ex- pense of the consumers, and that such disad- vantage to the consumers is facilitated by the ' customs duty imposed on a like article when Im- port'^d then the Governor In Council shall place sufh" article on the free list, or so reduce the ' duty on It as to give to the public the benefits of reasonable competition In such articles. i Ferhaps, Sir, before I go further, I ought ; to say something to the House in answer to the suggestions of my hon. friend from York (Mr. Foster) as to the amount of doty I to be gained or lost by these changas. I 32 bave to confess frankly that it has not been found possible to make a very elaborate caloiilatlou on that point ; It Is dlfflcult to make a calculation of what amuuut of duty will be lost or gained under the scheme which I have the honour to submit to the IIouso. Ah rosi)L'(;ts a few lt(Miis, we believe that the reductions made in the duty will undoubtedly involve some loss of revenue ; as respects the taril'f jjcud'ally, with the ex- ception of those few items, we think that, while the retluctions will be very consider- able and of great value to the people, they will be balanced to a large extent, if not altogether, by tlie i>xpansion of trade which we believe will follow the adoption of this policy. It Is not to be assumed that because the duties are reduced, therefore the revenue will be reduced. On the contrary, it is quite conceivable that by a policy of reduction of duty you may Increase your re- venue ; In like manner, it is conceivable that by a policy of increasing your duties, you may not increase your revenue to the extent that you anticipate. Speaking generally, our expectation is that upon a large num- ber of the Items, In fact, upon the tariff generally, with (lie exception of a few Items, [ the reductions will amount to a very con- siderable sum to the consumer, but there will be such an expansion of trade that practically there will be no loss of revenue. But that would not be true of all the items. There are a few items on which, undoubt- edly we shall lose revenue, and perhaps in [ the statement I make I shall omit to men- tion something which ought to be considered, because I have frankly to tell the House that the matter is one in which it is some- what difficult to be precise. I think, how- ever, that in the matter of iron, owing to the large reduction which we make, for example the reduction on pig Iron from $4 to $2.50 in our general tariff, with a further reduction of one-eighth of that duty, and ■ later on another eighth under the Reciprocal Tariff, there will undoubtedly be, in the be- ginning at all events, some loss of revenue. Making a rough estimate on that matter, I candidly admit it is only a rough one, I think we may lose on the item of iron $217,000. I think perhaps on the item of woollens we may lose IjS^To.OiX) ; on cottons something like !i!GO,000. On the item of corn we will lose about $207,000, less the amount which will be paid by the distillers, which I estimate to be in round numbers, $60,000. Deducting $00,000 from $207,000, the net loss will be $147,000. If we add these to the items already mentioned with respect to iron, woollens and cottons, we have a j gross loss of about $700,000. I do not pro- j fess to offer this to the House as a very correct statement, I admit it is difficult to I estimate, and we have to do it very broadly i and with great doubt as to how it may j turn out ; but I think we will not be far I astray when we say that for the first year j we may lose on these items about $700,000. We will gain something by the policy we propose, and I will refer to the resolutions I have to propose with respect to the excise : duties. The duty at present imposed by the j excise law on spirits is $1.70 per proof gal- |lon. We propose to increase that to $1.90 I per proof gallon. I know there is a desire on the part of some hon. members to still further Increase the duty on spirits. It Is naturally an article to which a Finance Min- ister turns in his desire to obtain revenue. Mr. FOSTER. Takes to drink. The FINANCE MINISTER. Some Fi- nance Ministers do ; as for myself I drink water. But every hon. member who has had any experience of public affairs knows that you may pusli your spirit duties to a point where you will not get increased re- venue, or at all events you will get it ac a high cost. I am free to confess that we are rapidly approaching that point in Canada. he .-e I do not suppose that we c duties much higher than wo yro; present time. If it is considered c to still further increase the duties, perience o'f other countries leaves room for doubt as to whether by Increasing the duties you will increase the revenue. I do not profess to give any absolute judg- ment on the point, but there is some doubt in my mind whether we would derive ary Increased revenue from the spirit duties if we increased .them materially above what we propose. Some branch may be found ou which increased duties may be levied, and if such Is the case, some Finance Min- ister will call it Into operation. We propose to reduce the duty on vinegar from 6 cents to 4 cents per gallon, hut at the same time we Impose a duty o'f 4 cents 33 ner proof pnllon on acetic add. Those In- SuHtS have come Into conflict, and the n,nnnfacturer8 of vinegar and acetic add Tno C I have reason to believe that Tu th whole this will be measurably satlB- Jactory to all as a fair compromise It Is adn-oposod that the Government may , exemit acetic add when used for mechanl- s i.r\r;mposltlonofanexclsedutyon| forelpn raw leaf tobacco, we Ret an Im Jor^ant Item of revenue, as I shall procm to show, and at the same time we confer considerable advautage on the growers of Xeco m Canada. How far It Is possible Jor our growers to displace foreign leaf was mud. disputed before the tariff commission ; but if the Cnnadlan producer can as a re- sult of this duty get some advantage, we see no rcnson why he should not have the same opportunity afforded him as has been af- forded to other industries. Our main pur- pose is to get revenue, but at the same time there Is no objection to the growers of tobacco in Canada receiving advantage from this resolution. Mr FOSTER. How much duty do you expect to receive from this Increased duty on raw leaf V three-quartetB of a million, which :«^e might probably need In that regard, an.. $700,000 we may need-perhaps that Is a arge es i- »nate-to make up the loss we will BUBtaln from the reduction of the dutles-we will come out about even. The bounty on Iron 1 13 also to be taken Into consideration, and may vary the figures a little. It has al- ready been stated that we are making very material reductions In the duties on iron. I The iron Industry was not spedahy favoui- !od m the original National Policy. At all I events In later years we know that hon^ I gentlemen opposite fdt they were justlfled ?u out.Ming ou a policy for the special de- ivelopmont of the Iron Industry, and In do^ Ing so they granted bounties on Iron and ' steel billets, as well as raising the duty to a very high point. The MINISTER OF FINANCE. From raw leaf tobacco we exped to receive the com- fortable sum of nearly ^1.000,000. We ex- pect to get from Increased excise duties on BDlrlts $509,000, Increased excise duty on dgarettes, iflOO.OOO, and from increased customf. duties on spirits, tobacco and cigars about $173,000. If we should realize our ex- pectations ou all these items, and of course S isa probability that the effect of the ncroasod duties may be to diminish con- sumptlon-lf W9 would get our full ostunato of the amount from increased duties on gnlrlts cigars and tobacco, the sum will reach $1,700,000. Of course I quite rorJi/.e Tat wo may not collect this sum. because It 8 wdl known that > -ith increase oL duties the difficulties of ooUe.Mon become ™ter I have also stated that we shall fose about $700,000 through reductions In In woollens and other goods. I have iron, wool portion o'f my "^' rthat i/we were continuing the old r^i^i^Twould need about $7.0.000 more ;;an it would provide. So if we take 3 BOUNTY ON IRON AND STEEL. We have reduced the duty and we propose now to make up to some extent, for a short time, the loss to the Industry by Increasing he bounty. How far it was a wise policy to 1 undertake the development ot the I on In Idustry m Canada In the way the Hon. gen- i tleman (Sir Charles Tupper) ajtempted In the face of many difficulties, and in the light of our experlence-how far that was a wise policy may well admit of ''ii-««^.f "^- „^"*- '* a not worth our while to argue it to-day. We now that large sums have been invested in this industry. We know that large iron industries exist in the country, and w^ide we r.ay not approve of the policy under which they are established, we have no de- sire to sec them snuffed out now. As m aenling with .all other Industries, we have shown" a %ery large measure of consider- r.tion. so we -desire to show fair consider- •Hion to the iron industry. Therefore wo s-iv if it is in the interests of the people of 1 Cana.ia that there sliall be a reduction In the duty on iron we are prepared to accept the responsibility of advising that the boun- ties on iron s"ould be increased for a term cf years in order that this Industry may have a fair chance for existence. We have s ;bstituted a bounty on the steel ingot for the bounty on the billet, and I am indined to think that will be more satisfac- tory to all concerned. We propose the fol- I lowing resolution :— 34 1. That It is cxpedleni to repeal Chapter nine of ntty-sevpn and flfly-elght Victoria, belnR: "An Act m provide for the payment of bounties on Iron and t-teel nianufaclured from Canadian ore " and nil reRulatlons thereunder made by Order of tho Onvernor In Council. 2. Thnt It Is expedient to provide that the Governor In Council mi-V authorize the payment of the fi llowhiK bounties on steel InRots, pud- dled Iron bars and pip Iron made In Canada, that Is to say : On steel Ingots manufactured from ingredients of which not less than fifty per cent of the weight thereof consists of pit? Iron made in Can- ada, a bounty of three dollars per ton ; On puddled iron bars manufactured from •!« Iron made in Canada, a bounty of three d(illar.A per ten ; On pis Iron manufactured from ore, a bounty of three dollars per ton on the proportion pro- duced from Canadian ore, and two dollars iier ton on the proportion prrduccd from foreign ore; 3. That it is expedient to provide that the Dov- ernor in Council may make regulations In rela- tion to the bounties hereinbefore mentioned in order to carry out the intention of these resolu- tions. 4. That It Is expedient to provide that the said bounties shall only be applicable to steel ingots, puddl'd ircn bars and pig Iron made in Canada prior to the twenty-third day of April, IDOL'. 5. That it Is expedient to provide that the tore- going bounties shall be nayablo only on iron and j.teel for consumption In Canada, and that the Governor General In Council may, at any time by proclamation, Impose export duties on such ir.'n and steel if the sa,me shall be export- ed from Canada ; such duties to be not grea*er than the amount of the bounty payable on such Iron and steel. Perhaps I may say in thnt connection that those wlio havo no knowloilao of tho subject may too hastily assuino that iron can be satisfactorily maiie in Canada from Canadian ore. It is not a peculiarity of the iron trade hero, but it is known in the Iron busi- ness sonei'ali.v, that it is found advautagoous to blend different kinds of ore, and, there- fore, the Canadian producer of iron would not be able to make iron of a satisfactory character if he were compelled to use only the Canadian ore. We recop;nizod that fact, and propose to pay tliis bounty witli due re- gard to the proportion of the Canadian ore whlcli they may use. We siv(> them the bounty for a term of five years from this date. Tliore 's another provision. We alwnys re- gard the action of a foreign country which giants bounties on products shipped to Ciiii- ada in competition with our industries, as a somewhat unfriendly action. We believe that a bounty fed article is improperly brought into competition witli our products, and we aceortllugly feel aggrieved. Now we are willing to pay a bounty on iron manufactured in Canada for consumption In Canada, but we have no Idea of paying the manufacturers of pig Iron or other Iron a bounty to entiblo I hem lo supply the world with cheap Iron. Therefore, we say tlmt the bounty shall be applied to Iron produced In Canada for consumption In the Dominion, and If this iron is shipped beyond the Do- minion we have the right to lini)08e an ex- port duty upon It equal to the bounty paid by the Government of Canada. I think, Sir, I have now presented to the House all the resolutions which are of Im- portance, although there are a number of others that are of such a formal character that I shall not deem It necessary to read them. Tllli ■' FAVOURED-NATION " TREATIES. Sir CHARLES TUrrEIl. Would my hon. friend allow me to ask him a tiuestion, as the subject Is a very important one. In granting tlie advantages which he has sta- ted he proposed to grant to goo■■;"■;«:; be fnrM.Mon b.v tli. m . ^^^^^ Kiel.tlng) to the fiiet thut tlie trosHy ih not tvontlos. n.-.l """"""'■.;";„, By u.e ^ ww.on Onna-'-'^tLrrenUreIy aelu.vo, and w.U have bU^h fall and I ^^ ^^^^^ ^batever. ""now 'rsbill not undertake to pass any .n^^isTEU OF FINANCE 1 have mn m,ent upon this very Important ques- ^^_ ^.^.j^^j i^^, the mtormat on Sn th n.ost-favoured-nation clauses ^^''^^J^ ,,, ,,t made these troat^es^ of th.°se imperial treaties. It is an Inter- ^^ ^^^,^,^^.^ ^hat wo all understood 1 na question, and it is -^\ ^^^^ \u.t ^nU. rl<.r (Mr. Slftoii), I h)ok forward lo that country Roini,' rapidly ahead. Further west, our distant province of British Cidunilila is cxporloncln^j iiii Inipotus from tho dovolopniont of hor rluh mineral dopo- Hlts. lu tho oldor imtvliicos there is tlu* promise of a prosperous year, and. as I have said, business Is only waltln« for the de- tails of tho tariff to bo niniouticod, to re- sumo Its accustomed olinnnols In Increased Mr. UUGHES. I would like to ask ni.\ hon. friend If he has taken any steps hi hlB Budget to provide for an export doty on logs or on pulp-wood V The MINISTER OF FINANCE. The hon. gentleman Is well aware, and tho llnuse '« j y„ij,m,. well aware, that numerous reijresentatlons j ^^ co'nelnslon, permit mo to sum up the have been made to the Government on this j ^.^^\^,(^ no'inls of tho policy which I submit to quostion of export duties, as applied °"t | this House. The Llboial party. In Its plat- merely to logs, but to a nuniber of other ; ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ Ottawa convention, doclurod articles. It Is a large quostion and .«"o Itself to be In favour of a reduction of tho which we believe should be approached with ] ^^y.^({ That pledge we have fulUUod to-day great consideration and deliberation. We i j^y substantial reductions in our gc-noral are not prepared to-day to declare our final ' tm-jcf and still further by the large reduc- judgment on that question. In the tariff i ^j^^^g' j,,.,,!,, j,, „ur reciprocal tariff. The which 1 submit to the House, we do not j Ottawa platform pledged the Liberal party piopose an export duty on any article, except L^ endeavour to bring about tho desired re- on iron Avhlch has received a bounty. We ! ^<^yJ.^y^ ^ylth the least i)osslble disturbance of do not think it would be prudent at this , )juslnci?s, and with no Injustice to any class, moment to take the step which the hon. gen- ; 'pimt pledge we ''ave f ultillod to-night by tleman's question suggests. At the same | placing on the Table of the House a tariff time, we reserve our judgment on that point, ! y.-ijif-h In its every line shows that the Gov- and tlie matter may come up again at a i ,.j.nmj,,it ijave approached the subject with later stage of the session. BUSINESS PROSPECTS. We have of late read and heard expres- sions of opinion that the trade of the coun- the utmost cousideiation, and with a desire to disturb In the least pcisible degree the various business InterostK of the Dominion. The Ottawa platform pledged us to have I particular regard for a reduction of duties try has been very much upset, not so much on British goods, and my hon. friend the by uncertainty as to the nature of the tariff, j Minister of Marine and Fisheries (Mr. Da- as by the delay in the announcement of it ; vies) moved In this House a resolution atlirm- and while there seems to be some hesitation j ipg that policy. We have fulfilled that in the extension of trade at the time our I pledge to-night in the most ample manner, fiscal system is under review, yet I cannot | Tlie Ottawa platform pledged the Liberal regard the existence of this period of sus- party to use all honourable efforts to bring pense as wholly hurtful. Warehouses which ! about better trade relations with the United have been over-full will be drained of their j States. We have already taken the first stocks, long credits and over-drafts will l)e j step in that direction by commissioning two considerably reduced, and In the end busi- 1 Ministers of this Government to visit Wash- ness will l»o established on a firmer basis ; i ington and make known the fact— if It was and once the details of the tariff are an- nounced, trade Avill not only seek its ac- customed channels, but will flow in increas- ed volume. Tlirnughont tiie whole Dominion the prospects look encouraging. In Manito- uecessary to make it known— that Canada is willing to negotiate with our American neighbours for a fair and reasonable reci- procity treaty. If onr American friends wish to make a treaty with us, we are will- 37 I Inc to n»>ot them nn.1 trciit on fair an.l euv.ltubl.' li-rniH. It II shnll not ph-uHO tho.n to .10 tbiit. w(. Hhiill In »)iio way n-Kivt tho fact, but HlmU ii..vlmIIh'Ichh p. "u our way rfJoIcluK. niu\ find otlior marlu-lH to ImlM up Ih" proHi.iTlty of Cauada iiiai'pt'ti.U'iit ol tlu> Aiiioilfau peoiile. Wo pri'wfiit to thlM lIoUH*^ a tavilY whleli IniH the iidvanlaK.' of b.'ln« sbiipbT thau tiu. oil.- Il.at now oxiHtK. and I f''t'l ftHSured that It win to a considi'iabl.' oxti'iit n- duel' that frU'tlon which haH ho lon« ex- ; iHiod lu-iwiH-n tho morehaniH of the country and the Oustoni-houHos. Wo swbndt n tarllt which lavRcly aban.loua the Hi.c :.ut a duty on breadstun.s. It may be as time rolls on, and al an eaiiy ;, \la.y may change their vievvs. t . fi,..t thev may see It In Ti :;tor St to make this distinction, ; ; thc7 may offer some preferential "us o the grain of Canada. If they can he induced to do that by fair argument I have no doubt it will be a good thing for rana^la But why should we wait for Eng- Strnl t take action 1 England has deal rnerously with us In the past. England fias Sven "s a larger degree of liberty per- bans ban is possessed by any other country on th J^ce of the earth. She has given us liberTy o tax her wares even when she admit' ot.r goods free, and we have taxed them to an enormous degree. Why shouM 38 we wait for England to do more ? Some- body must make a move In this matter, and we propose that Canada shall lead the way. My hon. friend the leader of the Opposition says that our project of freer trade with England is a delusive one. Sir CHARLES TUPPER. Hear, hear. The MINISTER OP FINANCE. Ls it delusive ? When I place these resolutions on the Tiiblo of lliis House to-night, they go into effect, and I speak with pride, in the name of the Liberal party, and the hon. gentlemen around me will share that pride, when I say that to-morro^^' morning, at every custom-house in Canada from ocean to ocean. the doors will open on terms of preferential trade with the mother country. I cannot doubt that this tariff will commend itself to this House and to the country, and when this policy shall have passed its \':irlous stages, when it shall have passed wAo law, then the members of the Parliament of Canada may feel that, in this glorious year of jubi- lee, they have made a noble contril)ution to that splendid parliamentary record which Tennyson had in his mind when he pictured the reign of Her Majesty Queen Victoria : And Btatijsmen at her council met, Who knew the seasons when to take Occasion by the hand, and make The bounds of freedom wider yet.