^^^ Vu^

IMAGE EVALUATrON
TEST TARGET (MT-3)

€^0

€//

/ ^^

1.0

III I.I

' la 11.70

L25 ill 1.4

1.8

1.6

Photographic

Sciences
Corporation

13 WE<T MAIN STREklT

WEBSTFR.N.Y. 14500

(716) 872-450a

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques

Technical and BibMcgraphic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

Thb Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may bignificantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked belcw.

L'Institut a microfilrri6 le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details
di cei exemplaire qui son: peut-dtre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la m6thode normaie de filmage
sont indiqu6s ci-dessous.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

I I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommagee

Pages damaged/
Pages endommag^es

Covets restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul6e

I I Cover title missing/

Le titre de couverture manque

I I Coloured maps/

Cartes g^ographiques en couleur

Pages restced and/or laminated/
Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul^es

Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages ddcolor^es, tachet^es ou piqu^es

□ Pages detached/
Pages d6tach6es

□ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)

I I Showthrough/

Transparence

I j Coloured plates and/or illustrations/

□

Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/
Reli6 avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge intdrieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes
lors d'une restauration apparaisseni dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 filmdes.

D
D
D
D

Quality of print varies/
Quality in^gale de I'impression

Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du matdriel supplementaire

Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6X6 filmdes d nouveau de fagon d
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppldmentaires:

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked b'*low/

Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous.

10X 14X 18X 22X

26X

30X

12X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

§tails
s du
;odifJer
r une
Image

The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:

National Library of Canada

The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol •—»- (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method: .

L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grdce d la
g6n6rosit6 de:

Bibliothdque nationale du Canada

Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et
de ta nettetd de l'exemplaire film6, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture an
papier est imprim^e sont filmds en commenpant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
dernidre pjge qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second
plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont filmds en commenpant par la
premidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la dernidre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

Un des symbolcs suivants apparattra sur la
dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbole — •► signifie "A SUIVRE". le
symbole V signifie "FIN".

Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent §tre
filmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmd d partir
de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent la mdthode.

jrrata
to

pelure.

32X

^v^

\^'

NATKVvAL LkBHARY

CANADA

BIB.JOili.-QU*: NAIIONALE

a»i:

v^.

, . ^x^Vl

C'k Itatioiuil ^olicjT.

-"."?■• ,^

A PRACTICAL VIEW

A PRACTICAL MAN.

SPEECH DELIVERED BY LEW1S^^IGLE,M.P.

( Member for South Essex, Out.)

IN THE

HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA,
MARCH, 1884.

OTTAWA, CANADA:

Printed l)y the C'nizEN rrintin<^ and I'uljILshing Co., 31 Metcalfe Street.

1S84

THE NATIONAL POLICY.

A PRACTICAL VIEW

A PRACTICAL MAN.

DELIVERED BY LEWIS WIGLE,M.R

(Member for South Essex, Ont)
IN THE

HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA,
MARCH, 1884.

OTTAWA, CANADA.
i*nnted by the CiTlziN Printing and Publishing Company, 31 Metcalfe Street*

/ 1884.

'•G

■;. '■-t,-

Mr. Lewis Wigle's Speech,

» — ^ «

[The following speech, delivered by Mr. Lewis Wigle, M.P. for
South Essex, has been published by a number of gentlemen who
listened to the masterly effort delivered by him in the House of
Commons, Ottawa, in March last.]

Mr. WIGLE said :— Mr. Speaker, I do not think T would say
anything on this occasion if it were not that hon. gentlemen opposite
constantly run down the National Policy, and claim that the manu-
factured products of this country are not cheaper than they were before
the National Policy was introduced. This is the second time we have
heard from the hon. menber for North Norfolk (Mr. Charlton) on this
subject, and he has challenged any hon. member to show that goods are
cheaper now than before the introduction of the National Policy.

Mr. CHARLTON. No.

THE TRADE POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES.

Mr. WIGLE. And the hon. gentleman always quotes the trade
policy of the United States. What produced the National Policy of
the United States 1 We find that in 1789, they started with a revenue
tariff of 8| per cent. ; a year or two afterwards it was increased to 11^
per cent. ; in 1792 it was further advanced to 13 J per cent. ; and in
1816 they commenced their National Policy. What caused them
to inaugurate that policy in 18161 It was the war of 1812. They
found they were depending on England for the guns with which to
fight her, for the powder and shot for the army, for cloth for the
clothing of the soldiers, for blankets to cover the troops ; and so they
settled the war question, and immediately afterwards they inaugurated
the National Policy, which tiveraged 21 per cent. That continued for
four years. After the next presidential election in 1820, what did the
manufacturers of England dol They rented warehouses at the seat of
Government in the United States and brought manufactured goods
there to prove that they could not be manufactured cheaper in the
United States. What did the people of the United States say 1 They
said if we ever intend to be a great, prosperous and independent
nation, we must bring manufactures to this country, so that our
people will be benefited by having the factories established here. They
said we do not object to English manufacturers selling goods here, but
to our people being compelled to take their farm produce to England,

leave tlie money there and bring back manufactured goods. We have
no objection to English manufacturers selling goods to the people of
the United States, they said, but we intend to impose such high
protective duties as will compel English manufacturers to come to the
United States and manufacture their goods, and thus our people will
spend their money at home. In 1820 the tariff" was advanced to 26
per cent. Four years afterwards it was increased to 38 per cent. ; in
1828 to 42 per cent. ; 1832 the compromise tariff' was introduced,
which was on a sliding scale for 10 years, reducing 2 per
cent, per annum, which had the effect of diminishing the
duties from 42 per cent, to 20 per cent. After the ten
years the tariff" was increased to 33 per cent., then it was
reduced to 24 per cent., and in 1857 it was reduced to a revenue tariff
of 19 per cent. Tn 18G1 it was decreased, and in 1872itwas increased.
What is it to-day? It averages 40 per cent, on cottons, over 61 per
cent, on cloths, over 58 per cent, on carpets, and on leaf tobacco grown
in any other country, 35 cents per pound. If the arguments used by
hon. gentlemen opposite be correct, the consumers of leaf tobacco in the
United States must pay 35 cents per pound additional. What is the
Tariff" to-day in this country ? On woollen blankets and cloths, 7-^ cents
per lb. and 20 per cent. ; cottons, 35 j^er cent, and 25 per cent, on hats.

THE RECIPROCITY TREATY AND ITtJ ABROGATION.

What produced the National Policy in this country 1 We had a Beci-
procity Treaty with the United States for a period of ten years, from
1856 to 1866. At the time of its abrogation, what did the Americans
say ] They said we are establishing a protective policy ; we think the
best course to pursue is not to renew the Reciprocity Treaty, and they
would not renew it. Then we had to do that which we thought best
for ourselves. What did hon. gentlemen opposite do when they were
in power 1 They sent Hon. George Brown to Washington at an expense
of $6,000 to see if he could not bring about another Reciprocity Treaty.
The Americans, however, said to him that he had better return to
Canada, that they had a Reciprocity Treaty for ten years and did not
■want another, tliat they were very well satisfied with their trade policy, and
when they wanted reciprocity with Canada they would let the Dominion
know. It was when the hon. gentleman came back that the leader of
the Conservative party, though he was in Opposition, asked hon. gen-
tlemen to bring down a protective Tariff", and the Conservative party
would assist them in carrying it out. When the ex- Finance Minister
was urged to adopt this policy^ he stood up in the House and said they
were nothing but flies on the wheel of this grea* nation, and that it
would be useless to attempt to do anything of this kind. As I said on
a former occasion, they are nothing but flies on the wheel, and they are
like all other flies. If you have a sore on your hand, first one fly

comes, then another, and another, until it is covered with flies, not for
the purpose of trying to heal the sore, but to make it worse. If we
have any iittlo sore in the National Policy these gentlemen light iipoa
it, not for the benefit of the country, but to run it down. (Cheers.)
They told the people of this country that if this National Policy were
brought in the people of the United States would retaliate, and that it
would be disloyal to the mother country to bring down a TaritF which
would put a duty on English goods the same as the duty on American
goods.

WHY WE KETALIATED. ;

Have the peoi)le of the United States retaliated '? Why did we bring
down this policy T Because the United States had a protective policy
averaging about 40 per cent. They had a ten rail fence all around their
country in the way of a 40 per cent, tariff; we had a four rail fence in
the way of a 17i^ per cent, tariff. Their manufacturers could jumi»over
our fence with their shoddy goods and jump back again with our money.
But when our manufacturers tried to get over, they found the fence so high
that they could not jump. We said, pull down your ten rail fence tO'
our four, or else we will make ours a ten rail fence too. Is not that
the way every farmer would act, and yet hon. gentlemen said they
would retaliate. Yes, they are retjiliating by saying : If you take the
duty off our coal we will take the duty off yours. So far as the loyalty
of this policy is concerned, pi'otection has been tried over five years,
and I will guarantee that the mother country consider us as loyal as
hon. gentlemen opposite, and we can stand on the great Liberal Conser-
vative platform and sing " God Save the Queen" with as much grace
as they can, yes, even a little more, because wo are talking in favour of
Canada, and these hon. gentlemen are wound up half the time to sing
*•' Yankee Doodle." (Laughter and cheers.) Now, Sir, you remember that
on the 29th of January of this year, there was an election in Kent. It
happened at the same time that an election trial was going on in Both-
well, In the town of Wallaceburg, there was a Young Men's Liberal
Association, and about four weeks before the election in Kent,
the hon. leader of the Opposition went there in order that the people
H)ight be educated as to the bad effects of the National Policy. I have
his speech here, and 1 say it cannot be borne out bj the facts, for I
have the goods to prove that they are cheaper in Canada to-day,
than before the National Policy. I wish to read an extract or two from
the hon. gentleman's speech. I shall not take it out of the Hmisard,
but out of the Hansard of Kent, that is, the Chatham Bamier ;
he said :

" I am told that it is a very different matter to ro to a Conservatire farmer,
if ho Is an intelligent man, and discuss the beauties of the National Policy.
There was a time when he was eager to boast of its achievements and to dilate on
the benefits accruing therefrom. Bat now bis ardor is somewhat cooled and he

is glad to whip up his horses and get away from the vicinity of his interrogator
as speedily as possible. This is a good sign, and shows that men are beginning
to see for themselves what they do not like to say — the falsity of the National
Policy, the jugglery ot the men who promised a period of undisturbed prosperity,
and who, having attained to power, fail to redeem that pledge, and set about
paving the way to retaining it contrary to the expressed will of a majority of tiie
people."

This speech ,/as reported on the 2n(l of January, 188 t. I happensd to
be in Kent on the 20r,h of January, election day, and I saw the
farmers of Kent \vhi})ping up tlieir horses to bring the voters to
the polls for Henry Smith, the Conservative candidate, and they put
him in by a larger majority than before. That, however, is not the
point I wish to refer to.

DOES THE POOR MAN BEAR THE BURTHEN 1

The hon. gentleman was di">cussing the duties on different goods, and
endeavouring to prove to the Young Men's Liberal Association of Wal-
laceburg that the poor mai is paying the burthen of duty, and the rich
man is getting oflf scot free, or nearly so. What does he say 1

" We have the item of blankets. A good article costing 63 J cents per pound
is taxed 35 per cent., so that in order to get three you have to pay the
price of four, or, if you bought in four, it cost you more than the price of the
fourth blanket for the duty. Those at 17 pence, 40 per cent., and the cheaper
article in more common use, 70 per cent. The goods in demand by the wealthy
pay 35 per cent. ; those used by the working classes pay 70 per cent. — a most un-
righteous discrimination. Who is it that pays the 70 per cent. ? The man Avho
is the least able and who is obliged to buy the poorer classes of goods. Who
pays the least ? The man whose circumstances enable him to pay the most. In
ladies' jackets and mantles, too, they have a kind of sliding scale, illustrated by

54 per cent. ; 48. 8d., 48 per cent.

the following; Goods at 3s. Ud.

lid., 42 per cent.; 7e. 3d., 40 per cent.; Os. lid., 37 per cent.; 98.

5s.
, ... 9d.,
30 per cent. ; 29s. 9d., 28 per cent. This is the Tariff as it affects woollens.
I could go on and give you the cotton instances too, if time permitted. Now, if
your Government had put on the Statute Book in words to this effect : Whereas
it is desirable that an Act should oe passed putting the burden ot the taxes upon
the poor to the exemption of the rich, therefore be it enacted that the cheaper
classes of blankets be taxed 70 per cent, and the best blankets only pay 35 per
cent. ; and the cheaper classes of cloths pay 50 per cent., and the fine cloths only
pay 23 per cent. ; that the poorest carpets pay 36 per cent., and the rich goods
only 20 per cent. ; also that the poorer mantle cloths pay 54 per cent., and the
high class cloths only 28 per cent. Suppose that if either Mr. Hawkins or Mr.
Smith had voted for such a Bill you would have condemned him when he
returned for re-election, lor having sanctioned such an unjust and iniquitous
measure. And because they knew you would, that is not the way they did it.
They say the rich man shall buy a pound of cloth and pay so much ; a poor
man shall buy a pound and pay the same. But, gentlemen, it is kept in the
back-ground that th« rich man's pound is light and costly goodJs, while the poor
man's is heavier and cheap."

9d.,

"We had tho hon. member for Bothwell (Mr. Mills) there too. I had
the pleasure of listening to liini, and I think he spoke a great deal
better in tho country than he does here. It seemed to me the other
night that he was not really sure whether he was here representing the
views of the majority of the people of Bothwell or not. I have heard
the hon. gentleman illustrating this Protective Policy with his
hat. He would say, " Gentlemen, there is a hat (holding it up).
Suppose we had not tho National Policy and I went Lito the United
States, I would pay $1 for that ha'^; I would come over from
Detroit to Windsor, and pay 17J^ per cent., so that it would cost
me $1.17|. Under this policy, however, I pay $1 for the
hat in the States, I come over to Windsor and pay 25 per cent,
duty, so that the hat would cost $1.25." Then his friends would choer
the hon. gentleman and say " that is splendid." But tho 25 per cent,
was not put there to burthen tho poor man, but to give our manufac-
turers the home market for all kinds of goods they manufacture. Now,
supposing that hat is made in Canada, and the Canadian maker can
sell it for $1.20 ; another man comes, offers to make the same kind
for $1.15 ; then. No. 3 brings tho price down to a dollar ; and another
manufac*iurer still comes along and says, I will not allow the Americans
to get this trade, ?. id I will sell the hat for 90 cts. So home aompetition
brings down the price. (Applause.) But that is not tho best of it.
Without this National Policy, v/e would be compelled to j-et these ..ats
in the United States ; and the manufacturers of hats . o^uld
have all that country to sell their hats in, and would bring their
surplus here. Now, without this policy, we would have to pay that
dollar. Where v ould it go to ^ Every man knows that it would go
to the United States. The hatter would pay the dollar to the whole-
sale man, the wholesaler would pay it to the retailer, the retailer
to the labourer, the labourer to the butcher, the butcher to the
farmer, the farmer to the blacksmith, and the blacksmith to someone
else, and every man whose hands that dollar went through would make
from 10 to 26 percent., and it would benefit thousands of people in the
United States. Where would the hat be 1 In Canada, and in six
months it would be worn out, then we would have neither hat
nor money. I have a hat that was bought in London at the rate
of $4.50 a dozen, or three York shillings a piece. That hat can be
sold for 50 cts., giving a profit of 33J per cent. ; and the result is that
when that hat is worn out, the money is in the country, and the poor
man can buy another with it. But the argument of the hon. gentle-
man is that the poor man has to pay this duty. Now, how is it ] The
poor man comes into a store where there is a hat for 50 cts., another
for 75 cts., another for a dollar, and another for ^1.25, all manufactured
in Canada. But if he wants a finer hat, he takes a fine wool hat on which
duty has been paid ; and I say that if he buys a $4.G0 hat, that is his
business, and not the business of the Keform party of this country.
The poor man is not compelled to buy that kind of a hat, but if he wants

a hat like the one the leader of the Opposition wears, and he pays his
three or four dollars for it, that is his business, and not the business of
the Reforra party. (Applause.) Now, Sir, we will come to the ques-
tion of a particular kind of cloth. The hon. gentleman, when talking
to the people of West Kent, told them that the poor class of people
paid 50 per cent, on their cloths, while the rich man paid only 23 per
cent. Well, 1 had occasion to go to a factory in West Kent, and I
said : " I want a yard of your heaviest cloth." There is the
piece of cloth I got (holding it up). It has a pound of wool in it, and
I paid 50 cts. a yard for it. It cost 30 cts. to manufacture it. Now,
I would like to know where is the 50 per cent, paid on that piece of
cloth. 1 will promise the hon. gentleman that if he or any of his
supporters behind him — and there are a lot of merchants there — can
stand up and show the house that there is 50 per cent, of duty paid
on this kind of cloth, I will leave this side of the House, and
go and support the hon. gentleman. Well, I explained this at a
meeting in West Kent. After I got through, an old French gentleman
came up to me and said : " Do you see that cloth in these pants 1 "
slapping his hand on his leg. My sheep grows that wool, my wife
bpins and my girl weaves it, ar. i. would like to know how I pay 50
per cent, on that." WI.at xs the difference whether it is done om my
farm, or at Mr. Taylor's factory in Chathaoj, it is all done in West Kent,,
and I would like these hon. gentlemen to show mo how a cent of duty is
paid on it. (Cheers.) But it is just like the case of the hat. A poor
man goes into a store, and he sees different kinds of cloth tkere at
from 60 cts. a yard to a dollar or $1.25, all manufactured in
Canada, but if he must have Scotch goods or goods imported from other
countries, then he pays the 23 per cent, the hon. gentleman spoke of.
So that it is the ri?^h man that pays 23 per cent, and the poor man does
not pay anything at all. Now, we will carry this argument a little
further. If the hon. gentlemen's argument were correct, thon if the duty
was 75 per cent., the poor man would have to pay 75 per cent, more
for his cloth ; if the duty was a dollar, the poor man would have to
pay a dollar more ; and if the cloth were prohibited altogether, then the
hon. gentleman would have to go back to Wallaceburg and tell the boys
there, " Unless you put us back in power before your last pair of
breeches are worn out, you cannot get another pair, because cloth
is prohibited from coming into the country." Then, of course, he
would have to say : ** Gentlemen, if I was wrong when I said in Nova
Scotia that it took 9 yards to make a shirt, am I wrong now in telling
you that you will have to take 9 yards for a shirt, after your pants are
all worn out 1 " (Cheers.) Well, Sir, when we went to West Kent, '"e
found that the Reform candidate and all the speakers for the Reform
party w«re attacking the National Policy, just as it was attacked here
by the 'eader of the Opposition. They all say the same thing. It puts
me in nyind of the two little boys who were quarrelling. One says it is
so, and the other says it is not so, " Well, 1 tell you it is so," says the

; pays his
isiness of
the ques-
i talking
)f people
y 23 per
nt, and I
e is the
a it, and
Now,

piece of
7 of his
jre — can
uty paid
ise, and
bis at a
ntleman
pants 1 "
my wife
' pay 50
e om my
3t Kent,
' duty is
A poor
■here at
irod in
tn other
poke of.
an does

a little
he duty
i. more
lave to
hen the
he boys
pair of
) cloth
rse, he
1 Nova
telling
ats are
mt, "'e
leform
i here
[t puts
^s it is
ys the

first boy, " because mother says it is so, and when she says it is so, it is-
80, if it is not so." (Laughter.) That is just the way with hon. gentle-
men opposite. They say it is so if Mr. Blake says it is so, because
when he says it is so, it is so, if it is not so. . . . ;, ,

! T WHAT WEST KENT SAID. > I

It happens that "West Kent sent to tlie Ontario Legislature a supporter
of the Mowat Government, from 1879 to 1883, with a majority of
140. But the party were not satisfied with that majority, and at the
general election they sent the Attorney-General to Chatham to have a
grand mass meeting the night before the election. Well, they had a
grand mass meeting ; the Attorney-General was there, and Mr. Meredith
was there to meet him ; and the result was that the people of West
Kent decided to send to the Ontario House a supporter of Mr. Meredith,
with 400 majority. At the last general election of this House, Mr,-
Smith was elected by only 166 majority. His opponent, Mr. Sampson,
was sick in bed, and it was said that if he had been up, he would have
been elected. Well, there has since been another election, when the
leader of the Opposition went to Wallaceburg, and the hon. member
for Bothwell also went into the Kiding to educate the people, ao that
they would be sure to send Mr. Sampson here with a large majority.
Instead of Smith coming back with 166 of a majority, after the people
heard from all these gentlemen, they sent him back with 283 of a
majority. (Applause.) I do not pretend to say that I can argue con-
stitutional law with the leader of the Opposition ; I do not pretend to
say that I can argue Chancery law with the hon. gentleman ; I do not
pretend that I have had the experience in public speaking, or the
education he has had ; but I say that when I am talking about cloth
and cottons, I know as much of what I am talking about as he knows
when he is arguing a question of constitutional law. In the matter of
law, I only have the theory, where he has the practice, but iu the matter
of these goods, he has the theory, and I have the practice. Now, ho
puts me in mind of Henry Ward Beecher. Henry Ward Beecher was
a great preacher and a great theorist. He found out b\' i*eading and
observation — he had read a great many books on farmint; and he made
lip his mind he would try the farming business — he found out by read-
ing and observation that dried apples were worth more than green ones,
so the first year he planted $1,500 worth of dried apples. It was a dry
summer and the apples did not come up. The next thing h© tried was
pork. He bought a pig for $S ; fed it with $25 worth of corn and sold
it for $9 ; and then he said : I did not mind that so much, for though I
lost a little on the corn, I made on the pig. The hon. gentle-
man argues theory and not from practice. I say he can-
not show, nor can one of his supporters show, where the poor man
pays a single cent of duty on the mass of goods worn by him.
The hon. member for North Norfolk said the Finance Minister haa-

«tated in tLis House that grey cottons were as cheap in Canada to-day
as in Massachusetts, but he would like some one to show him that they
are as cheap. I will give the hon. gentleman practieal proof. Here is a
piece of cotton manufactured in Canada, a yard wide. It does not take
9 yards of that to make a shirt either. (Cheers,) That cotton costs 5| cents
a yard, and I defy anyone to show where he can get goods cheaper in
the United States. Why cannot cotton be manufactui-ed here as cheap
as in the United States 1 The raw cotton is brought from the United
States into Canada free, it is taken into the manufactories and there
worked up ; it is sold to the wholesale dealer who sells it to the retailer,
And why should it not be sold here as cheap as in the United States 1

, '■'■'''':'-;:^:'-^. ^'f: COMPKriTION REGULATES OGST.

Competition is bringing it to a figure as cheap to-day as in the United
States. These gentlemen said that the competition would not bring
the prices down, did they not also say that the manufacturer would make
40 per cent ? That the rich would get richer and the poor man poorer 1
Their policy was to make the rich man poorer and then starve the poor
man to death. They told us that goods would be dearer. Did
they not tell us that when we put 35 per cent, on cotton that cotton
would cost the poor man 2 or 3 cents a yard more 1 Did not they tell
us that nails, that sugar, that everything on which a duty was put,
would cost the people more ? Did they not tell us that people would
have to pay more for agricultural implements t Now, the ei-Minister
of Finance himself says : You are right when you say they are cheaper
than ever I)efore.

Sir RICHARD CARTWRIGHT. I do not.

Mr. WIGLE. The hon. gentlemen said " hear, hear," when 1 said
they were cheaper to-day than ever before. He said "hear, hear,"
when I said competition among the manufacturers b^-ought the prices
down. (Applause.) He cannot deny that. If he did not say it, he
ought to say it. (Applause.) When the Conservative party were in
Opposition, did they stand up here and whine at the Government and
say your policy is wrong but we have nothing to propose 1 No ; they
stood u and said, your Revenue Tariff of 17^ per cent., under the cir-
cumstfi 'es, is not what we want. We want a Protective Policy, and if
you dc lot give it to us, we will go to the people, and we went to the
people with a platform. But when we ask these gentloraen what their
platform is, what their principles are, what do they say ! Principles —
we have no principles ; we are not iv. power. That is their whole
action. While the hon. member for North Norfolk stated that the
manufacturers were making 37 per cent., another hon. gentleman on
that side said the competition among manufacturers was breaking them,
all down. I would be glad to know the manufacturers are making

acla to-day
that they
Here is a
s not take
'S 5| cents
iheaper in
J as cheap
le United
md there
3 retailer,
d States ?

9 United
tot bring
aid make
I poorer ?
the poor
3r. Did
\t cotton
;hey tell
was put,
le would
U^inister
cheaper

a 1 said
, hear,"
prices
it, he
were in
jnt and

j they
the cir-

and if

to the
>t their
iples —

whole
at the
jan on

them
laking

a fair profit, I would much rather they made a good profit than see
ourselves keeping up manufacturers in other countries. Foreign manufac-
turers do not manufacture goods for nothing for Canada, and why should
we ask ours to do so 1 These gentlemen would rather read from the Blue
Books of the United States that manufacturers there were making
from 10 to 15 per cent., than read in our Blue Books that our
own manufacturers were making the same profit. That is their
policy. Our policy is to build up our manufactures, and we hope
they will make good profits. Hon. gentlemen opposite, all through
their speeches, have said this National Policy has caused so many man-
ufacturers to ejftond their capital that it is ruining them. But that is
their owa business, if they choose to put their money into enterprises
of this kind. We all take our risk. They go into the business with
their eyes open, and if they come out unsuccessful, they cannot blame the
Government. We all have the liberty to put our money into manu-
factures or to keep it out.

AFTER RECESS.

MUNICIPlL AND FEDERAL TAXATION. — THE DIFFERENCE.

In one portion of the hon. gentleman's speech (Mr. Blake)
before the Young Men's Liberal Association j^in Wallaceburg,
pointed to the Finance Minister of the present Conservative Govern-
ment, and said : " Gentlemen, what would you think if a Reeve of your
township would come before you for re-election, and would claim your
support on the ground that he had a surplus of |5,000 from the last
year ? " He was arguing that the surplus of this Government was a
wrong thing, and not a good thing for the country. He asked them
what they would do if this Reeve, claiming he had a surplus of $5,000,
asked them to elect him on that account. "You would ask him where
he got his $5,000, and he would reply that he took it from the pockets
of the people. Would you send a man like that back again as your
representative in the County Council] " That was not a fair argument.
The hon. gentleman ought to have told the young men of that associa-
tion the truth of the case. He did not tell them that there was a great
difference in the way municipal affairs were carried on, and the
way Government affairs were carried on. He did not tell them
that municipal affairs were carried on by direct taxation. Every
man in this country knows that municipal affairs are not carried
on in the way the affairs of Government are carried on. They know
that applications are put in for money for diffCTent parts of the munici-
pality, and on a certain day the assessor has the assessment roll com-
pleted, and all the municipal Reeve has to do is to figure up how much
is appropriated and see how much the assessment is, and figure out so
much on the dollar on the amount the township is assessed, and he need
not have a surplus at all. On the other side, the Government have to

look to the future, and calculate as to impoi'ts and exports, and so on ; so-
it is very different. (Applause.) But, when he was putting this as he
did, why did he not put it as it was, and say : " Gentlemen, this
Finance Minister, the Finance Minister of the Conservative Govern-
ment, left us this last year with a surplus of .$6,000,000 ; the ex -Finance
Minister, Mr. Cartwright left you with a deficit of $11,000,000 in five
years ; which would you rather have to represent you, the on«! who left you
with a surplus of $6,000,000, or the other who left you with a deficit of
$11,000,000] " That would be the way to put it, if his argument was
correct. (Cheers.') That is one part of the hon. gentleman's speech. I was
just thinking it would be a fine thing for him to go over and make a speech
to the American young Liberals against the National Policy there.
Would it not be a nice thing for the hon. gentleman to stand up there
and say to the young Liberals in the United States : " Boys, see here,
the Government •( the United States have put 35 cents a pound duty
on leaf tobacco coming from Canada, and so you will have to pay 35
cents a pound more for your tobacco." Why, they would say, every
little boy would say : *' That is not so ; I can buy tobacco here for 5 cents
a jiound." Suppose he said the poor man's clothing cost 60 per cent,
more because of the tarifi" on coarse goods from Canada or England,
they would say : " No ; we have no Canadian or English goods here
for the poor man; we manufacture our own goods, we grow our own
wool and make our own clothes, and we do not pay a single cent duty."
This speech of the hon. gentleman, where he tells the people that the
poor man has to pay 50 per cent, on cloth, and 70 per cent, on other
goods, 54 per cent, on mantle cloth, and so on, would not that be a fine
speech for a pamphlet for an American emigration agent
countries 1

in foreign

WHY THE UNITED STATES OBJECTS.

I imagine I see an American emigration agent in a foreign country saying :
" The United States is the place to go to. It is true that we have
protection and that they have protection in Canada, but the protection
that we have is not the same as they have in Canada. In the United
States we protect the poor man. He pays nothing for his coarse cloths
in the way of duty, but here is the Hon. Edward Blake's speech, the
leader of the Reform party in Canada, and he says it is the poor man
who pays for the protection in Canada. Go to the United States, where
the poor man is protected and the rich man has to pay the duty, and
not to Canada, where the poor man has to pay all the burdens."
Would not that be a nice pamphlet for a Yankee emigration agent ?
What do we find in the Boston Herald ? The Boston Herald says
Canada is over-protected, that the high protection has made agricultural
implements dearer than before the National Policy ; and what do they
give? They give the Globe for their authority. There would be
Another nice little sheet to put in the American emigration pamphlet^

al
r|
tl

-jiiitiiii

memm

to read in foreign countries. (Applause.) Why is it the Americans
always copy from the Reform papers 1 It is because they are always
running Canada down, and the arerage American editor would rather
that his people should read that Canada was lagging behind the United
States than that she was coming even with the United States, under
her policy. It would not do for us all to see alike ; I admit that. It
is necessary to have an Opposition. There were some ministers of the
Grospel once discussing this question, and one said : " It would not do
for uE all to see alike ; if we had all seen alike, if everyone had seen
with my eyes, every person would have been after my wife." (Laughter.)
Another said : *' Yes, that is so ; but, if everyone had seen as I see, no
one would lave been after her." (Renewed laughter.) That is just
the same with the Reform party. If everyone saw as hon. gentlemen
opposite see, everyone would have gone for a 17^ per cent, revenue
Tariff, and we would have had a deficit every year ; but, if everyone
had seen as the vast majority of the people have seen during the last
two general elections, there would not be an hon. gentleman on that
side of the House opposing this Government. That would not be right.
We want them there. It makes tlip ^^^^,le in the country feel better
to know there is an Opp'^'.laon to any Government. (Cheers.) I
will tell you what I believt p\it those gentlemen out of power. It was
their Finance Minister, nov. the ex-Finance Minister ; and that puts
me in mind of another compai'^'on. A lady ai^plied to a child for some-
thing for charitable purposes. " No," she said, " we cannot afford it,
our father is poor, he was a mercL .nt,but he took a bad two dollar bill and
failed." So with these gentlemen ; they took a bad two dollar bill, in the
person of the member for Huron, and failed, and I am afraid they
will never get back as long as he is their financier. Under this policy,
there have been over 600 organs, made by Bell <fe Co., sold in Europe
during last year, and in West Kent we find there was a capital stock of
$100,000 taken, and that was on condition that there was to be a
waggon works started there if the National Policy was adopted and the
Conservative party returned to power in 1882. They were returned on
the 20th June, 1882, and on the next day they commenced hauling the
bricks, and in less than four months from that time they were building
70 waggons per week ; and while the farmers in that part of the countiy
were paying $60 to $65 before this shop commenced, they are now pay-
ing from $49.50 in cash up to $55, on a year's time. That shows the
benefit of the National Policy. (Applause.)

Mr. MILLS. But it is closed up.

Mr. WIGLE. Yes ; and I will tell you the reason why. Tliey
•were making seventy waggons per week. The hon. gentleman said the
other day that times were not as good in the western part of this
Province as they were before the National Policy, and that is true ; but
he did not tell ibm reason. In the first place, our wheat was not half a

' ..

crop in that country ; the frost last year killed the wheat. In the ixexfr
place, that country depends mostly on the corn crop, more especially in
Kent and Essex, and the early frost killed the corn, the first time in 60
years, and the result was that we did not have corn to fatten hogs,
and that is the reason why times were hard there. When corn is killed,
that touches the farmer, and as the farmer is the man who buys these
waggons, you now have the reason why that factory closed down. We
all know that we are in a depressed state at the present time, but we
all know this: that we will get out of it with the National Policy a great
deal sooner than we would without it.

" THE RING OF MANUFACTURERS."

ITow, Sir, hon. gentlemen opposite have said that the manufacturera of
this country had formed a ring, that the manufacturers of cotton had
formed a ring, and that after the surplus that they had on hand was
worked off, they would run up the price, and we would have to pay
whatever they charged. Well, would not that apply to any other
country f Would it not apply to this country, if we had Free Trade ?
Do they not form rings in the United States, and could they not form
rings in Free Trade England, where there are more factories in any
industry than are needed 1 That is no argument at all. We find that
the cheap goods are those that the poor man uses. Why has the poor
man been able to inci'ease his earnings in the savings bank 1 It is
because, instead of having to pay 17 J per cent, on his cloth, he gets it
without paying any duty ; instead of paying 17| per cent, on his boots
and his shoes, he gets them here at home without paying any duty, and
so with everything else. He gets his tea free of duty, his coffee free of
duty, and the result is that he saves more money and puts more into
the savings bank than he did before. (Applause.) Now, if these hon.
gentlemen say that the National Policy has not cheapened goods, that
the poor man has to pay as high as 50 and 75 per cent, for many of the
goods he buys, why do not they propose their remedy 1 Why do they
not stand up and say : " Here is a piece of cloth, and we intend to
reduce the duty on it. Here is a piece of grey cotton, here is a blanket,
and we want the duty taken off." They are not ready to do so. Why
do they not bring these things up and then we can discuss them t The
hon gentleman, in talking about blankets, said the poor man paid 70
per cent, on his blankets. I have a letter here from a manufacturer
where he says that he will make blankets, 60 by 80, with a pound
of good, pure wool in them, and sell them for 50 cents a pound and
a grey blanket for 45 cents a pound. Now here is a pound of good,
pure wool in that blanket, 20 cent« for the wool and 30 for the manu-
facturer. Now let the hon. gentleman say where the poor man pays
70 per cent, on that blanket. It applies to everything else in the same
way. Of course, I admit, if we sent to the United States and bought
blankets, we would have to pay 70 per oent. on them, but we don't do
that. We first find out the price of the article in the foreign.

country, and then the price in our own country, and if vre
find it cheaper in our own country, we will not go into the foreign
country to buy it. The hon. gentleman from West Elgin (Mr. Casey)
said in his speech, that goods were dearer now than before the National
Policy. Well, Sir, the hon. gentleman certainly does not know what
he is talking about when he says that. Every man in this House
knows that he can buy boots and shoes cheaper now than at any time
since Confederation. (Cheers.) Every man knows that he can buy
sugars, teas, ready-made clothing, and everything cheaper than he
could before the National Policy. (Cheers.) Now, Sir, one of the
Reeves in the county I have the honour to represent, who is one
of the sti'ongest Reformers in that county, said to me a
while ago : '* How is it that times are so hard now ] We
haven't so much money as before. You told us the National Policy
would be a good thing for us." I said, well, let me ask jon this : have
you any wheat to selU It is worth $1 per bushel. He said, no. This
gentleman is a farmer, he has 100 acres, and is worth $6,000 or $7,000.
He said he had no wheat to sell. I said, have you any dressed pork to
sell 1 It is worth $7.50 per hundred. He said, no. I asked him,
have you any dressed beef to sell 1 It is worth $9 a hundred. He
said, no. I said, have you any beans to sell? They are worth $1.75
per bushel. He said, no. Have you any potatoes to sell 1 They are
worth 60 cents per bushel. He said, no. Have you any peas 1 " No."
Well, I said, what are vou blaming the National Policy for, if you have
nothing to sell 1 (Applause.) Now, I said to him, I will take you in
another way. Do you want to buy any cotton ? It is cheaper than it
ever was before. He said, no. I said, do you want to buy a suit of
clothes cheaper than you could ever buy them before 'i He said, no.
I said, what is the reason 1 Why, he said, I have no money to buy
with. He had nothmg to sell, and consequently he had nothing to buy
with. When they have poor crops and have no money, some people
blame the National Policy for it. (Cheers.) But if wo have a good
crop another year, I guarantee that you will see the National Policy
come out all right.

SIGNIFICANT FACTS.

Now, Sir, I cannot understand how it is that hon. gentlemen who
pretend to have good common sense should stand up here and denounce
the National Policy, and say that it makes pricesi of manufactured
goods higher, that the poor man has to buy. I say the high duty was
put on, not for the purpose of making the poor man pay higher for the
goods he buys, but to keep the American shoddy out of this country,
and to give our own manufacturers a chance to make their living.
Any man ought to see that who has got good common sense. I am
surprised to hear these gentlemen talk such nonsense. A gentleman
who is well known up west was asking why so many people left this

country, and he instanced a man named John Hardy. He said that
John Hardy went to the North- West and bought land and stayed
there a short time, but he found that he had to pay such a high
duty on agricultural implements that he would not stay there any
longer, and so he went over into the United States, where he could buy
these things cheaper than in Canada. Well, this story was told at an
election meeting in favour of the candidate, who was a friend of the
hon. gentleman fx'om Bothwell, and a gentleman came up and told me
that he knew all about this same John Hardy. He said John Hardy
did go into the United States and lie told him he made the greatest
mistake he ever made in his life. He said the reason why he went into
the United States was because the Reform papers and the Reform
party in this country said that we would never get the Canadian
Pacific Railway, and that his land in the North- West would not be
worth 5 cents an acre without a Rail^vay. (Applause.) But now, he
said, after they had built the railway, he was satisfied that he had made
the greatest mistake he ever made in his life, and while he was telling
that another gentleman stepped up and said : " Yes, and this same
John Hardy is one of the 11,000 Canadians who have returned to live
un^ier the old flag." (Cheers.) It is not necessary for me to say more on
this subject. I could bring forward many more facts to strengthen my
case ; but before I sit down, I desire to read what the American Consul
at Port Sarnia said about the protective policy. Consul Pace, in Novem-
ber, 1883, oaid: , . .

« To say that Canada has not been benefitted by the policy of Protection
would be to ignore facts in the outlet. At this point is shipped, by a tri-weekly
line of steamers, the implements of agriculture and tools of trade which are
destined to play an important part in the development of Canada's great north-
western possessions. These products ot the loom, the anvil, the furnace, the
field, the workshop, and the factory are all the products of Canadian industry.
Take away the Tariff, and a more convenient market would doubtless be found
for the pioneers of the British territory ; but the factories and workshops of
Ontario, which are now crowded to their fullest capacity, would have to close
their doors and discharge their artisans." .

That is the report he made to the American Government. No wonder
the Americana keep up their National Policy. J have shown diflfereut
articles manufactured in Canada whicn I defy hon. gentlemen opposite
to say were manufactured cheaper before the National Policy was
adopted. I would like them to take cloth, and demonstrate to the
people that the poor man really pays 50 per cent, duty on it, or any
^uty at all. (Prolonged cheering and applause.)