V "pj- IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 111.25 ^m m |5t 11^^ III" 9 9 Uuu |||| J£ |U 11.6 Photographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 ^ ;: • y Joku Hopkin's TToiv, Lib aift. JUN 21, , ^^J» ■fff" I Editorial Notice from the New Fork Tribune of Monday, May 14, 1888, OUU NORTHEUN NEIGTIHOK. Mr. Niiuiuo's letter, published un iiuothcr piigi', coutaius iuformiitiou tliut is greatly needed by CongresH and the country. It treats of the relations of the Doiniuicjn of Canada to Great Hriti'iu and the United States, and of vari- ous violations of treaty law and covenanted reciprocity. Senator Frye late in January sent to the Coniniitteo on Foreign Kelations resolutions of inijuiry respecting these abuses, and this letter virtually supplies the information which was then called for. It also refers in detail to the grievances which Kepresentatives Dingley, Nutting, and IJaker have brought to light in the House. Mr. Niinnio is not only master of the suliject, but also of ■ his temper. The relations of the Dominion to the United States are discussed with as much dignity as intelligence, and his statements of fact are not vitiated by a single unfriendly expression or the faintest reference to the subject of annexation. Some of the specific counts in the indictment against Canada may be briefly mentioned. By an order in council a rebate of eighteen cents per ton has been allowed on the tolls on grain passing through the Welland and St. Law- rence canals, if shiiinient be made to Montreal. This is a premium ofl'ered for the diversion of American commerce from American seaports and trans- portation lines. This is an open infraction of Article XXVII of the Treaty of Washington, and should be met by the immediate imposition of a tonnage tax on all Canadian vessels passing through t^ie Sault Ste. Marie Caual. In like manner the iuternational^arrafigehietifs relating to the transit trade, which is of immense value to Canadian corporations, art; violated in Manitoba, where the Dominion government refuses tQ ajlow grain to be shipped in bond over American railroads to Montreal. For five years Canada has failed to place on the free list various articles from which duty was entirely taken off in the United States when the tariff was revised ; and this neglect is in direct viola- tion of an act passed by the Dominion Parliament in 187U providing for reciprocity in this respect whenever the same articles should be admitted from Canada without payment of duty. Other instances of bad faith are given in connection with a brief summary of the denial of commercial privileges to American fishermen in Canadian harbors. The conclusion of the whole matter is this ; Canada has been allowed to impose upon the forbearance and good nature of the United States. The restraints of international law and the engagements of reciprocal compacts do not interfere with sharp practice by which temporary advantages may be secured for the commerce of the Dominion. The ambitious designs of Can- ada have been pursued in a particularly aggressive spirit since the present administration has been in power in Washingtou. Its government and rail- way corporations have acted on the principle that any favor that might be wanted would readily be granted by the State and Treasury Departments, and that no indignities or outrages offered to fishermen would be resented, and « i««WK3iK > that no coinraerciiU privilogoH withhold in violation of positive engagen.eutH would be donmuded under nieuuoe of retaliation. The time is rapidly ap- proaching when retaliation muHt be the answer to every act of injustice and every infringement upon the i)rinc-iples of international comity. Canada, by persistuiK in taking advantage of American tolerance and ma^^i'animity, must in the end exhaust the patience of the i)owevful nation whi(di freely and gen- erously shares with it all the advantages of its geographical i)08ition. THE DOMINION OF CANADA. ITH UELATIONS TO OREAT BUITAIN AND TO THE UNITED STATES. Three important (luestions have iiriseii during the last eighteen months touching the relations existing between the Umtecl btates and the Dominion of Canada, viz., the Fishery question, the sub- iect of " Commercial Union," and the improper mterference of tUe Canadian Pacific Railway (Company with the course of the develop- ment of our internal and foreign connuerce on the 1 acihc coast. The international aspects of the latter cjuestion arise irom the fact that the railway mentioned was constructed for political rat ir than commercial purposes, mainly from funds supplied by the Dominion government or through its credit, nnd that it is now openly carry- ing out its political designs. The consideration of these three international (luestions, in connection with certain important col- lateral issues, has prompted the inquiry —What is the Dominion of Canada, and what are the relations which it sustains to l:freat Britain and to the United States? This inquiry is in terms ex- pressfid in a resolution of the Senate of the United btates of January 30, 1888. , , i • -x Besides, other circumstances and events have awakened curiosity and prompted inquiry, viz: (a) The progress of Canada towards absolute "home rule;" (b) the constant and earnest profession by the Canadian people and government of devotion to British insti- tutions, and of fealty to the British Crown, while persistently pur- suing the policv of throwing oil" every form of interference by the British government in Canadian affairs, oven to the matter ot treaty making ; (c) the movement in favor of British Imperial Con- federation, which evidently has the sympathy and active cooper- ation of the chief political rulers of the Dominion, and which expresses itself in militarv preparations, and in the establishment of steamer lines subsidized by the British government and oper- ated in connection with the "political railroads" of Canada; and (d) the recent rebellion of the province of Manitoba aganist the national (?) authority, the deiwHemeut of which appears to be a complete surrender, at discretion, by the Dominion government, ... ., j .^ J-.w i iaiim ii ^ mt SMnm i S! M0 ^!i'V^^^' ' i involving n virtual payinont of (lai.ia^'fs for hiivint,' aswuto.l its authority. ThoHo thin^'H, tot,'ether with otlitu' mivnifoHtations of tlw condition of political affiiirH in Canada, (inbraciufj; acts appar- ently hoatilo to, or in bad faith toward, the United .States, couHti- tute at once a combination of i)arad()XcH and a nicnaco to^thiH country. They also emphaHize the* portinoncy of the Conf,'reH- Hional incpiiry— What is the Dominion of (!anada, ami wlnit are the relations which it HUHtains to Great Britain and to the United States? History of the C.\se. During the progress of the events which culminated in the inde- pendence of the United States, loyalty to the British Crown came in conflict with a stronger British trait, the love of liberty, and out of the contest a great nation sprung into existence, with new affections, purposes, and aspirations. In that struggle the people of Canada, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, I'riiux' Edward's Island, and Newfoundland did not join; Thousands on this side of the boundary line also maintained their allegiance to the British Crown, and, forsaking earthly possessions and attachments here, at great sacrifice, went and dwelt with their brethren beyond the border, with whom they were politically in sympathy. These events have only a historical significance in the United States, but they consti- tute traditional forces in the political life of the people of British North America, who are yet unable to entertain any clear concep- tion of governmental sovereignty, which, at least in some remote or sentimental manner, is not symbolized by a crown. They also cling to the infatuation of titles of nobility with an ardor which is almost pathetic. And yet a peaceful but radical change has taken place in the condition of the i)olitical affairs of British North America. To some extent monarchical forms have been preserved, but, as Professor Gold win Smith observen, in a way which shows " that monarchy is an exotic incapable of transportation to the soil of the New World." ^ , . ,r i n The great Canadian Prime Minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, nev*»'' loses an opportunity to express his devotion to British con- nei' ' " and to the monarchical form of government, but he also decla)-. ;i that he is " for home rule to the hilt." The whole course of the economic and political devalopment of the provinces now comprising the Dominion of Canada has been toward independent nationality. The British government has in one or two instances aided the local authorities in suppressing political revolt, but it has never asserted its authority against any popular movement toward that independence which the American Colonies won by the sword. Although the people of the Dominion of Canada have never de- clared that politically they " hold the people of Great Britain as they hold the rest of mankind," practically they do so, and the -'! i « v»»"»*a»*f «^»i**l* ^v.*-- (' raotlier coniitrv HtniulH rcadv to Hovor tlio nominal connection when- ever the Cftiiailia!! people Hl.all indicate that they no longer deHire to (.ontiimo the n^lationship. At the present, time it appears as though this relationsiiip were destineil to K^ow stron{,'er under the " Imperial Confederation of liritish Nations," the plan ot "nion which seems to meet favorable consideration in all parts of the British Empire Amonj? themselves the British people are En^dishmen, Scotchmen, and (Canadians and Australians, but toward a 1 the rest of the world thcv are Britons, and the spirit of Greater Britainisra now api)ears to bo predominant. Whether the centnfuyal tenden- cies of local interests or the centripetal tendencies of devotion to the inte.'i-itv of tlie British Empire are the stronger is one of the most momentous political (piestions of the present day. Ihe mil- itary advantaf,'es afforded by imperial unity appear to have great weiiht with the Canadians. They think also that the confedeia- tion of British nations would preserve the opportunities winch for centuries have been open to the strategies of British commercial enterprise. The movement in favor of Imperial Confederation will be made the fiubject of a separate article. liiE Dominion Goveunment. For many years prior to 18('.7 the union of the British North American colonies had been discussed, but during the civil war in this country— 18(;i to ISOf.- it was earnestly advocated for the purpose of establishing "a British nationality on this continent on monarchical principles." This is apparently the guiding thought to-day of Sir John A. Macdonald, the " Premier" of Canada The Dominion government, whose existence dates from July 1, 18(!7, is alreadv a political autonomy, closely allied to Great Britain in the bonds of affection, but differing from her in organic char- acteristics and in the objects of national polity. Military occupa- tion by the mother country ceased long ago, the Governor-Genera of Canada, sent out bv the Queen, has been stripped of all real authority ; the power to make her own commercial treaties is as- serted and practically exercised by the Dominion government, and in the absolute control of her fiscal affairs (Canada has adopted a tariff under which the products of Great Britain are taxed to the same extent that imports from other countries are taxed. But in spite of the apparent separation, there is a devotion to Britisb connection which appears to illustrate the force of the sentiment, "Let me make a nation's songs, and I care not who makes her laws." The philosophy of the political situation in Canada, it there be any philosophy about it, is a riddle to the American mind. Geoohaphicai Characteristics. The Dominion of Canada consists of four blocks of inhabited territory with wide intervening irreclaimable spaces. These m- ifi*^:* luil)ito.l areas aro houmka oi. th.. north l.v a rogion of oto.na froHt, a viiHt American Sil).nia. and on t,ho Honth by t\w Umted Statt'H They have no natural coniinorcial relation.* to ea<^h other, but, treoL'raphically. oacli in doHoly rohitod to this i-ountry. be- fore the Doininiou government wan orKanize.l, tho Heveral prov- inces were socially, conunercially. and politically stranK^s to each otlier, and the material connection is now maintiunod clue ly throuL'h the agency of two railroads, the Intercoloinal and the CJanadian Pacific, which subserve political rather than coininercial ends. Lord Lansdowne, the present Governor-General of (.ana.la, said, in 1885, "Confederation without the railway was not worth the paper on which the British North American Act was prnited. The union of the provinces appears to have been dictated by po- litical ends iu defiance both of the laws of nature and of trade. Newfoundland never went into the confederation, and, as the years roll by, she apvvrently sees widghtier reasons for Keeping out nl it. In order to p'-omoto exchanges between the agricultural, tish- iu<'. mining, and manufacturing hidustries of the several sections of the Dominion, the most nationalistic of all governmental expe- dients has been adopted, viz., a tariff on imports protective of homo industries. This has to a certain extent protuoted internal ex- changes, even as against that competition resulting from geo- graphical conditions so much more favorable to commerce between the provinces and the United States. i , i wv It has been supposed that the adoption by Canada of a tautt policy so different from that which prevails in Great Britain would teud to the disruption of the British Empire, but such has not been the case, either in Canada or in Australia, where a snnilar tariff policy has been adopted. Ever since she was forced to acknowledge the independence of the United States, Great Britain ha.^ steadily pre- served the policy of allowing her pruicipal colonies to wcirk out their own development according to the leadings of spocihc na- tional wants and specific national experiences. The political party now in power in Canada has adopted, and is strenuously main- taining, the policy of protection, and is also loudest in its protes- sions of loyalty to Great Britain. It is also assiduously engaged in the promotion of the scheme of British Imperial Confederation —a scheme which challenges the attention of the Umted States. Infirmities of the Dominion Goveunment. an article contributed to 7'Ae Cimtempnrary In an article contributed to The iJontempnrary Remew of July 1887, Professor Goldwin Smith says : " In its internal struc- ture the Dominion is a federation, and the relation of each prov- ince to the Dominion is that of an American State to the Federal Government." But the Canadian union is in its structural fea- tures greatly inferior to that union which constitutes us a nation. The constitution of Canada is merely the statutory enactment of I Qrmi liiitiiiii, ii country of which h\w in iniictically iudopendont, ami tliis H()-call(Ml constitution hiiH never l» for the Iohh of itH mo- nopoly. ,. i • ii Another baneful feature of the Cana.han government ih the piac- tice of continually appropriating money to (hfteiont HectioiiH in the form of subsidies, know as " better terms." Such payments are in the nature of compensation to particular provinces for uic(m- veniences or disadvantages which they are asHumod to sutTor as in- cidents of confederation. Professor Goldwin Smith declares this to be essentially a Hystom of political bribery. POLITICAI. ChARA(!TERISTIC8. Patterned after the Uritisli government, but without its tradi- tional safeguards, the Dominion government is essentially a polit- ical party government. The party in power absolutely controls both the legislative and executive branches of the government. The leader of that party, who is elected Prime Minister by the Commons, is for the time being autocrat of the country. In many cases party interest prevents members from voting according to their convictions and the interests of their constituencies Virtually, legislative power is lodged exclusively in the House ol Commons, which alone is elective. This characterizes both the Dominion government and the provincial governments As the Prime Minister is the leader of the Commons, the executive dom- inates the legislative in important particulars. According to our ideas, this is the very antithesis of responsible government. Sir John A Macdouald is to-day the virtual autocrat of Canada. l>rof Goldwin Smith characterizes the Dominion government as a » federal republic with a false front of monarchy." 1 o an Amer- ican citizen it looks like a tierce democracy with a monarchical feather in its cap, and a somewhat idolatrous fondness for the feather. ■fcyjitT*"*!""^" i-ii l '' , v'r t !1t'nf-^t''^^'--^~'' pendent, 1(1 to the y of the iH of the e to the !>(,' i)opu- Huvoral •orainion. ^eniniuut exchiHive i« " ( Jom- re(iuiieil lat eiuvct- , at tii'Ht rtiH tiuully ay to the f itH ino- 1 the prac- 3I1H in the luontH are for imion- iffor aH in- ihiroH this t its tradi- ly a polit- y controls vernuient. ter by the In many according tituenciea. 3 House of B both the 8. As the utive dom- ling to our nent. Sir f Oanada. )rument as oan Amer- lonarchical jss for the 4 Tho (Canadians dcclan. that thoir govnrn.nonr is inon' phiiLln than that of th., Unitod States. Thin is uti.loul.t.Hlly tru.|. An . Uh- tration of thn pliability of th. Cana.lmn syst,...u ,""^v bn ,us t.m. ml bv in»acininL' Socrotarv Havard. as tho p..hlu-al ai.t... rat ot the I?^.i e^itates, goin, t» thoSpoak.-r of tho [lo.so ot ;;i>'-- - tivos some m.nning. and, handin- to lam a '"II '^""""'^'""•^ "^ . Constitution of tho Unitod Statos. to b« put hn.ngh as a pa. mm « n-«, with an appropriation bill in favor of Ho.-tions hkely t > "Set, and then stopping over to tho Semite and u.tornung the r Sdent thereof that when tho bill oamo to that body . mus bo put through w..hout debate. Tho ( "anad.an Sonate is no Uloc^ - and exercises no in.loi.en.lont legislative power. Iho KHont Buccessful nuUitication of an act of tho Dominion govoinment bj the Province of Manitoba furnishes an illustration ot g..vorn.nen- tal pliability which does not excite the envy of the people ot tho United States. The Worktno Featurks of thk Domimon Govkuvmkkt mvvmm COMMEIICIAI, InTEUCOUUSK WITH OTIIEU LoiINTUIEH. Under the Canadian form of government duties may be laid upon exports as well as upon imports. Under our ConHt't^tion the U ^^^^ Statos Govoripu. itcan lay duties only upon imports. In the stiug- gles for commercial advantago, in which Canada always appears to be inclined to engage, she may use tho right arm of import duties as we a the left arm^of export duties, while the United States is coi. fined to the use of tho one arm. iiosides, in matters whore tude tactics seem to be involved, the Governor ^ couuci is uives tod with ample power to put duties on or take them oft as ciicun- Sices .nay seem to .-oquire. Pursuing the analogy ot per ona encounter, "this auxiliary power may be regarde.l as a so. t o kicking arrangement. Such an e(iuipment ot hs<-,al powe.s, ui cnnection wFtli the concentration of governmental f^'l'^tions m the hands of a few men, of course ivllows the e.Korciso ot a degieo of commercial tact and acumen in diplomacy, in legislation, and in the administration of executive duties w uch does not m^e '^^ the Government of the United States. This fact l^owevor does not suggest the propriety of any amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Attitude toward the United States. The historic origin of the hostile attitude assumed by the Do- minion of Canada toward the United States has already been noticed. Moved by such traditional prejudices the Canadians arrayed themselves against the United States during our war ot 1812 with Great Britain, and during our late civil war they th ew the entii-e moralforce of their sympathies on the side of the dis- 10 solution of the Union, apparently with the idea that the disruption of this country would tend, relatively at least, to advance British influence and power on this continent. Such conduct has not, of course, tended to elicit a kindly feeling toward Canada in any sec- tion of our reunited country. The last-mentioned manifestation of Canadian hostility was the more wounding to the feelings of the people of this country from the fact that it occurred at a time when Canada was enjoying the full benefits of the " Transit Trade, a complete reciprocity of transportation by rail, and the advan- tages of free competition by the St. Lawrence river and canals in the commerce of our Northwestern States, and that a reciproc- ity treaty with respect to trade between the two countries was m force, although it had proved to be much more beneficial to Can- ada than to the United States. It appeared as though the Cana- dians had allowed traditional political animosities, which the people of this country had long since consigned to the mouldy past, to lead them so far as to overlenp even the dictates of sound judgment and of self-interest. The immediate result of such action was that the reciprocity treaty of 1855 was abrogated in 18()6. But recent violations of treaty stipulations and reciprocal arrangements have tended again to excite the resentment of our people, and to suggest the adoption of a general line of specific retaliation in order to protect the interests of American citizens, and to vindi- cate the honor and dignity of this country. The more important of these recent matters of complaint will here be mentioned : Violation of the Transit Trade. . After the Canadian Pacific Railway was completed in 1886 the Dominion government refused to allow grain produced m Mani- toba to be transported over American railroads " in bond " to Montreal. The movement of several million bushels of gram was thus restrained. This is a flagrant violation of the privilege of the " Transit Trade," under which reciprocal arrangement the rail- roads of Canada have profited ten times as much as railroads of the United States. The " Transit Trade " has also been of enor- mous advantage to the commercial and industrial interests of Can- ada. The refusal of the Dominion government to allow gram to be transported " in bond " over American railroads has not been openly announced, but it has been carried out surreptitiously. The Ottawa authorities declare that no instructions have been issued to the officials in Manitoba to prevent the traffic, and the customs officials in Manitoba declare that no instructions have been issued to them whereby they can issue tbe necessary certifi- cates. Such conduct is discreditable to the Dominion government, and it ought to be met by a proper retaliation on the part of the Government of the United States. J I 'ftt^^r-'^*^^"*"^ ^-. -J¥^S-ii-i'..*J^**. 11 Refurino to tut. United States Reciprocity in the Matter of THE Extension of Lines of Transpoutation. Citizens of Canada and railroad corporations of Canada hav^ been granted about all the privileges for ^^^ich they have asked m the matter of extending Canadian railroads into and thiough the sevemTstates of this country. Such privileges have been gran ed by Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont and recently, "n/^r the generalpovisions of State laws, the Duluth, South ^bove & Atkn- Uc Railway, extending from the city of Duluth to Sault bte. Mane, Ind thelVnnneapolis, Sault Ste. Mane & f ^'J^'' ^'"^-^J'; f ", ing from Minneapolis to Sault Ste. Mane, both located n tbe States of Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan have passed undei he control of parties representing the interests of the Canadian! pcifac Railway. It is also understood that a line of railway in the s..^e hiteSis to be constructed from Duluth to the Canadian Pacific a a connecting hnk, the latter railway having a Ime already com- nleted from Sault Ste. Marie to the Atlantic seaboard These 3 rtransportation embrace in themselves the conditions o^ reciprocal commerce. They will evidently prove of great vahieo thecommercialinterests of Minnesota, Wisconsm and Michigan, and in a higher degree subserve the commercial interests ot Can- ada But ft the same time the concessions thus made to Canadian lines involve an indignity to the United States, and a POBitwe in- justice to the transportation and commercial interests ot this Suntrv,in view of the fact that Canada refuses to reciprocate ?he pri;ileges of the right of way so freely granted to her lines by the severaf States abovt mentioned. The situation of aftau-s is as follows : The people of Canada, in common with the people of t e United States,\re allowed to construct railroads in this country upon almost any location which they may choose, ^vhereas ml load construction in the Dominion of Canada has from the beg niing been determined mainly by politica considerations t^e ''^h'ef ot which is the consolidation of the different parts of that conted Trac'v in connection with the larger object of British Impenal Confederation, which latter scheme is re-enforced by military prep- aiations and ocean steamei subsidies. The Dominion govevmnent, in the pursuit of such political designs, not only dictates the oca- tLn of her main lines of railway, but has aided m their constiuc- on bv enormous grants and subventions. Again, the ob ect of such location of linls has been to prevent commerce from aking he north and south course to and from the United fates but to turn it in an east and west direction, so as not only to hold Cana^ dian traffic on Canadian lines, but to turn traffic of the United ^n^e^rugg'L railroad traffic along our northern border were merely a contest between rival raUroad co^^P^^^^^^^uTited be no doubt of the abiUty of railroad corporations of the United jJBI£pMMpMnw n states to dictate the course of trade ; but our transportati' i- tereais are completely overpowered by the authority and p .tiou- &ge of the Canadian government. Until the Dominion of Canada shall consent to reciprocate the favors which she has so abundantly received in the location of connecting lines in the United States, by allowing citizens of this country perfect freedom in extending American lines to Winnipeg, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, and Que- bec, the United States ought to respond to such an arrogant refusal of reciprocity by the imposition of duties upon eggs, ^resh fish, and potatoes, or by other acts of retaliation within the scope of the powers inherent in the National Government. The Treaty of Washington, concluded May 8, 1871, bore the first mark of this political scheme of encroachment upon the rail- road system of the United States. The words " to other 2)lacea in the United States," near the end of the second paragraph of Article XXIX, grant to Canadian railroads the right to convey goods from one point in the United States to another point in the United States without payment of duty, whereas there are no corresponding words in the first paragraph of the article referred to which grant a reciprocal privilege to the railroads of this country. The United States cannot, consistently with the duty of main- taining her dignity, consent that an iafeiior power on this continent shall alone dictate the course of our commercial currents, for the purpose of promoting political ends inimical to this country, nor of promoting political ends in which we have no interest whatever. The Violent Diversion of our Internal and Foreign Commerce ON the Pacific Coast. While the " transit trade " over connecting lines in the United States and in Canada east of the Sault Ste. Marie embrace re- ciprocal commercial advantages to the two contiguous countries, the portion of the Canadian Pacific Railroad west of Winnipeg offers no such reciprocal advantages. The enormous subvention granted to the Canadian Pacific, and the enormous annual subsidy granted to the steamer line extending from Port Moody to ports in China and Japan, constitute the instrumentalities of a violent diversion of our internal and foreign commerce. At the same time our Interstate Commerce Law operates as a protection to the aims and purposes of the Dominion government through its agent, the Canadian Pacific Railway. This whole matter is set forth at some length in the document entitled, " Our Canadian Relation- ships, No. 2." Refusing to Reciprocate in Aiding Vessels in Distress. On the 4th of February, 1888, the Hon. Newton W. Nutting, of New York, brought to 'the attention of the House of Repre- sentatives the fact that the Dominion government still refuses to 1- ^. 18 accept the offer made by the United States by act of June 19, 1878, to allow Canadian wrecking vessels and maclnneij to assist Canadian vessels wrecked in American waters, provided a like priy- iletre is extended to American wrecking vessels and machineiy m Canadian waters. This refusal to reciprocate in a cause winch ap- peals to the humane impulses cf mankind .^ m kee-mg with the refusal of the Canadian government to allow American hshing ves- sels the common privilege of seeking refuge in her ports in time of storm, and for replenishment and necessary repairs. Violation of the Trkaty of "Washington. A flagrant and most absurd violation of a treaty stipulation be- tween the United States and Great Britain was brought to the attention of the House of Representatives on the 4th ot January, 1888, in the form of a resolution submitted by the Hon. Nelson Dinglev, Jr., of Maine, a gentleman always vigilant of the mari- time and commercial interests of the United States. During the last three years, through the device of an " Order in Council, a rebate of ]8 cents per ton has been allowed out ot the total to | of 20 cents per ton on grain of all sorts passing through the Wel- land and St. Lav.rence canals, if shipped to Montreal Ihe long and short of this is a premium of 18 cents a ton offered by the Canadian government in fp,vor of the diversion of American com- merce from American seaports and American transportation hues. An officer of the revenue department of Canada has innocently con- fessed that " the object of the Du minion government in promul- ffatiiiff this order is to encourage trade over the St. Lawrence route instead of allowing it to go to American ports." This, however, as explained by Mr. Uiugley on the floor of the House of Repre- sentatives, is an open violation of Art. XXVII of the Treaty of Washington. It was hoped that the Canadian government would have acknowledged the expediency, if not tlfe justice, of receding from this manifest breach of treaty obligation, but this has not been done On the 20th of April the Governor General in Council ordered that the arrangement be continued during the season of navigation of 1888. The Government of the United States ought at once, in response to this indefensible discrimination agamst American commerce, to impose a tonnage tax of at least 10 cents per ton on the gross tonnage of all Canadian vessels passing through the canal at Sault Ste. Marie, the rapids in the stmit which con- nects the navigation of Lake Superior with that of Lake Huron. This canal, with its lock 515 feet long and eighty feet wide, was constructed a^. a cost of about $4,000,000, and is now owned and operated by the Government of the United States. Both Ameri- can and Canadian vessels are allowed to pass through Sault bte. Marie canal free of tolls. . . That the United States has full power to order such discnm- .. M ri latfirrfl i Trfri i t' iri i n -T U grVki^ , - mm^- ^ t M i ' ' ^* ^* - ■■ '" ' " ""' " 14 inating tax upon Canadian vessels ^ill be readily seen by exatnining Art XXVII of the Treaty of Washington, concluded July 4, 1871. it th^rS tLe canal belonged to tie State of Mielngan and xt was not transfeiTBd to the United States until June 5, 1881. Canadian Discriminations in Entry Fees. On the 7tl. of June, 1888, the Hon. A. X. Parser, of New York, stated in the House of Representatives that the Canadian govern- ment pennitB " Canadian shipping to come into and eave the^ ports for a whole yeai- with only a single charge of 50 cents, pa U Zee, while the American bottoms that go into Canadian ports are taxed every time by charges of entry fees, exit fees, and other charges." Mr. Parker adds: "We have had some experience m Canadian reciprocity, and are not in haste to liave it repeated. Refusal to Observe Obligations of Plighted Faith. On the 2d of April, 1888, the Hon. Charles S. Baker, of Roch- ester, brought to the attention of the House ot luiaesentatives perhaps the most flagrant of all the recent breaches of good fuith toward the United States by the Donunion of Canada. Ihe Cana- dian act of Parliament of May 15, 1879, provided that a large num- ber of specified agricultural and other products might be admitted into Canada fro.n the United States free of duty whenever the United States should admit similar articles from ^"""^^a Jiee o duty. This offer was accepted by our act of March 3, lS8d, with respect to many of the articles mentioned. But for hve years Canada has failed to place such ai-ticles upon her free list. Com- plaint having been made through the Hon. Chas. S Baker by par- rs injuriously affected, Secretary Bayard brought the matter m an unofficial wav to the attention of the Canadian government early in March, but the Minister of Customs evaded the whole thing by asserting that the Canadian government was not obliged to observe the reciprocity contracted upon its own mo ion untU every one of the articles enumerated by the Canadian act of 187a was made free by the United States. But this was manifestly ab- surd, as the act referred to provides that ^^any and all of the fol- lowing articles, &c., &c., may be imported into Canada free of duty "^ On the 28th of March Sir Peter Mitchell, of New Bruns- wick! called the Prime Minister sharply to account on the floor of the House of Commons for his transpai-ent act of bad taitli, to which the imperious leader sullenly replied that the act was per- missive and not mandatory, its language being " may be imported, and that the Canadian government was more concerned m protect- ing the interest of Canada than those of the United states. The shallowness of this defence was readUy exposed. But the resolu- tion offered by Mr. Baker in the House of Representatives on the 2d of April brought the Canadian chieftain to terms. Two days '■•■V r \ 15 afterwards, viz., on the morning of the 4th of April, Sir Charles Tupper Minister of Finance, announced on the floor of the House of Commons that at the instance of Lord Salisbury, Prime Min- ister of Great Britain, the articles made free by the act of Con- iiiess of March 3, 1883, had been placed upon the free list, and at the same time Sir Charles read a telegram which he had sent the previous day (April 3) to Sir Lionel West at Washington inform- ing him that on receipt of a copy of his (Sir Lionel's) dispatch to Lord' Salisbury the articles had been placed on the free list. There appears"to have been some remarkably alert diplomacy be- tween Washington, London, and Ottawa between the introduction of Mr. Baker's resolution in the House of Representatives on the 2d and Sir Charles Tupper's announcement in the Canadian Par- Hanieii on the 4th. But within three weeks Sir Charles Tupper, on bel If of the Canadian government, submitted to the " Com- mons'" a bill which so construed the words "any or all" in their act of 1879, that the Canadian government would in the future be able to select from any additions which may be made to our free list such goods onlv as it may choose to make free. Ihis clearly indicates the shrewdness with which the Dominion government mana"es commercial intercourse with the United States. Tolhis scheming and vacillating course of procedure the United States ou.'ht to respond at once by adopting the resolution offered in the House of Representatives by the Hon. Charles S. Baker, es- pecially the proposed duty of live cents per dozen on eggs and one cent per pound upon all tish. During the last fiscal year there were imported from the Dominion nearly eleven million dozen eggs and over thirteen million pounds of fresh tish free of duty. Hostile Attitude in the Matter of the Fisheries. The aggressive, inhuman, and most unjust attitude assumed by Canada towards American fishermen has been made the subject of a special statement. The case is a simple one. We maintained the common right of our fishermen to participate in the deep sea fisheries by the treaty of peace with England concluded in 1783. Since that time certain usages have been estabhshed and compacts entered into by means of reciprocal legislation, which constituted the more important features of the international relationships now existing between the United States and Great Britain, and yet at this day Canada, the real, and Great Britain, the ostensible, treaty- making power, attempts to claim peculiar rights over a large por- tion of the Atlantic Ocean under the pretext of "geographical ad- vantage," and asserts this claim in the denial to our fishermen of ordinary commercial rights, and of shelter in her ports when seeking refuge from storms. , ,. , . , i u There is no sensible reason why fash and fashing vessels should be tabooed those commercial privileges which the prevalent con- -T7T:--r-7T;V-rf*Tr:iff-T; I ^liilKJw"- 16 (lition of maritime reciprocity secure to all other commodities and to vessels enjjaged in all other peaceful pursuits. The exclusive right of the Canadians to the use of their marginal waters is now fully conceded, and u matters little what delimination of waters, bays, creeks, and harbors be made, provided the right of American fishermen to pursu« their vocation upon the high seas is not in- fringed upon. 'J'he privilege of occupying unsettled shores is no longer of any particular value, the question of bait even '.s re- solved, and there appears to be no more need of a fish treaty than of a pork treaty with Great Britain. If the rights of transferring cargoes in Canadian ports, shipping cargoes in bond by rail, and other commercial rights are longer denied our fishing vessels, such denials should be met by an immediate refusal to allow Canadian fishing vessels to enter our ports or to allow the products of the Canadian fisheries to enter the United States in vessels or by rail. CoNri.UDlNO RkM.MUsS. Canada has always assumed a hostile attitude toward the United States in time of war, and in time of peace her connuercial policy toward us appears to have been dictated by the French military maxim, L'tindaec, encora Paialace, touJourH faudaee. In connec- tion with Great Britain she has in matters of international inter- course with the United States persisted in stepping outside of the restraints of international law, and reciprocal arrangements en- tered into by treaty and by statutory compact, whenever her in- terests or her caprice seemed to render such course desirable. Touching these matters the United States has not exercised due diligence in defence of her own interests, and of the rights of her citizens. This has encouraged aggression. It would seem as though, in the eyes of the Canadians, the most striking character- istic of the United States is a "cha' 'ty which endureth all things," and that they have deliberately resolved to ascertain experiment- ally just how far they can exploit upon our generosity and forbear- ance. In the very nature of things such procedure must ultimately have on abrupt termination. If the United States had taken small advantage and large advantage of geographical position and of all the other opportunities presented by intimate relationships of commerce and transportation as Canada has done, the chief sources of her prosjjerity would have been dried up long ago. The question naturally arises, why has the Dominion of Canada been so unfriendly and so unfair toward the United States? Be- sides the political cause two others may be mentioned: First, Canada is a small and aggi'essive nation, enjoying the geographical advantages of contiguity to a great and magnanimous nation, which has not, and never has had, an affirmative foreign policy. Second, the breaches of good faith on the part of the Dominion are un- doubtedly attributable largely to the infirmities of her govern- — .. . . w t a ^. i mcntnl system, under which partisan riilohiis placed constitutional authority in eclipse and opened wide the flood-gates of license to the behests of personal ambition. The presumptuousness of a country of four and three-quarters of a milUon people, conditioned by serious impediments of clinmte and physical conformation, in its exploitation upon the commercial and political interests of acountry of sixty-five millions, possessed of resources and diversified advantages superior to those which char- acterize an'' other country on the face of the globe, would be a farce if it were not the expression of injurious and compromising attiicks. A country less just, or less magnanimous than the United States would speedily terminate such aggressions by the arm of power. Sir Richard Cartwright, a member of the Canadian House of Commons, has recently shown that during the last 'if) years one- fourth of the native population of Canada, and three-fourths of the immigrants into Canada, amounting in the aggregate to about 2,000,000, liave sought homes in the United States. Jiut the logic of these facts is apparently lost upon the people of Canada. The lust of poUtical power and the chimerical idea of perpetuating monarchical institutions upon this continent appear to have be- gotten a sort of mania which they are unable to throw ofl. In the interests of peace and good neighborhood, which, regard less of provocation, the United States must always cherish, we should not, and need not, adopt any general or reckless policy of retaliation, but simply respond to each specific act of injustice. That will in all probability be adequate to the cure of the evils complained of. It would seem that in so far as possible the Presi- dent of the United States ought to be reUeved of the respousi- bilitv of deciding as to the nature and limits of the retaliatory measures to be resorted to in each case. To this end, statutory pro- vision, specific and mandatory in its nature, ought to be adopted. There never before was a time when in the interests of peace, and in the cause of maintaining the honor and dignity of this country, there was greater need for watchfulness, and for the adop- tion of measures protective in their nature as against Canadian aggression upon the commercial interests of the United States : and this policy ought to be rigidly maintained until the last refusal to reciprocate privileges granted by the United States, or by any one of the States, has been withdrawn by the government of the Do- minion of Canada. JOSEPH NIMMO, Jr. Huntington, Long Island, N. May 8, 1888. t ■f \y