a! e> ^^^ v>. # IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) ^ /. / /j :a 6 w I.G Ui»2A |I25 •- 1^ III 2.2 l.i |1.8 1.25 1.4 1.6 pm # '/W A 'cm w ^ '^^ ^M S 7 /^ Photographic Sciences Corporation n? 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4503 ^ (/a :^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Note* techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6X6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui p^uvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une fnodification dans la m^thode normale de filmage sont indiqu^s ci-dessous. D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ D D D D Couverture endommagde Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur^e et/ou pellicul6e □ Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque □ Coloured maps/ Cartes g6ographiques en couleur Coloured ink (i.e. other than '^lue or black)/ ere de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ D Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other materia!/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e 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 apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film6os. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl6mentaires: D D D D □ D D n Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaur6es et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d6color6es, tachet6es ou piqu^es Pages detached/ Pages ddtachdes Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Quality inigale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppl^mentaire 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 6t^ film^es d nouveau de fapon 6 obtenir la meilleure image possible. This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film6 au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X SOX y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Library of the Public Archives of Canada L'exemplaire filmA fut reproduit grAce A la g6n6rosit6 de: La bibliothdque des Archives publiques du 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. Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetA de l'exemplaire film6, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont ia couverture en papier est imprimAe sont film^s en commen^ant par ie premier plat et en tarminant soit par la derniire page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commen9ant par ia premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par ia derniire page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboies suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols -^ signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s A des taux de reduction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, ii est film6 A partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 p H DD TH U Tb WIL si>eeos:es ON THB Public Enpesiure afil lational Folicj, BT THB HON. D. L. MACPHERSON, SENATOJi OF CANADA, ■ DBLIVBRBD IN JUNE, 1878, DURING HIS VISIT TO THE COUNTY OF BRUCE, (PART OF THE FORMER SAUGEEN DIVISION,) PUBLISHED BY THE LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE ASSOCIATION OF BRUCE. '* Tlxt ruin or proiperity of a State dependil lo muoh upon the Ad- ^ miaiitratioii of its Oovernment that to he aoquainted ^th the " merit of a Ministry we need only observe the oondition of the '* people. * * If -we see a nniyersal spirit of distrust and " dissatisftMtion, a rapid decay of trade, * * we may prononnoe " without hesitation that the Ooyemment of that oountry is weak, " distraoted, and corrupt." -Junius. WILLIAMS, SLEETH & MACMILLAN, PRINTERS, 124 BAY STREET. 1878. * THE LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE ASSOCIATION OF THE HOUTH HIDING OF BRUCE, TO THE HONORABLE D. L. MACPHERSON. * Walkerton, 17th July, 1878. Dear Sir, — I am requested by the Liberal Conservative Association of South Bruce, to ask your permission to publish in pamphlet form a report of your recent progress through this County and of the speeches which you delivered on that occasion. The Association is anxious that the matter contained in your speeches should be placed within the reach of every elector. Your exposure of the incapacity and extravagance of the Adminis- tration as a whole, as well as of the recreancy and cupidity of its individual members, must contribute in an important degree to con- vince the people of the Dominion of the unworthiness of the present Government. I am also directed to convey to you the thanks of the A.ssociation for having visited Bruce on its invitation. I have the honor to be your obedient servant, A. B. KLEIN, Secretary L. C. A. South Riding Bruce. The Hon. D. L. Macpherson, Senator, Toronto. HEI'L Toronto, 20th July, 1878. Dear Sirt, — I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of 17th of July, and cheerfully grant the request of the Liberal Conservative IV AsHociation of South Bruce for pemiiaaion to pulilish the Speeches lately delivered by me in your County. I could have wished they had been n»ore worthy of the compli- ment that has been paid me in desiring their publication. At the Hame time I shall be glad to see them wiear 1873-4 from 23 my comparative statements. 1 think I tan prove that I was ri^ht in doing so by no less important a witness than the Honorable (Jeorge Brown. I should not have alluded to Mr. Brown's Senate speech if it had not been industriously circulated in this constituency under the following attractive heading : — '* Aead and Sand to your neighbor, Senator Brown'i Spoeoh In the Senate. " Senator Maophorson's Fallacy and Sffisrepreeentations Szposed." My statements contained no fallacies or misrepresentations, so that Senator Brown found nothing of the kind to expose, but his own speech was full of errors and misrepresentations, .vnd I shall proceed to expose the most culp.ible of them. Speaking in the Senate of the Contingencies, Mr. Brown said : — " The hon, gentleman (Mr. Macpherson) then passed on to the item of " Contingencies— and I wondered what he would say about it: for I had " analysed this item for six years past— three of them under the reign of the " late Ministry and three under the present, and I found that in the old " reign the amount ran rapidly up every year, and in the new reign it ran as " rapidly down. Here are the figures: Tory Reign 187 1-2 $'53.-93 i«72-3 i«9.W4 " 1873-4 222,803 Reform Reign 1874-5 208,707 1875-6 172,548 1876-7 '57.479" Mr. Brown omitted altogether the Contingencies of the House of Commons. Now, the Government are just as much responsible for the Contingencies of the House of Commons as they are for the Contingencies of their de])artments. They are supieme in the Lower House. Therefore they are wholly respon- sible for the Contingencies of that House, and why Mr. Brown should have omitted that item I cannot understand. The effect of it was to con- ceal the amount from the public. I hope that was not Mr. Brown's object, but that was uncjuestionably the effect of his omission. Mr. Brown was guilty of great injustice in calling the year 1873-4 a year of the late Govern- ment. There could be no stronger evidence that I was correct in omitting that year from my comparisons than that Mr. Brown, in dragging it in, should have charged the late Government with the (Contingencies for the whole of that year. Could anything be more unfair and absurd than to charge a Government which had been only four months of the year in office with the contingent expenses of the whole year ? Their successors disbursed those Contingencies during eight months of the year, and yet Mr. Brown said that the late Government were responsible therefor. You know what Con- tingencies are— daily disbursements made at the discretion of ministers. I am amazed that Mr. Brown should have been guilty of such manifest injustice as to hold the late Government responsible for the daily contingent disbursements of his friends for eight months. In the following table Mr. Brown's erroneous and delusive figures are contrasted with the entries in the Public Accounts. The year of the largest expenditure, 1873-74, was that in^which Mr. Brown's m 24 friends disbursed — lavishly disbursed — the Contingencies during eight months^ I think I may assume that the retrenchment in 1876-7 was due to the atten- tion that had been called to the wasteful expenditure of the Government. Contingencies and General Expenses oi the Departments at Ottawa and of the House of Commons. AS ERRONEOUSLY STATED BY HON. GEO. BROWN. Tory Reign Reform Reign (( 1871-2.. 1872-3.. 1873-4.. 1874-5.- 1875-6.. 1876-7.. $153,293 . 189,174 222.803 , 208,707 , 172,548 157,479 AS RECORDED IN PUBLIC ACCOUNTS. 1871-2 $309,30* 18723 345,001 1873-4 425,330 1874-5 383,515 1875-6 410,026 1876-7 367,210 If there were time I would speak of the absurdity of talking about " Reform roign" and "Tory reign" in a matter of this kind. No one knows better than Mr. Brown does that such expressions are mere clap-trap^ without significance in the politics of the country ; that since the death of the lat^ Robert Baldwin, the patriot who was driven broken-hearted from public life by the self-seeking wing of his party, the Reform party as a party had no share in the legislation of the country until Mr, Mac- kenzie's accession to office, except on the measure of Confederation^ and that measure was jeopardized by Mr. Brown retiring from the Govern- ment in a huff before the foundations of Confederation were securely laid. The matter on which he resigned would have been unnoticed in the histo'.y of Canada except for Mr. Brown's resignation. All the legislation and all the reforms of the preceding twenty-five years had been carried by the Liberal-Conservative party. Many individual members of the Reform party bore a useful and honorable part. They joined Sir John Macdonald in perfecting useful legislation, until now, when the condition of the country is such that Mr. Blake taunts his own party with being " Reformers with nothing to reform." And such really is the condition of the country to-day. If you will look at the legislation of the expiring Parliament you will scarcely find a measure of national importance. The Government have taken the extraordinary ground, and have asserted it in Parliament, that they have no control over the destinies of the country, no power to promote its prosperity. As the Minister of Finance put it, they are mere " flies on the wheel," — (cheers and laughter) — with no more power to guide the destinies of this country than the fly has the power to guide the wheel 'on which it is but a powerless insect. (Laughter.) Gentlemen, this is not my simile, it is their own. It is a description of them by the Minister of Finance. It is a just one, however, for they have not done anything to benefit the country ; they acknowledge their own inability, and the suffering industries of the country proclaim their incapacity. 25 ook at leasure dinary )1 over A.S the rsand y than verless n. It wever, wledge a their INCREASED SALARIES OF CABINET MINISTERS. The next statement which I come to is one which will surprise you as much, probably, as any that I have submitted — it is, the increase in the salaries of Cabinet Ministers themselves. You know how jealous they professed to be, when out of office, of the expenditure of ever)' shilling of the people's money, and I shall now tell you how they have acted up to those professions where their own interests were concerned, when in office. In 1873 the salaries of the whole Civil Service' were increased. The civil servants represented truly that the cost of living had increased enormously since the time when the salaries had been fixed, and that they were not able to live upon their salaries. Sir John Macdonald's Government resisted these peti- tions for years, but at last, in 1873, influenced by their justice, by an over- flowing revenue, and by surpluses recurring year after year, the Govern- ment consented to increase the salaries. I may say there was no opposition to that act. The present Government, then in opposition, were as much in favor of it as the Government of the day. To show you that the matter was thoroughly discussed, and that it was as I say, Mr, Mackenzie, when the resolutions were before the House of Commons, moved an amendment to the effect that the salaries of the Cabinet should not exceed $75,000, and that they should be graduated according to the responsibilities and duties of the offices. After debate, Mr. Mackenzie asked leave to withdraw his motion. It was withdrawn and the measure passed unanimously. Both parties were, therefore, equally responsible for it. The following is the state- ment : — SALARIES OF CABINET MINISTERS. Mr. Mackenzie's Administration : The Prime Minister (Hon. Alex. Mackenzie) a year, $8,000 00 Do., for Sessional allowance ... . 1,000 00 Twelve Cabinet Ministers at $7,000 a year each .... 84,000 00 Do., Sessional allowance 12,000 00 $105,000 00 This amount for five years is $525,000 00 Sir John Macdonald'' s Administration : The Prime Minister (Sir John A. Macdonald) a year, $5,000 00 Do., Sessional allowance 600 00 Twelve Cabinet Ministers at $5,000 a year each .... 60,000 00 Do., Sessional allowance 7,200 00 $72,800 00 This amount for five years is 364,000 00 The Salaries of Mr. Mackenzie's Cabinet for the five years, from November, 1873, to November, 1878, will exceed the salaries of Sir John Macdonald's Cabinet for the five years next anterior to 1873, by the sum of $161,000 00 The Increase for each year is $32,200, which is the interest, at 5 per cent., on $644,000, and 5 cents a bushel on 644,000 bushels of wheat. \ I think it must surprise you to learn that Mr, Mackenzie and his col- leagues, after all their professions of economy and retrenchment, and of deep consideration for the people's money, will have taken during five years ending on 7th November next $161,000 more than Sir John Macdonald and his colleagues took during the five years anterior to 1873. (Sensation.) Then, too, the cost of living has declined very much. You know that everything you pro- duce is very much cheaper than it was in 1873. A change that every man feels, I do not care what his position may be, has come over this country. An unaccountable, an incredible shrinkage in the values of all produce, commodities, and property has taken place since 1873. Notwith- standing this change, not a word was said in Parliament during the five sessions which have been held under the auspices of these professedly economi- cal and pure patriots. They took their salaries without protest, yes, without murmur. (Cheers and laughter.) If they had not control over anything else, they certainly had over their own salaries ; they need not have drawn the full legal amount, or they might have returned a portion, or they might have reduced them by Act of Parliament. Their excuse for every short-coming is: " We are bound by our predecessors ; we are doing just what our predecessors " did." They do not seem to be sensible that a change has come over the condition of the country. They are now, in a time of great and universal depression, administering public affairs with a prodigality that did not characterize their predecessors in times of great plenty and prosperity. MR. BLAKE'S SALARY. Mr. Blake when at Teeswater, boasting of the economy effected by him in his department, omitted to mention his own salary of $7,000. It was a large sum to omit. The omission was serious ; I hope it was unintentional. He understated the cost of his office by the amount of his own salary, ($7,000.) Mr. Mackenzie draws $8,000 a year for salary and $1,000 for his sessional allowance, while Sir John Macdonald's salary anterior to 1873 was $5,000, and sessional allowance $600, making a difference between their emoluments of $3,400 a year. Mr Blake drew $7,000 a year as Minister of Justice, and, drew the same salary as President of the Council, an office which he himself had pronounced a sinecure. And in addition to his salary he received his sessional allowance of $1,000. A Voice — And he was sick, too. THE PREMIER'S SALARY. Hon. Mr. Macpherson — Sir John Macdonald discharged the duties of Prime Minister and Minister of Justice at the same time, for $2,400 a year less than Mr. Blake received as Minister of Justice or President of the Council, and $3,400 a year, including sessional allowance, less than Mr. Mackenzie receives as Prime Minister and Minister of Public Works. In five years end- ing 7th November next, Mr. Mackenzie will have received of the people's money $17,000 more than Sir John Macdonald received for five years anterior to 27 his col- of deep ending and his en, too, rou pro- Lt every ver this s of all ^otwith- the five conomi- without inything e drawn :y might jming is: lecessors over the miversal did not 1873, and yet these gentlemen have the shamelessness to speak of Sir John Macdonald's cab hire. It is truly contemptible. Mr. Blake mentioned it at Teeswater, and it has been taken up by Ministerialists and by the Ministerial Press with so much warmth and zest that, having regard to "the eternal fitness " of things," they may yet make it their question of National Policy, the ques- tion on which they will appeal to the people for a renewal of their confidence. I find in the leading organ of the Government in Montreal, a long article, headed " A remarkable political statement." Well, what do you think this remarkable statement is which is brought solemnly before the country at this time of general and extreme depression, when a cry is going up from the people for legislation which will lead to a revival of their drooping indus- tries? It is a statement reported to have been made by Mr. Ross, M.P. for West Middlesex, upon the cab hire of some of the departments of the late Government in 1872-3, compared with similar charges in 1876-7. Mr. Ross says the cab hire of the Department of Justice in 1872-3 was $1,035. I can only find $456 charged in the Public Accounts. It does not seem possible that one in Mr. Ross' position would intentionally mis-state the amount of Sir John Macdonald's cab-hire, and represent it as more than twice as much as it really was. I hope, for Mr. Ross's sake, there are items in the Public Accounts which I have failed to find. It would be base indeed of Mr. Ross to mis-state this item. The following table shows the amounts stated by Mr. Ross, and those found in the Public Accounts : — ii by him It was a entional. salary, 000 for to 1873 en their Minister ncil, an ition to uties of ye.a.r less Council, ickenzie ars end- s money terior to Cab Hire Charged in i 872-3. Cab Hire Charged in 1876-7. According to Mr. Ross, as reported in Montreal Herald, June i8th, 1877. As in Public Accounts. A^ in Montreal Herald, June i8tJi, 1877. As in Public Accounts. Privy Council $ 107 Department of Justice. 1,053 Militia 187 $107 456 188 335 113 337 $50 14 47 $51 14 Finance 335 Inland Revenue 115 Customs 472 47 $2,249 $1,536 $111 $112 I find other items charged in Public Accounts under head of " Contin- " gencies Civil Government," for Cab Hire, Petty Cash, and for Contingent Expenses, of which no details are given. For the years 1873, 1875, ^^l^t 1877, they were as follows : 1873. 1875. «876. 1877. Cab Hire $1,938 $ 510 $ 673 $ 839 Contingencies, including Petty Cash 3,858 5,782 5,417 4,711 Totals $5,796 $6,292 $6,090 $5,550 28 For 1876-7, the year referred to by Mr. Ross, these items were only $246 less than in 1873, and for 1875 and 1876 they were considerably more than in 1873. I mention this not because of the importance of the amount, for it is comparatively insignificant, but on account of the error or mis- statem.ent involved. On the whole it looks as if the " remarkable poli- " tical statement " might have to be rewritten. The next statement I come to shows the EXPENDITURE FOR ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. 1873. 1875- 1876. 1877. $398,966 $497,405 $544,091 $565,597 Increased annual cost of Administration of Justice under Mr. Mackenzie's Government $166,631 This Annual Increase of $166,631, is the interest, at 5 per cent., on $3,332,620 Before commenting upon this statement, I will read a few words from Mr. Blake's reply the other day to the deputation from Souih Bruce who requested him to allow his name to be used as a candidate. Mr. Blake gave Mr. Mac- kenzie a character in the following words : — " Our leader, the Prime Minister of Canada, * * * whose known " accuracy of statement is such as to render any announcement he makes " one to be relied upon." Mr. Blake is known to be a master of sarcasm. (Cheers and laughter.) I shall nov read to you what Mr. Mackenzie said about the Court of Appeal for Ontario. I find it in the report of his speech at Lindsay, published in the G/ode of May 30th : — " So with regard to the administration of justice, they say, ' How was this * * cost increased ?' It was increased, in the first place, the year that we * came into office by the establishment of a new Court of Appeal in the Pro- * vince of Ontario, which necessitates an expenditure of about $21,000 every * year. The late Government had paid the first instalment, or the first quar- ' ter's salaries, before they went out, but we have had the annual charge upon ' us ever since of $21,000." Now, could there be the least doubt in the mind of any one who heard those words, that the Judges of the Court of Appeal had been appointed by the late Government, and that that Government had paid the first quarter's salaries of those Judges? (Hear, hear.) The words do not admit of two meanings, and yet what are the facts ? Mr. Mackenzie's Government came into office on the 7th November, 1873. The new Court of Appeal for Ontario was not then in existence. It was created by the Legislature of Ontario ; and the Act establishing it became law on the 24th March, 1874, four months and a half after Mr. Mackenzie's Government succeeded to office ; the Act author- izing the appointment of the Judges and the payment of their salaries was passed by the Dominion Parliament in the session of 1874,, at the instance of Mr. Mackenzie's Government ; the Judges were appointed in May, 1874 by Mr. Mackenzie, and their salaries from the day of their appointment were paid by Mr. Mackenzie's Government. (Cheers.) Now, how is Mr. says ly $246 jre than unt, for or mis- )le poli- :iE. 597 166,631 ,332,620 rom Mr. equested Mr. Mac- ie known [le makes hter.) I Court of 3ublished was this that we the Pro- 300 every irst quar- ge upon ard those the late alaries of neanings, nto office tario was and the ths and a ;t author- r salaries at the i in May, lointment w is Mr. 29 Mackenzie's marvellous mis-statement to be explained? And yet Mr, Blake says Mr. Mackenzie's accuracy is so great that his statements can always be relied upon. After this I think we should not be told again of the responsi- bility of the late Government for the whole of the expenditure of 1873-74. Truth and decency forbid it. (Renewed cheering.) THE COURT OF APPEAL for Ontario is a costly court, and the $21,000 a year which appears in the Pubhc Accounts is the smallest part of what it costs the people. The former Court of Appeal was one which cost the country next to nothing, and so satisfactory were its decisions that very few cases were carried to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in England. The position of Ontario is peculiar and exceptional among all the colonies. I believe no judgment of the old Court of Appeal was reversed by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and the entire people of the Province were satisfied with the decisions of the old Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court was created by the Dominion Parliament at its first session under Mr. Mackenzie. Cases are carried from the Superior Courts to the Court of Appeal, and from it to the Supreme Court. No lawyer will be content to let his case rest until it goes through all the courts, and the cost to the suitor will be enor- mous. I am within the truth when I say that the Legislation of the present Reform regimes in Ontario and in '.he Dominion have increased the law costs to the suitor more than fifty per cent., altogether apart from the enormous sum of $565,597 paid by the public for the administration of justice. If these are reforms I confess I do not admire them. In the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council we had lor our Court of Last Resort the most learned Tribunal in the English-speaking world, and it was maintained without cost to us. Whereas our own Supreme Court costs the country upwards of $53,000 a year. The legislation under the Reform Governments has been highly favorable to the lawyers. Costs have been greatly increased, and a large amount of business has been distributed. When leading barristers are made judges their business is divided among the practising lawyers. The Reform regime has been a glorious one for the members ot the legal profession. THE POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT. There is no Department, I am persuaded, in which there is more room for reform and economy than in the Post Office. POST OFFICE. Total Revenue. Cost of Collection. Yearly Loss. 1873 $ 833,657 .... $1,067,866 .... $234,209 1877 1,114,945 1,705,311 590.366 Increased Revenue in 1877 over 1873 $281,288 Increased Cost of Collection in 1877 over 1873 637,445 Increased loss in 1877 over 1873 $356,157 To collect $1.00 in postage cost $1.28 in i873,and $1.53 in 1877. m m 80 CUSTOMS AND EXCISE. The extravagant, and, I fear I must add, the corrupt expenditure in the Customs is perfectly alarming. It is impossible to account for it except on the presumption of favoritism, which is but another word for corruption. You will agree with me when you hear the following statements : — CUSTOMS. Year. Total Revenue. ^^^f, S°'* "^ Percentage Cost Collection. of Collection. 1873 .... $12,954,164 .... $567,765 •••• 4-38 1875 .... 15,351,011 .... 682,673 .... 4.45 1876 12,823,837 721,008 5.62 1877 .... 12,546,987 .... 721,604 .... 5.75 Decrease of Revenue from Customs in 1877 compared with 1873 $407»i77 Increastd Cost of Collecting the Revenue from Customs in 1877 over 1873 153,929 If the Revenue had been collected as economically in 1877 as in 1873, the saving to the country in 1877 would have been $172,046 AT MONTREAL CUSTOM HOUSE. •Year. Total Revenue. ^Tf Percentage Cost Collection. of Collection. 1873 .... $5,011,154 .... $87,733 •••• 1.75 1877 3,865,410 117,989 3-o8 Decrease of Revenue in 1877 compared with 1873 $1,145,744 Increased Cost of Collecting the Revenue in 1877 over 1873 30,256 If the Revenue at Montreal had been collected as economically in 1877 as in 1873, the saving to the country in 1877 would have been, at that Custom House alone $50,352 The Revenue from Customs at Montreal in 1876 fell off $1,570,416 and the cost of collecting it was increased $17,452. Among the new items are wages to extra clerks, extra lockers, and extra services at Examining Ware- house — extraordinary additions to the charge for collecting a diminished and declining Revenue. AT \VAy ltlM!X!»>VI€K iirSTO.Il HOUSES i , -r ^ 1 o Cost of Percentage Cost Y-a.; lotal Revenue. r-' n t- r r^ n ^• Collection. of Collection. J.;.,'; .... $1,246,238 .... $73,353 5-8o 1877 .... 1,091,018 .... 96,171 .... 8.90 Decrease of Revenue in 1877 compared with 1873 $155,220 Increased Q.Q'?X of Collecting the Revenue in 1877 over 1873 22,818 If the Revenue in New Brunswick had been collected as economically in 1877 as in 1873, the saving to the country in 1877 would have been, in that Province $32,893 81 The per centage rate of cost of collecting the Customs Revenue in the United Kingdom for the year ending 31st March, 1876, was $3.37 (;^3 7.^. 6d.) per cent. The average cost for ten years from 1867 to 1876 was only $3-38 {jQz 1^- 9^') P^r cent,, although the many ports round the coast must make the collection and protection of the revenue exceptionally costly. The Customs Revenue of the United Kingdom for the >ear ended on 31st March, 1876, was $118,115,000 (^23,623,003) (including ^3,266,534 collected on behalf of the Inland Revenue), and the average amount for ten years from 1867 to 1876 was $118,138,085 (;!^23,6o7,6i7). There cannot be stronger evidence of extravagance and corruption than I have submitted in this statement. In New Brunswick the increased cost of collecting the revenue would be incredible were it not shown in the Public Ac- counts, I think our friends down in New Brunswick must think that the Onta- rio milch cow, as this Province has been called, gives a large quantity of milk and a good deal of cream also, (Cheers and laughter). Since Confederation, of course, everything from the other Provinces of the Dominion enters New Brunswick duty free, which accounts in a measure for the revenue not in- creasing. Before Confederation New Brunswick had to watch her coast from smuggling from Nova Scotia, Prince PMward Island, and Canada, as well as from the United States, making the cost of protecting the revenue much greater than it should be now. EXCISE. Total Revenue. Cost of Collection, Percentage Cost of Collection. 1873 $4,460,681 $171,704 3.80 1875 5,069,687 199.253 3-9° 1876 5.563.487 218,359 3.90 1877 4,941,897 211,157 4.28 Increased cost of collection, 1S77 over 1873. . $39,453 Increase of Revenue, 1877, over 1873 $481,216 If the Excise Revenue had been collected in 1877 as economi- cally as in 1873, the saving in 1877 would have been $23,361 THE COST OF IMMIGRATION, I now come to the only statement of mine which has been seriously questioned — the cost of immigration. It is as follows : — 32 Immigration and Quarantine for 1873, 1875, 1876, and 1877. Items. Total expenditure Quarantine items. Transport of Mennonites . Loan to do. Total number of Immigrants by the St. Lawrence route for 1873 ... . Total number of Immigrants by the St. I-Awrence route for 1875 Total number of Immigrants by the St. Lawrence route for 1876 .... Total number of Immigrants by the St. Lawrence route for 1877 ... . 1873. $277,368 11,871 36,901 Cost per head in 1873 $7 76 Cost per head in 1875 1875- $302,770 13,768 16,038 $18 90 Cost per head in 1876 *$26 55 1876. $385,845 12,233 38,761 57,670 96,431 10,901 Cost per head in 1877 1877. $353,951 44,598 309,353 20,237 79,700 99,937 7,743 $27 04 When the cost of Quarantine in 1877 and the amount advanced to Mennonites are deducted from the total expenditure of 1877 there remains $209,415 to be divided over the 6,785 Immigrants who landed at the Ports of the Dominion and at Portland, intending to settle in Canada, making the per capita cost $30.88. To the above expenditure should be added a large share of the salaries and contingencies of the Department of Agriculture and Immigration, at Ottawa* They were as follows: For 1873, $44,063; for 1875, $48,733; for 1876, $49,455; and for 1877, $45,080. * The cost per head is based on expenditure, less the amount paid to the Mennonites. Adding cost of transport of Mennonites, but excluding the loan to them, the cost per head of all immigrants for 1876 was Thirty Dollars and Ten Cents, and for 1877 was Twenty- nine Dollars and Sixty Cents. 88 Yll. 1877. 553.951 44,598 309.353 20,237 79,700 99.937 7.743 Ordinary quarantine is a part of the immigration charges, but in last year's accounts there is an item of $21,733 ^of small-pox quarantine at Keewatin and so I struck out the whole sum charged for quarantine for that year. I take as the basis of my per capita division the number of immigrants who came by way of the St. Lawrence, Halifax, St. John, and Portland. I maintain that they are the only immigrants who have been induced to come to this country by our agents in Europe, and therefore the only ones we can regard as compensating us for our expenditure. ^'iS'Conse- quently our expenditure must be divided among them to ascertain the cost per head. The only question that can arise with respect to this statement is as to the basis upon which it is made. I have taken, as I tell you and as I stated in Parliament, the arrivals at Dominion ports and at Portland, The Govern- ment, finding the expenditure enormous and unjustifiable, took the extraordi- nary ground that all persons coming into this country, no matter from where or under what circumstances, should be included \i\\.\\t per capita division, and claimed that twelve thousand and odd persons who came in by the Suspension Bridge and reported themselves at the Custom-house with settlers' effects should be considered as immigrants. I contend that that is perfectly absurd. These people came to seek employment on the Welland Canal and other works, and by reporting themselves as settlers they were allowed to bring in their effects duty free, but they cannot be regarded as immigrants. They are not of the class to induce whom to come to this country we maintain an expensive establishment. (Cheers.) I think you will agree with me that my basis is correct. I do not think the people will say that a Department costing about $400,000, in- cluding the cost of the Department at Ottawa, should be maintained to encour- age people to come from the State of New York to seek employment here, and unless they do so, my basis is correct. (Cheers.) The department should be called $27 04 inced to remains le Ports king the ries and Ottawa* )r 1876, ennonites. iper head Twenty- THE ANTI-IMMIGRATION DEPARTMENT. In 1875, when Mr. Mackenzie was in England, Mr. Jenkins, the Agent- General, issued a circular which was printed all over Europe declaring there was no opening in Canada for any immigrants except farm-laborers. In a letter written by Mr. Mowat last winter to Senator Skead of Ottawa the following appeared : — " Immediate!} after my return from Ottawa, I caused enquiries to be made *' on the subject of employment for farm. laborers. As I stated to the de- " putation at Ottawa, the demand for this class has hitherto exceeded the " supply, but I am sorry to find that this year the case is otherwise^ and it is " doubtful, indeed, if work could be found here for the unemployed at Ottawa, " who may be suited to farm-labor." This shuts the door of Canada against all immigrants. The Agent- General closed it against all but farm-laborers, and Mr. Mowat has now closed it against that class. Why are we paying $400,000 a year to maintain 84 a useless 'department ? I leave it to you to say whether you approve of it or not. (Applause.) The immigration agents of other countries are unfortu- hately proclaiming to the world that there is no opening in Canada for immi- grants, and are doing so without expense to us. I MR. BROWN IN ERROR AGAIN. . Mr. Brown questioned the accuracy of my Immigration statement, and he submitted one taken from what he called official returns. He said : — " And first as to the annual nett expenditure for emigration : — According to Mr. Macpherson. 1872-3 $277, 36« i«74-5 302,770 '' 1875-6 385.845 1876-7 And now as to the cost per capita : — According to Mr. Macpherson. 1872-3 $ 7 76 1874-5 >8 90 1875-6 26 65 1S76-7 According to Official Return. $296,617 241,600 228,077 110,670 According to Official Return. $5 90 8 82 8 85 4 08 " Where Mr. Brown found his "official rfturri" I cannot discover. It is not in the Pul)li<: Ai;c(junts, and 1 do not find it in the report of the Minister of AgriculturL. It was a bogus return, and the correct figures are those which I gave. The amounts I stated for 1877 are exclusiveof quarantine and of the large sums expended in the department at Ottawa. In the Public Accounts the amount charged as the total "expenditure on account of Immigration" for 1877 is $229,652, being $20,237.33 more than I have divided per capita. Mr. Brown calls the per capita cost $4.08, upon an expenditure of about $250,000 (including the department at Ottawa); this would give 61,274 immi- grants. Do you know where they are ? Are they in this country ? No, and every one except Mr. Brown and the members of the Government knows that they did not come to the country. Is this not proof that my estimate of the cost is correct, and that that of the Minister of Agriculture and of Mr. Brown is inaccurate, delusive, and absurd ? THE COST OF TELEGRAPHING. I will submit to you now the charges for telegraphing. Mr. Blake, at Tees- water, gave the cost of telegraphing in his own department, and said there was a very large reduction. That induced me to look into the figures, and I showed in the Senate that in 1874-5, the first complete yem nf the Mackenzie Government, the expenditure for telegraphing, according to the Public Ac- 85 counts, amounted to $38,507.62, against $24,875 for the last complete year of Sir John Macdonald's Government. Mr. Brown said : — " Well, this did appear to me a very large sum, and so I dropped into the Finance Department, and asked an explanation of it from one of the officers of the r3epartment. He went at once and looked into the matter, and 1 am sure the hon. gentleman will be relieved and delighted when he hears the explanation. Of course he has no desire to prefer unfounded charges against the Administration, and he will be rejoiced to find that he can conscientiously withdraw that frightful castigation he gave them for that $38,000 of telegraphing. It turns out that in 1873-4 there were only three-fourths of the year's telegraphing included, and that in 1874-5 there were five quarters charged. It so happened that the quarterly bill of the Telegraph Company was delayed so long, that the Government accounts for the year were closed before it could be certified, and it had, of course, to go to the next year's account. The effect of this correction of the hon. gentleman's figures entirely changes the aspect of the telegraphic complaint, and I call the hon. gentleman's attention to the great economy effected by the present Ministry on the lavish disbursements of his own friends. The contrast now stands as follows : 1873-4 $32,107 1874-5 19,326 1875-6 19.421 1876-7 15,255-" This statement is grossly inaccurate and audaciously misleading. Mr. Brown charges the late Government with the whole of the telegraph bill of their suc- cessors for eight months of 1873-4. Every one will see the scandalous injustice of this. Here are men held responsible for the telegraph bills of their successors. Surely they were no more responsible for the cost of transmit- ting than they were for the contents of those messages ! (Applause.) Since the close of the session I have looked thoroughly into this telegraph expenditure, and I find it was very much more than Mr. Brown stated, and more than I stated. When Mr. Brown went to the Finance Department to ascertain the correct expenditure for telegraphing he should have been careful to have got the accurate amount, and it is difficult to understand how an inaccurate amount could have been honestly given to him. Mr. Brown should have remembered that he had described the chief official in the Finance Depart- ment as "a mixer and muddler of figures," and certainly a very "muddled" statement of the cost of the Government telegraphing was given to Mr. Brown and by him given to the public. The expenditure under this head has been as follows : , . , , If 1^ r I 3G ',1 Items Charged in Public Accousts for Telegraphing. 1 [ Department. 1 1872. 1873- $ cts. 2.039 57 330 33 2.256 03 1874. 1875. $ CIS 3.876 93 957 50 725 08 1.326 57 2,288 88 442 26 5.399 94 1,909 62 690 49 754 51 3.009 43 4,151 20 310 18 1876. $ ct> 3.004 17 358 93 791 60 1,588 27 1,154 84 270 73 1,164 67 653 78 210 50 113 10 1.977 83 2,344 60 2,688 19 1,946 66 2,002 18 1877. Governor-General .... Privy Council Secretary of State Do $ Cts. 2,865 24 747 66 77822 $ cts. 2,942 85 523 03 846 60 374 83 1,721 44 879 49 2,929 58 J.095 15 863 61 843 20 2,062 71 3.281 20 4 SO $ cts. 2,842 61 220 95 458 03 1,647 87 753 >4 443 75 500 37 446 90 iii ' Interior Do 528 96 539 16 Justice 2.538 84 i.35« 64 1,332 61 1,686 81 1,967 49 4,371 88 I 039 27 1.529 61 323 19 2.655 42 2,479 96 Militia and Defence. . . . Do Do Finance 1,926 62 «.7i9 39 1,984 86 1,178 46 Public Works Do charged to Capital Do Subsidy, An- crln- Amerirnn Co 1,706 56 36 28 200 61 2, 164 65 Marine and Fisheries . . 2,635 76 1,488 76 2,165 62 Receiver-General Customs 242 86 2,392 09 414 75 1,604 57 1,127 37 6,277 24 87 50 698 38 1,695 88 244 34 2,241 31 Do Or.pan ,ind River Service 184 41 589 72 4 31 687 05 Inland Revenue Lighthouses A^culture, Arts, ±c . . Do. Immigration and Ouarantine 1,193 03 47867 1.908 43 583 92 709 13 1,196 79 632 33 870 64 994 66 614 33 50 10 Do &c.. 614 23 732 09 Do 271 34 1,018 47 954 77 1,248 34 21,475 08 Census 268 57 1,100 82 290 12 267 62 1,583 '6 1.256 56 802 52 Post Office 1,082 29 2,074 30 40 00 839 71 North- West Territories. General Departments & Miscellaneous 36 57 1,146 81 1 21,298 19 28,421 84 23.862 55 41,623 59 27,034 06 And if Mr. Brown were correct in saying that the expenditure of three quarters only of the year 1873-4 was charged in that year and five quarters li'l in 1874-5, the amounts should stand $31,916 for 1873-4 and $33,669 for 1874-5. The discovery of this error shows how easily the entry of a portion of the expenditure of one year may be postponed and made to appear in the Public Accounts of the succeeding year. Mr. Brown waxed very indig- r: nant with me for suggesting that such a "cooking" of accounts was possible. ■ He himself proved that it was not only possible but that it had occurred. I see the departments, especially the Public Works Department, have got into the way of dividing their telegraph accounts and putting ihem under sub-heads, thus making the departmental expenditure appear smaller than it had been. I saw that Mr. Mackenzie had stated that among the retrenchments ilil; 1,178 46 244 34 2.241 3' 709 13 6i4 33 50 10 271 34 ,oi8 47 954 77 ,248 34 .475 08 three uarters 69 for of a appear indig- Dssible. d. ive got under han it iments 37 • effected by him was the item for telegraphing. I do not find proof of this in the Public Accounts. On the contrary, I find the expenditure inc; eased and items actually charged to capital account. I suppose he would say that tele- graphing in connection with the Pacific Railway and other works paid for out of capital might be charged to capital. It was never done before, and when Mr. Mackenzie thought proper to introduce a new system, he should have explained that items were hid away in an unusual manner. Instead of a reduction as claimed by Mr. Mackenzie the expenditure for telegraphing in his own Department has been largely increased, and yet Mr. Blake Hays Mr. Mackenzie's known accuracy of statement is such as to render any announce- ment he makes one to be relied upon. PACIFIC RAILWAY. I now come to a very important statement, which is as follows : — Total Expenditure on Pacific Railway as per Public Accounts, to 30th June, 1877 $ 7,975,578 Estimates voted for the financial year ending on 30th June, 1878 1,814,000 Supplementary Estimates voted for the financial year ending on 30th June, 1878 823,900 Total Expenditure to 30th June, 1878, may be assumed ai $10,613,478 Estimates voted for this work for the year 1878-79 2,949,700 Total amount voted by Parliament $13,563,178 Two sections of this Railway are being constructed — one of 1 14 miles running westwards from Lake Superior to a point in the wilderness knownas English River,and one of 1 14 miles running eastward from the Red River to another point in the wilder- ness known as Rat Portage, the crossing of the Winnipeg River. Between these two ends or sections lies an intermediate section of 180 miles, which has not yet been placed under contract. Until it is built and until by means of it the two ends are connect- ed the whole will be utterly useless — there will be no way traffic between Lake Superior and the Red River. The Government do not propose, so far as is known, to have the middle section of r8o miles completed in less than five years. By that time the end sections — much wood being used in their construction — will be far advanced in decay. Notwithstanding the large expenditure of $10,613,478 upon the Canadian Pacific Railway, not one mile of it is open for traffic, nor likely to be so, for practical use, for five years or more, except the Pembina Branch. Interest will be fairly chargeable on the outlay upon the two ends of the Lake Superior section, from the date of their com- pletion until they are connected, which they are not likely to be in less than five years. Interest for five years at 5 per cent, per annum on the Government estimate of cost, $5,750,000 will amount to. . . . $862,500 I contend that when the Government decided upon building an all-rail line from Lake Superior to the Red River, they should have begun at Lake 38 i B Superior and built westward, taking the rails and other material with them as they advanced. Instead of doing so, they are building at both ends, and leaving a gap of i8o miles in the middle, which is not yet under contract, and which the Government, as late as last session, did not seem to have made up their minds what to do with. They spoke of trying to get a company to take the Lake Superior division. They spoke also, in the event of their failing to get a company, of going on with it as a public work, and they took a small vote to enable them to do so. The country between Thunder Bay and Manitoba is a barren, howling wilderness, which will never furnish any local traffic for the railroad, except some kimber. Of course, there will be through traffic for it when it is completed, but until then it will be useless. The Govern- ment originally intended to have built that line by a route which would have allowed the use of what Mr. Mackenzie called " the magnificent " water stretches." They intended to have gone by rail from Lake Superior to Sturgeon Falls, which is on an arm of Rainy Lake, and thence by water to Rat Portage, a distance of about i8o miles, and thence by rail to Selkirk, on the Red River. When that was their scheme, they commenced constructing the Fort Frances Lock. That Lock was intended to overcome the principal obstruction to the navigation between Sturgeon Falls and Rat Portage. Unless that route were adhered to. Fort Frances Lock was not required. The Govern- ment went on with its construction, notwithstanding that they had changed the line of the railway, and located it where the water stretches could not be used in connection with it. The moment they adopted the northern route the Fort Frances Lock became entirely useless, but the Government did not stop its construction, and it is to be finished this year. I asked for a Com- mittee of the Senate to enquire into the matter. One was appointed, and the information was elicited which I have submitted to you. The report of the Committee declaring the work useless was adopted by the Senate. ANOTHER " WATER STRETCHES " POLICY. One of the witnesses before that Committee, Mr. Sutherland, the superin- tendent of the construction of the lock, propounded a scheme for utilizing the water stretches. He proposed to carry freight in small cars which could be ferried by steamers across the lakes, and run from lake to lake on tramways, over nine portages, which he proposed to reduce to six, between Port Savanne and Rat Portage. Mr. Sutherland estimated the cost of the improvements neces- sary to adapt the route to transporting forty tons a day at $i 50,000. Mr. Mor- timer, the engineer who surveyed the route for the Government said the improvements necessary to enable ten tons a day to be transported over the route would cost $350,000. I do not care what is expended upon it, the scheme is not practicable, and I will tell you why. The lakes on the route do not open till 25th May and close early in October, about a month after harvest in Manitoba. Forty tons of wheat per day would be less than 1,500 bushels, and the two ends of the railway would get no more freight to carry 89 ipenn- ilizing could In ways, lavanne neces- r. Mor- the ^er the ion it, route II after 1,50° carry than could be carried over the portages. Forty tons a day would only load one train of 24 cars a week, so that the freight of one train a week on each end of the route, would be the utmost capacity of the connecting link. The sea- son of navigation on the water stretches lasts only 1 20 days, and during thirty of these in the Fall, after harvest, 45,000 bushels of wheat of the crop of Manitoba could be moved ! No passengers would go by the route. They would govidDuluih. The expense of carrying freight would be greater than by the Northern Pacific Railway from Duluth, so that the freight would go by Duluth. But suppose wheat could be conveyed from Manitoba to Thunder Bay by the water stretches and the Canadian Pacific Railway at the rate of 1,500 bushels a day for a month, the whole quantity, 45,000, would not be enough to load one schooner of the size of the locks of the enlarged Welland Canal. I think I have said enough to condemn and ridicule the scheme. (Applause.) Mr. Mackenzie, speaking of the Pacific Railway at Lindsay the other day, said : — " Now, Sir, what is the case ? We have not attempted to carry out an impossible bargain, (the arrangement with British Columbia.) We said at once it was an impossible bargain, and we entered upon negotiations with a view to the reduction of the terms of the engagement, but we did not hesitate to proceed with the initial parts of the undertaking which were peculiarly essential to the progress of the country. We have to look to those far western countries —those vast fertile plains designated by Mr. Butler as 'The Great Lone Land'— as a land where our child- ren are to find homes for themselves in the future ; where we are to direct a vast immigration from the old countries of Europe ; whence we are to supply the manufacturers of Ontario and the Eastern Provinces with much of what they are to consume in the future ; while the other Provinces send their goods to the west ; and we have, without any extraordi- nary effort, already nearly completed one-half of the distance between Lake Superior and Red River in the construction of that Railway. (Cheers.) We have constructed the road in every respect — ^except as to bridges, and there are not many on the line — equal to the Intercolonial, and we will manage, by a wise system of contracts and an upright system of manaee- ment, to build it at a cost scarcely more than half that of the Intercolonial. (Cheers.) I give these as results of the system ot administration which was initiated by the present Government." Would you not suppose from Mr. Mackenzie's words that he was building a continuous line ? What he says is sadly misleading but not strictly inaccu- rate, because about one-half is being constructed, but it is in the way I have de- scribed to you, leaving an intermediate section of 1 80 miles untouched, the two ends of the line remaming unconnected. The Canadian Pacific Railway ought to have been a work of very great advantage to this country, but from the way in which it is being carried out it is involving this country in very serious peril. A recent English writer says : — " As things are, the line will be in ruins probably within five years of the " date of its completion, and it may yet be the instrument which will rend "the Dominion asunder." I have told you about the Fort Frances Lock; you know as much about 11:? the Kaministiquia terminus and the Neebing Hotel as I do, and I shall not detain you by saying anything concerning them, except that both transactions are disgraceful to the Government. (Cheers.) You may understand what Mr. Mackenzie meant by the following bit of grandiloquence. I confess I do not : " We have to look to those far western countries — those vast fertile plains " designated by Mr. Butler as ' The Great Lone Land ' — as a land where our " children are to find homes for themselves in the future ; where we are to " direct a vast immigration from the old countries of Europe ; whence we " are to supply the manufacturers of Ontario and the Eastern Provinces with " much of what they are to consume in the future ; while the other Provinces ** send their goods to the west." Mr. Mackenzie's mode of inaugurating his great scheme of immigration is remarkable. He and Mr. Mowat together have closed Canada against all immigrants. THE STEEL RAILS. I next come to the steel rails. They were purchased years before they were wanted. It was not necessary to have imported any of them before last year, and had the purchase been delayed until then, fhey could have been bought for one-half the money they have cost the country. Mr. Mackenzie, speaking at Lindsay last month, said : " A good deal was said a little while ago by some gentleman near me " about steel rails, and nothing rejoices me more than to hear some of our " good Conservative friends foolish enough to bring that subject up." Can you believe that Mr. Mackenzie was sincere ? He proceeded to state that he had bought steel rails last year for ^7 13^. which is $37.58 per ton. The price paid for the 50,000 tons of steel rails was $54 a ton, and the extra charges, interest, extra wharfage, storage and handling must have brought the present cost up to $76 at least, and now they are old rails. I prove, there- fore, out of Mr. Mackenzie's own lips that he could have bought steel rails for the Pacific Railway as early as they were required at one-half the price he made the country pay for them. Mr. Mackenzie's condemnation of him- self for this transaction was complete, yet he said " he rejoices when a Conservative is foolish enough to bring that subject up." I ask again, da you believe Mr. Mackenzie was sincere when he spoke those words ? Mr. Mackenzie went on and said : — " Let me give you a few more figures. When we came into office we found " that they (our predecessors) were paying on the average for coal $3.73.j we " are now paying $1.7 7)^. They were paying out at that time for ordinary " bar iron $4.32 ; we are now paying $1.80. They were paying for cut nails ** on the average $5.32 per keg ; we are paying $2.80 ; for clout nails $15 per " keg, we are paying $7, etc." Mr. Mackenzie does not say anything about the fall in markets which had 41 • * taken place. He does not say the late Government paid more than the market price, or that they bought before the rails and other materials were needed — to the country's loss. He almost takes credit to his Govern- ment for the fall in markets. A more illogical statement than his could not have been made. The chief charge made agamst Mr. Mac- kenzie is that he bought the rails before they were required ; and he proved at Lindsay that if he had waited until they were required, he could have bought at one half the price he paid for them. He further said, " It is " a very much easier thing for our predecessors to show their capacity for " shovelling out the public moneys in this wholesale fashion, than it is for us " to be constantly quarrelling with contractors in order to get the work done at " the lowest figures, and giving out nearly all our contracts to those who are •' our political opponents." It is certainly astounding that Mr. Mackenzie should speak of any one "shovelling out the public moneys," standing convicted as he does of an appallingly profligate waste of the people's money. I don't know who the contractors are with whom Mr. Mackenzie has quarrelled, — certainly not Cooper, Fairman & Co., or Foster, of the Georgian Bay Branch, or Norris, or Neelon, or Hope, or the Red River Transportation Company, or Moore, of Goderich Harbor, or Carpenter, of the Dawson route, or Oliver, Davidson & Co., of Fort William Town Plot and Neebing Hotel notoriety, and also the contractors for building the Pacific Telegraph from Lake Superior westwards, or Mr. Jaffray, the grocer, of Toronto, or his contracting and purveying friends who hail from the County of Lambton. HOW THE RAILS WERE PURCHASED. Mr. Mackenzie further said : — " We purchased by open tender in the " market all the rails we did purchase, while the late Administration purchased " them by giving an order to a near relative of a Minister. * # * *"' I wish to say further that everything that could be obtained by contract the ** present Government have obtained by contract." This was an extraordinary statement for Mr. Mackenzie to make, and yet Mr. Blake said Mr. Mackenzie was so accurate that his statements were to be relied upon. There are several errors in his statement. So far from having purchased all the rails in open market, as Mr. Mackenzie said he had done. Cooper, Fairman & Co., who supplied 25,000 tons of steel rails, only tendered for from five to ten thousand tons, deliverable at Montreal and five to ten thousand tons deliverable at Duluth. The latter were not taken, yet Cooper, Fairman & Co. supplied 25,000 tons, of which 15,000 tons appear to have been without competition. They supplied 5,000 tons for Vancouver Island without competition, and not only that, but 5,000 tons m were taken from another firm also without competition at ten shillings per ton below Cooper, Fairman & Co.'s price, and it is difficult to see why that purchase was made, unless to get the cheaper rails out of the way of Cooper, Fairman & Co. This same firm of Cooper, Fairman & Co. got the freighting of 5,000 tons of rails from Montreal to Duluth for which they did not tender at all, and were paid a higher rate than others tendered for the work. Mr. Samuel, of Montreal, who was the lowest bidder, was refused the contract, although he offered security for its performance, on the ground that he was not a steam- boat owner, while Cooper, Fairman & Co.., who were not steamboat owners and had not tendered, were invited to Ottawa to confer with Mr. Mackenzie on the subject of this transport, and were given the contract at a higher rate than was asked by Mr. Samuel, and in the month of June following the contract was increased by 5,000 tons at the same rate without competition, though freight is generally lower at that season than earlier in the spring. Yet Mr. Mackenzie says, " everything is put up to tender." I am surprised at Mr. Mackenzie speaking as he did about a purchase of rails by the late Administration, through a relative of one of its members. The Government was not guilty of any wrong-doing in that transaction as Mr. Mackenzie well knows. The agent wronged the public, but no member of the Government was compromised. Mr. Mackenzie should not have forgetten that his brother was a me:iiber of the firm of Cooper, Fairman & Co. I am very far from saying that that was a reason why they should not have got contracts from the Government, but it was a reason why they should not have got contracts imless they were the lowest bidders ; it was a re;ison why Mr. Mackenzie should not have telegraphed them to Montreal to go to Ottawa to confer with him about a contract for which they had not tendered, and it was a reason why they should not have got that contract ata rati 'ligher than another had tendered at. Cooper, Fairman & Co. got altogether upwards of $1,500,000 of the public money, and so far as I can discover they only tendered for what amounted to about one-third of that sum. The rest — about $1,000,000 — they got by private arrangement. The Red River Transportation Co. received $206,850 for trans- porting rails at rates which made the service cost $45,000 more than it would have done had the lowest tender been accepted. The Hudson's Bay Co. for supplies, rents, &c., got about $150,000: for that, I presume, there was no com- petition. A great deal of money has been expended in the North-West, much of it unnecessarily, for which there could have been no competition and no audit. I have never accused Mr. Mackenzie of personal corruption. I would not charge any Minister with that crime, unless there were the clearest proof of his guilt, but I will say this, that no man was ever more unfortunate in his friends and favorites and surroundings than Mr. Mackenzie. They seem to have been self-seeking, greedy, insatiable men. (Cheers) C T (T 48 The Profit and Loss Account of the Government Steel Rails speculation may be taken to stand about as follows, viz.: — Cash paid in England for steel rails and fastenings $2,938,900 The same quantity could have been purchased, delivered in Canada in the Spring of 1877, for 1,800,000 • Loss on first cost $1,138,900 Interest to 30th June, 1877, on ascertained payments 271,365 To this must be added the cost of 4,000 tons laid upon the Truro and Pictou Railway, a line that would not have been steeled had not the rails been on hand 235,120 (The Government has taken authority to transfer this Railway to Nova Scotia as a gift to a private Company.) Ascertained loss to 30th June, 1877 $1,645,385 Interest is running on at the rate of about $13,500 per month and is increasing — I estimate the further loss by interest before the rails are used at $419,169 FAVORITISM AND WASTE. I will now submit a statement of loss upon Additional Items of Public Money Lost Through the Apparent Favoritism of Mr. Mackenzie's Government, Brought to Light Last Session. ( Vide Page 6y8 Senate Debates,^ 1. Loss on 5,187 tons steel rails bought without competition from Cooper, Fairman & Co., for which 10/ more per ton was paid than was paid at the same time to another house. . $12,604 2. Loss on railway bolts and nuts, for which Cooper, Fairman & Co. were paid over the lowest bidder 1.365 3. Loss on transport of 10,000 tons of rails, for which $2.04 per ton was paid to Cooper, Fairman & Co. on behalf of themselves and of Norris & Neelon, St. Catharines, and Hope & Co., Hamilton, over the lowest bidder 20,400 4. Loss on transport of 15,141 tons, for which $3.30 per ton was paid to Red River Transportation Co. over the lowest bidder ($49,965 U. S. currency) 44,969 5. Loss on Goderich Harbor contract 30,000 Loss on these Five Transactions $109,338 I will now read a statement of 44 The Revenue and Expenditure of each Financial Year since Confederation, was as follows :— Year. 1867-8 . 1868-9 . 1869-70. 1870-1 . 1871-2 . 1872-3 . 1873-4 . 1874-5 . 1875-6 . 1876-7 . Expenditure. $ 13,486,092 14,038,084 14,345.509 iq,*^ %o8i i/jj*- .468 19,1/4,647 23,316,316 23,713,071 24,488,372 Revenue. Total Surpluses from i $ 13,687,928 14,379,174 15,512,225 19,335,560 20,714,813 20,813,469 24,205,092 24,648,715 22,587,587 22,059,274 1875....... Surplus. $ 201,836 341,090 1,166,716 3,712,479 3,125,345 1,638,822 888,776 935,644 Deficit. $12,010,708 Total Deilcits lr«. "STC and 1877 1,900,785 ti,8o3,6i8 $3,704,403 The item pl.aced ;/. : ? 'nterc .1 Renewals Suspense Account was for an expenditure actually muae. .-iv «•, charging it to the work as ought to have been done, it was entered in a Suspense Account. Anyone who under- stands book-keeping will know that that was a piece of " cooking." The late Government are constantly charged with having engaged in the construction of works which involved a large expenditure from revenue, but absolute silence is observed upon the fact that they had an overflowing revenue and a yearly surplus. Under such circumstances they were bound to go on with works required in the public interest. Even Mr. Brown, when he spoke in the Senate of the expenditure of the late Government, said : — " The Macdonald Government was formed in 1867, and controlled the " public finances until the 30th June, 1874; let us see then how the annual " public expenditure increased in their hands. They were : In 1867-8 $13,486,092 In 1868-9 14,038,084 In 1869-70 14,315,509 In 1870-1 15,623,081 In 1871-2 17,589,468 In 1872-3 19,174,647 In 1873-4 23,316,316 " It will thus be seen, that in the four years from 18 67-8 to 1870-1, the * The item $23,862,89215 made up as follows : — Expenditure as in Public Accounts, official return . . $23,5^9»30' Add item of expenditure wrongly placed in Intercolonial Railway Suspense Account 34.3>59^ Actual Expenditure, 1877 $23,862,892 t This deficit is made up as follows : * ^ Deficit admitted in Public Accounts $1,460,027 Add item wrongly placed in Suspense Account as above 343»S9J Actual Deficit, 1877 $1,803,618 a (( 45 if since icit. $ ,900,785 ,803,618 704,403 was for ought to 10 under- The late istruction silence is a yearly ith works e in the lolled the lie annual >9 !i )8 ^7 [6 170-1, the }18 ** annual expenditure rose two millions of dollars ; that in the succeeding two " years it rose three millions and a half more ; but that in the next succeed- " ing year — that of 1873 4, which the hon. Senator (Mr. Macpherson) so " indecently seeks to fasten on the present Government — the annual expendi- ** ture went up at one jump, the enormous additional sum of $3,768,300." Examine the flagrant disingenuousness of Mr. Brown's statement. He only gave the expenditure. He said nothing about the revenue. He was silent about the millions of surpluses under the Macdonald Gov- ernment, and silent about the millions of deficits under the Mackenzie Government. Mr. Brown concealed also the fact that Two Millions of taxes had been repealed by the Macdonald Government in 1871 and 1872. Why did not Mr. Brown carry his contrast of expenditure beyond 1873-4? Can it have been to conceal the fact that the expenditure under the Mac- kenzie Government was greater in every year for which we have the returns, down to 1876-7 than it was in 1873-4, and that too in the face of a declining revenue (except in 1874-5), in the face of two deficits amounting to nearly $4,000,000 ? The correct figures will be found in my table. Mr. Brown charges me with " indecently seeking to fasten on the present Government the ^'increased annual expenditure of $3,768,300." Most of you have read my pamphlets. Mr. Brown has their contents at his finger-ends, and he knows that I only hold the present Government responsible for $1,800,000 of the increased annual controllable expenditure that took place between 1873 and 1876. I have repeatedly stated this in Parliament, correcting Ministerial mis-statemenls on the subject. I defy Mr. Brown to show that I ever held the present Government responsible for an increase of $3,768,300, or any sum larger than $1,800,000 of the increase between 1873 ^^^ 1876. You will thus see that the indecency Mr. Brown speaks of lies at his own door, not at mine. Why do Mr. Brown and the Ministers labor so hard and so dishonestly to gloss over the mal-administration, to conceal the extravagance and to misre- present the expenditure of the Government ? It cannot be done in the interest of the people. It must be done to promote some interest which is opposed to the people's interest. The Finance Minister at Lindsay the other day was as unjust as Mr. Brown was to the late Government. The difference between the two Governments is just this — the Macdonald Government had cash in hand from revenue to pay for the works which they carried on, the Mackenzie Government, without cash in hand, have gone on spending money as if they had annual surpluses instead of annual deficits, and have plunged ihe country into debt. The Finance Minister overstated the expenditure from revenue in 1873-4, and unfairly charged the late Government therewith. He charged against ihe revenue of that year items amounting to $1,273,907 expended upon undertakings which had theretofore been charged against capital, and which the present Government have sin e charged against capital or which were for exceptional purposes. He did so to make the expenditure from revenue of the late Government appear larger than it really was. m* i 46 . PUBLIC WORKS PAID FOR OUT OF REVENUE. Another statement is persistently made by the gentlemen at present in office (and I think I saw that a Minister o*^ the Crown stated it in the County of Bothwell the other day), that the present Government did not commence any new works to be paid for out of revenue, but only completed those which had been commenced by their predecessors. A list of works of this class com- vienced after i8yj and the expenditure upon each, charged to revenue, will be found in my pamphlet of June, 1877, pages 41 to 45. The expenditure according to the Public Accounts was as follows : Total amount expended in 1874 upon works not commenced in 1873. $327,552 Total amount expended in 1875 upon works not commenced in 1873. 203,546 Total amount expended in 1876 upon works not commenced in 1873. 556,596 Total amount expended in 1875 ^^^ 1876 upon works not com- menced in 1874 621,669 The present Government is, of course, alone responsible for this expendi- ture, as they succeeded to office on 7th November, 1873. I do not admit the plea which Ministers constantly put forth that their hands were tied by their predecessors, and that they were powerless. Do they mean to say that the Government of this country is not under the control of the Ministers of the day, and that they are not to be as prudent as ordinary individuals would be — that their expenditure is not to be governed by the revenue? The pretence is perfectly preposterous. If what they state is true, the Government of this country is like a runaway coach, and the Ministry simply throw down the reins and let the coach go to destruction — and we are going towards that goal very fast. (Cheers.) It is not the right to govern and control that is wanting in our Government, but it is the requisite skill and capacity that are wanting. A CHALLENGE. What I have stated to you touching the increased expenditure is taken from the Public Accounts, It is unseemly to have members of the Government and myself standing up before the public, the one denying what the other asserts. To put an end to these charges of mis- statement and to stop recrimination, I am perfectly willing to leave the audit of my statements to gentlemen who are qualified for the work, and who are strictly non-partizan. I will name the General Manager of the Bank of Montreal, Mr. Angus ; the General Manager of the Merchants' Bank, Mr. Hague ; thefGeneral Manager of the Canada Life Insurance Co., Mr. Ramsay, and the General Manager of the Permanent Loan and Savings Company, Mr. Mason. I am willing to leave it to any two or three of those gentlemen to say whether my statements are corrector not. (Prolonged cheering.) If it were a matter of politics, those gentlemen would not act, but it is not. They would simply have to deal with matters of account, to see whether such of my statements as the Government may ques- tion are correctly taken from the Public Accounts. Two or three ' ' my 47 statements are estimates, but all the others are from the Public Accounts. Unless the Government are willing to coire before the tribunal 1 have suggested, and prove that my statements are incorrect, let them forever be silent upon the subject of inaccuracies so far as I am concerned, and unless they be silent, I hope that fair-minded people will not listen to them until they accept my challenge. (Renewed cheering). CAPITAL EXPENDITURE. I will now show you the amount of Capital Expenditure during each finan- cial year since Confederation. The members of the Government and Mr. Brown name $125,000,000 to $130,000,000 as the amount of obligations which this Government had to face when they ' uccceded to office. The whole amount that has been spent on capital account, during the four years which they have been in office, is $26,931,732. I had been curious to see how they would explain this $125,000,000 to $130,000,000 of obligations. Mr. Brown tried it in the Senate, and Mr. Cartwright followed him at Lindsay. The following is a statement of Capital Expenditure for £ach Financial Year Since Confederation. Folio. na m G C 3 •-H > X < t/3 X3 OJ -1 Oh 00 Year. 1867-68 1868-69 1869-70 1870-71 1871-72 1872-73 1873-74 1874-75 1875-76 1876-77 Canals and Miscellane- ous Works. Pacific Railway. Intercolonial Railway. $ 524,126 325,127 281,630 461,969 552,998 1,526,811 2,731,482 2,808,560 4>904,S24 $ North -West Territory. Totals. 30,148 489,428 561,818 310,224 1,546,241 3,346,567 1,691,149 $ $ 50,0811 1 169,782! 19,113 1,567,5861 1,821,887; 2,866,376; 773,871 5,039,063, 4,827,183} 3,417,661! 2,645,460' 1,004,057; 241,888, 63,238! $ 574,208 514,023 3,671,104 3,670,396 6,232,349 6,005,240 5,254,698 6,9-'3,i8s 7,154,118 7,599,731 14,^17,231 7, 97 5,57-'' 22,586,245 2,920,000 Total Expenditure on Public Works since Confederation, charged to Capital Provincial Debts Paid with borrowed money — proceeds of Loans , Paid out of Surplus Revenue 47,59 9,055 47,599,055 20,452,340 68,051,395 57,480,053 $10;571.342 Of this sum of $10,571,342, no less than $10,186,288 accrued under the Administration of Sir John Macdonald. , Mr. Brown in the Senate said, " Sir John A. Macdonald's (Government pledged the credit of the country " for public works to a vast amount ; aad It^tt the burden of carrying them I m *' through as a legacy to their successors. Here is a list of engagements the " new Ministry found awaiting them when they came into power : — Canals $43,800,000 ^ Intercolonial Railway 10,000,000 Pacific Railway 30,000,000 N. S. and N. B. Railways 2,000,000 P. E. I. Railway 2,500,000 Minor works. 4,500,000 Improvements, St. Lawrence 2,500,000 Advances 1 ,000,000 $96,000,000 " In addition to these enormous undertakings, the new Ministry found $35, ** 000,000 of Public Debentures maturing immediately, for which no provision " whatever had been made b^ their predecessors." Mr. Cartwright at Lindsay remarked : " What have the Government done that they should be entrusted with a " new lease of power ? In reply to that he would say that, having faced a " series of entanglements such as no other Government in Canada had ever " confronted — (hear, hear) — having provided for engagements amounting to ** over $130,000,000 incurred by their predecessors, and having faced the " necessity of incurring enormous additional expenditure for interest on capital " sunk in works which these gentlemen had undertaken — having done this, " they had reduced the annual expenditure to a figure which did not exceed by " one dollar the amount they had found when they entered office, if they would " deduct the amount of their permanent investments as he had a right to ask " them to do." In his Budget Speech of T875, when speaking of the $125,000,000 engage- ments, he said : " There were twenty-five or thirty millions of dollars, which, " for many reasons, it was desirable to pay off, if possible." What do you suppose this " paying off" meant ? Simply renewing loans at a lower rate of interest. (Laughter.) Suppose any one of you owed a $500 note at a bank here and got it renewed or borrowed $500 at another bank to meet it — what would be thought of you if you were to go swaggering about the streets boasting that you had paid it off, while you had only renewed it? (Cheers.) Mr. Cartwright's statement was misleading and ludicrous. Some $35,000,000 was in the form of maturing debentures and was renewed at a reduced rate of interest, reducing to some extent the annual expenditure from income. The other items which Mr. Brown and the Finance Minister enumerate have not been expended, and the country was never committed to their expendi- ture. It is quite true that a portion of it has been spent upon the canals and upon the Pacific Railway, but the present Government did not feel itself bound by the engagements of their predecessors in respect to the Pacific Railway. They ajjandoned the scheme of their predecessors and adopted one of their own, which involves the sinking of a large amount of money hopelessly in the wilderness between Lake Superior and the Red River : but so much has been done that it must now be completed. No Government was committed to the other schemes named, and no prudent Government would have gone on with as much as the present Government has proceeded nts the ind$35, rovision with a faced a lad ever nting to iced the m capital Dne this, xceed by ey would It to ask 3 engage- s, which, do you ;r rate of a bank it — what e streets (Cheers.) ,000,000 jced rate income, ate have expendi- le canals eel itself e Pacific adopted f money iver : but /ernment /ernment roceeded 49 with in the state in which the finances of the country have been in since 1873. The pubhc resources and credit would not have permitted the country to have borrowed $125,000,000 or $130,000,000. The amount has not been wanted, and it is absurd and dishonest to speak ot it as the suni of inherited engage- ments. I hold that no (lovernment would be bound by the engagements of their predecessors to |)roceed with public works, irrespective of the condi- tion of the finances of the country. The doctrine is monstrous. It was especially unpardonable in the Government ot which Mr. Cartwright was Finance Minister to continue the public expenditure on an extravagant scale. Mr. Macpherson then briefly exposed the delusiveness of Mr. Cartwright's estimates of 1874 and 1875, which he did more fully at Port Elgin. (See his speech at that place.) THE VVELLAND CANAL HUNOLE. If there were one thing more than another expected of Mr. Mackenzie, it was that he would administer his own department carefully and intelligently, skillfully and efficiently. I have described to you his mode of constructing the Pacific Railway, and I think you will agree with me that that has not been characterized by much skill or judgment. The way in which the Wclland Canal enlargement has been proceeded with marks, if possible, still greater mal- administration and incapacity. One of the objects to be accomplished by enlarging the canal is to obtain the water supply from Lake Erie, "i'liere are twenty-five locks between Lake Ontario and Thorold. Twenty-four of these may be said to have been completed last year. The guard lock and other works near Port Colborne, including a barrier of rock containing 500,000 yards, were only put under contract last year, after the locks between Lake Ontario and Thorold were almost completed, so that those twenty-four Locks lie useless and worse — deteriorating for want of water. The following is the Expenditure on the Welland Canal. 1874 $ 746,420 1875 1,047,119 1876 1,569,478 1877 2,199,962 $5>562,979 Estimates voted for year ending 30th June, 1878 2,000,000 Supplementary Estimates for year ending 30th June, 1878, also voted and expended it may be assumed 138,500 $7,701,479 Interest on this sum at 5 per cent per annum is $385,074; for three years it will amount to $1,155,222, which amount at least, I am assured, will be lost to the country, in consequence of the injudicious order in which the works have been proceeded with. The enlarged canal is not likely to be completed before the spring of 188 1, I will now submit a statement of the Increase of Annual Charges under Mr. Mackenzie's Oovernment, many of them Caused by Mismanagement, Extravagance, or Favoritism. 1. Increase of annual Controllable Expenditure $2,300,000 2. Increase of Interest on debt, Management of debt and Sinking Fund 2,032,812 Total $4,332,812 The above sum of $4,332,812 capitalized at 5 per cent, amounts to $86,656,240; that is, the increased amount of annual burdens since 1873, for which the present Government is responsible, would pay the interest at 5 per cent, per annum on $86,656,240. It amounts to 10 cents a bushel upon 43,328,120 bushels of wheat, or a larger quantity of wheat, I apjjrehend, than is produced in the Dominion. Now, gentlemen, you know how much toil and anxiety it costs you to raise and market 1,000 bushels of wheat. T'.ie increased taxation imposed upon you by the present Government will take from you annually one tenth, or 100 bushels of every 1,000, that you raise, assuming the price of wheat to be $1 a bushel. These facts are as incontro- vertible as they are appalling. Among the items included m the increased annual controllable expendi- ture, for which the Government of Mr. Mackenzie is responsible, are the following : Salaries and Contingencies in Public Offices at Ottawa and Legislation $433,512 Salaries of Cabinet Ministers 32,200 Administration of Justice 166,631 Post Office 356,157 Customs 153,929 Immigration and Quarantine 54,850 Excise 34,453 Superannuations 51,807 Weights and Measures 60,661 The Government will, of course, say that my estimate of $2,300,000 as the amount of the increased annual expenditure for which they are responsible, is excessive. It is an estimate, and like every estimate open to question. But I believe it to be fair and liberal to the present Government. I now come to my last statement, which is as follows : — Bt .512 ,200 ,631 .157 .929 ,850 .453 ,807 ,661 GENERAL SUMMARY OF LOSSES. Loss by purchase of Steel Rails (estimate) $2,000,00 j Loss of interest on Lake Superior section Canadian Pacific Railway (estimate) 862,50 Loss of interest on Welland Canal expenditure (estimate) 1,155,222 Loss by Fort Francis Lock 250,000 Loss by apparent favoritism i09»338 Loss by Fort Pelly Buildings, practically abandoned 29,320 Loss by amount paid to relieve Mr. Foster of his contract for Georgian Bay Branch Railway contract 41,000 Loss by amount paid for purchase of K.aministi(iuia Terminus more than was necessary, estimated at 30,000 Estimated Loss upon these Items $4,477,380 It occurred to me when looking at your harbor to-day that, if the $30,000 overpaid on (loderich harbor, or even a portion of it, had been expended here, it would have done better service than it did by enriching a favorite of the Government, the friend of your representative, at the expense of the public. MR. CARTVVRIGHT'S LOANS. Late as it is in the evening, I must say a few words on Mr. Cartwright's loans. I have taken great e.xception to his mode of borrowing money. He has done it in this way. He insisted ",i borrowing at a lower rate of interest than capitalists in England wc willing to lend on Canadian securities. Mr. Cartwright said in effect to the capitalists, *' I want to gel «* money nominally at four per cent. ; I want to show the people of Canada *' that I have borrowed from you by showing to you the silver side of " my shield, while I show 'them the brazen side. They will not under- " stand the sacrifice involved, and I will issue the loan at a handsome dis " count." The amount lost, in round figures, on the last loan, as near as I can ascertain, was 12)^ per cent., or one-eighth of the whole amount of the loan. He sank that amount of capital in order to get the interest nominally lower than the market rate. While we got only 87 J/^ cents in the dollar, we have to pay interest on too cents, and have to repay 100 cents in the dollar. Mr, Cartwright has had the credit of borrowing at four per cent, interest, while the capital he sunk will bring the rate of interest well up to five per cent. ; and yet in the face of this fact I observe that leading Ministerialists are actually stating at public meetings that the rate of interest is only four per cent. What can be the explanation of such a mis-statement? Can it be that the gentlemen do not understand the cjuestion, or are they guilty of wilful misrepresentation ? His system involves an enor- mous loss of capital to the country, and what we want is capital to carry on our public works. Under Mr. Cartwright's arrangement about one-eighth of the capital was sunk in advance for interest. It is just as if one of you borrowed $700 but gave a mortgage on his farm for $8co, for the sake of get* ting money at a nominally lower rate than it actually did cost him. «n' 52 - QUEBEC . . 1 intended to say something to you on the constitutional question in Quebec. Many think the Lieut.-Governor of that Province made a fiUibuster- ing raid upon the Constitution. Every Province in the Dominion is deeply interested in the question. Ontario is as much concerned as Quebec, for it affects our constitutional rights and privileges. It was, therefore, unfortunate that your representative, the only constitutional lawyer of repute on the Gov- ernment side of the House, did not take part in the debate. His opinion was anxiously looked for and it was expected that, if he approved of the conduct of the Lieut.-Governor, he would have advanced strong constitutional arguments in support of his opinion, or that, if he looked upon the aC: of the Lieut.-Gover- nor as an act of dangerous usurpation, he would have had th.; patriotism to have condemned and denounced it. But he neither spoke nor voted on the question. Unfortunately the Ministerial party one and all seemed to think that what had been done in Quel)ec might serve them in the coming elections, and they suppressed their indignation (if they felt any) at the overthrow of the Constitution as they had done their professions and principles and pledges when the assertion of them might have weakened their hold on office. I intended also to have said something upon the political recreancy of the Government. It is, however, known to you all. You remember how Mr. Blake and Mr. Mackenzie denounced coalitions, yet, when they first went into office, they formed a coalition, and tempted men to sell themselves and their principles for place and pelf (Cheers.) Disregarding their pledges, they coalesced with their opponents from Cartwright to Cauchon. All these things are written in the history of the country, and I fear will have an evil effect on the very morals of the people, because it will enable men to justify political misconduct and corruption by pointing to what leaders of public opinion have done. The incapacity and extravagance of the Government are also chronicled ir; the history of the country. The consequences of these will be felt grievously in the pockets ot the taxpayers for many years to come. Their farms are mortgaged for the amount of the increased expenditure and they must pay it out of the first fruits of their labor. CONCLUSION. I have felt it my duty to expose the deficiencies of the Government. My object, as I have told you, is to see the Government of this country placed in the hands of competent, true, and honorable men, who will conduct the public business ably, honestly, and economically, for the benefit of the people of Canada, and not for the enrichment of political parasites. It is to me personally, except as one of the general public, a matter of indifference who may govern the eountry. I occupy the same position as yourselves, that of a tax-payer. It is in the interests of the people alone that I am exposing the Government, and doing it at the sacrifice of much of my own ease and comfort. I shall conclude by giving from an American writer upon a former American 58 • < Administration, words which, as paraphrased, may. be applied with justice, I think, to Mr. Mackenzie's Government: — " Mr. Mackenzie has parenthesized in history five years which will be marked " hereafter as the era of vicarious Government and the jieriod of greed — five ** years of such official incapacity and reckless extravagance, such selfishness ** and shamelessness, such low aims and base purposes, such grasping avarice " and eager over-reaching, such speculation in official information, and such " degradation ot all things which the Dominion has held to be high, and holy, " and worthy an honest pride, that to-day the country hangs its head, and holds " its nose, and waits for this Administration to pass." Mr. Macpherson resumed his seat amid prolonged cheering. A vote of thanks to him was carried unanimously and the audience dispersed. be leir It of the "ort. can THE BANQUET. ' A splendid banquet was given to Mr. Macpherson in the evening. Every seat was occupied and many who desired to be present were unable to gain admission. Mr. Macpherson, in response to the toast of his health, expressed his appreciation of the very cordial manner in which he had been welcomed by his old constituents. He was delighted to see the progress which the beauti- ful town had made, and to know that a new industry — the manufacture of salt — had sprung into existence and had flourished for a time since his last visit. He had visited the large establishment of Mr. Rightmeyer, but he was sorry to learn that it was not as prosperous as it had been or as it should be to give a fair return to those who had invested their money in it. He regretted to hear that some of the salt establishments had been closed — that the salt industry, like many other interests in Canada, had been overborne by the large importations from the United States, and that the town, like others throughout the Dominion, was suffering from the slaughtering of its indus- tries. (Applause.) He hoped there would soon be a return to a more prosperous condition of affairs, and it rested with the people to say whether it should be so or not. Within a few months they would have an oppor- tunity of choosing representatives either to support the present (iovern- ment, which declared their inability to do anything to restore the prosperity of the country, or to support the party which advocated a national policy. (Cheers.) He then proceeded to show that without such a policy manufactures could never be established in Canada. The F'inance Minister had expressed the hope that Canadian manufacturers would seek markets in other and more distant countries in place of in the United States, from which they were unfairly excluded. That was as unreasonable as the command of Pharaoh to the Israelites, to make bricks without straw. How could Canadian manufacturers extend their trade to foreign countries when they were not allowed to exist at home. Would he have them go to foreign coun- tries and say, " If we establish such and such a manufacture in Canada, will " you buy from us and what price will you give us?" Manufacturers must il 54 be firmly established in a home market before they could compete in foreign markets. (Cheers.) Designing men had endeavored to mislead the public by representing that the adoption of a national policy meant increased tax- ation. Nothing could be more fallacious. Only a certain amount of revenue was required, and that must be obtained under any circumstanecs. Under a national policy the duties would be imposed mainly upon such articles as could be produced in this country instead of upon those which must always be imported, (Cheers.) TIVERTON. On Wednesday morning Senator Macpherson and party drove to Tiverton, where he addressed a meeting of his old friends. He expressed regret at finding the harbors along the coast of Bruce, especially the harbor of Inver- huron, little better than they were fourteen years ago. If a small proportion of the money which had beei' wasted had been judiciously expended on the harbors of Bruce, the public would have benefitted. He might mention what was well known, that about $30,000 had been paid to the contractor for the Goderich Harbor Improvements in excess of the price at which an experienced contractor tendered for the work. That was a scandalous case of favoritism, and a large amount of money had been lost to the country, while the harbors on the coast of Bruce were left unimproved. Here, as at Kincardine, he exposed the fallacy of supposing that a national policy meant increased taxation, and showed that it would involve not an increase in the amount of taxes, but simply a readjustment of the tariff. At the conclusion of the address a vote of thanks was carried unanimously, and the meeting separated with cheers for Senator Macpherson and the Queen. UNDERWOOD. A rapid drive through a fertile rolling country, rich with luxuriant crops, brought the party to Underwood, where they were met by a party of friends and a band from Port Elgin, ten miles distant. The party proceeded to the Town Hall, where Senator Macpherson was presented with an address, to which he replied in a brief speech, dealing principally with financial matters* He also advocated a national policy, and pointed out the absurdity of the cry raised by its opponents that it meant increased taxation. He concluded by referring to Mr. Cartwright's insult to the Highland race, and amid cheers called upon them to resent the insult at the polls. A vote of thanks was carried unanimously, and the party, headed by the piper and the band, drove to Fort Elgin. PORT ELGIN. This thrivi- g town, one of the most beautiful, enterprising, and prosperous of the many thriving towns of Bruce, was all astir ?,s the party drove through its streets. Flags and bunting fluttered from scores of houses, and evergreen arches and mottoes of welcome testified to the hearty and generous greeting which its inhabitants accorded to their visitor. '■*© the to ers« cry by leers ous ugh een :ing At the Town Hall, which was handsomely decorated for the occasion, addresses were presented on behalf of the citizens of Port Elgin and the Liberal Conservative Associations of Port Elgin and of the Township of Arran, to which Mr. Macpherson replied at considerable length. He expressed his gratification at the warmth of his reception, as well as at the fact that it came, not from one party merely, but from the citizens of Port Elgin generally. There were circumstances which made that peculiarly gratifying to him. In that town he had been vilified by a member of the Government, the Minister of Finance, for the fearlessness and truthful, ness with which he had exposed the extravagance and shortcomings of the Administration. Ministers could not disprove any one of his charges, and had resorted instead to coarse personal abuse of himself. This splendid recep- sion, this glorious ovation, was a fitting rebuke to his traducers. (Cheers.) He was glad to see the interest which the young men of the country were taking in public affairs. On them devolved, in consequence of their greater advantages of education, the duty of investigating public questions for their fathers as well as for themselves, and of removing the prejudices which bound their seniors, traditional prejudices which had no longer any bearing on or signi- ficance in the public questions of the day. (Cheers. ) A more manly and thoroughly honest people than the inhabitants of Ontario did not possess the franchise in any country, and furthermore they were more advanced in intelligenr^ than almost any other people of the same number on this continent. Regard for consistency was a creditable and honorable feeling, but it might be carried too far, and it was carried too far in parts of Ontario, and in that very township. (Hear, hear.) He regretted to learn that the harbors on th coast of Bruce had been neglected by the Government, while they had put $30,000 into the pockets of a favorite at Goderich. He attributed that neglect to the fact that the people in certain parts of the county had so blindly and slavishly adhered to one party that they had lost their individuality and their political importance as communities. The result was that their interests were neglected when public improvements were in contemplation or public money was to be expended. The present Government could always count upon the support of certain sections of Bruce, and consequently they made no effort to deserve it. So long as that state of affairs continued, and until the people asserted their independence of self-constituted conventions and of self-seeking politicians, their interests w^uld be ne- glected. (Applause.) The young men should, therefore, devote themselves to searching for the truth and placing it before their seniors, who would cease to be deceived by traditional cries of Reform and Conservative^ now that those cries had ceased to have any significance. (Applause.) Mr. Blake had taunted his own party with being " Reformers who have *' nothing to reform." It was true, and a very happy condition it was for the country to be in. A country without political grievances, without civil or re- ligious disabilities, was in an enviable condition ; and the people of such a m 56 I : ■; country should put aside everything of an unimportant or only traditional character which was calculated to divide them, and should unite in promoting the development of its resources and in educating and elevating themselves and their children. (Cheers.) There was not one question, except the com- mercial policy, that need separate the people of this country, not one that honest representative men of the old parties could not sit down together to discuss and solve in the common interest. The cries of " Reform " and " Conservative " were now kept up by those who desired to per- petuate divisions and heart-burnings among the people, not in the interest of the people but of themselves, the self-seekers of the country. (Cheers.) The mission of the young men should be to seek the truth, and having found it, to place it before their seniors that they might no longer be influenced by designing men who would divide the people for the purpose of enriching themselves. Let the people accord their support to honest, patriotic men, and to able administrators, uninfluenced by ejife party names. He then replied to the address of the Liberal Conservative Association of Arran. The meeting dispersed with cheers for Senator Macpherson, Colonel Sproat, Sir John Macdonald and the Queen. In the course of the afternoon the Senator was driven to the harbor, which is in a condition that is far from creditable to the Government, considering that about a quarter of a million bushels of wheat were shipped from it and were subjected to extra insurance in consequence of the condition of the harbor. BANQUET AT PORT ELGIN. In the evening Senator Macpherson was entertained at a banquet in the Town Hall. The large room was crowded with the representative men of the town, and among those who had assembled to welcome the Senator were many gentlemen who had fought the battles of the Reform Party when there were reforms to be fought for, and when Reformers were more than placemen. The Hall was very tastefully decorated by the ladies of Port Elgin, many of whom graced the banquet with their presence. After the usual loyal toasts had been cordially drunk, the toast of the evening was honored with great en- thusiasm, and the piper played a stirring martial air. Senator Macpherson re- sponded, dealing with the finances of the country. Referrmg to Mr Cart- wright's speech at Port Elgin, he said it was almost wholly devoted to abuse of himself (Mr. Macpherson) — unprovoked and wanton abuse, for be had not, before the delivery ot that speech, uttered a discourteous word about Mr. Cart- wright. Mr. Cartwright's speech was insulting to the intelligence of his hearers, and the delivery of it was an abuse of their hospitality. (Cheers.) But he (Mr. Macpherson) would not return railing for railing. The people of Port Elgin had vindicated him. They had avenged him, and if he were to retaliate on Mr. Cartwright with vituperation, he should be lowering himself to his level, which self-respect as well as respect for them would prevent his doing. (Cheers.) Instead of explaining the finances of the country, Mr. Cartwright had devoted much time to Mr. Tilley's o/ estimates, and that he must have done for the purpose of deUiding and mis- leading his hearers. I'he extravagance or economy of a Government must be as- certained not frc'"^ estimates, but from expenditure. Governments should act as prudent individuals would act. When enjoying an overflowing revenue, improvements might be entered upon, and expenditure incurred which would be highly imprudent under different circumstances. Notwithstanding the serious and continued decrease of revenue, the present Government persisted in lavish expenditure. All would remember the professions of economy which had been uttered so profusely by Mr. Mackenzie and his colleagues when they were in Opposition, and the people expected when they raised them to power that retrenchment would have been practised. He had sup. posed that in Mr. Mackenzie's case, considering his professsons and habits, economy was with him an instinct, and that he would watch the expendi- ture of the people's dollars and cents just as faithfully and conscientiously as he would watch his own. Probably no man in Canada was more disappoint- ed with the administrative failure and poUtical recreancy of Mr. Mackenzie and his colleagues than himself (Mr. Macpherson). He was surprised that Mr. Mackenzie should have taken into his Government so extreme a Tory as Mr. Cartwright had always been, but he supposed it was a matter of ne. cessity, and an admission that there was no man in the Reform ranks qualified to take charge of the finances of the Dominion. MR. CARTWRIGHT'S MISCALCULATIONS. He would call attention to Mr. Cartwright's estimates of revenue and their deplorably fallacious character. Estimates of revenue were much more important than estimates of expenditure, and the former should govern the latter. Esti- mates of expenditure were always largely within the control of the Government while estimates of revenue depended mainly on the prosperity of the people. By watching how the revenue came up to the estimate, the Government had an unerring guide to the expenditure. He would read the estimates of revenue made by Mr. Cartwright in 1874 and 1875. He would read Mr. Cartwright's words, not his own, and would also place the returns of revenue before them that they might contrast the revenue with the estimates. In 1874 Mr. Cartwright imposed taxes vvhich he estimated would yield $3,000,000. In his Budget Speech, delivered on 14th April of that year, he said : — " The total amount expected to be derived from these new sources " of revenue is about $3,000,000, which is about the amount we require over " the $22,000,000 already estimated for, in order to meet the enormous addi- *' tional expense which we must expect during the next four or five years." He also said : " I do not think that any greater increase of the tariff than ive " suggest now would be wise. I think we have gone to the limit beyond which it " would be impossible to pass without resorting to direct taxation" The following is an extract from Mr. Cartwright's Budget Speech, delivered on i6th February, 1875: — " I think that drring those ten years (1874 to " 1884) we shall probably borrow from our own people, through the medium " of Savings Banks, or receive from miscellaneous sources, about One Million " of Dollars annually, amounting in all to Ten Millions." m In the same Budget Speech Mr. Cartwright further said : — •' If the House " coincides with me in the opinion that it will be wise and prudent with these " heavy engagements, to maintain a steady, moderate surplus, we shall probably " have another Million per annum from that source, amounting to Ten Mil- *' lions more." The following table exhibits Mr. Cartwright's Estimates compared with the actual results: — Estimated Revenue afier the Tariff was Increased in 1874. Estimated Revenue. 1875 $25,000,000 1876 25,000,000 1877 25,000,000 $75,000,000 Actual Revenue. 1875 $24,648,715 1876 22,587,587 1877 22,059,274 $69,295,576 Receipts of Revenue in 1875, 1876, and 1877 less than estimated by Mr. Cartwright in Budget Speech, April 14th, 1874 $6,704,424 Estimated Surpluses of Revenue. Estimated Surpluses. In 1875 $1,000,000 In 1876 1,000,000 In 1877 1,000,000 $3,000,000 Actual Deficits. 1876 $1,900,785 1877 1,803,618 $3,704,403 Less Surplus, 1875. 935.644 $^,768,759 Amount of Surpluses in 1875-76-77 (see Budget Speech Feb, i6th, 1875) estimated to be 3,000,000 Less than estimated by Mr. Cartwright in his Budget \ Speech of Feb. 16, 1875 $5,768,759 Estimated Increase of Deposits in Government Savings Banks. ( The amount on deposits in the Government Savings Banks at the end of the fiscal year before the date of his speech [30th June, 1874], was $6,078,678, and this sum must have been Mr. Cartwright's standard.) Estimated Annual Increase of Deposits in Government Savings Banks. 1875 over 1874 $1,000,000 1876 over 1874 1,000,000 1877 over 1874 1,000,000 Estimated Increase for 1875-6-7. $3,000,000 Decreased Amount on Deposit in Savings Batiks. 1875 less than 1874... $267,390 1876 •♦ •• .. 841,114 1877 " " ... 351.879 Total decrease of De- posits in Government Savings Banks in 1875-6-7 $1,460,383 Add estimated Increases $1,000,000 a year for three years... $3,000,000 Amount of deposits in Savings Banks less than esti- mated by Mr. Cartwright in his Budget Speech, i6th Feb., 1875 ' $4,460,383 o9 he House vith these probably Ten Mil- l with the 1874. ,704,424 ,768,759 Senator Macpherson continued : Let me compare the receipts with the estimates. Mr. Cartwright estimated the revenue at $25,000,000 a year at least. The amount received into the treasury for the three complete years of Mr. Mackenzie's Government, for which we have the Public Accounts, amounted only to $69,295,576, or an average sum of $23,089,525, being in round figures $2,000,000 a year less estimated. The exact falling off was $5,704,424, and the discrepancy between the estimates and the actual revenue increased annually. Again, Mr. Cartwright estimated that there would be an annual surplus of $1,000,000. Had this been realized it would have amounted for the three years to $3,000,000, but instead of this surplus Mr. Cartwrighi has been confronted with a net deficit of $2,768,759 for the three years, making the actual discrepancy between his estimate and the result $5,768,759. Then, again, Mr. Cartwright estimated that the revenue through the Gov- ernment Savings Banks would amount to a million a year over the amount of the deposits in 1874, but instead of that the deposits in the Government Savings Banks have not since 1874 reached the amount they stood at then, and the discrepancy between Mr. Cartwright's estimate of revenue from this source and the result for the three years is no less than $4,460,383. The Government had thus early warning of a decreasing revenue, early intima- tion that Mr. Cartwright's estimates were fallacious to the extent of millions a year, and surely it was their duty to have checked expenditure and enforced the most rigid retrenchment throughout the public service. But instead of retrenchment, the Government continued to distinguish its reign by extrava- gance and waste. What can be said in defence of a Government that could have been guilty of such recklessness ? Nothing indicates the condition of the poorer people more clearly than the deposits in the Savings Banks. Here they have been decreasing every year since 1874, and in the face of the great falling away from Mr. Cartwright's estimates the expenditure was continued on a prodigal scale. (Cheers.) ANOTHER OF MR. CAR TWRIGHT'S MISTAKES. 60,383 There is another matter in which Mr. Cartwright is concerned to which I wish to call attention. At Lindsay, less than a month ago, speaking of his supplementary estimates of last session, he said : — " Moreover it was the extreme of absurdity to suppose that other Govern- " ments did not find it necessary to bring down very large supplementary " estimates. Why, no longer ago than the year 1869-70, he found that under " the late Administration in one single year supplementary estimates were " brought down to the tune of $7,346,541. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) He " did not say that any blame was to be imputed to the late Government for " that ; the greater part of the expenditure was in many cases chargeable to " capital account, and in no respect to the income of the year But great " blame was to be attached to experienced men — men trusted by their " fellow countrymen — at any rate, by a considerable number of them — for " making it a charge against the Government that they had brought down (iO " estimates on (■ai)ital account amounting to $2,000,000 for thu last year, " without any mention of the $7,346,000 brought clown by these gentlemen "themselves. (Hear, hear.) That was not a fair thing to do. It was per- " fectly fair tocrilici/X' these estimates, but it was perfectly fair at the same " time for the honest opponent to take the opportunity of admitting that, so " far from being unusual, it was the customary course which all Governments " had pursued." This statement surprised me, and I turned up the supplementary estimates for 1869-70, and discovered that the Minister of Finance had committed an egregious error, one, considering his high office and his facilities for procuring accurate information, which was altogether unpardonable. He included the sum of $1,460,000 twice in the statement which he made at Lindsay. He misrepresented the Government of 1869-70 by that large amount; and I ask you if that were " a fair thing to do." It may have been only a blunder, but, coming from the Minister of Finance, it was an unpardonable blunder. I think it has become evident that neither his estimates nor his statements can be relied upon. I now dismiss Mr. Cartwright, and I hope the people, for their own sake, will dismiss him also. SOUTHAMPTON. A rapid drive brought Senator Macpherson and party to Southampton at an early hour on the morning of Thursday. They were met by a number of the residents, headed by the Saugeen Indian Brass Band, and escorted to the Town Hall, which was decorated with flags for the occasion. The streets were ornamented with graceful arches. An address was presented to Senator Macpherson by the Mayor of South- ampton on behalf of the people of the village, to which he replied in a man- ner that evidently produced much satisfaction among the audience. A most pleasing incident was the presence of settlers from Amabel and other portions of the Indian Peninsula, who expressed the obligations which they were under to Senator Macpherson and Col. Sproat for the justice and con- sideration they had obtained for them in respect to the revaluing of their lands, the necessary steps to secure this having been taken before the change of Government. The party were then driven down to the fine harbor of Refuge, formed partly by Chantry Island. It is a lovely, charming locality, and must become a fashionable rescn for the people of the Dominion. The party remained enjoying the cool breezes from the lake till the whistle of the train summoned them on board. PAISLEY. On the arrival of the train at Paisley, Senator Macpherson was met at the station by a vast crowd, and presented with an address by A. McNeil, Esq., President of the Liberal Conservative Association. Senator Macpherson having .«1 responded, a procession of carriages was formed and, headed by a band, drove through the streets of the town to the leading hotel, where he was entertained at a banquet. From the dining-room the party adjourned to the Town Hall, where Senator Macpherson addressed a meeting. He spoke at considerable length on financial and national policy questions, and then referred to the changes which had fken place in Bruce since he had last visited the county. He rejoiced to see the improvement which had taken place in Paisley. With its splendid water power it ought to be one of the most flourishing and rapidly growing places in the county, and all that was necessary to make it so, he be- lieved, was the adoption of a true national and patriotic policy. (Cheers.) With fair encouragement to capitalists, Paisley would soon become an impor- tant manufacturing town, benefitting not only its people but the farming com- munity in the vicinity by furnishing them with a home market for their pro- duce. Under the mistaken policy of the present Government capitalists had no inducement to invest their money in Canada. Investments in Canadian industries were practically prohibited, even in a town like Paisley where the facilities for manufacturing were great While Canadian manufactures were excluded from the American markets by high or prohibitory duties, they were overborne in their own markets by American manufactures. There was no opening for successful enterprise, and the fine water power of Paisley would be comparatively unused until their rulers adopted a national policy. (Cheers.) He told them it would rest with themselves at an early day to deter- mine whether to continue the present pauperizing policy or to change it for one that would restore prosperity. He addressed his brother Highlanders and told them that he had resented, so far as he could, the insult hurled at him, at them, and at the memories ,af their fathers by Mr. Cartwright. It rested with them to punish it through the ballot-box. at the Esq., having Note. — Mr. Gillies addressed a meeting at Paisley after my departure for Walkerton. I see that he accused me of political inconsistency in that I in 1864 had represented myself to be a Baldwin Reformer, and had not consistently acted the part of one since, ll is quite true that I did so represent myself. I was and am one still — Baldwin-Reformer and Liberal-Conservative are now synonymous terms. When accusing me of political inconsistency Mr. Gillies should have proved his charge by my votes in the Senate. I chal- lenge him to do so. It is political blasphemy in members of the present Ministerial party to take the name of Robert Baldwin upon their lips. The unselfish and pure Baldwin would have repudiated them with scorn I may define my (.-olitics in the following words of the large-hearted Scottish divine, the late Rev. Norman McLeod. D.D. : " All true politics should be in the line of making all the good possessed by the nation or " in the nation, as much as possible a common good. No institution can be righteou.sly " defended unless it can be proved to benefit the country more than its dectruction could do." Mr. Gillies further asserted, following in the footsteps of his unscrupulous leaders, that my financial statements were untrue and that he could prove them untrue from the Public Accounts, but, like his leaders, Mr. Gillies was careful not to produce the Public Accounts, and I much fear that to him the book of Public Accounts is a sealed book. — D. L. M. G2 WALKERTON. The drive from Paisley to Walkerton was through a rich and splendid agri- cultural country — one of the finest wheat growing districts in Ontario. The party were met about a mile from Walkerton by a procession of carriages, headed by a brass band, and escorted into and through the town to the Drill Shed, where the Mayor presented Senator Macpherson with an address, to which he replied at considerable length. The Liberal Conservative Associa- tion, by its President, also presented an address, to which the Senator suitably replied. THE BANQUET. In the evening Mr. Macpherson was entertained at a banquet in the Opera House, which was brilliantly decorated. The usual loyal and patriotic toasts having been duly honored, the Chairman proposed the toast of the evening, which was received with prolonged cheering. Senator Macpherson responded as follows : — Mr. Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen, — I thank you very sincerely for the cordial and hearty manner in which you have received the toast of my health. It is but following in the way in which it has been received throughout the county, wherever I have gone, and for all of which I feel intensely, deeply grateful. It is gratifying to me to see the banquet graced with the presence of so many of the ladies of Walkerton. Their presence is always a guarantee of good order at assemblages such as this ; and, furthermore, we are ban- queting under the Dunkin Act, as we have done at all the banquets which I have attended in the County of Bruce. THE NATIONAL POLICY. The words that I propose to address to you this evening will be on a sub- ject which I consider of vital importance to the country. It is what is know as the National Policy. (Applause.) I may tell you that I myself have been a Free Trader. I would be so to-day, if our neighbors would recipro- cate. (Hear, hear.) If they would reciprocate fairly with us, I would prefer such an arrangement to any other. We had not to consider the question of our commercial policy until within the last few years. Free trade and pro- tection were merely theoretical questions in Canada. From 1854 to 1865 we had a Reciprocity Treaty with the United States. That gave us free trade with our neighbors in all natural productions. When that treaty was abrogated, the war prices which ruled in the United States secured to us all the advantages, all the protection we required. OUR INDUSTRIES. It was not until prices fell in the United States to a level with our own that our producers and manufacturers found themselves at a great disadvan- idid agri- io. The carriages, the Drill [dress, to : Associa- ir suitably :he Opera tic toasts ; evening, esponded ;ly for the ny health, ghout the ly, deeply presence guarantee are ban- ts which on a sub- what is self have recipro- d prefer lestion of and pro- 1865 we ee trade aty was to us all our own lisadvan- 63 tage, found it impossible to compete with the producers and manufacturers of the United States, even in our own markets. Our manufacturers found it im- possible, manufacturing for a limited home market as they had to do, and with their products excluded from the larger markets of the United States by a prohibitory tariff, to compete with their rivals from that country who were permitted to bring their products into our markets at comparatively low duties, and crush our industries. The manufacturers of the United States have thus had, so far as the Canadians are concerned, a monopoly of their own market of forty millions of people, and a slaughter market in Canada for their suiplus products. It is not surprising, therefore, that Canadian industries should have succumbed one after another, until now but few of them remain, and that these few are languishing. THE NATIONAL POLICY OF 1870. In 1870 the Government of that day introduced into Parliament a tariff of a protective character — a tariff intended to promote a national policy. I considered it premature. I thought the i\mericans should have had a little more time allowed them to get over the war irritation under which they had abrogated the Reciprocity Treaty. I thought if we, in 1870, enacted a higher tariff, and one which would be represented as, to some extent, retaliatory, it might postpone the renewal of a Reciprocity Treaty, and that that would be unfortunate and undesirable. So anxious was I that nothing should be done to postpone the renewal of the Reciprocity Treaty with free trade secured in that way, that I moved an amendment to the Tarifif Bill in the Senate, and came within four votes of defeating that measure. A CHANGE OF TARIFF IN THE UNITED STATES IMPROBABLE. Every article that we produce is subject to a high duty when taken to the United States, while almost the whole of their natural products are admitted into this country free of duty. Our tariff on manufactured goods, such as cottons, woollens, hardware, &c., is 17)^ per cent, ad valorem. The American tariff is very much higher The tariffs of the two countries on the articles most in use are as follows : — Canadian Duty Wheat Free. Rye and Barley Free. Indian Corn and Oats Free. Wheat Flour Free. Rye Flour and Corn meal Free. Oatmeal Free. Potatoes 10 per Live Animals 10 per Coal Free. American Duty. 20c per bushel 15c per bushel IOC per bushel 20 per cent. 10 per cent. ^ cent per lb. cent 15c per bushel cent 20 per cent. 75c per ton. 64 Canadian Duty. Amkrk an Dtirv. j In packages 1 2c per Salt Free. . . . . ■ loo lbs.; in bulk Sc I per loo lbs. Wool Free. 25 to 50 p.c. Fig Iron Kree. $7 per ton. Bar Iron 5 per cent 35 to 75 per cent. Plate and Boiler Iron 5 per cent $25 and $30 per ton. Iron Rails Free. .... Steel Rails Free. .... Bricks Free. .... $14 per ton. $25 per ton. 20 per cent. Trees, Plants, and Shrubs 10 per cent 20 per cent. Fla.x, dressed Free. Flax, undressed Free. Flax Seed Free. Starch 2c per lb. $40 per ton. 20c per bushel. $20 per ton. ic. per lb. and 20 cent, ad valorem. The following articles, all of which in our tariff come under the general figure of 17)^ per cent., are, by the American tariff, charged with the rates undermentioned : — Screws 56 to 60 per cent. 40 to 50 II 35 35 30 to 70 «5 to 60 to 84 «5 40 to 70 to 60 to 81 to 60 to 40 Wood Saws Cars and Locomotives Machinery Stoves and other Iron Castings Woollen Cloth 66 Flannels and Blankets Ready-made Clothing 35 Carpets 50 Alpaca Goods Heavy Cottons Finer Cottons 50 Cotton Yarn 46 to Spool Thread . 47 Silk Cloths 50 Linen Cloths 30 Rubber and Leather Goods, Fur Goods, Glass Bottles and Lamp Chimneys, Clocks, Furniture, Carriages, En- velopes, Writing Paper, Room Paper, Felt Hats of wool. Guns, Rifles, Pistols, Umbrellas and Parasols. 35 Only last session of Congress a bill was introduced to modify the t. .f and adopt as nearly as p-ssiblea uniform rate of 35 per cent. — just double ours. Well, gentlemen, that bill was scouted by Congress. It was rejected with scorn, so that we have no ground to hope for a modifi- cation of the tariff of the United States, and yet here we are adhering to our own low tariff and allowing our industries to be extinguished. THE CANADIAN TARIFF. It is the habit of Ministerial theorists to tell the manufacturers of this country with a sneer, that they have a protective tariff of 17}^ per cent. icAN Duty. es I2C per in bulk 8c >s. .c. 1. cr cent. 30 per ton. m. )n. It. nt. )n. ushel. )n. (. and 20 ¥ i valorem. ;he general h the rates 3 per cent. O H 5 5 O 'I o " 5 II II II II M M II I and loubic ours. )r a modifi- bring to our lers of this per cent., 65 and should be content with it or close their establishments. But it should be borne in mind that while the rate of protection is nominally un- changed, the amount is changed very materially since the tariff was enacted in 1874. The duties under our tariff are levied on the ad valorem principle — that is, the duty upon every $100 worth of cotton say is $17.50. In 1874 the price of American standard sheetings was ten cents and eighty-hundredths of a cent (twelve cents United States currency,) per yard, the duty on which was one cent and eighty-nine hundredths ot a cent per yard. But the price of similar American cottons, (the goods which, I understand, enter into aompetition with Canadian cottons,) has fallen to seven cents a yard. The duty of 17^^ per cent, on seven cents is only one cent and twenty-two and a-half hundredths of a cent per yard, so that the pro- tection enjoyed by the Canadian manufacturer in 1878 is sixty-six and a half hundredths of a cent (say two-thirds of a cent) per yaid less than it was in 1874, when the present tariff was pas:;ed. To have maintained the protection at one cent and eighty-nine hundredths of a cent per yard, (the rate of 1874), the duty would now require to be 27 per cent, ad valorem instead of 17}^ per cent., and if the consumer had to pay 27 per cent in 1878, he would be paying no more dtity per yard than he paid in 1874. I fancy I hear a Ministerial theorist say, True, but the consumer saves the two- thirds of a cent per yard on his purchases of cotton in 1878. My reply to the theorist is that there is much in the intricate fabric of modem society not dreamt of in his philosophy. I would remind him that the consumers are also the taxpayers in this country, and that they must pay in one way and ano- ther, and sooner or later in revenue an amount equal to the annual expendi- ture of the Government. Now the deficits of late years have been largely owing to the fall in value of our staple imports. The deficits had to be covered with borrowed money, on which the country, which means the consumers of the country, is paying interest and must ere long pay the principal — the deficits. It will thus be perceived that the consumer has not saved two-thirds of a cent per yard on his cottons, but has gone into debt through his 1 -nt, the Minister of Finance, to that extent. Would it not, therefore, h Deen wiser and more for the advantage of the whole people to have paid o ay as we went along, to have avoided the national discredit of deficits, ai It have maintained this protection on our cotton and other manufactures at the same rate per yard or other quantity as was given to them in 1874. I have taken the cotton manufacture as an example. What applies to it ai> plies to all or industries. The country is concerned to know whether the Minister of F mce is still prepared to say, as he did in his Budget speech of >t think that any greater increase of the tariff than we suggest h; wise. I think we have gone to the limit beyond which it lossible to pass without resorting to direct taxation." If he is, enzie's Government is sustained at the general election, it is difficult to see how direct taxation can be postponed beyond next session. 1874, " I f' " now wouj. " would be i and Mr. Mac " SHOULD ADAPT OUR POLICY TO OUR CIRCUMSTANCES. It is useless in us, and folly, to attempt to set up a policy of our own which is entirely opposed to that of our great neighbor. Compared to that neighbor we are as a boy to a man. We cannot dictate a policy to them ; we must be governed by their policy. (Hear, hear.) If we disregard their policy, as we have done for years, and endeavor to set up a policy of our own which is at variance with theirs, we must take the consequences, and, unless we are very blind, we must foresee what the consequences will be. Our persistence in our present policy has brought adversity U|,)n the country, and it is to be hoped we shall have wisdom enough to change it and adopt a national policy. (Cheers.) CAPITALISTS WILL NOT INVEST IN CANADIAN INDUSTRIES. It is obvious that, as long as the present policy is allowed to continue, our industries will remain prostrate and our prosperity will lag. (Hear, hear). There is no inducement for capitalists to invest money in Canadian in- dustries. Our market is limited. The market in the United States is large, but the Canadian is practically excluded from it by the protec- tive tariff of that country. Now, if capitalists contemplated establishing manufacmres on this continent, would they not be more likely, under exist- ing circumstances, when the cost of the raw materials and of the elements that go to make up the cost of manufactures, including labor, is about the same in both countries — would not thoughtful, prudent moneyed men be more likely to establish their industries on the other side of the line in the midst of forty millions of people, and from whence they could enter when they chose the more limited Canadian market at comparatively low rates of duty and trample upon the Canadian manufacturers ? Would they not rather do so than invest their capital in this country, in the midst o "only four millions of people, knowing that, if they wished to take their manufactures to the larger market on the other side of the line, they would be met by duties so high that, when they paid them, tney would be unable to compete with the manufacturer in the United States; and in addition to this would be exposed to crushing competition in the limited home Canadian market. (Cheers). You will all see, gentlemen, the disadvantages of investing capital in this country, disadvantages so great that no prudent man would do it, and, therefore, while we remain under our present system, and the tariff of the United States continues what i*^^ is, there is no prospect of manuf-^cturing industries being established in Canada, because there is no possibility of their prospering (Cheers). One of the greatest evils of our present policy is that it virtually prohibits the investment ot capital in reproductive industries. There is no investment for capital except in mortgages, and the interest on these is largely sent abroad, to the impoverishment of Canada. T venture to say there are few, if any large manufacturers in Canada who, if they could, would noi remove their establishments to the United States. 67 JCES. m which neighbor we must r policy, m which ss we are stence in t is to be il policy. 5TRIES. Under present circumstances our importations are so large that all we produce and export is insufficient to pay for them and for the interest on the public debt of the Dominion and on other indebtedness — loans, provincial, municipal, ard individual. The amount of obligations for which the country has to provide is greater than its products are sufficient in value to meet. The consequence is, we are going heavier into debt every year. The balance of trade against us, that is, the value of our imports over the value of our exports for the ten years between 1868 and 1877, amounted to the enormous aggregate sum of $236,000,000. Now, gentlemen, it is surprising that the country is not more depressed than it is to-day, under these circumstances. Debt rolling up against us, deficits rolling up against us, the balance of trade against us, the policy of the Govern- ment against us. ;inue, our r, hear), adian in- states is I protec- :ablishing der exist- lenis that Dout the men be e in the ter when rates of ot rather millions he larger so high ith the ould be market, nvesting ould do tariff of cturing of their is that it There Ion these re to say Id, would HOW THE BALANCE OF TRADE IS ADJUSTED. The balance of trade, like many commercial questions, is one about which much is written by theorists, and these gentlemen would have us believe that our prosperity is not affected by the fact that our imports largely exceed our exports. I contend that that is a dangerous fallacy in this country. It is different in England, where, according to the official returns, the imports are larger than the exports, but England carries on an enormous indirect foreign trade ; English capital \z invested in every civilized country, and the interest on foreign investments and profit on her indirect trade, items which do not ap- pear in the Trade Returns, are more than sufficient to adjust the balance in her case. (Hear, hear.) We have little or no indirect trade, no foreign investments, and no means of meeting our engagements — no means of paying for what we import, except with the products ot the soil, the sea, the forest, and the mine. We have nothing but our natural products to export, and, therefore, if what we produce in that way is insufficient to pay for our importations and the interest we have to remit to our creditors, then we are rolling up a debt against ourselves. There can be no doubt upon this point. Theorists and doctri- naires cannot disprove it. Our country is in a state of heavy indebtedness and in a state of depression and suffering. It may be asked, " how do we " get on at all, owing such large amounts as we do ?" It is done largely by increasing loans. The Government is paying the interest on our debt, to a large extent, out of loans. Thus the evil day is postponed, but it is only postponed. The day of settlement has to come ; it is inevitable. Then, indivi- dual indebtedness is largely extinguished through the insolvency courts, and a depldrable way it is of extinguishing debts. We know to what an extent it has been the case in this country of late years, and that a system of honey- combing is still going on. Unless we can check this and restore prosperity — and I maintain we can only do so by an entire change of our commer- cial policy — the country will be thoroughly depleted of its means. (Hear, hear. ) '< 68 A MORK SERIOUS LOSS. And not only is the country being depleted of its money, but it is being depleted of what is more important — its wealth-winners — its young men. The last census of the United States, showed that nearly 500,000 native bom Canadians were settled in that country. How many have gone there since, you can estimate as well as I can. I have no doubt the number is very large. Is not this a deplorable state of things, and can we expect this country to rise in importance and wealth while it continues ? Without wealth we know it cannot rise in import- ance, and how can wealth be created when the more enterprising of the youth of the country are leaving it. (Cheers.) What can prove more convincingly that the policy of the Government is unsound and unwise than that "it is driving away the youth ? What can be more condemnatory of the Govern- ment than that it persists in a policy which is expatriating our youth and pauperizing our country, which is sapping the happiness and prosperity of the people ? VARIETY OF OCCUPATIONS REQUISITE. Young men, especially men educated as your sons are now, have more enterprise and more intelligence than their predecessors had, and many of .hem are not content to remain tillers of the soil, honest, honorable, and independ- ent though that occupation maybe. (Cheers.) The professions are overstocked with them, and they seek their fortunes in foreign countries in occupations which they ought to find at home. (Applause.) Young men, furthermore, vary in their tastes and reciuire varied occupations. The tilling of the soil is the primitive industry and conduces to independence perhaps with more certainty than any other, but it is attended with great toil, and young men who are highly educated are, as a rule, unwilling to incur such labor. And besides their unwillingness men's tastes differ with respect to occupations — differ just as much as their characters and appearance ; differ just as much as the color of tiieir hair— and, unless they can find in their own country congenial occupations, they will forsake it, no matter how painful it may be to leave their homes, their parents, and their friends. (Cheers.) WHAT AN ENGLISH WRITER THINKS OF OUR POLICY. I read recently the opinion of an able English writer on the trade of Canada. He ta a'S a gloomy view of our prospects under existing circum- stances. I shall give you his words : — " Canadian trade figures, taken generally, have for long given unmistakable " signs that her business on the whole was not following its natural course. " Canada has been importing beyond her means year after year, or at all events " much beyond her exporting capacity, and no doubt she has been able to do " so by reason of the mone\ which we had so freely lent her. A new, raw, '• unopened country, can have no margin to trade upon in this fashion, except 69 " by borrowing, and it follows, therefore, that so far as our business with " Canada has been based on money lent beyond the true capacity of the " country to pay the loans, it has been misused, and must be reduced. Since " 1873, ^ process of reduction has been going on, which is, therefore, so far " healthy ; but the limit is, I am persuaded, not yet reached, especially as the " exporting capacity of the Dominion has, at the same time, been on the de- " cline. What the healthy basis may be it would be hard, in view of the facts ** I have indicated, to predict ; but it is quite clear, when we consider the large " sum which the country has yearly to find for interest on Government loans " and on dividends in companies working with foreign capital, there can be no " safety till the export figures are in excess of the import. * * * " Wait till the tide has well turned, and then we shall see what the wealth " of the farmer means. He stands to be ruined by a big crop in Europe " and America. What Canada has most of, beef, pork, corn, wood, and wool, " the United States has a great deal more of herself, and what the United ■' States seeks to supply in the shape of manufactures, Canada wants to make " at home. There is hence no good scope for a large development of reci- " procal trade between these two countries at present, least of all a good out- " look for the farmer in the event of a succession of splendid harvests." Now, I should be sorry to say anything to alarm or discourage the farmer, but it does seem to me that we may be on the eve of just such a state of affairs as this writer foreshadows. THE DANGER OF A BOUNTIFUL HARVEST. The crops are very promising in Europe, and it is known the prospects in the United States are that the harvest will be greater than it ever was before. The Bureau of Agriculture at Washington, which furnishes valuable infor- mation to the people, estimates the wheat crop of this year at 400,000,000 of bushels, of which, it is believed, there will be 100,000,000 bushels to spare for export. Now, I just put it to this audience, many of whom are farmers, or connected with farming, what would be the condition of the farmers of this country if a considerable portion of that great surplus sliould be poured into our markets ? (Cheers). There is, as I have said, a prospect that the crops in Europe will be very large, and that the markets will be very low. THE ADVANTAGE THE AMERICAN FARMER POSSESSES. Then, it must be remembered, that the crop is harvested in the United States much earlier than in Canada, and that the high prices which may be anticipated early in the season, go to the American farmer because his wheat gets to market first. By the time the Canadian farmer gets his wheat to market he finds it glutted with wheat from the United States. This is almost an annual occurrence. (Cheers). THE HOME MARKET THE BEST. Now, there is no market, so far as the farmer is concerned, eijual to the home market, if it be fairly secured to him. Not only does he find sale there for the great staple products, but also for the smaller articles which, in the 70 aggregate, go far to pay the expenses of his farm and home, and which enable his wife and children to contribute largely to the family prosperity. ENGLAND AND FREE TRADE. England is spoken of as a free trade country, and free trade opinions have certainly made greater progress, and have been carried into practice to a greater extent in that country than in any other, but, at the same time, England is very far from being a free trade country. She collects from customs duties upwards of $100,000,000 a year. That proves to you that she is not altogether a free trade country. ENGLAND'S POLICY, PROTECTION TO MANUFACTURES. I think I can also prove to you that England's free trade policy, or what is called her free trade policy, was really an exceedingly able and profound policy of protection, and that the avowed object of the British Government and Parliament was to protect their own industries, and to secure to their manufacturers a monopoly of the markets of the world. (Cheers.) That may be a somewhat novel view to many of you, but I think I shall be able to prove its correctness, and to do so in the words of the great statesman who introduced England's free trade measures into Parliament — the late Sir Robert Peel. In 1846, when he introduced his bill to abolish duties on raw materials, including breadstuffs, he said : " In the year 1842 it was my duty, as the organ of the Government, to pro- " pose a great change in the then existing customs of the country. The general " plan upon which I then acted was to remit the duties upon articles of raw *' material, constituting the elements of manufacture in this country. The " manufacturers of this country have now, therefore, an advantage which they ** have not hitherto possessed. They have free access to the raw materials " which constitute the immediate fabric of their manufactures. They wished " to establish the prosperity of that great staple manufacture of this country — ** the cotton manufacture — on some sure and certain foundation. " Sir, 1 propose, in taking the review of duties still existing to which we are " invited by Her Majesty, to continue to act upon the principle which this " House has sanctioned, and 1 take in the first instance those articles of raw " material which still remain subject to duty. I mean to deal with them in " order still further to enable me to call on e manufacturer to relax the " protection he still enjoys. Sir, there is hardly any other article of the nature " of a raw material which is now subject to duty. I propose, without stipula- " tion, that England should set an example by a relaxation of those heavy *' duties, in the confidence that that example will ultimately prevail ; that the " interests of the great body of consumers will soon influence the action of the *• Governments, and that by our example, even if we don't procure any imme- " diate reciprocal benefit, yet, whilst by a reduction like that we shall, in the " first instance, improve our own manufactures, I believe we shall soon reap ** the other advantage of deriving some equivalent in our commercial inter- " course with other nations. " I do hope that the friends and lovers of peace between nations will derive " material strength from the example which I have advised, by remitting the 71 " impediments to commercial intercourse. But observe, if that be the effect, " I think in all probability that the continuance of permanent peace will expose " us to a more extensive and more formidable competition with foreign coun- " tries with respect to manufactures. During war we commanded the " supply of nations. Peace has introduced not only new consumers, but also " formidable manufacturing interests. In order that we may retain our i)re- " eminence, it is of the greatest importance that we neglect no opportunity of " securing to ourselves those advantages by which that pre-eminence can be " alone secured. Sir, I firmly believe that abundance and cheapness of pro- " visions is one of the constituents by which the continuance of manufacturing " and commercial pre-eminence may be obtained. You may say the object of " these observations is to flatter the love of gain, and administer merely to the " desire of accumulating money. I advise this measure on no such ground. " I believe that the accumulation of wealth, that is the increase of capital, is a " main element, or at least one of the chief means by which we can retain the " pre-eminence we have so long possessed." It is quite clear from this that Sir Robert Peel's object was to place the manufactures of his country on a secure basis, on such a basis as, he thought, should give them the manufacturing for the whole world. MANUFACTURES A BASIS OF WEALTH. Sir Robert Peel recognized that nothing contributes so much to the wealth of a nation as pre-eminence in manufactures, because a nation that manufactures even enough for herself retains within her own borders the wealth produced and Cxeated there, except so much of it as she must give in exchange for what she re- quires and cannot produce or manufacture, and must in time become rich under moderately prudent and economical government. The money which changes hands for what is produced in the country remains in the hands of the people of the country, and is not sent abroad to enrich other lands. When Oreat Britain opened her markets to the world, her far-seeing statesmen expected that other nations would accept the principles of free trade, follow her example and abolish their protective duties. But the statesmen of France, Germany, Belgium, Switzerland, and other European countries were far-seeing also. They recognized the fact that without manufactures they could not become wealthy and powerful, and they adhered to a protective policy. The United States did the same. The result has been that the manufacturers of those countries have not only retained a large share of their own markets, but have been enabled to compete with the manufacturers of Great Britain in the other markets of the world, and, latterly even to compete with them at home, to some extent, and now we find many of the British manufacturers looking for protection from the competition of their foreign rivals. I shall read a short extract from the speech of another member of the House of Commons, Sir Howard Douglas, delivered in the so-called Free Trade debate of 1846. He was arguing against the abolition of protective duties, fearing that the competition of foreigners would be too great (or the English manufacturer. He said : I 72 " But when the sphere of competition is extended and unprotected British " (Canadian) labour is made to run against protected foreign labour, foreign " competition must further beat down the efficacy and value of British (Cana- *' dian) industry, and of British (Canadian) labour, its main element, in " relation to foreign labour, not only to, but beneath, that level." Now, gentlemen, that is just the position we occupy towards the United States. They have protected labor, we have unprotected labor, and to com- pete with their prices our prices must be not only as low as their prices for the commodities we take to their markets, but must actually be lower to enable us to take them there, because, before we can enter their market we must pass their custom house and pay their high duties, which it is impossible for our unprotected manufacturers and farmers to do and live. Sir Howard Douglas goes on to say : " Import duties imposed upon one side, deprive the country against which " they are adopted, of the increased market, and consequently of the increased " productive industry which international intercourse would create if fairly " reciprocated ; and the due equilibrium can only be restored by imposing " retaliatory duties. "Smith expressly says, Book IV., Cap. ii: 'To impose duties upon *' ' foreign, for the encouragement of native industry, when burthens are laid " ' upon it by foreign nations, is one of the cases in -.vhich it is advantageous " ' to protect in this way the home productions. For to lay suitable duties " ' upon the productions of the foreigner who lays burthens upon yours, does not " ' give the monopoly of the home market to the home producer, nor turn *' ' towards any particular employment more capital and labor than would " ' naturally go there. It only hinders that amount of those actually engaged, " ' from being turned away into a less natural direction, and leaves the compe- " ' tition between foreign and domestic industry upon the same footing as " ' before the protecting duty so laid and retaliated.' " Adam Smith's observation is obviously true. Protecting duties on one *' side destroy the equivalent expression ; it is like expunging a value from one " side of an equation, without compensating for it on the other. " There cannot be two prices for the same article in the same market. The " foreign consumer will not pay more for a British than for a domestic article " of equal quality. The exporter cannot pay the rival duty, for, if so, he " would sell at a loss, or be undersold by the foreign rival ; and therefore, to " compete with foreign protected markets, British articles must be produced *' so much cheaper as to enter into this competition. The cost of production *' must therefore be reduced. This is most immediately and readily done by " reducing the wages of labor, and it is most important to remark that it is " precisely in times of pressure, when profits are most bare, and labor most in " want of employment, that this takes place, and that mechanical labor is " most extended : this not only displaces manual labor in times of pressure, " but by so much, precludes it from participating in future prosperity." I think those words are peculiarly suggestive, and that it behoves us to weigh them, and to see to what extent they do bear upon our condition, and to be influenced by them, and by other evidence, in determining the commercial policy which we shall adopt. " Messrs. Cobden and Bright, those able leaders of the free trade movement 73 in England, were manufacturers, and whoever will read their eloquent speeches will discover that their whole and sole object was to have the factories of Eng- land run on full time and at the lowest possible wages; to establish England as the workshop of the world. To accomplish their object it was necessary to obtain all raw materials free of duty, including breadstuffs. Without cheap bread cheap labor could not be had. The repeal of duties on British manufactures did not involve any sacrifice, did not at the time jeopardize the home market. Cheap capital, cheap labor, skill, and experience, protected the British manu- facturer then against foreign competition. Circumstances are changing in the most unlocked for manner. The foreigner not only competes with the British manufacturer in foreign markets, but has become a competitor in the British home market, and the British manufacturer is now beginning to call out for protection, British free traders were, and are ardent protectionists, of their own trades. Their national policy is protection for their own manu- factures. , FREE TRADE THEORISTS do a great deal to bewilder the ordinary thinker. They confine their own read- ing to works written exclusively on one side of the ciuestion, and they adhere to the views of that side, and insist upon carrying them into practice in the trade of a country like this, to which they are altogether unsuited. I believe there are men in the Government, who are influenced in this way — -visionary men — who, I am sure, have no desire to do the country harm, but, on the contrary, desire to benefit it, but whose minds are fixed in favor of free trade by reading works on that side of the subject, — and a very fascinating side it is — and, although they have no practical knowledge of commercial matters, they insist uiion carrying their theories into practice to the serious prejudice of the country. (Cheers.) They insist upon giving free trade to their neighbors, while they have failed to obtain it in return for their own country. Trade, to be of ec^ual advantage to two countries, should be carried on between them on €qual terms. Free trade, pure and simjile, would mean a reciprocity of trade such as we enjoyed with the United States — an untaxed exchange of commodities. If that cannot be got, the next best thing would be a reciprocity of tariffs, so that the exchange of commodities might be effected upon e(iual terms. If the cost of commodities in two countries is about the same — and it is so at ])resent in the United States and Canada — then, if one country imposes a higher duty than the other, it taxes the industry of that country more than its own industry is taxed by the other in return. It is obvious, therefore, that the industries of the country which has the lowest tariff are prejudicially taxed by its neighbor. Iment A PRACTICAL POLICY REQUIRED. While I should like to continue to be a free trader, I am satisfied that we shall not have free trade with our neighbors— that they will not give it to us. I am, therefore, prepared to throw aside theoretical opinions and to be guided by 74 practical statesmanship in the conduct of the aifairs of the country. I believe men who are charged with the administration of public affairs are in duty bound to do this. If a country is large, powerful, and wealthy, it can afford to adhere to piinciples which it may believe to be sound, but a country like ours must do the best it can under the circumstances in which it finds itself placed. It must compromise. We are like the mariner, we must trim our sails to catch the wind from whatever quarter it blows, and endeavor to use it to promote our advancement. The mariner cannot command a fair wind, but has to tack and get on as he best can with the aid of whatever wind may blow. This is very much oui condition. PRINCE BISMARCK ON FREE TRADE. The last great convert to a national policy of whom I have heard is Prince Bismarck. Here are his own words as they are reported : — " I have given free trade a trial, and it does not seem to have benefitted " the country commercially, industrially, or financially. I am overwhelmed " with lamentation respecting the decline of trade and the decay of manufac- " turing enterprise, and with assurances — from people for whose judgment in " such matters I entertain the highest respect — that partial and moderate " protection will remedy those evils as if by magic. Therefore, I also pro- " pose to give protection a chance of ameliorating the condition of the " manufacturing and operative classes, and of lightening the load which the '* budget unquestionably lays upon the shoulder of the nation. As certain of " the Ministers with whom I have hitherto worked on my former platform will " not range themselves by my side on my new platform, I must rid myself of " them, and put others in their place who will carry out my resolves." Now, Mr. Chairman, there is no more practical and successful statesman in the world than Prince Bismarck. These are his views, and I think we can well afford to profit by them. TAXATION FALLACY EXPOSED. It is often said that, if we were to adopt the national policy, taxation would be increased. That assertion is sent abroad as a sort of bug-bear by those who are opposed to a national policy. The Government fixes the annual expenditure, and then has to provide the revenue to meet it, and the com- mercial policy would merely govern the mode in which the revenue should be raised, the articles upon which it should be levied, not the amount. No one, I fancy, would propose that a revenue exceeding the wants of the country should be raised. The question is whether we shall continue to raise a revenue by imposing duties upon what we do not produce, or by increasing the duties on articles which we do or can produce. Therein consists the difference between the existing policy and the proposed national policy. The aggregate amount of ta- uion would not be affected, but the tariff would be readjusted, and that is well known to many of those who circulate a different tale to deceive again those whom they have already deceived. The adoption of a national policy would lighten the burden of taxation. 70 WHO PAYS THE DUTY ? Another point upon which there is much misapprehension, and upon which a great deal of learned discussion has taken place is the (juestion " Who pays the duty ?" The free traders, especially purely theoretical free traders, contend that the duty is paid by the consumers ; that it matters not to the producer what duty is imposed by the consumer, because he must pay it himself. There is a very simple rule by which every man can ascertain for himself who pays the duty on almost every article. If we produce that which our neighbors have not, and which they must buy from us, we can put our own jjrice upon it and leave them to pay the duty imposed by their Government. In that case the consumer untiuestionably pays the duty. But our neighbors and ourselves produce similar commodities and our producers have to compete with their producers. On their way to the American market our producers have to pass through the American custom house and pay the American duty, and when they reach the market they can obtain no more for their commodities than the American producer who pays no duty. (Api)lause.) In that case the Canadian producer pays the duty upon what he takes into United States markets. A FAMILIAR ILLUSTRATION. Let me illustrate this in a manner that will make it plain to every one. Suppose a farmer in this county takes five horses, valued at $ioo each, to De- troit to sell. The duty on horses in the United States is twenty per cent., which the Canadian farmer must pay before he can enter the Detroit market. That is, he must pay $20 a horse, and on his five horses $100, or the value of one horse, at the United States custom house before he can take them to market. There he will get no more for them than a Michigan farmer will get for five equally good horses. Suppose that he and a Michigan farmer each sell five horses at $ioo a horse, each gets $500 for his five horses. The American farmer takes his $500 home in his pocket, while the Canadian farmer takes home only $400 He had topay$ioo for duty. I do not think the Canadian farmer would be in any doubt as to who paid the auty on his horses. So it is with barley, wool, and in all cases where the Canadian producer comes into competition with the American producer in the markets of the United States — he receives the same price as the American producer, and has to pay the daty, whatever that may be. A POLICY ANNOUNCED. In adopting a national policy it would require to be what the words imply. All interests would have to be justly considered — Agricultural, Manufac- turing, Mining, Lumbering, &c. I may say that my own policy would be this : I would adopt the tariff which I believed to be for the interest of Canada, making it generally reciprocal with the tariff of the United States. We cannot compel them to adopt our policy, 76 and 1 would say something like this to them, if I said anything: We have offered to exchange with you, on a free basis the commodities which we both produce ; we would prefer that reciprocity to any other, that is, an absolutely untaxed exchange of commodities, but, as you refuse to enter into such a treaty with us, then we will adopt your policy. As you will not give us untaxed reciprocity, we will reciprocate tariffs. (Cheers.) That is the language I would use to them, and I would not do it in a spirit of retaliation at all — I would do it simply in the interest of Canada. I believe furthermore that a national policy is indispensable to the interests of the whole people. It is recjuired to unite and weld them together with bonds of material interest stronger than any that exist at present. If our Confederacy is to take the place it ought to take in the hearts of its children, its widely separated Provinces and diverse peoples must be bound together by something purer, stronger, more unselfish, more patriotic, more national than " the cohesive power of public plunder." INTER-BRITISH TRADE. I would further endeavor to create and foster what I will call an Inter- British trade, that is, 1 would offer to England and to our sister colonies differential duties. I would discriminate in favor of British products. Looking at our trade returns we should see what we import from foreign countries, and I would put certain duties upon those commodities. I would put lower duties u])on what we import from Great Britain and our sister colonies — if the Mother Country and the other colonies would discriminate in our favor. (Cheers.) I feel satisfied that a reciprocal Inter-British trade might be estab- lished in that way which would raise the prosperity of this country and of the whole British Eni])ire to a higher pitch than the most sanguine of us imagine. I believe it would lead to increased commercial prosperity, to a closer union of the British possessions, and that it would increase the warmth and strength of the connection which subsists between the various parts of the Empire. I do not see why we should not trade with the British West Indies on more favorable terms than with foreign countries, just as the States of Maine and Massachusetts trade with Louisiana. 1 do not know why we should not carry on such a trade with India and Australia as the Eastern States do with California. I believe if representatives of the Mother Country and of all the colonies met in Lon- don, they would discover that an Inter-British trade, such as I have lightly touched upon, might be inaugurated with the promise of great advantage to all parts of the Empire. At all events I think it would be worth trying, and that the present would be an especially favorable time to make the attempt. The present Prime Minister of England, the great Lord Beaconsfield, is pre- eminently the man to grasp and develope such a scheme. (Cheers.) It is possible that some theoretical free traders in England might object to Inter- British trade conducted on the principle of differential duties, in favor even of their own country, but I believe the practical business men of Great Britain m 77 , would view it with favor, esjiecially when they read our trade returns and saw that our im|)orts from Great Britain, which in 1873 were $68,522,776, fell in 1877 to $39,572,239 ; while our imports from the United States for the same period increased from $47,735,678 to $51,312,669 ; and that, in re spect to our exports, while in 1873 we exported to Great Britain $38,743,848, and in 1877 $41,567,469, we exported to the United States in 1873 $42,672,526, and in 1877 only $25,775,245. In 1877 our imports from the United States were double the value of our exports to that country, whereas our ex])orts to England exceeded in value the value of our imports from that country by two millions of dollars in round figures. This should give the people of Canada an idea of the amount of gold we are sending to the United States, in addition to sending them multitudes of our children. The subject of establishing an Jnier-British trade is unquestionably a great one, and worthy to be taken in hand by Lord Beaconsfield. We must all admire the patriotic and masterly way in which his Lordship has discharged his duty to his country in the present grave crisis. Standing resolutely in the councils of the nation he, by the force of his character and his great wisdom, has raised Great Britain to a jjosition which she has not occupied since the battle of Waterloo was forgotten. (Cheers.) He bearded the Russians, and insisted that the Czar should do justice to the Turkish Provinces, and should respect the rights and interests of Great Britain. He compelled Russia, at the close of a successful war, to relax her grasp upon her conciuests. It had become the habit to sneer at the military strength of England, and to count it as naught against that of the military powers of Europe, but Lord Beaconsfield has shown that the title of Empress of India is no empty title, and that the Empress of India can bring into the field forces of indisputable bravery to match, if reed be, the great armies of Europe. Lord Beaconsfield has reached a position of greater eminence than has been attained by any British Minister during the present century, for it has been attained without the shedding of one drop of British blood. (Loud cheers.) THE QUESTION OF THE HOUR. I do not know whether I should call the subject on which I have addressed you a dry one. It may be, as I have discussed it, but the subject itself is of the deepest importance to every one of us. It rests with yourselves, gentle- men, to determine whether we shall continue the policy which has existed for ; years, and under which we are going on from bad to worse— a policy which, if persisted in, I am satisfied, will lead us to disaster. It is for you to say whether you will permit that to continue, or whether you will brush from the wheel of State the flies that declare themselves to be powerless to guide it to prosperity. (Cheers.) The only great ([uestion which separates political parties in Canada to-day is our commercial policy. The importance of it can- not be overstated, and it is for the people of this country, within the next few months, to determine whether the present policy shall be continued for years 78 to come, or whether it shall at once be changed for a national jjolit y, which may restore prosperity to this country, as Bismarck believes it will do to his. He has determined to change his colleagues in order to give protection a fair trial. Let Canada change her Ministers and do the same. (Prolonged cheering.) Senator Macphf.rson pro])osed the health of the Mayor, the Chairman of the Ban(iuet, and in doing so referred to a gentleman present who said he had been told that Sir John Macdonald and those who professed to support a national policy, if they should succeed to power, would disregard their pro- fessions and not change the commercial policy of the country. He (Mr. Macphcrson) believed the gentleman who had said so must have been a supporter of the present (lOvernment one who, in conseciuence of the viola- tion of pledges by Mr. Mackenzie and his colleagues, had lost all confidence in the professions and promises of public men. He (Mr. Macpherson) would assure them that, if there should be a change of men, there would be a change of policy. That what he feared was that the present Ministry, when they discovered that the country was in favor of the adoption of a national policy, would declare themselves ready to carry it out. If Mr. Brown believed it to be necessary to keep his nominees in power, he would not hesitate to declare himself in favor of a national policj, and, if he did so, we should immediately thereafter find Messrs. Mac- kenzie, Cartwright, Mills, and other professedly extreme free traders and theorists perambulating the country, advocating a national policy. (Cheers.) He regarded this as cjuite possible, as office, he believed, was the only object of those gentlemen. But, even if they should pretend to change their opinions, he advised the people not to trust them. They would not know how to inaugurate a national policy. Besides they had betrayed the people once and should not be trusted again. (Cheers.) TEESWATER. On Friday morning the party were driven to Teeswater, where Senator Macpherson was cordially received by the Liberal-Conservative Association of the Township of Culross, who presented him with an address. He replied at considerable length, and when speaking on the national policy he mentioned that, when returning from Manitoba last year, he saw a cjuantity of furniture on the way to Winnipeg, and took for granted that it came from Ontario, but to his surprise learned that it had been manufactured at Cincinnati, and that almost all the furniture imported into Manitoba was from the United States. He encjuired why this should be? Furniture was manufactured as well and cheaply in Ontario as in Ohio, and the transport could not be less from Cin- cinnati than from Toronto. He . lid it seemed unreasonable and unjust, while the taxpayers of the Dominion were spending millions of dollars in Manitoba 79 and the North-West, that the profits of the trade of that country should be all reaped by the Americans. Mr. Macpher.son was afterwards entertained at dinner in the leading hotel of the place. FORMOSA. The party were then driven to the village of Formosa. The residents, who are, with few exceptions, Germans, turned out en tnasse to welcome their former representative. Of all the hearty receptions which had greeted Senator Macpherson, none was more cordial and hearty than this from the honest and independent men of Formosa. The Formosa band, one of the best in Bruce, accompanied the party through the village. The stay was necessarily brief, and, as Senator Macpherson drove off, he was followed with "three cheers and a tiger" from the inhabitants. MILDMAY. The village of Mildmay was reached late in the afternoon. It is a new place, but the centre of a fine farming country, as the evidences of prosperity in the village indicate. A large crowd and a band had assembled to meet him. He addressed them on the national policy question, ai?d then returned to Walker- ton, arriving there after sunset. DEPARTURE FROM BRUCE. On Saturday morning the Mayor, Mr. Shaw, and other leading citizens of Walkerton were invited to meet Senator Macpherson at breakfast at Colonel Sproat's. At noon he was accompanied to the railway station and took the train to Toronto. The progress through Bruce was one continued triumph, and at all the towns the leading men of both parties joined in extending a welcome to the former representative of the Saugeen Division, whose faithful and unselfish services all seemed anxious to recognize.