V] 
 
 'W 
 
 / 
 
 c% 
 
 cr^l 
 
 
 ^ :^ 
 
 ^^'<> 
 
 .yj>- 
 
 > 
 
 'V' 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 !lf 
 
 ^lilM 
 142 
 
 ii« 
 
 »t 
 
 1.1 
 
 |12 
 
 ■ 40 
 
 12.2 
 
 M 
 1.8 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 // 
 
 
 
 1.25 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 .4 6" — 
 
 
 > 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 

 
 '^ 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la methods normale de filmage 
 sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 □ Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 I I Covers damaged/ 
 
 D 
 
 Couverture endommag^e 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaurde et/ou pelliculde 
 
 D 
 
 Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes 
 
 I I Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 v^ 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 Pages ddcolor^es, tachet6es ou piqudes 
 
 n 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes gdographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 D 
 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages ddtach^es 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of print varies/ 
 Quality in6gale de I'impression 
 
 D 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 □ Includes supplementary material/ 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La re liure serr6e 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 6td filmdes. 
 
 n 
 
 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 6t6 filmdes d nouveau de fapon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 D 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppldmentaires; 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 26X 
 
 SOX 
 
 v/ 
 
 12X 
 
 16X 
 
 20X 
 
 24X 
 
 28X 
 
 32X 
 
laire 
 i details 
 lues du 
 t modifier 
 iger une 
 a filmage 
 
 The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 Thomas Fiiher Rare Book Library, 
 University of Toronto Library 
 
 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. 
 
 L'exemplaire 1\\m6 fut reproduit grdce d la 
 ginArositA de: 
 
 Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library, 
 University of Toronto Library 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6ti reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet6 de lexeinplaire film^, et en 
 conformity avec las conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 / 
 j^es 
 
 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 exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprimde sont film^s en commencant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 derniAre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont film^s en commenpant par la 
 premiere page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la 
 dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole — •- signifie "A SUIVRE ", le 
 symbols y signifie "FIN". 
 
 ire 
 
 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 cartas, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 filmds A des taux de reduction diff6rents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour etre 
 reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 A partir 
 de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut an bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la mdthode. 
 
 ty errata 
 Bd to 
 
 nt 
 
 ne pelure, 
 
 1900 d 
 
 T\ 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 32X 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
M 
 
 //iLh the Compliments of 
 
 David Mms,M.P. 
 
 ^v-^ 
 
 House of Commons ® ebatcs^ 
 
 SECOND SESSION-SEVENTH PARLIAMENT. 
 
 SPEECH OF MR. MILLS, M.P., 
 
 »'i 
 
 ON 
 
 THE BUDGET 
 
 TUESDAY, MARCH 29th, 1892. 
 
 Mr. MILLS (Rothwell). Mr. Speaker, it is not 
 my intention to enter into any ehiborivtc di-scussion 
 or review of the tinanciiil stiiteiuent made by the 
 Minister of Finance. It is clear, I think, to the 
 House, that the hon. gentleman, witii the (Jovcrn- 
 nient, and those who support hi n and tliem, have 
 got back upon their old grounds. We have had 
 in the speech of the Minister of Finance, the 
 old uiusic and the old instrutneiits with scarcely 
 any variations. The hon. gentleman has told 
 the House, that the diminution of the deposits 
 in the savings kinks are no indication of the 
 diminished prosperity of the country. When 
 the amount in the (lovernment savings banks 
 increased it was an evidence of the increased 
 wealth of the people, and when that amount has 
 diminished it is no e\-idence cf increased poverty 
 or diminished wealth. When the crops of the 
 agricultural population are gootl it is an indication 
 of the wisdom and care of tiie Administration, 
 and when the crops of the agriculturists are bad, it 
 is the fault of Providence, ami the Administra- 
 tion ought not in any degree to be held resjjonsihle. 
 We are told from tlie Treasui'y benches, and by the 
 gentlemen who support the ministry, that indus- 
 tries ought to be fostered. They are well fostered 
 in the Province of New Brunswick ; they ought 
 to be fostered over the entire Dominion ; and 
 we are also told that our commercial relations with 
 the United States have recently enjoyed the foster- 
 ing care of the Administration. Now, Sir, we are 
 having some new phases in the tactics of the Con- 
 servative leaders ; we are having a new departure 
 in parliamentary government ; we are having new 
 constitutional usages introduced and established, 
 and I suppose before many years elapse, should the 
 hon. gentlemen opposite continue to administer the 
 Government, we will have a complete change in our 
 parliamentary system. It used to be, and it is still 
 in the United Kingdom, the practice under our 
 system of parliamentary government, that the 
 House of ('ommons, the body which represents the 
 nation, is the most potent council to advise the 
 Sovereign. It is that body which is supposed to 
 exercise a paramount influence over every other 
 
 institution in the State. But, Sir, this is no longer 
 the case, so far as tin' Parliament of Canada is 
 ccmcerned. This Parliament is now supposed to be 
 a mere registering body, to register the wishes of 
 the Administration that may be expressed land 
 acquiesced in, some time before finil action is 
 taken, if the Administration finds it convenient, 
 or I'arliament may be called upon to sanction, as a 
 matter of form, what has already been finally 
 determined. So far as the prerogatives of the 
 Crown are concerned, we are having, in a large 
 degree, a revival of the doctrine of high preroga- 
 tive. We are ha\ ing introduced into this country, 
 in the practice of the Government those notions of 
 prerogative tliat led to the great civil war in the 
 time of Charles the First, and that were supposed 
 to be altogether overthrown by the revolution of 
 1088. It is true. Sir, thsit the hon. gentlemen on 
 the Treasury benches, are not claiming these extra- 
 ordinary powers on behalf of the Sovereign or the 
 Sovereign's representative, but they are claiming 
 them on behalf of that viceroy who exercises auth- 
 ority over the sovereign, and so we are having a 
 parliamentary committee known as the Cabinet or 
 Administration, usurping all these powers that 
 were at one time ('enied to the Sovereign ; usurping 
 them in the name of the Sovereign to be exercised 
 by the Sovereign, always upon the advice of the 
 (Jcvcrnment whose advice the Sovereign is not at 
 liberty to disregard. Here, this extraordinary 
 power is actually in the hands of the Adminis- 
 tration. It has been exercised by the Administra- 
 tion, and in a way that diminishes the usefulness 
 of Parliament, and seriously affects the interest 
 which the people take in the conduct of the Gov- 
 ernment of the country. There is nothing, in my 
 opinion, of more importance in the maintenance of 
 our parliamentary system, and in the protection of 
 the community against serious abuses on the part 
 of those in authority, than the maintenance of a 
 healthy public spirit in the community, and that 
 cannot continue to exist when the Government 
 acts without the sanction of the people's repre- 
 sentatives ; when they intimate to the represent- 
 atives of the people in Parliament and to the electors 
 
.'jiMi 
 
 
 » ^1 
 
 at large,' that they may give their mind a holiday, 
 tiiat the (jovernment of the country is in safe 
 hands, that their interests will be properly cared 
 for, and so they need give themselves little oi- no 
 trouble about the conduct of public affairs I 
 notice, Sir, that the "new colony," as it has been 
 designated by the (Conservative organs, who occupy 
 seats on this side of the House ■" oorting the 
 Administration— I notice tiiat tlw w colony " 
 
 praise the present state of things, i ney praise the 
 delegation to Wasliington, not for wliat they 
 accomplished, but for what they failed toaccomplish. 
 There has been a general expression of rejoicing, 
 not because the Oovernnient succeeded in doing 
 anything, but because tlie (Jovernment tlid iiothing, 
 and because those wlio went to Washington came 
 back able to declare that they had not succeeded, 
 and that they did not see before them any prospect 
 of success. They had the wisdom >,o fail, and by 
 failing to protect tlie farming population against 
 these calamities, wliichif they liad succeeded, would 
 have inevitably followed from that success. This 
 has been the declaration of nearly every hon. gentle- 
 maawhohasspokeninsupportoftheAilministration. 
 One hon. gentleman after another has arisen in the 
 Houseand declared that reciprocity with the Uniteil 
 States in the agricultural products of the two 
 countries, would have resulted in a very serious 
 calamity to the Canadian farmers, and so I have 
 been at a loss to understan 1 why these gentlenien 
 should, under these circumstances, have gone to 
 Washington at all. I am unable to understand 
 why they should havp gone there for the purpose 
 of obtaining from the viovernment of the United 
 States a (leclaration that they entirely agreed 
 ^vith the Minister of Finance — that they did not 
 see how he was to raise revenue if he succeeded, 
 and that he had Ijetter maintain the present 
 condition of things. Why should not these hon. 
 gentlemen who have recently come into Parlia- 
 ment, praise the Administration ? They may say to 
 the Government, and to some of the supporters of 
 the Administration in Parliament, and some perliaps 
 out of Parlianiei. j, that it is "Thou that hast made 
 us, and not we ourselves, and we are tiie slieep of 
 thy pasture." These hon. gentlemen sit here by 
 the grace of the Administration, and l)y the favour 
 of some hon. gentlemen who support tlie Adminis- 
 tration ; and there is no doubt that tliose 
 potent influences which have brouglit so large 
 a number of recruits to the otlier "lide, have 
 proved of inestimable advantage to the hon. 
 gentlemen who have recently obtained seats 
 in this House. The hon. gentlemen who have 
 spoken in support .of the Minister of Finance 
 on this subject find it very difficult, to spell 
 free trade and non-intercourse in one word. 
 Punch, many years ago, represented Mr. Disraeli 
 as a chameleon, on whicli the words free trade and 
 protection were mixed up together. Now, the 
 Canadian chameleon has not been a very active 
 animal, and there is not much chance of convincing 
 the community that the (iovernment are in favour 
 of reciprocity with our neighbours, and, at tlie 
 same time opposed to putting the larger number of 
 products, which may 1)e interclianged between the 
 two countries, upon a free list. The lion, gentle- 
 men wlio have spoken are, no doubt, pleased, for 
 another reason besides that of protecting the farm- 
 ers against the calamity of having a free market in 
 the United States. They can use their old speeches. 
 
 Those speeches, Sir, are not in danger. The visit 
 fo Wasliington has not rendered them absolutely 
 useless, and so far as we can judge from what has 
 been said by the Finance Minister, they may serve 
 a useful purpose to tliose hon. gentlemen for many 
 sessions to come. At all events, they will, no doubt, 
 serve them as long as the hon. gentlemen who now 
 occupy 'he Treasury benches, continue to sit there. 
 There is to be no furtlier efTort at negotiating a re- 
 ciprocity treaty with our iieighbtnirs across the 
 border. The march has taken jilace ; the capital 
 of the United States has been visited ; the attempt- 
 ed negotiations have failed. The ( Jovernment have 
 convinced themselves, and their sujiporters.and they 
 have convinced Mr. Blaine and ( Jeneral Foster, that 
 there is no chance whatever-of success ; and so this 
 whole business is ended, and the (Jovernment must 
 .eniaiii where they are. They must retain the olil 
 policy, they must sing the ohl tunes, their friends 
 must support the old leaders, and wave the old flag, 
 and that is tlieir business. They are confined 
 within very narrow limits ; their work of investi- 
 gation and reflection is at an end ; and all they have 
 to do is to defend tlie fortress, retain the hon. 
 gentlemen who support them, and use the old arms 
 for the maintenance of the citadel. Well, Sir, I do 
 not exactly see the matter in that light. Whatever 
 may have been the intentions of the Government — 
 and we can hardly suppose now that they were 
 serious or that they ever expected to accomplish 
 more than they did accomplish — it is pretty clear 
 tiiat thoir friends who followed and supporte<l them, 
 did not *'nke the same comfortable view of the 
 situation, us long as the negotiations were threat- 
 ened, or were in progress. They felt sonieuneasiness. 
 They were inclined to think that in some way or 
 other, the hon. gentlemen on the Treasury benches 
 had got oflf the old path, that they were deviating 
 from that course to which the economic orthodoxy 
 of that side of the House required that they should 
 adhere, and that they were in danger of being lost ; 
 ami th'»y could never understand how it was that 
 those gentlemen should stray so far away from 
 home as to go to Washington to negotiate about 
 a business, which, if it succeeded, would prove so 
 detrimental to the interests of Canada. That was 
 their position. They supposed that some sorceress 
 had got possession of the Finance Minister— that 
 some false Duessa, who had robed herself in gar- 
 ments tliat did not belong to her and appeared 
 young and beautiful, proved, when sti'ipped of these, 
 to be a \'ery offensive, oUl, deformed individual, 
 like the falr.e Duessa in the " Fairy (Jueen." Now, 
 Sir, the hon. gentleman, no doubt, when he 
 started for WashingUm, played the part of the Red 
 Cross Knight. He got to the White House, which 
 was, his friends feared, a palaceof enchantment ; but 
 somehow, by the interposition of some friendly fairy, 
 the hon. gentleman was released from hit delusions, 
 and became clothed and in his right m'nd ; and ne 
 returned without inflicting any serious injury on 
 the people of ( "anada. That is, in their estimation, 
 the hon. gentleman's position. I remember some 
 years ago reading a play in whicli the here, call d, I 
 think, Sir Pertinax McSycophant, was anxious to 
 grow suddenly rich, but was puzzled h 'W to 
 succeed unless he found some rich person wlio 
 would be ready to marry liiin. So it appeared that 
 he met an old, toothless, phthisicky, ricketty, rheu- 
 matic specimen of humanity whose affections he 
 won in a fortnight, whom he married in a mouth 
 
 'i 
 
 \ ' 
 
■j 
 
 
 and buried in a year ; and tlien, with a largo hu 
 of money, a sorrowful countenance, aniT a light 
 heart, he was enabled to begin life anew. Now, the 
 hon. gentleman uamc bauk here, and I uni sure it was 
 a melancholy pleasure to liim to tell how he failed. 
 He was very mucli like .Sir I'ertinax ; and not 
 only did we see the nielanclioly ])lea.sure wit!) 
 which — no doubt with a melaneiioly countenance, 
 btit with real pleasure at iieart — he announced to 
 the House the failure of the negotiations, but, .Sir, 
 the pleasure was not a melancholy one to the "new 
 colony," nor to his older followers. It was perfectly 
 clear from the loud cheens with which tiie 
 announcement was received, that it was a nuitter 
 of genuine rejoicing to them. It was aday of emanci- 
 pation. They were once more free. Thej' couhi 
 once more, without any limitations or reservations, 
 declare themselves supjOTrters of t he ohl policy to 
 which they had atlhered for so very long a time. 
 Now, Sir, there is not only this feature of the dis- 
 cussion, 1/ut tiiere is a larger one, if we look at the 
 circumst nces which gave rise to this visit to 
 Washington. It is important, in order to under- 
 stand t!ie whole (juestion, to notice how it l)egan, 
 as well as iiow it ended. There was a dissolution 
 of Parliament, and tins tlissolntion, we were in- 
 formed, was for tiie ))urpose of obtaining popular 
 sanction to the very serious business in which 
 tiiese gentlemen were about to engage. There 
 was no popular sanction sought by the 
 (Jos'ernnient for the Franchise Act. There 
 was no yjopular sanction sought wlieu it was 
 proposed to ])ut the wards of tlie ( lovernment, the 
 unenfranchised Indians of tiiecountry, upon the list 
 of voters. There was no popular sanction required 
 ivhen it was proposed to undertake otlier constitu- 
 tional changes or not less importance. Sir, Parlia- 
 ment is elected for a period of five years. The law 
 provides for the continuance of Parliament during 
 that period. The law has entrusted the Crown 
 with the power of dissolution, under certain circum- 
 stances. What tliose circumstances are, is pretty 
 well defined Ijy the usages and practices of Parlia- 
 ment and the Crown, in the mother country. It is 
 not a power that can be lightly used. It is a 
 power, says Sir Robert Peel, " which never can be 
 employed carelessly with.iut blunting tiie instru- 
 ment," It is of the first conse(|uence that those 
 usages and practices should bo regardeil by the 
 (tovernment, when advising the Crown, to dissolve 
 Parliament. I am not going into a discussion of the 
 question whetiier this was, and in what respect it 
 wiis, an improper dissolution. I referred to the 
 subject last yea'-. I have no doulit whatever, that 
 tiie Crown was badly advised, and that the preroga- 
 tive of dissolution was abused, when that power was 
 exercised in putting an end to tlie Parliament 
 which prececled this. Honourable gentlemen 
 want popular sanction for negotiations, the 
 character of which wtis not disclosed. They asked 
 the judgment of tiie cov.iitry on a question «hich 
 tl\e country was not psrniitted to know and to 
 understfvnd, and they h<.-i)ed that the jjeople of thi.s 
 country would regard tliat as a serious declaration 
 of principle. Now, let us look for a moment at 
 what Parliament did in former years, and what it 
 did without question, in puttinc upon the Slatute- 
 l)ook what is called " the standing offer. " There 
 is a law which declared that the Government should 
 at any time, under certain circumstances which are 
 set out in the statute, enter into negotiations with 
 
 the United States, and immefliately put a large num- 
 ber of articles, indicated in the statute, upon the free 
 list. This ( Jovernment re(|uired (Hipular sanction for 
 wiiat Parliament had autiiorized it to (hi. Does 
 the (<overn!nent reipiiie popular sanction for wliat 
 has already, over and over again, received popular 
 sanction ? Most assuredly not ; and it can be 
 hardly said tliat the Administration were serious 
 when they undertook t(» appeal to tiiecountry, and 
 assigned as a reas(jn for that appeal, liiat they 
 re(|uired iK>]iular sanction for the step they were 
 almut to take. The lion, gentleman, the Minister 
 o' Finance, says that the (loverniiient are not re- 
 s]ionsible for the McKinley Hill. Well, I dissent 
 from tiiat view. We all reniemlier here the discus- 
 .sioii we liad in 188(5wlieni. large number of articles 
 had Ijeen put upon the free list by the Congress 
 of tiie United States, and we asketl that they should 
 be ])ut upon tilt' free list by tlie Parliament of 
 Canada. They were natural jiroducts. They were 
 such as a large numiiur of our people had a special 
 interest in, especially those who reside in the 
 Maritime Provinces. A large trade was growing 
 up in them. We were exporters of many of them, 
 yet tiie Ooverninent, at the instance of some of 
 their supporters, voted down the proposition to put 
 tliese articles on tlie free list. The financial depart- 
 ment of the (ioverimient was then in charge of Sir 
 Leonard Tilley. Two years later the (Jovernmeat 
 entered into negotiations with tlie (Jovernment of 
 Washington about another matter, the treaty of 
 1 8HS, relating to the fislieries. Sir Charles Tupper, 
 wlio a .'te<l as Comniissii/ner for Canada, came nei-e. 
 He wt'.s, I tiiink, ilinister of Finance at the time. 
 He was, at all events, a member of the Government, 
 anrl he pres.sed upon tlie ( tovermnent thenecessity of 
 putting upon the freelist tliese articles, that we had 
 propo.sed slioulil go on the free list two years before. 
 He did so, on representations from Washington. 
 The Government luid declared against doing that 
 particular act. Tlie lion, gentleman who now leads 
 tlie House had himself spoken against the proposi- 
 tion not two days before ; but. at the instance of 
 the Minister of Finance, theinatterwaspresaedon the 
 attention of the (Government. They receded from 
 the position they liad taken, and put those articles on 
 the free list. These articles remained there but for 
 a single season, and were again put back on the 
 list of dutiable articles, and then the McKinley 
 Bill came into operation. Now, the Government 
 for a series of years, acted upon these representa- 
 tions tliat had been made. What were they ? 
 Why, they had said again and again : If you per- 
 mit us to pursue a courageous policy, we will bring 
 the Congress of the United States to their 
 knees, we will bring them to their senses ; and 
 Sir Charles Tupper, as a member of the Ad- 
 ministration, '•"'iuted out again and again to 
 this House, .king a statement which was 
 not accurate, but which wa« ::c,ortheless 
 made, that the mere threat of putting a duty 
 upon American coal had the effect of inducing Con- 
 gress to take the duty oflF Canadian coal. He gave 
 that as Un instance of tlie power Canada liad, if 
 she chose to exercise it, of completely altering the 
 fiscal policy of the United States. The Govern- 
 ment pursued this system, talking loudly, talking 
 very grandly, intimating what we had power to do, 
 intimating the cowardly, the humiliating position 
 we would be in if we failed to exercise our power, 
 and to show the Congress of the United Stateo our 
 
 i 
 
 % - 
 
independence of thoin. All this tall talk, and these 
 actions ultimately called attention, whicli was not 
 before attracted, to the relatioiis between 
 Canada and the United States. They speci- 
 ally called the attention of the American (Jov- 
 ernntent to the matter, and the result was 
 the McKinley Bill. The McKinlcy Hill, Sir, 
 had its origin in the policy and in the language 
 employed by the hon. gentlemen who .sat on tiie 
 Treasury benches, and in thejuewspapers supporting 
 tliem, and the hon. gentlemen who voted with them 
 auvl occupied seats behind them in this House. 
 Well, on the eve of the last general election, these 
 hon. gentlemen announced that they were about 
 to negotiate a treaty with tiie United .States. They 
 were divided between their support of a treaty 
 and their support of the National Policy. They 
 were to leave here on tiie 4tli of March, they were 
 to reach Washington on the 6th, at a pei'iotl when 
 it would be '■ ^ n how great a victory they had 
 achieved, " . -iir hands wotdd be strengthened, 
 so that t )uld successfully carry on their 
 
 negotiatioi. ,jth the neighbouring Republic. I 
 think that the correspondence, to whicii I shall 
 refer, shows that the representations then made 
 were not such representations aa ought to have l)een 
 made to the people of this country; that tliey were 
 I'epresentations made for the purpose of convincing 
 those who were tlissatisfied with the policy of pro- 
 tection, that they were about to receive relief at the 
 liands of the Administration ; that the relations be- 
 tween the United States and Canada liad undergone 
 change ; that the ( Jovernment had abandoned their 
 fiscal policy of restriction, and that they were pre- 
 pared to treat that policy as a mere means to an 
 end. In fact, we were told again and again, at tiie 
 last general election, tliat the policy of protection 
 was not adopted as a policy good in iiself but as a 
 means to an eu<l ; that their policy, as the resolution 
 of 1878 in fact declared, was 'dimply a means of 
 forcing the people of the Uniteil States to agree to 
 freer trade relations, and to froer commercial inter- 
 course, with the people of th's country. Now let me 
 call the attention of the Hoiue to the correspondence 
 which took place between His Excellency and the 
 Colonial Office, and the (Government of tliis coun- 
 try and the British Embassy at Washington, for the 
 purpose of promoting a belter under8tan<ling in 
 connnercial matters between Canada and the neigh- 
 bouring Republic. Before commencing to read quo- 
 tations from this correspondence, let me say that, 
 although the Government sent an embassy to 
 Washington a little latei- than they had promiseil 
 the people of this country that such a delega- 
 tion or embassy would be sent, that delegation 
 or embassy remained there for a remarkably short 
 period of time ; it did so because the Secretary 
 of State complained that faith had not been kept 
 with him, and those gentlemen were put on 
 probation for misconduct before those negotiations 
 could be renewed. On the 3rd November, 1890, 
 the Colonial Office informed the Foreign Office that 
 suggestions had been received from the Governor 
 General by telegram, and that a reply fo these 
 suggestions should be telegraphed to the British 
 Minister at Washington, if the Foreign Office 
 approved of what the telegiam contained. The 
 words are : 
 
 " With instructions to consider in what way the wish of 
 Canada to be included in any arrnngement may fristbe 
 made, and to telegraph home foi consideration the erras 
 
 of any convontton or arranccment which be thinks could 
 bo obtained or is desiriible. 
 
 This was done by the Foreign Office on the 
 following day, and on the tttli Nf)vcml)er the 
 Foreign Office informed the Colonial Office that 
 they had received "the substance of a draft conven- 
 tion from Sir Julian Vauncefote that ho had pri- 
 vately communicated to Mr. Hlaine for an arrange- 
 mentastotishingqut'stioiisand as to trade regulations 
 between the United Stjites and Newfoundland. I 
 am to point out tliat Sir .luliau Pauncefote defers 
 replying to the enquiry addrcNsed to him ad to the 
 best mode of inchuling (Canada in such an arrange- 
 ment until he has discussed tlie draft witli Mr, 
 Blaine." On the lOtli November, a protest is made 
 by the Canadian Government against the New- 
 foundland treaty. On the 2()th November, the 
 (\inadian Government wim jiiformed by Lord 
 Knutsford that " Her Mpjesty't. Government will 
 delay the Newfoundland convention if Canadian 
 negotiations can be entered upon at once on lines 
 proposed by your Ministers so that both may 
 proceed part paixn. Any reciprocity treaty between 
 Canada and the United States would, as previously, 
 be framed so as not to place imports from tiiis 
 country at a disadvantage, and it is presume<l 
 that Canada would wish to retain control o\'er her 
 taritF with a view to possible extension of her 
 trade with the colonies and England." There is 
 a suggestion from the Colonial Office in con- 
 se(|uence of a communication received from the 
 Government of Canada with reference to the pro- 
 posals of the (Tovernment which have not been laid 
 liefore this House. What correspondence was 
 there, that gava rise to this suggestion '! How is it 
 that that conmunication of the 19th November 
 from the Government of C'anada has not been laid 
 before Pai liamont? The Governor General informs 
 Lord Knutsford on th.'; same day that "the (/ann- 
 <lian Ministers are prijpared to open negotiations 
 immediately on the lines indicated in my telegram 
 of the 19th." What were those lines indicated in 
 tne telegi-am of the 19tii ? Why is it that the con- 
 tents of that telef/am have noj been laid before this 
 House, and that the (Jovernment have not seen 
 proper to communicate to Parliament the proposal 
 which is necessary, to enable Parliament to form a 
 judgment upon the conduct of the Administration? 
 They go on to say : ' ' Provided their representatives 
 at Washington could bo commissioners associated 
 with the British Minister and empowered to nego- 
 tiate directly instead of being merely <lelegates." 
 Thatisthecondition on which they proposed tounder- 
 take immediate negotiations. VVha*' were the lines 
 indicated in that telegram, not a word of which 
 has up to this hour been communicated to Parlia- 
 ment? We arerefiuired, oni'.jcountof thestatement 
 of the hon. Minister, to exercise our judgment 
 upon the conduct of the Administration, and 
 the papers which are necessary to enable us to 
 form a judgment upon the conduct of the Adminis- 
 tration are not yet laid before Parliament. On the 
 28th November, 1890, Lord Stanley informs the 
 British Minister at \^'ash^ngt,on that 
 
 " Wo are prepared to arrange for commercial relations 
 with the United States being liberally extended and wish 
 that the United States may be so informed. This Govern- 
 mont objects to sending delegiitesto Washington unoffl- 
 oially, as liable to give rise to misunderstanding, but is 
 ready at once to open formal negotiations with the sanction 
 of Her Majesty's Government." 
 
 They also say ; 
 
 
8 COUltl 
 
 I 
 
 ( 
 
 " They woulU noRotiiite iminddintRly on the lines 
 indioiiti'd in my toIuKram of the liltli if tlioir ropreBontii- 
 tlvci could be cuniniissionorH oinpuwored to nogotluto 
 directly iniitoad of uoroly dclegatoK." 
 
 Tiiu.sf! are the wonls eontaineil in the despatch of 
 HiM Kxcellency uiroii tliiH very important suWjeet. 
 (In the 1th Deceniner, l»r<l Kniitftford, iu acominu- 
 nii.'iitioii to r^jnl Stank-y, says : 
 
 " With reforoiico to yourdospaloh of the 19th of Inbt 
 month, Her Miiicaty'n Govornmont agree to the Miniater 
 at Wii8hini;ton being assigtod by one or more Canadian 
 i)leni|ioteMtiario8, if the United etatrg oonsont to negotia- 
 tioDf." 
 
 On tlie oth I)eceinl)er, 
 Lord Kmiteford : 
 
 Lord (Stanley telograplis 
 
 " May wo now moke definite official proposals through 
 the HritiHb Minister to the United States Qovernment. 
 
 'I'liat coniinunieation sIiowh tl'ut up to that time 
 no formal cominunication, or no proposal, had been 
 made liy the (lovernmeiit of Canada to the liritiiih 
 Kmha.isy at Washington with the view to its heinj/ 
 I'ounnunicated to the (Jovernnient of (he United 
 States. Their eoiinnuniuation which they i)roposed 
 us a basiH of negotiations oirthe suhjcct of recipro- 
 city, was with the Colonial OfHce. That is con- 
 tained in the telegram of the 19th Noveml)er, 
 wliich has never been laid before I'arlian'ent, but 
 the Colonial Ottice calls forcaution — thatthey would 
 notui.'.ertake to discriminate against liritish goods, 
 and that they would not enter into such trade re- 
 lations with the United Stiites as would make it 
 iiupossiblu for them to extend their relations with 
 the mother country, or with other British pos- 
 sessions. On the 17th December, .Sir Julian Paunce- 
 fote writes to Lord Staidey : 
 
 " I Hill informed by thoScorotarv of State (Mr. Blaine) 
 that his (lovcrninent could not re; pond to the suggestion 
 of a formal commi.'<sion until a bos^s of arrangement had 
 been first reached. Ho expresses i. strong desire to con- 
 clude a wide reciprocity treaty." 
 
 These were the words used in the des- 
 patch of tlie liritish Minister at Washington, that 
 Mr. Blaine desired to conclude a wide treaty of 
 reciprocity. He does not limit the Government 
 to any specific kind of treaty exec >t that it ought 
 to be a treaty mutually beneficial and comprehen- 
 sive in its provisions. I^ord JStiv-uey informs Lord 
 Kuutsford, on the 13th December, upon what terins 
 the (Government are j)repared to negotiate. Now, 
 the fact that that telegram of the 19th is suppressed, 
 and this formal despatch of the 13th December is 
 given, goes to show that the contents of the tele- 
 gram did not c(jrrespond with the contents of the 
 despatch. Let us know what were th ; Government's 
 first impressions. What were the views, what 
 were the proposals in contemplation as a basiii for 
 connnercial arrangements with the United States, 
 as suggested in this telegram of the 19th November? 
 The House has a right to know what views the 
 Government entertained on the subject at thpt 
 time. Now, this despatch of the 13th December 
 reads as follows ; — 
 
 " I '.lave the honour to send to your Lordship 'o-day a 
 telogiiiphic message of wiiich the following is the sub- 
 Btancu:" 
 
 That telegraphic niessage of *A\e 13th is not here. 
 
 " With roforenCfi to my telegram of the 10th inst., this 
 Government is dasirous . to propose a joint com- 
 
 mission, such aa that of 1871, with authority to deal 
 without limitation and to prepare a treaty respecting the 
 following subjects : — 
 
 I " 1, Renewal of the Rooiprooity Treaty of 1854, with the 
 ] moditioiitioMs required by the altered circumstances of 
 I b(>th countries, and with the exteiiaions deemed by the 
 I r uuuisgion to be in the interoat of Canada and the United 
 States. 
 
 "2. Heconaidorationof the treaty of 188Swlth respect to 
 the Atliintio fisheries, with the ann of securing the free 
 admibsion into the United States markets of Canadian 
 fishery products in return for facilities to be granted to 
 the United States fishermen to buy bait and supplioa and 
 to tranship cargoes in Canadii, all ^uch privilegea to oe 
 mutual. 
 
 "3. Protection of mackerel iind other fisheries on the 
 Atlantic Ocean and the inland waters also. 
 
 " 4. Relaxation of the seaboard coastuig laws of the two 
 countries. 
 
 " 5. Relrvxation of the coasting laws of the two countries 
 on the inland waters dividing Canada from the United 
 States. 
 " fi. Mutual salvage and saving of wrecked voasels. 
 "7. ArrangcmontH for settling boundary between 
 Canada and Alaska." 
 
 Now, the«e were the topics that were suggested in 
 this communication of the 13tli December as sub- 
 jects for discussion in the I'arliamcnt of C'anada 
 and the (Jovermnent of the United States. It will 
 be observed that the (Jovernment proposed in this, 
 the treaty of 1854 as the basis for negotiation be- 
 tween the two (lovernmcntson the subject of reci- 
 procity. The viovernments had again and again 
 mformed I'arliament through a long series of years 
 beginning in 1S71, that itwas not possible to secure 
 a treaty of reciprocity with the United States 
 u))on the basis contained in this first proposition ; 
 and why they should undertake to suggest as a 
 basis for the negotiation that which they them- 
 selves stated never could be a basis for a successful 
 treaty, I confess I am unable to understand, except 
 upon the o le hypothesis, that, however anxious 
 the 'lovernniont might be to succeed with regard 
 to some of the other matters, they were merely 
 anxious to allay public feeling, to postpone the 
 public decision, until the elections were over ; and 
 then if they failed, or if it became iiianifest that 
 tliey did not desire to succeed in the establishment 
 of reciprocal trade relations with our neighbours, 
 no harm could come to them politically. That is 
 the one ..iference which may be drawn, and it seems 
 to me the only one that can be drawn, from the 
 proposition, and from what subscviuently happened 
 with regard to it. I need not refer to the second 
 proposition. Isupposcthe Government aicanxious to 
 accomplish that. I should have been sorry to have 
 seen tliem successfid with regard to some of 
 the provisiona of that treaty of 1888. I am 
 willing that the Administration should go a long 
 way in establishing freer trade re'itions, and 
 making liberal commercial arrangements in all 
 those mattcLS referred to in the treaty of 1888 ; 
 but I am not anxious, I am not willing, to see 
 any government, or any party, sacrificing the 
 sove' eign rights of this country to the demands 
 of o ir neighbours, and those sovereign rights 
 were, in uiy opinion, to no inconsiderable degree 
 sacrificed by the terms of the treaty of 1888, I 
 need not refer to tiie protection of the mackerel, 
 or to the relaxation of the laws relating to the 
 coasting trade. I may say that the proposition 
 relating to m-utiial salvage und the saving 
 wrecked vessels, which the Minister of 
 when Minister of Customs, fought with so much 
 vigour and success for a long series of years, 
 he supported at \Vashington. I think I may con- 
 gratulate the Minister of Militia on the progress 
 which lie has mac'e in that particular, and that he 
 is now prepared to support, as in the interests of 
 
 iig of 
 War 
 
humanity iva well iw in t\\v inturoRts of connnerco, a 
 |Hility wiiich ho Iiok liithcrto oppoHcd witli iv great 
 ileal (if vigour and with a great ileal of hmoccus. 
 Now, the next Huhject to which I nhall icteriMa 
 Htatonient made hy a nienilier of the < iuvcrninent. 
 It iu tliJH : 
 
 " Mr. Hlninc roiilipil tliia lo ondciivoiir to olitiiin the 
 u|)p<iinttnoin oft lio t'ormitl ("immiKiiion to iirri vo at the rooi- 
 pyooity woidil l)o iifohiHi', Ixil tlmt tlic> UnitcMl gtaten (lov- 
 ernmuiit waH williiiK to diKi'iins the (juexlion in private 
 with Sir.IidiHM l'iiiiii«'«foti' Hedoiio ornioriMli<l<'initi'nrrom 
 Canada, and to consiili'r every mibjool as to wliicli there 
 wa« a liope of aKroumcnl on the groundx of minual in- 
 terostfi ; if not to rJMlt bo ariive a uton nntil by private (lin- 
 oininiun he him natiiflod liiinnelf that Ruod Rronnd existed 
 for expeeliiid an iiKreenient l)y nioiinH ofii cnnitniByion. 
 Ho addi.d that he would lie prepared lo enter into private 
 negotiations at any time after 4tli March " 
 
 IIo added that he would lie j>re'|.ared to enter 
 into these negotiations iitaiiy time after 4tli .March. 
 This waH the o(nninnni>!ation the (ioverninent 
 received from WnHhington a«to Mr. Hlaine's inten- 
 tions. Mr. Blaine informs Sir .Jnlitui I'anneefote : 
 
 " I had not a moment to give lo llio ituhlort u".til after 
 the adjournment of Congre.><H in March, but ,ftcr that 
 date I would be willing to respond toy.ur request, to 
 have a full but private conferenee with tile HritiHU Minis- 
 tor and one or rnoro agents from Canada to go over every 
 point of diB'eroncc and oonsidcr every subject upon which 
 a mutual interest can be loinuicd. If an agreement is 
 reiiched, all well ; if not, no ofliciiil mention is to bo made 
 of the elTort. Above all thingi* it is important to avoid 
 public reference to the matter. This the President will 
 insiKt upon."' 
 
 Now, this was the nmlcrstanding in regard to 
 these initial negotiations. Mr. Blaine said, when he 
 received the proposith)!! which the (lovernnient 
 Bubinitted : I am not prepared to enter into negotia- 
 tions by the appointment of a formal t'ommission. 
 Your proiiosition for reciprocity is vague and may 1)3 
 one exceeilingly limited. I do not know how you 
 propose to deil with the matter. I do not know what 
 your proposals are. It may be a useless waste of 
 time to undertake negotiations on such a basis : 
 let us hy private and infornuil intercourse, 
 which is to be kept strictly secret, ascertain 
 whether there is any reasonable {)rf)spect of arriv- 
 ing at an agreement before we appoint a 
 Commission for the purpose of negotiation. 
 That was hib proposition. And why he wished 
 to keep it secret is perfectly obvious. 8uch 
 a proposition as the one contained in the topics 
 for negotiations supplied by the (Jovernment is one 
 which ndght arouse against it a very large section 
 of the population of the United States, without 
 bringing a singlesection to support the Administra- 
 tion that would entertain it. Ic was important 
 to know more specifically what it was that. 
 Canada was willing to agree to have re<;inrocal trade 
 in, and until that should be asr^i-taiuid, it was 
 most undesirable that tlie matter should be put 
 before the people ; beca'.ise '.\,e (Joverninent of tlie 
 United States would be in this position : there 
 would be a large nundwr of intorests prepared to 
 attack the propositio.:, and no interests prepared 
 to give it their support, '"hat would be the neces- 
 sary consequence of making public a proposition 
 such OS the Government of Canada submitted to 
 the United Suites. That was not done. The 
 Government did not keep secret these informal 
 negotiations, on the contrary they published abroad 
 that such negotiations were to be had, and of this 
 Mr. Blaine complained, and he certaiidy com- 
 plained with good reason. After that a member of 
 the (Jovernnient said : 
 
 "Sir John Ma^donald'.« (loveriimpnl not long ago made 
 n doHnlte proiiosRl to the Wasliingtoii nulhorltins for the 
 ■cttlcincnt ol^ all xliliiig diffcrl■ll(■o^ ootwfcn the two 
 eouiitric'K, on the biuis of the extciisiou of tnide bolwocn 
 the two cciuiitrles. It involves partial rooiprcioity, llie 
 enumcratnd iirllcleH to inoludo genenilly » number of 
 naturnl proilucts. IJut the proposition disriirds any idea 
 of commi'roiiil union or inirestrictod rflclproolly. More- 
 over, lliese proposals wire invited and suggfunl by flio 
 Wiisningtoii iiuthoritlos," 
 
 Did Mr. UluineH HnggeRti(Ui- that If the Hubject of 
 reciprocity was entertained it slnnihl be a wide pro- 
 j)osal for reciprocity wariimt a statement of 
 this sort ? ^ In my opinion, it did not. I hold it 
 to be a nusreiireMentation of Mr. Blaine's state- 
 ment to Miey that it warrants the assertion made iu 
 i\w paragraph I have read. It is further said : 
 
 "The Commissioners from Cnnada and Great Drltain 
 ■tart tor Washington on the 4th March, the date of the 
 opening of the new Coiigrcs."." 
 
 The reason was not that a new Congress waa to be 
 oj)ened at that date, but that the Secretary of 
 Stale woidil have leisun in conse(|nence of the 
 ternnnati(ni of the old one. There is no statement 
 nnide by Mr. Blaine that warrantt; the intimation 
 that negotiatioiks were to begin on the 4th of 
 March, and that a delegation was to start ■«» the 
 4th March. There is not a particle of the corres- 
 pondence brought down that warrants a state- 
 ment of this sort. Mr. Blaine says that before 
 that time he will not have leisure. It is clear that 
 the intention was that the fixing of the date for 
 these negotiations was to be a matter Utv future 
 arrangement. But that was not one acted unon, 
 nor wliat was represented to the Canadian pnnlic. 
 A Minister said : 
 
 " The result of the Canadian elections will be known on 
 the 6th March, the day the Commissioners reach 
 Washington. In order that the Commission may have 
 no uncertain sound. Sir John A. Macdonald has decided 
 to appeal to the country and ask for judgment on tb«8e 
 propCuals of his to the Washington autlioritios." 
 
 What were tiiese proposals V Was there a'lything 
 definite, on which jntlginent could be passed '! No, 
 It was necessary that negotiations should take 
 place, that conclusions should be reached, that the 
 public should know what those conclnsicms were 
 before it would be possilde for the public to form 
 a judgment. It should not have been dime 
 before negotiations were begun. If the opinion of 
 the country was recjiiircd, it was required after 
 negotiations were com)deted, and the terms agreed 
 \ipon were known, and it whs a mere ijretense to 
 dissolve I'ttrliameut, under the circumstances, for 
 any such pui-pose as that set out in this statement. 
 It is impossible it could be so. .Sir John Macdonald 
 shortly after this time issued an address himself. 
 It was elaborate. It discussed the various issues 
 that had been put before the people. It iliscussed 
 the policy laid before the country by the 
 party of whicii he was the head ; but there 
 is not in the 'wldress from the Ixiginning to the end 
 a syllable with respect to those negotiations that 
 were to take place at Washington. He said noth- 
 ing in regard to them, and I suppose the reason he 
 said notliing was the understanding with Mr. 
 Blaine that tiiese matters were not to be made sub- 
 jects of public discussion. Nor was the fact of the 
 discussion of this question in an informal way to 
 be made public, unless they reached a conclusion 
 justifying the appointment of a Commission for' the 
 purpose of negotiating a formal treaty. When the 
 statement became public, Mr. Baker, a member of 
 
 M 
 
 th 
 an 
 th 
 
 pa 
 St a 
 
 iU 
 
 in I 
 wi 
 
CongreM, AiMieMMfd a Icitttr to Mr. liluiiu' ailliii(( 
 Mr. MliiiiUi'H ultciitioii to wlml liml Iwcii k'uU-iI liy 
 tliu (iovurniiiuiit or the iiic'--' of tln' (iovcriimciit, 
 liiiil HxkiiiK liiiii wimt rouiiuitioii tlirri' wiim for 
 tliCMc repreHtiilHtioiiH. \Ir. IUkcr'8 li-tter Ih thin : 
 
 " My Dkah Mh. Ul.AitiK,— It Ik roporleil in the nown- 
 liiipOFH of (!iiiin<lu iiikI iiIork the iiortliprii Ixirilvrof my 
 iflnli', wht'ro my cdiii'tiliit'iitH iir« d ^'I'ly iiitt'r»'Hti'(l in tlic 
 aiil>jucl, lliut ni'Kotiiilioni' urti i;i>iiiiri>n luMwi'fn tliidODiui- 
 Iry and (Iroiil llriliiin, witli a view to jmrliiil ruciprocity 
 with Ciii.iidii, inrlnilinK niiluiiil prntluvti only mid not 
 iniinurHcturi'H ; iind it i-< uliitod lliiit Sir CliiirU^H Tuppor Id 
 (in liiH wiiv liorc ii" ii I'omniinHinm'r to ni'Kotiiito for unci) 
 inodifipiitlonH of iiiir larilV. I nlmll be very Kind if you 
 will enublo mo to iinHWur iny coniititiioiitt. 
 " Very truly your», 
 
 ••(•HAS. ,'^. Il.AKER." 
 
 To tliiH .M''. Il'iiiiii; on lliu ><unie diitu, llie •JtJtIl 
 tlaimary, ISitI, uddrt'HHeil tliu foUowinj^ icply : — 
 
 " Dkati Rill. Hakkh,— I iiutliori»!o ymi to I'mitriidict tho 
 ruinourn you rolor to. TIiiti! art' no nonotiations wliiilovur 
 on foot tor li rccir.rocity troiily with riiiinidii, iind you 
 iniiy !)« iiHaurod that no suoh Hohonio for a rociprooity 
 troiity with tho Dominion, confined to natural products, 
 will hoontertaincd liy thinOovornmont. Wo know nothing 
 iȣiiir ('hallos Turipor'n comir;: to Wanhinnton. 
 " Vi'ry tridy, Sic, 
 
 •• J.VMKS (J. HLAINE." 
 
 Now, Sir, ai:y one wlio IniH lead t lie coiieMpoiideiicc 
 between the ('oloiii:d Olfiee and the Foreign OHiee, 
 between Lord .Staidcy ami the Colonial Ottice, be- 
 tween Loiil Staidey and liie liriliHh nird)a8Nador at 
 Washington, the minutes of Comicil, and the eoni- 
 inunicution by the (iov<'rnment of Canada, will see 
 tliat in every |iartiiniliii' thiH letter of Mr. lilaine 
 is true. Ther*! weie no negotiationH pending. He 
 refused to agree to the appointment of a Connnis- 
 sion, he refused to agree that there shouhl be nego- 
 tiations, until by inforniiil ami i)rivute conversation 
 with the lion, gentlenu^n on the Treasury benches 
 he had aseertuineil what their meaning was when 
 they proposed a re(aj)roeity treaty on the basis of 
 tiia't of IS,')4, moditied as re(|uired by the changes 
 tliat luid taken |)lace in both countries in that 
 j»eri;>"; of time. Mr. Blaine's view was clearly 
 stated in this letter ;and thetioverninent, from the 
 time that letter was written down to the time that 
 they say they failed at Wasiiington in these infornuil 
 negotiations, knew j)re;i8ely what kind of proposi- 
 tion the American (ioveriiment were prepared to 
 entertain. That that proposition must be as V)road 
 and ai comprehensive as tlie Finance Minister has 
 stated to this House, I do not believe. I think that 
 a treaty of a very ditl'erent character, without these 
 restrictions which he suggested, can be negotiated. 
 I think that he did his best to preventany agreement 
 that his party woidd be willing to accept. I have 
 no doubt of that whatever, and 1 say. Sir, that 
 under these circumstances it was of the first conse- 
 (pience that every memorandum, every letter, every 
 oomniunication, every report of matters that took 
 place between the Canadian tioverinnent and the 
 (Joverninent at Washington, and every report that 
 was made to His Kxcellency here in reference to 
 this visit to Washimiton, shoulil have been lai<l 
 before Parliament before the Minister of Fin- 
 ance undertook to discuss the subject at all. Now, 
 there is in this letter of Mr. l-Waine a specific decla- 
 ration. He declares that no projtosition looking 
 to a treaty confined to natural products will be 
 entertained, and the (iovernment knew that before 
 they left Ottawa for Washington. They promised 
 to go to W ashington while tlie general elections were 
 
 pending, they left on tlitN tinal v. nit of theirs when 
 
 the bye eleotioiis were pending, ami so the (lov- 
 ernment have, by their action it, the first instance 
 ami in the lust, shown what in .heir opinion wan 
 the public feeling on tlu- subject of recipnjcity. 
 Strongly, as they Iwdicrvcd, the syHtetn ..f protection 
 had taken hold u|K)n the minds of the inanufuctur- 
 ing dasMes ; strongly as they felt thcmselveH 
 entrenched by their subserviency, shall I say, to 
 that class; at iili events let me sny, by their 
 devotion to it ; they still felt that the agricultural 
 popidation and the conimercialclasses of this country 
 were interested in freer trade with the neighlsnir- 
 ing Hepnblic. It would not do when any number 
 of liye-clections were pending, iiuiuh less would it 
 do when a general election was pending, to leave 
 till ,>ublic of this country to si.ppose that they 
 were not pre)>ared to entertain jiropositions looking 
 to more liberal trade relations with the Uiiiteil 
 States. On the (tth February last year the Minis- 
 ter of ilustice spoke to the people of the city of 
 Toronto, end he said in his speech amongst other 
 things, those which I will now read : 
 
 II when tho lime oomos tbat in 
 1), wliatovor lii» Bontimonts may 
 
 " It will bo proved I' 
 rciipontiu to that Mr. 1(1 
 bo— and 1 am bound foi u 
 (landor — as tho noKotim 
 luiit the Dominion of Vn 
 these two countries, he 
 for reciprocity and oni 
 hor. That etaluraont i >> 
 ourselves of that to extend 
 
 •nt to (live him credit for 
 
 Vowfoundland would not 
 
 r u trade troatjj between 
 
 mg to make a wide treaty 
 
 "pnrato neKotiatiuns with 
 
 '", we are jbound to avail 
 
 ide." 
 
 That the United States were willing to make a wi<le 
 treaty of reciprocity, he knew. That statement 
 was made by Mv. Hlaine, and he says we are IkiuikI 
 to avail ourselves of that to extend our trade. 
 Yes, Mr. .Speaker, I think the (iovernment were 
 bound to avail themselves of it, liut the (lovern- 
 inont in the course which they ailojited and in the 
 pro|)osition which they made, showed that thoy 
 were not <lisposed to make a wide treaty of reci- 
 procity. It was a treaty of ii very different char- 
 acter ; it was a treaty that would require to lie 
 cliaract<!rized by other terms than as a wide treaty 
 of reciprocity, which they expressed their readiness 
 to negotiate ; a treaty the character of which was 
 such that they knew from the time that this pro- 
 position was submitted to the British Government 
 to be communicated to Washington, that it would 
 not be accepted. Again the Alinister of Justice 
 said : 
 
 " The next reciuost from Mr. DIaine was that preparatory 
 to negotiations Doing entered upon, tho Canadian (Jovern- 
 inoiit would propound a basis upon which tho convention 
 would eventually proceed. We did so in a document 
 which has been published in the press offering to consider 
 a renewal of the reciprocity of 1854, with such modifica- 
 tions as the oircumstancesof tho two countries might call 
 for." 
 
 Now,Sir,that is a statement which I have no cloubt 
 is fairly accurate. Mr. Blaine no doubt insisted upon 
 preparatory negotiations before such a proposition 
 was made, bv.t tliat jiroposition when made was of so 
 indefinite and of so vague a character that it pre- 
 vented the appointment of the Commission until 
 theCiovernmentof Canada made cleartheir meaning, 
 until they explained tothetiovernment of the United 
 .States how far they were prepared to go and what 
 modifications they were prepared to propose. The 
 Minister of Justice goes on to say : 
 
 " It is stated that having made that proposition to Mr. 
 Blaine without any prospect of its being accepted, and 
 without any prospect of it.s being eventually entertained. 
 Sir John Macdoneld has sprung the elections on the peo- 
 
Ih 
 
 l« of CKtindii uiidi'r tlio pntMM Of hi* HoiliK (<) iiiitnrtttiri 
 e iiriolliitioiin wliil« In r««ll^ tnn CiililiH'l HI WniililiiR- 
 ton win linvti iiciiMtnf it. Let inu It'll voii lliiit.nii fiii I'rniii 
 Ihitt ni'liiH triio, wt< hnil tlii> |iri>|M)iiiiroii ilmt whk 'ul)iiiit- 
 teil til Mr. Illiiiiir ; that tlinnimwt'r thiil Mi'. Illitiiio iiiiulu 
 to UK wnx thitt III' WHK williiiK ti> iiiilGr mi ii in'i'liiiiiiitiry 
 illioiinHiiiii to iiri'ct'rii' till' iiioro I'lirniiil eiiiiiiniiiiliiii ; lie 
 wttM williiiK tu uiilnr ui>oii tliikt iliituiiaiiloM nml In iMiimiili-r 
 nil iii'ititH cmhriuMtii In It, l>.>i would imt lie iircpiiri'il to 
 do io until nfturllic 4th iil Miiruh." 
 
 Nuw, Sir, the I'liiniiiiunt wliiili 1 niiiku ii^ailiHt that 
 Htati'iiient of llir NliiiiNtt'r nf .luHtici' Im, that ut the 
 
 tilllV it VVikH lllllllc tluTV WUHtiVCrV ri'UHOlllllliogl'Ollllli 
 
 foi' MiippDHiii^ tliat thii critii'iMin whii'li liti wiirt 
 aiiHwtiriri^', wild a well foiiiidt'd criticiMiii. What 
 (l<M)H his critic dhv ? Tiiat tliu (iovrriiiiu'iit hiiij 
 nimlo the iiroponition to Mr. HIaiiii' without any 
 proHpcct (it itH iK'ing acccptt-il. \(i\v, iliil they not 
 Hu iiiakii it? Hull thuy any priiHpei't that it woulit 
 Im) aecepttMl ? Ilail not .Mr. lUaincH rcfuMul to ap- 
 |ioint coinuiiHNioncrH, his iiHiHlancvon ii iircliniiiiary 
 (lisuuHHion of tliiM iironoMition, and IiIh li'ttcr to .Mr. 
 liaker w))icli liaii alrcaily appcarcil Iicfoic tiiiH 
 Hpeecli was delivcniil had not all tliettv thiiigi* 
 niadi! it perfectly clear that the < Joveninieul were 
 not going to Mucceed.and that when they nought to 
 perHuadetheelectorHofC'anadatohiild theirjudgiiu^it 
 in suHpense until the elections were over, and tiie.se 
 negotiations had taken place, they were giving the 
 jteople of Canada an aHBuninee whicli tliey were 
 not warranted in giving them ; liecantu there was 
 not any ground whatever for hoping tliut the (iov- 
 erninent would Huccced in the i)rop<mition whicli .t 
 had suliinitted at the time. Tha Houne will hear 
 in mind that these negotiations, which the hnn. 
 Minister of .Justice discussed so fully and freely in 
 that speech, were negotiations, that were to have 
 been kept secret. Whether he felt that lliey had 
 been already divulged by the Prime Minister >.nd 
 Sir ( 'harle.s Tujiper, uiul that lie was not making 
 matters any worse by further discussion, or not, I 
 do not know ; he has never given us any explana- 
 tion on that point. How was it that the ple<lge 
 of secrecy was broken, and that those statements, 
 which were to be kept secret, and about which 
 nothing was to be said if there was no snccesH, were 
 fully revealed from the very beginning? Well, 
 Sir, after the elections were over and t'arliament 
 met here, the negotiations were made the subject 
 of discussion in the debate on the Address, in 
 which my lion, friend from South Oxford criticised 
 the "onduct of the (lovernment in reference to 
 these matters, and his criticism was answered liy 
 the Minister of Finance. In the eour.se of his speech 
 the hoii. Minister of Fiiniuce said : 
 
 '' Cougequeiitl}', when there is an nltcriiativo, when the 
 Minister of Justice makes asolomnstatutnoiit in Toronto, 
 when he gives oincial uttarance, H|)eakinK as a MinLster 
 of the Crown, as to how these negotiations were eoin- 
 raenced, and how they were carried on ; and on the other 
 hand, there is a letter sent hy Mr. Blaine ton Mr. liaker 
 saying some things, and not statingothers, the hon. gentle- 
 man says : ' I believe Mr. Btiiino and not the Minister.' 
 I think, if my hon. frienC will allow me to tell him so, it 
 would be well for him to trust, thoCniiiidinii people alittle 
 more, and oven to trust the Canadian Ministers when they 
 make grave statements on their responsibilities as 
 Ministers of the Crown." 
 
 He further said : 
 
 "Is the hon. gentleman afraid of his case? Was ho 
 afniid that if ho waited three or four days, until these 
 papers came down, that ho would not be able to make the 
 speech ho has just made, and so decided to forestall the 
 Address and get his surmises .spread throughout the 
 country before they could have a chance of being con- 
 fronted by documentary truth." 
 
 i '\'\\n hon. li.ember for South Oxford would not wait 
 
 ' thriu' or four days until thoMe |Mi|Miri were brought 
 
 iliiwii. Well, the lioimv waited three or four 
 
 I iiiiiiiiliM before Moiiie of the papers made their ap- 
 
 I p<>aranc(!, and when they Mere brought down many 
 
 j pullers of the utnioitt iniiHirtaiii'i' to the proper elu 
 
 riilutloii of the Hubjei't were omitted, and to this 
 
 hour the lloiiKi' is not in pusseMMion of them. 
 
 Sir iIOH.N THOMI'SO.V. Will the hon. gentle- 
 man allow me to ask him w betlier he did not com- 
 iilain that tlii^ telegram of the llllh of NoNenibur 
 liail not been brought down ? If xo, that is a mil- 
 take, beiNiiise I liiid it is in the iHiok. 
 
 Ml. MILLS (Itothwell). The lion, gentleman 
 will see, I think, there is just an extra 'I fro.ii that 
 telegraiii, but there is not a HyUable referring to the 
 propositions of the (ioveriinient on this Hubjuct. 
 
 Sir ilOIIN TIIO.Ml'.SON. Tlieie is u rofmenco 
 to the telegram, according to the custom in all 
 diplomatit^ commniiications, but tlieii^ is not an 
 extract, with the exception of half a dozen words. 
 
 Mr. MILLS (Itothwell). On page 7.'i I lind an 
 extract from the telegram of Lord Stanley of I'res- 
 tcni to Lord Knntiftird, dated lltth .November, IN'M), 
 as follows : 
 
 " lliivo roi^t'ivcil ymir tulegniiimf 15tli iiist. Mydovern- 
 mont view with the iitmosi iiliiriii proponed convontion 
 between Newt'oiiiidlHiid and the United otute.'", 
 
 " It iitTeot!' flilu'rii'S iiiteiciil." of CaimdH Uii well iis those 
 of Newroundhiiiil, iiiid phii'us fl.iherios and other priiiliict.> 
 .if Cmiiiilii on ilitluront ioothig from those ol' Newfound- 
 land in United .States markets. 
 
 " Sanetioii of Nuwfouiidl.tiid Treiily by Her Miijeatv'n 
 (Joveriinient would niateriiilly aid United Slates policy 
 by placing Canada I'l di^advaiiliige with neigliboiirinif 
 colony of Newloundliind iind producing disciintont here. 
 
 " Dominion (iovernment resipei'l fully remonstrate in 
 strongi'st terni." iig;iin!<l signature of pniposcd I'onventioii 
 at Wiislilngtoii. I will leiegruiih text ol Council Minute 
 when received." 
 
 On the next page, I find this telegram : 
 
 " Canadian Ministeri' are prepared to open negotiations 
 immediately, on liiie.i indicated in my telegram of the 
 li)th, proviifeil their rcpre9i'iitalive!< iil WasTiington can 
 be commissioners associated with liritinh Minister, and 
 empowered to negoiiato directly instead of being merely 
 delegates." 
 
 Now, the extract from the telegram of the lOth 
 does not allude at all to the negotiations. What I 
 complain of is that that telegram contains proposals 
 US the basis of negotiations, and the ISritish Oov- 
 er'inient in their answer say that they hope the 
 negotiations will not "place imjiorts from this 
 country at a disadvantage, and it is presumed 
 that Canada would wish to retain control over her 
 taritt' with a view to possible extensiop ■>? her trade 
 with the colonies and Knglaud." Now, when I 
 take that statement as springing out of the receipt 
 of this telegram, and the other allusion, it is clear 
 that the telegram of the lilth November must have 
 coiitaiubu proposals relating to the basis of negoti- 
 ations which are not in the extract ]iublished. Now, 
 I I have said this much with regard to the papers that 
 I are brought down, and the suggestions these papers 
 contain are not fully disclosed. I wish now to 
 discuss the subject of the recent negotiations and 
 what I regard as constitutional usr.gcs with refer- 
 ence to the rights of Parliament in respect of papers 
 and documents whichJiave l>een the outcome of the 
 intercourse between the Unit<!d Slates and Canada. 
 There are two thingg to consider, the rights of the 
 Crown and the rights of I'arliankciit. Now, with 
 regard to the rights of the Crown, every one knows 
 that under our constitutional system the Crown is 
 
 I 
 
1 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 the ori^n of the nm-urntnent for nouotiation 
 witli fiiri'igii utttUw. Kxciy uik* kiioHN lliiit tin- 
 iiititrrDiirMt iHttwoeii ('Hiintlu iiiitHln-ut Kritaiii iiiiil 
 uny foreign Mtuti' \h tin iiitciTountti IukI tlimiigli the 
 iiiHtrmiiiMiliility of tli«- Sovurfiuii, itii<l lliat uvcry 
 MiniMtvr or iiinl>ithMik<lor HprikkH in tliti niinif of tho 
 M<ivvrci){n in (^itrrving on (Iii'nv ncgoliutionN. Now, 
 tlu) prat'tiou iH tlmt ii ict'onl hIiiiII Ik* l.i^pt un<l a 
 t-u|K>rt niailu to th(! MiniHtiT of Foreign AlFairN un 
 tliu (irfj;an of tliv SovoiciKO in tliJM iNirliciilar, of 
 ovitry trimMactionand of mi'iy iliHiniHNion whieli iiiii 
 tuitcn pliu'it iKitweon any ri'pi'imcntativr of tint ^iov- 
 ornnuMit of (iri'ut lliituin or of Cunaila ami any 
 rcprvHcntiilivu of a foirign Htat*^ Tlii-n, aftci niicIi 
 a iliMciiMMion liaN taki^n |ilao(<, if any parlianiinitary 
 action ii4 riM|uii)'il or any ilim'nHHion lakcH place 
 in I'nrlianiunl. it iH the i-igjit of I'arlianii'nl to 
 have liefore it all tlume paixTH vvhii'ii tliepulilic 
 intcreHt will permit to lie luiil U'fore it ; ami the 
 iirat^ticu Ih that if the important ilociinuuitH eaiuiot 
 lie laiil liefore Parliament, iliHcuMMion on that Hulijei^t 
 nIiuII Ite poxtponeil, I \enture lo say that 'he lion, 
 gentlemen on the 'I'leaHnry lieneheH will not liiiii 
 one iiiMtunee in a century where hiicIi a iliHciiHHioii 
 hao taken place in I'ltrliaiiiciit at the iiiHtancc of the 
 MiniHter, without all the paperx lieiiig put liefore 
 I'arliiJiient. Let me cull the attention of the iioiiHe 
 to an important rule in tliiM particular, ami I will 
 firHt reail an extract or two from Mr. ToiIiI'm Uiok 
 on I'iuliaiiicntary ( Hiveriiiueiit. Todil Muyit at jiuge 
 .'<r»0 <if \'(iluiiie I : 
 
 " It if uiHiueBtiiiniilily of iiiiiiiuiisc advantaKi' t<i lliu 
 country, that thodiiilciuuitiu lraniiactioiiHaii(l|ii-oc(teiliiiK8 
 ot lluidovcriiDiiiiit ahroail .slicnildbc freely ouiiimuiiiuutud 
 liiI'arliainiMit, I'ortln'reliy the Ibreign iiolicy of tlieCriiwii 
 nnliimrily reeiiivi'H the iiiiiirnbatiiiii of I'lirliaiiionI, and is 
 HUStaincil hy Ihu iitruiiRtn ot an i-iillithtoiicd tiiiblie upl- 
 
 iiioii. TIiIh in itHolt' coiift'i''* Hti addltiiinal WHlKlit to our 
 liolivy mill niiiiiionn aliroad," 
 
 'I'lieii, at pagt^ 4.S1», he further Niiys : 
 
 "The nile whioli forbids any uiicroaohmoiit by Parliii- 
 nieiit upon tho exrcutive autliorily of llic Criiwn ling a 
 fiirtlivr ii|i|iliuation, to which our attention niui<t now be 
 diroeted. It ih imiicrutivc that Parliaiuonl rball bo duly 
 informed of evco'tliinif that may be uecoi'.xiiry to explain 
 tho milicy and prociicdiniw of tlovoniuient in any part of 
 tlio Empire, and tbo fnllejit informal ion is cominuniuated 
 bv (loverniiK'iit to bulb IIousom, from tiniu to time, upon 
 all luiilterH of public eoiiceni. For it i." in Parliament 
 that autboritalivo statunieiit.i arc uuide or information 
 (fivon, by Miiiintor.'', upon public (iuciition.M; and iioaetion 
 in Parliiiment should lie buKod uii declanitionii of policy 
 made olccwhorc." 
 
 Now it in us much the right of Parliament to know 
 what has passed lietwecu any Miiii.iter of the 
 ("rowii and any foreign (iovernment or otiicial, as it 
 in the riglit of the ("rown to know what hiiB passed. 
 This Parliainent has ix superintending power over 
 the Cabinet. It exercises a supreme authority over 
 the poli(^y and conduct of the Administration. It 
 is entitled to form a judgment upon all jiroceedings 
 of every department of the (Jovernmeiit ; and t<i 
 enable it to discharge that duty intelligently and in 
 the public interest, and not to take a leap in tliedark, 
 not to depend wholly u|)on a statement made by a 
 Minister of the Crown in the House, it is the un- 
 questioned right of Parliament, before it is called 
 upon to discuss any matter of public importance, 
 to have all the papers relating to that subject laid 
 ))efore it for the purpose of enabling it to form an 
 accurate and unbiassed judgment. Let me give to 
 the House a few instances from the practice of the 
 Imperial Parliahieut, which go to sustain the gene- 
 ral proposition I have just stat«d. I am not stating 
 merely a proposition relating to a rule of proceilure 
 
 2—0 
 
 in the Houne. I »m Mating a ennitHtitional prin- 
 ciple whieli (jiiabloit the HoiiHu to uxerciiHi an effec- 
 tive ami an intelligent control over the (-onduut of 
 every oll'cer of the State, and over the conduct of 
 the nu^inbiirit of the AtlininiNtration coinbined. i am 
 uKHertiiig liere, in the intereiitM of parliamentary 
 uovei tiim-nt, tlii^ maintenance of a principle, which 
 it IN iieceMwiry to maintain, to enable the House to 
 discharge its duty in this particular, i am not ask- 
 ing that the lIoUNe shall undertake the work of tho 
 .Ailiuinistralion. I am imt asking that it shall exer- 
 cise a iiKMldleHome intcilii ciicc over any Ministor 
 in the discharge of his duties in his department, 
 but I am maintaining that the House, as thesuiireinu 
 council of the iiiition, has siipri nic autiiority 
 in advising the Crown on all matters of 
 great public im|Mirtaiice, and Iiim a right to over- 
 rule every other council of the State in its views ; 
 and I am stating what is alwolutely necessary to 
 enable it to disciiarge a duty, which, under the 
 cinistitution, it is called upon to discharge and 
 which it Iuu4 a right to discharge. Now let ine 
 give you a few instances. I say this, that there 
 Is not an iiiMtance in which the < ioverninent ever 
 initiateiladiHciission and withheld the papers, in the 
 history of the Knglish Parliament, as far as I know. 
 There are instances where private nienilHU'8 have 
 insisted upon discussing a ipiestion before all the 
 papers could be brought down, or when it was in 
 the interests of the State that some of the iwiiers 
 should be Held back : but when the (ioverninent 
 have not laid all the iNipers on the Tabic of the 
 House, the House has insisted upon the iKistpono- 
 inent of tho discussion. Ihit for a Minister of the 
 Crown to initiate a discussion upon an important 
 ((uestion of public jiolicy, ami to inform the House 
 that he will give it no information excejit what he 
 chooses to give in his speech, is an unprecedented, u 
 most unconstitutional and impro|ier course to pur- 
 sue, one that would make it, if acted on generally, 
 (juite impossible for the House to dircharge those 
 high functions it is called ujioii to discharge ivs a 
 council of the State. 
 
 It l)eing Six o'clock, the Speaker left the t'lmii'. 
 
 After Recess. 
 
 Mr. MILLS (|{<ithvell). I shall now refer to a few 
 cases which I think will go to establish the general 
 proposition which I laid down, and which I think 
 IS supported by the two citations I made from Mr. 
 Todd's vei-y excellent work on Parliamentary 
 (ioverninent in Knghmd. The first is a short 
 conversation which took iilace in the House of 
 Lords between certain noble lortls on the subject 
 of the aid that had been given by the Government 
 towards the maintenance of tho Colonial Govern- 
 ment in the Fiji Islands. Viscount Canterbury 
 moved for copies or extracts of any other corres- 
 pondence or documents ex];lainii)g the present 
 position of the colony of Fiji. It Was stated by 
 liini that up to that time-there had been only three 
 papers laid before Parliament, and that the nei -s- 
 sary information for tlie consideration of the con- 
 dition of the colony was not before the House. 
 Lord Kimberley, who had been Colonial Secretary, 
 but whose party was not in office at that time, 
 said the reason assigned for the delay in the 
 preparation of the {tocuments was the pressure 
 of work in the Colonial Office. It Mould 
 
 /■I 
 
10 
 
 •f*: 
 
 seeiii from his statement that application 
 for these documents had been made under 
 a former Administration. Lord Carnarvon said 
 " thib only showed the inconvenience of bcinc 
 olhitfed to speak on a suliject without having all 
 the mforniation necessary to render their statements 
 quite accurate." The discussion vas a mere incid- 
 ental discussion as to tlie importance and necessity 
 of liaving the documents before the House for the 
 further discussion at a later period, but Lord (Jar- 
 narvon pointes'l out that some of tiie opinions 
 expressed were inaccurate, and that tli"irinaccunicy 
 was line to a lack of the proper information, which 
 v/ent to show the importance of liaving tlie informa- 
 tion in the hands of members before the subject 
 was made a matter of serious discussion. Tlie next 
 case to which I will refer is a motion wliich was 
 made for the Berlin memorandum in iS7(i. 'i'lmt 
 motion was made in tiie House of Lords by Lord 
 Campbell, in reply to whom Lord Derby, who was 
 then the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, said : 
 
 " Ihopc I shiill not bo charged with dUrespoct to this 
 House or discourtesy to nny member of it, if I do not in 
 my turn take the opportunity of explainmg and justifying 
 In detail the policy which we have pursued." 
 
 Further on in the same speci'li, Lord I)erl)y said : 
 
 "There is another reason why a full discussion is not 
 at present possible — it would require as i\ preliminary, 
 that the papers relating to what is past should be before 
 your Lordsnips, and that your Lordshijis should have had 
 time to consider the-»>, The production of these papers, 
 which has often been premised, has been unavoidably 
 delayed ; but they shall he laid before Parliament during 
 the present session and in time for a full discussion of 
 them, if such discussion be thought desirable. But to lay 
 them at the present moment on the Table would be pre- 
 mature and inconvenient ; and moreover, they could only 
 be produced in a very fragmentary form." 
 
 There were two reasons assigned for not proceed- 
 ing with the discussion to which the papers related. 
 Tlie one was tliat the House had not all the papers 
 and correspondence in its possession which would 
 enable it to discuss the matt-jr i;<telligeiitly, and 
 the second w&s that, these papers being largely 
 c ■• spondence with foreign Governments, the 
 ' -I'-'nistration were not in a position to lay them 
 dj'.ve Parliament. Yon will observe, Mr. Speaker, 
 ;iiat thi.'< discussion, incidental and brief as it was, 
 ' s not initiated by the Administration but 
 bN pilvate members of the House, who asked 
 for the papers in order that a full discussion 
 should be had ; and that it was stated that 
 these papers were essential to a discussion of the 
 matter ; that the Minister admitted that, and 
 also that the duty devolved upon him to bring 
 down these prpers. Then, in another case that 
 took place in the same year, 1876, Mr. Bruce, 
 who was subsequently a member of the Adminis- 
 tration, and who was at that time a prominent 
 member of the House, asked Mr. Disraeli, who was 
 the leader of the House of Commtms at the time, 
 " Whether he can fix a day for the discussion of the 
 motion upon the aflfairs of Bosnia and Hcrzigovina." 
 This motion had reference to the contemplated 
 acquisition of these two provinces, which had pre- 
 viously been part of the Turkish Empire, by the 
 Empire of Austria, and these papers were asked 
 for in order to have an intelligent discussion on 
 that subject. In reply to Mr. Bruce, Mr. Disraeli 
 said : 
 
 " I quite recognize that my.hon. friend has a locusHtandi 
 in this question m the notice he has previously given ; and 
 assuming as a matter of course that there will boa discus- 
 sion on the subject even if there may not be one which in- 
 
 Tolveg the opinion of the House by a formal motion, I 
 sbculd, under those circumstances, recognize the claim of 
 my hon. friend and endeavour to meet his convenience. 
 But until the papers arc on the Table, I think I should 
 hardly do justice to the feeling,'* of the House if I made 
 anj; arrangements for the discussion of a question of such 
 iiU important character by a private member. 
 
 Tlie reason given for not fixing a day for the dis- 
 cussion of the (luestion was that the papers had not 
 yet been brought down. Uptni the motion that the 
 papers on the Eastern question should lie laid on 
 the Table of the House, Mr. Disraeli said : 
 
 "All those papers are public recor's of the feelings, 
 policy and views of the differciil countries, and can always 
 be produced ; but in course ot ju'gotiations of this kind, 
 there are confidential communications made by foreign 
 powers, and" it is very often highly necessary for the vindi- 
 cation of our cour.^e, and as illustrative of our policy that 
 those do^-vments should be pul.iisbod ; but the House will 
 see at once that the ancient custom which has always been 
 observed, of consult'ng foreign powers before confidential 
 communications on t-icir part are Inid before Parliament, 
 i; a very proper and very wise one. The House will feel 
 that otherwise there would bo an end to all confidential 
 intercourse with any foreign power. When we are told 
 that all the Government has to do is to consult the House 
 of Commons, and not under any circumstances fo consult 
 those who are our allies, the only consequence ot anch a 
 policy would be that all the papers we could lay on the 
 Table would be documents which the Honse would soon 
 find were wanting in light and information on many points 
 of the most interesting character." 
 
 Here Mr. Disi'aeli points out in the first place that 
 a full presentation of the papers may be necessary 
 to a full consiileration of the conduct of the(iovern- 
 mentandtoa justification of the viewsof theGovern- 
 ment on an important matter of international con- 
 cern. But he also points out that before these 
 papers can be laid upon the Table, some of which 
 were of a confidential character, the consent of the 
 foreign (Tovernment, with whom that communica- 
 tion was had, siiould be obtained ; because if a 
 Government were to assume, without such consent, 
 tlie right to lay papers, under all circumstances, 
 before the House of Commons, a (iovernment would 
 be extremely cautious as to what its public docu- 
 ments would contain. It might be driven to carry 
 on, by private and unofficial communication, through 
 private or unofficial channels, that highly confi- 
 dential correspondence that is, under present prac- 
 tice, found in the papers of a public character. 
 Now, in so far as any correspondence of this kind 
 may be immature, as the question has not yet been 
 finally dieposed of, the Government may find it in 
 the public interest to witiihold these papers. But 
 the Government that iloes so must also find it in 
 the public interest, so far as it is concerned, to take 
 care not to initiate a discusssion upon the subject. 
 When they ask the House to consider their conduct, 
 and to pass it in review, commenting upon or ap- 
 provingof thecourseth^yhavotaken, they aro bound 
 to put the Housein possession of all these documents, 
 and all tiiat information which is necessary to enable 
 the House to form a proper judgment. Now, what 
 I complain of in this case is that the Minister of 
 Fiuance introduced into his speech a discussion of 
 communications of an informal character that had 
 taken place with the Government at Washington, 
 a correspondence which was of th". highest import- 
 ance to the people of this country, 'flie hon. Min- 
 ister has made a statement to the House ; he has 
 told us what passed in a veiy imperfect manner, 
 but he has withheld from tiie House all those 
 papers, all the memoranda, all the notes, or pn- 
 tocols, if any were kept, of the communications 
 that were had, and he givesusno opportunity, except 
 
11 
 
 in so far as his speech gives it, of forming an opinion 
 for ourselves. I say that it is treating the House 
 in '\ highly improper iiinnner, it is treating it with 
 the greatest possible iuilicnity. The Administration 
 sit on these benches anil noltl their official position 
 with the sanction of this House. Their continuance 
 in office is due to the goodwill and confidence of 
 the House, but that confidence should be a rational 
 confidence, and mot a superstition. They deny to 
 the House an opportunity of coming to a ra- 
 tional conclusion when they withhold from us 
 that information which is necessary to enable 
 the House to judge properly for itself. Let 
 me mention another case. When Sir Austin 
 Layard, in 1853, proposed to discuss the invasion 
 of Turkey by Russ'a, and moved for the ])aj)er8. 
 Lord Palmerston stated on tliat occasion that 
 it vould be highly inconvenient to lay those papers 
 before Parliament, and as the papers could not be 
 laid before Parliament, it would be very improiKjr 
 to call upon the House to discuss the subject ; that 
 the House, before that discussion took place, ought 
 to be in possession of all the facts, and that it would 
 not be in the public interest to carry on such a dis- 
 cussion in the absence of the necessary material by 
 which a proper conclusion upc-n the subject could 
 be reached. This was tlie statement made on tliat 
 occasion by one of the first parliamentarians of the 
 cr ntry, by one who was as conversant with the 
 Ci. stitutioiuil rights of Parliament and with the 
 constitutional rights of the Administration, ius any 
 man who has, in our ilay, sat in the English House 
 of Commons. Sir, I do not know that I could quote 
 to the House a higher authority than the one to 
 which I have just referred. Lord Palmerston held 
 the office of Foreign Secretary in tlie United King- 
 dom for nearly half a century. At a later period, 
 in 1878, during the Kusso-Turkish War, the flast- 
 ern Q.iiestion was again discussed, and the Karl of 
 Oranville on that occasion moved for certain papers 
 and public documents, and I will read a sentence 
 or two from a very brief speech he made on that 
 occasion, and the answer that was given by Lord 
 Beaconsfield : 
 
 " Earl Qranvii.lk— I am quite sure Her Majesty would 
 net desire ihat a matter of such great imporUmoo should 
 be considered without the fullest information tiaving 
 been afforded to the House." 
 
 And again : 
 
 " I should bo ghidtoknow when those papers will bo'n 
 the hands of mombtrs of this llouso ? I also wish to know 
 whether the correspondence will include, besides the cor- 
 respondence between this country and Russia, the corres- 
 pondence with the other powers? 
 
 "Lord Beaconsfikld— They will not be limited to the 
 correspondence between this country and Russia, but 
 'will contain papers relating to the proposition of the 
 Congress by Austria." 
 
 Lord Beaconsfield proposed that Monday week 
 should be a day for the consideration of this 
 message. 
 
 " Earl Granville— I think that will depend entirely on 
 the papers which, I understand from the noble Earl, will 
 not bo confined to the papers between this country nnd 
 Russia ; but will include also those between this country 
 and Austria. I think wo have a right to know the views 
 of all the great Powers with regard to whether there 
 should be a conference or not. 
 
 " Lord Bkaconsfikld— I shall not fix the day for the 
 discussion till Monday." 
 
 Now, these papers were to come down innnediately, 
 and it was not until after the papers were in the 
 hands of the House that the Government proposed 
 to fix a day for the consideration of the subject to 
 
 which the papers alliuled. Is that the way in 
 which the House was treated on this occasion? 
 Not at all. Here the Administration informed the 
 House last year, it informed the country again 
 and again that there was to be an unofficial dis- 
 cussion on the subject of reciprocity with the 
 tiovei'iiment of the United States. That unofficial 
 discussion has taken place. The correspondence, 
 tlie papers that the Government submitted — which 
 I will undertake to show must, in the nature of 
 things, be very important— have not yet been 
 brought down. Sir, the Minister in his speech, if 
 he wislied the House to consider this subject, ought 
 to have »tated when these papers would have been 
 brought down, when the House would be ])ut in 
 full possessio'i of everything that was in the pos- 
 session of the Administration ; and after he had 
 put the House in full possession of these papers 
 and this correspondence, he might then have aaked 
 the House to fix a day, or have proposed him- 
 self a time when the subject should lie- 
 taken into consideration. But to propose a 
 discussion on the subject, to undertake to tell 
 the House what the (lOvernment thought, what 
 certain members of the {Tovernnient said to the 
 (loverument at Washington, and to declare that 
 the subject now is put at rest forever, is to treat 
 the House, I say, with the greatest possible in- 
 dignity. The lion. Minister has not dealt fairly 
 and frankly with the House ; he has not given to 
 the House that consideration to which it is entitled, 
 when he withheld the papers and proposed himself 
 to remain the master of the situation. Sir, I need 
 not cite any furtlier authorities than those which I 
 have already cited. They are sufficient to illus- 
 trate the principle which I laid down before we rose 
 at six o'clock, which was confirmed by Mr. Todd, 
 and which is abundantly sup] lortsd liy these autho- 
 rities. I say that the rule is clear, that it is a 
 highly improper proceeding for Ministers to initiate 
 a discussion in Parliament upon a subject, and I'.t 
 the same time to withhold papers relating to that 
 subject, fn n Parliament. Let me say again, there 
 is a diflference in this respect between a Minister 
 and a private member. If a private member, in 
 face of the fact that the House has not been put in 
 possession of the papers, and against the remon- 
 strance of the Administration, insistsupon a discus- 
 sion, he may express his opinion upon the subject. 
 But the House is not liound to go on with the dis- 
 cussion. It is, however, altogether different with a 
 Minister of tiie Crown. The information is in his 
 pospession, and he must act upon the well-settled 
 principle that the House is never ready for discus- 
 sion until the Government are ready to lay before 
 the House the papers which are necessary to 
 enable it to come to an intelligent conclusion. 
 The Hoase ought to be iii possession of all the 
 information of which the Government are possessed ; 
 it ought to have the same opportunity to form its 
 judgment which the Government has, because the- 
 members of the (lOvernment for all these purposes 
 do not in any respect differ so far as their rights 
 are concerned from any other members of Parlia- 
 ment, it is the right of every lion, inomber, before 
 he is called upon to vote or to discuss a question of 
 this sort, to have in his possession the material 
 which wil' enable him to form a proper judgment 
 upon the subject. Sir, I have already alUuied to the 
 fact that the Minister of Finance, and I may now say- 
 also the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, exhil/lteft 
 
12 
 
 1\ 
 
 no little pleasure in referring to the circuin- 
 stanee that they had faile.l. The Minister of 
 Marine and Fisheries said that the failure 
 would be satisfactory to the business men <.f 
 the country ; the question was disposed of, 
 in fact it was now put out of the purview of practi- 
 cal politics, and the country might have some rest. 
 Let me, having said tins mucli M-ith respect to the 
 constitutional (juestion that has been raised by the 
 o.ourse which the Minister of Finance has pursued, 
 say a word or two with respect to the negotiations 
 as' they are disclosed to the House in the speech 
 which the hon. Minister addressed to it. He said 
 that recipiocity on the lines offered by Mr. Blaine 
 would necessitate discrimination against the impor- 
 tations and products of the motlici' country. I am 
 not here going to contest that pro])ositiou. I si ,ll be 
 better prepared to discuss it when I have at my 
 disposal the same material the Minister liimself lias. 
 But I wish to call attention to this fact, that the 
 Government have long proposed, and this Parlia- 
 ment has long sanctioned, apolicy of discrimination 
 against the United Kingdom. The taxes on the 
 products of the United Kingdom are discrimina- 
 tory. The Government do notplace the indus<-''Lo of 
 the mother country upon the same footing as those of 
 some other countries. Let me remind the ( i o vernment 
 of this fact that, when the products of f)ne country 
 are free and we tax the products of another country, 
 it is not necessary that those pioducts should be 
 of the same kind in order that the taxes should be 
 discriminatory, in favour of one country as against 
 the other. Does not the hen. gentleman know that 
 when he imports tea and coffee free, tliat when he 
 exempts them from taxation altogether, he obliges 
 other imports to bear larger taxes or on such 
 of them as are the subject of taxation ? Does he 
 not know that he is discriminating against the 
 United Kingdom and in favour of the countries 
 where tea and coffee are produced ? Can there be 
 any doubt on that subject '! Does he not know that 
 he seriously affects, by the amount of free importa- 
 tions the imports of the country which are subject to 
 taxation ? Has not .Spain over and over again com- 
 plained that Spanish wijies are subjected to a higher 
 tax than the wines of France, and is it any re- 
 ply that the wines produced in Spain are of a diffev- 
 ent character from those produced in France V Thei'e 
 is discrimination. Tlie whole policy of taxation is 
 policy based on the self interest of tlie Government 
 that imposes it, and it can only be justified on the 
 ground that it is in the interest of the people in whose 
 behalf it is imposed. There is uot a counti-y in the 
 world, so far as I know, that places all countries 
 on an exact footing of e([uality. The products of 
 some are admitted without taxation, and the pro- 
 ducts of some are highly taxed. And the fact that 
 they are different does not alter or change the 
 principle ; the fact tliatone cmnmodity is taxed and 
 the other is free makes the tax discriminatory as 
 much as if we received the articles from exactly 
 the same countries. In another respect it is dis- 
 criminatory. Take, for in.stance, M'oollen products. 
 Sir Francis Hincks years ago showed tliat the tax 
 on woollen products of England were higher than 
 the tax on similar products of the United States. 
 We tax certain articles according to weight, and 
 specifically, and also ad valorem, and wlien taken 
 together tlie tax on liorse blankets is very nnicli 
 higher than the tax on broadcloth, in proportion 
 •to their value. So it is in regard to some otiier 
 
 articles. The whole system of taxation is unequal, 
 and as Sir Francis Hincks showed the few 
 blankets imported from the United States 
 paid in proportion to their value a far lower rate of 
 taxation than corresponding articles from the 
 United Kingdom, l)ecause they belonged to a 
 different class. But the whole system ot specific 
 taxes will make it discriminatory and such as 
 exists at this moment, and it is against the pro- 
 ducts of the United Kingdom. The Minister of 
 Finance said tliere couhl not be a treaty of recipro- 
 city with the United States on the part of Canada 
 unless it was a discriminatorj^ tariff against Great 
 Britiiin. What evidence does the hon. gentleman 
 submit to us ? Recently the Americans made a 
 treaty with the West Indies. It is not discrimina- 
 tor}'. They had concluded a treaty Ahich the 
 hon. gentleman succeeded in defeating, with New- 
 foundland. That was not discriminatory. I am 
 not prepared to admit that any treaty which does 
 not discriminate against Great Britain cannot l)e 
 made with the United States. I am satisfied that 
 the negotiations, if carried on by hon. gentlemen 
 who were anxious for a treaty, instead of hon. 
 gentlemenwho in all their speeches have p'-onov -iced 
 themseh'es against a ticaty, whose supporters in 
 this House since the financial speech was nuide by 
 the Minister of Finance, have, without an excep- 
 tion, spoken against a treaty of reciprocity, show 
 the spirit by which the party of hon. gentleman 
 opposite are actuated, and the spirit in which those 
 hon. gentlemen journeyed to Washington for the 
 purpose of carrying on those negotiations with 
 the United States would have resulted differently. 
 I think a fair ti'eaty is a possibilitj'. I 
 think that we have before us up to this time no 
 evidence that this subject was fullj% exhaustively 
 and adequately considered by hon. gentlemen 
 opposite in their intercourse with Mr. Blaine. Let 
 me say this, that some preparation for the proper 
 discussion of this subject is necessary, some consi- 
 derati(m of the facts, some careful analysis of the 
 trade between the two countries, .some estimate of 
 the possibility of an uicrease in consecjuence of 
 the change which the (Government proposes. One 
 of the statements made l)y the hon. gentlemen Wiis 
 that Mr. Blaine said tluvt a treaty of reciprocity 
 confined to natural products could not have in it 
 any of the elements of nuituality in reciprocity. 
 What evidence is theie o* tliat ? What answer did 
 the hon. gentlemen make to that statement ? What 
 document or menioraiulum did they prepare wheu 
 they went to propose a treaty of reciprocity in 
 natural products ; what argument did they advance, 
 for the purpose of upholding that proposition ? 
 Hnw is it, that tliis is not before Parliament boforr 
 this (juestion was made a subject of discussion ? 
 Wlien I look at our Trade and Navigation Returns 
 I find that there liave been imported from 
 tlic '" ited States into Canada last year $24,00(),(KK) 
 wortn of products that were not subject to taxation 
 at all. How mucli do we send to the United States 
 free from taxation at this moment ? How much 
 of that )?24,(M)0,0(K> worth are natural products, 
 and what would be the volume of trade between 
 the two countries under a system of free trade in 
 natural products ? If the hon. gentlemen went to 
 Washington to make a proposition to tlie Govern- 
 ment of the United States, and they proposed to 
 confine reciprocity to natural products, I suppose 
 they went there prepared to show that that propo- 
 
13 
 
 Let 
 
 sition was a fair one to the Unitetl Stiites. The 
 lion, gentleman told us that Mr. Blaine said it was 
 unfair, but the hon. gentleman did not give to the 
 House a single statement to show that he contended 
 the contrary. He does not lay before the House 
 any memorandum of facts by w!iich the oflfer is 
 justjfied and by whicli an attempt is made to show 
 that it is a fair .ind proper offer. Now, Sir, it 
 seems to me that the( lovernment ought to have come 
 to the House prepared to submit to the House all the 
 data by which tlioy had fortified themselves, liefore 
 they set out on their journey to the southern cap- 
 ital. Why is it not in our po.ssession ? Why do 
 not the Government give us an opportunity of seeing 
 how far they acted earnestly and in good faith, or 
 how far they sacrificed the interests of the agricul- 
 tural and labouring population of this country to a 
 few persons engaged in manufacturing, whose confi- 
 dence the (iovernment have so unremittingly en- 
 joyed ? It seems to me that it is clear that the Hou.,e 
 has not been properly dealt with in this niatter, and 
 that the comse taketi by the (lOvernment is not 
 usual and is not constitutional. I believe that the 
 House is entitled to full infoinnation. and that 
 everything that the (■lovernment had in their 
 possession by which they undertook to sustain tlu^ 
 propositions which they made to the (4ove\"mient 
 o<^ the United States, and the answers whit!, they 
 received from the Government of the United States 
 should have been at this moment in our hands, and 
 until they were prepared to put these papers in our 
 hands they ought to have abstained from initiating 
 any discussion upon this subject. Sir, 1 have stated 
 already that I know a number of gentlemen in this 
 House, some of whom are Here for the first time, 
 some, after an interval of absence from the House, 
 who refer to the result of these bye-elections as an 
 evidence that the country supports the policy which 
 the Government have pursued. But, Sir, what is that 
 policy ? Is it the policy that the Government in- 
 tended to pursue, or that they sought to persuade 
 the country that they intended to pursue, when 
 they set out on this journey to Washington, or is 
 it the old National Policy, and when a member 
 of the (iovernment told this House, that no greater 
 disaster could liefall this country than to permit 
 the free importation of foreign products of the 
 
 United States, and that reciprocity in natural pro- 
 ducts would be a calamity ; and when that calam- 
 ity was one of the things which the Government by 
 these negotiations, if they were in earnest, in- 
 tended to inflict on the country ? Was it protec- 
 tion or reciprocity upon which the recent elections 
 turned ; which was it that these gentlemen sup- 
 ported ? Did they support the Government in 
 undertaking to negotiate a reciprocity treaty, or 
 did they support the Government in opposing 
 negotiations and undertaking to secure the defeat 
 of that treaty? What were the views that these 
 hon. gentlemen were elected to uphold in this 
 House ? Now, Sir, I have said that there were 
 potent influences other than those of the popu- 
 larity of th<- measures of the Administration which 
 were not wit-hout their effect in the elections which 
 have taken place. Let me read a letter which has 
 recently appeared in some of the newspapers. This 
 letter is addressed from St. Mary's by a Mr. 
 Ingram, of St. Thomas, to a gentleman in that 
 city. It says : 
 
 " Dear Sir,— Your tolegram to hand this afternoon and 
 am (find to hear from you. Thing.« were quite dull until 
 to-night, and mayhap to-morrow it may be all O.K. Hold 
 yourself in readiness at any time. I will write you when 
 to come if O.K. ; if not, I will write you ' no good,' Mr. R. 
 Ber. is not here yet ; keep patient. 
 
 " Yours in haste, 
 
 " AV. H. IN6KAM." 
 
 I supjjose most hon. gentlemen will understand the 
 significance of a communication of that sort, and 
 that it means a good deal, I have no doubt. I draw 
 my inferences, and every hon. gentleman in the 
 House can do the same thing. But, Sir, I am of the 
 opinion that the protective policy of the Admin- 
 istration enjoys, to-day, in no degree, a greater 
 mcnsure of public confidence or a greater degree of 
 popularity than it did when the general elections 
 took place in March last. 
 
 OTTAWA : 
 
 Printed by S. E. Dawson. 
 
 Printer to the tiueen'§'Most Excellent Majesty 
 
 1892.