Kel IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (Mr-3) 1.0 I.! us B4 110 IL25 i 1.4 ■ 2.0 m I 1.6 PhotografAiic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STCEZT WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) S''2-4503 sv t f% '^A V O^ '^ 1 ,; The following tables give the trade returns of all the British North American provinces, from 1850 to the present time, distinguishing how much of the com- merce w&8 with the United States, .All the values are estimated in gold : .©7 . •>Jtf,. TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. >'■(' Canadian trade from the year 1850 to June 30, 18G7, [values in gold.) < ' • IMPORTS. iwi: Yoari. Pro tnO real Urituiu. 1851 18.52 1853 1854 it5dD ■ ••«>■• •■>•■< 1856 , 1857 1858 1659 , 1861 , 1863 1863 1864, (6monthH). 1864-'65 )865-'66 1806-'67 $9,631,931 12, 037, 993 10,671,133 18,489, 131 82, 963, 330 13, 3i)3, 5tit) 18,212,934 17,5.VJ,(W5 12, 286, H.53 14, 767, 873 15, 839, .320 17,945,570 21,089,915 20, 176,964 11,878,907 21,035,871 34, 060, 969 From KrltlMb coioniuH« lu North Americii. $385, 620 436,971 480, 954 633, 66 t 67.5,115 8(m, 988 1, 0;»3, 594 751,888 423, 366 381, 370 393, 464 499, 177 .53.''>, 4(i9 510,713 93, 831 51 1, 570 In Wt'Mt 111- dluH. $4, 451 13, 625 5, 115 3, 479 8, '.73 14, 1.35 17,614 26,823 .533 15, 802 371 38, 851 133, 195 217, 3.33 209, 329 From llnitHd Statet). 1,108,373 137,81)2 I $6, 372, 494 7, 935, 972 8, 477, 693 11,783, 147 15.5:1,3,098 20, ii-iii, 677 23,7114,509 aO,224,(>51 1.5,63.5,550 17, .592, 265 17, 258, 585 20,2116,080 22, 642, 860 18,457,683 7,953,4 m 14, 820, .',77 20, 268, 903 From other cuuutriuH. $365,216 570, 296 651, 5! 18 1,074,039 1, 355, 109 1, 073, 909 1,616,736 868,211 732, (.83 793, 873 905, 260 ' , 098, 96;) 1,673,814 2,0;J4,651 1, 264, 440 3. 274, 644 3, 869, 396 TotalH, $16, 7.59, 702 8i». 994, H.57 20, 'm\, 493 31,981,436 40. 529, .335 36.086, 169 43, -)84 387 39, 43 ). 498 29. 077, 8.58 33.53.5,913 .34,413.431 39,7.'>0, 161 45, 980, !»:» 41,313,206 21,4(16,712 39,851,991 Coin and bullion. $323, 366 439, 933 675 10, 248 35, 504 3, 304. 675 9.619,694 4, 653, 887 8, 475. 504 4, 768, 478 59, 633, 670 i 6, 610, 872 EXPORTS. To Great Britulu. To BritlHh colonleH. To United StatuD. To other countrleii. Totals. Coin and bullion. Years. 4 In North America. In West In- dies. 18.50 $4, 803, 399 6,031,401 6, 756. 857 11,465,408 10, 87(5, 714 6,7.38,441 10, 467, 644 11.102,045 8,898.611 7. 973, 106 12.749,891 18, 787, .592 15,045,420 17,401,8.56 4, 700, 244 14, 637, 1.58 $1, 808, 776 1,037,519 812, 139 1, 380, 466 1, 539. 275 1,023,447 1,086,041 875, 239 960, 426 840, 475 723. 5:14 1, 030. 9;)9 826.871 935, 196 348, 090 1,065,057 $8, :176 3,912 13, 961 $5, 9.3.3, 243 4,917,429 7,5:16.155 10, 735, 4;55 10, 4 18, 883 20,002.291 20, 218, 654 14,762,641 13, 37:J, 1.38 15, .586, 9 17 20, 698, :)48 16, 158, :i74 16,980,810 20, 9 10, .53.3 8. 022, 963 24,213,588 $108,281 164, 144 188, 495 239, 974 185, 329 420, 533 263, 775 866, 699 840, 4:i3 355, 806 370, 889 380, :195 550, 553 841,002 94,089 835, 850 $12,943,795 13,810,604 15, 307, 607 2;i,80l,;i03 23, 019, 190 28, 188,461 :)2, 047, 017 27, 006, 634 23, 472, W)!) 24, 763, 329 34, 542, 663 36, :i69, 682 ;;:{,4i7,i28 40, 146, 129 1.3, 179, 342 40, 792, 960 1851 18.52 1853 1854 8, 989 3,749 10, 803 1855 ia56 1857 1858 1859 7,025 $3, 6.52 I860 89,238 244, 513 178,997 1, 685, 403 704,166 1,688,191 1861 12, :i82 13, 775 57, 542 14,016 41,313 1862 1863 1864, (6month§).. ie64-'65 1865-66 1866-'67 14, 450, 854 3, 549, 197 .53,815 j 83,179,416 980, 903 42. 154, 185 2,916,034 ■*»*4 For the year ending June 30, 1867, the exportH from Canada to the United States were mainly composed of the following : ' Produce of the forest ; $6,831,252 AnimalH and their products 3,636,192 Agricultural products 11, 185, 227 • ;;" ' ''■'-' Nova Scotia trade for the years 1865 and 1866. '"' ';''• ' \" v': " • •';■;*,' -"■■--••;- ■■;' "^^ ' 1865. "o'-v^-' i866. •' Imports $14,381,662 $14,381,008 Of which from the United States 4, 325, 857 4, 04 1, 844 Exports 8, 830, 693 8, 043, 095 Of which to the United States 3, 610, 797 3, 228, 550 The principal articles of export were fitih, about 3,500,000 dollars, and coal 1,000,000 dollars. ^ ■ 4 TRADK WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. New Brunswick trade for the year ending December 31, 1866. Imports $10, 000, 704 Of which from the United States 3, 743, 896 Exports 6, 373, 705 Of which to the United States 1, 866, 944 Newfoundland trade for the year 1866, Imports $5, 784, 849 Of which from the United States 1, 399, 038 Exports 5, 694, 305 Of which to the United States 426, 436 The above vahies do not include the shipments of dry and pickled fish, oils, furs, &c., from Labrador direct for foreign markets. The imports of Newfoundland are chiefly breadstuffs and animal food. In 1866 the imports were — Of flour 1..:. 183,677 bbls. $1, 002, 062 value Of bread 46, 256^ cwts. 175, 158 " Of pork 21, 666ibbl8. 350,698 " Of butter 15, 630 cwts. 285, 332 •• The exports from Newfoundland are principally fish and their products. The reciprocity treaty expired on the 17th day of March, 1866. The fol- lowing statements give the prices of Canadian produce in the Montreal and Toronto markets upon the first of each month since January, 1865, and which the termination of the reciprocity treaty might be supposed to affect, so far as it put an end to their free admission to our markets : •} 5 -iX ^ \ ? 300, 704 743, 896 J73, 705 355, 944 784, 849 399, 038 694. 305 426, 436 ish. oils. >od. In 62 value 58 « 98 4( 32 « cts. The fol- real and id which 80 far as I- I' • 1^ ^ > is I I o TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. wm r^ r.H p^ p«i F-1 FN ^4 r-t rN ^ f-4 f4 ^ fH rN -^ fH f* Si. I i CO (M T» rt «*■ »o to OJ o n II n s 8S581SS3SS * » _______ p- r- IN (N lO (o(o t^ t- to o S8888SS8SS S?SSSSSSS1212!:1fi S?S S^!2i2i3;3!2s;;; (Ofr- S r> (o 8 S in S <3 gS2i2f; ?.'?.' 88 ';., ;'n;oi.) li'v-,..' In >,-,(; id, • ',,'.i,'' ■ 'H •gs. &: . <0 r- t- Q O lO 15 lA irr If) f» o>a>mooa-tao 'lata* i« 8 8S?.S wScjSSSihffjnL'iirairiSwioxi W !0 <0 00 UJ >« J'- O » Q {■- I- 1^ l« sa as? in aSG o .a ira in lO lo o o o 1ft o in 1.-5 If} in c o o ifj Q lO in 10 in <2 o 2 o in in !3 2 9 "1 Q o o = o 2 t- 1- 1» 1-v? «oo»Hi?5cic<(?Jol'»''roui--o — i>.(ot~0'inn into intsmestotstoot- -t-t-t-J>'«•!D^-ln«ot-x^-c^Ol-le^(^^^lrt^■-•<»aoaoaoaoo>o>iX)t^ooaoaoc)00)a>o>o>o>9)0>aoaDaoao ■V '<)• m m CO - 1- P- 00 00 00 o> o> t^ oo oo oo oo oo oo oo s> ^ 88 ODOO 3J 5 13 O 1i TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PR0VINCR8. PnccH of Canadian produce in the Toronto market, (spvcic valuation.) i ',', . ; /•'!:' Ill f ' i I I' M Months. Ill 'u> •■li '■' . ' ' . ' i . . ' ^ I. -'M'-Mfl ' ' ' ■'■ • '>, M 1 iH .'. ; 'iji 1 ' II n ii lOOS-Jannnry... Ft'hiuHiy . . Miirch April Miiy JllllH July AllKIIHt 8i'|)triiibfr. Octoljrr November , Decemlior . 18CC— Jmiuiiry .. Febrmiry .. Mureli ♦April May Juno July AugUHt .... September October November . Decembor . JllliUHry . .. Frbruury . . Mnreh April May JU -3 July AugUHt September , October . . . . November . Ducuinber . Flour. 1867 $4 95 4 2.5 4 3.'l 4 5U ft 00 5 H7 5 as 5 18 fi ou (I 87 fi 50 G 2.'> 6 a5 7 0« 7 V.'5 7 (0 8 US 8 25 8 00 47 (H? 95 65 20 57 50 76 60 70 80 80 2 00 10 87 80 65 50 56 .57 58 o ■3 . o a JO 3 r $0 S8 62 HO 90 P4 Mi 88 80 62 59 63 62 62 65 63 67 71 70 73 «i) 58 60 75 66 72 73 71 77 79 70 75 75 80 82 73 72 ►. % $0 69 68 67 74 73 65 55 S5 64 80 70 68 72 60 65 64 66 60 6.5 5.5 54 65 58 52 58 .55 .58 64 70 68 70 7.5 eo 83 82 1 05 $0 :ii 34 33 32 33 38 38 34 87 3L .30 30 30 33 37 47 .54 48 50 53 58 58 95 55 \ * Reciprocity treaty terminated. An examination of these tables shows the remarkable fact that large as were the sales of produce by Canada to the United States, under their free admisision to our market ; yet the prices obtained in Canada, after the termination of the reciprocity treaty, for such articles, was in almost every instance higher than when it was in operation. It cannot be denied — granting the correctness of the figures given above, which are from official sources — that whatever amount of this produce was purchased for consumption in the United States, since March, 1866, was purchased at as high prices in the Canadian markets as before the abrogation of the treaty ; and that the American consumer was compelled to pay the American duty in addition. / ii(. IMPORTATION OF PINE LUMBER FROM CANADA. ■I'i- t When the reciprocity treaty was under discussion, the free admission of pine lumber was strenuously opposed, upon the ground that Canadian lumber would interfere with the domestic supply, and that consequently the American lumber manufacturer would suffer. Since then, however, the supply of pine lum^ sr has nearly ceased in the eastern States, and the consumption in the eastern and middle States, on the Atlantic slope, has almost wholly depended upon the Canadian supply from TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. !i 6 ^U 31 34 33 39 33 32 33 34 87 31 30 30 30 32 37 47 54 48 50 52 5a 52 55 55 the vallciy of the Ottawa. Larpe qimntitien of pine lumber are mnnnfuctured in Michigan, WiHconuin, and northern MinneHota; hut tlio growiti}? wc-^Nrn (leinund it) even greater than the industry and rcaourceM of thorte Stalurt ciin mei't. The d<:creaMiti{5 Hupply of himbor in Maine itidiic(;d sovcral ('nt('r|)ri8iii(|U('nt«'(l only by wihl animalH and tlie scarcely less sava{;e Indians. Thes(; pineries are a con- tiiuiation of the pine regions of Michigan and Wisconsin, aiul stretch alon;; the Ciiippewa and St. Croix, tiio shores of Lake Superior, and acniss the Missis- Bippi, above and beh)W St. Cloud. Large tracts of these lands werc! purchased at the time, but it is only within a very recent period that they have been occu- pied. The increase of population in southern Minnesota and the surrounding States has created an enormous demand for building material, and the saw mills erected at St. Croix, St. Anthony Falls, Minneapolis, &c., have been found unable to keep pace with the iud'easing wants. The trade may bo said to bo almost in its infancy, yet it already exceeds the busieRt scenes ever witnessed on the banks of the Penobscot, Kennebec, Androscoggin, Saco, and J'a8sama '"'11'.:;: -I'.'.iu 'ir.i ' • ,1 1 ni 1865 1860 1867 Stock boards or ahippin^ boards : Price iu gold de- livered on the bar^e at Ottawa, per M. , ; '(,■''''' $9 50 to $9 75 10 00 10 00 Siding planks: Price iu gold delivered on the barge at Ottawa, per M. ;>d.J Ui Ov..;!!;, ^ $15 00 to $16 00 17 50 The practice of the wholesale lumber trade in Canada now is, that at the commencement of the season contracts for the year are made by American pur- , chasers, so that the shipments to the United States do not vary ; and it is, there- fore, unnecessary to give the monthly price lists. The prices for lumber are much higher than used to be paid some years, ago. .Tjie^cpntra-Qte fpr the i approaching season are not yet made. y %. -r 8 TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. To show not only timt nearly »ill tlio tilankM an American duty practically oxcludin); tlu^ Hale of tliette nrticlei* in our marketH, altli(Mi{;li it baH not benefited tlu^ American producer, ha tbe pricex are no bi^^ber lu^rc tban wben provincial competition existed by tbeir free adminnior. ( )ur priiu'.ipiil tradi; in, of courHe, witb the most (xtpulous divinion of tlie provinccH, now known by tbo names of Ontario and (.^iieliec. Tbo cHtimated population of confederated (janada at tbis timu is 3, ;>()(), 000 ; of wbicb but (iOO.OOU renido in New Brunswick and Nova Hcotia. Tbe returns already ^iven hIiow tbat I be repe.il of tbo reciprocity treaty ban not lowered tbo prices of produce in Ontario and Quebec, Avbile tbo ex})ort of lumber to tbo united States lias not only been great«'r, but tbo prices paid for it in (Janadii / are bibber now tban over. Tbesj; results are unexpocKui in tbo general belief ^ wbicb prevailed tbat a difVenmt exbibit would be prcsentud, conHcquunt upon tbe imposition of duties on our iiortlu^rn frontier. Under tbe Canadian tariff, adopted December 21, 18G7, by tbe confederated parliament, coal and coke; are still ulmitted free of duty. A proposition was made, wfien tln^ir tariff bill was under consideration, to impose a duty of .00 cents a ton upon foreign coal, by way of meeting tbo duty impost^d by our tariff since tbe termination of tbo niciprocity treaty. It was alleged by Nova Scotia mem- bers tbat a duty of 50 cents a ton would enable tbat province to send coal to western Canada and compete successfully witb Aiiiericon coal in tbat market. The ministry, bowever, opposed tbo proposition, and it failed to carry. It is not improbable tbat it may be again offered during tbo session of J'arliamout now sitting. Tbe value of tbe coal and coke imported into (Canada during the fiscal year ending June .30, 1867, was $1,253,115; of wbicb $730,676 was imported from tbe United States. A Canadian duty of 50 cents a ton would uiuloubtedly give tbe whole of this trade to Nova Scotia; but tbe Canadian government could not consent to such an imposition unless by a total disregard of tbe interests of tbe consumers in western Canada for tbe benefit of a cir- cumscribed and purely local interest in tbeir extreme eastern limits, and w'^h a view solely to retaliate against the duties levi« d upon coal under our taritt It is only doing simple justice to tbe existing goveniment of Canada to acknowl- edge that it has strenuously opposed the ill-considered attempts which have been made to induce the adoption by parliament of anything approaching a retaliatory policy. The liberality and good judgment which that government has displayed since the confederation of the country, in its commercial policy, must have great weight and will be fully appreciated by Congress in considering the subject of a liberalization of our trade relations. THE FRliE NAVIGATION OF THE RIVER ST. LAWRENCE AND THE FISHERIES. The resolution calls for information " as to the nature of the arrangements made for securing to American citizens the free navigation of tbe river St. Lawrence, and the privilege of fishing in the waters adjacent to Canada." feet. These exports chiefly took place from the western peninsula, and went to Cleveland, Erie, BuiTHio, Oswego, and Touawanda. The mills in Tonawanda and Oswego had each a nmnutacturiug capacity of 20,0()U,0U0 feetl The export of so large a quantity of lumber from a section of country already drained to a considerable extent, he thought, should be preyoutod. Petitions were now in circulation, to be forwarded to the government, asking protection in this maUer. It was not one which came within the class of questions to which free trade versus proiectiou was applicable. It was for the interest ot the province, he thought, to retain as great a portion of the timber now on the peninsula as possible, for the uses of the country. *' The motion was agreed to." . ,' ' 10 TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. 4' These queationa were embraced in the reciprocity treaty, and consequently upon the repeal of that measure they reverted to the condition existing previous to 1854. No arrangements or nnderatanding have been entered into since the abrogation of the treaty, between the United States nnd the government of Great Britain or of Canada with reference to these subjects. But the Canadian government has seen fit to permit the arrangement practically to continue in force, BO far as our citizens are concerned, in the hope, as they avow, that some under- standing will shortly be entered into for liberalizing trade between the two countries, and tiieir desire, in the meantime, to do nothing which might bear an unfriendly interpretation. The freedom to navigate Lake Michigan they do not consider as any equivalent. Strictly speaking, it can scarcely be said that the Canadian government has permitted tlie arrangement under the reciprocity treaty to continue,* ao there is really no regulation or " order in council" upon the subject of the St. Lawrence. Since the termination of the treaty American vessels desiring to pass either to or from the ocean through the St. Lawrence, have asked permission in each case of the Canadian government, audit has in no instance as yet been refused. But the informal manner in which this peruiission has been given, and the absence of any general regulation upon the subject, evidently shows that the Canadian government does not desire to have these spocial permits regarded as precedents, cr as in any manner committing the government in its treatment of the question hereafter, should no general arrangement be entered into with the United States. The free imvigation of the St. Lawrence is a matter of necessity in the im- mense growth of the great northwest. Already the various channels of com- munication for the produce of that vast territory to tide-water, where it seeks the markets of the world, are crowded beyond their capacity, at certain periods. No artificial communications, no matter upon how liberal a scale they may be constructed, will be sufficient for the almost immediate future. Apart from the question of direct trade between the upper lakes and Europe, the existing com- munication, even with its limited canals, is of the last importance. It is not exaggerating its consequence to assume that even a war for the possession of the right to the natural outlet to our great lakes and the fertile, teeming territory they dra'.n, would be less costly to us, in its consequences, than the loss which the closing of that outlet to our products would enti\il. And yet, notwithstand- ing the gravity of this question and the extent of the interests involved, our citizens enjoy the privilege at this moment solely through the liberality of the Canadian government, without any understanding whatever of an official or even unofficial cbaractei', and without the right to enter a complaiut if the per- mission to use that river was refused. It is useless to go into tabular statements to show that up to this time the St. Lawrence has not been used to any great extent as an outlet for American produce. It is not necessary to advert to the important indirect influence which the fact of the existence of this great natural outlet has in the cheapening of freights from the west. It is, as it were, a standing menace against the tyranny which a single route might enforce, and operates always as a check in this way. The argument that the St. Lawrence is of little consequence to the trade of the west, because it has not, up to this time, been used as an outlet for our pro- ducts, might have a degree of plausibility if it could be maintained that the productiveness of the great northwest had reached its limits, and that the crops of the past were not to be exceeded by the harvests in the future. The growth of the western States is of almost fabulous rapidity as it is of gigantic proportions, and who can pretend to set limits to its manhood ? Even at its present pace, how long will it be before the produce of that region will choke up all existing means of transportation ? The day is not far distant when the Mississippi and the St. Lawrence will each be covered by vessels, floating to leas favored countries the generous fruits of the boundless prairies, whilst the TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. li tly upon vious to ince the ment of an ad i an in force, e under- the two bear an y do not tent haa there is awrence. either to ach case id. But absence an ad i an BcedeutB, question d States, the im- of corn- it seeks 1 periods. Y may be from the ting com- It is not essiou of f territory )ss which ithstand- Ived, our ty of the )iHcial or : the per- time the ■American ce which jening of B tyranny this way. ! trade of I railToads and canals within our borders will be burdened also by the overflowing harvests. The following is a statement of the length of the St. Lawrence navigation, and the present capacity of the canals connected therewith. The St Lawrence navigation is 2,385 miles long, and eight caruilb, of which seven are Canadian and one American, have been built to make it practic;ible for all ita length. The annexed exhibit shows the various distances and the size of the canal locks: ■■•-.-.•■■-■- -.■;..;,-,.: ■ ,. , .■■..■■. .-. ,i,. . ..., ; ,1 StrnitH of Belle iHle to hvtul of tide ivater, (Three Rivcrn) To the Lachinu canHl, (Moutrcul) Lacli'ae ciitiftl To BeauhikriioiB canal Beauhurnoiti canal To Coi'nwnll cnnnl Cornwall cHniil To FarraiiV Point canal Farraii'H Point canal I'o Rapide Plat caual Rapidu Plat canal To Iroqnoiii canal Iroquoia and Gulop'B cunal To the Welland canal, (head of Lake Ontario). Welland canal, (Luke Ontario to Erie) . To Sault St. Marie canal (bead of Lake Hu-on) . Sault St. Marie canal (United States) To Fond du Lac, (Lake Superior). Total § t:5 "a i 9 9 ft. "9ft. 9 ft. '9ft. 9 ft. 9 ft. lOift. "s a K to 44f '48* 4 'iii 151 20Gi 3:50 5:)(!* 12 54 8i The St. Ours lock and the Chambly canal connect the St. Lawrence and the Hudson via the Richelieu river and Lake Chaiiiplain. Distance from Montreal to New York, 456 miles. The annexed table gives the dimensions of the largest vessels which can pass through the various locks ; also, through the Charaplain and Erie canals in the United States : !, St. Lawrence canal Welland canal Ottawa canal Kidean canal Chambly canal Chaniplain canal, (United Stales) . Erie canal, (United States) Length in feet. 186 142i 95 127 114 89 102 Breadth in feet. 44} 26i 18* 31.^ 23 13i 17i Draught of j •' • '-.1/} water when i Tonnage, loaded. ! 9 10 5 5 6* 4 7 600 400 100 250 230 70 210 .,-»j .1,,',^ i>;/.i..,..., «;A/ili|- ,.ti 1,-. ,_ ,,'•■'" •»• '''*'.f>ii .lu;4l(j ,«./?)U^i3'>i)bm-: •iii'V ^mjr.tnV -•,<( '"2;/-!. j •,,..,■ . ir.,. <,*,■?.« -».;,-.^v «,f-s "i The fishery question h again completely unsettled by tlie abrogation of the reciprocity treaty. Upon the termination of that convention, the Canadian authorities, in conjunction with those of New Brunswick, Nova Scotia. Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland, and with the sanction of the imperial gov- ^ ernment, imposed a license duty of 50 cents a ton for the season, upon foreign fishing vessels. The license was fixed at that nominal sum more as an asser- 12 TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. 4 4 y 4 ! tion of the rights of sovejreignty in the shore fisheries, &c., than with any belief that it would afford protection to the provincial fishermen ; and, as stated by the Canadian ministers at the time, in the expuc';ation that some arrangement would have been entered into by which trade relations betwfien the United States and the provinces would have been revised, adjusted, and liberalized. The license fee was increased by Nova Scotia (previous to confederation) last year to $1 a ton — the other provinces, however, making no change. Our tariff imposes a duty of $2 a barrel upon ibreign-caught fish ; and the Canadian fishermen complain that this duty practically excludes them from our markets ; whilst at the same time nearly all of the mackerel caught by Ameri- can fishermen are found within the three-mile limits of the Canadian coasts, and are procured by our vessels only in consequencri of the Canadian license issued to them. Under these circumstances, the deepest distress actually prevails now amongst the Canadian fishermen — to such an extent as to have called forth the charitable contributions of their fellow-subjects in other portions of the country, not dependent upon the fishing trade. A strong appeal has been made to the Canadian authorities and the imperial government to increase the license to $2 a ton, for the season, upon American vessels, and I have reason to believe that the appeal has been successful, and that $2 a ton license will be charged upon foreign vessels this season. It can scarcely be maintained that the Canadian gov(;rument has placed the license at too high a sum, under all the circumstances. The granting a license at all is a friendly act ; and the fixing of it at $2 a ton does not by any means place their fishermen upon an equality with our fisher- men in our markets. Two dollars a ton i'cciise duty upon vessels for the sea- eon is about 20 cents a barrel upon an average catch — whilst our tariff imposes a duty upon Canadian-caught fish of $2 a barrel. And this, it must be borne in mind, is the protection given in our markets to our fishermen upon fish — mackerel — which is caught almost wholly in Canadian waters, by our people, in consequence of the granting of licenses to them by the Canadian govern- ment. 1 am not seeking to maintain any doubtful theory, but simply to state indisputable facts. And I therefore have no hesitation in declaring that I can- not understand how, under the facts of the case, the Canadian government could have refused to increase the license, in view of the starving condition of their people engaged in this avocation, and in the face of the heavy duty our tariff imposes upon the product, if brought to our markets in their vessels. We obtain the mackerel in the shallow waters washing the Canadian shores, and inside of the three-mile line, by virtue of a license from the Canadian government. The catcli of this description of fish outside of those limits is inconsiderable. The r duty of $2 a barrel cannot be sustained upon any theory of a protection to our fisheries ; it is simply a tax for the benefit of the American fishermen, and to the detriment of the Canadian fishermen, who in point of fact OWN the fisheries. There is also another view of the subject worthy of consideration. There is reason to believe — indeed the statement remains uncontradicted — that the heavy duty of two dollars a barrel under our tariff has been of little advantage to what may be termed " legitimate" American fishermen, i. e. persons who actu- ally catch the fish. It is stated as a fact that the greater portion of the mack- erel brought into our markets in American vessels, and which of course is entered free of duty, is not caught by our fishermen, but is purchased from Cana- dian fishermen at a reduced price and transferred to American vessels, thus giving all the advantage of the two-dollar duty to smugglers, and holding out a direct incentive to fraud. It is unquestionably more, profitable to purchase the fish in a surreptitious manner and avoid all risk of catching them ; but it will hardly be contended, if the existing duty is thus taken advantage of, that it fulfils either a bonelicial or a moral purpose. " ' " It would extend this paper to unreasonable limits t6 entef into a discussion of the very grave issues involved in the fishery disputes previous to the con- ny belief tated by ingement United beralized. tion) last and the 1 from our >y Ameri- oasts, and ise issued avails now forth the . e country, de to the snse to $2 jlieve that •ged upon Canadiaa imstances. t $2 a ton 3ur fisher- )r the sea- flf imposes : be borne pon fish^ ur people, in govern- [y to state that I can- ment could on of their r our tariff We obtain d inside of aent. The able. The jtion to our , and to the FISHBRIBS. 111. There — that the [vantage to who actu- the mack- f course is Tom Oana- Bssels, thus loiding out o purchase em ; but it age of, that discussion to the con- TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. if Vftntion of 1854. They will be found in the executive documents of the period, and set forth at length and with great indui>try in the Hon. Lorenzo Sabine's report (Executive Documents first session thirty-second Congress, part 2 ) As Mr. Sumner remarked in the Senate, in 1864 — The fisheries have been a great source of anxiety throughout our history, even from the bogiuniug, anJ for scve.al years previous to the reciprocity treaty they have been the occa- sion of mutual irritation, verging at times on positive outbreak. The treaty was followed by entire tranquillity, which has not been for a moment disturbed. This is a plain advau- tage, which cannot be denied. The following is the number of licenses issued to American fishing craft since the termination of the treaty, together with the sums paid : ■r-'i-^.- .■ • ,■ :; ■•;...;..,.' I 1866. '. ' ' ;■■ ••■ Licenses issued by Canada, 10 vessels, paying $296 Licenses issued by New Brunswick, 1 vessel, paying 13 Licenses issued by Nova ij cotia, 354 vessels, paying 9, 368 Licenses issued by Prince Edward Island, 89 vessels, paying 3, 389 45 vessels 13, 016 m.. - ^ ■ -■■— ^ 1867. By Canada None. By New Brunswick No return. By Nova Scotia, 269 $13, 929 By Prince Edward Island, (estimated,) 100 3, 000 ■ " 369 vessels 16,929 The tonnage of vessels was in 1 866 26, 033 , , , t ,t , ,. , in 1867, (estimated) 19,000 Although the license fees have generally been collected at the mouth of the gut of Canso, Nova Scotia, because most convenient, yet the best fishing grounds are in the waters of the province of Quebec, (the bliy of Oholeurs, &c.) The Canadian Year Book for 1866 gives the following statement descriptive of these fisheries. The most valuable sea fisheries in the Atlantic are close by the shores of the Dominion, vir... those on the Banks of Newfoundland, the St George's Banks in the Gulf of St. Law- rence, and the Bay of Fundy. It is known that there is no mackerel left on the shores of the United States, while the cod, the herring, and other valuable fish in coamier'je never go south of the cold waters which surround our coasts. All the maritime nations of the wond have consequently endeavored to secure rights of fishery in our waters, endeavors often sup- ported by armed forces and resulting in sanguinary wars. The United States' rights are (since the repeal of the reciprocity treaty) defined by the convention of 1818, which gives them the right of fishing ou the coasts of Newfoundland, Labrador- and the Magdalen Islands, but expressly precludes them from taking or curing fish within three miles of the coasts, bays, and harbors of the other provinces. During the existence of the reciprocity treaty, this three-mile limitation was abandoned, in cohsiaeration of the right of free entry for our products into United States markets. It revived with the repeal of the treaty, but, pending another adjustment of the matter, the imperial and colonial governments have agreed to allow American vessels to fish within these limits on payment of a license. There have often been between 400 and 500 United States fishing craft in the Gulf of St. Lawrence alone, with a tonnage of over 30,000, ; manned by over 6,000 men, taking fish to the value of over $1,000,000. It is certainly to be hoped that Congress will at once take such action as will I relieve our fishermen from license dues, and at the same time avoid a renewa'i I of those difficulties, the former settlement of which was regarded by Mr. Web- ster and Mr. Marcy as not the least important feature of the treaty. 14 TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. TERMINATION OF THE RECIPROCITY TREATY. ^ffS • The principal reitson for tlie termination of the reciprocity treaty was not so much a consideration of inequality in its provisions — for these might have been amended without j^oinj^ to the extent of abrogating the convention — as the fact that the rebellion had forced upon us a condition of things whicli did not exist when the treaty was made, and which rendered its continuance an embarrasHment in the arrangement of our complex tariff system. As stated by yon in your report to Congress in 1865, •• the people of the United States could not consent to be taxed as producers while tho.se outside of our boundaries, exempt from our burdens, shall ha permitted, as competitors, to have free access to our markets ;" hence it was desirable to aboli:«h a treaty, which, by the course of events, had come practically to discriminate against our own citizens. The immense public debt ol the United States worked changes requiring new arrangements and adap- tations, and these requirements could only be reached, so far as the British North American provinces wore concerned, by the termination of a convention which was based upon a wholly dissimilar state of facts. The establishment of a system of internal revenue taxation in the United States mu^t be met by the imposition of duties upon produce crossing cur borders. Properly levied, and calculated solely with a view of beir;g equivalent in proportion to the internal revenue tax, these duties would really be a continuation oHhe. principle of equality in the exchange of natural productions between the United States and Canada, which lay at the foundation of the treaty of 1854. So reasonable was this argument felt to be, that the representatives of the several provinces have placed on record their acquiescence in its justice. A delegation, comprising members of the governments of the then provinces of Canada, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia, visited Washington, and, on the 2d of February, 1866, submitted the following "memorandum," acknowledging the changed condition of the country the propriety of establishing duties on articles here- tofore embraced in the free list of the reciprocity treaty, equivalent to the internal taxation existing in the United States, and general propositions for the rearrange- ment of trade relations between this country and the provinces they represented : / . . ,' MEMORANDUM. '.'T.-.^,^. .'..[.'.". !'" ' "■•■>■,' , .'. The trade between the United States and the British provinces should, It is believed, under ordinary circumstances, be free in reference to theit natural productions, but as internal taxes exceptionally exist in the United States, it is now proposed that the articles embraced in the free list of the reciprocity treaty should continue to be exchanged, subject only to such duties as may be equivalent to that intcruat taxation. It is suggested that buth parties may add certain articles to those now in the said list. With reference to the fisheries and the navigation of the internal waters of the continent, the British provinces are willing that the existing regulations should continue in effect ; but Canada is ready to enter into arrangements with the view of improving the means of access to the ocean, provided the assurance be given that the trade of the western States will not be diverted from its natural channel by legislation. And if the United States are not prepared at present to consider the general opening of their coasting trade, it would appear desirable that, as regards the internal waters of the continent, no distinction should be m&de between the vessels of the two countries. If the foregoing points be satisfactorily arranged, Canada is willing to adjust her excise duties upon spirits, beer, and tobacco, upon the best revenue standard which may be mutually adopted after full consideration of the subject ; and if it be desired to treat any other articles in the same way, the disposition of the Canadian government is to give every facility in their power to prevent illicit trade. Canada is also prepared to make her patent lawf> similar to those of the United States. It is not necessary to allude to the reasons which led to the failure of any legislative arrangements at that time. It is sufficient to state, that the matter rests precisely where it did at the termination of the treaty, so far as any recip- rocal agreements between the two countries are concerned. Since then, how- ever, a change has taken place in the political condition of the provinces, which i TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. 16 •i.i .'<•,. Tf^ was not so ; have been -aa the fact d not exist larrasHment on in your not consent pt from our mtirkets ;" ivents, had ense public and adap- itirth North tion which )ment of a met by the levied, and lie internal of equality (id Canada, the several delegation, nada, New February, 8 changed licles here- he internal rearrange- presented : leved, under as internal 3S embraced )nly to sttch parties may 3 continent, effect; but IS of access will not be lot prepared ar desirable de between b her excise be mutually ther articles ility in their States. re of any he matter iny recip- len, how- :e8, which 1^ 7 I are now confederated under the name of Canada; and the British government has given the Canadian authorities the practical control of all subjecta aH'ectiiig that dominion to the extent of directing her Britannic Majesty's minister here to act in concert with the Canadian government in all matters connected with any negotiations in relation to commerce and navigation on our northern fron- tier. This will greatly simplify any arrangement which may be entered into in the future; as, instead of being forced to negotiate practically with the British government and four h'gisUtures with separate and independent governments, as was the case when the niciprocity treaty was concluded in 1854, any agreement can now be made directly with Canada. The treaty of 1854 only went into effect after obtaining the consent of each separate province, and it was for a time a matter of doubt if the various conflicting interests of the sevenil provinces could be so ai ranged as to SHtisfy them, {vide correspondence on the subject between Mr. Marcy and Mr. Crampton, 1854 ) • It may be remarked th'*, the commeice between the United States and Canada increat-ed, since 1852, in a striking manner. Thus, in 1852, the total trade between the United States and Canada amounted to but $16,013,848, whilst the total returns for 1867 amounted to 852,978,224. How far this increase is due to the growth of population and the improved means of communication, and how much to the fact of the establishment of the reciprocity treaty, might measurably be estimated by looking at the census returns, railroads, &c., but which would extend this report beyond reasonable limits. For the purposes of the occasion, it can safely be assumed, at all events, that the treaty was not a drawback to the g.owth of the trade; as the returns from no other country with which we have commercial relations show anything like as rapid a growth as that with the British provinces within the last decade. An analysis of the trade between the United States and the British provinces during the continuance of the reciprocity treaty, proves that a valuable portion of it consisted in the interchange of articles of a similar character at different points ; at one point showing imports of certain articles into the United States from one portion of the provinces, whilst at another point the United States exported similar articles to other sections of the provinces. This was illustrated by the honorable Mr. Howland, of Canada, in a conversation with the Commit- tee of Ways and Means of the House of Kepresentatives in 1866, when he said, " The great point for us to consider is, that from our relative geographical posi- tion, the interests of the two countries require that their commodities should be interchanged with the greatest freedom possible. Thus, our fisheries are at one end of the province, and we scarcely ever see their products ; we buy the fish we want from you, and send ours somewhere else." And it may also be added, that whilst Nova Scotia sold a certain amount of coal to the States contiguous to her, yet nearly all the coal conimmed in western Canada came from Ohio. These currents of trade, when corrr ctly understood, show that that description of commercial traffic is very far removed from any question of competition with the products of either country. High tariffs on each side may exclude the coal and fish of Nova Scotia from the American markets ; but, on the other hand, they will equally exclude American fish and American coal from Canada. The value of these at tides exported to Canada from the United States, and vice versa, will be seen in the tables given in this report. t '(> ifoi I ■ j'l").;;^ h fHJ t There is, however, a very important and valuable commerce which natnrally grows out of a liberalization of trade with Canada, and inducing the Canadians to sell their products in our markets, and enabling us to become their factors in the export of this produce to the markets of the world. It cannot be given in statistical tables, but, nevertheless, no one will deny its existence. I allude to the purchases naturally made in our markets, from the fact that their products are sold to us, although we are in reality only the agents of the European consum- ers, who are the ultimate purchasers. Other things being equal, the seller expends 16 TRADE WITH THE BRITISH PROVINCES. his money where lie gets it, in supplying hi.<) wants. As the factors of the Cana- dian farmers, under a liberal system of commercial intercourse, we are the medium through which he receives the money for his products, and he purchases what he requires of our wares and merchandise as a matter of convenience and of course. If, on the other hand, we exclude him from our markets — if he is com- pelled by heavy duties on our frontier to cross the Atlantic, and compete with us directly in tlie markets of Europe, who can contend that he would not there also purchase his supplies ? CONCLUSION. The conclusions which are fairly deducible from the facts and figures here- with presented are, that a wise policy in behalf of the interests of our own citi- zens requires that the existing itate of things, consequent upon the abrogation of the reciprocity treaty, should not be continued. Too little attention has been directed to the trade between the United States and the people lying for hundreds of miles along our northern frontier, speaking the same language and bprung from the same ancestry. I do not allude to our common origin in any spirit of sentimentality, because such considerations are absurd as between nations, but to show that commercial intercourse with such a people, intelli- gent, industrious, and enterprising, must be of value to us. In point of fact, the commerce already existing between the United States and Canada is exten- sive and important — ranking in consequence third in the list of countries with which we hold trade relations, as will be seen by the following table, for which I am indebted to the director of the Bureau of Statistics : 1 I 1 < t t c a i: n e' Table exhibiting the trade of the United States with the following countries during the fiacal years ending June 30, 1860 and 1867, respectively, (in millions of dollars and tenths, specie.) Countrie*. "* Domestic ex- portd. Total imports. Re-cxporta. Net iraportg. 1860. 1867. 1860. 1869. 1860. 1867. 1860. 1867. 1. Greftt Britain 196.2 59.0 18.6 99.3 185. 44.2 15.6 99.6 138.5 43.2 23.8 156,6 178.9 31.2 33.3 168.8 6.0 3.1 4.0 13.8 6.6 1.8 3.7 8.6 132.5 40.1 19.8 142.8 172.3 2. PrRtict* .-.--. 26.4 3. Britinli North American provinces . All otlier couutries 29. 6 160.2 Total 373. 1 1 3.14. 4 363.1 412.2 26.9 20.7 33.'>. 2 391.6 M. B. — The countrieH are named in their order of consequence among all countries with which we trade. ALEX. DELMAR, Director. Bureau or Statistics, Treaeury Department U. S, A., February 19, 1868. So far as the official facts can be relied upon — and they have been collected with a view solely to ascertain the truth and not to sustain any preconcerted theory — there can be no question, first, that the duty imposed upon pine lumber has fallen upon the American purchaser; secondly, that the effect of the impo- sition of an unreasonably high duty lipon other products must be in the end to jforce the Canadian producer to seek the European markets through other and \^heaper channels. The market for the surplus produce of this continent is in Europe. The price is mainly regulated by the European demand ; and all the advantage we can expect to derive from the Canadian export of these articles must be obtained from handling them — by being the merchant of the Canadian fanners. They do not enter into competition with American products of a similar character to any extent on this side of the Atlantic. The competitioa