• .Yv
IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-3)
1.0
I.I
IIM
2.0
1.25
U III 1.6
vQ
<^
/}.
o
e).
<?.
<r2
^ ,> ^
■V
>>-
7
z!^
Photographic
Sciences
Corporation
23 WEST MAIN STREET
WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580
(716) 872-4503
/<'\%
i/x
CIHM/ICMH
Microfiche
Series.
CIHIVI/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.
Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques
1980
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 6X6 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 m^thode normale de filmage
sont indiquds ci-dessous.
D
n
□
D
D
D
Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur
I I Covers damaged/
Couverture endommagde
Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaur6e et/ou pelliculde
I I Cover title missing/
Le titre de couverture manque
Coloured maps/
Cartes g6ographiques en couleur
Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire)
I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur
Bound with other material/
Relid avec d'autres documents
Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/
La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge int^rieure
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 ajout6es
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas 6t6 filmdes.
n
n
Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur
Pages damaged/
Pages endommagdes
Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes
Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/
Pages d^colordes, tachet^es ou piqu^es
Pages detached/
Pages d6tach6es
Showthrough/
Transparence
I I Quality of print varies/
Quality indgale de I'impression
Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel supplementaire
Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible
Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement cu partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6t^ filmdes d nouveau de fa^on d
obtenir la meilleure image possible.
D
Additional comments:/
Commentaires suppl6mentaires;
This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/
Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous.
10X 14X 18X 22X
26X
30X
7
12X
16X
20X
24X
28X
32X
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks
to the generosity of:
Library of the Public
Archives of Canada
L'exemplaire film* fut reproduit grflce A la
g6n6rosit6 de:
La bibiiothdque des Archives
publiques du Canada
The images appearing here are the best quality
possible considering the condition and legibility
of the original copy and in keeping with the
filming contract specifications.
Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with a printed
or illustrated impression.
The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol — ^ (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol y (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.
Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too large to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right and top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:
Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le
plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition at
de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire film6, et en
conformity avec les conditions du contrat de
filmage.
Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprimie sont filmds en commen^ant
par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la
derniire page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impressioii ou d'illustration, soit par le second
plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires
originaux sont fiimds en commen^ant par la
premidre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par
la derniire page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.
Un des symboles suivants apparaUra sur la
derniire image de cheque microfiche, selon le
cas: le symbols — »■ signifie "A SUIVRE", le
symbols V signifie "FIN".
Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc, peuvent dtre
filmis d des taux de reduction diffdrents.
Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre
reproduit en un seul clich6, il est film6 d partir
de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite,
et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre
d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants
illustrent ia mdthode.
1
2
3
1 2 3
4 5 6
Y
<
■■' ^
r
PLATFORM
OF
THE LIBERAL PARTY
OF
CANADA.
Exemplified by Quotations, Tables and Arguments
Based on Census and Trade Returns.
{i
^
r
CHARLOTTETOWN, P. K. 1>LAND:
GE|^ V. GARDINER, STE.\M PRINTER, QUEEN S TREET.
18G6.
/•
S
LIBERAL PLATFORM
—ADOPTED BY THE—
1.
OTTAWA,
JTJIsrE, 1893.
We, the Liberal Party of Canada, in coriventiou assembled declare
l.-FREER TRADE-REDUCED TAXATION.
That the customs tariff of the Dominion should be based, not as
it is now, upon the protective principle, but upon the requirements
of the public service ;
That the existing tariff , founded upon an unsound principle, and
used, as it has been by the Government, as a corrupting agency where-
with to keep themselves in office has developed monopolies, trusts and
combinations ;
It has decreased the value of farm and other landed property •
It has oppressed the masses to the enrichment of a few;
It has checked immigration ;
It has caub^ed great loss of population ;
It has impeded commercel;
It has discriminated against Great Britain ;
In these and in many other ways it has occasioned great public and
private injury, all of which evils must continue to grow in intensity
as long as the present tariff system remains in force.
That the highest interests of Canada demand a removal of this
obstacle to our country's progress by the adoption of a sound fiscal
policy, which, while not doing injustice to any class, will promote
domestic «nd foreign trade, and hasten the return of prosperity to our
people.
That to that end. the tariff should be reduced to the needs of honest,
economical and efficient government;
That it should be so adjusted as to make free, or to bear as lightly
as possible upon, the necessaries of life, and should be so arranged as
to promote freer trade with the whole world, more particularly with
Great Britain and the Ignited States.
We believe that the results of *he protective system have griev-
ously disappointed thousands ot persons who honestly supported it,
and that the country, in the light of experience, is now prepared to
declare for a sound fiscal policy.
The issue between the two political parties on this question is no\r
clearly defined.
The Government themselves admit the failure of their fiscal policy
and now profess their willingness to make some changes ; but they
say that such changes must be based only on the principle of pro-
tection.
We denounce the principle of protection as radically unsound and
unjust to the masses of the people, and we declare our conviction
that any tariff changes based on that principle must fail to aflford any
substantial relief from the burdens unuer which the country labors.
This issue we unhesitatingly accept, and upon it we await with
the fullest confidence the verdict of the electors of Canada.
2.— ENLARGED MARKETS -RECIPROCITY.
That having regard to the prosperity of Canada and the United
States as adjoining countries, with many mutual interests, It is de-
sirable that there should be the most friendly relations, and broad
and liberal trade intercourse between them ;
That the interests alike of the Dominion and of the Empire would
be materially advanced by the establishing of such relations ;
That the period of the old reciprocity treaty was one of marked
prosperity to the British North American colonies ;
That the pretext under which the Government appealed to the
country in 1891 respecting negotiation for a treaty with the United
States was misleading and dishonest, and intended to deceive the
electorate ;
That no sincere effort has been made by them to obtain a treaty,
but that, on the contrary, it is manifest that the present Government,
controlled as they are by monopolies and combines, are not desirous
of securing such a treaty ;
That the first step towards obtaining the end in view, is to place
a party in power who are sincerely desirous of promoting a treaty on
terms honorable to both countries ;
\
That a fair and liberal recipntclty treaty would develop the great
natural resources of Canada, would enormously increase the trade and
commerce between the two countries, would tend to encourage friendly
relations between the two peoples, would remove many causes whicn
have in the past provoked irritation and trouble to the Governments of
both countries, and would promote those kindly relations between the
Empire and the liepublic which att'ord the best guarantee for peace
and prosperity.
That th^ Liberal party is prepared to enter into nearotiations with
a view to obtaining such a treaty, including a well considered list of
manufactured articles, and we are satisfied that any treaty so ar-
ranged will receive the assent of Her Majesty's Government, without
whose approval no treaty can be made.
3.-PURITY OF ADMINISTRATION-CONDEMN CORRUPTION.
That the Convention deplores the gross corruption in the manage-
ment and expenditure of public moneys which for years past has ex-
isted under the rule of the Conservative party, and the revelati )n8 of
which by the diflferent parliamentary committees of inquiry have
brought disgrace upon the fair name of Canada.
The (Government which profited politically by these expenditures
of public moneys of which the people have been defrauded, and which,
nevertheless, have never punished the guilty parties, must be held
responsible for the wrongdoing. We arraign tne Government for re-
taining in office a Minister of the Crown proved to have accepted very
large contributions of money for election purposes from the funds of a
railway company, which, while paying tne political contributions to
him, a member of the Government with one hand, was receiving Gov-
ernment subsidies with the other
The conduct of the Minister and the approval of his colleagues,
after the proof became known to them, are calculated to degrade
Canada in the estimation of the world, and deserve the severe con-
demnation of the people.
^ould
vrked
the
Inited
le the
4.-DEMAND STRICTEST ECONOMY.-DECREASED EXPENDITURE.
We cannot but view with alarm the large increase of the public
debt and of the controllable annual expenditure of the Dominion and
the consequent undue taxation of the people under the Governments
that have been continuously in power since 1878, and we demand the
strictest economy in the administration of the government of the
country.
lent,
iirous
1 place
ity on
.'5— FOR RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT— INDEPENDENCE OF
PARLIAMENT.
That the Convention regrets that by the action of Ministers and
their supporters in Parliament, in one case in which serious charges
were made against a Minister of the Crown, investigation was alto-
Vl
f^ether refused, while in another case the char(?es preferred were
altered and then referred to a commission appointed upon the advice
of the Ministry, contrary to the well settled practice of Parliament ;
and this Convention affirm :
That it is the ancient and undoubted right of the House of Ck>m-
mons to inquire into all matters of public expenditure, and into all
charges of misconduct in office agaiudt Ministers of the Crown, and
the reference of such matters to royal commission created upon the
advice of the accused is at variance with the due responsibility of Min-
isters to the House of Commons, and tends to weaken the authority
of the House over the Executive Government, and thiB convention
affirms that the powers of the people's representatives in this regard
should on all fitting occasions oe upheld.
6— THE LAND FOR THE SETTLER-NOT FOR THE
SPECULATOR.
That in the opinion of this Convention the sales of public lands of
the Dominion should be to actual setileisonly, and not to speculators,
upon reasonable terms of settlement, and in such areas as can be
reasonably occupied and cultivated by the settler.
7.-0PP0SE THE DOMINION FRANCHISE ACT-FAVOR THE
PROVINCIAL FRANCHISE.
That the Franchise Act since its introduction has cost the Do-
minion Treasury over a million dollars, besides entailing a heavy ex-
penditure to both political parties.
That each revision involves an additional expenditure of a further
quarter of a million ;
That this expenditure has prevented an annual revision, as origin-
ally intended, in the absence of which young voters entitled to the
franchise have, in numerous instances, been prevented from exercis-
ing their natural rights.
That it has failed to secure uniformity, which was the pr-'icipal
reason assigned for its introduction ;
That it has produced gross abuses by partizab revising barristers
appointed by the Government of the day;
That its provisions are less liberal than those already existing in
many Provinces of the Dominion, and that in the opinion of this Con-
vention the Act should be repealed, and we should revert to the
Provincial Franchise.
8.-AGAINST
THE GERRYMANDER-COUNTY
SHOULD BE PRESERVED
BOUNDARIES
That by the Gerrymander Acts, the electoral divisions for the re-
turn of members to tne House of Commons have been so made as to
prevent a fair expression of the opinion ot the country at the general
elections, and to secure to the party now in power a strength out of
all proportion greater than the number of electors supporting them
;
were
idvicse
nent ;
CJom-
ito all
, and
an the
)f Min-
ihority
ention
regard
IE
ands of
iilators,
can be
R THE
the Do-
Bavy ex-
further
is origin-
d to the
exerois-
kr''iGipal
larristers
fisting in
this Con-
H to the
)AR1ES
would warrant. To put an end to this abuse, to make the House of
Commors a fair exponent of publio opinion, and lo preserve the his-
torio continuity of counties, it is desirable that in the formation of
electoral divisions, county boundaries be preserved, and that in no
case parts of different counties should be put in one electoral division.
9-THE SENATE DEFECTIVE— AMEND THE CONSTITUTION.
The present constitution of the Senate is inconsistent with the
Federal principal in our system of government, and is in other respects
defective, as it makes the Senate independent of the people and un-
controlled by the public opinion of the country, and should be
so amended as to bring it into harmony with thefprinciples of popular
government.
10-QUESTION OF PROHIBITION-A DOMINION PLEBISCITE.
That whereas public attention is at present much directed to the
consideration of the admittedly great evils of intemperance, it is de-
sirable that the mind of the people should be clearly ascertained on
the question of Prohibition by means of a Dominion Plebiscite.
Ir the re-
side as to
general
A out of
Ing them
s
A PRIMER OF TARIFF REFORM.
iini)08ed on commodities imported from
Q. What is a tariff?
A. A tariff \h a tax
foreign countries.
Q. What is a tax?
A. A tax is the portionof property or product whichjthe Govern-
ment takes (by compulsion) from every citizen— not a pauper— for
public purposes.
Q. vVhat are public purposes, in the sense of this definition?
A. A definition given by the Supreme Court was as follows :
"For the puri^ose of carrying on the Government in all its machinery
and operations."
Q. What is free trade?*
A. Free trade is the right of every man to freely exchange the
products of his labor and services in' such a way as seems to him
most advantageous, subject only to such restrictions as the State may
find necessary to make for the purposes of revenue or for sanitary or
moral considerations. Converselv, it is the denial of the right of a
free government to arbitrarily take from any person any portion of
the product of his labor for the benefit of some other man who has not
earned or paid for it.
* The following detlnitlons of free trade and protection appeared in tlie
Ptiiladelphia Ameriran, of August 7th, 1884, a representative pro^^ectlonlst
paper :
" The term Free Trade, although much discussc.i, is Eeldom rightly defined.
It does not mean the abolition of custom houses. Nor does it mean the substitu-
tion of direct for indirect taxation, as a few American disciples of the school
have supposed. It means such an adjustment of taxes on imports as 'will
cause no diversion of capital from any channel into which it would otherwise
flow, into any channel opened or favored by the legislation which enacts the
customs. A country may collect its entire revenue by duties on imports, and
yet be an entirely Free Trade country, sn long as it does not lay those duties in
such a way as t<i lead anyone to undertake any employment or make any investment
he would avoid in the absence of such duties. Thus, the customs duties levied by
England — with a \ ery few exceptions— are not inconsistent with her profession
of being a country that believes in Free Trade. They either are duties on
articles not produced in England, or they are exactly e(|uivalent to the excise
duties levied on the same articles if made at home. They do not lead anyone
to put his money Into the home production of an article, because they do not
discriminate in favor of the home producer. It is therefore no concession to
the protective principle when the Democratic platform says that ' since the
foundation of the government custom house duties have furnished its main
source of revenue,' and that ' this system must continue.'
"A protective duty, on the other hand, has for its object to effect the
diversion of a part of the capital and labor of the people out of the channels in
which it would run otherwise, into channels favored or created by law."
9
m.
i from
^overn-
per— for
m?
follows :
ichinery
mge the
3 to him
bate may
litary or
ight of a
jrtion of
[) has not
red In the
|c*ectlonl9t
ly iletlDed.
[e Bubstltu-
the school
•ts as -wUl
otherwise
jenacts the
jporls, and
[se dntien in
investment
s levied by
profession
'b duties on
the excise
lad anyone
[hey do not
tcesslon to
' since the
5d Its main
ettect the
khannelB in
Iw."
Q. What is prelection ?
A. Protection, on the ground of advantages accruing direotly or
incidentally, advocates and defends the imposition of taxett on imports
for other puruoses than those of revenue. The i)rotective system is
opposed to tno revenue system because the (ioverimient collects
revenue on what comes in, while protection is secured only to the
extent to which commodities are kept out.
y. What is the idea underlying each?
• A. Free trade assumes that a peoph* like those of ('auada might
be left t.> themselves to decide what is to their own advantage;
Protection assumes that Piirliament vm\ better decide what business
the v^eople shall do than the people themselves.
Q. What is a taritf for revenue only?
A. A '• tariff for revenue only " is one so framed that all the
taxes which the people pay, the Government shall recrive.
il. What is meant by n tariff for revenue with "incidental
protection?"
A. The adjustment of a tarilf for revenue* in such a way as to
afford what is twrnied ''incidental protection" is based on the sup-
position that by arranging a scale of dutie-. so moderate as only to
restrict and not prevent imi)ortations, it is possible to secure sutticient
revenue for the State, and at the same time stimulate domestic
manufactures by increasing the price of competitive foreign products.
Q. Is this double object capable of attaimnent V
A . Undoubtedly ; but it is al^o one of the most costly of all
methods of raising revenue. For while revenue to the State accrues
only from the tax levied on what is imported, another tax, arising
from an increase of price, is also paid by the nation upon all domestic
products that are sold and consumed in competition with the foreign
article. A tariff for revenue so adjusted as to afford incidental pro-
tection, is therefore a system which re(iuires the consumers, who are
the people, to pay much in order that the State may receive little.
PROTECTION INVOLVES THE PRINCIPLE OF SLAVERY.
Q. What is the highest right of property ?
A. The right to freely exchange it for other property.
Q. How do you prove this ?
A. If all exchange of property were forbidden, each individual
would be like Robinson Crusoe (jn his uninhabited island. He would
have to live on what he individually produced or collected, and would
be deprived of all benefits of co-o})erati()n with his fellow-men, and
of all the advantages of production that come from diversity of skill
or diversity of natural circumstances. In the absence of all freedom
o1: exchange between man and man, civilization W(mld be impossible;
and to the degree in which we impede or obstruct the freedom of ex-
change -i, e., commercial intercourse,— to that same degree we oppose
the development of civilization.
Q. Is it the intent and result of a "protective" taritf to restrict
exchanges ?
A. It invariably amounts to the same thing, whether we make
the interohange of commodities costly and difficult by interposing
nMMii
10
deserts, warn ps, unbridged streams, bad -roads or bands of robbers
between producers and consumers, or whether, for the benefit of some
private irti^rests, that have done nothing to merit it, we impose a toll
on the commodities transported, and call it a tariff In both cases
there is a greater effort and an increased cost required to produce a
given result, and a diminution of the abundance of the things which
minister to everybody's necessities, comfort and happiness. A twenty
per cent duty is like a bad road; a fifty per cent., like a broad, deep
and rapid river, without any proper facilities for crossing, a seventy-
five per cent., like a swamp flanking such a river on both sides; while
a bundled ner cent- duty, such as is levied upon kerosene oil, is as a
band of robbers, who strip the merchant of nearly all he possesses,
and make him not a little grateful that he escapes with his life.
Q. How does a tariff, enacted for so-called "protection," involve
the principle of slavery ?
A. Any system of law which denies to an individual the right
freely to exchange the products of his labor, by declaring that A, a
citizen, may trade on equal terms with B, another citizen, but shall
not under equally favorable circumstances trade with C, who lives in
another country, reaffirms in effect the principle of slavery. For both
slavery and the artificial restriction of exchanges deny to the mdi-
vidual the right to use the products of his labor according to his own
pleasure, or what may seem to him the best advantage. In other
words, the practical working of both the system of human slavery
and the system of protection is t ) deprive the individual of a portion
of the fruits of his labor, without making in return any direct com-
pensation.
Q. What is the argument generally put forth by protectionists
iio justity the restriction of freedom of exchanges?
A. That any present loss or injury resulting from such restric-
tion to the individual will be more than compensated to him
INDIRECTLY, as a citizeu of the State.
Q. Was not this essentially the argument used to justify
slavery ?
A. Yes. The plea for slavery j^sserted that the system was
really for the good of the slaves, and that any deprivation endured by
them for the good of society— meaning the masters— would be fully
compensated to them, through moral discipline, if not in this world.,
certainly in the world to come. It made the slaveowners, who
enacted the laws, the sole judges of the question.
Q. Have not the same arguments employed for the restriction of
exchanges— i. e, indirect or future individual or social benefit as a
justification i^y present personal restriction or injury— been always
used to justify every encroachment by despotic governments on the
freedom of the individual?
A. Yes; and especially in warrant of State persecution for heresy
or unbelief; of enforced conformity with State religions; of abridging
the liberty of speech and of the press and of restricting the right of
suffrage. In short, the restriction of freedom of exchange for the
purpose of subservitig private interests, is one of those acts on the
part of the State which are utterly antagonistic to the the principles
of free government; and which, if fully carried out, would be
absolutely destructive of it.
11
jbbers
E some
3 a toll
1 cases
iuce a
which
iwenty
i, deep
iventy-
while
is as a
jsesses,
involve
e right
lat A, a
at shall
lives in
or both
le indi-
lis own
n other
slavery
portion
3t com-
tionists
restric-
;o him
ustify
ra was
ured by
36 fully
world,
•s, who
ction of
tit as a
always
on the
heresy
ridging
ight of
for the
on the
inciples
)uld be
THE TWO POLICIES.
What are the broad distinctions dividing the two great political
ymrties in Canada ?
FnEE TuADB as against Prote<tion, Reciprocity as against
Restriction, and Jfouest Kroiiomicdl Government as against the
hxtrai'n(/((nce, Misnuinuifement and Corrujyfion which has charac-
terized Canada's Government for years past!
Other important issues relating to Thf^ Sen(iU\ Prohibition and
other matters also divide the parties, but at present the great Trade
Qut'stion over -rides all else.
The policy known as the N. P., which has been in force since
1878, is sought to be still longer retained by the Conservatives.
Its basic principle is the imposition of duties so high that foreign
manufactures will oe excluded, and their manufacture in Canada
encouraged and promoted, ar^d the argument used is that domestic
competition will be sufficient to keep prices down and prevent the
consumer being fleeced.
The Liberals object to this policy as being unjust to the State,
unjust to the coneumer, and calculated to promote extravagance and
to diminish instead of enlarge our commerce
They contend that the experience of the sixteen years past has
confirmed their predictions, and that in the words of the Ottawa
platform the N. P. has
1. Decreased the value of farm and other landed projierty.
2. Oppressed the masses to the enrichment of a few.
3. Checked immigration.
4. Caused great loss of population.
5. Impeded commerce.
G. Discriminated against Great Britain.
The taxes collected under the N. P. and paid direct to the
Treasury have since the year 1878 amounted to nearly ONE
HUNDRED MILLIONS OF DOLLARS more than would have
been taken out of the people had the McKenzie revenue tariff been
maintained instead of the N. P. tariff.
Notwithstanding this enormous increase of taxation there was a
JDE PIOIT
last year of S1,000,00() odd, and this year it is very much greater. The
DEFICIT, as the returns up to end of January, 1895, show, will retch
at the end of the fiscal year,;Fivc Millions of Dollars.
12
But che excessive tnyation laid upon the people and jmid into the
Treasury is only a small proportion of the rcul tcuation^ the greater
part of which the people are compelled to p^^y to the protected
industries.
The best authories place this at 02 for every SI paid to the
Treasury,
Even if it were only equal to that paid into the Treasury it would
be enormous.
The (luestion arises right on the threshold of the argument, why
should a law be passed enabling one man or several men formed into
a company, to compel people to pay him or them a much larger sum
for the goods they buy than they "would be obliged to pay in the open
market.
If any particular man, sa\ John Smith, was able to get a law
passed at Ottawa saying that he should have a monopoly in Canada
of the sale of any particular article, whether rupe, cotton, iron,
woolens, oil, rice, sugar or any other article, and should have the
right to chaige what ])rice he pleased uj) to a cei'tain fixed price far
beyond that for which it could be purchased abroad, every elector
would at onee say: Why, that's an immoral and unjust and an unfair
law.
And yet the N. P. tariff is just such a law and has just such an
effect, the only diflference bemg that its favorites are as a rule
COMPANIES and not individuals.
THE N. P. MONOPOLY.
Experience has shown tkat when foreign goods are excluded
and the Canadian market kept close for Canadian manufactures,
unrestrained by foreign competition, the result is the formation
of COMBINES AND MONOPOLIES, which control the market,
buy up all Canadian competition and charge the consumer for
his goods the utmost limit the hnu { N. P.) alloivs.
Such today is t!ie case with Cordage, Cottoxs, Woolens,
Si(;aj{, Etc., Etc, Er<\
For a few years internal competition had the effect of keep-
ing down the prices, but as the Canadian market was a limited
one, the fa(*tories soon cut each othcj's throats, and now either
by a MONoroLV, such as exists iu the cotton and cordage trade,
or by a monopoly as in the iron trade, competition does not exist,
the ordinary laws regulating prices are ignored, and these pet
industries are enable to ileece the consumer at their own sweet
will, and all by virtue of a law passed by the people fleeced.
THE LIBERAL POLICY.
The policy of the Liberal party is in the first place:
1. To reduce the annual expenditure to the lowest sum
compatible with honest economical government.
18
keep-
iuiited
either
trade,
exist,
ie pet
sweet
sum
2. To abolish all unnecessary expenditures and curtail and
reduce those which, though necessary, are extravagant,
3. To raise by taxation only just so muck money as is
absolutely necessary to carry on the government.
4. To so adjust the customs tariff that ALL THE TAXES
PAID THROUGH IT SHALL (JO INTO THE TREASURY
AND NOT INTO THE COFFERS OF A FEW FAVORED
INDUSTRIES.
The present Government say they cannot " run the
machinery" for less than the present expenditure, and that the
present customs tarilF (which collects $20,000,000 for the
Treasury and more than $20,000,000 besides for the combines,
trusts and other protected industries) is the best they can devise.
Mr. Foster, in his Budget speech of J 804, expressly and
deliberatelv stated THAT THE MAIN OBJECT IN FRAMING
A TARIFF OU(JHT NOT TO BE TO RAISE REV^ENUE
FOR THE COUNTRY, BUT TO DEVELOP THE INDUS-
TRIES OF THE COUNTRY.
His exact words were : "So far as the revenue aspect is
"concerned, it is OF INFINITELY LESS IMPORTANCE than
" the etlect and details of the tariif upon the trade and develop-
" ment of a country.''
As opposed to all this
The Liberal party says that several millions may he lopped
off the present expenditure without injuring the public service.
(Hon. D. ]\Iills estimates the possible saving at $4,000,000.)
The Liberals further say that while all citizens according to
their means should be taxed for the support of the national
government, t6 tax them for the support of private enterprises,
and under cover of law to take money from one citizen's purse
to enrich another, is a ,i;ross injustice and "legalized robbery."
Now in order properly to understand the working of the
N. P. we ought to consider carefully how we s^o.jJ jinancially in
iS;-S, how we stand nnancially to-dav, and how our present
DEBT, TAXATION AND EXPENDITURE compares with that
of the revenue tariif period of Mr. McKeuzie, and how that great
test of national wealth and progress, viz.: the population of the
country stands and compares with foimer periods.
At the end of the financial year 1878, when Mr. McKenzie
went out of power, the nett debt of the Dominion was
$140,362,069.9L
14
DEBT AND EXPENDITURE LARGELY INCREASED.
The Conservative Governmeut has increased this debt since
then nearly $110,000,000, until, as shown by the Canada
Gazette of February 7, it stood, M January, 1895, at close upon
$250,000,000. equal tOy'^SO for every man, woman and child in
the Dominion.
Now it may well be asked by any man in the Maritime Provinces
How much of this -til 0,000,000 increased public debt has been
spent in the Maritime Provinces? Of course a large sum went to
pay for the Canadian Pacific Kailway and other large sums in
building new canals and deepening others, but after making
every reasonable allowance for important and neceBsary public
WOBKS, it is evident that there must have been GROSS AND
UNBOUNDED EXTRAVAGANCE, while in many cases the
country was DEFRAUDED AND ROBBED.
Taking each ten years and starting at Confederation we find
the nettdebt as follows: (See Public Accounts, 1894, p. xxx.)
1867 $ 75,728,041.37
1877 132,235,309.00
1887 227,314,775.44
1S94 240,183,029.48
1895, Jan. 31 249,407,462.55
Now look at our nett taxes paid to the Government during
same periods. The.se taxes consist of customs and excise duties
alone. •
In 1867 we paid in taxes, - * 11,700,681.08
17,697,924.00
28,687,000.00
a
1877
•
((
u
1887
u
H
(<
1«QA
u
It
o«
9,203.00
(See Public Accounts, 1894, p. xxxii.)
In the intervening years of 1889, 1890 and 1891 we paid
respectively $30,613,522, !!<31 ,587,071, and $30,314,151.
Now while the public debt and the taxes have increased as
shown, how has the annual expenditure been maintained?
We give the figures taken from the Public Accounts as
follows:
TOTAL EXPENDITURE.
. . .8 $ 13,486,092.00
*r-8 23,503,158.25
1887-8 36,718,494.79
1893-4 37,685,026.62
15
INCREASED THE TAXES.
It will thus be seen that while the Conservatives have
INCREASED the people's taxes ACTUALLY PAID INTO THE
TREASUKY by over *1(),()00,0()0 each year since they came into
power in 1878, they have also increased the annual expenditure
over that incurred in Mr. McKenzie's time over $14,000,000
yearly, and at the same time have added to the public nett debt
$110,000,000. The following figures show the comparison be-
tween 1878 and 1894.
1878.
181)4.
Customs taxation,
Total taxation,
Expenditure, -
Nett debt, - -
$ 12,782,824 $ 19,198,114
17,841,938 27,579,20;{
23,508,158 37,585,025
140,362,069 249,407,462
These enormo'^' ims can hardly be fully appreciated by an
average man. F jmparisous with other countries may assist
in enabling oneao grasp their meaning.
^reat Britain has for more than a century past been
engaged in costly wars by land and sea and in all parts of the
world. She has had necessarily to pile up an enormous public
debt. Yet to day the annual charge for the PUBLIC DEBT OP
GREAT BRITAIN is only 31 per cent, of its revenue, while
that of Canada is not less than 41 per cent. In other words.
Great Britain has, out of every $100 of rev^enue collected by
customs and excise taxes, to put by 831 to defray the annual
charges of it public debt; while out of every !!<100 Canada collects
by customs and excise taxes she has to put by •*41 to defray the
annual charges of h6r debt. These charges embrace the interest
on the debt and the sinking fund which we are obliged by law
to keep up.
Now look at the UNITED STATES. Their debt practically
speaking is paid off. It is now only $12 per head of the
population and it only takes $7 out of every i^lOO they collect by
customs and excise taxes to pay the interest and charges upon it.
So that while CANADA has to take $41 out of every $100
she collects by customs and excise taxes to pay the interest and
charges on her debt, GREAT BRITAIN only has to take |31 for
a similar purpose, and the UNITED STATES only $7.
16
But the Tory orator says under the McKeu/.ie Goveniuicut
you had nothing but
DEFICITS,
while the Conservative Government has had a series of sur-
plusses. This statement is far from accurate. The Public Ac-
counts shows, p. xxxiii., that there were surpluses in lHTA-74 of
i*S88,77r).7!)— JS74-7r> of A!K{r),()t4.(K).
It is true that in the three following years there wer(j
delicits as follows: 1875-70— $J ,1>00,7S5— 1870-77 1,460,027—
1877-78—1,128,140.
Hut it must never be forgotten that these deficits were not
incurred by any extravagance or increase in the expenditure
but because the taxation of the people was reduced. As a matter
of fact nearly $o, 000, 000 less taxes were raised in, each of the
years 1876-77 and 1877-78 than were raised in 187.'{-74 or 1874-7a
and of coui'se many millions less than the Tory Government
has since raised.
The reduction was mainly caused by the cheapness of goods
imported, the customs duties being levied by an ad valorem rate
or so much per hundred upon the cost, it is manifest therefor
that if and when the cost of the goods imported is reduced say
one-third, the tax paid by the people to the Governmeijt is
greatly reduced, so it was in the three years referred to owing
to the world wide depression then existing and thus it was that
deficits occurred.
Governments are as a rule only blanieable for deficits when
they are guilty of EXTKAVAGANT OK INJUSTIFIABLE
EXPPjNDITURE and not simply because the amount of taxation
they raise from the people is small.
But what is the record of the Tory Government since 1878 in
this point.
DEFICITS.
In 1878-9 the deficit was - - !?1,037,090
1,543,227
2,240,058 ■
5,834,571
810,081
1,210,332
Foi' the present year 1805 the returns are of course not com-
plete but we have the official returns for the seven months end-
ing January 31st, published in Canada Gazette and they show
that while there was a deficit of $1,210,332 for the whole year
1879-80
1884-5
1885-6
1887-8
1893-4
goods
ti rate
erefor
id say
eijt is
wing
that
;78 in
com-
eud-
show
year
17
1893-4 the REVENUE for the seven months ending January 1895
was $2,159,720 less than for the corresponding period in 1893-4
while the- expenditure was !?738,310 greater. We are therefore
almost THREE MILLION DOLLARS worse off on the 3l8t
January 1895, tkau on 31st January 1894, and THE DEFICIT
when the fiscal year ends on 1st July, CANNOT WELL BE
LESS THAN FIVE MILLIONS and may considerably exceed it.
With our financial condition thus DARK, with huge deficits
a«d a rapidly falling revenue, with our taxes increased to the
limit of the people's endurnce, the Government, instead of cur-
tailing expenditure, have largely increased it; while our debt
has reached figtres which almost force thoughtful men to doubt
our fature.
GREAT LOSS OF POPULATION.
The CENSUS RETURNS show tha^ excluding altogether the
886,000 immigrants who camei to Canada during the ten years,
1881 to 1891, there should have been au increase of population
by NATURAL INCREASE ALONE (calculated at 2 p.c. a year)
of not less than 900,000. The actual increase was in round
figures 500,000. The LOSS IN NATIVE BORN POPULATION
WAS THEREFORE IN THE TEN YEARS 400,000. If to this
however be added the 886,000 immigrants who according to the
statistics of the department of agriculture were brought into
tl^is country during these ten years at a cost of according to the
Public Accounts, p. iiv. about $3,000,000, the actual exodus from
Canada during the ten years 1881 to 1891 amounted to OVER
1,200,000 PERSONS or 120,000 EACH YEAR. The United
States census agrees with ours in this regard and shows that of
every male born in Canada, between the ages of twenty and
fifty years, one in three 13 found in the United States.
The following Table is compiled from the census returns by
the Dominion Statistician Johnson and published in the
Statistical Year Book for 1893, p. 119.
POPULATION OF CANADA, 1871, 1881 AND 1891.
PROVINCE8.
1871
1881
Iricre.'iM;,
:Fer Cunt.
Ontario, -
Quebec, -
Nova Scotia,
New Brunswick,
Manitoba,
British Columbia,
Prince Ed. Island,
The Territories,
1,620,851
1,191,516
387,800
285,594
18,995
36,247
94,021
1 ,926,9221
1,359,027!
440,572j
321,233!
62,260
40,459
108,891
56,446
18.6
14.0
13.6
12.4
247.2
36.4
15.8
1891
j Intrta^c,
(Per Cent.
2,114,321
1,488,535
450,396
321,263
152,506
98,173
109,078
98,967
9.73
9.53
2.23
NONE
144.95
98.49
0.17
75.33
18
These official figures show that the Maritime Provinces have
suft'ered in the matter of the exodus worse than any of the others,
having lost during the ten years between 1881 and 1891 allowing
for natural increase of the population 165,000 PERSONS.
The increase of population in the Maritime Provinces between
1871 and 1881 was lo3,281 allowing for natural increase at 2 per
cent, a year it should have been 163,480.
The Exodus therefore during that period reached 50,000 or
5000 a year.
The increase between 1881 and 1891 was only 10,000. Allowing
for natural increase at 2 per cent, a year, it should have been
175,000.
The exodus therefore during that period was 165,000 or 16,500
each year.
During the revenue tariff period, therefore, which covered
nearly all the years 1871 to 1881 the prosperity of the Maritime
Provinces, as evidenced by increase of population, if not all that
could be desired, was at least respectable.
During the ten years of a protective policy that prosperity,
as similarly evidenced, was altogether wanting. An exodus of
165,000 persons in ten years from a population of 870,696,
inhabiting such a rich and highly favored part of the world as
Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and P. E. Island, is APPALLING.
But, say the Protectionists, people have gone to Manitoba
and the Northwest and British Columbia.
Would that it were so. The inexorable facts recorded in the
census returns absolutely disprove any such theory. They show
that the total number of Maritime Province people to be found in
1891 in Miinitobn, Northwest Territories and British Columbia
was 4,280. What became of the other 160,000? Every one
knows THEY WENT TO THE UNITED STATES.
es have
! others,
,1 lowing
i.
between
at 2 per
0,000 or
Lllowing
,ve been
)r 16,500
covered
laritime
all that
(sperity,
:odus of
870,690,
irorld as
LLING.
[anitoba
in the
3y show
md in
)Iumbia
fcry one
10
NEW BRUNSWICK UNDER THE N. P.
That the Province of New Brunswick has not prospered
under the N. P. is very apparent. A simple statement of facts
speaks eloquently against a protective tariff. Despite its vast
forest wealth, agricultural resources and valuable fisheries, it
presents arrested development. Note this contrast :—
Increased population from 1871 to 1881
Increased population from 1881 to 1891 only
35,639
30
The city of Moncton, through its favorable situation as a
railway centre has, through special causes, grown rapidly in both
decades; and deducting the increase in the city of Moncton the
statistics for the entire province outside the city is rather start-
ling. Note the contrast : —
Provincial Increase (less Moncton) from 1871 to 1881 - 32,207
Provincial DECREASE (less Moncton) from 1881 to 1891 3,703
This is the province, one of whose representatives, Sir
Leonard Tilley, as finance minister advised the merchants to
clap on full sail for twenty years of prosperity.
But again the Protectionist argues the tendency has been of
late years for the rural population to migrate to the cities.
Has that been the case in the Maritime Provinces? Unfor-
tunately, no! The people have left us altogether.
Look at the following tables compiled from the census
reports and to be found on pages 123 and 121 of the Government
Statistical Abstract for 1894:
POPULATION OF CANADA BY ELECTORAL PISTRICTS, 1891 ani 1881.
Nova Scotia.
ij
:l!
Electoral Districtn.
Annapolis
Anti^unish
Cape Breton ....
Colchester
Cumberliind ....
i^'s^y •• ••
Gny.*b(>rouKh. . . .
Halifax (City)...
IT.ilifox (Ccunty)
H.uit-^
Inverness
Kind's
Lunenburg
Pictou
Queen's
Richmond
Shelburne
Victoria
Yarmouth
Ih8l.
1S91.
20..598
IcS.OGO
3l,25S
•20.720
27,368
li>,881
17,808
30,100
31,817
23,3o9
2.5.6.51
2.S,409
28,583
35,535
10,.577
1.5.121
14,913
12,470
21,284
19,:{50
16,114
34,244
27.100
34.529
1 9.897
17,195
38,495
32863
22,052
25,779
22,489
31.075
34,541
10,610
14,399
14,956
12,432
22,216
Increase '"'DecrensH
Number. Per Cent.
— 1,248
— 1,946
2,986
440
7.161
— ()13
2,395
1,0461
—1,307
1281
— 980'
2,492
— 994
o o I
o.i|
— 722
43
— 38
932
. 60
■107
90
16
201
- 3 4
0-8
33
- 50
05
- 40
8-7
- 2 7
03
- 47
03
- 0-3
Bkunswick.
Albert
Carleton
Charlotte
Gloucester
Kent
King's
Northumberland
Queen's
Restigouche
St. John (City) .
St. John (County)
Sunbury
Victoria
Westmorland . .
York
Island.
i« 1881.
)ecr»"«sH
'er Cent.
- 6
■107
90
10
261
. 3 4
08
3 3
- 50
Oo
- 40
8-7
- 2 7
03
- 4-7
03
- 0-3
4-3
-110
- 36
- 8-9
15-2
5 4
- 9-8
24
-13-3
17-7
- 7-4
- 5.4
-13-3
161
9-9
1-9
07
6-2
--4-4
II
Now here we nave the alarming fact that Heventeen counties
in the Maritime Provinces, eight in Nova Bootia, eight in New
Brunswick and one in P. E. Island, havk not only lost all
THEIR NATURAL INCREASE OF POPTLATION, BUT HAVE
ACTUALLY^ FEWER PEOPLE THAN THEY HAD TEN
YEARS AGO.
If the process continues it will take only a few years to de-
populate them altogether.
But how about the Maritime Cities ! !
Unfortunately their plight is if anything worse.
Turn again to the record. The census returns show the fol-
lowing as the result of the census in cities in the Maritime
Provinces of 5,000 inhabitants in 1881 and 1891;
Now supposing the natural increase of population in these
cities had been retained, how would their population have
respectively stood in 1891 :
1881.
Natural iniiease
Population as it
Actual loss or gain in
Population
2 percl. per year
shoukl have
'increaseil.
Popul.ition.
St. John,
41,353
8.270
49,623
—10,444
Halifax,
36,100
7,220
43,320
— 4764
Charlottetown,
11.485
2.297
13,782
— 2,308
Moncton,
5,032
1,006
0,03»
-f 2,727
Fredericton,
6,218
1,243
7,401
— 959
Yarmouth
3,485
697
4,182
-f- 1.907
Truro,
3,461
692
4,153
+ 947
Total, 107,134 21,425 128,559 12,992
Total population of the above seven cities as they would
have been in 1891 if they had retained their natural
increase
Total population as shown by census returns, 1891,
Aotual loss in 10 years,
128,559
115,567
12,992
22
A SAMPLE NEW BRUNSWICK COUNTY.
Albert County, New Hrnnswick, is a striking? illustration of
the baneful cflfec'ts of the National Policy. Jt in a county with
a lar^e «ea board, rich agricultural rcHourceH, fine Ntoue quarries,
unrivalled depositH of plaster, and whip-owners' investments.
Here is the county's record until the two fiscal policies:
From 1S71 to 1881 Albert County INCRKASED under a low
rev<»nue tariff, 1,057.
From 1881 to 18r,l Albert County DKCKKA8EI) under a high
protective tariff, J, .'{58.
Tn the past ten years the county has lost within 300 of its
total ^Min ol the ten years pieced ing.
SHIPPING.
One of the great industries of the Maritime Provinces was its
shipping. The following tables indicate its KISE, progress, and
decadence.
Statement of the shipping of the Maritime Provinces for the
years 187.'{, 1878 and 181).'{, as shown by the Marine and Fisheries
Keport, 1804, page cvi.:
Nova Scotia.
Tonnajre.
1873 440,701
1878 553,368
1803 ;!.. 300,203
New Brunswick.
Tonnage.
277,850
335,965
150,080
P.E.Island.
Tonnage.
.38,018
54,250
20,970
It ,
From the foregoing table it appears that while the registered
tonnage of the three Provinces in 1873 was as follows :
Tons.
Nova Scotia 449,701
New Brunswick 227,840
P. E.Island 38,918
Total,
716,469 tons.
a.tiou of
ity with
uarrieH,
itiiiouts.
Br a low
sr a high
[) of its
; was its
ess, and
for the
ishei'ies
Island,
nna^e.
,918
8
l.,250
[0,970
ristered
23
It had increased in the yesir 1 878 to the foUowinjj; figures:
Nova Scotia r>r>.'{,;U)8
New IJiMinswick ;{.*{"> ^jMir*
P. E. island 54,250
Total 94a, 783 tons.
or an increase of 237, 114 tons which, at the average value per ton
estimated by the Afarine l>ci)artinent of *.'{0, mai<e AN IN-
CREA8E in the value of the registered tonnage of $7,113,42o
between the years lS73and 1878.
The National Policy was introduced in 1879, and has con-
tinued in force ever since. The registered tonnage in 1893 was
Nova Scotia 39(),2«8
New Brunswick 15(),080
P. E. Island 20,970
Total, 573,319 tons,
or a DECREASE OR LOSS of 370,204 tons, and at the same esti-
mate of *30 per ton of $11,108,220.
It is contended that this deplorable decrease is not charge-
able to the National Policy and certainly there were other
causes which contributed to bring it about.
But while credit is taken to that Policy for every increase
in the industries of the people,since it was introduced, it is well
to call attention to the fact, that one of the chief industries and
modes of investing their money of the people of the Maritime
Provinces HAS ALARiMINGLY DECREASED UNDER IT.
The money formerly invested in ships has been withdrawn
or lost, and to a considerable extent that portion withdrawn has
been invested in those FACTORIES or INDUSTRIES such as
the SUGAR and COTTON FACTORIES which are not indigenous
to the country but have been called into being and are main-
tained by the NATIONAL POLICY.
If instead of protecting by heavy taxation on the people the
sugar and cotton industries, and so inducing capitalists to with-
draw th*ir capital frora the natural industries of the country
and invest it in these exotic manufactures, our people had been
encouraged and induced in all legitimate ways, to change their
wooden ships for iron and steel ships, as was done in Great
Britain, we would not have had the deplorable record as shown
above staring us in the face.
24
In the foregoiug figures no reference has been ni;;(l^ to sbi*^-
building. ,
The facts are as follows :
NOVA SC;OTIA BlILT.
No. of Vessels. Tonnajre.
1874 17r, 84,480 V-iluo fit $40 per ton »M;^7!>,200
1878 167 4!),784 " " 1,!)9 1,360
181)3 111 15,08!) '■■ " 603 360
NEAV miUNSWICK JUJILT
No. of Vessels. Tonnage.
42,027 Value at
27,3^8
2,81!)
1874
90
1878
56
1893
119
per ton, $1,681,080
1,094,720
112,760
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IJUILT.
No of V^essels. Tonnage.
1874 88 24,634 Value at $40 per ton,
1878 28 10,348
1893 3 634
The industry is practically extinct.
SEA-GOING SHIPPING.
(I
% 985,360
415,280
25,360
Pardonable pride is exhibited by Canadians from time to
time in pointing to the fact that Canada is the Fifth mercantile
power in the world.
Statistics show however that the National Policy or high
taxation is ''getting in its work" in this direction as well as in
others. *
" Protection " as Sir Charles Tui)per once observed before
he became a pervert from Free Trade principles, "has swept the
American Flag from the sea." Let us in Canada beware lest our
continuance in maintaining the odious system may produce the
same results.
To day of the ocean borne freight to and from Canada, only
about 20 is carried in Canadian bottoms, while 80 is carried in
British and Foreign ships.
Below we give a table from Trade and navigation returns for
1894 p. 576, showing the SEAGOING VESSELS inwards and
outwards during the year ending June 30, 1893.
o '■■^iv
:^7!>,200
!)9 1,360
603 360
,G.S1,0S0
,094,720
112,760
9N5,360
415,280
25,360
binic to
cautile
V high
11 as in
before
3pt the
est our
ce the
I, only
ried in
rns for
U and
25
TOTAL SE\-GOING VESSELS, Inwards and Outwards, 1893.
British,
Canadian,
Foreign,
Tons Register.
3,780,915
2,189,725
4,637,771
10,608,611
Quantity of Freight.
Tons weight.
1.698,734
805,741
1,086,056
3,590,531
Crew, Number
106,861
109,952
200,822
417,625
This shows that of 10,608,611 tons shipping employed in
carrying the 3,590,531 tons weight of freight to and from Canada
only about one-fifth is Canadian. Of the 11 7,635 menelnployed only
109,952 are employed in Canadian ships.
Nearly 80 p. c. of the profits of Canada's seagoing carrying trade
goes to Foreigners and others outside of Canada. If we rejoice
that Canada's exports have increased our joy must be tempered
with the knowledge, that we employ Foreign bottoms to carry
theui away and that foreigners enjoy the profits of the carriage.
In 1878, matters were not so bad. The statistical abstract
p. 625, shows that in that year, the seagoing shipping entered and
cleared at Canadian Ports with cargo and in Ballast was as
follows :
1878
ERITISH.
Tons Register.
2,294,688
CANADIAN.
Tons Register.
1,928,531
FOREIGN.
Tons Register.
2,461,165
Total Tonnage
6,684,384
This shows that in 1878 of the total tonnage engaged about
29 p. c. was Canadian. Instead ofincreasing,our relative proportion
in 1893 was reduced to 20 p. c.
The number of crews employed that year is not given in the
"Statistical Eeport."
Compare the foregoing tables and facts with similar tables
as regards British shipping.
The Registered tonnage of Great Britain (see Statesman '.s
year Book) was in 1850, 3,096,000; 1860, 1,325,000; 1880,6,236,-
000 ; 1092, 8,644,754. u .j ^ , ^
The greatest part of the entire international tradejof^the
world is conducted in British bottoms.
HALIFAX AS A WINTER PORT.
The Tories wish to make the Haligonians believe they have
built up Halifax as the winter port in Canada and diverted traffic
from American ports. But this is not true. In 1893 the ocean
borne tonnage over the 1. C. R. to and from Halifax was only
19,714 tons as against 18,354 tons in 1878, a year of depression.
Six years ago (in 1888) the ocean borne tonnage was nearly three
26
times as lar^e as in 1893. and iu 1888 (ten years before) it was
32,786 tons as jip;iiiust i9,7i4 tons in 18<K{. What do these statis-
tics show ? Tliat the N. P. has dwarfed the natural j^rowth of
Halifax as a wint(!r port and crippled the earning ability of the
Intercolonial Railway.
COTTON MILLS AND SUGAR REFINERIES.
Now as to these COTTON AND SUGAR MILLS and the
monies invested in them, let us look at the census returns.
Now Tirnnswick had in 1891 five mills, viz., .St*. Croix,
Courfenay Uay, Parks, Moncton. and Marysville.
The capital invested in them in Land, Buildings, Machinery
and working capital, i!<2, 733,000.
They employed 025 men, 853 women, 147 boys under 16, 127
girls. Total hands, 1752.
They paid out in wages !*49S,000 oi- !?284 each employee.
Nova Scotia ha<l in 1891 two mills, one in Halifax and one in
Windsor had a total capital in land, *21,114, buildings, .^111,883,
machinery, !?283,988, working capital, $158,800, making in all
^575,7
85.
They employed 184 men, 190 women, 56 boys, 33 girls, total
463. To whom were paid !?90,753, wages yearly or $196 per
head.
What returns were made on the capital. The Marysville
Cotton Factory is a private enterprise owned and run under very
exceplional circumstances by a man of indomitable energy, Mr.
ALEX. GIBSON. He pays NO TAXES, PAYS nothing for.fuel,
using the refuse of his saw mills therefor and manages himself.
Such a inill ought to pay a return and would no doubt do
so under any Government Policy. When unrestricted re-
cei>rocity was being discussed, Mr. Gibson felt so sure of his
ability to compete with the American manufacturer that he is
reported to have expressed himself as willing to abandon Pro-
tection if he could gain access for his wares to the American
market
The history of the other mills is pretty much the same. The
mills were bonded to raise money to carry on their business.
K<\stiicte<l to a small market in Canada fiercely competing
in that market with each other and the many other Canadian
mills, the ])ro(l notion far exceeded the demand, the prices fell,
the mills closed down, the mortgagees foreclosed, the mills were
sold and the result was that the oi'iginal capitalists lost the
mills and EVERY DOLLAR OF THEIR CAPITAL INVESTED
IN THEM and went for years without any dividend or return.
)) it was
se statis-
lowtli of
by of the
ES.
and the
lis.
t*. Croix,
:achinery
jr 16, 127
iiiployee.
[1 one in
$111,883,
3g in all
iris, total
^196 per
[arysville
Lder very
!rgy, Mr.
for^fuel,
himself.
tloubt do
cted re-
■e of his
lat he is
Ion Pro-
merican
le. The
less.
peting
;!anadian
jces fell,
Ills were
lost the
ESTED
leturn.
■i
27
In the case of the Moncton Mills the original sliareholders
got back some 17 or 20 cents on the dollar of their investment.
To-day they are all (excepting Gibsons) in a HTdE COM-
BINE, governed by a central committee at Montioal, sometimes
shut down, other times running on part time, and entirely
managed in the interests of the monopolists.
The Protective Tariff permits and enables this combine, sill
competition being done away with and foreign competition
prohibited by the Tariff, to charge just snch prices as the
monopolists plc^ase, limited only by the prices charged lor
foreign goods after paying the duties.
SUGAR.
Great credit is claimed by the Protectionists loi- having
taken off the duties upon sugar some years ago, and as th(!v say
'reduced the TAXATION OF THE PEOPLE SOME TIIRKE
AND A HALF MILLIONS OF DOLL APS YEA PLY.
Mr. Foster in his Budget speech last year said : —
"The duties on glass have been reduced ; the duties on salt
" have been reduced one half and niort; than all, three years ago
*'the duty on raw sugar was completely taken olf, lilCMlTTIN(J
''TAXATION to the amount that had I'urmerly been eoilected."
This claim explicitly adiuits that the duties they exacted on
sugar for YEARS WERE TAXES PAID BY THE PlOOPLi:.
This was formerly denied. Its atlmission is most important not
only as regards sugar but all other articles taxed by duties.
It must not be forgot reii that these sugar taxes were only
removed when the Government was forced to do so by the action
of the (Inited States (iovernnient in reducing the sugar duties
there.
All sugar duties however are not removed, sixty-four one-
hundredths, or practically % of a cent per lb. is still exacted on
Refimed Sugar.
This gives a substantial protection to the sugar relineis,
who importing the raw sugar FJih^E, refine it, sell it to the con-
sumer and make him pay TO THEM, in IXCREASED PKICi:,
the duty of jf of a cent, per lb. which he would have paid into
the Treasury, if he imported his sugar. la this way the con-
sumer pays an enormou'" tax upon sugar. What it amouurs ta
cannot be estimated with matheiuatical ainairacy, because it is
uot known whether the reliuer charges the consumei" with the
full protection of sixty-four onehundredths oi' % of a cent per
lb. on every pound consumed. If he does the tax the sugar
consumer paid would amount to over *1, 500, 000, But if he
only paid % of that protective tax, it would reach the respec-
28
table sum of over one million dollars. All of which goes into
the pockets of the sugar refiners.
In 1893 WB IMPORTED 1,651,670 LBS. REFINED SUGAR
and the duty of eight-tenths of a cent, per lb. gave the revenue
about $9,000. In the same year WE IMPORTED 245 MILLION
POUNDS OP RAW SUGAR.
Being FREE the revenue got NOTHING. On its manu-
factured product there then was a duty of eight-tenths of a cent,
now sixty-four-one-hundredths When this 245 million pounds
raw sugar were manufactured into refined sugar and
sold to thf consumer, does the reader imagine the
refiner made him a PRESj^NT OF THE AMOUNT OF HIS
PROTECTION. The idea is absurd. Sugar refiners are like all
other men. They will charge all they can get and when they
have a protection of 'i of a cent, a lb. they charge that to the
consumer or just so much short of it as enables them to under-
sell foreign sugars, and whether that is ^, § or ^ of this pro-
tection the result is very large. Now the estimate of the quantity
of refined sugai- consumed in Canada yearly is from 250 to 300
millions pounds, -^n the basis of 250 millions pounds of consump-
tion the rj cent. i)er lb. duty, would leave the snug sum of
ftl ,600,000 as paid by the consumer of sugar to the refiner.
Whileonly $9,000 was paid into the Treasury.
But the N. P. man points to tne price of sugar in New York
as beiug higher than sugar in Montreal.
Why ? Because the America Tariff exacts a tax of 40 p.c. on
the cost alike of RAW and REFINED SUGAR.— This is equal to
nearly a cent a lb. The Treasury gets the benefit of all this tax
and has an additional tax of J cent, per lb. on refined sugar as
protection to the refiners, e(iual to 12^ cents per 100 lbs.
Our tariff admits raw sugar free and imposa<* a tax of 64
cents, per 100 lbs. on refined.
Thus the Canadian refiner has 5iJ cents per 100 lbs greater
protection tlian the American.
The New York refiner pays including the duty for his raw
sugar 3 cents and sells granulated for 3'^ per lb.
The Canadian gets his raw sugar free and charges 3 3-8 for
his granulated.
He therefoi' makes ^ cent*a lb. or $i..50 a barrel more for his
sugar than the American refiner for his.
The Canadian Treasury GETS NOTHING. If the refiner
says he does not charge the duty why keep it on.
The value of the products of these refineries by the census of
1891 was $17,000,000.
foes into
SUGAR
I revenue
ILLION
s manu-
if a cent,
pounds
cir and
ine the
OF HIS
i like all
len they
t to the
) under-
his pro-
juantity
>0 to 300
)nsuinp-
sum of
refiner.
jw York
p.c. on
?qual to
lis tax
igar as
of 64
greater
lis raw
13-8 for
|for bis
I'efiner
Isus of
29
If we were allowed to import our sugar free from England
we would save jnst ^ of that amount being the diflfereuce be-
tween the cost of sugar imported from England and that
bought in Canada.
That would mean $2,125,000. If the duty makes no differ-
ence in the price charged by the refiner, we say take it off and
give the people a present of $2,000,000.
THE RICE QUESTION.
By a similar legerdemain the people are compelled to pay
about $300,000 yearly in the "shape of taxes upon rice while only
about $50,000 finds its way into the Treasury.
The feat is worked in this way: —
Cleaned rice pays a duty of 1} cents per lb; uncloaned pays
about :]r of a cent, pei- lb. Then; is consequently a protection
of 1 cent a lb. given to those who import the paddy or uucleancd
rice, and hull and clean it.
The Trade and Nav. Returns for i894 p. lO show that in the
year 1 893-4 there was imported over 3t. millions lbs of cleaned
rice , which paid a duty to the treasury of about $44,ooo. While
of uncleaned rice there was imported dose on 23, 000,000 lbs
which only paid about $53, 000 to the treasury. This 23, 000, 000
lbs of uncleaned rice made about 22,ooo,ooo lbs when cleaned
ready for sale.
The cleaner being protected one cent a lb would of course
charge that or nearly all to the consumer to whom he sold the
rice.
The consumer therefore paid the tax of 1 j cents for each lb. of
rice he consumed, but he paid jcent each lb. or in all $.53, 000 to
the treasury while he paid i cent pei- lb, or$22o,oooto the cleaner.
In this way out of every $5 of taxes the consumer paid, the
treasury got $1 and the manufacturer $4.
Last session Mr. P'oster tried to remedy this gross injustice
and when he introduced his new tariff, he pro[»osed to reduce the
duty on cleaned rice and raise it on unhulled. so that the
treasury might receive more of the taxes paid by the rice con-
sumers.
The rice cleaners however sent a deputation to the capital,
took the Finance Minister by the throat and made him abandon
his reform, and leave the consumer at the mercy of the cleaner of
rice. It was discovered that the pioposed refoiin was a "clerical
error" and the tariff was restored to what it had originally
been.
30
THE CORDAGE COMBINE.
The customs tax is 1^ per lb., and 10 per cent, equal to
about 2^ cents a pound. This to a maritime people is one of the
most odious impositions of th(^ National Policy, and works the
most grievous injustice.
The monopoly of Canada enjoyed by "The Consumers'
Cordage Company " is almost complete.
Canada has been handed over to the tender mercies of this soul-
less corporation, bound hand and foot, and pays it tribute yearly
IN HUNDKEDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. All foreign
cornage is pracc^'cally excluded by a duty of a shade over 2 1-6
cents a pound.
The smaller rope factories were bought up by the large com-
bine, their doors closed, their workmen turned adrift, and their
proprietors paid THOUSANDS A YEAR to walk about and
enjoy themselves.
The rope factories in St. John and Quebec are cases in point.
Having silenced in this way Cenadian competition, and had
foreign competition excluded by the tariff, the Consumers Cordage
Co., with INIr. John F. Stairs, M. P. for Halifax, as its President,
(and it need hardly be said an out-and out supporter of the N.
P.) proceeds to recoup its expenditure in buying up its rivals,
and to build up collossal fortunes for those enjoying its
monopolies by fleecing* the Canadian Consumer.
The 2 1 () cents duty per pound, payable upon foreign cordage
imported, is not paid into the Treasury by those who use rope,
because practically foreign rope is excluded.
The consumer is bound to buy the Canadian rope.
He pays the tax of 2 1-6 cents a pound, op nearly that, all
rig-ht, but he pays it to Mr. John F. Stairs, M. P., and his co-
monopolists, and not to the Treasury.
So complete is the monopoly that the Attorney-General of
Nova Scotia publicly stated that he would be willing to pay its
"weight in solid silver for every inch of rope that was not
bought, or compelled to be bought, from this single combine, in
the Dominion of Canada."
But this combine, when it sells its rope in Newfoundland or
St. Pi :irt\ iiiu. io sell it in competition with rope manufactured
el .r.'L.ere, au(i actually sells it, from 1 1-2 to 2 cents less per
\,\;\ra . than it sells the same article to Canadians in Canada.
TUib is an intolerable outrage sanctioned, encouraged aud
maintained h^ the National Policy.
Some kinds of cordage, not manufactured by the com-
bine is imported still, and the revenue leceived in 1892, about
$14,000 in duty on it. Bat rope is monopolized.
/
31
KEROSEPIE OIL.
No duty is more unjuHt, unfair or discriminating than that
charged upon kerosene oil.
Its history is, that somewhere about the year 1868 a customs
duty of 15 cents a gallon and an excise duty were levied on
kerosene oil.
In 1877 the excise duty was removed, and the customs duty
reduced to (> cents per wine gallon.
When the imperial gallon was adopted this duty was
increased to 7 1-5 cents and so remained until 1894, when after a
very vigorous fight the Liberals in Parliament, headed by Mr.
Davies, succeeded in forcing a slight reduction of 1 1-5 cents,
making the present duty G cents per imperial gallon.
But the iniquity of this tax can be properly appreciated only
b}^ remembering that when the duty was left at 6 cents a wine
gallon in 1877, the price of American oil of the same quality as
that now imported, was 20 cents per gallon, which made the then
duty about 30 per cent. Of late years the price has fallen to 3^
cents per wine gallon, while the duty remains the same at 6 cents
— equivalent to nearly 1.50 per cent.
Many invoices of imported oil were read in Parliament last
session. /
One importation to St. John, N. B., March, 1894: Two tanks
oil, invoice 1396; Quantity, 10,908 gallons; Duty paid, $785,
almost 200 Per Cent.
Another invoice about same date: Quantity, 9,643 gallons;
invoice cost, $405; Duty paid, $694.
Last November (1894) the Eastern Oil Co. produced an in-
voice of oil imported into St. John under the present tariff:
Invoice cost, 721; duty, $1,029— equal to nearly 150 per cent.
The trade and Navigation Returns for 1894 show that in that
year there was imported into Canada, 5,958.368 gallons, value
$436,476, on which duty was paid to the amount of $430,564.77,
or almost 100 Per Cent.
But lliut iliis is uiijustlv levied om be st'cii hoin t,hi> following
table:
Quantity, Galls.
\'alue.
Duly.
I'er Cenlage
Odtario,
2,064,o7.S
i?l 53 707
!?148,G52
9G-6
Qarlit'C,
7.S3,So<s
.')2,Goo
5 0.437
1071
NovM Scot4)i.
l,024,(i22
50,583
73772
123 7
Ni'W Biunswick,
1,010,322
55,984
72.743
130-3
P. E. Islnn.l, -
2o.5,00G
11,544
1S,3G0
JoS 2
Miilitob;i,
397,113
20 2G3
28.600
1411
P>r!ti-!i Ci>hiniiaa,
442,203
83,416
31,818
381
Noi-cluvrst Ti r,
2.481
450
178
39-5
5.980,183 $437,692 $430,564 98'3
\
32
Now this unjust duty is maintained ostensibly to protect an
Ontario Industry which jjjives employment a j shown by the censws
returns vol. 3 p. 231 to 270 persons.
The statistical abstract for 18!)4, p. 379 shows the quantity of
CANADIAN OIL consumed in Canada in 1893 to have been
10,083,800 gallons, as against 0,249,946 gallons of American
oil.
On this latter duties were paid into the Treasury amounting
to about $430,000. An amount equivalent to that duty or more
must have been paid the Canadiail oil refiner.
The result was that the Canadian consumer paid into the
Treasury in taxes on the Canadian oil he consumed $430,000 and
on the 10^ million gallons of CANADIAN OIL he paid the
Canadian manufacturer $760,000 or nearly $2 for every $1 paid
paid into the Treasury.
Supposing the Canadian manufacturer let the consumer off one-
half the tax, he would still have paid in taxes on oil not $1 of which
went to the Treasury, nearly $400,000.
All this to give employment to 260 men.
GOODS CHEAP AS EVER ! !
But the argument is advanced by Tory speakers that GOODS
ARE AS CHEAP IN CANADA AS EVER THEY WERE.
Even if this statement was correct it is entirely beside the
question.
That question simply is are goods as cheap as they ought to be
and as they would be if the protective duties were removed ?
What are the facts. They are that owing to improved
machinery, cheap raw products, cheap food, etc. Goods are now
and have been for some years manufactured and sold in England
cheaper than ever before.
Remember the farmer does not now receive anything like as
much for his products as he used to. Look at the figures.
1884
1894
Wheat, per bushel.
80 cts.
55 Qis
Barley,
53 "
38 "
Oats,
33 "
28 "
Hay, per ton.
- $9.50
$7.50
It is manifest; therefore, if the farmer gets so much less for his
produce and has to pay the old prices for the goods he requires to
buy, he must be so much the worse off.
3S
Now the following table, reproduced from the Coniinerciiil
Bulletin, shows the exports and selling values of the great staple
goods in England in 1874, 1884, and 1894:
EXPORTS FROM GREAT BRITAIN.
~» *
I'erceiuage
of intrcase
or ilecrea&e.
-+18-6
—12-8
Cotton Yarns (lbs.)
1874 220,599,074
1884 271,077,000
1894 2.S6,1 98,500
Cotton Fabrics (yds).
1874 3.603.348,527
1884 4,417,481,000 h.22-6
1894 5,312,753,900 -h20-2
Linens (yds.)
1874 190,409,712
1884 150,672,700 —20-8
1894 152,069,700 h- 093
Iron and Steel Manufactures.
1874 2,487,162 (tons)
1884 3,496,352 +40.6
1894 2,656,125 —24.
Value.
£14,516,093 stg.
13,811,767
9,289,078
£55,014,066
51,061,408
50,223,291
£6,173,255
4,149,830
3,273,448
£31,225,380
24,487.669
18,731,140
!'crLt:in,i«c
of iiiLrea-.
or (lecreaM!.
— 4-8
—32-7
— 718
— 16
—32.7
— 2li
— 21-0
— 23o
These figures in themselves speak volume.s. In cotton yarns
they show an increa.se in quantity produced in 1884 over 1 874 of
18% while the increased quantity was sold at 4% Zesvs. In 94, 12/,'
less in quantity was produced, but it sold for 32.7 p. c. or nearly
one-third less in price than in 1884.
In Cotton Fabrics, the year 1884 produced 226% more than
1874, yet the product sold for 7.18 per cent less price showing a
cheapening of nearly 30 per cent in ten years.
1894 showed astill further increase of 20 per cent in quan-
tity produced while it sold for 1 per cent less price.
The same story is told in Linens. 1884 produced 20 per
cent less in quantity than 1874, but sold for 32 per cent less price,
while 1894 producing nearly 1 per cent more sold for 21 per cent
less.
In Iron and Steel the results are more wonderful, the year
1884 produced 40 per cent more quantity than 1874 and England
w^
\
84
sold it to litT customers 21 por cent less than she sold the smaller
producdun oj IS74. Tliu ytMir 1894 produced 24 per cent, less
quantity and Kngland sold it 28 per cent, less than she sold her
1^84 'prodact.
COTTON AND COTTON GOODS I I
But fi|)art, from the above tables let us look at the facts.
Mr. Edgar stated in the House of Commons and the correct-
noss of his Htai^oments has never been challenged, that the raw
cotton to!1 in cost between 1890 and 1(S98, 1 cent 6 mills a
pound. 'J'his, on the en.)rmous quantity imported of about 40
milli(ma of pontids, amounted alone to a profit of |660,000. The
wages of thi- operatives were not raised and the prices chargjed to
the consumer instead of beinfj lowered were raised from 10 to 25
per cent, during those three years. But the dividends and the
reserve funds set apart by the companies were raised.
Mr. E<lgar further stated that 13 million dollars worth of
cotton is manufactured by the Canadian Cotton Companies, and
that tin duty paid by the importers last year, on all cotton goods
broucht into the country was a trifle over 28 per cent. Supposing
there was no otlier profit on that S13,000,000 than the 28 per cent,
paid by the actunl importers, who, paid that in addition to the
freight and profits paid to the English manufacturer of cotton
goods.that would make a sum of $3,640,000 paid by the people to
the Combine', under the protection given by the Tariff.
In lather word?, on the S4,.500,GOO worth imported a tax of
i?l, 200,000 is paid, which goes into the treasury, and on the
$13,000,000 worth of ciittons manufactured, an equivalent tax of
$3,640,000 is paid, which goes into the coffers of the combines.
Take the history of these Combines to see how the people are
fleeced and the facts hidden from thorn. In 1892 the Dominion
Cotton Cc. one of the combines which controls 11 mills of the coun-
try, had a Capital of $1,. 500,000. They decided to double that Cap-
ital, Tlu'\- issnc^d (he new stock t<o themselves. They only paid
of the npw stick 10 per cent, or $150,000 and the balance of
$1.3.")0 000 was watered. On April 14th 1893 the annual report of
that Company was published. It state*! that the earnings for that
VQfiv wero alinnt 20 per cent on the capital of $3,000,000 but as on
the last $ 1.. 500,000 the shnreholders only paid 10 per cent, or
$ 1.50,000 while the Company paid a profit of 10 per cent on the
whole l.V millions, these gentlemen actually received 200 per cent
on all the money they paid in.
85
INCREASED DUTIES ON DRY GOODS,
The National Policy has imposed very heavy duties on dry
goods. Careful examination by large importers has shown tliat the
average duty on dry goods is about 83 per cent, against \7h per
cent, under the Liberal Government. But many articles in comm-on
use by the middle and poorer classes pay very much high(>r dut'.ts.
Cloth, of which the clothing of working people is largely made, has
been taxed 40, 50, and oven 00 per cent. The consniiuM- has to pay
not only the increased duty, but a good deal more, as will i»e seen
by the following calculation :
Comparison of cost — $100 worth of Dry Goods.
UNDER LIBERAL TARIFF.
Cost of goods in England, SlOO.OO
Importation, Freight, Insurance, etc., 8 p. c, cS.OO
Duty, 17i p. c, 17.50
Cost to importer.
Wholesaler's profit, 15 p. c.
Cost to retailer.
Retailer's profit, 25 p. c,
$12550
18.S2
$144.32
36.0S
Cost to consumer, $180.40
Thus even under the Liberal tariff it cast $80 to place $100
worth of goods from England in the hands of the consumer. Now
let us make a similar calculation under the National Policy, with
average duty on dry goods 33 per cent.
UNDER TORY TARIFF.
Cost of dry goods in England • $100.00
Cost of importation ,S.OO
Duty, 33 p. c. 33.00
Cost to importer,
Wholesaler's profit 15 p. c.
Cost to retailer,
Retailer's profit, 25 p. c.
Cost to consumer,
$141.00
21.15
$162.15
40.51
$202.05
Cost of $100 worth of goods under Liberal tariff, $ 180.40
Cost of $100 worth of goods under National Policy, 202.05
Increased cost to consumer, $ 22^25
\
16
A similar calculation applied to a parcel of cloth used for cloth-
ing, and paying (JO per cent, duty, would be as follows :
CoHt of ^roods, S 100.00
Cost of importation, 'fi.OO
Duty GO per cent., 60.00
C'oMt to importer,
Wholesaler's profit, 15 p. c.
Cost to retailer,
Retailer's profit, 26 p. c.
Cost to consumer.
Cost of 8100 worth of goods -mder Lihonil tariff, $ 180.40
Cost of $100 worth of goods under National Policy, 241. r)0
S 108.00
25.20
!J 1!)3.20
48.80
S 241.50
Increased cost to consumer,
$ Gl.lO
Under the system of an ad valorem and specific duties there
are many eases in which articles of dry good are taxed as high as
00 per cent.
THE IRON DUTIES.
The positive harmfulnesa of protection is well illustrated by
the history of Canada's desperate efforts to tax her iron industry
into greatness. Ail she has succeeded in doing has been to tax her-
self very nearly to death. In the low tariff period from 1807 to
1879 pii,' iron was free while a 5 per cent, duty only, was imposed
upon bar and rod iron. Coal was free too. Coal and iron are raw
materials of every manufacture and by making them as cheap as
possible the low tariff governments gave encouragement to the
9stablishraent of manufactures. Agricultural implement factories
in particular sprang up here and there, and foundries and rolling
mills began to make their appearance. Unfortunately for Canada
a Protectionist Government came into power in 1878, and in over-
hauling the tariff, duties of $2 per ton were placed on pig iron, I7i^
per cent on bar iron, and in proportion, on other forms of iron, or
manufactures of it. But it is the fate of a protective duty to go on
enlarging itself until it bursts. In 1883 the duty was reinforced
by a bounty of SI. 50 per tor. As the development of the iron
industry still failed to satisfy the Government, Sir Charles Tupper,
in 1887 resolved on drastic measures, and brought down to the
« #
87
houso a new Iron schetlulo. Uy it pig was taxed S4 per ton, (or
S4.oO piT per long ton in whicli t'onn pi.j iron is bought); puiMli'iI
luirs $'.) pur ton; har ironSl.'i pt'r ton; pluto iron $l.S per ton; cast
iron pipi! #12 per ton; hoop iron SLS per ton, and everything else
in proportion. At the siiine time the bounty was reducotl to Ul ,
per ton.
TUPPER'S PROMISES.
This new tariff, Sir Charles Tuppor assured the House, was going
to do the trick- Me predicted that the iron industry which would
si)riiig lip in consequence would furnish ein|)loyment to "an army of
nun, numbering at lea;-it twenty tht)usand, increasing our iK)pulatinn
from 80,(KKt to UK),(KM) souls, and affording the means of supporting
them in comfort and juosperiiy." lie declared that were we to manu-
facture all the iron and steel articles imported, "and there is uo
reason why \vv should not steadily progress to that point, the popula-
lation 1 have mentioned of 1(K),()00 souls, would be uc less than
trebled." lie prophesied that blast furnaces would be called in o ex-
istence in Carleton (N. H.), British Columbia, Manitoba, Cobourg,
Kingston and VVeller's Bay. All this was to be done without the cost
of iron and steel being increased to the consumer.
How different was the realization ! The first effect of the tariff
was to very nearly double the price of every piece of hardware, from
a ten-penny nail up. It in the course of a year or s > all but wiped
out the imnortant iron and hardware importing business of the
country. Tliis prejudically affected the shipi)ing interests, and the
profits of the steamship lines l)egan to decrease until they disappeared
altogether. One of the chief lines of steamers is now in liquidation
largely as th(^ result of this attera|)t to force these blast furnaces into
existence. By atfcctinu" the shipping interests it added to the cost of
tr.insv)ortation of wheat to (4reat iiritain and thus reduced the
farmers' profits on grain. Thus this iron schedule can account these
amount its aecomi)lishments: ft /nfn increasid to the Cduddian con-
sinner the prire of eri ri/ iii'ti<'h; in the nuini(f<(cture of mhich iron
enters, from 50 to iOOper cent., thus aililing not less than three or fo^ir
nuffion dollars 2>er year to the taxation, f/orne hi/ the Canadian people;
it has ruined the iron and hardware importing houses, it has burdened
the manufacturers who use iron, it has seriously
INJURED CANADA'S SHIPPING INTERESTS,
and it has lessened the price of every bushel of Canadian wheat ex-
ported.
And unfortunately for the protectionist apologist, he cannot say
in reply: " But, is not all this more than compensated for by the blast
furnaces which nightly crimson the sky at Carleton County, Welle 's
Bav. <'obourg, Kingston, Manitoba and British (>)lumbia, by the
100,000 souls maintained in 'comfort and prosperity?' If all that Sir
Charles predicted in the way of development had come to pass the
game would still have been too dear for the candle. But not even one
of George Johnson's lynx-eyed enumerators could discover the
38
100,000 people or the blast furnaces. They never materialized and Sir
Charles' prediction was put on the shelf along side of his other
famous prophesy made in 1879, that in fifteen years the Canadian
Northwest would be exporting 640,000,000 bushels of wheat annually.
\
THE IRONMASTERS' MONOPOLY-
The iron duties worked to the enrichment of one class— the home
makers of hardware. It did not greatly assist the production of pig
iron, which was nominally its object. For this there was a very good
reason. The protectionists who in selling want to have the people
obliged, unr^er penalty of fine, to buy from them at their own price,
are not in l>;'.ying ignorant of the virtues of Free Trade. The rolling
mill men, the nail combinesters, the makers of tubings, etc., saw
clearly enough that the effect of such a tariff as that proposed would
be to greatly increase the price of that xohich they had to sell; but
they saw with equal clearness that if the cost of their iron were in-
creased their position would not be improved. They therefore
journeyed to Ottawa, and as gratitude for past favors, as well as a
lively expectation of further favors to come, impelled the Govern-
ment to treat them with marked consideration, they got what they
wanted.
A clause was inserted in the schedule which while it in no degree
lessened the effect of the duties, deprived the producers of pig iron
of most of the benefits they anticipated. The duty on scrap iron was
left at 82 per ton. In consequence, the rolling mills in place of
Ksing iron made from. Canadian pig imported scrap from the ends
of the earth and used, it in preference. We have the authority of
Mr. Foster, the Finance Minister, for saying that in consequence
of this gross discritnination no har iron was made in Canada from
Ca»<idian puddled bars. The manufacturers of hardware bought
their raw material almost at free trade prices, and they sold their
07itput at the highest point thu i\dreme tariff ptrniittea. To make
sure that they should get every cent possible from this condition of
affairs, which they doubtless knew was too good to last, they
formed a series of combines to regulate prices, and bull-doze whole-
salers from any attempt at importation. These combines, as they
existed a year or so ago, were made up as follows:
FOSTERED COMBINES.
Wire nail combine; Pillow & Ilersey, Montreal; Peck, Benny & Co
Montreal; Montreal Rolling Mills Co.; Dominion Wire Manufactur
ing Company; the Ontario Tack Company, Hamilton; the Ontario
Lead Pipe and Barbed Wire Company, Toronto; the Ontario Bolt and
Forge Co , Swansea; Parmenter & Bullock, Gauanoque.
Canadian Tack Combine: Pillow & Ilersey, Montreal Rolling
Mills, Peck, Benny & Co , the Ontario Tack Company.
Horse shoe uombite: Pillow & Ilersey, Abbott & Co., Peck,
Benny & Co., Montreal Rolling Mills.
Pressed Wrought Spike Combine: Peck, Benny iL Co., Pillow &
Hersey, Abbott & Co., Montreal Rolling Mills, Abbott <* Co., the On-
tario Forge.& Bolt Co.
\
39
Bar Iron Combine: Pillow & Hersey Company, Abbott <fc Co.,
Montreal Rolling Mills, Peck, Benny & Co.
The above list gives a very good idea of all those who profited by
the enormous addition to the public taxation made by Sir Charles
Tupper while laboring under the excitement of a prophetic spell.
ENORMOUS PROTECTION.
So outrageous was this schedule that the Government was obliged
at the session of 1894 to amend it By the new taiiff then adopted,
pig iron secured a duty of $i and a bounty of S2 per ton, making the
total protection 86 on the net ton; the duty on scrap was raised to |3
per ton, for the remainder of 1894, and to $4 per toB begii ning January
1st, 1895: the bar iron duty was reduced from $13 to 810 per ton;
puddled bars reduced from 89 to 85, and the other iron and steel duties
equalized- This is a much more symmetrical schedule than the one
it replaced, ft?<^ it will fail almost as lamentably in its attempt^ to give
employment iu the iron industry to 20,00() men. Iron was cheapened so
greatly during the last few years that despite the excessive protection^of
$Q per ton, Canadian iron cannot hold its own let alone supplant the
imported article. In Montreal Scotch iron is very largely used, though
American is beginning to get a strong footmg; but in Ontario
American iron is almost exclusively employed in manufactures. It
can be bouglU in Pennsylvania and laid down in, Toronto with all
charges paid iov less than would have to be paid there for the Cana-
dian article. Is it not therefore as clear as that two and two make
four that the effect of this duty is to handicap every Ontario manufac-
turer to the extent of |4.48— the amount of the duty— on every long
ton of iron he possesses. Tne American manufacturer gets his iron
from 84 to 85 a ton cheaper ; his coal costs him 60c. a ton less, and in
consequence he can manufacture much cheaper than can his Cana-
dian rival The latter finds it difficult to compete in the Canadian
markets notwithstanding the ex'-esmirf duties on manufactures of iron;
and when it comes to exporting he would not be in it for a single
second had the Government not granted him relief by a device which
illustrates the uselessness and costliness of Protection. By an Order-
in-Council ])assed last fall, the Canadian manufacturer can recover on
exported goods 99 per cent, of the duties paid for raw material. The
Government in making such a regulation destroyed completely its own
theory that the protective duty does not add to the cost of tne goods,
and they dealt a deadly blow as well at the native iron industry, the
encourageniene of which has been the ostensible object of the legisla-
tion of the past 16 years. Mr. Geo E. Dru-nmond, of Montreal, at the
last meeting of the Quebec Mining Association, said that the "way in
which this enactment la framed, and the manner in which it works
are most detrimental to the development of the Canadian iron industry
in its broadest sense." He said, furthermore, that it "simply serves
to nullify the protection and encouragement to the Canadian iron
industry, granted by the Dominion Governmeut itself at the last aos-
/
40
THE CONSUMER FLEECED.
While the manufacturer is thus handicapped, the consumer of
iron articles is being unmercifully fleeced. The duties collected on
iron and steel, and manufactures of same last year, 18U4, were only
about S100,00() short of .i?3,(KX),0()0. The consumer is therefore between
the upper and the nether millstone, the Customs tax grindingabove, the
manufacturer below. The sum of about 13,000,000 ground out of him
into the Treasury gives but a faint idea of what is squeezed out of hi m
by the iron combines and trusts The latter must amount at the low-
est figure to another $3,000,000
To sum up, we have been trying for sixteen years to develop the
Canadian iron industry by taxing foreign iron. Dunng the last eight
years of this period we have had excessively high duties on iron, and
manufactures of iron, with the further assistance of a bounty. The
only results have been to bleed the general consumer of millions of
dollars, to handicap the manufacturer, and to destroy our importing
and shipping interests, while the native pig iron industry is no further
ahead than it probably would have been under free trade conditions.
All this disturbance of normal trade conditions; all this destruction of
genuine industries, all this piling on of taxes has been for the bene-
fit of the congeries of combines which are in their own way useful to
the Government at election times, by supplying not only generous
donations to the campaign fund but a treasurer to administer it as well.
The iron duties are on the Liberal list- They will have to go.
THE COAL DUTY.
Conservatives have said much about the value of protection
to the coal trade. In nothing has the National Poticy been a
greater failure than in its effect on the coal trade. What the
Nova Scotia coal miners were led to expect in 1878 was the control
of the Canadian market, and the exclusion of imported coal, es-
pecially American. The great coal consuming province of On-
tario was the particular market that was to be given to the miners.
All these great expectations have been dissappointed. Excepting
a very small quantity carried by the railways for their own use,
in the eastern part of the Province, Nova Scotia has sent no coal
to Ontario. American coal instead of being shut out, has come
in more largely than ever. There has been an increase in the
Nova Scotia coal trade, but only such as would probably have
occurrv>d if there had been no duty.
The record of the Conservatives on the coal question has been
a very tortuous one. In 1878 one of their great cries was that
they wanted reciprocity in coal and would get it. In the National
Policy of 1879 t^^y included a standing offer of free coal to the
Americans. After a little while the mine managers of Nova
Scotia (nearly all Conservatives) began to preach a different
doctrine. They Bald they could not stand reciprocity in coal.
/
41
^ U ^
They declared that the adinissiou of American coal would ruin
them. Coal was taken out of the standing otfer. For years tb©
cry was that if coal was made free the Nova Scotia mines would
have to close. This was notably the cry at the general electioa
of March, 189L when botii the Tnppers, seuior and junior, made
speeches on these lines wliich had much influence in the mining
districts. Official records now show that at that very time,
while this cry was being raised in mining districts to influence
the votes of miners, there was on file at Washington a letter from
Sir John Macdonald oflering to make coal free if the Americans
would do the same. Here is a copy of the letter:
Lk8 Kochkks,
St. Patrick,
UiviERK DU Lour.
Private
.July 30, 1«»0.
My Dkak Sik, — 111 answer to your esteemed uote of this <!ay, I desire to say
that I am fully assured that the Parliament of Canada will be ready to take off
all Customs duty on coal, ores and lumber imported from the United States,
whenever Conjijross makes those articles free of duty.
The Canadian Government has already authorized Sir .Julian Pannceforte
to f tate to the American Government that they will bo prepared to take ofi the
export duty ou logs whenever Canadian lumber is admitted into the United
Slates intirkt;l at, a reiUicd rate of .Sl-"'0 per thousand, board measure.
You are at liberty to show this to such members of Congress or the Govern-
ment as ycu please. It should not, for obvious reasons, be published in the
press or quoted in Congress.
In the U. S. Tariff Act provision might be made for the making the
above-mentioned nrticles free whenever and so soon as they are made free by
the Canadian J'arliament.
I remain, my dear Sli',
Faithfully yours.
John A Macdonald.
S. J. KrrcniR, Ksc).
This letter, although marked ''Private," was an official offer
to the United States Government and was used as such. It be-
came public by being placed on the files of a committee of the
United States Congress, which had the tarilF question under
consideration. To tell the Xova Scotia iuiners that the Liberal
policy of reciprocity in coal would close the mines, and to carry
on negotiations at the same time to bring about just such a policy,
was a piece of political judggling which an honorable govern-
ment would hardly care to undertake. But the Ottawa Govern-
ment were quite equal to it.
Many of the Nova Scotia coal mines have been in the hands
of small companies who have been doing business in a small way
and have been afraid of competition of any kind. Things have
now taken a difterent shape. The Whitney Company, organized
by the Fielding GoT6rnment, is a large concern, chiefly Ate-
\
/
42
erican, but including also some leading Cana<lians. Ample
capital, improved maithinery and generally belt(!r business
methods will give the Nov;i Scotia coal trade a fair chance.
Instead of being afraid of American competition this company
has challenged it and would accept reciprocity in coal as a great
boon, although llie other companies have been for some years de-
claiming against it. This big company has been formed with the
full knowledge that the coal question is a mudi debated one and
that at no distant day coal must be made free. Knowing this
well the company have subscribed their capital and gone on with
their business. The abolition of the coal duty might create
some disturbance of trade arrangements at the beginning. But
there is little reason to doubt that in a short time the business
would get down to a solid basis and would prosper in common
with othei- industries. One gi cat advantage of the Liberal
policy to the coal trade is that by a reduction of the tariff, many
articles required by the companies for tht^ development of mining
operations would be made cheaper, and the workmen would
benefit by the cheapening of food, clothing and other things.
Has the N. P. Given Employment to the People ?
Tory speakers point with enultation to the census returns
as proving affirmatively this question. If an en«piirer is not
satisfied on this point by tho exodus during the decade '81 to '91,
let him return to rhe same census returns and analize them
The Statistical Abstract for 1881, page 180, which purports
to give tills analysis, states that there are in Caiiadvi 1,659, .'355
persons whose occupations are given by the census. They are
divided into classes as follows:
Agriculture 785,201
Fishing 27,079
Lumbering.
11,750
Mining 15,168
lotal.
'90,210
Trade and Transportation (including sailors
14,000, railway^ employees 23,000, ex-
pressmen and teamsters 17,000, retail
traders 40.000, etc 186,595
Manufacturing and Mechanical pursuits 320,001
Domestic and Personal Service 246,113
Professional Avocations 63.210
Non-productive Class 52,986
Total,
1,659,355
\
/
43
f
•lasses aie l)onofitte(l by the National
How many of these e
Policy ?
It is contended that those engaged in manufactupine- and
JNdtional Policy, but it must be remembered that a very great
rSfrli ,T'r'lr^"^' ^^''^ ^'^^" employment were tiourishing
Hidustres under the revenue tariff which prevailed up to 1878
'uJZ'^ "''''^"'' ^^ '' ^^'^^^ "^^^'^^^ to conclude that the
.UO 000 persons engaged in manufacturing and mechanical pur-
tr;i^''''n\T-^ ""Y ^^P^^d^^-^t »Po» the existence of a igh
rn. h; r\^^^''' contrary, it will be found that a very small pio
portion of them are so dependant. **'» piu
The same Statistical Abstrnct gives the most numerous of
the various employments of these 320,000 as follows, and Tt is
butTnd re.' If ' T. "'' f"'''"'^ "^^^^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ National Poc;^^
out indirectly and largely injured.
Carpenters and Joiners,
Dressmakers, Milliners and Seamstresses,
Blacksmiths,
Boot and Shoemakers, '
Tailors and Tailorosses,
Saw and Planing Mill Operators,
Ma'^jons,
Painters and Gla/iors
Machinists,
Butchurs,
Compositors and Pressmen,
Ship and Boathuilder,-,,
Turners,
Millers,
Moulders,
Currioi-N and Tanners,
Harn.vss and Saddlny,
Bakers,
Brickinukcrs,
Cheese Factories and Creameries.
Coopers,
Marble and Stone Cutters,
Plasterers,
Plumbers,
Lumbermen,
Tinsmiths,
4.5,769
:W,494
18,,54r>
1G,11<»
l."),U94
10,312
10,202
!',r.72
7,23«
(i,")-)0
4,435
4,975
4,384
4,070
3,713
3,047
4,551
3,138
3,438
3,204
3,585
2.500
3,249
12,319
4,740
255,181
\ /
44
■^
<
A careful examination of the census shows that out of the
above number of 320,000 persons, there is a very small propor.
tion who may reasonably be supposed to be benefitted by the
National Policy. The following table shows the chief ones :
Mill operatives (cotton) by vol. 2 of census
returns 6,053; by vol 3 6,953
Mill operatives ^ oUen) by vol 2 — 4,421;
by vol 3 6,139
Mill operatives (textile and not specified) 3,876
Manufacturers and officials of Manufacturing
Companies 6,169
Mineral and Soda Water Makers, (by vol. 2,
354, and by 3rr? vc: 643
Glass Blowers and W» rkeis, (by 2 vol. 581,
and by 3rd vol 689
Hat and Cap Makers, 368
Hosiery and Knitti.j«r Mill Oj^^vitives (by 2nd
vol. 946, ana by 3jd no' 1,803
Linen Mill operatives, (by /oil v., . 43. and
by 3rd vol 1
Oil Works employes^i^by ^vol.; 2— 167,1and
by 3rd volume 276
Organ Makers 368
Rope, Twine and Cordage factory o per ativ 38... 627
Sugar Makers and Refiners 1,927
Umbrellaand Parasols 97
Silk Mill operatives 294
30,239
These 30,000 represent the proportion of the 320*000 engaged
in those industries which may fairly be said to in any way owe
their existence or continuance in operation to the Protective
tariff.
It maybe said that the mining interest is protected and en-
couraged, and there is no doubt that this is so. The statistics
show that there is engaged in Canada :
Agriculture 735,207
Fishing 27,079
Lumbering 12,756
Mining and Quarrying 15,168
Total, 790,210
These 15,000 may be benefitted^ but it is at the expense of the
•tlitr 775,000.
'
\
lie
r.
tie
45
In the Maritime Provinces the total number engaged in
mining is
In Nova Scotia
In New Rrntiswick,
In P. E. Island.
Total,
97
- IS
5,775
As no P.E. Island resident has ever discovered these eighteen
or know where they *' mine," some doubt may be cast upon these
figures.
Of the 700,000 farmers and their sons engaged in farming in
Canada, the census show that in Old Canada, that is New Bruns-
wick, Nova Scotia, P. E. Island, Ontario and Quebec, during the
ten years, 1881 to 1891, there was a decrease of 36,000, in the
Maritime Provinces —
New Brunswick lost
Nova Scotia
P. E. Island
8,605 Farmers
10,095
265
Total decrease of fanners iot Mr 'itime Provinces 18,965
ed
we
ve
n-
ics
he
Do Duties on Agricultural Products Protect
the Farmers ?
But the Tory orator contends the N. P., by the imposition of
duties upon Animals, Meats, Eggs. Butter Cheese, Apples, Beans,
Hay, Barley, Oats, Oatmeal, &Cm largely benefits the farmer.
As to most of these articles but little is said, as we are well
known to be large Exporters and not Importers of them, and the
argument that the imposition of duties on articles we don't im-
port protects the farmer or gives him a higher price is felt to be
absurd.
For instance, no reasonable man could successfully contend
that oats, barley, eggs, potatoes, hay, etc., of which we are enor-
mous exporters, are enhanced in price to the farmer, or that
mackerel, etc., could be enhanced in price to the fisherman by
any duty that could be put on. One hundred per cent, would
have the same effect as ten per cent., and neither would have any
eflfect, as we do not import, but export.
46
\
Rnt it is said this reply will not rover the case of hogs, pork,
or beef. J jet us see if this is so.
The following table taken from the Trade and Navigation
Returns for 1894 shews the quantity and value of imports of
animal products for home consumption, with the quantity and
value exported in l.SiKi.
fmports for home consumption.
Value.
Butter, $ 46,637!
('heese. 20,964!
Lard (rendered) 12,620'
Meats, vi/: '
liaron k Hams, I . .,0!
,,, „ , ,, ,,• , 76.088
Sh Iders iV Sides ) ' !
Heef salt'd in brls- 95.575;
Mutton, 149
l^ork (barrelled) 272.000
Poultry & Oame, 12,297
(banned Meat.^
Other meats, fresh
and salted, 38,799
Exports of Oanadian Produce.
No. of lbs.
Value.
No. of lbs.
224,384
.$ 1,296.814
7,036.013
1 r 6, 1 06
13,407,470
133^946,365
146,885
66,7 73
709,624
670,155
1,970,318
18,504,347
2,316,588
21,279
356,106
2,132
7,671
89,957
3,862,546
8t,953
20,840
(,03,022
1,005,087
10,1 15,626
426,990
24,991
418,598
Total $575ii29, 7,765,78611)8. $17,903,396 ' 172,079.658
Of Agfricultural Produce we export and import as follows:
EXPORTS.
Imports for home
consumption.
No of Bushels.
No. of Bushels.
Barley,
2,040,648
2,138
Beans,
276,313
'3,752
liuck wheat,
594,604
10
Oats,
7,2 73>9o^'
44,264
Peas (whole)
3^255,810
1 1 1,032
Peas (split)
'58,536
Rye,
59, '21
,302
Wheat,
9,271,855
9,069
Other Grain.
39.958
22,970,781
Total bushels,
80.567
" value.
$ 13,831,969
$ 167,500
\
.".
47
Potatoes and Hay.
Of potatoes Canjula exports 1,1 12,8.'3(T bushels of ii value of
$422,000 and impoits for home coiisuniption, only ;<7,r>71 bushels
of tiM? value of SSOOO.
Of hay she exports 151,851 tons of a value of 81,452,872 auil
imports for home cousumption 1101 tons of a value of .*! 1,000.
Mackerel.
Of maekerel Canada exports in fiesli, eanned iind pickled
5.%, 153 dollars worth and imports in fresh siud pickled only 1858
dollars worth.
These tables conclusively show that with respect to all these
Agricultural i)roducts and fish Canada is a g^reat exporting" coun-
try — and the imposition of duties on these articles with the idea
of protecting the farmer or fisherman is a blind and a humbug.
The i)riee the farmer or fisherman receives is governed by
the markets of the world to which we export. The* British
market fixes the price of our wheat, oats and peas, bacon and
ham, cheese and butter. The American market fixes tlie price of
our barley, beans, mackerel, wood, hay, potatoes, eggs, horses,
sheep, poultry, hides, pelts.
All the duties in the world imposed by us on these articles,
cannot in any way affect the price, because we don't import them
bub export.
A frantic effort is being made to induce the farmer to believe
that pork and beef are exceptions to this rule an<l that the duties
are a protection to the farmer and keep out American pork and
beef. There is nothing whatever in this argument.
While we import a much larger quantity of barrelled pork
than we export, we at the same time export nearly $2,000,000
worth of bacon and ham, and import of them piactically nothing
($7B,000). Our ham and bacon exports are therefore twenty-five
times as much as our imports and oui total pork exportation in-
cluding hams, bacon, etc., besides barrelled pork is about six
times the value of the importation foi- home consumption.
The barrelled pork we import is used chiefly by the lumber-
men and does not enter into competition with such pork as P. E.
Island produces.
As a fact barrelled pork is often cheaper in Chicago than in
Toronto (the two great pork centres for TJ. S. and Canada) while
at the same time the farmer is getting more for his live hog in
Chicago than in Toronto.
The explanation of this seeming anomaly lies in the fact that
the Chicago packer utilizes the hog in packing better thau we do.
\
/
48
Everything including the blood, bristles and even the offal is
utilized and turned into something of money value, and the
Chicago rnan gets a higher price tor the hams and b^ly bacou
not put in the barrel.
If the duty was taken off pork to-morrow it would not in-
crease the price paid to the farmer in Canada for his hog in the
slightest.
The buyer and pork packer in P. E. Island reprulates the
price he pays the farmer by the prices ruling^ in Chicago.
If these prices go up he raises, if they go down he lowers.
The duty does not enter into his calculations at all, nor does the
Chicago i)ork come into serious competition with him.
The lumberman will buy the Chicago pork, and pay the duty.
It is preferred by the shanty man.
Canadian pork is used for home consumption and is preferred
to the American pork.
Reform of the Tariff!
Many people were led to believe from the statements made
by Ministers, and from the fact that they spent a year going over
Canada pretending to ascertain the workings of the National
Policy among the people, that it was their intention to reform the
the tariff. A great flourish of trumpets was made on this point,
and a new tariff* was actually introduced by Mr. Foster at. the
session of '94. His original resolutions proposed several hundreds
of chauges, all in the direction of lightening the burdens of
the people Among other things, specific duties as such were
to be abolished, but as time progressed and the different manu-
facturers were able to bring their influence to bear, the proposed
chauges and reductions were abandoned. Specific duties were
restored, and with the exception of a reduction made on agricul-
tural implements and binder twine, the tariff remains substanti-
ally as onerous as before. This can be proved beyond any doubt
by taking the monthly returns published in the Canada Gazette,
showing the quantity and value of goods entered for consumption
and the duty collected thereon in each month.
Take the month of December, 1894. The total value o^
dutiable goods entered was $4,262,352 5 the duty paid was
$1,347,603, or about 31| per cent.
The average of the present tariff, therefore, is as nearly as
possible the same as the oldltariff.
By the last I'rade and Navigation i?eturu8, 1894, we are
enabled to show what the taxes exacted on each class of goods
w«r«.
I
\
/
49
The following is a list:
Ourriages, ' ' I'
Manufactures of Cotton,
Earthenware and China,
Manafac. of Flax, Hemp and Jute,
Fruits (dry and green)
Manufactures of Glass,
Hats, Caps, etc.,
Manufactures of Iron and Steel,
Musical Instruments,
Oils of all kinds, Mineral, Animal,
Vegetable, etc.,
Paper and manufactures of, includ-
ing Wall Paper, etc.,
Provisions, - "
Soaps,
Champagne and Sparkling Wines,
(N.B.—WiNBs.— Compare with Kerosene
Oil, which pays about 160 per cent.)
Vegetables (melons, potatoes, toma-
toes, fresh corn and baked beans
VALUE.
I 408,787
4,0 57,402
709,737
1,618,983
1,817,450
1,219,543
1,320,000
10,113,177
375,421
DUTY PAID.
» 127.891
l,29.-),843
238,429
360.951
461.000
324,566
396,191
2,878,368
103,110
pnR
f'ENT.
313
28 4
336
223
25-3
26-6
300
28-4
27-5
1,297,421 681,256 525
1,187,236
734,481
176,959
166.785
401.715 33 8
204,311 27-8
64,680 36-6
91,311 54'8
in cans, . • -
220.631
53,408
242
Wood and manufactures of, -
1,087,128
298,564
27-4
Wool and manufactures of (blan-
kets, cloths, tweeds, flanuelK,
socks, shawls, cloaks, shirts, car-
pets, etc.)
10,946,244
3,309.389
30 2
Total dutiable goods,
$69,873,671
$21,161,710
30-8
Specific Duties.
Among the'many promises of the tarifif revision (in 1894) waa
the total or partial abolition of specific duties. These duties,
levied on the pound, the yard, the bushel, or the dozen, are un-
fairly heavy on consumers of cheaper grades of goods. To tax a
yard of cheap cloth the same amount as a yard of superior
quality is a manifest injustice to consumers of coarser lines.
This injustice pertains to all specific duties, and as in other
objectional features of the Canadian tariff the revision has left
matters little or no better than before. The injustice is in pro-
portion to the fluctuation and range of prices. As an instance,
the tax of two cents per lb. on raspberries, cherries, strawberries,
etc., is trifling when such small fruit are expensive laxuries'
\
/
50
But, when the pride falls and they become articles of common
use, it may be as high as fifty per cent. The Government has a
twofold object in retaining this class of duties. They lessen the
burden on wealthy consumers, who are able most effectually to
oppose the protective system, and obey keep the public in
ignorance of the extent to which they are taxed. An innocent-
looking tax of a few cents per pound or per yard may, and does,
conceal duties of more than 100 per cent. The following list
shows some of the unjust discriminations effected by specific
duties in the new Canadian tariff. It does not contain all the
discriminations, and the widest variations have not been pre-
sented :
Rate of Datjr.
Collars, per doz. . . . 24c per doz. and 35 p. ct.
I< l< U l< l<
....
Cuffs " pairs. .4c.per pair and 25 p. c.
Shirts
It
(I
. $1 per doz. and 25 p. c.
Blankets, per lb 5c. per lb. and 25 p. c.
<(
Oilcloth per yard. . . "k 30 p. c. but not less than
" " . . . / 4c. per square yard.
Wall paper, borders per rolH i^c per roll and
** " / 25 per cent.
Tweeds, per yard
(I
It
ii
it
Coatings
«
Overcoatings, " '.
<i i<
Castile soap, per lb 2c. per lb
<i «C (I
Canned fish ** . . . , i}4c, per can or p'lcge.
Upon an assumed
cost of
$0.72
1.44
96
1.92
4.00
20.00
40
65
8
75
9
75
25
2.00
1. 00
6.00
50
7.00
12
20>
ID
20
(This duty is levied on the can)
Boolcs 6c. per lb
Soap, common, per lb . . ic per lb
.t t( <(
Clothes wringers, each. . 25c. each and 20 p. c.
Ready-made clothing, per suit .
i< (i <i
cheap
dear
5
10
4.00
10.00
8.00
30.00
Rate per cent,
of duty.
581-3
41 2-3
75
50
50
30
37>^
33
SO
30
41 2-3
27
65
30
35
26 3-3
%
16 2-3
10
15
7>^
100
I
30
10
26X
42
33
\
/
51
Rftte of Duty.
Upon Mil KMunied lUtd mt otlit.
of duty.
Socks and stockings perdoz. pair^ioc per doz.
Dessicated Cocoa, per lb.. .5c per lb,
<i <i It
Rice, per lb i ^c. per lb .
it It .<
Raisins, per lb ic. per lb .
(I «i <i
Prunes, " ic. per lb .
4( (I t(
Currants, dried, per lb . . . ic. per lb .
i( it fi
Vinegar, per gal 1 5c. per gal . .
if ti It
Cornstarch, farina,etc.i^c. per lb.,
and 35 p.c.
coct of
60
10.00
IS
»5
5
fo
5
13 i-a
4
«S
6
10
«5
30
10
18
li
it
(i
li ti ti
Coal Oil 6c. per gal
Carpets, cotton warp,per yard,3C. per yard and 5 p. c. 20
50
all wool " 5c per sq. yd. and 25 p. c. 50
it It it il it I QQ
Cordage, per lb i ^c. per lb and ' o p. c. 10
it it it (t 20
Window shades, per yd^l 35 p. c. but u.^/' less 10
*' " / 5c. per sq. yard, 20
Baking Powder per lb .... 6c. per lb 30
60
ti
II
5» a-3
36
41 3-3
33 1-3
»5
I a i-s
20
8
6 a-3
.16 2-3
10
100
50
15
81.3
from 60 to 100
40
31
35
30
22 1-2
16 1-4 ,
50
35
20
10
On tweeds, etc., where the duty is not stated above, the tariff
taxes the goods per pound weight, thns manifescly pressing mor«
heavily upon the coarser and heavier goods.
Extracts From the Tariff.
The following are the duties imposad by th% tariff upon
some of the articles in common use :
Adzes and hatchets
Agate iron-ware, 36
Agricultural implements : Mowing machines, self-
binding harvesters, harvesters without binders
binding attachments, reapers, sulky and walk-
ing ploughs j harrows, cultivators, seed drills
and horse rakes, 30
Agricultural implements; Axe(9 of all ]|i|i4Sy*<'y^M
hay knives, lawn moif:9r8, pronged forli^, ra^et)
' hoes and other agricaltnral tools or impl«mentB, 36
36 per cent.
t(
((
<(
52
\
/
Agrionltaral implements : Shovels, spades, 50 cts.
per dozen and 25 per cent.
Axle grease, 25 "
Bags or sacks of hemp, linen or jute, and cotton
seamless bags, 20 "
Bags, cotton, made by the needle, 32^ "
Bags, paper, printed or plain, 25 "
Baking powder, 6c. per lb.
Barbed wire fencing of iron or steel, |c. "
Binder twine, 12^percent.
Blankets 5c. per lb. and 25 "
Blueing, (laundry) 25 "
Bolts, nuts and washers (iron or steel) Ic. per lb and 20 "
Bolts, nuts and washers firon or steel, less than 3-8
inch in diameter) Ic. per lb, and 25 per cent.,
but not less than 35 "
Boots and shoes (leather) 25 "
Braces or suspenders. 36 **
Braids, ;.... 30 "
Brass nails, rivets, screws, etc., 30 "
Brushes, 25 "
Buckles, iron or steel, 27^ "
" brass, 30 "
Builders' hardware, 32^ "
Buttons, pantaloons, etc., 20 "
Candles, paraffine wax, 4c. per lb.
'* (other than above); 26 percent:
Candy and confectionery, 36 "
Caps and hats, fur, 25 "
Caps and hats and bonnets, 30 "
Carpenters' rules, 35 "
Carpets (two-ply and three-ply ingrain, whose warp
is wholly composed of cotton or other material
tban wool worsted, ha\r of alapaca goat or
like animals), 3c. per square yard and 25 "
Carpets (treble ingrain, three-ply or two-ply com-
posed wholly of wool) 5c, per square yard and 25 "
Carpets (other than above) 30 "
Carriages, buggies, pleasure carts and similar
vehicles (not elsewhere specified). -Costing not
more than $50, $5 each and 25 per cent; costing
more than $50 ?5 "
Carriages : Farm and freight wagons, carts drays
and similar vehicles 26 "
\
/
53
Ohains, trace, tug and halter
Ghimneys, lamp, glass,
Ghina ware and porcelain ware
Ghurns, wood
Crocks and churns, earthenware, 3c. per gallon of
holding capacity
Clothes wringers 25c. each and
Cordage IJc. per lb. and lOJp. c
Collars, cotton, linen, etc *24c. per doz. and
Cuffs " " 4c. per pair and
Cultivators
Currycombs and currycards
Cutlery, table, not plated
'♦ << plated
" N. O. P., not plated
Cutters and sleighs
Duke, cotton, printed, dyed or colored
Earthenware and stoveware, jugs, crocks, etc. 3c.
per gallon capacity
Earthenware, viz., drain pipe and tiles
" drain tiles not glazed
Edged tools, n. e. s
Envelopes, printed or not
FLOUE,
Fanning mills and parts,
Barbed wire fencing of iron or steel
Buckthorn and strip fencing of iron or steel
Fertilizers, compounded or manufactured
Flags, bunting or cotton,
Forks, prong^, hay, manure, etc.,
Furniture, all kinds,
Glass Goods, lamp chimneys, etc.,
Mirrors, 27^ to
Axlegrease,
Grindstones,
Halter chains,
Hammers,
Harrows and parts,
Hats, caps and bonnets, not fur,
Hay knives,
Hay rakes, wood,
India rubber and waterproof clothing,
Linen clothing,
Mangles, washing,
Harvest mitts and mitts and gloves of all kinds
B2^ per cent
30
((
30
n
20
((
20
(t
2ic
1 per lb.
25 per cent.
25
ti
20
it
32^
a
324
11
36
n
25
K
30
t(
30
<(
35
if
20
11
35
n
3
0"
75c.
per bbl.
35 per cent.
fc.
per lb.
gC.
t<
10 per cent.
30
((
35
u
30
a
30
((
32^
<(
25
a
30
((
32^
((
25
'(
20
((
30
((
35
(<
35
<(
36
It
32^
n
27i
ti
35
((
54
\
i'* i
ft !
Nails and spikes,
Wire nails,
Gut nails,
COAL OIL (equal to from 100 to 150 per cent)
Ploughs, walking and sulky,
Horse rakes,
T&akes, not elsewhere specified,
Eice, cleaned,
Saws of all kinds,
Screw nails, 4
Scythes,
Scythe stones,
Separators and parts,
Shears (pruning and sheep) :
Sleighs and sledges,
Soap (common)
Soap (castile, mottled or white)
Starch,
Steam engines, (portable)
Stoves,
Stovepipes,
Stove shovels,
Sugar (raw above 16 Dutch standard and all
refined) 64c
Syrup,
Molasses,
Surcingles (cotton or hemp)
Suspenders and braces,
Underwear of all kinds, 30 to
Washing machines,
Winceys, checked, striped or fancy cotton
Windmills,
30 per cent.
Ic. per lb.
|c. per lb.
6c. per gal.
20 per cent.
20 "
35 "
lie. per lb.
32J per cent.
36
It
((
per
<(
It
(I
lb.
35
30
30
35
30
Ic.
2c.
lie
30 per cent.
27i
27i
27i
I. per 100 lbs.
^c. per lb.
l|c. per lb.
30 per cent:
35
35
27i
30
30
" The customs tariff of the Dominion should be based, not as
it 18 now, upon the protective Principle, but upon the require-
ments of the public service ; and it should be so adjusted as to
make free, or to bear as lightly as possible upon the necessaries of
life, and should be so arranged as to promote free trade with the
whole world, more particularly with Great I^ritaiu and the United
States."
\
55
nt.
b.
b.
al.
at.
lb.
nt.
t).
at.
s.
b.
b.
t:
iS
3-
;o
Df
ENLARGED MARKETS -REOIPROOITT.
Plank 2— Liberal Platform.
" That, having regard to the prosperity of Canada and the United
States as adjoining countries, witn many mutual interests, it is desir-
able that there should be the most friendly relations and broad and
liberal trade intercourse between them ;
" That the interests alike of the Dominion and of the Empire
would be materially advanced by the establishing of such relations ;
" That the period of the old receprocity treaty was one of marked
prosperity to the British North American colonies;
" That the pretext under which the Government appealed to'the
country in 1891 respecting negotiation for a treaty with the United
states was misleading and dishonest, and intended to deceive the
electorate;
" That no sincere effort has been made by them to obtain a treaty
but that, on the contrary, it is manifest that the present Government,
controlled as they are by monopolies and combines, are not desirous
of securing such a treaty;
" That the first step towards obtaining the end in view, is to place
a party in powcr who are sincereljr desirous of of promoting a tea ty
on terms honorable to both countries}
" That a fair and liberal reciprocity treaty would develop the great
natural resources of Canada, would enormously increase the trade and
commerce between the two countries,would tend to encourage friendly
relations between the two peoples, would remove many causes which
have in the past provoked irritation and trouble to the Governments
of both countries, and would promote those kindly relations between
the Empire and the Republic which afford the best guarantee for
peace and prosperity;
" That the Liberal party is prepared to enter into negotiations
with a view to obtaining such a treaty, including a well-considered
list of manufactured articles, and we are satisfied that any treatv so
arranged will receive the assent of Her Majesty's Government, with-
out whose approval no treaty can be made.
The Benefits of Reeippoeity.
Reciprocity is not a mere theory as regards the effects to be pro-
duced. The old reciprocity treaty extending from 1854 to 1866 atfords
practical illustration of the benefits to be derived from interchange
of trade with the United States. During the twelve years that treaty
remained in operation our exports to the United States nearly quad-
rupled, rising from $10,473,000 in 18-54 to $39,950,000 in 1866 from all the
provinces now embraced within the bounds of the Dominion. The
period durng which the treaty remained in force was one of marked
prosperity for all the provinces Since the abrogation of the t reaty
m 1866 our export trade with the United States has practically re-
mained stationary, though maintaining the average annual increase
from 1854 to 1866 would hare carried it up for 1893 to over !|100,000.000,
the actual amount having been for that vear 837,296,110 of the produce
of Canada, not including coin and bullicn, the produce of Canada,
which amounted to an additional $809,469.
V
'. I
\ ■
'\\
56
Sham Negotiations,
It is obvions that the advantages to be derived from reciprocity are
very great, and it is to be regretted that the Government has been
gmlty of duplicity in dealing with the question. When Parliament
was dissolved in February, 1891, the reason assigned for the act was
that a treaty of reciprocity with the United States was about to be
made, and t-hat it would be desirable to refer the treaty to a Parliament
fresh from the people, and not to a moribund House Statements in
Government organs that a reciprocity treaty in natural products simi-
lar to the treaty of 1864 was bemg negotiated at Washington, and that
Sir Charles Tupper was goin^ there as Canadian Commissioner, at(
traacted attention in the United States, and on January 29th, 1891i
Congressman Baker addressed a letter to Mr. Blaine,^ Secretary '»f
Stete,!asking if these rumors were well founded. To this enquiry yr.
Blaine made the following unequivocal reply :
/
* Washimoton, D. C, 29th January, 16i9i.
My Dkar Mr. Baker,— I authorize you to contradict the rumors yon refer
to. There are no negotiations whatever on foot for a reciprocity treaty with
Canada, and you may be assured that no scheme for reciprocity with the
Dominion confined to natural products will be eutertained by this Government.
I know nothing of Sir Charles Tupper's coming to Wasbingtou.
Yours very truly,
JAMES G. BLAINE
Five days after this letter had emphatically given the lie to the
claim that reciprocity negotiations were in progress. Parliament was
dissolved on th' pretext above named. And the false representations
thus made to the electors no doubt aided powerfully in securing a
verdict favorable to the Government.
Having won the election upon these representations it became
necessary to fulfill the promise to send commissioners to Washington,
and this was done in April, 1891. Owing to indignation at the
duplicity and misrepresentation of the Canadian aivthorities as to the
action of the United States Government in tne premises. President
Harrison refused the Canadian commissioners an interview.
In February, 1892, Canadian commissioners succeeded through
through the intervention of Sir Julien Paunceforte in obtaining a re-
ception by Hon James G. Blaine, American Secretary of State, and
then stated their proposal for reciprocity to be on the basis of the
treaty of 1854 and to be confined to natural products. To this proposal
Mr. Blaine made answer that the United States would consider no
proposition for reciprocity which did not embrace an agreed list of
manufactures, as was well known to the Canadian commissioners
from all previous declarations of the American State Department.
In truth the Canadian proposals were a mockery made solely to save
appearances.
\
57
The repftrt ruade by Mr. Blaine to the President of his interview
with the Canadian Coininissioners in a state document, signed by him
and ptublished in the offcial records of Congress, contains the
following:
" At the first conference, on February 10, the commissioners
" stated that they were authorized by the Canadian Government to
" propose the renewal of the reciprocity treaty of 1854 (which was
" terminated in 1866 by the action of the Congress of the United
" States), with such modifications and extensions as the altered
"circumstances of both countries and their respective interests
" might seem to require.
" In answer to an inquiry, the commissioners stated that the
" modifications or extensions contemplated in the schedules of
" articles should be confined to natural products and should not
"embrace manufactured articles.
" The commissioners were informed that the Government of
of the United States would not be prepared to renew the treaty
of 1854 nor to agree upon any commercial reciprocity which
should be confined to natural products alone; and that in view of
the great development of industrial interests of the United States
and of the changed conditions of the commercial relations of the
two countries since the treaty of 1864 was negotiated, it was re-
garded of essential importance that a list of manufactured goods
sfundd be included in the schedules of articles for free or favored
exchange in any reciprocity arrangement which might be made.
" The commissioners then inquired if the Government of the
" United States would expect to have preferential treatment ex-
" tended to the list of manufactured goods of the United States on
" their introduction into Canada by virtue of a reciprocity treaty,
"or whether it would regard the Canadian Government as at
" liberty to extend the same favors to the manufactured goods of
" other countries not parties to the treaty on their introduction
" into Canada.
" The reply given them was that it was the desire of the Gov-
" ernraent of the United States to make a reciprocity convention
" which would be exclusive in its application to the United States
" and Canada, and that other countries which are not parties to it
" should not enjoy gratuitously the favors which the two neighbor-
58
I
" iiig countries might reciprocally concede to each other for valuable
" cousidoratious and at a large sacrifice to their respective
" revenues.
" Upon receiving thi i reply, the Canadian commissioners
" asked that the further consideration of the suhj„ct be adjourned
" till another conference, to enable them to consult as to the course
" which they would adopt in view of the foregoing declaration."
" In the conference of the 11th the Canadian commissioners
" stat'jd that they had given careftd consideration to the suggestion
" that manu^Actured goods should be included in the schedules of
" articles for exchange in a reciprocity convention, and to the desire
" expressed by the Government of the United States that such
" American goods on their introduction into Canada should be
" accorded preferential treatment ever similar goods from other
" countries; and they announced, with an expression of regret, that
" they did not consider it possible to meet the expectations of the
" Government of the United States in these respects. In the first
" place they encountered a serious obstacle in the matter of
"revenue. If any considerable list of manu "• jtured goods of the
" United States should be admitted free into Canada, it would
" entail a material loss to the Dominion treasury, and if the same
favors were likewise extended to the merchandise of other
countries the loss of revenue would be much greater. They felt
that they would not be able to recoup these losses by other
methods of taxation. In the second place, it seemed to be
impossible for the Canadian Government, in view of its present
political relations and obligations, to extend to American goods a
prei'erential treatment over those of other countries. As (Canada
" was a part of the British Empire, they did not consider it
" competent for the Dominion Government to enter into any com-
" mercial arrangement with the United States, from the benefits of
" which Great Britain and its colonies should be excluded.
" The announcement of these conclusions of the Canadian
" commissioners was accepted as a bar to further negotiations on
" this subject, and it was not again discussed except in connection
" with the fishing privileges on the Atlantic coast."
FORMER RECIPROCITY TREATIES.
[Articltflll, Treaty with Great Britain of 1854. J
It is agreed that the articles enumerated in the tjchednle hereunto unnexed,
being the growth and produce of the aforesaid Britisli colonies or of the
United States, sball Ini admitted into each country rebpectively free of duty :
\
no
Oratn, flonr andbreadstnffof all kinds.
Animals of all kinds.
Fresh, smoked and salti;d moats.
Cotton, wool, seeds and vegetables.
Undried fruits, dried fruits.
Fish of all kinds.
Products of flsh, and of all other
creatures living In the water.
Poultry, eg'^s.
Hides, furs, skins, or tails, undressed.
Scone, or marble, in Its crude or nn-
wrought state.
Slate.
Butter, cheese, tallow.
Lard, horns, manures,
Ores, of metals, of all kinds.
Coal.
Pitch, tar, turpentine, ashes.
Timber, and lumber of all kinds, round,
hewed and sawed, unmanufactured
in whole or In part.
Firewood
Plants, shrubs, and trees.
Pelts, wool.
Fish oil.
Rice, broom corn, and bark.
Gypsum, ground or unground.
Hewn, or wrought, or unwrouglit
burr or grindstones.
Dyestuffs.
Flax, hemp, or tow, unmanufactured.
Unmanufactured tobacco.
Hags.
[Article IV, Diaftof treaty with Great Britain, 1874.— Geo. Brown Treaty.]
It la agreed that the articles enumerated In Schedules A, B, and C, hereunto
annexed, being the growth, produce or manufacture of the Dominion of vJanada
or of the United States, shall, on their Importation from the one counti'y Into
the other, from the 1st day of July, 1875, to the 30th day of June, 1876 (i)oth
included), pay only two thirds of the duties payable at the date of this treaty
on the Importations Into such countr> of such articles respectively ; and from
the 1st day of July, 1876, to the 30th day of June, 1877, (both Included), shall
pay one-third of such duties, and on and after the 1st day of Jgly, 1877, for the
period of years mentioned In article xili of this treaty, shall be admitted free of
duty Into each country, respectively.
For the terra mentioned in article xili no other or higher duties shall be im-
posed in the United States upon other article not enumerated in said schedules
the growth, produce or manufacture of Canada, or In Canada upon such other
articles the growth, produce or manufacture of the United States, than are re-
spectively Imposed upon like articles the growth, produce or manufacture of
Great Britain, or of any other country.
SCHKDULK A.
Consists of the following natural products :
Animals of all kinds.
Ashes, pot, pearl, and soda.
Bark.
Bark extract, for tanning purposes.
Bath bricks.
Breadstuffs of all kinds.
Bricks for building, and Hre bricks.
Broom corn.
Burr or grindstones, hewed, wrought,
or unwrought.
Butter,
Cheese.
Coal and coke.
Cotton wool.
Cotton waste.
Dyestufls.
Earths, clays, oohers, sand, ground or
unground.
Eggs.
Fish of all kinds.
Fish, products of, and of all other
creatures living in the water, except
tish preserved in oil.
Firewood,
Flax, unmanufactured.
Flour, and meals of all kinds.
Fruits, green or dried.
Furs, undressed.
Grain of all kinds.
Gypsum, ground, unground, or calcined.
Hay.
Hemp, unmanufactured.
Hides.
Horns.
Lard.
Lime.
'!
II
■i
60
Malt.
Manures.
Marble, stone, slate, or granite,
wrought or unwrought.
Meats, fresh, smoked or malted.
Ores of all kinds of metals.
PeltH.
Pease, whole or split.
Petroleum oil,crude,reflnd or benzole.
Pitch.
Plants.
Poultry and birds of all kinds.
Rags of all kinds.
Ulce.
Salt.
Seeds.
Sbrnbs.
Skins.
Straw,
Tails.
Tallow. •
Tar.
Timber and lumber of all kinds, round,
hewed and sawe<1, manufactured In
whole or in part.
Tobacco, unmanufactured.
Tow, unmanufactured.
Trees.
Turpentine,
Vegetables.
Wool.
Schedule B.
Consisting of the following agricultural implements:
Axes.
Bagholders.
Beehives.
Bone-crushers, or parts thereof.
Cultivators, or parts thereof.
Chaff-cutters, or parts thereof.
Corn-huskers, or parts thereof.
Oheese-vats.
Cheese-factory heaters.
Cheese-presses, or parts thereof.
Churns, or parts thereof.
Cattle-feed boilers and steamers, or
parts thereof.
Ditchers, or parts thereof.
Field rollers, or parts thereof.
Fanning mills, or parts thereof-
Feed-choppers or parts thereof.
Forks for hay and manure, hand or
horse.
Grain Drills, or parts thereof.
Grain-crushers, or parts thereof.
Harrows.
Hoes, hand or horse.
Horserakes.
Horse-power machines.or parts thereof
Hay tedders, or parts thereof.
Liquid manure carts, or parts thereof.
Manure sowers, or parts thereof.
Mowers, or parts thereof.
Oil and oil-cake crushers, or parts
thereof.
Plows, or parts thereof.
Root and seed planters, or parts thereof.
Root cutters, pulpers, and washers, or
parts thereof.
Rakes.
Reapers, or parts thereof.
Reaper and mower combined, or parts
thereof.
Spades.
Shovels.
Scythes.
Snaiths.
Threshing machines, or parts thereof.
SCUBDULK C.
ron«lstinff of the following manufactures, —
Axle.s, all kinds.
Boots and shoes, of leather.
Boot and shoe making machines.
Buffalo robes dreseed and trimmed.
Cotton grain bags.
Cotton denims.
Cotton jeans, unbleached.
Cotton drillings, unbleached.
Cotton tickings.
Cotton plaids.
Cottonades. unbleached,
(Cabinet ware and furniture, or parts
thereof.
and other
sleighs or
(Carriages, carts, wagons
wheeled vehicles and
parts thereof.
Fire engines, or parts thereof.
Felt covering for boilers.
Gutta-percha belting and tubing.
Iron, bar, hoop, pig, puddled, rod,
sheet, or scrap.
Iron nails, spikes, bolts, tacks brads
or sprigs.
Iron castings.
India rubber belting and tubing.
\
61
und,
id In
reof
eof.
arts
■eof.
I, or
irts
of.
her
or
Locomotives for railways, or parts
thereof.
Lead, sheet or pig.
Leatlier sole or npper.
Leather, harness, and saddlery of
Mill, or factory, or steomboat fixed
engines and machines or parts teereof
Mannfactures of marble, stone, slate
or granite.
Manufacturers of wood solely, or wood
nailed, bound, hinged, or locked with
metal materials.
Mangles, washing macbines,wringing
machines, and drying machines, or
parts thereof.
Printing paper for newspapers.
Paper-making machinef^.or p.iris themnr.
Printing type, presses, and folders,
paper cutters, ruling machines, page
numbering machines and stereotyp-
ing apparatus, or parts thereof.
Refrigerators, or parts thereof.
Railroad cars, carriages and trucks,
or parts thereof.
Satinets of wood or cotton.
Steam engines or parts thereof.
Steel, wrought or cast, and steel
plates and rails.
Tin tubes and piping.
Tweeds of wool solely.
Water-wheel machines and apparatus
or parts thereof.
American duties have been imposed upon Canadian agricultural
products imported into the United States since 1866. In October,
1890, these duties were largely increased by the McKinley Hill and the
disastrous effect upon our export trade produced by this increase is
shown by a comparison of farm exports tor the year ending June 30th,
1890, the last year before the McKinley Bill went into operation, and
the year ending June 30th, 1893, the last year for which we have full
trade returns since the bil went into operation. The following is the
comparison in twelve leading articles of farm products.
Comparison of Export of Farm Products, 1890—1898.
Name of Article,
1890
1893
Horses,
- $1,887,895
$1,123,339
Cattle,
104,623
11,032
Poultry,
105,612
52,114
Eggs.
Wool,
1,793,104
324.365
236,436
228,030
Flax,
175,563
124,082
Barley,
4,582.562
638,27 1
Split peas,
74,215
4,214
Hay,
922,797
854.958
Malt,
149,310
19
Potatoes'
308 915
259,176
Rye.
1 13,320
3,302
$10,453,352
!?3,624.892
Dd,
ids
United States Market Compared With All Others.
It is the custom of the Conservative orators, and of the Con-
servative press to seek to belittle the importance of the* American
market, and we are told that substitutes for that market can easily
be obtained, as for instance in Australia, a country which last year
:
62
took of the farm products of Canada to the value of $25 only. A
statement of the lines in which our exports to the United States,
even under the grievous restrictions of the McKinley Bill, exceeded
our exports to all the rest of the world in 1893 will show how
utterly destitute of foundation is this assertion. Here is the table
which is more convincing than argument :
Arttcleo or clasaiflcation of exports
:<
the produce of Canada.
United States.
All other countries.
Products of the mine,
$ 4,750.280
$ 573.010
forest.
18,869,900
12,49.., 950
Fresh water fish and salt
water fish, fresh.
1.287,822
4,642
Horses,
1,123,339
337,818
Swine,
130,093
15,997
Sheep,
1,088,814
1 59.041
Poult' y,
52,114
9,013
Bones,
58,444
10,282
Hides,
385,240
7,122
Sheep pelts,
66,939
10
Wool,
228,030
281
Flax,
124,082
Berries,
96,104
115
Fruit, N. E. S.,
24,640
1,114
Barley,
038,271
300,084
Beans,
351,058
4.024
Hay,
854 958
597,914
Straw,
25.117
932
Maple sugar.
48,174
1477
Trees, shrubs and plants,
11,959
232
Potatoes,
259,170
102,782
Vegetables,
105,830
10,404
Other articles,
27,090
1,577
Fertilizers,
7,700
■
Furs,
0,004
3,103
Grindstones,
24,754
948
Gypsum,
27,091
2,3£0
Household effects,
1,240,085
37.081
Lime,
97,898
8.207
Barrels,
10,031
0,297
Household furniture,
123,872
50,749
Wood pulp.
424,253
1.640
Other manufactures,
249,752
117,727
Bullion,
309.459
J!28,132,233
Ifl4,932.145
\ /
. A
atos,
B(lc(l
how
tttble
tries.
6S
RECIPROCITY.
In conneotion with this subject of Reciprocity with the United
States, the following tables are submitted showing the exports ot the
three Maritime Provinces, during 18'.)3, and the countries where
exported to :
NEW imUNSWICK.
Total exports
Of these the United States took
Over 50 per cent.
The rest of the world t(X)k
« 7,253,611
:<,735,074
« :J,518,.537
Of this 8:i,518,537 Great Britain took almost 8,3000,000, of which all
but $225,000 was deal and deal ends.
Practically, therefore. New Brunswick's market for all she has to
dispose of, except deals and deal ends, is found in the United States.
Thu prochicts ot* her manut'iicturos. ."? 444,990
mines, 6(3,348
fisheries, 7')6,437
* '* animals and their produQts,* 158,041
" a^ricullurul produce, 174,763
All find their best markets in the United States, while leas than
half <i million of her total exports find a market in all countries of the
world outside of Great Britain and the United States.
The case is even stronger with
PHINCK EDWARD ISLAND.
Her total exiK)rts in iao;5 reached
Of these the United States took
or over 60 per cent
All the rest of the world took
« 1,235,344
<)t)8.152
a 567,202
NOVA SCOTIA.
Total exports,
or ihese the United States took
or nearly one third,
All the rest of the world took
$10,308,628
3,230,218
» 7,078.410
This is irrespective of 8304,220 coin and; bullion exported to the
United States.
These tables show that one of the most valuable markets for the
Maritime Provinces is the United States.
That it would be suicidal on our part not to cultivate and
develop it,
64
That in flpite of hontUe \t(iri/fH on both m'tf,en our trade witli the
United States, in the years 1893-04 was aa follows :
Nova Scotia, exi)ort8 to United States, $ 3,-230,'218
New Brunswick, '' " " 3,735,074
P. K. Island " " '• 608,152
Total exports, S 7,573,444
Nova Scotia, ImjwrtH from U S., 9 2,465,576
New Brunswick, " " 2.933,763
p. E. Island " " 130,294
Total trade of Mar. Provinces with
with the United States in 1893 4.
5,620,632
813,103,076
This trade is capable of infinite expansion. A reciprocity
treaty would re-vivify trade, increase our exports and imports,
duplicate our profits, increase the value of our lands, retain at
home and give employment to our population.
We do not ignore the increasing value of our British trade.
On the contrary we desire to increase it. That is evident by the
resolution moved by Mr. Davies in Parliament, and voted down
by the Tories : Resolved that
'' Inasmuch as Great Britain admits the products of Canada
into her ports free of duty, this House is of the opinion that the
present scale of duties exacted on goods mainly imported from
Great Britain should be reduced."
We have and will have the British markets absolutely free.
We want two strings to our bow. We want to make the Ameri-
can market as free as the revenue acquirements of both countries
permit.
We know we could have negotiated a reasonable p"i *■"
Reciprocity treaty in 1891 or 1892, embracing a fair list o .,uu
factured goods.
We believe such a treaty can yet be had. The task has been
rendered exceedingly difficult by the blundering of the Tory Gov-
ernments. But it is not insuperable ; and if a Liberal Govern-
ment is returned to power we can reasonably hope for the
successful negotiation of a Reciprocity treaty with the United
States at an early date.
\/
Go
.au-
PURITY OF ADMINISTRATION -CONDEMN
CORRUPTION.
** That thft convention deplores the groHS corruption in the
Di!inag(MiM'iit aixl oxprnditiiio of public moncj'n which for yearH
past has exist<!(l under the rulnof the ('ouservatire party, nnd the
revelations of which by the different parliamentary cominittees
of enquiry have brought disgrace upon the fair name of ('anada.
'* The (Tovcrniucnl which profited politically by these c.v
penditurcs of public moneys whi reof the people have been de-
frauded, aud which, never huicss, have never punished the
guilty parties, must be held responsible for the wrong-doing. We
arraign the (iovernmeut for retaining in office a Minister of the
Crown proved to have accepted very large contributions of money
for election purposes from the funds of a railway company, which
while paying the ])olitical contributions to him, a member of the
Government, with one hand, was receiving Government subsidies
with the other.
" The conduct of the minister aud the approval of his col-
leagues after the proof became known to them are calculated to
degrade Canada in the estimation of the world, aud deserve the
severe condemnation of the people."
A Few Examples.
The force of the charge of corruption made against the Con-
servative Government, and the urgent condemnation they deserve
can be best shown by a few examples.
The illustrations given are confined to cases involving the
action of members of the present administration, or of their sup-
porters in the House, who have been sustained in their wrong-
doing by the ministry and the party in Parliament.
1. In the Caron case the evidence is complete of the levying
by a Minister for a reptile fi^nd of au enormous sum from those
interested in railway government subsidies, and its expenditure
by Ministers in electoral corruption. The exposure is more re-
markable because the original charges were mutilated and enquiry
largely stifled, on the motion of Mr. Bowell, the present First
Minister.
The McGreevy Conspiracy illustrates the levying of cor-
I'U' u funds from contractors for public works, the complicity
ol listers, and the timpering with justice by the release of
poi oal criminals.
s/
m
S. The Blind Share Case illustrates the eucouragement aud
assistance given by Mr. Bowell, the new Premier, to the traffick-
ing in Orders in Council.
4. The Cochrane Case is a gross case of the sale of public
offices by a member of Parliament.
5. J'he Turcotte case is one where a Member of Parliament is
maintained in his seat while drawing the profits from a Govern-
ment contract.
The Capon Case.
Sir Adolphe P. Caron, M. P., is the leader of the Conservative
party in the Province of Quebec, and ne ranks next to the Premier
in the Cabinet, both in seniority of appointment and in intiuence.
In 1892, charges were made by Mr. J. D. Edgar, M. P., in the
House of Commons that sums amounting to $100,000 and upwards
were levied from Government contractors and those interested in
certain railway subsidies, and were spent in the bribery of twenty-
two constituencies in the District of Quebec,at the general election
of 1887,
To investigate these charges, he demanded a reference to the
Committee of Privileges and Elec^^^ions. The members comi)osiug
this committee are, in the proportion of two to one, supporters of
the Government.
The Ministers did not dare to face a full enquiry, and there-
fore they put up Mr. Mackenzie Bowell, the present Premier, to
move to strike out some, and to vary others of the charges.
I'he Parte McGreevy inquiry of the previous year was made
before the Committee of Privileges aud Elections, and it had been
so damaging to the Government that they dared not again face
the committee. Mr. Bowell, therefore, provided in his motion
that the emasculated charges should be referred to a Royal Com-
mission, to be appointed by the Government and selected by the
accused. Mr. Bowell's motion was carried by the usual party
majority.
Mr. Edgar very properly declined to appear at the sittings
of this Royal Commission but sent to the Commissioners a list of
his witnesses, whom they called and partially examined.
In due time the Royal Commission reported the evidence
taken, i'he startling and disgraceful facts revealed before them,
even under the limited scope of the inquiry, show that the Minis-
ters had good reasons for dreading the more complete exposure
that would have been made if the original charges had been gone
iuto. . ; ..
s^
67
to
It was clearly shown that when Sir Adolphe Caron entered
the Ministry in 18cS0, he was a shareholder of the construction
company which received all the Government subsidies granted to
the Quebec and Lake St. John Eailway Company. After he
entered the Government, the subsidies voted tO that railway ex-
ceeded a million of dollars. The late Senator Boss was president
of this company, and Mr. Beemer was the contractor, also deeply
interested in the subsidies. Just before the elections of 1887, Sir
Adolphe Caron applied for a political subscription from Senator
Ross, who promptly gave him $25,000.
According to Mr. Beemer's books, there were also about the
same time a number of other payments amounting to $25,000
more, which was charged to "A. P. C." and " G. E. F." These
letters were sworn to have ment "A. P. Caron" and "General
Election Fund." There can be no doubt that at least $50,000
were furnished towards a corruption fund in 1887, from those in-
terested in the subsidies to this one railway. It was a great
investment for them, of course, to make this contribution, for
the Government have paid them $46.'i,408 since 1887.
Then there was the remiscouata Railway, which was also
receiving Dominion subsidies, and was partially enquired into by
the Royal Commissioners. They found in this instance, too, thac
$25,000 was set apart and expended by this railway for political
purposes during the progress of the work of construction.
These sums went to swell a Reptile Fund for the District of
Quebec alone, for the election of 1887, which amounted to
$112,000 according to the figures of the McGreevy papers papers
published in The Globe.
Out of the twenty-two counties where this fund was expended,
the Government only carried ten seats, making an average cost to
the country for each member returned to support them $11,200.
It is not o.t all unfair to assume that in the rest of the Dominion
similar corruption funds have been provided by the same vile means
for the elections of 1887, and for all elections.
The raising of these enormous sums before every general elec-
tion is a well recognized practice of the Conservative party in
Canada. Before another Royal Commission in 1873, it was proved
that Sir Hugh Allen paid for the promise oi the old Canadian
Pacific Railway Charter, $365,000 to the election fund of the Con-
servative party in 1872. How much more they had from other
sources for that election will never be known.
68
\f'
For each dollar that a contractor, or a subsirlizeH railway com-
pany, or a tariff-protected monopolist, pays to reptile funds, he is in
a position to demand A ten fold return iu the plunder of the public.
By the acceptance of these bribes, the Government phice themselves
at the mercy of the contributors.
Since the exposures in the Caron case, several new Ministries
have been constructed, and in each one of them Sir Adolphe Caron
has been placed in a high and honorable position. His offence has
been adopted by the Conservative party as their own, and he him-
self has boldly justified it in his place on the floor of Parlinment in
these memorable words: "I say that under the same circum-
stances what I did on that occasion I would do ag>ain to-mor-
pow in order to help my friends."
The McGreevy Conspiracy and the Langevin-Caron
Reptile Fund.
In 1891, a number of charges were made in Parliament by Mr.
Tarte, M. P., against Sir Hector Langevin, then Minister of Public
Works, and Hon. T. McGreevy, M. P. Mr. Tarte alleged that the
contracting firm of Larkin, Connolly & Co., were allowed by Sir
Hector Langevin, then Minister of Public Works, with the assistance
of Mr. McGreevy, to choat the country out of hundreds of thousands
of dollars on Government contracts.
These charges were referred to a Committee of the House for
investigation, and the public were startled by the revelations of
fraud and conspiracy by which the country was shown to have
lieen robbed of about half a million of dollars. The full extent to
which this money was applied to Tory Corruption Funds will never
be known, but evidance was dragged out rf unwilling witnesses
that $119,438 of it were paid for election expenses.
The famous (Quebec District Election Fund i)f 1887 receivi d
$20,000 from these contractors, and that fund was distributed for
election purposes by two Ministers of the (Vown, Sir Hector
Langevin and Sir Adolphe P. Caron. .
As an instance of the grossly corrupt uses that were made of
this Reptile Fund, the case of Three Rivers, Sir Hector Langevin's
swn constituency, may be given. In 1887 the total number of
votes cast for Sir Hector, the successful candidate, was 640. The
sum returned by Sir Hector's agent and published as his total law-
ful election expenses was $917.09. The sum sent into the con-
\/
69
le of
vin'.s
r of
The
law-
con-
stitnency from this fund alone was 3^13,160. No wonrlor In was
successful after an expenditure of oyer $20 for every vote he re-
ceived.
Messrs. McGreevy and Connolly were placed on trial for their
part in this conspiracy to defraud, and on conviction in November,
1894, were sentenced to gaol for twelve months. How could a
Conservative Government who owed their places to the support
given them by these conspirators permit them to serve out their
sentence ? How could Sir Adolphe Caron, a noble knight nnd a
Minister, who had received and expended in corruption, part of
the proceeds of this conspiracy, allow his friends and pals to lan-
guish in prison while he was an adviser of the Crown ? It was
therefore represented to the Government that confinement did not
agree with the prisoner's digestion, and they were liberated after
but three months' imprisonment.
The eminent judge who tried the case (Mr. Justice Rose) said
that the offence was only aggrava^^^ed by the purposes of electoral
corruption to which the proceeds of this conspiracy were applied ;
yet it was the verj' Vmseness of the objects of the con-piracy that
saved these culprits from the punishment of their crimes. To
screen the crin:inal purveyors of the Reptile Fund th'.' course of
justice was tampered with and the prison doors were flung open
wide for the escape of the men who ha<l dark political secrets in
their breasts, which they threatened to divulge.
In order that the full responsibility may be shown to rest
upon the proper shoulders, the following extract is givon from the
Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons of 3rd July, 1894.
It is a motion of want of confidence, and .^11 the Government sup-
porters in the House voted agiiinst it :
"The Order of the day for the House to go iigain into Com-
mittee of Supply, beini; lead :
" Sir John Thompson moved, That Mr. Speaker Ao now leave
the Chair.
" Mr. Edgar moved in amendment thereto, that all the words
"after the word "that" be lel't out, and the fc llowing inserted in-
" stead thereof : "from the public trial and conv.ciiun of Thomns
" McGreevy and N. K. Connolly for conspiracy to defraud, anrl
" fiom evidence and papers already before this Hou.'^^e, it appears
"that large portions of the moneys which were found, upon said
" trial, to liave been criminally received by the said Thomas Mc-
70
" Greevy from Government contractors, were so received by him for
' the purpose of being expended in elections in the interest of the
" (.'Dnservative party, and for distribution by Sir Hector Langevin,
" M, P., and Sir Adolphe Caron, M.P., for the election of themselves
" and of other supporters of the Government at the general elec-
" tions held in February, 1887."
" That it further appears that large portions of the said
" moneys, together with other large sums collected by Sir Adolphe
" Carou from those interested in Government railway subsidies,
" were expended and distributed by Sir Hector Langevin and Sir
" Adolphe Caron, and in lavish and illegal amounts, to assist in
'■ the election of themselves and of other supporters of the Govern-
" ment, in the district of Quebec, at the general elections of 1887."
' That the said Sir Hector Langevin and Sir Adolphe Caron
" were then, and are now, members of this House, and on the roll of
' Her Majesty's Privy Councillors for Canada, and the said Sir
" Adolphe Caron is a Cabinet Minister and Postmaster General."
*' That in the qpinion of this House, the said Sir Hector Lan-
" gevin and Sir Adolphe Caron are deserving of the severest
'' censure foi- their connection with the said transactions, and
" that it is a public scandal and an injury to the reputation of
" Canada that Sir Adolphe Caron should continue to hold the
*' position of a Minister of the Crown,"
"And the question being put on the amendment; in was
negatived on division."
Bowell and the Blind Shares.
In 1882 a craze set in for the formation of Colonization Com-
panies in the North west. The plan was to secure an Order-in
Council from the Dominion Government granting large tracts of
land at low prices to individuals who would then form a joint
stock company to buyout their grants. For this purpose a mem-
ber of the House of Commons, now deceased, associated himself
with Mr. James C. Jamieson, a son-in- v of Sir Mackenzie
Bowell, then and now a Minister of the Crown, and they pro-
cured for themselves and ten others in April, 1882, an Order in
Council granting them several townships of very choice land. Mr.
Bowell was consulted about it before the Order in Council was
passed, and knew of the exceedingly advantageous *' deal " that
had been arranged for the profit of his supporter in the House,
and for hiH son-in-law. Both of those gentlemen were to receive
what was called '' blind shares " in the stoek of the company,
71
that is, stock on which they were to receive all the profits with-
out paying auy money into the company. A company called
" The Prince Albert Colonization Company " was accordingly
organized with twelve shareholders, ten of whom were paying
parties, and the aforasaid two gentlemen were non-paying hold-
ers of blind shares," each to the extent of $33,000.
It is true that Mr. Jamieson had to pay another party $500
to get in on the ground floor, but so warm an interest was t«,ken
by Mr. Bowell in this clever scheme of making money out of the
Government grant that he offered to lend, and did lend, to Mr.
Jamieson this $500, which was afterwards repaid to Mi . Bowell,
when Mr. Jamieson sold out his blind shores for cash.
On the demand of Mr. Edgar, M. P., these charges were re-
ferred for investigation to the CJoumiittee of Privileges and Elec-
tions. They were proved to be literally true ; yet by a ninjority
composed entirely of Ministers themselves, Mr. Bowell was white-
washed by the Committee, and his conduct was declared to be be-
yond reproach. This report was laid before the House of Com-
mons on 18th May, 1886, but although the House sat until 2nd
June, the Government did not dare to move for its adoption. The
position therefore is that Sir Mackenzie Bowell was accused in the
House of conduct of which he himself said : " These statements
affect not only my position as a Minister of the Crown but my re-
putation as a public man." These charges, so serious and disgrace-
ful to a Minister and a public man, stand of record yet against
him on the journals of the House oi' Commons. They have not
been dealt with by the House. Arc they wiped out by reason of
his elevation to the Senate ? He allowed the Session and the
Parliament, in which the charges were made, to pass without a
mov?, satisfied apparently with the whitewash of a packed com-
mittee, and a verdict cast by his own colleagues on that committee.
Is this the stainless Premier, the puro and lofty statesman, who
leads the Conservative party of Canada to-day ?
No wonder that he moved the resolution to burke enquiry in-
to the charges made against his colleague Sir Adolphe Caron in
1892. " A fellow feeling made him wondrous kind."
Corrupt Sale of Public Offices — The Cochrane Case.
From 1888 to 1890 the patronage of the County of E ist
Northumberland was in the hands of Edward Cochrane, Conserva-
tive M. P. The completion of the Murray Canal gave a number of
positions as keepers of swing bridges across the canal to beawar.l-
ed to political supporters by Mr. Cochrane.
72
There wits at that time also a vacancy tt) be Hllcd l)y him in
the position of keeper of the Presquc Isle Light House.
A committee of Mr. Cochrane'^ suppor ers was organized for
the express purpose of corruptly trafRckini,' in these offices, and
with the full knowleii<^e of Mr. (>ochrane they did corruptly sell
and dispose ol such offices.
Hedley Simpson paid $200 for tlie Light House position, and
each of the following persons paid from $125 to $200 apiece for
the petty positions of keepers of swing bridges, namely: Wesley
Goodrich, John D. Cloustou, William Brown, Robert May and
Thomas Fitzgerald.
When Mr. Cochrane, M. P., was informed that the price of
the berths had been duly paid, he recommended to the Govern-
ment the appointment of these men, and the appointments were
promptly made.
The proceeds of these corrupt sales were applied to the poli-
tical purposes of the Conservative party in the riding, and in
part to pay off a promissory note on which Mr. Cochrane, M. P.,
was personally liable.
Mr. M. C. Cameron, M. P., brought these matters before the
House, and this flagrant and miserable abuse of patronage, and
this sale of public offices was proved before a select committee of
the House of Commons in 1891. A mild censure of the system of
sale of public offices was passed, but the whitewash brush was
applied, and the Government majoiity refused to (jondemn the
conduct of the member who not only escai)ed censure, but has
been treated by his party as a martyr, a hero, and a victim of
Grit persecution ever since.
Buying Up a MembeF of Parliament. The Tureotte Case.
Mr. A. J. Turcotte, the present M. P. for Moutmorenci Co.,
was elected on 11th March, 1892. He is now a very active per-
sonal ally and supporter of Sir Adolphe Carou. At the time of
his election he was cairying on a grocery business in Quebec in
partnei ship with Mr. Provost. The tirm then had a contract with
the Government in the name of Mr Provost, for the supply of the
militia at the Citidel of Quebec with groceries and provisions,
and up to the dissolution of the firm on 2nd February, 1893, they
received from the Governujent cheques amounting to $4,112.85.
This amount was all paid over by the tirm to Mr. Turcotte for his
private beuetit.
y
73
After tho dissolution of the firm, Mr. Turcotte continued in
the grocery business and supplied the Militia Department with the
goods. For these he leceived all the payment for his own benefit,
although the cheques, as before, continued to be issued in Mr.
Provost'H name, and were endorsed by him over to Mr. Turrotte
who cashed them.
It is of course grossly improper tor a member to be .sitting in
the House drawing pay from contracts let to him by the Mini.s-
ters. He is in fact sold to them, and does not represent the people,
but is the slave of the Government.
The law condems this sort of thing very clearly, for section 10
of the Independence of Parliament Act, says :
" No person, directly or indirectly, alone or with any other,
by himself or by the interposition of any trustee or third party,
holding or enjoying, undertaking or executing any contract or
agreement, expressed or implied, with or for the Government of
Canada on behalf of the Crown, or with or for any of the officers
of the Government of Canada, for which any public money of
Canada is to be paid, shall be eligible as a member of the House
of Commons, or shall sit or vote in the said House."
Yet in spite of the plain language of the statute, the Govern-
ment majority iu the House on 13th July, 1894, was called upon
to whitewash Mr. Turcotte in the face of sworn evidence proving
the above facts.
On that date Mr. Edgar, M. P., moved a resolution declaring
tliat Mr. Turcotte had forfeited his seat.
Four Conservative members refused to swallow the scandal-
ous whitewashing vote, but all the rest were whipped into line,
voted down Mr. Edgar's motion, and had to justify by their votes
the clearest breach of the Independence of Parliament that was
ever proved before a committee.
Under that precedent, members can be safely bought up by
public money, like sheep in a market, to support any Govern-
that happens to be in power.
Favoritism and Extpavagcance.
The Hon. .John Haggart, Minister of Railways and Canals,
represented his present eonstituenviy of Lanark in 1882, and used
his influence with the Government to induce them to undertake
the construction, at public expense, of a short canal of six miles
in length (called the Tay canal) from the liideau canal to the
town of Perth, with a branch to Mr. Haggart'g own mill in that
town. The estimated cost inclusive of certain land and damages,
was $132,660. i he actual cost has amounted to the enormous
sum of lH76,128.
74
Is this imiueuse expenditure justified by traffic upon the Tay
canal 1 On the contrary it is navigated only by some skiflfs, one
scow, two yachtH and two tugs. The total revenue from this
canal for the year ending Jan. lat, 1894, was .fl35.76, while the
actual cost of maintenance was for this same period, $2,486.00.
Here is an instance of grossly excessive expenditure which lays
the member who forced it upon the Government for his own ad-
vantage, open to the charge of being utterly unfit to manage the
Department of Railways and Canals.
A resolution condemning that expenditure was moved in
1894 by Mr. John Charlton, M. P., but was voted down by the
usual Government majority.
Curran Bridgre Scandal.
I'he story of the constructien of two Government bridges
over the Lachine canal (commonly called the Curran bridges),
involves as startling a disclosure of incompetence, extravagance
and criminal neglect of duty as has yet been made in Canada. The
responsible head of the Department is Honorable John Haggart,
Minister of Railways and Canals and the work was all done in
the city of Montreal, within telephoning distance of the Minister's
office. The bridges were constructed during the first four months
of the year 1893. The Department decided to have the work on
the sub-structures of the bridges done by day labor. The contract
was entered into with a contractor named St. Louis, a Govern-
ment election pusher, who carried out the work as laid out by
the Department and under its superintendence and direction.
The original estimate of cost of these sub-structures was
$122,000, but the account presented to the Department for that
work have amounted to $430,325, and of this sum $394,000 has
actually been paid to the contractor by the Government.
I Q order to illustrate the nature of the outrageous over-
charges a few examples may be given. The supply of timber and
lumber paid for is over 1 ,000,000 feet, board measure, more
than could have been used in those works. The cost of stone
cutting on one of the bridges, if it had been let at the usual
prices by piece work, would have been $3,000, whereas the
amount paid by the Government, including the contractor's price
is $16,715, and the cost of stone cutting on the other bridge was
still more excessive, rhe prices paid by the Department to the
contractor for labor were greatly beyond current prices, in some
instances being as high as $12 for work for which the contractor
only paid $4.50, and $9.20 for other work for which the contractor
only paid $3.75. False pay lists were made up with the names
of hundreds and thousands of men upon them who never worked
at ail, and very many of whom were entirely fictitious.
I the Tay
;iflf8, one
L'oin this
liile the
J,486.00.
lich lays
own ad
lage the
loved in
1 by the
bridges
)ridge8),
Lvagance
Ida. The
:Jaggait,
done in
inister's
• months
rork on
contract
Govern-
i out by
tion.
ires was
for that
,000 has
IS over-
iber and
e, more
f stone
e usual
reas the
•'s price
dge was
t to the
in some
itractor
Q tractor
e names
worked
75
No check was kept by any Government official upon these
lists, or upon the number of men employed. For months the
contractor, St. Louis, was allowed to charge just what number of
men he liked, and these pay sheets were duly certified by the
Government officials as correct, and paid by the Government.
One official swore that he kept a private memorandum of the
numbers of men employed each day for some weeks. On com-
paring this the truth of which was sworn to, with the Govern-
ment returns, it was found that where 10 men were actually cm-
ployed 30 were charged for, and where 30 were actually employed
90 or 100 were charged, and where 100 were employed 300 or 40t>
were charged.
It was the most open, bare-faced swindle ever exposed in
Canada, and to this day not one of the culprits has been con-
victed in court or punished. A pretence has been made of be-
ginning a prosecution against St. Louis, but it is only a pretence.
The elections will soon be over, and if the Government is sus-
tained, Mr. Ouimet will take good care that his cousin St. Louis,
does not suffer. The Government Commissioners. Messrs. Mc-
Leod, Douglas and Veniot, appointed to examine into the facts,
reported that the amount stolen was $195,693.
This was a larger sum than the whole work could have been
completed for had it been built by contract in the usual way.
These facts cannot be contradicted or denied, as they have
been proved on several occasions, and Mr. Haggart, while not
denying them, is pursuing a somewhat cowardly course of throw-
ing the whole blame upon subordinate officers of his Department.
The people of Canada, however, pay Mr. Haggart a very
large salary for looking after this business for them, and it is a
mon/ijtrous proposition that he, the responsible Minister of the
(^I'own, should be able to clear his skirts by blaming subordinate
officers and contractors whom he appointed and paid. Mr. St.
Louis, the contractor, excuses himself on the ground thrft he was
forced to contribute so much money to the election of the Conser-
vative party that he had to make it up out of contracts. In order
to avoid the exposure of particulars of his political contributions
all his books connected with the matter were burnt. It is pos-
sible that the inward history of this disgraceful transaction will
never be known, but the Government and their followers who de-
fended it by their votes last session, will be held to strict ac-
count when they appear before their electors. Sir Richard
Cartwright, on the 18th July, 1894, moved a resolution in the
House of Commons exposing and condemning this transaction,
but it was voted down by the usual Government majority.
76
Refusal of Enquiry.
When charges of misconduct have been made against Ministers
in the House of Commons, the Government iiavt; sometimes altered
the charges. There is another instance where a serious charj^e was
made against a Minister of the Crown, and the (ioveniincnt crtilfid on
their majority in Parliament to vote down and nifuse aiiy inciuiry
whatever into the matters charged. This was notably the case
when in 18U1 Mr. J. F. Lister, M.P., brought serious charges against
Hon. John I laggart in connection with the Section B. contract. On
the 13th September, 1891, he made the following motion :
"That James Frederick Lister, Rlsquire, the member rein'«'sent-
ing the electoral district of West LambU)n in this House, liaving de-
clared from the seat in this House that he is credibly informed, and
that he believes that he is able to establish by satisfactory evidence :
"That in the year 1870 Messrs. Alexander Manning, Alexander
Shields, John James Macdonald, Alexander McDcmell, .lames
Isbester and Peter McTiaren enterod into a contract with the (4ov-
ernment of Canada for the construction of a ]>ortion of tln! Canadian
Pacific liailway between Port Arthur antl Kat Portage, known as
Section H,
" The said contract and the works in connection therewith were
completed by the said contractors to whom they were a source of great
})ront.
"During the whole period covered by the said contract, the
Honorable John G Haggart, now Postmastei'-Geneval and a member
of Her Majesty's Privy Council for Canada, was a mcnluu' *of the
House of Commons for the South Hiding ot Lanark, and still is such
member.
"That the said Honorable John G. Haggart became and wis
beneficially interested in the pi-oflts of said contract whinh accrued
to the share thereof standing in the name of the said Pofcr McLaren,
and has received large sums out of the said profits, and has oi her wise
derived direct and substantial pecuniary benetils tlierefrotn
" That during the pi'ogress of the said works, and whiU; the said
Honorable .fohn G. Haggart was so interested therein, members of
the said firm were called upon by members of the Government of
cJanada for largo contributions for iwlitical purposes, and such con
tributions were paid out of the mone> s of tht; said lirni. and with the
knowledge and assent of the said Honorable .lohn ii. Haggart were
charged against the profits of the firnj ; and while the said contribu-
tions were so (l^manaed and i);ii(l, the suid tirni of contractors were in
various ways deptmdent upon the (Toverinn.Mit by reason of many
matters being unsettled and in dispute in relation to the said con-
tract, which were at the time of such contributions or subsequently
settUnl not unfavorably to the said contractors
"That a Select Committee be appointed to enquire fully into the
said allegations, with the power to send for persons, papers and re-
cords, and to examine witnesses upon oath or affirmation, and to em-
ploy shorthand writers to take down such evidence as they may deem
necessary, and to have the evidence printed from day to day for the
use of the Committee, and that the Committee do report in full the
evidence taken before them, and all their |)ro<ieedings on the refer-
ence, and the result of their enquiries, and that rule 78 of this House
77
liniaiers
i altered
ir^e was
'ail';(l oil
■ in<iiiiry
the ease
against
act. On
!pr<'sent-
viiif? de-
led, and
v^idence:
lexaiider
James
he (4nv-
!aiiadiaii
!1()\VI1 aH
ith were
of great
act, the
member
:of the
is sucli
iiid was
accrued
cLareii,
herwise
the said
ibers of
meiit of
ch con
ith the
rt wer(^
)utril»n-
\ver(^ 111
many
Id coii-
juently
1 1 to the
and re-
to em-
y deem
for the
tuU the
e refer-
Houae
The ex-
1877-8 was his
year was
a portion
that
For
as to the selection of committees be susjiended and that the said com-
mittee be composed of Mes.srs. Mills (Uoth well), Kdj?ar, Karron, Lister
(who shall not have the right to vote), Dickey, \Vo.)d (Hrockville),
(Tironard and McLeod "
This motion was voted down by the usual Government majority.
Public Expenditure Has Increased Alarmingfly.
Since Confederation in 18(57, the public expenditure has increased
alarmingly. Commencing with Sn,48(),()l>2 in 1807-8, it nad risen to
»87,58r),025 in 1893-4. On July 1st. li^W, tht; estimated pouulation of
the Dominion was .'{,520,000. On July 1st, 1801, the estimated popula-
tion was but little over 5,000,000, showing an increase of population
during the period (• fraction over 42 per cent , while the increase of
expenditure for the sime period was #24,008, 0.'W, or 178 per cent. The
increase of the net debt during the same period was #170,454,588, or
225 per c ent.
Mr. Mackenzie came into office November 8th, 187;{.
penditure for that tiscal vea" amounted to $2:i,:U<>,:U0,
last full fiscal year in office and th(i expendit ire for
$2:5,503,158. An increase for the term of only #18»),842.
of the fiscal year ending June ."iOth, 1878, .\Ir- Mackenzie's administra-
tion was responsible as it held office till October lOth, 1878, making
three months and ten days of the year, and if a comparatively exact
statement of the increase of expenditure under Mr. Mackenzie's ad-
ministration is desired, the supply bill for 1878 will lurnish the
data.
In no year during Mr. Mackenzie's administration did the ex-
penditure exceed the amount of the supply bill for that year. The
sui)ply bill for 1878 9 amounted to $23,0(50,000, and his administration
would not have exceeded that amount Had he remained in office
therefore till July 1st, 1870, the increase of expenditure during his
administration would have been *}.>>, 000. That the expenditure for
18780 actually reached the sum of .#24,455,381 is due to the fact that
for nine months of year Mr. Mackenzie's successors administered the
finances.
During Mr. Mackenzie's administration the contracts and obliga-
tions left by his ju'edecessors rendered an increase of the debt neces-
sary, and of course rendered an addition to the annual interest charge
unavoidable, but so great was the e(!onomy and prudence of his ad-
ministration that diniii'.^ his term of oflioe, the controllaliie expendi-
ture was reduced by tlK^siim of $1,781,000, and the taxation from cus
toms duties fell from #14,325,192 in 1873 4 to S12,900.(159 in 1878-9, a
decrease of ^U,424,533.
By selecting the period commencing,' July 1st. hSSi, and ending
July 1st, 1891, an exact comparison can be made for the docando
between the increase of debt, of expenditure, and of customs taxa-
tion on the one hanrl an(] the increase of population on the otlier
hand.
Population, 1881,
4,824,810
Population, l.«91,
4,882, 23fJ
I, crease,
- 508,429
Percjntage of incrousc,
- iiee
B
ir
78
Net debt, 1881, - - ?1 56.395,780
1M91, - - 2.S7,801),030
Increase. - «82,41.S,250
Percentage of increase, 53
Expenditure. 1881, - - »25,602,554
1801, - - 36,343,567
Increase of expenditure, $10,841,013
Percentage of increase, 42
Taxation by customs duties, 1881, $18,406,092
" • 1891, 23,3»9,300
Increase, - $4,993,208
Percentage of increase, 27
Increase of the Controllable Expenditure.
The 8tati>tics relating to the increase of the controllable ex-
penditure since 1878 are ot a most unsatisfactory character. .The
increase of population between July 1st, 1878. and July 1st, 1893,
have not exceeded 21 per cent, advance upon the population in the
first year named. During the same period the proportion of in-
crease in controllable expenditure has been very much greater. In
1878 the expenditure on account of Administration cf Justice,
Arts, Agriculture and Statistics, Fisheries, Quarantine, Indians,
Legislation, Militia and Defence, Public Works, Superannuation,
Excise, N rthwesi Territories Government, Mail subsidies and
Steamship subventions, Civil Government, Adulteration of Food,
Mounted Police .and Miscellaneous amounted to $5,256,424. The
expenditure for the same purposes in 1893 amounted to $10,384,272,
an increase of 97 per cent, during a period when the population
increased 21 per cent. Some of the items of increase need no com-
ment as will be seen by reference to the following statement:
Arts, Agricultnre and Statistics, 1878 $ 92,365
•893 25M35
Increase $166,270
, Percentage of increase 180
Fisheries, 1878 $ 93,262
1893 482,381
Increase $389, 1 19
Percentage of increase 417
Quarantine, 1 878 $ 26,340
1893 101,954
Increase $ 76,610
Percenta^ife of increase 287
Indians, 1878 $421,503
1893 956,552
Increase $535,o49
Percentage of increase ^ 126
79
Militia and Defence, 1878 , $618,136
•' '• i«93 ',4«9,745
Increase $801,609
Percentage of increase 129
I'ublic Works, 1878 $9(;7,46g
" " 1893 •. 1,9^7.832
Increase $930,363
Percentage of increase 93
Superannuation, 1878 $106,588
1893 2''>3»7'o
Increase $157,122
F^ercentage of increase 147
Kxcise, 1878 $215,024
i«93 387,673
Increase $178,649
Percentage of increase 80
Northwest Territories Ciovernment, 1878 $ 18,199
" " " 1893 276,446
Increase $258,247
Percentage of increase '1420
Civil (Government, 1878 $823,369
i%3 1.367.570
Increase $544,201
Percentage of increase ...66
Mounted Police, 1878 $334.74'^
" " 1893 615,479
Increase $280,748
Percentage of increase 83
It is time to call a halt. The march of corruption has been
continued too long. With increase in debt, expenditure and taxa-
tion, ?o far outstripping increase of population, the result, if wo do
not change our course, will be serious if not disastrous. Already
the consequences of extravagance and currupt waste of money and
rnsources are severely felt. The population of the country is at a
standstill. Without increase of population our undeveloped re-
sources cannot be utilized. Without a radical reform in the admin-
istration of our public affairs the increase of population and the
corresponding increase of wealth and property will be meagre and
unsatisfactory. Is it not time for patriotic citizens of all shades of
politics to give the situation of the country careful consideration,
and is it not evident that the record made by the party in power
since 1878, warrants the belief that thp principles, the purposes,
and the methods of its leaders now in office render them incapable
of giving the country an honest and economical administration of
its affairs ? To other men must be assigned the task of extricating
the country from the difficulties that njw confront it.
80
Admiiiiatratjou. Puiif.y of,. 5, Go
Albert To.. N. B 22
Agriculttiral prodiicts, duties on. . . .45
Boundaries, County nrcsprved U
Biaiue's letter, Reciprocity. 56
Bowell and Blind Shares 70
Corruption condemned 5, «)5
County Boundaries (5
Cotton Mills 20.
Cordam:u ;}0
Cotton and cotton jjoodt* 34
Co8f to consumer under N. P. & Fveo
Trade 3r>
rorablncH, Met of 38
Coal duty 40
Caron Corruption 65-(jC
Cochrane Case fiO, 71
Currau Bridge Scandal 74
Dedclts 11, 16
Debt 14, 78
Dutiable goods, Dec. '1)4 . 4b
Duties, avei-aRo, under N. P 48
Edgar, J. 1)., M. P 69
Enlarirc'd markets 4
Economy demanded 5
Expenditure •■ 5, 14
Exodus 18
Extracts fron Tarirt' 51
Extravagance 73
Expenditure, Increase 77
" controUiible 78
Vavorltlam 73
Free Trade and Protection 11
Free Trade, ^ ;'>
Free Trade, dettuilioii :)f S
Franchise 6
Government, respou-^ibie 5
Goods cheap as t-ver ! 32
GurrviTiander 6
Halifax as winLor port.
Hay
.25
.47
Independence of Parliament 5
Iron Duties 36
Ironmaster's monopoly j. . . .38
Kei osene oil 31
Lister's motion re Hagyart 76
Liberal Platform 3
Liberal Policy 12
Letter from Sir John A. 41
Langevin Caron Hej»tile Fund 68
Monopoly 12
Mining 45
Mackerel 47
Markets, enlarged 4
McGreevy Conspiracy 65, 68
N. W. T. Government. 79
New Brunswick under N. P lt>
Natural increase 21
Negotiations —Reciprocity 56
Object of Tariff to develop indus-
tries— (Foster) i:;
Occupations, injured by N. P. ... .43
'• benefited by N. P ..44
Platform, Liberal 3
Purity of administration 6
Parliament, Independence of 5
Prohibition and Plebiscite 7
I rimer of Tariff" u; form 8
Protection, d 'flnilioii of 9
Policies, the two 11
Popula ion, loss of 17
Population of Maritime Provinces. 20
Potatoes 4 7
Pork 46
Refusal of enipiiry 76
Reduced taxaticm 3
Reciprocity 4, 55
Responsible Goveiument 5
Reflner .cs, Sugar 26
Rice 29
Reform of Tariff 48
Sail' of public offices 71
Senate defective 7
Shipping ■— 22
Shipping, sea going 24
Si'gar 27
Sir John A. Macdonald's letter. . .41
Specific duties 49
Teniihcouta Railway. . . ,67
Taritt Reform 8, 48
Tarirt', detlnition i)f 8
Tariff, extract:^ from 51
Taxes increased 15
Tax ')ii each class of goods, Table. . .49
Tapper's promises 37
Tnr.otte Case 66, 72
Vessels .
.25
12
41
1 08
12
46
.... 47
i
. 65, fiS
7i»
1J>
21
56
uilus-
i;}
43
44
3
6
5
7
8
9
11
17
ces . 20
.....47
46
7«
. .... 3
..4,55
5
26
29
. . . . 48
71
.....7
22
24
27
. . .41
49
. . . ,i;7
. .8, 48
...8
...51
... 16
le...49
... .■(-
W, 72
. ..25