* V . 
 
 AI'^'*-^>^' 
 
 ANADA AS IT IS! 
 
 4 
 
 •e 
 
 ■-»'., 
 
 J^r 
 
 An Address delivered November 28th, i89l, 
 
 BGFORB BIB 
 
 COMMERCIAL CLUB OF PROVIDENCE, R. I. 
 
 BY 
 
 HON. J. A. CHAPLEAU, M.P., Q.C. 
 
 SECRETARY OF STATE OK THE DOMINION OF CANADA. 
 
 PUBLISHED BY REQUEST. 
 
 PBOViD|!NC|i, R.I,, December, 1891, 
 
 /^^f 
 
C V^-^Jl. 
 
 ', i:;jt; 
 
HON. J. A. OUAPLEAU, Q.O., M.P., 
 
 ON THE 
 
 COMMERCIAL RELATIONS BETWEEN CANADA AND THE HNITED STATES. 
 
 Tho Commercial Club of Providence, E.I., on the evening of Saturday, November 28th, 1891, for the second 
 time in its history, devoted its attention to the question of closer trade relations between the United States and 
 Canada. Mr. Erastus \V iuian Hpoke before tho club in February on the advantages of reciprocity with Canada. 
 The speeches on this occasion were to set before tho members the Canadian Conservative view, as to tho 
 length Canada should go in negotiating a commercial treaty with the United States. The Canadian guests Avere 
 Jlon. J. A. Chapleau, Secretary of State, Mr. Richai-d White, managing director of the Montreal Gazette, Mr. 
 John Maofarlane, of the Canada Paper Conipay, and Mr. L. H. Taohd. Tn the evening at 6 o'clock a re- 
 ception took place in the Narragansett Hotel parlorn. At "7 o'clock'lhe dinner began. 
 
 There wei-c about seventy gentlemen vi'csent. Mr. Arthur 11. Watson, President of the (Jiub, had the head 
 of the table. Hon. J. A. Chapleau bat at his right, with Governor Ladd and Senator Dixon beyond, and Mr. 
 Richard White and Mr. John Macfarlane on his left. The other guests included Congressman Lapham, Lieut.- 
 Gov. Stearns, Secretary of State Utter, Speaker of the House Capron, Mayor Smith, Col. Samuel P, Colt, Mr, 
 Richard S. Howland, Mr. Edwin G. Angell, &c., &c, 
 
 ^\ 9 o'clopk President Watson rose and called the gathering to ordor. 
 
Mr. Wateon introduced Mr. Ghaplcaa as the principal wpeaker. He said : " This evening the Club has the 
 honor to onterldin a distinguished mombor of the Canmlian Ministry, a gontloman who is by birth an orator and 
 by education a statesman, who .ms hold many important offices of state, and who, as a leader of the Conservatives, 
 is admirably qualified to speak of Canada as she is, as she has been, and as he hopds she may be. T have very 
 great plojisure in introducing the Hon. J. A. Ohaploau, Secretary of State for the Dominion of Canada," 
 
 CANADA AS IT IS. 
 
 Mr. Chapleau saicL.: " Mr. Ohairman and Gentlemen, — The cordiality of the welcome you have given me 
 reassures me against the natural fear which a stranger must oxporieuco in venturing to address, in a language 
 foreign to his own, such au assemblage us I see before mo. I had folt honored by the kind and flattering 
 invitation tendered to mo by your club ; and now, oven before I have accomplished the arduous task I have 
 undertaken in accepting your invitation, I feel rejoiced and happy to have accepted it, when I look at the 
 sympathetic faces — when I hear the Hympathetic greetings with which you receive me. 
 
 " I undei'stand now why I wa.s not stopped by the Araerictin Customs officer in entering this country: that 
 intelligent officer must have at once understood that my engagement here was not an alien labor contract but a 
 most plea^•urable visit to a beautiful and most hospitable city. Certainly I could not desire to have a more intelligent 
 and representative audience of the American people than I have hero to-night. Smallest of all among the States 
 of the Union, Ehode Island, like the little tribo of Benjamin among the twelve tribes of Icrael, has always stood 
 among the foremost of the brotherhood of the republics of the Western Continent. Foremost in order of history, 
 for was it not here that the Northmen settled tive hundred yeai-s before Columbus crossed the ocean ? Foremost 
 in the gay world of fashion, so long as Newport remains the crowned queen of society. Foremost in manufac- 
 tui'ing enterprise, in proportion to its population. Foremost in its unequalled library, to which students of 
 American history throughout the world must come, and in the front rank of intellect by its university, the 
 Alma Mater of so many 
 
 BRILLIANT AND DISTINGUISHED MEN. 
 
 That splendid pile of university buildings, your publio library, your athensBum, all with their magnificent 
 collections of books, going up into high scores of thousands, are monuments of your greatness that put ^ shame 
 populations of five times your magnitude, (Cheers.) Your state enjoys the proud distinction of having 
 inaugurated the real development of the cotton manufacturing industry on this continent, an industry that 
 has grown to proportions so colossal, since Samuel Slater's modest initial efforts at Providence and at Pawtuoket 
 Falls, St^ndin^ here and looking back into the pa^es of biatorv, I (^n^ ^eiQiqded th^t this city qf youva is oa 
 
sacred ground. Sacrod to the cause of religious liberty, which here had \vn birthplace, and sacroJ to the memory 
 of Eoger Williams, ' one,' if I am allowed to quote a high-minu ^d Protestant writer, ' of the sweetest souls with 
 which God ever adorned the earth we tread.' Politicial liberty you who dwell in New England had always in 
 abundance, but religious liberty you had not, nor did it anywhere exist in the English colonioo until, in Iho 
 mind of Roger Williams, there dawned the idea of liberty of the soul. 1 say nowhere else, for even the charter 
 of Maiyland excluded Unitarians. First of all in this City of Providence was announced the only theory under 
 which men can live in harmony and peace, 
 
 • TUE PRINCIPLE OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, 
 
 If, then, gentlemen, the history of your fair city raises such noble thoughts, how much does its name, Providence? 
 — " La Providence," for the word is a French word too. How it raises our thoughts to the Father of all men 
 whoso bund guides the destiny of nations as well as of men — who protected Roger Williams in the wildei'noss of 
 Narragansett and Champlain on the shore of the groat river to the north. 
 
 " Gentlemen, as [ look around and see in your beautiful city, and in an audience such as this, the evidence of 
 prosperity and culture, I can see how bountifully Providence has blessed you. His h'md has led you along the 
 checkered path of your destiny a.id brought you out in peace and plenty. I rejoice at it — and as I think of your 
 career and that of the great Union of Republics of which you form part — as I picture, in my imagination, the 
 opening vistas of your increasing prosperity, I rejoice — for, in the family of nations, we are learning that the 
 prosperity of one is the prosperity of all. Gentlemen — sonsof Roger Williams — children of Providence — can there 
 be a ' Providence' for you and none for us ? We know that cannot be. We men of the North feel and know that 
 we also have a history and a career and a dcstiu}' before us, and that the luminous star which has guided you 
 will also guide us. We feel that Providence has enti-ustod to oui- hands the development of the northern half 
 of this continent, and we are not cowai-ds to shrink from our task. 
 
 " Men may come here and tell you that the political party I represent are actuated by hostile feelings to 
 you; if they speak so they tell you falsehoods. (Hear, hear and cheers.) Yes falsehoods. (Hear, hoar and 
 cheers.) Our feelings aro kindly, and wo are as desirous as they are of extending the intercourse between our 
 country and yours to the farthest limit of friendship consistent with manly dignity. Why should we not be 
 so ? Bat the difference between their party and mine is that my party believes in the destinies of Canada — theirs 
 does not. My party believes in a providential career for our country, their party thinks that there is no 
 Providence save for others. My firm belief is that your country and mine can go on, each in its own sphere, 
 developing the resources of this continent side by side in brotherly amity, distinguiuhod by these individual 
 differences which mark the members of one household, but bearing the family lineaments of civil and political 
 liberty which stamp the races from which we have sprang. 
 
CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES, 
 
 placed 8idp l)y side by nature, niUHt either bo friends or enemies ; they are too near neighbors, they have too 
 many intorisiri in common, too mnch ambition of the same kind to bo indilierent to each othor. I think it iw 
 time they should be friends. (Hear, hoar.) 
 
 " If wo look back to the past, wo find that the two countiies started the tiamo year in the race for life. 
 Quebec and Jamostown of Virginia, wero both founded in 1608. Now England was planted later on. The 
 young Oolonioa »vei-o not out of their loading strings when thoy began that long series of jwars which only ended 
 by the cession c f Canada. Those wero hard times, when force roigne<i supreme, when the life of man was 
 counted for vary little ; when both countries seemed to borrow the foi-ooity of the Indians. Your ancestiji-s wore 
 accused of having sent the Mohawks to butcher, in the dead of night, the inhabitants of Lachino. My ancestors 
 retaliated by nouding expeditious against Doerfield and Haverhill, to accomplish massacres which wero considered 
 great deeds in those times. And to think that Canadians have travelled, for that glorious deed, all the way from 
 Montreal to Massachusetts on snowsboes, in the middle of winter ! Finally the seven years war put an end to 
 the struggle aud you came out victors. The coiony of Now France, had practically boon abandoned by the 
 Mother Country, who did not much value " these few acres of snow," as Voltaire called Canada. It was from 
 Boston, and, therefore, fi '>in the territory of Ehodo Island, that- the hardest blows were directed against New 
 France. It was so mucli ..« that the English colonists wero known in Canada, not as the Americans, but as the 
 Bostouians (les Bjstonnais), a name by which the poof le of the United States we o known along the shores of 
 the St. Lawrence, up to a very few years ago. 
 
 " One feature has always struck me when reading the history of these eventful times ; it is the strange, if 
 not the deep diplomacy by which your forefathers alternately used England to turn the French out of Canada, 
 and then used the power of France to drive the English out of this country. 
 
 " But, gentlemen, that is the history of the past, and, thank Heaven, it is forgotten, in this sense, 
 that no evil feeling survives those terrible times. I am not exaggerating when I say that there is no 
 nation under the sun that has more prestige in the eyes of the Canadians than the Americans. We share the 
 admiration of the world for your greatness, your progress, your institutions, which wo would envy if we did not 
 enjoy the same liberties as those you are blessed with. Like the United States, Canada is a democracy organized 
 on a liberal basis, where the lace for power, wealth and honors is open to all ; where men at tbo holm to-day have 
 mostly all tome from the humblest ranks of society. 
 
 " And, now, gentlemen, let me again turn back to the pages of history and, from its teachings, explain to 
 you tho real " struggle in Canada" and the true position of '• Canada as it is." Let me show you the true issue 
 which lately returned to power those who are now ruling our country, and clear away from your minds 
 those mists of misconception which our enemies have thrown around it in oi-der to disguise their own 
 folly and failure. Let me tell you of some of the people who founded my Northland home. Very little 
 
more than one hundred yoars iigo there sailed from the port of Now York a fleet of Kngl'mh (jhips hearing witli it 
 one of the waddoHt burdens recorded in history, but one full, alHO, of lessonH of hope and of courage. It was the 
 fleet which carried 
 
 THE TJNITEID EMPIRE LOYALISTS 
 
 • 
 
 Becking in the wilderness now homes and political institutions after their own hearts. That was a Kmali part of 
 t!io total emigration ; yet, in the space of a few weeks, twelve thousand souls — men, women aud (ihildron — snilod 
 from that singlo port of Now York. Thoy were not obscure or iinkni'wn ])eoplo. They wore mostly from the 
 oducatcd classes of colonists — owners of property and profo>8ional men— but there wero people iirnong them of 
 all classes of society. Many of them had sei ved the King in arms. They had fought for a great idea — they wore 
 unionists against secessionists and had fought for the organic union of tho Anglo-Saxon race. Few of them had 
 approved of tho parliamentary measures which prccij)itatcd tho Revolution; hul, in wui, only two sides are 
 possible, and thoy chose that which, in their vicr, Iisid tho hottei- right. They loft behind them broad cuUivuted 
 fields and roomy mansions to begin the world anew in log huts and tents. The fleet carried thorn to tho rouky 
 coasts of Acadia, a name which covers tho territory now known as New Brunswick ami Nova Scotia. New 
 Brunswick was not known for years after as a separate Province, and but a liandful of people wero scattered over 
 that immense territory." 
 
 '• Other oxilos streamed over the northern border of the colonies which had hecomc tho United States. Thoy 
 entered what is now tho prosperous Province of Ontario, then a wilderness of forest roamed through by scattered 
 bands of Missisanga Indians. Their strong arms and brave hearts supported them in their aiduous labnurs, and 
 they built up in Ontario, as in Now Hrunswick and Nova Scotia, political institutions unsurpassed in the union 
 of freedom with order, by anything which tho genius of the Anglo Saxon race has produced elsewhore. They 
 became farmers in the western proviiice and on the Atlantic coast, thoy became sailors; or, rather, tlioy continued 
 to be sailors; for the settlers were chiefly from tho seaboard colonics; and at this very day, owing to their 
 maritime enterprise and skill, the Dominion of Canada stands fourth among tho nations of tho world in the 
 registered tonnage of shipping. Thus the loyalists proceeded to clear up a new land for theniselvcB — now the 
 Dominion of Canada." 
 
 "Loyalists! A strange word that — singularly antiquated. For are not all tho "enlightened" asking 
 what is loyalty? Why should an illusion of past ages invade the domain of practical politics ? These absurd 
 people — these ancestors of ours — only a hundred years ago actually had political principles. Loyalty is the honor 
 of nations — an abstract 'idea which ''disillusionized" people do not apprehend. Practical men sneer at such 
 abstractions, burpractical men are, in such matters, the most inconsequential in the whole world. The world is, 
 and always has been, ruled by ideas; for man docs nor live by bread alone, and nations which lose their ideals 
 dibappear, not having any real inner continuity of life. Loyalty in a people is what character is in a 
 
8 
 
 man, the inner nnd abiding princi])lo wliich shnpes hiH outward conduct to ono dofinllo aiid HtoiuUly consistent 
 type, and groww stronger in thus ahaping it. Loyalty is that which holds together the congeries of raoeH 
 ond tongues culled Switzerland, and which saved the Unito<l Slates in the great civil war. So much for 
 one element which hud a lar;<e share in making the history of Canada, but iutonninj^'led with thorn was a people 
 of noble and ancient lineage, to whom I urn jiroml to belong — a people isolated from the parent stock — 
 a people abuiidonod by their natncal parents, who found in the British Crown, though alien in race, in language 
 and religion, a friend nnd protector when their need was the sorest, and under whoso sway they enjoyed that 
 li! eity of the soul of which Kogor Williams had dreamed. Is it any wonder, then, gontlemon, that gratitude 
 with the French colonist should soon have developed into loyalty, and that there should have sprung up u deep- 
 rooted feeling of attacliment to the British crown us the tried guardian of tiieir lungiiago, their institutions nnd 
 their laws. (Cheers.) With such a stock of men, strong-hearted, level-headed, patient toilers ot the land and 
 sea, Canada was well equipped for all emergencies ; against open aggression us well as subtle and tortuous 
 methotis of encroachments. And (rod knows we wore spared neither of those. Whether we look back into our 
 niemoiies or listen to our grandparents, we lind that every decade had brought itc own troubles and alarms. 
 There were the JJaine boundary, the Oregon question, the sympathizers of '37, the " codfish war," the Fenian raids, 
 and other weary disputes, during every one of which our speedy and irretrievable ruin has been confidently 
 predicted; just as our candid friends are now cliecrfully waiting the appalling results of the McKinley tariff to 
 overtake us. iJut with all this the prudent and thinking men who happened to govern our country during 
 those irritating times, relying upon the loyalty and the tried expoi-ience of the people, succeeded in pi oserv- 
 ing conridcnco at home nnd peace abroad. Wo had the extraordinary case of a Prime Minister leigning almost 
 supreme over a democratic community, during over a quarter of a century, almost without interruptiorj. 
 (Hoar, hear, and cheers.J It must be admitted, however, that 
 
 THE PRESENT CANADIAN OPPOSITION 
 
 had good reason to anticipate success at the elections which would necessarily have taken place in the nutnmn, 
 for the sixth parliament was in the hist year of its life. The influence of the Local Government was in their favor 
 in all the provinces. Thoy had been out of power since 1878, and it was their turn, for a Government so 
 long in office as the present Domiiaon Cabinet, must make many active enemies and lukewarm friends. The 
 fanners were uncomfortable and disposed for a change, when the Opposition committed the irretrievable blunder 
 of identifying their party with a policy of unrestricted reciprocity with the United States, and thus traversing 
 the continuous traditions of Canadian sentiment and history. Sir John Macdonald watched th« moment when 
 they should become hopelessly committed, and then, unexpectedly, dissolved the House and threw himself upon 
 the national feeling of the people. The battle was fought politically, as far as party programme wont, on a 
 
protootionist baaiH, but roally upon s fir deeper isBue — that of national oxiHtonoe. No doubt this wuh disclaimed 
 by the Opposition. No doubt Sir Kiciiatd Ciirtwi-ight comes of a good loyul ntocilc. No doubt Mr. Liiiuier would 
 dcpi-eoatc a union which would dwarf the importance of his riico and rolij/'ion, but, (lovorod up thougli it was in 
 evory way, the isauo w;ih thoro, and the (juiclc bouso of 
 
 t TIIK PEOPLK DETECTED JT AT ONCR. 
 
 Thoy l('l( that, in a "liickor " with the United Statos Government, the national iudopendence was safer in the 
 hands of the present Cabinet than i i that of (lioir oppmenis. 
 
 " That a proposition to permit the United States Uovornmont to regulate our commerce and settle our tariff 
 should liave secured even the measure of support it did, ought to suggest much searching of conncience to our 
 proBOiit rulein. The power proposed to be Iwindcd over so fratikly to Washington wo had won after a long and 
 hai-d struggle with our own motherland. It was a thing above all others of which we were most jealous, and 
 yet, at the 'ast election, an important minority voted apparently to yield it up to the United Suites. Any stone 
 is good enough to throw at a politif-fil antagonist and, cnce in power, the Opposition would feel its responsibilitu s ; 
 but to permit Congress to close our jjorts against Great lirituin, by moans of the McKinloy tarifl' or any such 
 Chinese legislation as it may adopt, is not a declaration of independence — something might be said for that — 
 but a renunciation of independence and a declaration of abject dependence which would stagger the solf-respoct 
 of the smallest Central .\merican republic. Such a policy would rapidly diminish the imports from England 
 and Franco and utterly destroy our own manufueturefc. Then after ten or twelve years, the Detroit experience 
 would bo rojieated. Wo should be told that wo ought not to expect the advantages of free trade with the 
 United States unless we are pi'opared to share all the burdens of citizens. Then with oar manufactures ruined 
 and our self-respect gone wo should bo compelled to sneak by a back way into the American Union, instead of 
 entering it like free men by free men's votes. But, say 'siipeiior persons," why resist the inevitable? 
 Annexation must come sooner or later, and they point to the wealth ol'the United States — its millionaires, the 
 gieatest in the world. The reply is easy. Very rich men are not a strength but a weakness to a state. 
 (Hoar, hear). Enormous disparity of fortune has alwa3's been a sign of impending change, and the stability 
 of a state rests rather upon the absence of very poor men than upon the presence of very rich ones. 
 Again tho Review of Reviews assures us, in connection with a portrait of Mr. Wiman, that " Canada is the outer 
 fringe" upon a groat industrial community of which it shjuld normally be an integral portion. Canada has not 
 the material lesources of tho United States, but she haa existed independent of them since tho settlement of 
 America ; first as French Canada, then as Canada of the exiles, and now as Canada of a united . people, and 
 there seems to a Canatlian no reason why she should not continue independent. Moreover, let it be granted that 
 eventually that is her fat<5, it is no reason why she should rush to it. A man o :' sense does not shoot himself be- 
 cause he must die some day. (Cheei-s and'laughter.) A good deal has boon said at various times in our history 
 
10 
 
 about the invasion of CitTiada from the Unitort States. Tliere might bo some reanon of late to talk about the 
 invasion of the United States from Canada. (Hear, hear.) Contrary to the custom of war, however, the 
 invaders from Canada receive the 
 
 KINDEST EECEPTION IN THIS COUNTRY. 
 
 (Cheers.) Some become citizens of the United States and help to increase your prosperity. Some come hero 
 for the purpose of negotiating treaties, not always with success. And some, like mysolf, come at the kindest of 
 invitations to deliver public tiddresses on public questions. And all of them have occasion to say at the end of 
 the visit, what Arteraus Ward is reported to have said to the people of a western town, ' Gentlemen, I never 
 was in a placeVhere I was treated so well, nor, I may add, so often." (Laughter.) This kindly treatment, 
 well and often, did not begin to daj'. Long ago, in 185-t, Lord Elgin was received in the United Stales with a 
 remarkable enthusiasm. (Cheers.) In 1850 the people of Buffalo gave him a reception on the occasion of a formal 
 visit to ihe Welland Canal. An amusing story baa been told by the Mayor of Buffalo at the time. An enthu- 
 siastic guest, as he listened to Lord Elgin, said, ' Fine fellow ! If he comes here we'll make him Mayor.' As the 
 speech went on, the enthusiastic gentleman said excitedly, ' By George ! we'll make him Governor of the State.' 
 And finally, as the eloquent orator worked on the feelings of the audience, the Mayor's friend slapped the Mayor' 
 on the shoulder and cried. 'Heavens! we'll make him President— nothing less than President.' (Cheers and 
 laughter.) In 1865, one oi'the gr.eatest orators that Canada ever produced, Hon. Joseph Howe, was joresont at 
 the great convention at Detroit and delivered an address on the occasion, which deserves to be considered as one 
 of the great oi-ations of the literature of public affairs on this continent. I refer to that speech for the special 
 purpose of quoting from it one paragraph which is as true and as living in its interest as it was upon the day its 
 utterance moved the 
 
 MINDS OF THE DETROIT CONVENTION. 
 
 'I may well feel awed,' said Mr. Howe, 'in the presence of such an audience as this, but the great question 
 which brings us together is worthy of the audience and challenges their grave consideration. What is 
 that question ? Sir, we are to determine how best we can draw together in the bonds of peace, friendship 
 and comniorcial prosperity, the three great branches of the British family. In the presence of this 
 great theme all petty interests should stand rebuked. We are not dealing with the concerns of a city, a province, 
 or a state, but with the future of our race in all time to come. In 1874 Lord Dufforin, whose name in every part of 
 the woi-ld is a synonym for brillancy and ability, had a friendly reception from the Chicago Board of Trade and 
 in the course of his speech he said, ' In the policy which the Government of Canada has shown itself willing to 
 promote, I believe there existed but one motive, and that is the desire to come to an understanding with the 
 Government of the United States. I do not think that for one moment we have imagined that in any agreement 
 
11 
 
 or treaty which may be negotiated it would be either possible or desirable to make a one-sided bargain. What 
 we desire is fair and equal dealing, and I believe you, gentlemen, are actuated by the same honorable Hontiment.' 
 " I have referred to these events and quoted these speeches in order to bring before the minds of those who 
 may have forgotten them, or may be too young to remember them well, the fact that there has been establishetl 
 between these two countries a tradition of friendly relations among public men, and between public men nnd 
 public bodies on both sides of the line — a tradition which no man in his senses wishes to see broken, which every 
 man who cherishes a love for peace and the prosperity which accompanies and promotes peace, wishes to Hoe con- 
 tinued and confirmed. It was in accordance with this tradition of friendliness that Mr. Laurior, the leader of 
 the Opposition in Canada, was entertained in Boston on the Hth instant at a banquet at which the 
 Governor of the State was present. It is in accordance with this same tradition of friendliness that 
 you, gentlemen, have done me the honor of inviting me to be present and address you this evening. I am 
 here to-day animated by the friendliest feelings towards this country and by the most perfect loyalty 
 to my own country and to my Queen. I may therefore venture to carry on in this address that tradition of reci- 
 procal friendliness which Loi-d Elgin established, which Howe made memorable, which Loi-d Dutl'biin reasserted) 
 and which I have learned from my lamented friend, Sir John Macdonald, to appreciate and value myself. 
 (Applause.) Gentlemen, I think you do well to receive the name of Sir John Macdonald with appluuse, for 
 
 HE WAS YOUE FRIEND AS WELL AS MINE, 
 
 and when he died your interests as well as ours suffered a temporary loss. If I do not say an irreparable loss, it 
 is because in this world no man is essential and all losses are I'epaired and all vacancies filled in time. But Sir 
 John Macdonald established'in his lifetime, and left to us, old colleagues, a tradition which we are willing, nay, 
 very desirous to carry on, a tradition of friendly commercial relations with the United States consistently with the 
 maintenance of Canadian interests in the protection of its rising industries. (Cheers.) To show you how woL' 
 established is this tradition, let me detail for you as men of business the steps which in times past have been 
 taken by the governments of which Sir John Macdonald and many of his late and present colleagues were m<!niber8, 
 to establish reciprocal relations between these countries. 
 
 THE HISTORY OF RECIPROCITY NEGOTIATIONS, 
 
 as appeal's by our laws and reports, shows that Canada has always been favorable towards fair and friendly 
 trade relations with the United States. In 1947 an address was moved in the Legislative Assembly of Canada 
 praying that nogotialions should be entered into with the Government of the United States to procure the 
 admission of Canadian products for consumption in their markets on the same terms as the products of the United 
 States were admitted for consumption into Canada, that perfect reciprocity may be established between the two 
 countries. In that same year old Canada passed a law reducing rates on Import duties on United States produota 
 
12 
 
 from 12J to 7^ per cent, and raising tho rate upon British imports from 5 per cent, to 7i per cent. This measure 
 wa8 passed, relying upon the supposed willingness of the United States to negotiate a fair measure of 
 reciprocity between the two countries. It gave an immense advantage to the exporters of the United States, 
 but no corresponding legislation was enacted by that country, nor was reciprocity granted. In 1849 an act was 
 passed enacting that ' whenever under any law of the United States of America the articles enumerated in the 
 sche'lule to that j\.ct annexed, being the growth or production of this province, shall be admitted free of duty 
 into said United States of America, then similar articles being the growth or pioduction of the said United States, 
 shall bo admitted into this province free of duty when imported direct from tho United States.' A similar bill 
 was reported by the Committee of Commerce and passed by the House of Repi-esentatives, but failed of 
 consideration in the Senate in both 1848 and 1849. In 1850 Sir Fi-ancis Hlncks visited Washington on behalf of 
 the Canadian provinces and addressed an able letter to the chairman of the Committee of Commerce in favor of 
 the adoption of a measure of i-eciprooity on the basis followed by tho Canadian act of 1849. His efforts failed, 
 i<nd the 
 
 UNITED STATES SENATE REFUSED TO ACT. 
 
 In 1854, after much correspondence, a treaty of reciprocity was at length negotiated. Under this treaty the 
 following articles were declared free in both countries, and the treaty was to continue in force for ten years : — 
 
 SCHEDULE. 
 
 Grain, flour, and breadstufts of all kinds ; animals of all kinds ; fresh, smoked and salted meats ; cotton, wool':, 
 seeds and vegetables; undried fruits, dried fruits; fish of all kinds; products of fisli, and of all'Other creatures 
 living in the water ; poultry, eggs; hides, furs, skins or tails undressed ; stone or marble in its crude or unwrought 
 state; slate; butter, cheese, tallow, lard, horns, manure; ores or metals of all kinds, coal, pitch, tar, turpentine, 
 ashes, timber and lumber of all kinds, round howed 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; hown, 
 wr^jught or unwrought burr or grindstones ; dye stuffs ; flax, hemp and tow ; manufactured, unmanufactured 
 tobacco, rags. 
 
 Scarcely had the treaty been put in operation when agitation began in the United States for its amendment or 
 abrogation. The border cities complained that their manufactured goods met an import duty at the Canadian 
 frontier, that Canadian duties on manufactures were rsused from 15 to 20 per cent. This, in the face of the fact 
 that mnnufactured goods were excluded by express words from the operation of the treaty, that United States 
 duties on manufactured goods imported fiom Canada were higher than Canadian duties on like articles, and were 
 raised by tho Morrill tariff ; that consular fees were imposed for proof of origin of free goods, and that the United 
 States used no effort to obtain free ubo of the State canals for Canadian vessels. The agitation was taken up by 
 
13 
 
 the Legislature of New York State and pi'eesed upon Congress by a resolution of bothlHouses of that body. 
 And it had its effect. In 1865 notice of the abrogation of the treaty was * iven by the United States, but 
 neither Great Britain nor Canada abandoned the friendly attitude they had always taken. When the notice of 
 the abrogation of the treaty of 1854 was given on March 11, 1855, by Mr. C. F. Adams, in London, to Lord John 
 liussell, the British minister was disposed to think that the Government of the United States was not serious, 
 so great a body of commercial opinion in the United »States seemed favorable to the continuance of the 
 treaty, fn 1865 Sir Alex. Gait and Hon. W. P. Howland from Canada, Hon. W. A. Henry from Nova Scotia, 
 and Hon. A. J. Smith from New Brunswick, were sent by their respective govoi-nraonta to Wiwhinglon to 
 co-operate with Sir R Bruce in a friendly attempt at negotiation for a renewal of the treaty of 1854. These 
 gentlemen found ' that no renewal or extension of that existing treaty would be made by the American 
 authorities, but that whatever was done must be done by legislation.' 
 
 THE NEGOTIATIONS FAILED; 
 
 owing to the unfriendly feeling in Congress, a result which Lord Clarendon, in a despatih to Sir F. Bruce, 
 most sincerely deploi-ed. By the Customs Act of 1868, section 6, certain enumerated articles, the growth 
 of the United States, were permitted to be imported into Canada from the United States, free of duty or at a less 
 rate of duty than is provided in the said schedule upon the proclamation of the Governor-in-Council, whenever 
 the United States shall provide for the importation of similar articles from Canada into that country ee of duty 
 or at a less rate of duty than is now imposed on the importation from Canada of such articles into the United 
 States.' This was an olive branch held out by Canada to the United States in spite of the hostile experiences of 
 previous years. In 1869 Sir John Rose was sent by the Canadian Government to Washington, and, in conjunction 
 with Sir Edward Thornton, proposed new negotiations, with the consent and approval of the British Government 
 of thnrt time, for a reciprocity treaty based on the treaty of 1854, with the addition of manufactured articles to the 
 free list, the mutual opening of the coasting trade, the protection of patents and copyrights, and a treaty of 
 extradition. It was found impossible to make auy propositions which the American GovernnMJnt would accept 
 and the negotiations fell through. In 1871, during the session of the joint committee which framed the 
 Washington Treaty, Sir John A. Macdonald, Commissioner for Canada, and his colleagues, the British 
 Commissioners, proposed : ' That the Reciprocal Treaty of 1854 should be restored in principle.' Tiie United 
 States Commission replied in the negative. In 1872 the Government of Sir John Macdonald in response to a 
 resolution of the Board of Trade of the Dominion, called attention to the fact " that both Her Majesty'n Govern- 
 ment and the Government of Canada have availed themselves of every suitable opportunitj-, since the abi-ogation 
 of the reciprocity treaty, to press upon the Government of the United States (he desirability of a renewal of 
 reciprocal trade relations between the latter country and Canada, upon a broad and liberal basis ; and submits for 
 the favourable oonsideratlon of Your Bxoellenoy in Coanoil that the Dominion Boai-d of Trade be informed that 
 
14 
 
 Bhould the Government of the United States comply with the wishes of the United States National Board of 
 Trade, the subject will receive the fullest consideration oftheGovernment of Canada. Tlio United States National 
 Board af Trade in 1872 had petitioned Congress for & renewal of reciprocal tiade relations with Canada ; and the 
 Dominion Board of Trac'.e had brought this fact to the notice of the Governnont of Canada, 
 
 "In 18'74, Mr. George Brown, at the instance ofthoMackenzie Government, which, by its minute of council, de- 
 clared its belief that a most favorable opportunity was pres sr, led for a renewal of negotiations for a reciprocity treaty, 
 was sent as a commissioner to Washington, and, in conjur/ction with Sir Edward Thornton, after a good deal of 
 discussion, negotiated a draft treaty of reciprocity. But the President did not oven allude to it by message, nor 
 did the Senate of the United States, a thing within the scope of its authority, ratify or even deign to discuss it. 
 
 THE FAILURE OF GEORGE BROWN'S ATTEMPT 
 
 in 18'74 had such an effect on Mr. Mackenzie's Government that during the remainder of its tei-m it made no 
 further attempt in that direction. In 1875, when Mr. Wallace asked if the Governmeut intended to renew 
 negotiations, Mr. Mackenzie replied : ' We will always be ready to negotiate for a reciprocity treaty with any 
 nation.' In inaugurating the national policy of 1879, which had become an essential part of public policy in 
 Canada, if it were to have any great national industries, the Government of Sir John Macdonald did not overlook 
 their traditional goodwill towai-ds the United States and towai-ds fair reciprocal relations. Therefore, the Customs 
 Act of 1879, chapter 16, section 6, contained a special enactment still favoring reciprocity on a liberal scale. No 
 answer was made to that offer. In 1887, when Sir Charles Tupper was at Washington, he made a for- 
 mal proposal once more to the Government of the United States for a mutual an-angemont providing for 
 greater freedom of commercial intercourse between the United Slates and Canada and Newfoundland. Mr. 
 Bayard's reply was a flat refusal. It will thus be seen that the position assumed by Canada has from the first 
 been thoroughly consistent and continuously favorable to the adoption and maintenance of 
 
 A JUST AND REASONABLE MEASURE OF RECIPROCITY 
 
 with the United States. This has been shown : 1. In the address of 1847. 2. In the act passed in 1849, in the 
 Cusfoms enactment of statutory otfences, in 1868, 1879, and 1888; and in the speedy ratification by onr Parlia- 
 ment of the treaties of 1854, 1871 and 1888. 3. In the repeated efforts made by Canada tor the continuance of 
 the old treaty of 1854, and, after its abrogation, for the renewal of reciprocal relations on a fair and equitable 
 basis. This expose establishes that, in Canada, we all agree on the necessity of establishing closer commercial 
 relations between the two connti'ies. The disagreement begins on the means to attain that desirable object. 
 The only pai-ty who has not shown his willingnese to do anything, but whose consent is all-impoilant in the 
 matter, is Brother Jonathan, wlio must laugh in his sleeve at the sight of our struggle, if ha has made up his 
 mind 
 
16 
 NOT TO TRADE WITH THE KANUOKS. 
 
 The great argument put forth in fiivor of unrestricted reciprocity is that it would open to Oanadii a market 
 of sixty millions of people, forgetting that Canada wojld find in that market of sixty millions competitors in all 
 wo can sell to the Americans. They forget that the United States are the greatest producers of the world, and 
 that there is not one article of the farm which they do not produce. They overlook the fact that our young 
 industries would be crushed in the struggle in Canada with the powerful and old American manufactures. Of 
 couiue, there is no denying the fact that your tariff is very hard on Canada. It pinches in several places, but 
 we are not on that account to stand there and raise our hands to heaven. (Hear, hear.) In this strait, we did 
 and are doing what shrewd and energetic Americans would have done in our position. Wo turned around and 
 looked for new markets for our surplus productions. We have succeeded with many articles, and are sure to 
 dispose of the balance before long, saying in the meantime to you : Gentlemen, if you wish to trade with as, we 
 are ready; just now is the time, but remember we aio no beggars and can afford to do without you, although 
 not without some hard efforts. (Cheers.) 
 
 THE McKINLEY TARIFF 
 
 is a measure for the passing of which we ought not to feel angry with the United States. It has done ns good. 
 It has caused us to realize that we can stand upon our own feet, where before we leaned a little for support upon 
 the United States. (Hear, hear.) Here and there, commodities we have to sell have experienced restricted sale 
 in consequence of the McKinley tariff; but speaking in general the McKlnley tariff has not been felt to be 
 injurious in its results. The best proof of this is the cii-culation of bank notes. You kilow, we, in Canada, have 
 the best banking system in the world, not excepting even the Scotch system, on which ours is modelled. (Hear, 
 hear.) Years ago Hunt's Merchants' Magazine, of New York, eulogized the paper currency of Canada as 
 possessing a decided proclivity all the time, and especially in dull seasons, to return to the emitting bank. That 
 is to say, such notes cannot be kept out except so far as they are in active .employment, for they can find no 
 resting place outside of the vault of the issuer, and this makes them fluctuate in amount exactly in obedience to 
 the wants of commerce. A few weeks ago Mr. Cornwall, cashier <of the Bank of Buffalo, read a paper at the 
 meeting of the American Bankers' Association in Now Orleans, in which he said: 'Canada has for many 
 years existed under a banking law which has given her a circulating medium full}' meeting all the j'equirements 
 of every season, both as to elasticity and safety,- and to-day she has the most perfect currency system oj 
 any nation in the world except Scotland.' Now the circulation under this banking system is the best tost 
 of the state of the country. If there is prosperity, the circulation expands; if times are dull, down goes the 
 circulation. 
 
1« 
 
 BEFORE AND AFTER. 
 
 Here is a table which shows the condition of things after and before the McKinley tariff went into force. 
 The expansion of circulation from July to October of each year was : 
 
 1885 $4,C08,00O 
 
 1886 6,439,000 
 
 1887 6,107,000 
 
 1888 6,005,000 
 
 1889 4,890,000 
 
 1890 5,313,000 
 
 1891 6,602,000 
 
 You will see that the increase in the circulation required for the business of the country in October, as com- 
 pared with July of 1891, was the largest of all the years given. It was, with the exception of three previous 
 Octobers, the largest of any year. It was the largest in ten years. (Hear, hear.) Now, in Canada, the expansion 
 of circulation from July to October in each year is duo to the crops in the first place. It is the farmer and the 
 moving of his products that run up the circulation. You will see, therefore, that 
 
 • 
 
 THE CIRCULATION IS THE BEST TEST . • 
 
 of the condition of the farmer. If the McKinley tariff had hit the Canadian fai*mer hard, the circulation would 
 have been of only a normal character, or below the average. But the circulation last October was $1,250,000 
 above the average of the previous six years, or 24 per cent, of an increase. It is evident that the McKirlcy 
 tariff has done Canadian farmers no harm. Why ? Simply because we have sought for other markets and 
 have been successful, and have found these markets were profitable, less liable to interference and with better 
 prospect of future growth. (Hear, hear.) 
 
 • • • 
 
 ■• THE MARKETS WE HAVE SOUGHT 
 
 are principally for food products ; onr lumber and other products of the forest, the world needs and takes. There 
 is a constant demand for these. During ten years, 1880-89, exports of forest products averaged $22,386,000 a 
 year. In 1890 they were $26,180,000, or $3,800,000 above the average. These look after themselves. So of the 
 pi-oducts of our mines. Our asbestos is the best in the world. Our phosphates are of the highest quality. Our 
 nickel will soon be in the steel armor plates of the navies of the world, recent experiments in the United States 
 showing the immense value of nickel in the composition of these armor plates. . 
 
17 
 
 NOW OUR FARM PRODCICTS 
 
 are finding thoir way to the old countries of Europe, principally to England. The points that troubled our far- 
 mers when the McKin'ey tariff came into force were barley, lambs, horses and eggs. The general trend 
 of our oxportp of agricultural products during twenty-five yonrs has been an increase in exports to Europe 
 and relative decrease in such exports to the United States. That is quite natural and irrespective of 
 taritTs. In 186b wo sent 60 '36 per cent, of our farm products ta the United States and i{4'61 per cent, to 
 Great Britain. In 1890 we sent 60-08 per cent, to Great Britain and 36-50 per cent, to the United States — as 
 near as possible a complete reversal of the positions occupied by those two countries a^ takere of our farm products, 
 and during that period the aggregate tnvde of Canada in those products has increased in u large proportion. The 
 McKinley tariff 
 
 SIMPLY STIMULATED THE MOVEMENT 
 
 which has been going on for nearly a quarter of a century. With respect to barley, we sot to work and grew 
 two-rowed barley such as California grows, and now wc appoiir in the English markets as competitors of 
 California, instead of supplying the Eastern and Middle States, .is we did. (Hear, hear.) We sent in 1800 
 to England five times the quantity of barley we did in 1889, and very much more in 1891 than 1890 — the 
 reports being very favorable and showing that our barley in England will have the same superiority it has in the 
 United States. With respect to eggs, we used to send all we had to spare to the United States. It was con- 
 venient. It suited the stage of development of our transportation facilities. But the McKinley tariff came in 
 force just when we had solved the question of transportation of fragile articles, and wo were able, without ^ 
 break to the continuitj' of movement, to switch off to the English market. This season wo have sent thre^ 
 million and a half dozen of eggs to England, where in 1889 we sent about three thousand dozen. We hav« 
 
 SUBSTITUTED MILLIONS FOR THOUSANDS. 
 
 (Hear, hear.) The market for eggs in Great Britain is immense; and actual experience shows that we 
 can put our eggs down at a lower rate of freight than Prance can send them. We can, with pur 
 cooler northern route across the Atlantic, transport them in the best condition. The market for horses 
 is increasing. We sent nearly ten times as many hoi-ses to England in 1891 as we did in 18!)0. They 
 commanded a higher price in England ; and as soon as we raise just the sort of horses England wants we 
 can get still higher prices. The day for the street car " screw " is past ; electricity has electrocuted them. The 
 McKinley tariff finished what little life there was left, and we are going in for better hoi-sos. (Laughter.) We 
 did a large trade in lambs with the United States, and nice juicy food they were. The farmers thought that 
 trade would surely feel bad eflfects from the McKinley tariff. The lamb trade went right along, and in Poi-th, 
 
18 
 
 where tho Consorvativo party had a large demonstration recently — and whkh is the centre of a largo lamb- 
 raising district — the tnrmorB said they never got better prices than this season. In the article of cheese 
 we find a market in Great Britain for all wo can produce, and possibly it may surprise some that we 
 exported to outside countries in 1890 over $9,300,000 against $8,600,000 exported by the United States to 
 all coun'ries. Wo have recently found that thei'o is in England a market for all the poultry we can raise, 
 and oui' initial ventures have proved such a success that the coming Christmas in England will 
 
 SEE MORE TONS OF CANADIAN POULTRY 
 
 distribuled over the British isles than there were in previous years single individuals of this class of 
 food. In pork proiiucts we have discovered that we have a supcriorit}' of one cent a pound ovei- those of the 
 United States. This has stimulated ])rodiiction, ar.d notwithstanding our increased export this season to Great 
 Britain we have in the single province of Ontario neaily 400,000 swine more than we had in 1889. With respect 
 to manufactures the recent census shows that the amount of capital invested has increased by over 20(t ])er cent., 
 as compared with ten years ago ; that the average artisan produces more and is paid more than he was ten years 
 ago. Now, gentlemen, let mo remind you of a very important point when j-ou talk of tho offers made by the 
 Liberals of Canada and of those of the Conservatives. There is a great ditference in the ])Ositiou of men in power 
 and men in opposition, in men with the grave responsibilities of office, and men having to answer only for each 
 of themselves individually and not bound by any of their promises made in Opposition. With this truth before 
 your eyes I can assert that if the Liberals came into power they would not give more to the Americans than we can, 
 for this reason of state necessity, that, if they did, they could not carry on the Government of Canada for want of 
 money. Canada has spent fifty millions in improving her waterways; one hundred millions in building railroads 
 and many millions in oth(>r public works. These expenditures constitute the public debt which is to be paid, and 
 tho tariflt' is looked to to supply the interest. The carrying out of the Liberal platform would mean the greatest 
 crisis that Canada has ever seen. The Liberals are too wide awake not to see the breakers ahead of their policy, 
 and they would avoid them ; but in the meantime, if they can use the Americans to hoist themselves into power, 
 they do not see why they should not do it. Tho unrestricted reciprocity scheme will receive Hs quietus the very 
 day the Liberals come into power. But I go further and say that 
 
 UNRESTRICTED RECIPROCITY IS DEAD. 
 
 " Tho more it is discussed the farther off it seems. An important letter by Hon. Edward Blake completely 
 exhausts the question, and must prevent it from continuing to be the main plank of the Opposition platform. 
 Rather than follow in i(^ dangerous course the party of which lie has bo long been a distinguished leader, Mr. 
 Blake has chosen to abandon public life altogether. When loyalty to the country prevails over loyalty to such 
 f'ose and long existing party ties, one is justified in feeling renewed confidence in the destiny of Canada. 
 
19 . 
 
 Sir, the diflcussioii of tbnt important topic, tho commercial intercourse between Canada and the United 
 States, has given rise to some other questions involving directly the national existence of our country. First, 
 
 THE QUESTION OF NATIONAL INDBPENDKNCB. 
 
 There are those who say, and they are not far from telling the truth, that every native born Canadian is 
 Canadian first and last, and that every day the. proportion of native born Canadians increases as against the 
 native born Britons forming tho Dominion. It is true, and I admit it, (hut every (^nnadian wants at maturity a 
 country of his own to live for, to fight for, and, if necessary, to die for. (Hear, hear and cheers.) Nobody is so deaf to 
 the teachings of history, as not to realize the natural fact that colonies, like shoots from the parent tree, gradually 
 but surely tend towards independent life. Tho only question is a question of time. The age of majority foi- 
 children has been fixed by the wise legislation of great men, at different ages for different countries or diflferent 
 purposes, and it greutly depends upon the circumstances in which a young man is situated in relation to his 
 father, either tho line of business ho pureuos, the amount of interest he has or the measure of liberty he 
 enjoys under the protection of his father before he finds it useful and wise to go into business on his own account. 
 This is the very position of Canadians. Although dependent on the Mother Country for our protection among 
 the other nations of the world, we are enjoying a measure of political liberty which ^ 
 
 IS EQUIVALENT TO INDEPENDENCE. 
 
 (Hear, hear.) " In that respect I fully agi-oo with Mr Laurier, who said at Boston the other day that ' England has 
 granted to Canada and to all her colonies every right, principle and privilege which she once refused.' Nowadays 
 has been realized the truth proclaimed by Charles James Fox, in the last century, that the only method of iieeping k. 
 British colony is to give power to govern themselves. So, to-day, the British Goveinment docs not attempt to 
 lay taxes on us or force British goods into our ports. We are at this moment at liberty, and wo have the 
 right, to tax British goods and British wares. With pride I say it, though Canada is still a colony, Canada is fiee. 
 The only tie that binds Canada to the motherland is Canada's own will. After admitting that there is in Canada 
 at the present moment no desire for independence, the Liberal leader says that he believes ' that the time has 
 come when the powers of self-government that we have ai"e not adequate to onr present development; that we 
 should be endowed with another power, tho power of making our own commercial treaties.' Here I must 
 
 JOIN ISSUE WITH MR. LAUEIER 
 
 and I cannot do better than to quote from tho powerful contribution of your distinguished fellow-counti-yman, Mr. 
 Andrew Carnegie, in one of tho last numbers of The Nineteenth Century. Speaking against the scheme of 
 Imperial Federation, which has attracted so much attention in late years, Mr. Carnegie says : 'It surely cannot 
 
20 
 
 have failed to attract tho attention of the inemberH of tho Imperial Federation League that even Sir John Mao- 
 donald, a native born Briton, waH forced to announce tliat Canada was no longer to be thedepemJont, but the ally of 
 Britain. In fiitnro, said Sir John, i\» quoted by Mr. Carnegie, ' England would be the centre, Rurrounded and 
 Kustained by an alliance, not only with Canada, but with Australia and all her other possessions, and there would 
 be thus formed an immense confodorutlon of freemen — the greatest confederacy of civilized and intelligent men 
 that over had an existence on tho face of the globe.' "'Alliances,' adds Mr. Carnegie, 'are made between 
 independent nations. Sir John must have also embiaced the Republic, for this is necessary to make the greatest 
 confederacy of intelligent and civilized men. Sir John asserted the independence of Canada to the fullest extent, 
 when he recently commanded Lord Salisbury to tear up a treaty which had br>en agreed upon by Sir Julian 
 Pauiicoforto and Sccretai-y Blaine, with Lord Salisbury's coi-dial approval, which the British Government had 
 presumed to make without consulting Canada.' I do not vouch for the accuracy of Mr. Cainegie's representation 
 of Sir John's views, but I believe in that mysterious and natural growth of nations towards independence, which 
 alone can give them the full development of their strength and resources. That sentiment does not exclude, 
 in ita patriotism, tho 
 
 FULL EXERCJSR OF ALLEGIANCE AND LOYALTY. 
 
 • 
 
 I am not prepared to say, with Mr. Laurior, that simple questions of fiscal policy or commercial treaties can 
 bring the severance of Canada from il - tonnoclion with Great Britain, as it did bring it in your country in 1715. 
 I again prefer the authority of Mr. Carnegie, who writes that: 
 
 ' It was not a question of taxes that produced the independence of the United States, this wae the incident 
 only which pi-ecipitatod what was bound to come a few years sooner or later, independent of any homo policy. 
 Franklin and Adams had no idea of separating from the motherland when they led in tho refusal to be taxed 
 from Westminster; but they soon found themselves compelled by a public sentiment, until then latent, to advance 
 to independence.' 
 
 Sir, I am a British born subject, and a Frenchman by parentage. I am proud of and loyal to the great countiy 
 to which I politically belong ; I am proud of and true to the blood that runs through my veins, that Norman 
 blood which is tho boast of the noblest scions of England. The two nations are deserving of your love and respect, 
 as they have mine. You owe to one 3'our birth as 1 owe her my freedom as a citizen ; tho other helped you in 
 your struggle for independence, whilst she gave me my birth as a man. Both have noble traditions; in tho 
 bannors of both there is glory enough to cover the world. (Loud Cheers.) With such a parentage, with such 
 traditions of courage, of intelligence, of gloiy, are the Canadians to bo denied the noble ambition, the sure 
 destiny of being a people by themselves, 
 
81 
 
 AN INDEPENDENT NATION ? 
 
 I do notdoabt if n\ore^than I doubt my sincere ftllef^iance to the conBtitution of my country and to my sovoroign. 
 Bat I do not doubt eitiior that no powev on earth will force me into flubmission against my will or agninnt'my 
 conscience. Againstmy Willi would be, made a slave, never a subject. And the hour has passed in the life of nations, 
 and that hour novor camo in this free continent of America, when free men could be forced into another 
 people's allegiance. I know that it has been said and written both in this country and in ours that the 
 effect of the McKinley tariff will so cramp the trade and finances of the people of Canada that we will be 
 compelled to seek annexation to the United States. Well, sir, I know the feolings of our people, with whom 
 I have lived in constant communion of sentiment during the thirty years of my political life, and I do not 
 hesitate a moment to say that no consideration of finance or trade can have influence on the loyalty of the 
 descendants of the races of whom I spoke to you in the opening of my address, or tend in the slightest 
 degree to alienate their affections from their country, their institutions, their Go/ornment and their Quoon. 
 (Cheers.) IF any one in this meeting believes that in refusing commercial interoourwe toOanuda Congress wpuld 
 undermine the loyal feelings of our people, he is labol-ing under a delusion and doing injustice to a people whoso 
 
 SENTIMENT OF LOYALTY IS AS INDELIBLE 
 
 as your own, and I cannot do bettor than affirm, with more energy if it be possible, with Mr. Laurier what he 
 affirmed the other day in Boston • ' If such a boon as freedom of trade were to bo purchased by the slightest 
 sacrifice of my nation's dignity, I would have none of it.' Let us rather cherish the idea, Sir, that those solemn 
 and proud professions of dignity and courage will not be needed, but that the public men of both countries, 
 echoing the sentiments of the two nations, will find a happy solution of those important problpras. For my own 
 pai't, I look to the future with hope and with security, with Andrew Carnegie. 1 would cheeifully set aside the 
 scheme of Imperial Federation, the theory of an empire trade league, to see roi.;ize<l the grand idea of a race 
 alliance of all the countries blessed with the noble and free political institutions which (rreat Britain has devised 
 for the good of humanity, an alliance which would hasten the day when one power would be able to say to any 
 nation that threatened to begin the murder of human beings in the name of war under any pretence : 
 
 ' Hold, I command you both ; the one that stirs makes me his foe. 
 Unfold to me the cause of quarrel and I will judge betwixt you . ' 
 
 A Kriegsverein with power so overwhelming that its exercise would never be necessary." 
 
 "Those are noble words from a noble heart and I endorae them with the same enthusiasm as I endoroeyour 
 own countryman's conclusion, 'Fate has given to Britain a great progeny and a great past. Her future 
 promisee to ^^ PP less gr^atftn4 prolific ; l)ut,bowerer numeroua tho children tl^w§ cm o«ver be but on© mother, 
 
22 
 
 and that mother, great, honored and beloved by all her offspring — ae I pray she be— is this sceptred isle, my 
 native land. God bless her.' (Cheers). 
 
 SIR, THERE IS NOTHING TO DESPAIR OP, 
 
 nothing to fear, whon the great citizens of a country are disposed to approacli and discuHs the burning 
 issues standing in the face of two countries in such a lofty spirit, with such a largo and warm lioart. 
 (Cheers.) I have no doubt but that the same sentiment of noble foUownhip which animates you, 
 animates the great American nation. (Hear, iioar.) I know that such is the Hcntiment which ani- 
 mates our people in Canada. I am not hero as a representative of the Canadian Government. I have 
 not and could not have asked such a mission when T accepted your kind social invitation, liut I must not forget, 
 and you cannot ignore, that I am a member of the House of Commons of Canada, and that I have the right to 
 convey to you the expression of the good will, of the heartfelt sympathy, and the offer of the widest possible 
 measure of reciprocity in friendliness and good wishes from my Canudian fellow-countrymen. Yes 1 In Canada 
 wo rejoice in your prosperity, in your magnificent development, in your patriotic love for your flag, in your 
 solution of some of the great problems that troubled your national existence and in your assured hope of solving 
 them all. But we are proud, too, of our own country and our own flag, of the splendor and strength of our le- 
 sources and of the well nigh boundless possibilities of our future greatness. Even as you do, we love free 
 institutions ; these we have, and they are the best suited to us and to the genius of our population. If you .have 
 a republic, we have a veritable commonwealth — ' a crowned republic ' as it has been happily called. You are far 
 ahead of us in point of numbers, but we know that our people live in peace and plenty no loss than yours. 
 (Hear, hear.) And it is our hope that Canada and the .United States, in friendly rivalry in all the art« of 
 peace, in all the marts of commerce, may go on through the ages to come, the happiness and prosperity of each 
 acting !i8 a stimulus to the best efforts of the other, each working out a destiny of the brightest augury, and so 
 linked in the bonds of amity and loving kindness that thoy may be said in the majestic words of Milton, " To 
 progress through the groat circles of revolving centuries, clasping hands with unfailing joy and bliss in ovormea- 
 sure forever." (Loud and prolonged cheers.) 
 
 " Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I thank you for your kind invitation, for your cordial reception and for 
 your patient attention. This day will remain on§ of the brightest of my life, andjfpr it I will ever thank you 
 and never forgot " Pi-ovidence,"