were would rather make it than see the country they so much respected and revered hu miliated or its position weakene i by any dem nd on their part for protection. H might be wrong. He knew he spoke sen. timents which hon. gentlemen would de ride; they had done it before with reter ence to some of the suggestions he hid offered; he expected it again. but the future would, he thought, prove that he was not very wrong as he had been proved to have been not very far wrong before, in reference to the circumstances that had led us to the point where we now were (Her. hear.) He did not wish to detain the House He had sufficiently in licated the position which he thought we placed in to day. He had sufficiently indicted the pressure which he thought had induced the Government to recom mend the adoption of the Treaty, which they thought objectionable not long before [Her, har] He would address himself for a few moments to the question before the House, and to the mode in which we should deal with it. It was clear from what he had said that his view would be that concession was a thing to be avoided and not to be made; but before presenting his views be would refer to the motion and the amendment before the House. The motion was for the se cond reading of the bill, and the amendment of the member for Wet Durham had the effect of declaring that the second reading should not pass. Now. he was quite aware that, according to pulimentary rule, the passing of the motion of amendment did not defeat the bill; but at the same time he was equally aware that the passage of that amendment would bring on a Ministerial crisis, and virtually defeat the bill; and he was perfectly aware also that if that result were to follow, and the Government were defeate l. be was certain that, from the views off red by the mover of the amendment, his course would be not to proceed with the bill himself; therefore he thought it was beyond doubt that the success of the motion would operate as a defeat of the bill. Then the grounds upon which the hon. member for West Durham placed his ad vocacy of his amendment were rather based upon what the Imperial Government should do than upon what we should do if the Treaty was objectionable. On Canadian grounds, then, it ought to be met by a square vote against it. It ought to be rejected. If, on the other hand, it was only intended to indicate to the Imperial Government what they ought to do then we had no right to pass it. (Hear, hea) Therefore the conclusion that he arrived at was that he must support the Treaty. as to the implicy of He was convinced that the only thing which we could now control, which had passed irremediably beyond our reach was the navigation of the St. Lawrence. | and, much as he valued that, rather in the sense of maintaining our own exclu. sive right to it. much as he valued that, still, in an economical point of view it did not concede much to the United States With that exception, everything that was proposed to be done would come again before us ten years hence. Before that time arrived the country would have greatly increased in population and strength; before then public opinion would have ripened far beyond what it now was; before then the expressions which he had ventured to make use of this night might be the general expressions of the country. If they were so, then he said, it was still more our duty to express our acquiescence in the Treaty, however repugnant it might be to our pride. The wisest thing we could do was to subject ourselves to the terms which England might offer, and to remain under her protection, because we would have proved unable to protect ourselves. (Loud cheers) Hon Mr. HOWE desired to refer to the remarks of the member for West Dur. ham, which it had been complained that no Minister replied to. The hon. member had read too much, and he could not help thinking of the wish "Oh that my enemy would write a book." The quotation from the minutes of council by that hon. member were fervent, loyal, and were exactly what ought to have been at the time, and under the circumstances. But, unfortunately, they failed to convince the Imperial Government. He could imagine the hon. member pleading some case be. fore a jury. If he failed to obtain a verdict, what would he do? Why, he would make the best compromise he could in the interest of his client, and that was what the Government had done. Then the hon. member had complained that lives were not to be lost and property destroyed for a sum of money. What example, however, had the United States set in this matter? The Alabama and other cruisers had destroyed her property: lives were lost and blood shed, and no higher insult could be offered to a nation; and yet, in view of the horrors of wir, they had agreed to take money for the whole. Then, again, the hon. gentlem in had har rowed their feelings by describing some imaginary willow bereaved of her son; but supposing that widow to be real, the son could not be brought to life, and if she were in poverty, the utmost that could be done would be to make her life as com'ortable as if her son had lived. Then Again there was the statement, "how tarnished was onr honour." Well, suppose a min had a beautiful helpmite, and some morning he had found she had left him for another min; there were only two things to be done-shoot the man or get damages. Was it not very likely that, if the hon member for West Durham met the injured man he would say, Shooting won't help the matter; bring an action and I will get you substantial damages." Then as to the Fenians. Did they not fancy they had been wrongel; and did they not fancy that they were carrying on a lawful warfare? England had had great trouble with these men; lives had been taken by them; and even the Prince of Wales had been turned out of Dublin; and yet see with what leniency and for bearance England hid treated them. If the English Parliament and press, instead of the calmness and moderation they had shown, had been actuated by the singain. ary spirit of the gentlemen opposite in the master of the Alabama question. the two nations would have been involved in war. In the pimphlet he had published some time ago, he had termed the Americans an aggressive people, and the organ from which hon gentlemen opposite took their tone at once denounced him in the foulest terms, and the hon. member for Lambton took him to tisk; and yet in a few days afterwards that hon. member characterized the American policy as singully aggressive, and the hon. member for West Durham was equally alarming, comparing Canada to Naboth's vineyard, and saying that the Americans were so aggressive they would seize that vineyard. o that those gentlemen need not com plain of him, for they had expres-ed themselves in stronger terms than he had ever used. Turning to the Treaty itself, he first desired to say that Canada and Canada's Government were in no way to blame for the abrogation of the Recipro city Treaty. The Treaty was lost partly because of the Alab ima and other cruisers. England was certair ly wrong in not seizing those cruisers when they re-entered her ports. On the abrogation of the Treaty, En land favoured the license system in connection with the fisheries. It was tried and failed Then the Government pro. tected the fisheries, and he never could understand the opposition of the Mari. time Provinces to th it protection How. ever, the water police took the field, and they were aided by British cruisers; but, wis there not great danger in this? When this step wis taken, up came the headland question the question of the right to trade in our ports, and then there was General Butler rousing the American fishermen, bave and instigating the American Government resigned, Canada would have had both to declare war. Then on the first intima England and the United States against tion that reciprocity would be given anew, her. When he wrote his pamphlet, reciMr Rose was sent to Washington, but his procity had been denied, the troops were mission failed. Then the Postmaster- gone, and he saw our independent action General went to England to press our would come to an end without the cordial policy and views on the English Governs support of England. Up to that moment ment, and his visit ultimately resulted in the London Times had stated that England the High Commission. The structure of had ceased to be a Western power, and that Commission had been complained of, that when she sent a couple of companies but the Canadian Government had no of men to Manitoba that was the last time voice in that. The hon. Minister of Jus she would interfere. His pamphlet had tice was asked to take a part in that Com- changed all that. In the Times now they mission, and if he had shrunk from the said- we are "just as zealous for Canada responsibility, what would gentlemen op、 as we ever were ;" and the Standard rep site, what would the Toronto Globe, proached the English Government with what would indignant Grits generally have having given Canada grounds for the fears said? Would there have been a word in he (Mr. Howe) had lawfully expressed. the English language sufficiently oppro- He maintained that Sir John Macdonald bious to apply to him? Those who now had only acted properly in. delaying all blamed him for what he had done would explanations until Parliament was assemthen have blamed him for what he had bled and all the papers could be brought failed to do. The hon. gentleman and the down, and said that when England, in the Government, however, were not so timid, interests of peace, consented to help Ca. and he went. But how could he go as a nada in the only legitimate way, on Canadian Commissioner? Canada, although account of her just claims, the question a Dominion, was still a colony, and, in ad largely changed; and the only wise thing dition, the United States would not have was to fall in with the Imperial policy and allowed these parties, two of which would establish peaceful relations with both be against her. Then, if the hon. gentle England and the United States. The hon. man had declined to go to Washington. gentlemen opposite claimed to have sus the Imperial Government would tained the Government, so that a proper acted without him and would have pro- arrangement could be secured; but their ceeded with their Imperial policy. It was support was not sincere. The Government objected that the Minister of Justice ought had been taunted with having no policy, to be responsible to the Canadian Parlia but he declared it bat. He pointed out ment. Was he not so responsible? Was the Minister of Finance as most successful, it not in the power of the House instead ani spoke of the satisfactory results of of receiving his speech with approbation, the efforts of the Minister of Militia, to have received it with averted heads. which would be evidenced if ever occasion and to have driven him from office? I should require. England even took every fibre of his frame, and in every flish example from the organization of the of his mind from the moment he returned, Canadian militia. Then again there were he felt that responsibility. Since that the Minister of Customs, and the Minister return, hon. gentlemen opposite had en- of Inland Revenue-how faithfully their deavoured to create suspicion. His hon. duties had been administered He spoke of friend manfully fought one battle and. the Minister of Marine as the most zealous looking at the papers, it would be seen and painstaking Minister possible, and that the Government fought another bat- that his efforts would he felt to the advan tle, and that while there was a chance of tage of the country for years to come, making a satisfactory arrangement, they and spoke of the naval schools being seconded and aided the hon. gentleman. established by him. The Minister of But they fought in vain. But the fisheries Public Works could be seen labouring were reserved to the Canadian Parliament. from morning till night, anu the country As the negotiations went on, the particu- throughout was feeling the result of his lars were telegraphed to England, and labours. He also spoke of the Secretary then the leader of the Imperial Govern of State laying out the new country of the ment assumed the whole responsibility of North-West. They and their party were the Treaty, and the hon. Minister of Jus. united to a man, proud of the past and tice might, of course, have resigned his confident of the future. position; but his responsibility in doing so would have been awful, involving the breaking up of the peaceful relations be. tween the two countries. Suppose he had Hon. Col. GRAY spoke of the observa. tions of the Secretary of State for the Provinces, with regard to the Fenians, as the most unexpected possible. He deem ed it his duty to speak of this, and say that the expressions used could not be approved. He was astonished to hear the hon. gentleman defending the Fenians Hon. Mr. HOWE denied having defend. ed the Fenians He had merely said that they imagined they were in the right. In and Hon. C. GRAY said, after that explanation he should not continue his remarks on that subject As to the treaty, he thought it the most important question that had ever been before the House. whatever capacity the Premier had acted the re ult was before the House, could be accepted or rejected as the House pleased. Then referring to the use by the member for Durham of England's motto, he would ask what right had (anada lost? He must refer to a remark of the member for 20thwell, as to the admission of fi-h and oil into the American market free The fish producing oil could not be found in the waters within the limits of ex lusion. It had been said that the action of the House last session on the tuit could have no effect on the Americans, for the matter was settled before the House dealt with it. He referre i to the dates of the votes, and maintained that was not the case, and that the Minister of Justice was right in what he had said as to the result of the action of the House. He thought the Hou-e should have some intimation from the Premier of what the effect would be on the American legislation. He would now take the Treaty, pint by point, speaking first of those that had not been of jected to. First, there was the franking system of goods, which was to extend throughout the whole of both countries. The whole of the coasting trade of the lakes would be secured 10 Ontario on account of the advantages she would have over the Americans by cheaper labor and and cheaper construction. The great productions of the far west would pass down the St. Lawrence, and the Canadian canals, an object which Canada had long des red to attain. He referred to that part of the Treaty by which Americans were allowed equal rights with British subjects to the use of the St. Clair Flats Canal, although it had been asserted that the canal was built entirely in the Dominion. If such assertion was correct the Americans should not have been allowed to build the canal at their own expense without having been informed of that fact, and he considered that they had an equita le right to use it on equal terms with Canada. The rules as to the duties of neutra's were of the utmost importance to Canada, as the third maritime power in the world. Without them the commerce of this country would be ruined in case of England being at war with any foreign power. He could pot estimate the benefit Canada would derive by means of the peaceful relations which the Treaty of Washington would establish between the two countries. It must be plain to every man of intlligence that twelve or fourteen years of peace would do more to place Canada in a position to maintain her rights than anything else that could possibly be devised. The facts before them must convince them that they parted with nothirg, and that the conclusion necessary for the ratification of the Treaty would be to the advantage of the country at large. If Canada were a separate, independent country, unconnected with England in any way, and maintaining her own position, he doubted if any compensation would be adequate for the cession of the fisheries. They must expect to make some acrifi cies for the interests of the Empire, and benefit of the concion. The fisheries were invaluable, but rendered doubly so by the market which the Treaty gained. The admission of our territorial rights and compensation for the difference in Value between the American and Canadian fisheries should be remembered. He had heard no objection to the Treaty from the Maritime Provinces, on the contrary he believed they approved of it. In order to make it more clearly reciprocal he thought Canada should be on equal terms with the United States, and, although it was against British policy to give bounties, the Canadian Parliament would have the power to adopt that course if it should be found that the United States persisted in doing so. It had been urged that the Ferian claim constituted no part of the Treaty, and therefore should not be considered in the present debate; but he thought they should look at the question as it now stands, and not as it stood on the 20th January last, or at any other time. The British Government might have thought they were not in a position to press their demand, and offered Canada compensation. He had observed that the ery of those in the United States as well as in Canada who were opposed to the Trea y was "humiliation." He thought that the term was more indicative of the opposition of party than the opposition of principle All knew that such was the case in the United States, and although gentlemen in opposition in the Canadian Parliament said they had risen above the question of party, it was singular thatthe same language should be used in both countries. He was of the opinion that Hon. Sir JOHN MACDONALD said that as a number of gentlemen on both sides of the House desired to speak on the subject it would perhaps be better to adjourn the debate and go on with it on Monday, taking the vote on Tuesday. He consi any cession in regard to the navigation of | the intention of the Government to go on the St. Lawrence would be more in sound with the debate any further to-night. than in substance. The United States must take the advantage of the Canadian canals to get to the seaboard, and while they could do so they would not make canals on their own side, and in case of war the whole would be in the possession of Canada. He agreed with the hon.dered the motion of the hon. member for member for Sherbrooke that they must be West Durham a direct censure on both prepared to make some sacrifice in order the Government of Canada and the Imto maintain the connection with Great Bri-perial Government, and they could not go tian; but had they made any sacrifice? If there was any complaint it was from On tario and not from the Maritime Provinces, which were most interested. What they wanted was the coasting trade of the United States and the registration of ves sels. Mr. MILLS said that the hon. gentle. man had referred to the remarks of the member for Sherbrooke, who took the position that the Government of Great Britain, in giving us the liberty to exercise our judgment as regards the fishery clauses, referred also to the question of connection or separation, and said that those who voted for rejecting the fishery clauses assum ed the responsibility of declaring Canada's independence; and he thought that Government had endorsed that position. Hon. Sir JOHN MACDONALD asked how the Government had done so. Mr. MILLS- By Cheers. Hon Sir JOHN MACDONALD emphatically denied that any cheers had issued from the Government seats. Hon. Col. GRAY said he could see nothing in the action of the British Gov. ernment by word or deed to show that they had any desire to sever the connec tion; on the contrary they had promised to defend Canada to the full strength and force of the Empire. It was the highest compliment to Canada to have inserted in an Imperial Treaty a stipulation that part of it should be left entirely to the action of the Canadian Parliament. Mr. BLAKE-Was it a substance or a form? Hon. Col. GRAY replied that it was a substance and no form and it was within the power of the Canadian Parliament to reject it if they should be pleased so to do. He went on to say he had listened to the arguments of hon. gentlemen opposite, but had found in them no sound objections to the Treaty which should cause the House to reject it, and in conclusion he urged hon. members who desired to do real service on behalf of England, to do that which she now thought necessary for the peace and welfare of the Empire. Mr. BODWELL asked whether it was on with any other business until it was disposed of. He would therefore suggest that they should proceed on Monday, and take the vote on Tuesday. Hon. Mr. MACKENZIE said that the hon. gentleman was not right in assuming this motion to be a motion of want of confidence. The House had been invited to pronounce an opinion on the matter, and the hon. member for West Durham had simply in his motion said what he believed to be the opinion of the people of the country. The proposition therefore to resume the debate on Monday on that ground was not sound, He would suggest that if the debate was continued on Monday the Government should give a portion of next day for ordinary business. Hon. Sir J. A. MACDONALD said there would be no objection to giving Friday for that purpose. Mr. BODWELL then rose to move the adjournment of the debate, when That hon. Mr. BOWELL asked the indulgence of the House for a few minutes. He referred to the language used by the hon. member for Sherbrooke as being of a nature likely to injure the country if allowed to go uucontradicted. gentleman had stated, in most emphatic language, that England had told the Gov. ernment that they should accept the Treaty or the alternative, the responsibility of selfgovernment. Immediately afterward the hon. gentleman had added that he was convinced that the truth had been kept from the people of this country. Coupling that with the language of the hon. member for Lanark, in a speech he had made at Hamilton, in which he distinctly stated that in conversation with prominent gentlemen in England they had told him that Canada must prepare for ultimate separation, he could not resist the conclusion that there was something behind the scenes which we had not been made aware of. He (Mr. Bowell) was prepared to vote against the Treaty on its merits, and would like to do so, confident as to the future, because he believed there was something more than a shadow in the right, which had been reserved to Canada, of rejecting or ac |