4,130 of which went to the United | has been done for the fishermen ? It is said the market of the United States had been opened up for the sale of their fish. States. There were imported of horned cattle 4,580, whilst we exported 38,968 -34,651 of which went to the United States. Of sheep Canada imported 8,690, and exported 242,458, of which 236,808 went to the United States. Of butter Canada imported but 221,966 pounds. She imported 9,268,044-6,579,405 pounds of which went to the United States; and of eggs Canada imported 35,637 dozen, and exported 3,521,068, of which 3,424,850 dozen went to the United States. un These figures show that the balance of trade in these products of the farm was largely against the Eastern States and in favour of Canada. The Maritime Provinces have been appealed to in this debate to come up and support a protection policy as one in their interest. Now the the interest of the Maritime Provinces are varied and important. He spoke more particularly for Nova Scotia as he had the honour to represent, however worthily, a constituency in that Province. We have agriculture, fishing, mining, ship-building, and lumbering, not one of which can in any way be benefited by a protection policy. High tariffs as has been so often and so ably explained during this debate, mean high labour, dear food, a higher price for everything that enters into the consumption and production of all their industries. The agriculturists of Nova Scotia want no protection. They have no competition from the United States for any of their productions. Wheat in Nova Scotia is not grown to any extent, and consequently the farmer must of necessity procure his flour from abroad, and if a duty is placed on flour as contemplated by the resolution, it will be a tax on the Nova Scotia farmers. Nova Scotia imports annually about 400,000 barrels of flour. A duty of 25 cents per barrel on this article would make a tax of $100,000 on the people of Nova Scotia. During this discussion, we have heard but little about the fishermen of the Dominion, a most important branch of industry--except that some hon. gentleman from the other side of the house has said, "that much had been done for that class, and it ought now to bear a tax on flour and meal for the benefit of the farmer." What There was exported from Canada in 1875 $5,580,527 worth of fish, of which $3,738,165 were exported from Nova Scotia, of which only $892,010 went to the United States. "Now, this is what has been done for the fishermenmerely the right or privilege to sell $892,010 worth of fish annually. But what has the fishermen given for this privilege, Sir? We have been told that the "only lever we had to enforce "this much desired Reciprocity Treaty "with the United States had been "given away." Well, what that lever? that lever? Was it not the right to fish in our waters, which has been given away, a consideration for which it is expected this Dominion will receive a large amount of money. This money will be paid to the treasury of Canada, and the fishermen will see none of it. Then, the fishermen have paid dearly for the paltry privilege of selling a few fish to the Americans, and he protested against this House imposing a duty on their flour and meal. was Now, a great deal has been said about placing a duty on coal. He did not believe that any duty this House will submit to will be of any benefit to the coal interests of Nova Scotia, and for the same reason that he would vote against a duty on flour and meal he would vote against a duty on coal, because it would be sectional. Whilst in the case of flour and meal the tax would fall on the Maritime Provinces; in the case of coal it would fall on the western Provinces. If the Government desired to do anything to relieve the coal interests he would inform them wherein he thought this can be done, and done fairly to the whole Dominion. The coal owners of Nova Scotia pay now-and have paid since mining commenced in that Province-a duty to the Local Government for revenue purposes of 10 cents per ton; this amounts to a duty of 5 per cent. on all the capital engaged in mining. He thought it was a matter worthy of the consideration of this Government, in view of the fact that the Local Government cannot afford to relinquish this tax, to arrange with that Government | views upon the subject, they would in the way of commuting the amount doubtless be embalmed in that report which gives to the Local Government which all were so anxiously expecting. a sum annually of about from $80,000 No one would question the magnitude to $100,000, according to the amount and importance of the farming and of coal raised. He remembered lumbering interests of this country, when the Finance Minister introduced and yet neither of these great indus his tariff two years ago, the hon. tries had sent one single petition to this member for Cumberland violently House, or one deputation to the Governattacked the policy of the Government, ment, asking for increased protection, and said that it remained for an Ontario not but that they felt the prevailing Finance Minister to impose increased hard times, not that they suffered from taxes on the Maritime Provinces-that the general depression (and he could he was entering the thin wedge of the speak feelingly as well as truly when Protectionist. He could only say it now remained for a Nova Scotia representative to labour industriously to drive that wedge home. Mr. HĂGAR said he was well aware it was time this debate should cease. The question had been most ably and exhaustively discussed, and a most formidable array of figures and statistics given to the House, to add to which, he felt, would be an infliction. He would therefore confine himself to a few general remarks. When he read the amendment of the right hon. member for Kingston, he was forcibly reminded of the angling proclivities of the right hon. member. He was, it was well known, an adept in the piscatory art, for he had himself confessed that he had often thrown his net and caught therein many a fish-big as well as little; and now, not with his accustomed skill, he had made another cast; once more thrown his net, baited it with protection, and hoped thereby to draw within or entangle in its meshes, no less a prize than the farmers of this country. But he (Mr. Hagar) imagined they were too shrewd, too intelligent, and to wary to be allured by such a bait; and unless it was changed for something more palatable, he would find his catch, not only small in size, but few in numbers. He (Mr. Hagar) denied that the farmers of this Dominion required increased protection, and had yet to learn, that in any number they had asked for it. He was himself a farmer, and represented a farming constituency, yet he knew of but one farmer in his county who advocated protection, and as it was understood he had given the hon. member for Centre Wellington the benefit of his he said no interest suffered more keenly or severely than the lumbering interests), yet they did not seek relief at the expense of their neighbours. They had not, like some smaller industries, besieged the Government, which in their way they would fain make paternal by replenishing their pockets, which perchance extravagance, mismanagement or misfortune might have depleted. Neither of these great industries asked for increased protection, but they would hail a Reciprocity Treaty with our neighbours across the lines, if such a thing could be brought about on a fair and equitable basis, as the greatest boon that could be conferred upon them. He did not desire to seem uncharitable, and he must confess it appeared to him as if this whole agitation for a conceived in protective tariff was greed, begotten of selfishness, and (with the exception of a small number of honest visionaries who believed what they practised, and that opposite class who desired to make political capital out of it) it was sustained and nourished by the few who desire to enrich themselves at the expense of the many. In these times of general depression, which extend to other countries, not perhaps more favourably situated, but certainly wealthier than our own, when trade languishes, when every interest, | suffers,-when capital is withdrawn, because confidence is weakened, he considered that unless it were absolutely necessary for purposes of revenue to meet our engagements, it would be worse than folly to increase the burden of our taxation. The opinion of the hon. member for Cumberland, to the contrary, notwithstanding he believed the course the Government had taken Mr. DEVLIN said it would require two or three hours to go over the points raised on this important question. He gave the House notice in order that members might retire if they chose; but if the House wished to vote now he would reserve his speech for another occasion. upon this question-the policy of re- | tariff would benefit the country he trenchment they had initiated-seek- would support the resolution. ing by a wise, prudent, and judicious economy to curtail expenses, and to make our income square with our expenditure would commend itself to, and meet with the hearty approval of, the great majority of the people of this country. This policy was in accordance with that sound, true and correct legislation, the great object and aim of which was to confer "the greatest good upon the greatest greatest number." Mr. WHITE (Renfrew) was understood to say that he would not have spoken at such a late hour after so many eloquent speeches that had been delivered, but for the fact that he represented here an important industry whose interests had not been much discussed during the debate. He did not believe in protection as a principle of political econmy, but he felt that the large duties which the United States imposed upon lumber and timber going into that country, while large quanti ties of lumber and timber came from Michigan to the Quebec market free, was an unfair competition with the Canadian lumbermen. He held in his hands a letter which stated that contracts had been made for the delivery of deals in the Quebec market, and he felt that some measure of relief should be afforded to the lumbermen of this country from such competition. He had heard it stated that the passage of the Michigan lumber through the country was a benefit to our carrying trade, but he had not heard anything advanced to justify the belief, that this lumber was not carried in American bottoms. He believed that such an adjustment of the tariff as was indicated in the resolution before the House would have the effect of bringing about reciprocal trade relations with the United States rather than the continuance of the slaughter policy which had been so long adopted, and had produced so unsatisfactory a result. With reference to the farming interests they were identical with the interests of the lumber trade. When one flourished the other flourished and when one languished so did the other. Believing as he did that a proper adjustment of the The members were then called in, and the House divided, when the resolution was negatived on the following divi sion : Brown, Wallace (Albert) Laflamme, Scriver, Sinclair, Skinner, Smith (Peel) St. Jean, Taschereau, Thompson (Haldimand) Thomson (Welland) Tremain, A pair was made for Mr. Charlton, and that gentleman not having returned, he and Mr. Domville would stand against each other. Mr. BROWN said he paired with Mr. Laflamme for Friday night. The House then went into Committee of Supply-Mr. Scatcherd in the Chair. On the item for the Militia Department, $35,151, Hon. Mr. MITCHELL suggested there should be a reduction of expenditure at headquarters. Mr. BOWELL pointed to an increase in this item of about $4,000, which he could not understand under this policy of economy. Every salary, with the exception of about three, had been increased, and there had been additional messengers employed. Hon. Mr. CARTWRIGHT said those increases of salary were statutary. The item was passed and the Committee rose and reported progress. The House adjourned at thirty-five minutes past Two a.m. Macdonald (Sir John) Holton. Hon. Mr. HOLTON said he was paired on Monday and Tuesday with Sir John A. Macdonald, and understood that the pair terminated with the sitting last night. They both expected that the vote would be taken last night, but some hon. gentlemen seemed to understand that the pair continued until the vote was taken. Had it not been for that he would have voted against the amendment with the utmost alacrity. Hon. Mr. TUPPER said the hon. member for King's County (Domville) told him he paired with the hon. member for South Waterloo, but he observed the latter had voted on this occasion. HOUSE OF COMMONS. THURSDAY, March 16, 1876. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Three o'clock. BILL INTRODUCED. Mr. ROBINSON-To incorporate the England and Canada Mortgage Security Company. THE JOURNALS OF THE HOUSE. Mr. ROES moved the adoption of the fourth report of the Committee on Printing. The last paragraph was a recommendation to dispense with the printing of the journals of the House, by which a saving of $2,350 will be effected. This was the system adopted by the Senate. The SPEAKER said this was such an important matter that time must be given for due consideration of it. After a brief discussion the report, Mr. ARCHIBALD said the pair ex- with the exception of the last parapired at half-past seven this evening.graph, was adopted. THE MEMBER FOR TWO MOUNTAINS. Mr. TASCHEREAU moved that the Journals of the House of Assembly for the Province of Canada for the Session of 1866, relating to the production of certain papers, in the case of the Queen vs. J. B. Daoust, be now read. He proposed, if the motion should be carried, to refer the case with the papers to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. Mr. DAOUST then read the following statement: Before withdrawing from the House, according to the practice, when any motion in which a member has a personal interest is under consideration, I beg leave to make the following statement: In the month of March, 1865, two indictments were found against me for forging the name of my brother in-law to two notes, one for $500 and the other for $300. I knew that my brother-in-law had authorized me to place his name on those notes, and that a witness was present when the authority was given to me; but when the first indictment was tried I could not remember who the witness was. I could not swear to the fact myself, and I was convicted because I could produce no witness to substantiate my statement. The trial of my case was published in the newspapers, and my witness heard of it and came forward to testify to my innocence. The first indictment was tried in March, and the second indictment in April, when the witness came forward and was examined. On his evidence I was at once acquitted by the jury without leaving the box. I then directed my Counsel to move to set aside the verdict and to obtain a new trial on the first indictment. Judge Mondelet, before whom the motion was made, set aside that verdict and granted me a new trial on the affidavits that I put in; the Counsel for the Crown consenting that a new trial should be granted. When my case came before Judge Aylwin for the new trial, he held that the new trial was illegally granted, because no new trial could be granted on facts alone, and directed that it should be referred to the Court of Appeal for adjudication, and that Court so decided on the appeal at the Crim iminal Term following. Mr. Ramsay, judgment against me, and Judge Monas Counsel for the Crown, moved for delet, before whom the motion was made, declined to entertain the motion, declaring that his order to quash the aside, and there was therefore no converdict against me had never been set viction against me on which any sentence could be passed. Mr. Speaker, I might close my statement here, but I consider that I should not make it complete unless I called honourable House to the fact, that after the attention of yourself and this these charges had been made against me, I was elected to this House by acclamation, and sat as the Member for the county of Two Mountains for for a whole Parliament; that the the members of the present Government, who were then in this House,.. sat in the House with me; that the Hon. Chief Justice Dorion, the leader of the members from Lower Canada who were opposed to me, also sat in that House, but no one of them, during all that time, ever made any motion against me, nor since the present Government took office have they ever instructed any Crown officers to ask that sentence should be passed upon me on that conviction now ten years old. On this statement of facts, Mr. Speaker, I think that I may fairly leave the consideration of my case to the members of this honourable House, believing that as I now withdraw from their presence for a time, they will speedily restore me to the position to which my constituents so lately unanimously elected me. Mr. Daoust then retired. Mr. MASSON thought the House was entitled, after the statements made by the hon. member for Two Mountains, answering conclusively any accusations in advance that could be made against him, to know if any of these assertions of these assertions were questioned by the mover of the resolution or any hon. member present. If not, he hoped the Premier would take this question in hand, and move that the House do proceed to the next order of the day. |