New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-01-28

vocabularies upon The Tribune should take any
notice of the above refutaton of the fssehood.
They will do as they find agreeable and we shall
not presume to blame them for sticking to what
is most congenial to their tastes and habits.
Reciprocity of Trade with Canada.
The bill for the establishment of Reciprocal
Free Trade between the United States and the
British Provinces has been made the special order
of the day in the House of Representatives for
next Tuesday AS this measure has already been
adopted by Canada, and has been ngitated for the
last three years in Congress, we deem this tit
ting occasion to offer against its adOp-
tion by this country in its present shape. Before
doing so, it will be proper to preface our remarks
by a sketch of the origin and history of the pro-
posed measure and it must be borne in mind that
it is limited to only few of the products of the
soil of the two countries, with their lumber and
minerals. The two great items are Wheat and
Lumber
So long as the Wheat and Lumber of the Colo
MES of England were received on more favorable
terms in the British markets than those of Foreign
Countries. we heard nothing about proposals for
Reciprocity from our Canadian neighbors. The
necessity for obtaining from our Government
Treaty whereby the Markets Of the Union would
become available to the Canadians, was first CO.
gently set before the British Authorities by an
Address of the Provincial Assembly, adopted du-
ring its Session at Montreal in 1916, when the GER
tainty that Sir Robert Peels Free Trade bill
would become law was established beyond
doubt We have been informed on good author
ity that Mr.. Hamilton Merritt, one of the ablest
I III.
iector of the Welland Canal, was the originator
of the Address referred to. We may mention in
passing, or the authority of Canadian papers, that
this gentlemans late resignation of his seat in the
Ministry at Toronto was caused by the adoption
of Retaliatory Tariff by his colleagues, to be
submitted TO Parliament in case Congress shall
refuse at this Session to pass the Reciprocity Bill
But to proceed;
The address referred to was couched in such
urgent terms that the British Government lost no
time in giving instructions to Mr.. Pakenham, their
Minister st Washington, to open negotiations for
a Treaty with our Government, by which the
markets OF the Union would be opened to her
Colonies as & setoff for the loss of the advantages
formerly enjoyed by them in those of the Mother
Country. The Imperial authorities had discern
ment enough to perceive that if this were not
speedily effected, there would shortly be a cry
throughout all her North American Colonies for
annexation to the States. pom this point the
delay Of one or two years in obtaining the action
of Congress on the subject has fully verified the
anticpatOns of the British Government; aud it
was only by the most emphatic assurances of the
Canadian Ministry, given by Mr.. Hincks their
Inspector General, TO the people of Canada that
that they had adopted such measures as would
fha ma Gov mt m IA "a.
ciprocity, that the Annexation Movement was
arrested last Winter.
Mr. Pakenham, in accordance with the instruc-
tons OF his Government, opened negotiations with
our authorities at Washington, in the autumn Of
1886, and the matter was favorably entertained
by them. President Polk, being of opinion that
the best and speediest way of carrying it into ef
feet, would be by the passage Of a bill by Con-
gress and the adoption of similar course by the
Canadian Legislature, instead of by Treaty, which
would require TO be ratified by the Senate, direct
ed Mr.. Walker, Secretary of the Treasury, to
make Report thereon to Congress. Gov. Hunt,
the Chairman Of the Committee Of Commerce, in
the House, reported Bill which had been previ-
ousy agreed upon by Messrs. Walker and Paken-
ham, and II passed that branch of Congress in the
spring of ls4s, without opposition, and almost
without remark. We can only explain the facili-
~ with which it passed the House by the suppo-
sition that its be ariDgs both commercially and po-
litcaly, and its general Importance, were not IN
derstoOd. Congress was not aware at the time
that the great anxiety Of England 10 obtain the
measure arose wholly from the fear that the with
drawal Of the Incidental Protection, which her
now defunct Corn Laws had afforded to Colonial
industry and enterprise, would lead to revolution
airy measures on their part. Members seem to
have acted upon the belief that the measure was
fair and equits5le-that We should receive as
much advantage from it as it would confer on our
Colonial neighbors.
1t was represented TO them by the British and
Canadian authorities that, hitherto, the Canadian
market had been, at least four out of every i've
years, better than that of the Union for Wheat
and most other articles Lumber excepted COM
prised in the bill. In proof of this official returns
were quoted 70 show that very large quantities Of
Ohio and other W estern Wheat had nearly every
year for a long period been imported into Csnada
and sold for expectation to England where it was
received on the same terms as Canadian. This |
concession had been made by the Imperial Al
thorities TO Canada in order to throw the carry
ing trade Of the Western States through her Ca |
nails and. by allowing the wheat TO be ground IN
trdHSifH. 70 favor the Canadian miller. The ef
feet which Sir Robert Peels Free Trade mea-
sures would be likely to produce upon the Cana
dian market, does not seem to have been duly
considered at Washington. Fortunately for this
country, the House bill did not reach the Senate
in time 10 be taken up that session.
During the short session ofls4s-9, the BILL as it !
had passed the House the previous year, was
brought before the Senate by Gen. Dix and
would probably have passed but for thu apirited |