The New York herald., 1874-11-27
THE CANADIAN RECIPROCITY TREATY.
British Commercial Opposition to American
Trads Intsrests-A Remonstance
and Ministerial Reply.


Of Commerce waited on Lords Derby and Carnar
Won, the Foreign and Colonial Secretaries, to pre-
sent objections to the proposed Canadian Reel
pr0city treaty with the United states.
Mr.. Sampson Lloyd said under the proposed
treaty the manufacturers OF England were
placed at great disadvantage compared
with those OF the United States. The
treaty was unfair in principle. and
would be exceedingly injurious In practical
e1ect. He wished to submit as gen.
eral principle. that IN any case where British
colony or dependency negotiated treaty with .
foreign country. England should not be placed in
worse position than the foreign country.
Lord Derby replied that the government fully
agreed to this principle.
Mr.. Barron, representing Leeds, said he ala not
oesire to have protective clause. He only
wished Canada would not graut America anything
more than England.
Mr.. Bebrens representing Bradford, stated
there was party in Canada which was so power
full that 1t might take action prejudical to Eng
land II the treaty was not clearly worded to pre-.
vent 1t. He asked for the insertion OF a clause
providing that the United States shall never have
the right to claim any remission OF duties not &C.
corded 20 British commerce.
Lord Derby then replied at length He said -
III do not know that we ever received deputa ton
IL Wuuou Vt0Wa VIC 50 eutlEely concur. 4Our
case Is In substance acceded to absolutely en-
tirely. We agree with you on the main point, that
in every negotiation of this kind s is the duty Of
the government to see that English trade ana
commerce are not placed at o disadvantage as
compared with those OF foreign countries.
We should fall most grossly In our duty II for
any consideration whatever we allowed the impo-
sltion OF . difrerenrtal duty against our own
manufacturers. That never was our inten-
ton. There ID nothing in the proposed
treaty, as we understand 1t, leading to
that conclusion. learn that apprehensions
are entertained on the subject with some sur
prise. AS regards the difficulty Of defining the
articles mentioned In the schedule with sufficient
clearness something must be allowed for the good
sense and faith OF the two governments charged
with the Interpretation Of the treaty. As
for the danger OF creating bad feeling
between England and Canada If any provisions
uniavorabe to British trade are inserted in the
treaty, am firmly convinced no such provisions
exist, ana l agree that did they exist
they would have created bad feeling.
There is another side to the question. While
protecting British trade we are bound to look
at the peculiar position OF Canada In her relations
to the United States We are bound to place no
unnecessary obstacles in the way OF the freest
commercial relations between those countries
II IOr any supposed interest of our own
we objected to treaty establishing
such freedom 1t Is perfectly clear that discomfort
among loyal Canadians would result. Those at
tached to the imperial government. who, believe
immensely preponderate, would lend strength to
the party which looks forward to annexation to
the United States Iapprehend tnat the views OF
those who suppose tnat this treaty establishes
dtferential duties In favor or America
Is that the duties on American goods
were to be diminished at once, whereas the duties
on the same class OF English goods were only to be
reduced in q series Of years. You say there ia no
guarantee OF this In the treaty. The reason is
that the commercial relations OF England and
Canada cannot be dealt with in treaty with a
foreign Power. They are relations OF a purely do
mestic character. II any Canadian Parliament
were hereafter to seek to impose diferential du-
ties the Governor General would be competent to
reserve such an act for the consideration Of the
home government. make the statement clearly
and distinctly that there Is nothing in
this treaty which, considering the re-
lattons OF the mother country with the
colonies would make It possible for Canada to
impose differential duties on England In favor OF
the United States.
Lord Carnarvon spoke In similar terms, point
ing out that Canada had never shown any inten-
ton OF imposing duties discriminating against
England.