, 1874-07-19
RECIPROCITY.
The New Treaty Discussed by the Do.
mini0n Board of Trade.
Considerable Opposition to the Treaty in
Its Present: Shape.

United States were received with applause, ant
voted the privileges Of tile floor. The question
Of reciprocity and the proposed treaty coming
up, amotion to discuss article BY article was lost
| Mr. Trast, Of Toronto, moved resolution
reattirming the already expressed opinion
| Of the Board in favor Of tho principle OF rs-
cip1ooty. He said recip tocity would be Of The
| greatest possible convenience and advantage te
both oountries- The Ontario barley market il
| found in the United States, which would like to
receive the article free ct duty. while on the
| other side Outa1o would like to receive United
! States coal for their manufactures and
| domestic purposes ir. like manner. In
| the maritime provinces We have fsh. fo1
which the United States gives a market,
| and she can send back roauy articles wanted
here. No uncertain sound should be uttered.
| Ihs Board must act consistently, and he hoped
| there would be no Dackwardnesa on the part
! OF commercial men Ii entering into the Discus
| zion.
| Mr. Elder, Of st. John, proposed the following
| amendment: First, that this Board reiterates
| its formerly expressed opinion IN favor Of reci-
| procity between tho United States and Cam
ada. Second. that while The document
known as the draft Of the reciprocity
treaty contains many desirable provisions, par
ticularly such az relate to the exchange OF nat
ural productions and the reciprocal extension Of
maritime privileges, the treaty ia nevertheless
defective in privileges secured for Canada,
WHICH are QoL nearly 30 FaluAQl6 III Lu06e COZ
ceded to the United StGtes, and that thus Board,
by means of q properly constituted Committee
and other wise, take steps to represent to the
Government OF Canada those aspects Of the
treaty in which it is unfair to Canada, or might
operate prejudicially to Canadian interests
Regarding the point about barley and coal, Mr.
Elder SAID he would battIe it by arranging in
terchange Of these articles. No argument was
necessary to show that the treaty was unequal,
aud that there was no reciprocity in it. While
~ T1 -.
open to Americans, the coasting trade Was not
thrown open to our vessels. It strange pro-
vision that, while maritime privileges are being
given to Americans, and tlle lakes aud rivers
made free to thdm, nothing ia done for these
provinces. Although they were the key to the
negotiations. the fisheries arc conceded, and wo
are given no trade along the Atlantic coast OF
the United States such as We require. |
As regards manufactures, Canada can
never reuprocate. Consumers were not
d1asatised with the prices they paid or with the
extent Of production. The manufacturers did
not ask for competition. but this is thrown IN Al
an additional boom Mr.. Elder urged that the
Atlantic coaating trade be made reciprocal, and |
that the Bay Ve1te Canal be built aud Americans |
admitted to it or equA terms.
Mr. Gillespie, Of Toronto did not believe the |
manufacturers Of Canada Could compete with
those OF the United States- He could not see
ests OF The country, and could have formed n |
judgement upon them. He believed tho tresty !
was sprung upon the country.
mr. waterman, OF LONDON, WAS n 1a'ol Oh
RECIPROCITY on equal te!.na- ne coulu ma1utao-
ture goods here AZ wen 4s IN the on1teu STATES,
but he did not want to pay 81 aud get only 20 |
cents. We did not want = trnaty that would |
make us feel uncomfortable i'll twenty years.
The Caughnawaga Canal project wus simply max
1Dg al outlet 1or New iork: What tue country
canal rates with the people OF the United States.
slr. dFeGofy. OF aamllton. "na opposed TO me
OF the canals for the purposes pro-
posed:
Mr. rye, OF Qoeoec, sald that ne tao n9t con-
slider TINT this treaty gave Just ind lbe!al
reciprocity: he referred peIt!eulany .aa % me me
coadslhS tfaoe OF the United otates' onoel Tue
oEeratons OF tn9 ~" Americans we1o com
1etlng IN ~ ont1sn POTTS. Ano IL no
:han IN St. Johns: Merchants here hid seen zen
lse'ehts reduced very .oH ~ consequenIo @ oG1
our smps canuot cary 11g'Bn1s rom we A4eil
,an poft 10 anoIneI. IN Qoepeo iney "1le
sIro5sls Dppooeu ~ .he asuss at; iea1K ~ .re
aeels IL tnese canals FL couIo 90 ueepenea & ,s "
ees w. "o nau ~ su"l auLeo suou !. a;sht
nen' ano ta.luie " pss1o'm , =. asuS
q eao t1'e, n"a on,.daod to
~ SuooII An1y hnen na opfSn.I Esnsi -
. oullolng tne csos .ls.. eauas a. ~ o. o.
primary importance 10 preserve our HEn1fs' III.
'ues ~ "ao ans oySo G,, ~ Au; sn;a ~ na.. ou1
- ~ ss -
sned us oy RESTRICTIONS nn1aso1ao4e u eanaoa;
hat It amounted 10 no feciproclty at ah. heap-
ng machinery ana otng1 81 ltlcsa t "e eoo'o nl@na-
actnfe as "ei az tno Gn1teq otates;
III. DonGaA, OF WINDSOR, oel'e!ea our manu-
acturefs were aoie TO compeIe "lln ll'a.S IN Inc
Jnited states, and ne "as opposed 70 III. FL
ser amenonient-
Mr; ChuEchll OF London, ea'd the treaty pro-
'1ded TOR the construction OF canals Tor the bet
er convenience OF the Americans; Under the
i'd reciprocity treaty tue agrlcnltur'sts sold !:
nen . eats At from 10 to ~ cents, ther barley at
. to % cents per M ousnel, aud other gra'ns IN
'roPoTtlon~ Inc reciprocity treaty was
nnolleo, ana, contrary 70 e1pecsatlon: me prices
OF agl1cnltnTal pfoaocts "ens up, e ana nave r.
na'nea 40. England "as me nasnfal mafRet
Or ontnno prooucts. Ihe gnlted states and
srltlsh markets we're nos alike. IN England
here WAS an oVerpopoious country re4'nfingto to
q FED hut IN the United states they Pro, =
uceo mere wheat shRn Was needea
or 1nelr own consomption, anu Ems
1ade CASUAL and uncertain tue market
OF our surplus agncuitura! products. He BE- ]
eSed treaty was de3uslon, and would de- {