The Hawaiian gazette., 1875-01-06
Canadian Reciprocity.

LORD DERBY, in his reply to the British pro-
tests against the Canadian Reciprocity Treaty
with the United States, says: 81 do not know
that we ever received deputation in whose
views we so entirely concur. Your case is in
substance acceded to absolutely, entirely. We
agree with you on the main point, that in every
negotiation of this kind it is the duty of the Gov
eminent to see that English trade and COM
merce are not placed at disadvantage as COM
pared with those of foreign countries. We
should fail most grossly in our duty if, for any
consideration whatever, we allowed the impo-
sition of a diferential duty against our own
manufacturers. That never was our intention.
There is nothing in the proposed treaty, as we
understand it, leading to that conclusion
learn that apprehensions are entertained on the
subject with some surprise. AS regards the
difficulty of defining the articles mentioned in
the schedule with sufficient clearness some
thing must be allowed for the good sense and
faith of the two Governments charged with the
Interpretation of the treaty. As for the dan
ger of creating bad feeling between England
and Canada if any provision unfavorable to
British trade is inserted in the treaty, am
forcibly convinced no such provisions exist !;
and 1 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 po-
sition of Canada in her relation to the United
States. We are bound to place no unnecessary
obstacles in the way of the freest commercial
relations between these countries. If, for any
supposed interest of our own, we objected to
treaty establishing such freedom, it is perfectly
clear that discomfort among loyal Canadians
would result Those attached to the Imperial
Government, who, believe, immensely pre-
ponderate, would lend strength to the party
which looks toward to annexation to the Uni
ted States. Iapprehend that the view of those
who suppose that this treaty establishes diff
ferential view in favor of America is that the
duties on American goods were to be dimin-
class of English goods were only to be reduced
in a series of years. You say there is no guar
antee of this in the treaty. The reason is that
the commercial relations of England and Cana
da cannot be dealt with in a treaty with
foreign power. They are relations of purely
domestic character. If any Canadian Parlia-
ment were hereafter to seek to impose differ
entail duties, the Governor General would be
competent to reserve such an act for the con-
sideration of the home Government make
the statement clearly and distinctly that there
is nothing in this treaty which, considering the
relations of the mother country with the colo
MES, would make it possible for Canada to
impose differential duties on England in favor
of the United States"
Lord Carnarvon spoke in similar terms,
pointing out that Canada had never shown any
intention of imposing duties discriminating
against England.
1t will be seen that Mr.. Gladstone does not
hesitate to take the bold position that the Cana
dian reciprocity treaty is necessary to check
or prevent the annexation movement in Canada. /
In other words, British statesmen clearly see
that reciprocity with America must be secured, |
or the more formidable question of annexation
to the United States will present itself as an
ugly alternative. In this they show their po-
litical sagacity, for unless the reciprocity con-
vention is ratified, the project of annexation I
TO the United States will soon become the I
of powerful party in Canada, and /
with every prospect of success.