Waterbury evening Democrat., 1888-02-25
DENOUNCING THE TREATY.
CANADIAN SENATORS AND CON-
 MOWERS DISSATISFIED.
The Opposition Leader in the Senate Speaks of it as the ''Late Washington Patchwork" and Harshly Crttictses Joseph Chamber1ain's Action.

lhc oppoSlCIOh AcSsucI HI SAAO S'--eso
 Speaks of it as the 'Late Washington
 Patchwork" and Harshly Criticfses
 Joseph Chamberlain's Action.
 OTTAWA, Ont, Feb 25-The senate dealt with the fishery treaty yesterday. In the debate on the adoption of the address in re- ply to the speech from the throne there was lively time in the senate. All the speakers on the government side eulogized Sir Charles Tupper and his colleagues, declaring that the treaty just one, calculated to settle diff faculties of long standing.
 Senator Scott, ex-minister of militia in a former administration, delivered speech ln which the government and the fishery com missoners were roundly abused for sacrific- ing Canadian interests. The cause of friction between the two countries. he said, was not removed by the late Washington patchwork. Canadians willingly preferred to extend the hand of fellowship to the American people rather than to have their rights bartered under the nominal title of treaty. MT. Chamberlain was i'll qualified to represent the imperial government He came to America as the representative of the British manufac- turer. A settlement must be effected at all hazards, and Canadian rights sacrificed in order to preserve relations between England and the United States. MT. Scott analysed the various clauses of the treaty, stating that Canada had granted many concessions with .out receiving a single one in return. Reci- lprocity of trade between the two countries was the only solution of the difficulty The fishery treaty, he said, would prove 8 dis astrous bungle to Canada, and within an other year would give rise to increased fric- tion between the two countries. He attrib- uted the surrender largely to MT. Chamber lain, and added that Canada's experiences with British diplomats have been anything but profitable.
 In the house of commons the movers and seconders of the address in reply to the speech from the throne congratulated the Dominion on the fisheries treaty Sir John Macdonald intimated that until the papers are laid before parliament the opposition should treat the matter with the discretion that the circum- stances called for.
 Sir Richard Cartwright said that whatever might be the merits or demerits of the treaty, its terms are hopelessly inconsistent with the position taken by the government a year ago. The treaty has settled nothing. Nothing can be found in it in the shape of recognition of the just rights of Canada. Either the gov ernments were grossly ill the wrong before or they are now. He was surprised that the government could come down now and express the hope that the treaty will be regarded as
  issue between the United States and Canada He was afraid that the facts, when disclosed, would raise a doubt whether Canada must not in the future take the conduct of the treaty into her own hands without the Eng fish interfering, and thereby prevent her in terests from being sacrificed to promote inn perial views
 Peter Mitchell, formerly minister of fish cries under the present premier, said he did not agree with the statement in the speech that both nations would be satisfied with the treaty. He did not think the treaty had been framed in the interests of Canada.
 In the course of the debate the banner of Canadian independence was incidentally raised. Strong feeling respecting commercial relations with the United States was shown, indicating unexpectedly and significantly the restless and unsettled condition of the public mind on the present political status of the Dominion