The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1888-08-31

Ont, yesterday, to listen to political
address from Sir Hector Langeyin,
Minister of Public Works, and Sir John
Thompson, Minister of Justice. The
speeches of both ministers we're preg-
nant with significance, being the first
public utterances of Ministers of Gov
eminent since President CleYelanG's re-
taliatory threats.
SIR HECTOR LANGEvIN
sketched the history of the fisheries
dispute, showing that the United States
fell back on the treaty of 1918, of their
own accord, and that Canada was
maintaining her just rights. After
great deal of labor to adjust the
differences admirably by treaty, the
United States Senators frustrated their
efforts. Then Cleveland followed that
up with a threat 10 punish Canada.
What for? Because there was no
treaty. 1t was not 'Canada's fault.
The President wanted to stop
Canadian goods from coming
over the American railways IN bond be-
Gauge American fishermen are not per-
mltted to bond their fish over the Ca
madam railways; but that right, with
others, was given up by Americans
long 90 in consideration of the Labra-
dor fishing advantages. These adyant-
ages she had and would not give up
while the right to bond was demanded
without any concession. Canada
made many concessions. The United
States could not expect to have
all the concedlng on Canada's side.
He respected the dignity of
the United States and he was sure
they all did, but Canada had honor
and dignity as nation and as a part
of the British Empire and no true
Canadian was disposed to lower Can
ada's position. Referring to
UNRESTRICTED RECIPROCITY,
he said it was sugar coated CONNER
cial union. While discussing President
Clevelsnd's message he said they
should be collected and calm. If their
neighbors got excited, they should con-
slider the time at which their neigh
boris excitement existed. They should
resent too many hard names
and hard words spoken against
Canada. Canada was great country,
terri orally as large, or larger, than the
United States. They had different in
stitulions, some of which, at least, were
better IN his opinion, than those in the
| United s ates. Canada has been re-
sponsible TO her people, which was not
the case in the United States. Was it
not much better to have the ministry
directly responsible to the people, so
that when wrong-doing and misman-
agement prevailed, the people could
turn the ministers out?
SIR JOHN THOMPSON
said: The Liberal leaders had been
starring through the Province of On
tario, but all their efforts were vain.
An evil genius was pursuing them.
They had been preaching new gospel,
proclaiming that the only salvation
| for Canadians was to adopt unre-
stricted reciprocity. But even while
they were preaching about bet
ter trade relations, the President
of tt e United States and the Senate
| took counsel together to find out the
best way to harrass Canada most, with
the least injury to their own country.
There is little prospect of getting the
advantage of the United States when
its representatives showed such hostil-
ity. But he was sincerely glad at the
good the Presidents messag had done
in this country. The citizens of
| Canada were III no mood to submit
to the dicta ion of any foreign
power. The Liberal press in
plain in their statements. He admitted
that the President of the United States
was q great statesman; that he was at
the head of great nation, and that the
words he uttered were of great respon-
sibility. The policy of this country
should be of great prudence and the de
sire be to conciliate rather than jrri-
tate; be friendly, rather than un-
friendly, with any power in the world.
But this was also a great country. All
our citizens did not aim at
developing its resources. Many Cana
dams looked to the trackless
sea for their living, and when
| the right of these fishermen were i'm
posed upon. it was their duty to uphold
their rights and the honor of the
country. All that was held up as a
reason for non intercourse. 1t was
Canada's refusal to permit American
fishermen to send cases of fish in bond
over the Canadian railways to the
United States. The United States chose
| tuouSSlHcS " ~ DdCh W tue treaty VI
1918, and its provisions being en-
forced, there is nothing unfriend-
ly in that. That their conduct in
seizing American vessels is not harsh,
is borne out by the support of the
British Government On the inquiry
into every case. The United States in
1918 gave up the right to fish within
the three miles limit. American fish
ermen were to have no commerce al
privileges on the Canadian shores.
They could not salt their fish or buy
supplies; they could only enter the
harbor in case of a storm or to make
l repairs. But the remuneration of these
privileges was brought about by giving
American fishermen the right to fish
4 along the Labrador Coast and Magda-
lene Island and they now wish to hold
u on to this, while they will not give up
the old one. The means of retaliation
], proposed was the withdrawal of the
| privilege to bond goods through the
| United States to Canada. This priv
iege was secured to them by article 20
of the treaty of Washington, and it
required two years notice, by Che
terms of the treaty, before any article
could be suspended. No notice of that
| kind has been given, and Cleveland, re-