Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1892-06-23
OUR RELATIONS WITH CANADA.

municatlon 20 tho sennte--He Recom-
mends Retaliation in Regard to Naviga-
tion Of Canadian Canals.
WASHINGTON, June 2i --In state
paper sent 20 the senate yesterday In
answer TO u resolution OF Fcbru-
ary "a, calling for Information rela-
tive TO reciprocity negotiations with
Canada, the president sounds the death
lSnell of that project, and deliberately
recommends that congress iinme-
diately proceed 10 retnliatc upon
the Dominion for its repeated de-
nial of rights 10 American citizens
(guaranted by the treaty Of Washing
tom ia connection with the navigation
of Canadian canals.
The president In his communication
says that his answer 10 the resolution
was delayed at the suggestion Of tho
secretary Of state until the conference
on the Sd inst. took place between tho
secretary of state and the British min
lister and Hon. Mckenzie Rowell and
Hon. George Il. Foster. Hon. John w.
Foster also appeared on behalf Of the
government of the United States at the
request Of the secretary Of state. Tho
president says:
The result OF the conference, as to the prac.
tieabiliiy OF arranging q reciprocity treaty with
the dominion Of Cannda Is clearly stated IN the
lotter OF Mr. Blaine and was anticipated, I
think, by him and every other thoughtful
American who had considered the subject A
reciprocity treaty limited 70 the exchange OF
national products would have been such only in
form. Tho benefits OF such a treaty would
"a "a IN
vious experiments on this line have been UNI
satisfactory 10 this government treaty
that should be reciprocal in fact and Of
natural advantage, must necessarily have EN-
hraced an important list Of manufactured arh'
cles and have secured 20 the United states
free or favored Introduction Of these articles
into Canada as against the world; but IL was
not believed that the Canadian ministry was
ready 10 propose, or assent TO such an arrange
ment The conclusion Of the Canadian commits
sioners is stated in the report OF Mr.. Blaine as
follows:
In the second place II seemed TO be imposs
bic for the Canadian government, IN Wow OF It's
present political relations and obligations, TO
extend 10 American goods preferential treat
meut over those OF other countries AS Canada
was IA part Of the British empire they did not
consider Il competent for the dominion govern
mcut 10 enter into any commercial arrange
ments with the Unitoi states from the benefits
OF which Great Britain and It's colonies should
be excluded"
II Is not for this government 20 argue against
this announcement Of Canadian officials opn-
ion. II must be accepted however, think, as
statement Of condition which places an In
suporablo barrier in the way Of attainment Of
that large ana beneficial intercourse and roclpr0-
cal trade which might otherwise be developed
between tho United States and the dominion
II Will be noticed that Mr. Blaine reports as
no An IN
formal engagement to repeal and abandon tho
drawback Of / cent "a ton given 10 wheat GRAIN
that Is carried through 20 Montreal and shipped
thereirom 10 Europe. by the American rail-
ways, running from Ogdcnsburg 70 Oswego and
other American ports, the shippers paid tho
full p cents ton, while ia effect those 10y tho
way OF Montreal pay only ccgtA 1t was un-
derstood that the Canadian commissioners whe
were al three members OF the cabinet would
gee TO the withdrawal of this discrimination
From the report OF the recent conference by
Mr. Foster h will bee seen that the Canadian
commissioners declare that this statement does
not conform 10 their undertaking. and that the
only assurance they had Intended 10 give was
that the complaint OF the government OF tho
United States shoule be taken into considera-
tion by the Canadian ministry on their return
10 Ottawa Mr. Foster who was present at
the first conference, confirms the statement Of
Mr. Blaine While this misunderstanding Is
unfortunate the more serious phase OF tho -it-
uation is, that Instead Of rcscinding the dis.
eliminating canal tolls " which this govern
ment complains the Canadian ministry after
the return of the connie siouers from their visit
10 Washington on April Z, rcissuod without
any communication. by which o rebate Of ls
cents q ton IS allowed upon grain going 20
Montreal, but not 20 American ports
and refusing this rebate even 10 grain
going 20 Montreal ~ trans-shipped %
nw w NrrfsH 90
Partridge, the solicitor Of the department OF
state. which accompanies the letter OF the scc-
rctary OF state states these Determinations
very clearly. That these orders as TO canal
tolls and rebates are ia direct violation OF aru-
cle g7, oi the treaty Of 1891. seems % be clear
II is wholly cvasive 90 say that there are no
Discrimination between Canadian and Amcri-
can vessels that the rebate is allowed 10 both
without favor upon grain carried through 10
Montreal or trausthipped alta Canadian port 20
Montreal Tho treaty runs.
To secure 20 The citizens of fhc United
States the use % the Molland - Lawrence
aud other caunls iu She dominion on terms of
equality with The inhabitants OF the dominion
II was intended go give consumers in mo
United States % our people engaged IN railroad
transportation, ana % those exporting from our
ports equal torma iu passing their merchandise
through these canals. This absolute equality
OF treatment was the coneido ration for couces-
sions on the part OF ths government made Ia
the same article OF tho treaty and which have
been watchfully kept III matter OF regret
that the Canadian government has not respond
ed promptly t0 our request for tie removal OF
those discriminating tolls The papers Submit
ted show how serious the loss Inflicted Is upon
our lake vessels and upon some of our lake
ports In view Of The faci that the Canadian
commissioners stiu contest with us, The cloin
that these tolls are Disseminated and insist
fffaiFf ff4.r nf