The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

1| 11 $4 (A, Hbennt c amctge tioomr in Bail‘s Block, Siant of in ‘â€"B. 8. Cassells. Situation Wanted as Writer . Boots & Shoesâ€"Linton & Cooper. BOOI'BANDIIBUH «+ WOLESAL L. . SHBARER, MACKEDIE & Co., (of Montreal) nq-d- Amhwmdijl Bell‘s ncA 1 wet in Montreal, an equal in fnish and style to Situation Wanted as Bookeeper. Quebec Gulf Ports Steamship Companyâ€"â€" Herrick & Crombie. , List of Lettersâ€"G. P. Baker. motion to adjourn on the evening of the British Columbia ball? No one would have accused the honourable member for Lambton of being too favourably disposed towards British Columbia or British Coâ€" lumbia‘s representatives, neither would they have been likely to have charged him with being too ardent a votary of Terpsi. Union Forwarding and Railway Company Tormm'ns. Two good compositors can obtain per‘ wqâ€"m‘-au-d“ by applying immeâ€" April 18, 1872 _ nations held opinions which were directly antagonistic to each other, the only mode of adjustment was are course to brute force. Buch, at all events, has been the rule in past times. Great Britain and the United States hare, however, come to the concluâ€" sion, that when international disputes have to be settled, the pen is a more power ful and satisfactory weapon than the sword, or, in other words, that diploâ€" maoy can effect a more permanent and conclusive adjustment of quarrels, than all the strategical skill of a Moltke or thé impetuous valour of a Murat. The Treaty of Washington is the first result of this trinmph of Anglo Saxon common sense. The Parliament of Canada have to deterâ€" mine whether or not the moral effects of this treaty shall, to a great extent, be desâ€" #The pen is mightier than the sword !"‘ This is a saying which, though often reâ€" peated, has never, so far as international disputes are concerned, been realised or Eie Oftaioa Cimes. her part in the matter, refuses, in return for certain advantages which she obtains, to permit American fishermen to ente her waters, the good feeling which the treaty was calculated to encourage will tgeame to exist, and all the efforts of the leading public men in Great Britain and America will have been in vain. Now let us see why it is that the members of the Ontario Opposition claim that the Treaty ought not to be concurred in by the Caâ€" nadian Parliament. First, because the Americans are for ten years allowed to fish im our waters, while the American market and Americ¢an fisheries are thrown epen to the Canadian fishermen. Second Iy, because the Americans are allowed the free navigation of the River St, Lawrence. These are the principal objections raised by the Grits. There may be some minor objections, but these are the chief. As to the first, it will, we presume, be admitted that the fishermen themselves are the best every man connected with the fishing trade in the Maritime Provinces is in favour of the ratification of the Treaty of Washington ; that they being fully consciâ€" ous of their ability to cope successfully with their American rivals upon equal terms in the same markets, are thoroughâ€" ly satisfied with the Treaty. Why then should we in Ontario oppose it? Surely not on account of the fishery clauses, which according to the statement, not only of the Nova Scotians but also of the American fishermen, rather tend to the advantage of the former. SBecondl!y, as to the free navigation of the River St. LIawrence. To what does this concession amount ? The free navigation of the eimals is not conceded to American vesâ€" sels ; the canals are as much the properâ€" ty of Canada as ever they were. No one has disputed our right to them, and, so long as we exercise sway ovrer them, what does the navigation of the rivrer amount to? What reason then have the Grits for objecting to the Treaty? Not because of the permanent establishment of the bondâ€" ing system, a matter in which the merâ€" chants and business men of the commuâ€" nity are largely interested ; not because of the right of transhipment conceded to us which is likely to be most beneficial to Canadian shippers? No! But there is a reason why the Grits should oppose the ratification of the fishery clauses. There is a reason why they should disapprove of the navigation of the St. Lawrence being made free. There is a reason why Mr. Mackenzie, after refreshing himself and his memory by a long perusal of the extracts from the Globe contained in that eternal serap book of his, should inveigh against the Treaty and oppose the fishery clauses, and that reason is one to which a man of his narrow minded views must appear potent indeed. The reason is, beâ€" cause the government of Sir John Macâ€" donald endorse the Treatr as it now Why did the Globe, in its report of irliamentary proceedings, suppress the NEW ADVERTITISEMENTS. THE CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY The report furnished by Mr. &ndford‘ Fleming as to the progress of the exploraâ€" tory survey of the Canadian Pacific Railâ€" way, furnishes us with many interesting and important facts. | From it we derive in the first place encouraging evidence of terprise upon the carrying out of which our future weltare so much depends, and hhmmnmmm For the convenience of their customers °W X O L E8 iALE. m MONDAY, MAY 6, 1872 THE TREATY. , Mackedie & Co. 19%2â€"4 to obtain the amount of reliable informaâ€" tion necessary before the construction of the line can be commenced. Our friends from British Columbia will, we have no doubt, be especially gratified to find that the Government are so thoroughly in of the industry and energy with which the Dominion Government, and those who have been employed by them, have workâ€" ed during the past twelyemonths in order @arnest, and the people of the Dominion generally, recognising as they . do, the importance of the work, will bogl‘ad to receive this assurance of the practicability and probability of the Canadian Pacific Railway being constructed at an early «y. . i se The survey of the line extends from & point named Mattawa, near the river Otia wa opposite Lake Nipissing, to the Pacific Coast, and it is divided into three great divisions, viz.: Mattawa, to Fort Garty ; Fort Garry, to the Rocky Mountains ; from the Rocky Mountains, to the Pacific Coast. From Mattawa to Fort Garry, the distance is about ls'ne hundred miles. No serious engineering difhculties were met withinmf;:z the Valley of the Uttawa to the N Shore of Lake Suâ€" perior. The country extending from 8mall Black River to the Nepigon River, is excessively rough and nodirect practicable route through it, has yet been discovered. Other explorations however in rear of this rugged belt of country are now in proâ€" From a point on the Nepigon river the route proceeds westerly without any imâ€" portan t obstacles to White Fish Bay on the Red Hiver near Fort Garry. The country west of this point, extending to the base of the Rocky Mounta‘ins, consists for the most part of open prairies, and i# free from engineering difficulties, although the great width of some of the rivers inâ€" dicate that there ‘will be some long and expensive bridges on the Canadian Pacific Railway. In order to ascertain what route would be the most free from obstaclesin the shape of wide rivers, a double expediâ€" tions was organized to proceed from Fort Garry, one to the Yellow Head Pass, and the other to the Howse Pass. Thesurvey in British Columbia was divided into disâ€" tricts, one between Howse Pass and Shusâ€" wap Lake, a second between Shuswap Lake and the Straits of Georgia by the Lower Fraser River, a third between Y olâ€" low Head Pass and the Upper Fraser River through the Cariboo country . | gress, and the report states that " enough is known to warrant the assumption that all difficulties in this quarter will be obâ€" viated." Engineers were appointed to conduct the surveys in each of these districts, and six surveying parties were organized, with the view of thoroughly exploring the country, and gaining information which would lead to the selection of :the most eligible line for the railway. A table of approximate distances shows that from Matâ€" tawa to the Pacific Om'zébfldnhnoe will be from 2,450 to 2,700 hiiles, dependant upon whether the terminus in British Columbia is fixed at New Wostminster or Bute Inlet, which are 2,450 miles from Mattawa, or at Victoria, in Vancouver‘s Island, which is 2,700 miles from the eastâ€" ern starting point. The work which has thus been accom. plished within less than twelvemonths, is a very great and important one. 1t is no small undertaking to make even a prelimi.â€" nary sand superficial survey of a line stretching across the centinent, and when we bear in mind that a very large portion of the route surveyed had never before been traversed ‘by a white man, we may arrive at a still better conception of the difficulties which had to: be battled with and overcome. To the Government the thanks of the country are due for the energy they have displayed in pushing on the work ; and especially to the Minister of Public Works, and to Mr. Sandtord Fleming and his well selected and experienced staff will the public gratitude be freely extended. : The pledge given by the Government to the country last year in reference to the conâ€" struction of the Pacific Railway seems likely to be carried out without much difâ€" Sculty ; and, in spite of the efforts of the Grits, ere ton years have passed away, the golden bond of friendship and Imperial unity which connects East ahd West toâ€" gether, will be strengthened and rendered yet more enduring by a chain of railroad On the invitation of the Hon. James Skead, Drâ€" Grant, M.P. for Carleton, the Hon. J. C. Abbott, Alonzo Wright, Esq., M. P., J. M. Currier, M. P., and, other representatives of the Ottawa Valley, both Houses of Parliament, the Mayor and Corâ€" porstion of the City of Ottawa, the banking interâ€" ests of the vicinity, represented especially by Messrs. Noel and Eastwood, and a great congre gation of more ordinary people went to the steamer * Queen Vistoria," commanded by the gallant Captain Bowie, on Saturday morning last, The day was cold, bleakâ€" and wintry, and there were not, perhaps, so many present from the Parliamentary Buildings as there would under more favourable auspices have been, There were, nevertheless, some representatives of the Board of Works, some representatives of the Post Office Department, some men of note in other eapacities, and quite a first rate entertainment provided for them, by the representatives of the Uttawa Valley, and whose weal was particulariy regarded by Mr. William H. Sixsmith, the bookâ€" keeper and paymaster of the thousand men, who are getting ready, as it by magic,the new locks to overcome the Long Sault Rapids of the Ottawa, between Granmville and _ Carrilion. There was a grand . entertainment on . board of the steamer. Captuin Bowie, .as usual, did his utmost to accommodate the passengers, and in spite of a strong wind and every other adverse cireumstance,the party were hurried forward to the locks, The house of the late Hon, Louis Joseph Papineau became visible, and after some hours of really comfortable sailing the Bay of Grenville was reached. The canal intended to overcome the rapids was dammed up, and the parties from, the steamer had only time to witness one of those tremendous "nitroâ€" giycerine" explosions, by which Mr. Goodwin, the energetic contractor, is getting rid of the incumâ€" brances to a deep channel for the passage of vesâ€". sels, through the locks, A two foot railway at present, runs along the bed of the canal. Whole cart loads of, debris from the botâ€" tom of a river are deposited on the hill tops, and such vast loads of masonry, are built by thé numerous derricks, which Mr. Goodwin has raised, as to astonish the beholder. There is a lock being built, 45 ft., in width and 200 ft. in length, withall the modern improvements, in that solid, unpretending style of masonry, every stone being of equal depth and n=ziitude, as to vie with the lines of the pyramiâ€"ls themselves. One3 can searcely contemplate bow much bodily matter bas been expend&}, until he learos that some 1,600 men are engaged upon a work which in about fourteen days will be entirely completed. 1t is agreat and grand underiazing that of the widening of the Grenville canal, _ ‘The rest will appear toâ€"morrow. Crwket:â€" The Committeo of the Ottawa Cricket Club met on Saturday last at Salmon‘s Hotel, for the purpose of completing their arâ€" wfl_‘wtho ensuing season. The first general meeting of the elub will be held on Monâ€" day, the Dth inst., and the opening match of the season will be played on the 2ith inst.â€"Civil Serâ€" vice v. The City. Several new members were proposed and elected, and the prospects of the elub for the coming season are very bright; His Excellency the wovernor General has kindly granted the club permission to use the splendid ground at Ridesay Hal EXCURSION TO GRENVILLE. o_ * ue l SNg t Dominion Rarltament. PIFT H SE 1O N : Il~;11' PARLIAMENT . HOUSE OF COMMON3. .« Frivat, 2od May, 1872. HUN. SIR JOHN A. M «CDONALD‘S sPEECH ON THAE WASHINGTON TREATY CONTINU®D > ©We shall now enquire whether the «convention of 1818, is an existing com "pact, and if not, what are the rights of «* American fishermen under the treaty of *« peace of 1783." * Since the expiration of the reciprocity 4 treaty in 1866, the British Goversment, « both at home and in the provinces, has, «in its st:tutes,its official instructious,and " its diplomatic correspondence, quietly # assumed that the convention of 1818 is ©again operative in all its provisions. That "the State Departmect at Washington © should by its silence have admitted the « correctness of this mmptliomhioh is « equally opposed to principle to auâ€" «e :l?ority,ingomrbblo. We shall maintain «* the proposition that the treaty of of " 1783 is now in full force, t.htufllimih- | " tions upon its efficiency have been reâ€" © moved ; and that it is the only source. © and foundation of American fishing rights @ within the North Eastern Territorial " waters. In pursuing the discussion we « shall show, tirst, that the renunciatory «* clauses of the convention of 1818 have «* been removed ; and secondly, that article " I1I of tke Treaty of 1783 thus left tree from the restrictions of the subsequent as oomp.ct, was not abrogated by the war of 1812‘ The writer thus concludes : * Article III of the ‘Ireaty of 1783 is " therefore in the nature of an:â€"executed © grant. It created and conferred at one " blow rights of property, perfect in their ‘‘nature, and as permanent as the dominâ€" © ion over the national soil. These rights © are held by the inhabitants of the United " States, and are to be exercised in British « territorial waters. Unaftected b‘thonr " of 1812, they still exist in full and « vigor. Under the provisions of this ‘Treaty, American: citizens are now « entitled to tike fish on such parts of " the coists of Newfoundland as British © fishermen use, and also on all the coasts, " bays, and creeks, of all other His Bmâ€" tannic Majesty‘s dominions in America, « and to dry and cure fish in any of the " unsettled bays, harbours, and creeks of « Nova Scotia, the Magdalen Islan is and «* Labrador. | § * The final conclusion thus reached is sustained by principle and by authority. " We submit that it should be adopted by " the Government of the United States, " and made the basis of any further negoâ€" © tiations with Great Britain," I quote this for the pnr})ou of shewin that the pretension was formally set u; and elaborated by ‘jurists of no mean standing or reputation, and therefore it is one of the merits of this Treaty that it forever sets the dispute at rest. The writers on this subject, the very writers of whom I have spoken, admit that if the treaty is adopted the claim is gene, beâ€" cause it is a formal admission by: the United States Government that under the convention of 1818, we have now on the 8th of May, 1871, t.hotg;operty in these inshere fisheries, and this was admitted again after the question had been raised and mooted in the United States, that the very ratification of the treaty was formailly equal in its effect to an ogrop- tion of the convent.on of 1818. They agree by this treaty to buy their entry into our waters, and this is the strongest muiblo proof that their argument could no longer maintained, and the agreeâ€" ment by the fishermen to pay a sum of money by way of license for permission to enter our waters is the strongest possible proof of the admission on the part of the fisherman thsttbeyhnonorifittooono into Canadian waters exce :t by our conâ€" sent. Just as the paymen: of rent by a umt'uthonm,utproofofhhadmk- sion of the rights 0 tbohndlor:hoohtho wthztocnmdnn sum as an equivalent for the use of our fisheries, an acknowledgment of the permanent continuance of our right. So much, sir for that portion of the treaty which affects the fisheries. 1 alluded a minute ago to the St. Lawrence. The surrender of the free navigation of the River St. Lawrence in its natural state, was resisted by England up to 1828. The claim was renewed the present Government of thé United and asserted in the formal monlr by the present President of the United States. Her Majesty‘s Government in the instructions sent to Her Commissioners took the powerâ€"and bllxt{ of this matter into her m.. t was a matter whifch we could b.::zntmlmnuu a matter of boundary two and afftecting a river which forms the bound.;zbotmtbolimiuoltho Emâ€" pire and the limits of the United States, it is solely within the control of Her Majesty‘s Government, and in the inâ€" structions to the plonifiotontinriuthhhn- guage was used : " Her Majesty‘s Govâ€" * ernment are now willing to grant the 4 free navigati n of the St. â€" Lawrence to « the citizens of the United States on the * same conditions and tolls imposed on « British subjects.‘" Ineed not say, sir that as a matter of sentiment I w this, but it was a matter of sentiment only. Howerer, there could be no pracâ€" tical good to Canada in resisting . the conâ€" cession, and there was no possible evil inâ€" o ege of uavigating rextamgan pave of privilege of navi piece broken mter“gm‘ tween St. Regis and Montreal, In no way could it affect m judicially the interest of: Canada, trade, or her commerce. Without the use of our canals the river was useless. Up to Montreal the St. Lawrence is m not only to the vessels otft the U States, but to the vessels of the world, Canada courts the ohinof the whole world, and it would have been most absurd to suppose that the ports of Queâ€" bec and Montreal MN l¢ be Mndon: American shipping. No ter ovi of actual w.rpl:::bo sd:;.o:d than the fact of the ports of a country boinf closed to the commerce of another. .It never entered into the minds fof any that our ports should be closed to the trade of {Ibo tMworld in general, . or the ni States in perticular, _ no more than it entered into the minds of the English to close the ports of London or Liverpeolâ€"those ports whither the flags of every nation are invited and welâ€" comed (cheers). From the sources of the St. L«awrence to St. Beg: the United States are part owners of the banks of the rvers, and by a wellâ€"known principle of international law the water flowing beâ€" tween the two banks is common to both, and not only is that a principle ‘of law, but it is a law of actual treaty. The only question then was whether, as the Ameriâ€" can people had set their hearts upon it, and as it could do no harm to Canade or to England, it would not be well to set this question at rest with the others, and make the concession. This was the line taken by Her Majesty‘s Government, and which they had a right to take ; and when some one writes my bioflphyâ€"lt I am ever thought worthy of having such an interesting document prmrcdâ€"md when, as a matter of history, the questions connected with this treaty are upheld, it will be found that upon thk.,)u w every other point, 1 did all I to protect and enlarge the rights and claims of the Dowminion (cheers). Now, sir, with respect to the right itself, I would cail the attention of the House to the remarks of a distinguished Enfluh jurist upon the point. I have from the works of American jurists, and I will now read some remarks of Mr. Phillimore, a standard English writer on international law. What 1 am about to read was written under the idea that the Americans were claiming what would be of practical use to them. I was not aware that the difficulties of navigation were such that the concession would be of no practical use. (The following is the extract from Mr. Phillimore‘s work]:â€" * Great Britain possessed the northern «* shores of the lakes, and of the river in " its whole extent to the sea, and also the © scuthern bank of the river from the THOE OTTA W a « latitude fortyâ€"five degrees hnorthtoi * mouth. The United ¢ m‘:l “thgumen:o{hm and of 4 the Et.. Lawrence, to the int where * their northern boundary Pt:uched the « the river. These two governments were 64 t6 66 66 * *hmfor, placed pretiy much in the «¢ same altitude towards each other, with «* respect to the navigation of the St, Lawâ€" © rence, as the United States and Spain ‘.mmin with respect togh‘n:."’,. 64 nd .i”‘ b‘.l . acâ€" "qu,;‘u‘i‘:iou dlmithm“u.d Florida. . . w4 argument on part . of the «* United States was much the same as *‘ that which they had employed with reâ€" U a to the uviruon of the Missisâ€" "nm They referred to the dispute 64 sb:ut theog:;nhgoftho S;‘cho‘dt in-lr‘)!%i, i+ and anntan that in tha mss «P ik<L «* and contended that, in the case of that " river, the fact of the banks having been «‘the creiti>n of artificial labour was «* a much stronger reason, than could be © said to exist in the case of the Missis " sippi for closing the mouths of the sea 64 66 L 6 64 * adjoining the Dutch Canals of ‘the Sas 64 M-min. and that this peculiarity « probably caused the insertion of the « stipulation in the Treaty of Westphalia ; that the case of the St. Lawrence differâ€" «* ed materially from that of the Scheldt, * and fell directly under the principle of free navigation enbodied in the Treaty * of Vienna respecting the Rhine, the * Neckar, the Mayne, the Moselie, the «* Meuse, and the Scheldt. But especially " it was urged, and with a force which is «* must have been diffticult to ur:\rry, that * the present claim of the United Statet 4# with respect to the navigation of the * St. Lawrence, was precisely of the same " nature as that which Great Britain had " put forward with respect to the naviga~ * tion of the If-idrpi when the mouth " and lowenhomfo th&t rigor vond in “tho&ouedono another State, and of «*.which claim Great Britain had procured «* the recognition by the Treaty of Paris 4 imperfect, and not a perfect right ; that "un‘l‘{utyofViem Ji,d not sanction " this notion.orfi a nah;ml right:‘:o the free *« passage over rivers, but, on contrary * the inference was m not being a nas " tural right, it required to be established «* by a convention ; that tho.rifiht of pasâ€" * sage once conceded must hold good for « other purposes besides those of trade in " peace, for hostile purposes in time of * war ; that the United States could not at oouiltol:tly'“\‘:go b.hthur' claim _ on «* princip ut g prepared to « apply that pr ng_ot reciproâ€" * city, in favor of subjects, ‘to the «+ navigation of the: Mississippi and the 6t ;Iudm, w'hichnd might be h;d «* from Canada. carriage or by the 6 canals of Now%orkmd Ohio. * © The United States replied, that ‘pracâ€" " tically the St. Lawrence was a strait, and « was subject to the same principles® of " law; and that as straits aré accessory " to the seas which they unite and * therefore the ri.lbt of nn{ptmi them «is common to all nations, so the St. «* Lawrence connects with the ocean those «* great inland lakes, on the shores of * which the subjects of the United States * and Great Britain both dwell ; and, on «* the same fll.nc:flo, the natural link of «* the river, lik natural link of the "a qualified ooo:n:lnd of exception " to the paramount rights P rty ; <r that it was what these writers fl’:d t 5 strait, nm:: be oqulllhy’ ?)?tihhbl: 'l:‘:r the 66 puw R ® Bâ€" * sage over hl;m&h was always pl?:fl- ing upon the minds of the writers on 4 International Law, is intrinsically differâ€" ent from a passage over water; in the latter instance, no detriment or inconâ€" veniencé can be sustained by the counâ€" " try to which it belongs, ‘The track of the ship is effaced as soon as made; the " track of an army may leave serious and "lasting‘ injury â€" behind. â€" The United * States would not ‘shrink‘ from the ap« * plication of the analogy with respect to * the navigation of the Mississipp1, and 4 whenever & connection was effected beâ€" 4 tweesn it and Upper Ca-d:]. similar w * that existing betweer the United States # thould be: applied." 1t wan heweres & o jed. It owever * to be recollected, that th::u of rivers * which both rise and disembogue them: ““l'.":hhhdg.tlh“ of lt:: same 4 nation very rhh u * principle, from that rivers whm 6+ Lving their sources and navigable porâ€" « tions of their streams in States above, 66 66 66 66 66 64 «* of convention did not disprove that this “uviafionmamnttcdwfl'g i restored to its proper â€"postion 6t dhohrg themselves within the limits 4 of other States below. «* Lastly, the fact, that the free navi “fionofrfnuhdboen made a m:tlsr 64 " The result of this controversy has * hitherto produced no effect. _ Great « Britain has mmflnfln 4 right. ‘The United States ‘stil! remain " debarred from the use of this great «* highway, and are not permitted to carr 4 over it t’heproduoo of the vast .ncf‘rfi « over it the produce of the vast and rich * territories which border on the lakes 4 above to the Atlantic ocean. 5 ‘B.l’}:fil digron;dw dcnymt!;s-tlfimt 64 may ind her u ‘ " strict law ; but it is at least equally Jifi- « cult to deny, first, that in so doing she « exercises harshly an extreme and Lmh * law; secondly, that her conduct with reâ€" «* spect to the navigation of the St. Law. ‘mhin#iqmddwihbleimon.- &« sistency her conduct with respect * to the na of the Mississippi. On " the that she possessed a small * tract of domain in which the m-iappi * took its rise, she insisted on her right to = 98 ts ground that she possemes bore " on t possesses "* banks of the St. Lawrence where it disâ€" +« embogues itself into the she denies *« to the United States the :atdufi: ! gation though about one half of 4 waters of lakes Ontario, Erie, Huron and *« Superior, and the whole of Lake Michi. # gan through which the river flows, : are * the property of the United States. C «* An English writer upon International «« Law cannot butoxrshopo, that this + summunjus, which tln'amo':spmwh-‘ 4 es to summa injuria may be untirily * abandoned by his country. Since the & late revolution in the South American +« Provinces, by which the deminion of « Rosas was overthrown, there appears to 4 be good reason to hope that the States + of Paraguay, Bolivia, Buenos, Ayres, and « Brazil, will open the River Parana, to the « navigation of the world." : * On reading a report of a speech of m; io e t aooie on memonne is subjectâ€"a very interesting speech, if he will allow me so to characterâ€" ize itâ€"I find that in speaking of the naviâ€" gation of Lake Michigan, he stated that that lake was as much a portion of the St. Lawrence as the river itselft. I do not made that statement, but those inland seas are seas as much as the Black Sea is a sea and not a river.. The like is enâ€" closed on all sides by the United States territory ; no portion of its shores belong to Canada, and England has no right by international law to claim its navigation. Sir, she never has claimed it, for if my hon. friend will look into the matter, he will find that these great lakes have ever been treated as inland seas, and as far a« masgnitude is concerned, are worthy of tion of Lake Michigan should be granted. as an equivalent for the navigation of the St. Lawrence, the argument could not be based on the same footing, and we did not and could not pretend to ‘have the same grounds. It is, however, of little monient whether Canada has free navigaâ€" tion : _ of Lake â€" â€" Michgan â€" or not, for the citiese on the shores of that lake would never consent to have their ports closed, and there is no fear in thomldofomvo-ohb-infik:xdudod from those ports, for I would to see :ucu' dmuflfi:&o'm ports i ping of England, or or of the 'orii. . The smail portion of the St. Lawâ€" ing so treated. Although Her Majesty‘ repce which liss between the two points ] have mentiohed would be of no6 use, as there is mo advantage to be obtained therefrom as a lever to obtain %t" Bon. Mr, MACKENZIE : Hear, s Hon. Sir JORN A> MACDONALD : My hon says " Hear, hear," but I will tell him fhat the only lever for the obâ€" taining of reciprocity is the sole control of our Is. So long as we have the control o:dhuo canals we are the masters, and can do just as we please. American ves the down trip can run the ' if they get a strong Indian to steer, but they will never come back again unless Cansida chooses, (hear.) ‘The keel drives through thoss waters and then the mark disappears forever and that vessel will be forever sb{ent from the place that once knew it unless by the consent of Canadas. Therefore jas I pointed out before the recess as we had no lever in the question of the | fisheri‘s we had none to get r{ciprocity except the naviga tion of the St. Lawrence. I admit that for any f ical use or purpose whatever, except for purpose of ‘ivinfixwmion to trade, f« rt.hotg of enlarging our relations with o_gnglgd States in any way, neither were the fisheries or the St. Lawrence any value ; but the real substanâ€" tial value lis in the canals, and these caâ€" nals and right to them is expressly stated in tmz; and when the tre t; in clause which relates to the canals uses the w «* The Government of Her Britannic jesty engages to urge upon the Gover: t of the Dominion of Canaâ€" da to secure to the citizens of the United States the use of the Welland and St Lawren d other canals in the Dominion on terms of equality, &c.," it contains an admission by the United States, and it is of some advyantage to have that admission, that the are our own property, which we can open to the United States as we please. ‘The reason why this admission is important is thisâ€"article 26 provides that © the na;irtion of the River B8t. Lawrence ascending and descending from the 45th el of north latitude where it ceases to form the boundary between the two tries from to and into the sea shall forevér remain free and open for the pur%n- commerce to the citizans of the United subject to any laws and regulations} of Great Britain or of the Dominion of Canada, not inconsistent with such privileges of free navigation," for fear that it might be held in argument made it was known that for the purpose of ascent the river could not be overcome in its natural course an argument might be hung upon it thit the ascent might be open to the United States and that thereâ€" fore it might imply as a matter of argu ment, that the canals were available for that purpose. And so the next clause preâ€" vides and specifies that these canals are :K:c_inlly within the contrul of Canada and Canadian Government, and prevents any inference being drawn from the lanâ€" gmie’of the preceding article. I know), sir that there has been in some of the newspapers asneer cast upon the latter paragraph of that article which gives the United States the free use of the St. Lawâ€" rence. lreferto the navigation of the rivers Yukon, Porcupine xnd Stikine. for fear tlrzfi.it lm_&h: be held in argument that whereas at time the treaty was Hon. Mr. MACKENZIEâ€"Hear, hear. Hon. Sir JOHN &. MACDONALDâ€"My hon. friend again says " hear, hear." I :o;_'rothltho will hear and perhnr he rill hear something he does not know, WIll HOUE w-lvuuus uo WOoOs NJb REINZM (hear, hear.) I may tell my hon friend that the navigation of the River Yukon is a great trade, and that the Amsricans are now sending vessels and are fituung out others for the. nsvig:i:g of the Yukon. I will tell my hon. fri that at this moâ€" ment United States vessels are goinii 13; that river and are underselling the Hudâ€" son‘s Biy people in their own country, (hear, hear), and it is a matter of the very greatest im nce to the Western counâ€" try that t.hg navigation of these rivers should be open to the commerce of Briâ€" tish subjects, and that actess should be had by of these rivers, so that there is no ty at all for the ironical cheer of my*hon. friend. Sir, I am not unaware that under an old treaty entered into beâ€" tween Russia and England that the former granted to the latter the feee navigation of these streams, and for the free navigaâ€" tion of:all the streams in Alaska. But that was a treaty between Russia and England, and it may be argued, and would be arguâ€" ed by ‘England, that when the United States took that country from Russia it took it with all its obligations ; but, Mr. Speakâ€" er, there are two sides to that question. Lh:‘ United states, I venture n::"l.” woulld an argument u it, ean only tell my hon. friend tg:unm”of the United iitates have exercised authority in the way of prohibition, and have oftered the pretext that that was a matter which had been settled between Russia and England, that the United States now had that country, and would deal with it as they chose, and therefore, as this was a n panpom aplerinns new t was nbm settled at once as g:n. England and the United States, as before it was between England and Russia. Beâ€" loroh.v':fithoquufion of the St. Lawâ€" rerce, I make one remark, and will then proceed to another topic, and that 1s, that the article in question does not in any way hand over or divide in any way the Rirer St. Lawren:e, or give any soveâ€" reignty or right whatever, except in the matter of navigation. Both b..L belong to Canadaâ€"the management, the regulaâ€" tion, the tolls, the improvement, all belong. to Canada. The only stipulation made in the Treaty is that the United States vessels may use the St. Lawrence on as free terms as those of Canadian mbgoau. i:‘ is n(:t a transfer of territorial rightsâ€"it is simply a permission to naviâ€" gate the river by American vessels, that the navipuoluLu ever remain free and open for the purpose of commerce, and 003@ the ‘mof commerce, * to *‘ citizens of the States, subject to **any laws and regulations of UGreat * Britain, or of the Dominion of Qnd:% " not incensistent such tho,gmlqo " free navigation.‘"‘ Now, Mr. Speaker on the ?m relating to navigation, i shall allude to one of the subjects includ ed in the Treaty, although it was not conâ€" tlon'zbud in the instructions given to the British Commissione:s by Her Majesty‘s Government â€" in fact, it was scarcely knownâ€"and that is what is known as the St. Clair Flats question. It is known that the waters of &o River St. Clair and the waters of Lake St. Clair are free to both nations, that the boundary line which diâ€" vides them is gravldod by treity, that the ‘Treaty of 1842 provides that all the navi Etnn from the point where the River St. air flows from Lake St. Clair shall be common to both nations, so that all those channels are free, were made common to both nations, and are so now. In the St. Clair Flats, and in oonnc{::noi to improve the navigation, Canada made approâ€" riations for the purpose of improvement g'hm were also a&gr?ri-afiom madeâ€"I fag Stete or Michigen, or 67 privats ingr te of Michigan, or by private indiâ€" vidualsâ€"for the purpose of i:;roving the waters, and the United States made a canal in and through the St. Clair Flats. The question then arose whether that canal was in Canadian territory or within that of the United States. °1 have no doubt that the engineering offisers ap pointed by the United States to choose the site of the c :nal, and to construct it, acted in good faith in choosing the site, believing that it wis in the United States, and from all T canflearn, nt:nqmtobnr vations provedfthat to be the case . Hon. fir MACKENZIE: Hear, hear. . Hon. &.r JOHN A. MACDUONALD: My hon. friend says «Hear, â€"hear," and I have md:‘.uboflndnbum‘:qn-.gu{ an one, as he is quite competen s ie ce mm un might be founded in favor J that view from the language of the report of the language the evidence tiken. â€"of the division of the different sites. 1 admit that a strong argument might be based on spouks of tile oft ship ciapasts, but from 1 t from the evidence and statements that have beenoouoou;ionfingintitmbhdd to be a matter of doubt whether the ga« ndwtmofitn'ifihthbom- dary of but ‘theâ€"Commissioners di| not satisfy themselyes on that point, sâ€"that is, if we looked at and combined with that 18 7 2 . of Great but they Jomodandphudm::um to a map, and anyone rnl% report with the map and holding the map as a roruonoftbonpor'h.t‘hu canal is entireâ€" y in the United tes. It may be unfortunate that it is so because it may greatly impede the navigation of those flats by Canadians. But the question is whether under that treaty, m:? that map which is a por ion of the treaty and as obâ€" l[ijptory as the treaty is that the canal is in nited States or not. When the point was raised that the map was inconsistent with the report, Her Majesty‘s Government I have no doubt unaer the advice of Her Majesty‘s legal advisers made it a point with words that cannot.admit of argumernt that the two nust be taken together and that the map explained and defined the meaning of the language of the report so that Her Mgjesty‘s Government de: clined to argue a proposition so unworthy of being urged as that the map was not binding and obligatory upon them. But sir, * out of the nettle, d u:for. we pluck the flower] cafety." The House will see by looking at the clause I reférred to, that it is a matter of no consequence whether the canal is in the United States or Cana da, because for all time to come that canal is to be used by the people of Canada on equal terms with the rloot the United States. in the .pmm my hon. friend to which I have referred, that canal he says is only secured to Canada during the existence of the treaty. I say it is secured for all= time, just as the navigation of the St. Lawrence is given for all time. _ The _ United _ States have gone to all the expense of building the canil, and now we have the free use of them. If the United States put on a toll there we pay no . greater .tolE and it is of the first and last advantage to the commerce of both nations that the deepâ€" ening of these channels should be gone on with, and I can tell my hon. friend, moreover, that in this present Congress there is a measure to spend ae.l::lo addiâ€" tional sum of money on this out of the reverues of the United States for that object. Fo much for the St. Clair Flats. Now, sir, as to some of the advantages to be guined by the Tresaty, 1 would call the attention of the House to the 29th clause, which clause ensures for the whole time of the existence of the Treaty, for twelve years at least, the continuance . of the bonding system, : We know how valuable that has been to us, how valuable during the winter months when we are deprived ofithe value of a zeaport. The fact that the American press has been loudly calling for the abolition of the system is a proof of the boon which they considered it to be. They have said that if Canadians would be so bumptious, they would be deprived of this system, and allowed to remain cooped up in their frozen country. It the United States should ever commit the folly of injuring their carrying trade by adopting a ‘hostile policy in that respect, and they have occasionally, as we know, adopted a policy hostile to their commercial interest, they could do so before this Treaty was ratifiedâ€"they canâ€" not do so now. For twelve long years we have a right to the bonding system from the United States over all their avenues of tnde‘wmd longdllnfom that time exâ€" ires, I hope we s have the Canadian fiacific Railway reaching to ‘the Pacific Ocean, and with the Intercolonial Railway reaching to Halifax, we shall have an unâ€" interrupted line from one seaboard to the other (cheers), This is one of the sub stintial advantages that Canada has gained by this Treaty. Then, sir, the 30th article conveys a most valuable privilege to the railways of Canada ° that _ are running from one part of the country to another, and 1 must take the occasion to s1y that if this had been pressed upon the consideration of the American Government and American Commissioners at Washington, during the negotiation, much of the merit is due to the hon. member for Lincoln (Mr. Mer ritt). He it was who l:fpliod me with the facts, he it was who called attention to tae great wrong to our trade by the Actof 1866, and impressed bg him with the great importance of the su joctx.l was enabled to press the adoption of this article and to have it made a p. rtion of the treaty, Now sir, that this is of importance, you can see by reading the Buffalo p:pers. Sometime ago they were crying out that the entrance had been made by the wedge which was to ruin their coasting trade, and that the whole trade of the lakes was being handed over to Canada. Under this clause if we choose to accept it, Canadian vessels can go to Chicago, can take American produce from American ports, and can carry it to Windsor or Collingwood, or the Welland Railway. ‘That same American produce can be sent in bond to our frontier, giving the traffic to our vessels by water and our railways by lind, to Lake Ontario, and can then be reshipped by Canadian vessels to Ouofi O'L-burgh, or Rochester, so that this clause gu us a direct amelioraâ€" tion and of the extreme, almost h.nhoxnlminoudtngilyu-dh Uniâ€" ted Etates (_3 and I am quite sure that in this age of railways and when the votes and proceedings show thit so many new enterprises are about to start that this will prove a _ substantial improveâ€" ment on the former state of aftairs. Then there is.mion that if, in the exercise of our discretion, we choose to put sdifiennh th!nnlo oltzlhonm can vesse our and if New m:m continue her export duties on lumber passing down the river St. John, the United States may withâ€" draw from this arrangement so that it will be hereafter, if the treaty be adopted, and this act passed, a matter for the consider. ation of the ‘Government of Canada in the first place, and of the legislature in the next, to mmit-?‘dl- ent for them to take advantage of this bouhth:&ndioth-.lph:t.ho expediency of their doing so, e no :oilubt,-dlhnno donb:uhrlh‘nt luficlyuokw establish those ghhbronrmndnilmyn, (hear, hear.)â€" The only other subject of pooufhthmwcmd:hmuofion with the treatyâ€"the whole of it of course is interesting to Canada as a part of the Empire, but speaking of Canada as such and of the interest taken in the treaty Ioon.llo{â€"tho only other subject is the manâ€" ner of disposing of the San Juan boundary question. That is settled in a way that The United States Govarnment were, [ believe, as sincerely convinced of the justice of their own case. Both believed whether many hon. members have ever studied that question. . It is‘a most interr esting one, ani has long been a cause of controversy between the two countries. I am bound to uphold, and I do uphold, the British view respecting the channel which they were in the right, both were firmly grounded in that opinion ; andmchbo‘i:g the case there was only one way of it, that was to leave it to be settled by im« partial arbitration. I think the House will admit that no more «dlistinguished arbiter could have been selected than the Emperâ€" or of Germany. In the examination and decision of the question he. will have the assistance of as able and eminent jurists as any in the world, for there is no where a more distinguished body than the jurists of G'or"-:ny, who u.:d especially f?lil:llll’ with pnm&l- i practice of interâ€" nations! law. Whatever the decision may be, whether for England or against it, you miy be satisfied that you have got a most learned and careful judgment in the mitâ€" ter, to which we must bow if it is against us, and to which J am sure the United States will bow if it is agrinst them (héar, hear ) I think, Sir, I have now gone through all the articles of Interest connected with Canada, 1 shall alludie to one omission from it and then [ sh.ll have done; and that is the omissjon of all allusin to the settiement of the Fenian claims.. That Canada was deeply wmpdb;thououks' known as the Fenian raids is indisputable. England has admitted it and we all feel i We felt deeply grieved when those raids were committed, and the belief was funlin which I must say I share that due exerâ€" which 1 must 1 share that due exerâ€" the cegeulestine Witkin their terrivery of t ir territory bands of armed men openly hostile toa peaceful country, and to put an end to incursions by :l,ll who urrp’l:l 'ungv‘c our borders, slew ur people and destroyed our property: 1t was therefore a fit thing to press upon Englan1 to s86k compensation for these great wrongs. As & consequence of our position as a colony we could only do it through England. | : We had no means and no authority to do | « it directly ourselres ; and consequently we | ; urged our case upon the attention of| 1 England, and England consented to open | 1 negotiations with the United States u..on | i the subject. In the instructions it is /. stated that Canada had been invited to ‘ : send in a statement of her claims to Engâ€" ) : land and that it had not don®g so; and I| || dare say it will be charzedâ€"Indeed, I ) i have seen it so st:ted in some of the newsâ€" | | papersâ€"that that was an instance of Can |« acian neglect. Now, it is not an instance | , of Canadian neglect, but an instance of | . Canadian caution, (hear, hear.) Canaâ€" | : dians had a right to press for the payâ€" | ; ment of those claims whatever the amount; | | for all the money necessary to be spent to | repel those in:ursions had been taken out | , of the publictreasury of Canadsa and had | : to be raised by the taxation of the country. | Not only had they right to press for that, | but every individual Canadian who sufter || ed in person or property because of those |. raids had an equal right to compensation. | It was not for Canada, however, to put & | limit to those claims, and to state what amount of moneyâ€" would be conâ€" |. sidered > as a _ satisfactory liquideâ€" tion _ of _ them. It â€" has never | been the case, when commissions havre | been appointed for the settliement of inâ€" | . ternational claims to hand in those claims in detail before the sitting of the commisâ€" |. sion. What Canida pressed for was that |. the principle should be established, that |. the demand should be made by England umdtho United States, that thit demand | a be acquiesced in, that the question of damages should be referred to a tribunal like that now sitiing at Washington for the investigation of claims connected with the civil war in the South, that time should be given within which the Canadi<n Govâ€" ernment as a Government and every indi vidual Canadiin who sufterel by those outrages should have an opportunity of filing their claims of putting in am account and of offering proof to establish their right to an icdemnity. The Canadian Government carefully avoided by any statement of their views the placin» of a limit upon those claims in advance of exaâ€" mination by such a commission; and I think the House and country will agree that we acted with due discretion in thit respect, (hear, heir). Now, one of the protocols will show the result of the deâ€" mand for indemnity. The ‘emand was made by the British Commissioners that this question should be discussed and con<iâ€" | . dered by the commission, but the Uaited States Commissioners® objected, taking the ground that the consideration of these claims was not included in the corresponâ€" | deénce and reference. In doing that they took the same ground that my hon. friend the member for Sherbrooke, with his usual acutness and his usual knowledge of the value of language, took when the matter was discussed in this House before my departure for Washington. He said then that he greatly doubted whethsr under these letters which led to the appointment of the High Commission it was intended that the Fenian claims should be considerâ€" ed ; and although my hon. friend the Miâ€" nister:of Militia, arguing from an opposite point of view, thought it might fauly be gnld that those claims were included, I I myself could not help feeling the strength of â€" the argument advanced _ by the _ hon. member tor Sherâ€" brooke, and 1 stated at the time that I thought there was great weight in the objection which he pointed out,. The American Commissioners, as the event proved, raised that objection, maintaining that that the point was not includes in the oonupomz::o in which the subjects ~of deliberation w;n -t‘:u&. u::‘ !:hhon hl: was proposed to them by itish, t American Commissioners declined to ask S eisegs the s0ope 97 ther se in Sust the scope of their duty in respect. Now, we could not help that. There was the correspondence to speak for itself, and it was matter of more than doubt whether those claims were included in it, ‘The British ambassador representâ€" ed that he has always thought that the correspondence did include them ; and he was struck with surpriseâ€"perhaps I ought not to say surprise, for that was not the expression he usedâ€"but he was cegjainly under the tflro-ion that it had been regarded by all parties that they were cov ered by the correspondence. Still, let any one read those letters, and he will find it is more than doubtful ;\bhe will find, indeed, that it is altogether doubtfal whether the agreement to enter into the negotiations could be construed in any way so as to bring these claims into the discussion. If it was doubtful, and if obâ€" m was raised on that ground, the Commissioners had no to compel the American La-m to determine the doubt in their favor, and force these claims upon their consideraâ€" tion. The consequence was that they were omitted from the deliberations of the Commission. Whose fault was that? It was the tault of Her Majesty‘s Govern â€" ment in not demanding in clear language, | in urmh;:h& could not be :{m stood, mnfi&fim these claims should be one of matters dealt with by: the Commission (hear, hear). 1t was a great disappoin:ment to my colâ€" leagues that the objec:ion was taken, and that all hope of getting redress for the injury done by those Fenian raids was deâ€" mndcofuutboCmmi-ionflWu: ington was concerned, in consequence the defective language of the correspond» ence snd the defective nature of the subâ€" mission to the Commissioners. Now, was responsible for that error. had promised to make the deâ€" | mand, and Imd had failed to make | it. Not only but Her Majesty‘s Goâ€" + vmtwoktbor-.randbilit, of withâ€" | drawing the claims altogether, and Mr. Gladstone fully assumed all the responâ€" | eibility of this step, and relieved the Caâ€" | nadian Government from any share in it, | when he stated openly in the House of | Commons that the Imperial Government | had seen fit to withdraw the cl.ims, but | that they had done so with great relucâ€" : | tance and sorrow for the manner in which | Canada had been treated. Canads, there | fore, had every right to Jook to England | for that satisfaction which she failed to | receive through the inadequacy of the | correspondence to eou:r the Tm F by taking responsibili I m b’pnh the claims put herself | in the tion of the United States, and | we a fair and reasonable ri_ht to look |to her to assume the responsibility of | settling them. She did not decline that > | responsibility, and the consequence was, | that if we failed to obtain redress from r |\ the United States for those wrongs, we h«d yet an opportunity of securing comâ€" { pensation, which would not have been :\ offered to us if it had not been for the | | steps taken by this Government [hear, r | hear)}. â€" But, sir, we are told that it is a â€" | great humiliation for C«nids to take this money. Why, it is our due. We are enâ€" titled to it, and we must have it from some one. England refused to ask it for us from the United States, and she acceptâ€" ed all the ibility which that refusal involved. m‘m‘u accepting that responsibility ; she must take the câ€"nse quences, and she 1« willing to do so. But :&. .mlh "d:,: C were illing that com tion which l-;l.ns thus .cknovs: was due to us by her shoul i take a direct pecuniary loLun.LWo were u:v’illin‘ that it should be the payment of a certain amount of money, ana there were several strong reasouns why we should not acc< pt reparation in that shaae . lo the first place. ifl-pl;;p@ of that kind were made, it would cause an investigation as to the settiement of the amount to be made beiween England and Camads of a -ut‘::-conly eh:rnow We -oc:: have spectacie a julge appoin to examine the dflmo’: detail, with Canada pressing her case u bis attenâ€" .on."_'" cases, and putting herself in a posiâ€" tion which c wuld hardly fail o be regarded as one of bostility to Canadian interests. 1t througboyt have been of s> friendly and pleasant a character, should be placed in Cema® 20 C “;:lb"&. last 1 unâ€" jeopardy in that way : * WO suggestion was thro:.' ::gd :::Nl a causing England to expend , /; °0@ causing England to expe or pulting the least a4, upon her people, would, do us more good, and prove af .â€" greater advantazge m.‘:,m::l“ m mere money compensation '.'.""‘I Th gon‘lnly'expoct. This was a moie of d; rei. ing of the question in the bichest Cispos. ‘ut}nf «ctory to both countries, ..:’“ which does not in the least o t our dignity or our self '.’:TN' hbear) The credit of Canada u.‘("' is well established ; her ‘:xoa M:‘ known wherever she h2s had finge dealings. Her Maje=ty‘s Government zo to the House of Commons and ‘- autl!:ori!y fi) gursrantee a Canadiap : with a wellâ€"groun assurance public of Bnghntt:vill never ;:h;: upn to put their hards m'u.*’.‘ or tax themselves one farthing to ps [ (Cheers) At the s ime time the 1.,.’,: Governmment, by giving us this guarante, grants us a boon the nfnoofM'. the great works of public 1mprovement have undertaken was expiained the “: day in a manner that I would not atiempt to unitate by my bon. friend the Finance Minister. Besides the double advan; to ourselves in getting the .‘.“': of _ Englard . without mw f to the Englisn people there is to be con. sidered the great, the enormous benefit â€" that accrues to Canada from this open avowal on the pairt of Fngland of the h | terest she takes in the success of o# | great public enterprises (Cheers) No-g c .n say now when she 1s mhfl.- of her most distinguished statesmen t ,’ take the place of the nobleman who now â€" s> worthily nerere its Her Mywjesy in the Dominion. No one can when L.L ’ is aiding us by endorsing a loan I over so many years, and which :.{: ~~' finally extinguished till most of us now here will have been githered to our fathere. No one can say under these cir. cu nstances she has any iduof.m: berself from us and giving up the colonies. . [Cheers] The solid substantial advantage of being able to obtain money on better terms than we cou.d on our own er dig alone is not the only benefit this | tee will confer upon us; for '“'R‘ finish at once to «11 creamers or C tors who may hopeordmnum the alienation and sepiration of the colo. nies from the Mother®Country ~‘Thet m a more incalculable advantage than the mere advantage of England‘s guarantes of : our finan sial stability, gr.at and important as that it is.{ Loud‘cheers; Aye, but it is said that it is a bumilia:i in to make o: ot this kind. Why, Sir, it was no ha tion in 1841 to obtain an Imperial guars tee for the loan necessary to constres the canals originally. 1t was not commâ€" dered a humiliation to accept a gusranie for £1,400,000 in 1865 for the purpase of buil tingftortificâ€"tions, nor was it a bumilis tion :0 obtain _ £4,000,000 upor a similar purrantee to combus the intercol niai *railway. Why is i&a humiliation then in this case to acceptthe ’mnntoowhon Engiand voluntarily comes orward ani accepts the responsib lity for withdrawing our claims in respect to the Fenian raids. it was by no from us that that rup.%?-‘: sumed, for Mr. Gladstone rose of his own motion in the House of Commons and ac cepting _ the reâ€"ponsihility edmittes that it should take a tangivle shape. it did t:ke such a shape, and I suy a most satisfactory shape in the guarantesof £2,500,000 immediately and we may my £4,000,000 in all ultimately. [Ch: But 1 hear it objected that Canmaa ought not to have made a bargnain at all _ Nhe could h .ve allowed the Fenian claims to go and dealt with the Treaty separately, accepting or rejecting «it on its merits. Sir, Camda did not muke a bargain of thit kind, but she went fairly and opalyul.lfl Government and sarl: Here is that has been negociated through your influence and which affects importast commercial interests in this country, it is unpopular in wanada because Of its pâ€" cuniary arrau,ements, but it bmn for lmg:fi-bl. c-xu:-md lor:: of the peace of t pire, but pecumiary interests of Cansda should, in the opini n of the Canadian Government, be considerâ€" ed ; And the undoubted sJaim of Canads for compensation for these, Fenlian ow trages has been set aside . We may well therefore call upon you to strengthen our hands ty shewing you are unwilling to sacrifice Cansda altogether for imperiâ€"l purposes sclâ€"ly. tir we asked ‘that lor, Canada, and the response was immediate and gratifying, except thit England did not except the whole of our p‘h- w flnnmeo a loan of £4,0000, But 1| amas certain as l am ".m this House, and I am not speaking the book, that h«d it not been for the ub« fortunate cloud that arose betwe n th¢ United States and England. which threst« ened to interrupt the friendly settlement of.llquoofionntmth-.hfi which [ am now happy to say is pflg the dfficulty would have been by Engiand permiitting us to add to the £2,5000,000, £1,400,000 WW teed some years since to be on fortifications and other defensive pre parations. ‘That money bad not been 6X« pended, snd there would now have been no object in opplyi:: it for the consirue tion of works which would huve beed & standing menace to the United fi »ad would have been al ogether out place immediately after signing & l? peace anga amity which I hold to,b¢## foodono. 1 do not hesitate to say, a9d ':fi“ 1 am _ not speaking #ith out the book, that 1 beleve .fi of that kind would have been to Her Majesty‘s Government, but whes the cloud arose, when there was 4 bility of this Treaty being heldas® and when there was danger of the tiuubdmunm“c'hr to the unfurtunate position in they w:;.l:dm-.-ma was not the h: E to uchub1 $eX ueremting our. territory. â€" Then ing our territory. not the time either for the Câ€"n:dian GOf spen@® money upon these works, or 1 fend and retain the Dominion as pendeacy ,of the 80"”‘9“: (cheers ) "I say, therefore, that are actually receiving a gusranb | States will say, and saf , when two great nations ‘ the Unitea States have h ‘< ‘;fl.. fi «sheries â€" amounu®s . rbout $84,000 per annum. ’:.‘: Treaty, and you will have t you Englâ€"nd to send her fleet and gi* "" mw-ml_-drb!i-""fi., u.ou‘hyonvnll-u‘!‘-'“u NN‘“M-F“‘:.",-.& the bad feeling which 4* og) be lately unu:cwmw m-m-fl.-dmflb.-_‘a least additional the American RAF" arge annual expestiatt i sheries ’:E:-lhl 18 or annum. â€" Beject ht will have ud": her fieet and giv® Y" have settled all h6# itory,. Then #8 he C.n«udien G# unwillingness L. if acted illingness W rke, or to d# nion as a 4+ . n of & tmm! guarantee of â€" f England and _ heâ€"= 2000 oved, and m rer to be ad unon. WA _ x# all â€"I have rese‘ved : ounitry, and alter the ~""’ â€" 7e r“â€", We op °s P Uota* of my un wes from ihe © forg * this 9 w. nnd shost io arbitration, es i0 5l 0d powe! ; _# _ »uugafale was but here i am,. thank E.MM wh mixsen those peopie moral influâ€"nce it may be opp Hf other v tion which . «4s fi“n‘loâ€".‘bxfl lover the wor :t:nu-y &*";* of ma k }lnnuoomod by a selti s of Cane l« o s insy ®" s {ubed a principle wh o â€"" this world C in ans thas will will . _.‘z escape 0 sould be £0 matier to the p: 2e * . . 11 1 hope 9 M 1 ho nes shat m7 â€",p.‘y“n‘::.' Te, g:! « »ir0e yeud a MIHBG Gover ‘and l thit the said a word O ssmc ige areat all part, â€"a poser what th one ave .wi‘y: re; all 1# lhe tj 16 char th ; A10.F Lhe irom E Lhe