Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

knowledge of international law, and the fact that he had been chosen by a Republican Government in the United States to discharge most important duties as a Commissioner to China in the arrangement of a treaty. I do not believe, Sir, that it would be possible for any Government in the United States to select three gentlemen more eminently patriotic, more heartily devoted to the interests of their country, than the three gentlemen I have named; and after sitting face to face with them for three months in keen and sharp controversy, the only result of our communications has been to leave upon my mind the very highest respect for the character, standing, and ability of those gentlemen, and a desire not only of continuing the acquaintance which I had the pleasure of making with them, but that it should perpetuate a genuine and thorough friendship. I can only say, Sir, that when I came to meet them in conference, I was greatly surprised, and you will not be surprised to learn that such was the case after hearing the papers I shall read with reference to commercial intercourse. After the statement of the President of the United States in his Message of 1885, asking for a commission, after the letters which passed between Mr. Bayard and myself, you will readily understand that I went there expecting and looking forward to a settlement of this question on very much the same lines as those upon which it had been settled in 1854 and, to some extent, in 1871. I am right in saying that the instructions with which I was charged by this Government were to obtain, if it were possible, as near an approach to the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 as I could obtain—that is, the policy of carrying out free exchange in the natural products of the two countries. I was to urge that policy, and I think you will have no doubt as to the course pursued by me after reading the proposition that I made in the conference on December 3rd, 1887:

"Sir Charles Tupper begged leave to submit a note containing the following proposal from the British plenipotentiaries :

That with a view of removing all causes of difference in connection with the fisheries, it is proposed by Her Majesty's plenipotentiaries that the fishermen of both countries shall have all the privileges enjoyed during the existence of the fishery articles of the Treaty of Washington, in consideration of mutual arrangement providing for greater freedom of commercial intercourse between the United States, Canada, and Newfoundland."

[ocr errors]

It has been suggested that this is very vague. Well, I confess I am unable to see it. I considered that in formulating that proposal I was bound to ascertain if the Government of the United States were prepared to accept any greater freedom of commercial intercourse, to ascertain to what extent they were prepared to meet Canada in order to secure for their fishermen the enjoyment of the advantage which they had under the treaty of 1854 and under the treaty of 1871. If that proposal does not formulate as broad and as general an invitation to the Government of the United States as could be made, provided they were willing to deal upon a commercial basis at all, I should be very happy if any hon. gentleman will point out to me wherein the proposition is wanting. I intended to give the Government of the United States the fullest opportunity of stating just how far they were prepared to go in reciprocal trade with Canada. I knew, Sir, that the air was full of theories of commercial union, full of proposals of unrestricted intercourse, and I thought I could not do a better service to Canada, under these circumstances, than to ascertain at the very outset what was the position of the United States as to that question. I do not hesitate to tell you what that position is. . . . I am bound to take this opportunity of saying that you can go to Washington, as I did; you may mingle for three months, as I did, with the leading men of all parties and all classes; you may go through the House of Representatives from beginning to end and canvass every man, and you may go to the Senate of the United States and canvass every man, and I will

say that you will not find a single man who will talk to you on the subject of unrestricted reciprocity, as I did not find one at the time when public attention was being turned to it in this country.

Was it not desirable that we should know what the views and sentiments of the United States were upon the subject? Talk to them, Sir, of commercial union-I tell you that I did not meet a man of any party, I did not meet an American statesman, who would not hold up both hands for commercial union with Canada. Why, Sir? Because he knows that it would give Canada to the United States; he knows that you would never occupy the degrading position of having a neighbouring country make your tariff and impose taxes upon you. I say, Sir, that it is a condition of things from which the most craven Canadian would recoil. This proposition of unrestricted reciprocity, of free trade with the United States, with liberty to make our own tariff with the rest of the world— I say I did not meet a man-I discussed this question fully and freely from day to day with scores of leading public men in the United States-I did not meet a man who would talk about such a thing for a single moment. Why, Sir, they treated the very proposition with scorn. They said: "Do you suppose that we intend to make a free-trade arrangement with Canada that would involve free trade with England, and destroy the position we occupy in relation to all the vast industries of this country?" I say, Sir, that under these circumstances I did a service to Canada. And you have got the answer. You did not get from Mr. Bayard the statement: "If you will go the whole length of unrestricted reciprocity with us, if you will make everything free, then we will talk with you." Nothing of the kind. Here is the answer, coming from the leader of the Administration of the United States, which conclusively shows that, I was going to say, but, after the interesting and animated discussion we had in this House, I will not say that it was a waste of time to

take up a fortnight of the time of Parliament in discussing that which it is just as rational as to have been discussing how to construct a railway from Canada to the moon. The answer is here:

[ocr errors]

'While continuing their proposal heretofore submitted— on the 30th ultimo-and fully sharing the desire of Her Britannic Majesty's plenipotentiaries to remove all causes of difference in connection with the fisheries, the American plenipotentiaries are constrained, after careful consideration, to decline to ask from the President authority requisite to consider the proposal conveyed to them on the 3rd instant as a means to the desired end, because the greater freedom of commerical intercourse so proposed would necessitate an adjustment of the present tariff of the United States by congressional action, which adjustment the American plenipotentiaries consider to be manifestly impracticable of accomplishment through the medium of a treaty under the circumstances now existing. Nor could the American plenipotentiaries admit that such a mutual arrangement as is proposed by Her Britannic Majesty's plenipotentiaries could be accepted as constituting a suitable basis of negotiation concerning the rights and privileges claimed for American fishing vessels. It still appears to the American plenipotentiaries to be possible to find an adjustment of differences by agreeing on an interpretation or modification of the treaty of 1818 which will be honourable to both parties and remove the causes of complaint to which end they are nowas they have been from the beginning of this conferenceready to devote themselves."

Mr. Bayard gives a further illustration of the position in his letter to the Senate. It is dated Washington, March 22nd, and in it he says:

[ocr errors]

"In conformity with the invariable course pursued in previous negotiations, when the conference met it was generally agreed that an honourable confidence should be maintained in its deliberations, and that only results should be announced, and such other matters as the joint protocolists should sign under the direction of the plenipotentiaries. With this understanding, which was strictly kept, the discussions of the con

ference proceeded, through its numerous and prolonged session, with that freedom and informality in the exchange of views which the nature of the negotiations required, and without which its progress would have been materially hampered, and any agreement rendered very difficult of attainment.

"

'Upon the conclusion of the treaty some members of the conference at once left the city under the pressure of other duties, and it is thus possible that some statements were excluded that otherwise might have been placed in the joint protocols.'

I have explained to the House my great surprise at finding they did not give what I assumed that the purely formal protocols would give-that is to say, all the proposals made and the counter-proposals and the replies on both sides. I assumed that the protocols would contain those. Mr. Bayard has explained how it was that this was not done.

"After the conference had finally adjourned and Sir Charles Tupper had returned to Ottawa, a request was received through the British Minister that assent be given to the publication of a certain proposal which had been submitted by the British plenipotentiaries and declined by the Americans. The consent as desired was given, and I enclose herewith a copy of the papers so referred to. Every point submitted to the conference is covered by the papers now in the possession of the Senate."

I wish the House to note that. Although we have not given any proposals and counter-proposals, here is the statement, which I confirm as being thoroughly and entirely accurate, that the papers submitted to the Senate, as the papers submitted to you, give all the information necessary for the consideration of this question.

"Excepting the question of damages sustained by our fishermen, which, being met by the counter-claim for damages to British vessels in Behring's Sea, was left for future settlement."

President Angell, who was one of the commissioners, after he returned home, made the following observations :

« ForrigeFortsett »