General of Canada in Council, *or the Governor in Council of Newfoundland, before the same are executed.”

Thus, in a case in which, for unlawfully fishing or for unlawfully preparing to fish, the judge forfeits the vessel, that decision shall not be carried into execution until the Governor-General in Council shall have had the opportunity of deliberately examining the evidence upon which this judgment was founded, so as to remedy the judgment if they think there is any ground for the exercise of greater lenity than the judge has felt himself able to use.

Article 15 is, of course, a contingent article. As I have already informed the House, the plenipotentiaries of the United States stated they were quite unable to put anything in the treaty that would necessarily touch the fiscal policy of their country. They say to do so would be simply to invite rejection of the treaty, on the ground that they had infringed the jurisdiction which Congress possessed, the United States Congress having, as I have shown the House, adopted, in the most emphatic form, the policy not to allow any changes in their tariff except by the act of Congress itself. We therefore put this in the contingent clause. We provide absolutely for the concessions that have been made with reference to delimitation, and with reference to the treatment of United States fishing vessels, when compelled to resort to our ports in distress or in need of casual supplies or for a homeward voyage. All these were made absolute by the treaty ; but when it came to that which is of great value to the United States fishermen, when it came to that which enables the United States fishermen to make Canada a basis of supplies for the purpose of better competing with our own fishermen, we then felt that we had a right to take our stand, and if Her Majesty's plenipotentiaries have not been able to support the extreme contention of the Canadian Government, hon. gentlemen will find that, on the other hand, the plenipotentiaries of the United States, who had, as a matter of diplomatic

intercourse, taken a very strong ground as to the indefeasible rights of American fishing Vessels to obtain, in our ports, as commercial vessels, whatever supplies they required for carrying on their fishing—to be able to purchase bait, to be able to purchase supplies of every kind, and to be able to tranship their fish-they will find that our friends on the other side had, in the same way, to concede a great deal as compared with the extreme contention that they had made. Here it is provided, as a just and proper security to the interests of the fishermen of Canada, who have the right, while excluded by heavy duties from the markets of the United States, to such protection as the treaty of 1818 has provided for them, that whenever the question arises as to Canada being made the basis of supply for the American deep sea fishing vessels—because the question of fishing is not in the controversy at all, the Americans having given up the right to catch fish in the inshore waters of Canada-that only can be done for a sufficient quid pro quo. We have, therefore, provided in Article 15:

“Whenever the United States shall remove the duty from fish-oil, whale-oil, seal-oil, and fish of all kinds (except fish preserved in oil), being the produce of fisheries carried on by the fishermen of Canada and of Newfoundland, including Labrador, as well as from the usual and necessary casks, barrels, kegs, cans, and other usual necessary coverings containing the products above mentioned, the like products, being the produce of fisheries carried on by the fishermen of the United States, as well as the usual necessary covering of the same, as above described, shall be admitted free of duty into the Dominion of Canada and Newfoundland.

And upon such removal of duties, and while the aforesaid articles are allowed to be brought into the United States by British subjects, without duty being reimposed thereon, the privilege of entering the ports, bays, and harbours of the aforesaid coasts of Canada and of Newfoundland shall be accorded to United States fishing vessels by annual licences, free of charge, for the following purposes, namely:

"1. The purchase of provisions, bait, ice, seines, lines, and all other supplies and outfits ;

2. Transhipment of catch, for transport by any means of conveyance;

“ 3. Shipping of crews.

“Supplies shall not be obtained by barter, but bait may so be obtained.

"The like privileges shall be continued or given to fishing vessels of Canada and of Newfoundland on the Atlantic coasts of the United States."

I think that is a measure which will meet with the hearty approval of the House. I think that will be regarded as a fair and reasonable proposition that, if fishing vessels of the United States are allowed to make Canada a base for obtaining their supplies and furnishing all the materials necessary for the outfit of a fishing voyage, for the transhipment of their catch, and making our harbours and ports the means of carrying on their industry, the fishermen of Canada, with whom they are in that case better able to compete than they could otherwise, are entitled to have their fish entered free in the ports of the United States. While the plenipotentiaries of the United States were not able to make this an absolute provision, I do not hesitate to say that I look confidently to the period in the remote future when fish will be made free and the fishermen of the United States will be able to obtain all the advantages in our ports which are here given to them. It will be observed that we have made this much larger in its provisions than either the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854 or the Washington Treaty of 1871, inasmuch as we have made it cover many places which were not covered by either of those treaties, and not only that, but we have taken care to guard against what might be called the rather. sharp practice, if such a term were admissible in regard to a neighbouring country, that, while allowing our fish to come in free, they should impose a duty upon the cans or tins or coverings in which the fish were included. - More

than that, we have made this cover all the inland waters of Canada, as well as the sea coast, and have made this provision as to the entry of free fish, provided they take advantage of this clause and make Canada the base of their supplies, apply to the fish of British Columbia—that is, to the whole of Canada, the same as it does to the Atlantic coast. I think I have now dealt with the treaty in its entirety as it stands, and I have only to refer to the modus vivendi in Schedule B, which provides that, while this treaty is sub judice, before it can be ratified by the Senate of the United States, the Parliament of Canada and the Legislature of Newfoundland, during two years or, pending that ratification, until these privileges to which the American fishermen would be entitled if our fish is made free, those privileges shall be enjoyed by the American fishermen on the payment of $1.50 per ton. I need not tell you that, on the eve of the ratification of a treaty of this kind by the Senate of the United States, a collision between the fishermen of the two countries or anything which would incite bad blood or become a cause of prejudice would probably prevent the ratification of a treaty which would be otherwise ratified, and to prevent that we offered in this modus vivendi for two years the privilege to these United States fishermen of obtaining these various benefits which are provided for in the treaty by the payment of $1.50 per ton. I do not think this will be regarded as an excessive rate, and I think it will greatly conduce to good neighbourhood between the United States and Canada. This modus vivendi was accepted by the United States plenipotentiaries in the most kindly spirit. They recommended the President to submit it to the Senate for their information, and I think I may say that it carries on the face of it the approval of the Governments of both countries. Now, having referred to the various provisions of the treaty, I am happy to say that I shall have to detain the House but a few minutes longer, but I would like to draw the attention of the House to what has been accom

plished by this treaty. I have told you what position Canada stood in with regard to the United States of America before the initiation of these proceedings. I have told you that we stood face to face with an enactment which had been put on the Statute Book by a unanimous vote of Congress, ratified by the President, providing non-intercourse between the United States and Canada. I need not tell you that that Bill meant commercial war, that it meant not only the ordinary suspension of friendly feeling and intercourse between two countries, but that it involved much more than that. If that Bill had been brought into operation by the proclamation of the President of the United States, I have no hesitation in saying that we stood in the relation to that great country of commercial war, and the line is very narrow which separates a commercial war between two countries from an actual war. Speaking a year ago, I pointed out in my remarks, with a view to prevent the possibility of such an Act going into force, all the advantages that in our present position we could avail ourselves of to protect ourselves against such an unfriendly Act on the part of the United States. · I then said that it would be a mad Act. I say so now. No man who knows anything of the intimate commercial relations which exist between Canada and the United States could contemplate such an Act going into operation without feeling that it would tear up from the foundation those intimate social and commercial relations which exist between these two countries, which, in friendly rivalry, are making rapid progress which has attracted the attention of the civilised world. It would produce a condition of things the end of which no man could foresee. If that Act had been adopted, we had no means of looking to any increased commercial intercourse between that great country and the Dominion of Canada. Under those circumstances, it behoved the Government of Canada to adopt any means in its power to avert such a disaster, which, great as it would have been to Canada,

« ForrigeFortsett »