192 



COMMERCIAL INTERCOURSE. 



Plants, shrubs, and trees. 

 Pelts, wool. 

 Fish-oil. 



Eice, broom corn, and bark. 



Gypsum, ground and unground ; hewn, or wrought 

 or unwrought burr or grindstones. 

 Dye-stuffs. 



Flax, hemp, and tow, unmanufactured. 

 Unmanufactured tobacco. 



While the subject of abrogation was under 

 discussion several of the Boards of Trade, in 

 their action, expressed the opinion that the 

 treaty should be continued until a new one was 

 made. The Board of Trade of Detroit made 

 a report on the subject, from which some of 

 the most important arguments in favor of the 

 treaty and objections against it are thus sum- 

 marily condensed : 



From the year ending June 30th, 1821, to June 30th, 

 1863, the total exports to Canada and the other Brit- 

 ish American Provinces were $422,443,981 ; the total 

 imports for the same time were $260,327,900 mak- 

 ing a balance in favor of the United States of 162,- 

 116,081. 



We find the principal argument in favor of an abro- 

 gation of the treaty to be the fact, that, since the 

 treaty went into effect, the Parliament of Canada has 

 largely increased the duties on manufactured articles 

 produced by us, causing a large decrease in the de- 

 mand for such articles, and consequently acting in- 

 juriously upon our interest. We say this is no valid 

 objection, as these duties do not touch one single 

 article named in the treaty ; and further, no one 

 claims that any infringement of the treaty has taken 

 place. On the contrary, it is admitted on all hands 

 that both parties have been scrupulously exact in the 

 observance of its terms, in spirit and in letter. 



The second argument used is, that the people of 

 Canada and the British Isles have no sympathy with 

 us in our present struggle ; that, on the other hand, 

 all their best wishes and feelings are with our ene- 

 mies. This view of the case is largely dwelt upon 

 to create a prejudice against the treaty. We con- 

 sider this no kind of argument, as it has nothing to 

 do with the subject under discussion ; and it is not 

 in keeping with the dignity of a great and powerful 

 nation like the United States, to allow itself to be 

 betrayed into hasty and ill-advised acts of legislation, 

 because a portion'of the inhabitants of certain coun- 

 tries dp not like us. This is not a question of likes 

 or dislikes ; it is a question of trade and commerce, 

 affecting the well-being of 70,000,000 of people. 



It is farther argued that our lumber interests suffer 

 by the competition of the Canadian lumber mer- 

 chants. We consider this a most wholesome as well 

 as needful competition. It is well known that the 

 pineries of the great West are_ being rapidly taken up 

 by large capitalists, and that in a few years monopo- 

 lists will hold the most of these lands ; this result 

 will leave the consumer at the mercy of these great 

 landholders, who would then control the price of 

 lumber, and put it to such a rate as would greatly re- 

 tard the building and improving of our cities, towns, 

 and villages, and weigh heavily upon our farming 

 interests. 



Coal is covered by the same argument as lumber. 

 Coal-masters are combining all over the land to raise 

 and keep up the price of fuel, and we are only sorry 

 that Nova Scotia does not export to the cities of our 

 Atlantic seaboard twenty times more coal than she 

 does ; because if she did, we would have a much 

 larger and cheaper supply at the West. In helping 

 us to coal and lumber at a reasonable price, the 

 treaty is a real blessing. 



Touching the fisheries, although they have not 

 been near so profitable to us as was anticipated, the 

 settlement of a question that was rapidly drifting the 



two countries into an attitude hostile to each other 

 was a boon so great to both parties that, had the 

 treaty affected nothing else, it would have been worth 

 all the advantages its enemies claim we have given to 

 Canada. 



We now come to breadstuffs. It is claimed by 

 those opposed to the treaty that this portion of it 

 affords great and improper advantages to the Cana- 

 dians. We claim the advantages are on the side of 

 the United States and not of Canada. Instead of 

 being injured by the importation of Canadian grains 

 we are largely benefited. We will try and prove this, 

 and we think the proof is conclusive. In 1863 we im- 

 ported at Detroit 300,000 bushels of Canadian white 

 wheat, on which Americans received the following 

 sums for labor, freight, insurance, elevating charges, 

 and commission : 



Elevation and shipping charge on 300,000 bush- 

 els, 2c $0,000 00 



Fire insurance on value here, $450, Jc 1,125 00 



Freight to Buffalo on 300,000 bushels, 6c 18,000 00 



Transfer at Buffalo, Ic 8.000 00 



Canal freight to New York, 20c 60,000 00 



Measuring at New York, Ic 3,000 00 



Commission on value at New York, at $1.90 per 



bushel, $484,250, 2J per cent 14,250 00 



Lake insurance on $584,250, at J per cent, pre- 

 mium 2,921 25 



Total charge paid Americans $103,295 25 



With the revenue law as it stands at present, the 

 Government would have received directly, as its por- 

 tion of the benefit, the following sums : 

 On canal and lake freight, $78,000, at 2J per cent. . $1,950 00 



On gross sales, $584,250, at of one per cent 730 30 



On stamps for time drafts for $400,000, at 50c. per 



1,000 200 00 



Assuming that all parties interested netted the 

 moderate sum of $10,000 on this property, it 

 added just that amount to the net incomes of 

 the various parties interested, so that with a five 

 per cent, income tax, the Government would 

 get another sum out of the transaction of. 500 00 



Amount paid to treasury $3,880 00 



Here we have a sum of $111,676.55 paid to the GOT- 

 ernment and people on one lot of 300,000 bushels of 

 white wheat. Every transaction of the same nature 

 resulted more or less in the same way. The oppo- 

 nents of the treaty say that this wheat would have 

 come in under a twenty per cent, ad valorum duty, 

 and that we should have had all these profits and the 

 duty_ besides. To this we reply : We would not have 

 received one single bushel of the wheat with a twenty 

 per cent, duty, for the simple reason that the amount 

 of this tax would have paid the freight charges, in- 

 surance, and commission, from the point or way- 

 port from which the grain started in Canada to 

 Montreal, where it would have sold for a larger sum 

 than it would have done in Detroit. 



Our commission merchants complain that a vast 

 quantity of flour is now purchased in Toronto by 

 parties who used "to make their purchases in Detroit, 

 and claim that the treaty ought to be repealed on 

 that account. To say the least, this complaint is 

 rather selfish and ungenerous; for the plain English 

 of the desire is to get a law passed by Congress that 

 will compel the New England consumer to purchase 

 his flour in Detroit, whether it is to his interest to do 

 so or not. A better and more natural way would be 

 for our merchants to offer our New England friends 

 flour at fair rates instead of holding it from one to 

 two dollars per barrel above all other markets, as 

 they have generally done for the past few years, and 

 by this cause have driven the flour trade that used 

 to centre here, to Toronto, Chicago, Milwaukee and 

 Toledo. A spirit at utter variance with the ordinary 

 rules of trade has lost us this business, and nothing 

 else. 



The next complaint against the treaty is, that it 

 fosters and sustains rival transportation interests 

 through a foreign country. This is the most ground- 



