BRITISH, COLONIAL AND OTHER CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 443 



them in the land of their birth. I could not quite follow the reason- 

 ing of the leader of the opposition in this regard. If the Americans 

 are excluded by legal process from entering those bays or ports, does 

 it not follow that the whole trade in herrings, either frozen or pickled, 

 would revert to the people of this colony ? The demand for that fish 

 must be met. If the United States fishermen can not supply the 

 demand the people of this colony may. In the absence of herrings 

 going in duty free, as they did at the present time in American bot- 

 toms by an evasion of the United States tariff law, the people of this 

 colony could afford to enter into the industry and pay the duty of 

 three-quarters of a cent per pound that is now levied by the American 

 customs. Again, natives of this colony, who, as the leader of the 

 opposition alleges, now go to Gloucester and obtain employment in 

 the fishing schooners that sail from that place, would find employ- 

 ment here in the same trade, viz, that of conducting the frozen and 

 pickled-herring trade between this colony and the neighboring Re- 

 public; in other words, they would pursue the employment under 

 the British flag rather than under the Stars and Stripes. It is per- 

 fectly true that the Canadians have a herring fishery, but it is also 

 true that their herring fishery does not amount to sufficient to supply 

 their demands. It is indisputable that they have to come to our 

 shores and obtain supplies of herring and other bait fishes to suc- 

 cessfully conduct their fisheries. That being so, it can not be cor- 

 rectly alleged that by this bill the herring trade will be diverted from 

 Newfoundland to Canada. The leader of the opposition has asked 

 the question, " If it is possible for the people of this colony to engage 

 successfully in the frozen-herring trade, why is it that they have not 

 done so ? " The answer is perfectly clear ; because they have had to 

 compete with the Americans who carried into the United States, duty 

 free, whilst the people of this colony have had to face a duty of three- 

 quarters of a cent per pound, or a tax equivalent to 25 per cent of the 

 article. It will not be contended that the people of this colony are 

 unable to compete with the fishermen of the United States or any 

 other country upon equal terms. My memory as a member of this 

 legislature goes back now for nearly a quarter of a century, and I do 

 not remember that the position was ever before taken in this House 

 that our fishermen could not compete with either the American or 

 French fishermen on an equal footing. The object of every bill that 

 has been introduced into this legislature in relation to foreign fisher- 

 men has been with the sole view to bring about an alteration in the 

 foreign bounty system or the reduction of prohibitive duties. That 

 was the object of the bait act. The contention of the introducers 

 of that measure was that it was to be used as a lever for the purpose 

 of bringing about the abolition of the bounty paid by the French 

 Republic upon the fish caught by French fishermen upon our coasts. 

 It has been asserted that the Canadians will come down here, take 

 our herrings, and then dispose of them to the Americans. It is quite 

 possible that the Canadians will come down here; they have come 

 here up to the present time, and I do not hesitate to say that to a 

 great extent they have thwarted us in carrying out the bait act 

 against the fishermen of France. I have been advised by Inspector 

 O'Reilly, of the fisheries department, that certain parties in Canso 

 are, at the present time, preparing cold storage with a view to sup- 

 plying both French and American fishermen with bait fishes obtained 



