BRITISH, COLONIAL AND OTHER CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. 449 



did not mean it; he meant effect, and there was a great deal of dif- 

 ference between intent and effect. He meant that he considered the 

 means taken to retaliate upon the Americans bad, that it would drive 

 our people to America, as he would presently show. Then the hon. 

 the Premier did not think his action with regard to this measure 

 patriotic. He thought that true patriotism was to speak the truth. 

 It would not be patriotic to endorse a measure which would involve 

 the colony in a great deal of trouble and expense, and prove a farce 

 because the measure was based upon a misconstruction of the treaty 

 of 1818. If he could prove to the Premier he was wrong in his con- 

 struction of the treaty, and that the bill was ineffective, he was a true 

 patriot. Would he be patriotic to support legislation which he 

 believed to be harmful to the mass of our population. He only said 

 what he believed to be true. He did not appeal to the gallery, he did 

 not appeal to that prejudice miscalled patriotism. He never thought 

 prejudice patriotism. The hon. the Premier, in reply to the conten- 

 tion that the Americans could obtain bait in Canada, read a commu- 

 nication showing the distress caused by the Bait Act in 1890, and 

 argued from it that this could not be done. The people who have 

 advanced this argument must have been reading some of the speeches 

 of the hon. gentleman when he was one of the principal opponents 

 of the bait act. Does not the hon. gentleman remember that period ? 

 Did he not remember his promise to the people of Fortune Bay to 

 repeal the Bait Act if his nominee were elected. He admitted the 

 right of the hon. member to change his mind, and would be glad to 

 support the present measure if it were confined to the question of bait 

 alone. With reference to his opposition to the present measure, there 

 would not be the same objection if it were permanent. He had been 

 in favor of the refusal of bait to our competitors when the Bait Act 

 was anathema to the hon. the Premier. The men who gave their 

 opinion upon this measure and passed a resolution in favor of exclud- 

 ing the Americans from bait supply were consistent. They followed 

 out the policy they were the exponents of when the hon. gentleman 

 rated them as selfish men who desired to obtain the government to 

 pass the Bait Act for their own selfish purposes. He was glad to see 

 that time had mellowed and broadened the hon. gentleman's views 

 with regard to those gentlemen and their opinions. He would also 

 note that the hon. the Premier, whilst taking the trouble to obtain the 

 opinions of the mercantile community, by his own admission, had 

 not taken the trouble to obtain the opinions of members of this house. 



Mr. CASHIN. Hear, hear. 



Mr. MORIXE. With reference to the opinion expressed by the mer- 

 chants of Water Street, in their resolutions, they dealt with two 

 matters. 



First : the enforcement of the bait policy. 



Second : the question of export duty on herring. 



The resolutions could not be construed as in favor of the present 

 bill. The first resolution was only an affirmation of the opinions 

 held by them before the Premier was in favor of any such a measure ; 

 the second asked for an export duty of fct. per Ib; that the Premier 

 has not added to this bill, therefore he has not acted upon the 

 opinion of the merchants. They knew nothing of the provisions of 

 tnis bill at the time these resolutions were passed. If they had, 



