AWARD OF THE FISHERY COMMISSION. 1877 



2d. Upon whom is the incidence of duties levied upon fish exported 

 by Canada into the United States, the producer or the consumer T 



I again (if I may do so without giving offense to my learned friend* 

 on the other side) express my obligations to Mr. Miafl for the valuable 

 assistance he has afforded in preparing my argument on these points. 



Article XXI of the Treaty of Washington is as follows : 



It is agreed that for the term of years mentioned in Article XXXIII of this treaty. fih 

 and fish-oil of all kinds (except fish of the inland lakes and of the river* falling into them, 

 and except fish preserved in oil), being the products of the fisheries of the Uniuii SutM or 

 of the Dominion of Canada, or of Prince Edward Island, shall be admitted into each coun- 

 try respectively free of duty. 



ARTICLE XXII. Inasmuch as it is asserted by the Government of Her Britannic Maiettj 

 that the privileges accorded to the citizens of the United States under Article XVIII of this 

 treaty are of greater value than those accorded by Articles XIX and XXI of this treaty to 

 the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty, and this assertion is not admitted by the Government 

 of the United States, it is further agreed that Commissioners shall be appointed to de- 

 termine, having regard to the privileges accorded by the United States to the subject* of Her 

 Britannic Majesty, as stated in Articles XIX and XXI of this treaty the amount of any 

 compensation which, m their opinion, ought to be paid by the Government of the United 

 States to the Government of Her Britannic Majesty in return for the privileges accorded JU 

 the citizens of the United States under Article XVIII of this treaty ; and that any ram of 

 money which the said Commissioners may so award shall be paid by the United State* 

 Government in a gross sum within twelve months after such award shall have been given. 



The advantages which might be expected to flow from the reciprocal 

 freedom of markets, provided for by Article XXI, might be of two 

 kinds 



1. Increased trade. 



2. Increased profits upon the volume of trade already existing. 



The latter, however, could only obtain upon the supposition that the 

 duties previously levied had been a burden upon the foreign producer. 



In reference to the first of these questions it is contended 



1st. That the increase of consumption in the United States of British- 

 caught fish has not been equal to the increase of consumption in Canada 

 of the products of the United States fisheries. 



2d. That a considerable portion of the products of British-American 

 fisheries, exported to the United States for many years past, has beeu 

 re-exported to foreign countries, where they have entered into competi- 

 tion with other foreign exports of Her Majesty's British-American sub- 

 jects ; and it must be borne in mind that these fish have not paid any 

 duty. 



These propositions will be dealt with seriatim. 



By reference to statement No. 8, to be found on page 43a of the ] 

 ish Evidence, it will be found that for the seven years following the ab- 

 rogation of the Reciprocity Treaty (ichen duties were payable upon tmpoi 

 tations) the imports of fish and fish-oil from the United States into tlie 

 Dominion of Canada and Prince Edward Island were as follows 



igg^ "!".!!"/. i7i>. i 



1869.!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 



1870 



1871 



1873!."."."."."."!!."."."...!..".." 



the average annual value being $)52,50G. 



During the years 1874, 1875, 1870, 1877, ichcn no tluht* 

 they have, under the operation of the treaty, been as tollowsj 



1874. 

 1875. 



1876 "MX* 



1877 : - 



the annual average having been increased to $721,637. 



