243 



•' It is not because tlie tenant fails to exorcise tlio rip;lits whicli he lias acquired by 

 virtue of his lease, tliat the propritlor should he (l('i)arre(l from the recovery of his rent." 

 On liiis |irinci|)le, we elaiui liial all the sul)iecls of Her Britannic Majesty are tenants, 

 under ihe Trealy, and nnist [lay for tlie priviU-j^e wlietlier tliey \ise it or not, and you 

 are hound t.) take that into consideration, in establisliing the value of the privilejjes 

 exchauL^ed. 



Further, if tins is a Treaty between Great Britain and the United States, it cannot 

 be converted into a 'I'realy between the United States and Canada. This Coiuniissioii 

 cannot alter it, or sui)plenient il. Certain si)ecilied provisions in the Treaty it can 

 execute, iiut it cannot amend its errors, or correct its faults. If in that Treaty the 

 British (iovernment lias comiiromised or endanj^ered tiie interests of the Colonies, much 

 as i( is to be re<;ret'ed, you have no power to undo the work ; it is a matter with whicli 

 the Commission has iiotliing; to do. 



Upon the negotiation of tiie Treaty of 1S71, the most correct and influential repre- 

 sentative of public opinion in England, the London " Times," used the following 

 langua<;e : — 



" W'f waU.'licil with sDiiic uiii'iisiiu'ss tlit> n'|ii'iitcil s]iliitt('is (if Imd fwliiii; hulwi'uii tlu; lislRTiiii'ii ol' 

 New KiiuImiiiI iiml llif |pimi|i1c of the Muiitiiiii' rioviiici's, lit'ciuiso wu fiiiild iiL-ver lin wrtiiiii lliiil an 

 uu'ly iiiriili'iit, iiiii,'lii nut Miiiii' liny fmrc us, niuc-li iii^'iiiiist unr will, to lici'diuo tint uliiini|iioiis of ii 

 (limi'.ri wf I'lmiil only half ii|i|iiov('. 1 1 is vi'iy cii.sy, tlu'rcfiin', to uuilcrstiiiiil with what iimtivcs (nir 

 Ministers siii,'i;i'stiMl :i ( '(iMniiission, iiml with what rcaclinL'Ss tiiey yii'lilfcl to the hint, that it s'lonlil \m 

 alliiwiMl to si'tlli- all siihjcrts of ilillci'cnix' ln'twecii the two countries. Linl Deiliy has rejieateilly 

 liianieil their euLterness, ami the American (lovernuu^nt enulil not hut lie sensible of the ailvuntai^o 

 they ohtaineil when the ( 'oniniisssioiiei's arriveil al Washinj^lon, liounil to ecmie to some .settlement on 

 the imints in ilis|iute. U is ti'ui^ thai one of the Coniniissiiiners was the Prime Minister nf Canada, 

 hut ai,'iiinsl this eiri^umstaneo must, lie set the facts that the other four aiijiroached ihi'ir work from iin 

 Knj,'lish ]ioiijt of view, that the Commissioners, as a liody, were iuslruetiHl from day to ilay, and, we may 

 almost say, hdui hour to hour, hy the Ku^lish Caliiiiet, and their work wiw done with an eye to the 

 il|)]ii-oval of the i';ui,dish |ieo|ile. It was iuevitalile that the results of their Liljours shouhl not satisfy 

 the inhahitanls of the l)omiuioii. We are far from sayin;; that the Commissioners did not do their liest 

 for Canadian interesis as they understood ihem, hut it was uol in human nature for ihem or their 

 instruct ions to he to Canada what they are to Kn^dand ; and, as the Treaty was conceived for the jiurposo 

 of remiivint,' the present and con!i'n,'ent liaiiilities of i'jigland, it was agreed upon us soon as it was 

 believed lliat these liiilulities were settled." 



If this is so, then surely this Commission was not appointed to correct " the inevitable " 

 results of the 'J'reaty wliich crea'.ed it. 



The Colonial authorities recognized tliis view. When that Treaty was formed. Earl 

 Kimberley, writing lo the Colonial Governor, made tliis statement, in a paragraph which 

 is not too long to read, for I do not mean to trouble you wiiii a great many quotations. 

 It is a slatement of tlie Secretary of State for the Colonies to the Governor-General, 

 dated, " Downing Street, June 17, 1871," and published at Ottawa; — 



" The Canadian (liivennnent itself took the initial vi; in sn^'uestinj,' that a joint nritish and 

 American Commission should lie apiminted, with a view to settle the disputes wliich had arisen as to 

 the interpretation of the Treaty of liSIH. Put it was certain, that however desirable it mi.^lit be, in 

 d(!faidt of any comiih'te si'ttlement, to a]iiioint such a Commission, the causes of the dillicuilty lay 

 ilecper than any ipiestion of interpretation, and the nii're discussioti of such ]ioints as the correct 

 detiintion of bays, could not lead to a really friendly au'reement with the United States. It was 

 necessary, therefore, to endi'avour to find an ei|uivalent which the t'nited .States might be willing to 

 give in return for the fishing ]irivileges, and which Croat liritain, having regard both to Imperial and 

 Colonial interests, could pi'ojierly accept. Her .Majesty's (Iovernment are well aware that the arrunge- 

 nienl which would have been most agreeablt! to Canada, was the conclusion of a Treaty similar to the 

 Keciprocity Treaty of lS,"il, and a 'loposal to this ellect was [ires.sed upon the United States' Commis- 

 sioners, as you will hnd in the .'iiiti. I'rotocol of the Conferences. This proposal was, however, declined, 

 the United States' Commissioners stating that they could hold out no hope that the Congress of thu 

 United States would give its consent to s\icli a tariff amendment as was jiroposed, or to any extended 

 plan of n'cijirocal free admission of the products of the two couiitriei. The Uniti^l States' 

 Connnissioners did indeed |)royiose that coal, .salt, and tish should he reci| rocally admitted free, and 

 luudier after the 1st .Inly, IS74; but it is evident that, looked at as a tarilf arrangement, this was a 

 most iuadeipiate oiler, as will be seen at once when it is compared with the long list of articles 

 udmitl"d free under the l!cciproc''y Ti.iiiy, .Moreover, it is obvious from the hunk avowal of the 

 United Siati's' Coinmissionei--, that they only made this oiler beeau.se one branch of Congress had 

 recently mo"e limn ''are expressed itself in favour of the ahilition of duties on coal and salt, and 

 because ("oi'gre.ss had iiartially removed the duty from lumber, and the temlency (jf legislation in 

 the U';iU'd States was towards the reduction of taxation ami of duties, so that to have ceded the lishery 

 rights in return for tlie.se concessions wo\dd have been to exchange them for commercial arrangements, 

 which there is e\ery reason to ludievemiy before long be made without any such cession, to thu mutual 

 advaniai^t.' of both the Dominion and the t'nited Siat<'s ; ami Her Majesty's (iovernment are hound to add, 

 that whilst, in deference to obtain a renewal in ]iriuciple of the Ueciprocity Treaty, they are convinced the 

 catablishmenl of free trade betw ecu the Doiuiuiou and the United States ia not likely to be promoted by 



