It would take fifty-seven years fishing at ! Lake Superior by the Americans in the ten 

 the rate our men have been permitted to | years from 1880 to 1889, including 1889. 

 fish to equal the catch of whitefish on , 



Troi't caught on Ijoth sides of Liilie Superior in the Years 1880-1885-1887. 



1880. 

 1885. 

 1889. 



Average yearly catch of trout on Lake Sui)erior 

 on both sides of the lakes 



Catch of trout in Lake Superior in ten years, 

 1880 to 1889, inclusive 



Canada. 



Lbs. 



312,800 



911,570 



1,020,500 



2,244,870 

 748,290 



7,482,900 



L^nited States. 



Total Valuk. 



Canada. 



Lbs. i Rate. S 



1,4(;4.750 I0cts.| .Sl,280 



3,488,177 " i 91,157 



3,;^jr),724 " 1 102,050 



8,319,(5-"'>1 



2,773,217 



27,732,170 



224,487 



.4,829 



748,2<>0 



United 

 States. 



140,475 

 .348,817 

 3;iO,(>72 



831,904 



277,321 



2,732,170 



Catch of Whitefish and Trout on both sides of Lake Superior in ten Years, 1880 to 1889, inclusive, 

 taking as a basis of calculation the average for Years 1880, 1885 and 1S89. 



Loss to Canadians in ten years 50,000,000 pounds whitefish and trout and over $4,00<),0(M). 



Using the figures furnished by the Depart- ' 

 ment of Marine and Fisheries, there was in 

 this one lake alone, a loss of $4,000,000 in 

 ten years. According to that one-sicied 

 fishery arrangement, it would take 48 years 

 fishing on the Canadian side, to equal ten 

 years fishing on the United States side of 

 Lake Superior. Wherever you go, if you go 

 further west to the Lake of the Woods, the 

 American people are permitted to fish as the 

 Minister says ad libitum. They ai*e catch- 

 ing the fish while our Canadian people there 

 and along the shores of the county of Essex, 

 in the fishery" districts of Lake Erie, have 

 been prevented from taking their fair share 

 of fls-h. 



The hon. gentleman has stated tliat thei-e 

 is no man from the Lake Erie district in 

 this House who can rise in his place, and say 

 that he really believes that the Lake Erie 

 fisheries are now in as goc>d condition as 

 they were on account of the onslaught made 

 on them from year to year by the fisher- 

 men on either side of the lake. I have 

 given the figures which conclusively prove 



there has been no extraordinary onslaught. 

 I would like the hon. gentleman when he 

 makes a statement of that kind to support 

 it by statistics. Why, Sir, if the proper 

 figures could be got at, they would show 

 that we should have no less than 100.(X)0,000 

 pounds of fish on our side of the lake to 

 equal the excess of American catch since 

 1870, and it would take the entire catch of 

 Nova Scotia ten or twelve years to make up 

 the excess that the American fishermen have 

 taken out of Lake Erie In the last thirty 

 years. 



Sir CHARLES 

 Hear, hear. 



HIBBERT TUPPER. 



Mr. ALLAN. The hon. gentleman says 

 " hear, hear," but these are figures that he 

 can get from the Canadian blue-books, and 

 from the census returns of the United States. 



We have he^ird a good deal about some sort 

 of reciprocal arrangement for a great many 

 years. The hon. gentleman told us that it 

 was the policy of the Government in 1870, 

 twenty-five years ago, and that it was also 



