12 



think that it is for the good of Canada 

 that the old policy should remain in force. 

 In order to show that, he must prove that 

 the fish remain in Canadian waters, and 

 remain there to be talcen by Canadian 

 and not American fishermen. If he 

 cannot do that, it is quite evident 

 that liis policy has been a failure, and that 

 there has been a very serious loss to the 

 people of this country, a loss to Lake Erie 

 alone, according to the figures of the hon. 

 gentleman, in twenty years, of about $40,- 

 000,000, the excess of the American catch 

 would be that much in value greater than 

 the Canadian catch. That is the point, 

 whether Canadian fish is here for the Cana- 

 dians, or whether they have been caught 

 by the Americans. There is no profound 

 knowledge required in this matter. If the 

 fish are not here, it is quite evident that 

 •his policy is a failure. 



I think it is dno to this House and to this 

 country that the hon. gentleman should give 

 a little better explanation than he gave in 

 his speech last year, and more reliable, leav- 

 ing out such statements that these were 

 really very little ; no difference in the 

 catch in Lake Erie, that the figures 

 were all talk, when the actual figures, 

 as compiled from the blue-books of 

 Canada, show that in the short period 

 of tw(Mity years. tl)oro is a difference of 

 over 400 million pounds in that Lake alone. 

 If we go on and extend our inquiry, we shall 

 find u very great difference also in Lake 

 Superior. In the Lake of the Woods the 

 same policy is being pursued, prevent- 

 ing Canadians from taking their share, and 

 throwing the trade into the hands of 

 the American people. Now, I think it is 

 about time that lion, members should look 

 into this matter, and that the people who 

 are behind the Minister should compel a 

 change of policy. It is about time that the 

 reign of common sense should be ushered 

 in. The idea of handing this enormous 

 trade over to the American people, and year 

 by year talking about some arrangement by 

 which the fisheries can be preserved, while 

 the American people continue catching as 

 many fish as they possibly can, with all 

 the appliances of nets and boats that they 

 bring into service. This is an important 

 matter, ?t is not a fisli-hook and line busi- 

 ness. Hoii. members from the maritime 

 provinces must understand that this is no 

 ordinary matter. If they compare the quan- 

 tity of fish caught in Lake Erie alone, with 

 the catch of New Brunswick, they will find 

 that the catch of the Canadian and American 

 side of Lake Erie is greater than that of 

 New Brunswick, and it is not very much 

 behind that of Nova Scotia. Yet the Minis- 

 ter and tlie Government have thought that it 

 is a wise policy to stand and look calmly 

 on and prevent our people from fishing, and 

 see the Americans enjoy this vast trade, a 

 trade of G3.(XK).000 pounds. Sandusky is the 

 greatest fish market in the world, handling 



twenty million pounds of fish annually. I 

 have not been guilty of using extravagant 

 statements, as charged by the hon. gentle- 

 man ; I have no desire to infringe upon his 

 domain in that respect. I am sure that his 

 statements, attributing to the McKinley Bill 

 the results of the figures which have been 

 presented, I have shown to be extravagant. 

 As a matter of fact, the catch on the 

 Canadian side is only seven or eight million 

 pounds, and he can put that on, and it 

 makes very little difference. Yet he will get 

 up in this House and state that this differ- 

 ence is made up by the operation of the 

 McKinley Bill, when I have shown that the 

 figures were made up before the McKinley 

 Bill came into operation. I think the hon. 

 gentleman propounded a question in his 

 speech that I have forgotten to notice. He 

 evidently thinks it is a clincher, and is an 

 answer to the whole attack that has been 

 made upon his department : 



I would ask the hon. gentleman, how he will 

 explain this to me, that, while the United States 

 are spending millions to our thousands in fish 

 culture, yet it was my experience to find a -re- 

 quest from the hatchery at Detroit, on the United 

 States side of that narrow sheet of water, for 

 permission to come into Canadian waters, in sight 

 of the so-called United States fishermen. cO obtain 

 the necessary quota of eggs for their hatchery, 

 stating that they could not obtain thtim on the 

 United States side ? The reason is clear, and it 

 is consistent with all the reports that I have 

 bfen able to find— that our side of Lake Erie and 

 our side of that river are peculiar. 



Now, that is a great question. He wants to 

 know why it was that Americans ask for 

 permission to fish upon the Canadian side 

 of the Detroit River, and if he establishes 

 that there are a few more fish on the Cana- 

 dian side of the river, he thinks his whole 

 argument is established. Now, Professor 

 Prince, in his report, ^ 3aks of this very 

 subject, and says that it is owing to the 

 pollutions of the Detroit side, and I find 

 that confirmed in the American report : 



In earlier years there was a great abundance of 



whitefish in this river, and the annual yield was 



very large." Mr. James Craig, of Detroit, who 



has for many years engaged in the fish business 



of that city, informs us that near Fort Wayne, 



within the city limits of Detroit, the average 



catch of whitefish in haul-seines was from 18,000 



to 21,000 fish, weighing on an average from 2% 



to 2% pounds. On 12th November, 1871, at one 



, haul of a seine, 3,100 whitefish were caught. With 



I the growth of the city and the increase of the 



: amount of sewage entering the river, the flsher- 



I ies have declined to their present condition. The 



number of whitefish taken in the vicinity of Fort 



I Wayne in 18^0 was only 3.000, and the output of 



< the entire river was only 35,000 pounds. 



I That is tlie answer to that statement. But 

 I liere the hon. gentleman makes another, 

 which shows that after all he does not under- 

 stand every thing in connection with his own 

 department. The hon. gentleman says : 

 " The great fish market for Detroit, 

 especially in regard to whitefish, is 

 In our waters." The hon. gentleman 



