Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors][merged small]

Hind in his report here notices my testimony, and endeavors to manufacture out of it something to support false deductions. He takes the exports to the United States, for the year 1872, from Prince Edward Island. Why he takes that particular year I cannot understand, but then he says:—

"In this independent official statement we observe Senator Howlan's figures for mackerel not only correctly given, but the total amount of fish exported to the United States in 1872, returned by the Custom House officer at $137,746, in place of Mr. Barry's $92,838 worth.

"In effect, a Senator of the Dominion produces upon oath, before a court of justice, the

records of his Own work and his Own Government in a distant Province, when that Province possessed jurisdiction over her Trade and Navigation Returns. Subsequently, in the same court of justice, an officer of the Dominion Customs Department at Ottawa, produces upon oath an alleged statistical statement of the same details, but differing altogether from the Senator's statement, and he declares that he has derived his results from the same source as the

Senator himself."

sult from that as from the Nova the meeting of the Commission at HaliScotia fishery, and we were com-fax, and gave my evidence. Professor pelled by force of circumstances to go to the United States or elsewhere to buy herring. On page 19, again, with regard to pickled halibut sent to the United States, he goes on to show that pickled halibut going to the United States from Nova Scotia was recorded at a certain rate; that pickled ha but going from New Brunswick was recorded at a different rate. That matter is very readily understood. At one particular season of the year halibut is very high, while at another season of the year it is very low, and other causes may combine to increase the lower prices. Now, again, with regard to the annual expense, it is true we have no internal revenue bureau connected with our Government here as they have in the United States. We have to depend altogether on the Customs and the Trade and Navigation returns. Under the circumstances it is surprising that our statistics are as accurate as they are. In the United States every man has to pay duty on his income, and there are supervisors on every mile of the coast taking evidence as to Now, the matter is very easily exthe exports and imports, and the value of plained. In Prince Edward Island the the fisheries, while we have to depend fisheries are mainly on the north side. altogether on our Trade and Navigation The prevailing winds during the fishing returns and Customs reports. Notwith- season are from the north-west. At instanding the facilities for compiling statis-tervals, possibly about three or four tics in the United States, I have no weeks, a very heavy blow comes on from hesitation in saying, from my experience the south-east or north-east. On such at all events, that if you were to examine occasions vessels loading off the north them as critically as Professor Hind has shore go to Shediac at the Gulf end of examined those of this country, you might the Intercolonial Railway, and deliver find them as imperfect in some particulars their mackerel there to be placed en route as our own. There may be inaccuracies for Boston or other ports in the United from a variety of causes, but I do not States. As a consequence, those mackthink the charge of systematic fraud or erel would not appear in the Custom inaccuracy can be borne out. It is a House returns of Prince Edward Island, matter of notoriety, in connection with whilst they would necessarily appear in this fact, that after a comparison of both those of New Brunswick. the returns of this Dominion and of the matter was under discussion, and when United States on this particular question, Judge Foster took up the returns and the difference in 27 years does not read them, I remember distinctly he amount to much more than $100,000; said "these differ from your statement." proof sufficient that the statistics were I said "I cannot help that," and I exvery well attended to and very exactly plained at that particular time the taken. I know, so far as I am concerned, discrepancy between them. Those reI was not a supporter of the Government turns were taken from the journals of which was in power at that time, but our own Legislature. I explained it having been asked to give evidence as a very distinctly so that no misunderstandpublic man before the Commission, I ing should arise. Now Professor Hind did so. I left my home, and attended misconstrues that. He says:

When the

men

"The thing is done in such a manner, that | for the service, under the supervision of the officer of the Customs Department at Professor Spencer H. Baird, who has in Ottawa triumphs in this court of justice, and use is made of his falsified figures. The two very able reports contributed a mass of statements cannot be true, and the Senator's information on the subject, second to statement is susceptible of verification." none, and of the most valuable data Why was it "susceptible of verification?" which can be relied on ; a mass of inforThe answer is obvious, because, then and mation that I am sure no other country there, I substantiated the statement I in the world could supply, and Professor gave by official documents, and he Hind himself furnished some information should have stated in his pamphlet the about the homes and haunts of the fish. reason which I gave, and not to try to So accurate were the instruments find fault with the gentlemen who pre- they had on board the Speedwell that they pared the statistics from the only data were enabled to go to some particular they could get the returns from their part of the Gulf when there was a disown custom houses. Then he goes on pute about fish, to go down to the botfrom that to state that, if the statistics tom, and bring the identical fish up itself. are wrong in one particular, they are 1 can come to only one conclusion, that if wrong in the other. But he goes on anything of a very important nature in to show, from the records of Prince the interests of the American people Edward Island, that my statement is had been lost sight of, there were men correct. It certainly may be a pleasure well qualified indeed to supply it to him to do so, but it is entirely beg-who have given great attention to the fishging the question. On page 29, in the ing interests, of illustrious men and mersame way, referring to oysters, he puts chants-highly accomplished merchants; the exports of oysters from New Bruns- and to think that they would allow their wick at 13,274 barrels. What the price case to be treated in such a way with the of oysters was in the United States very eniment men they had on the Comat that particular time I am at a loss to mission, I do not believe it can be know, but it may have so happened that verified if a committee is struck to investhere was a very large export of oysters tigate the matter. from Prince Edward Island to St. John, Hon. Sir ALEX. CAMPBELL New Brunswick; that the oyster crop The hon. member from Halifax, who has in the United States was bad at that brought this matter under the notice of time, and where there was almost daily the House seems to have satisfied himcommunication between St. John and Bos- self that the statements which have been ton,it may possibly have been in the inter-made by Professor Hind are not entitled est of those engaged in the oyster business to credence, and that he is probably a at this time to ship to Boston from St. monomaniac on the subject of them. He John. There must be some commercial has also told us that almost all the perreason why this export appears in the re-sons who have been engaged in the turns. I fail to see that any case is made Fishery Commission have been in suc out here which cannot, with a very little cession attacked by this gentleman. investigation, be satisfactorily reported the statements are therefore in themon, and I have no doubt that, if the Am-selves incredible, and the hon. gentleman erican Government thought it was of points out the reasons why he thinks sufficient weight and importance, cor- they are, and if the person himself is in respondence would be furnished on the state of mind that the hon. gentlethe matter. After the exhaustive evidence produced at that Commission from men acquainted with the Atlantic coast, from the United States, do not believe that they would have allowed those statistics to go unchallenged. They had every sort of information they could get, and, to use a common expression, they left no stone unturned. The American steamer Speedwell was fitted up specially

man describes

Hon. Mr. POWER ed that.

If

I only suppos

Hor. Sir ALEX. CAMPBELLI must express my regret that he has thought it proper in the exercise of his discretion, to bring them before this House, because it cannot but have the effect of giving them a factitious importance. The hon. gentleman says be does

so because, although he does not himself believe, and although he thinks no person who has informed himself will believe, those statements, yet he is apprehensive the general public may

Hon. Mr. POWER The hon gentleman does not refer to the fact that the statements have been made the subject of a debate and resolution in Congress.

Hon. Sir ALEX. CAMPBELL

I see by the papers that that is the case, but they do not seem to have attracted much notice or to have been at all believed in. So far as we are concerned, it must be borne in mind that the fisheries arbitration under the provisions of the Treaty of Washington was between Her Majesty's Government and that of the United States; that the Commissioners were appointed by those Governments respectively; that the conduct of the case on our side was in the hands of a gentleman appointed by Her Majesty's Government; that the evidence marshalled by him; and that any returns which were furnished to him were

Was

put forward in the exercise of his discretion. The gentleman who acted as agent for Her Majesty's Government, Mr. Ford, formerly the Secretary of the British Legation at Washington, is well known to many members of Congress,

Chas. Dilke, it seems to me that it would
have been much better on our part to have
allowed the matter to rest until those who
were responsible for the conduct of the
investigation should decide that they
attach sufficient importance to these
statements of Mr. Hind to take notice
of them. The statistical information
which was furnished to the agent
for Great Britain before the Com-
mission, at the
request of the
Imperial Government, by Canadian offi-
cials, related to two subjects, trade and
The former statistics were
fisheries.
compiled from the returns which had
been laid before the Canadian Legisla-
lature, session after session, for twenty-six
One cannot suppose that the per-
years.
sons engaged in compiling statistics dur-
ing all those years were in a conspiracy
to prepare false returns to be used in the
fisheries investigation; and not only is
this the fact, but before being placed in
the hands of the agent of the Imperial
Government they were collated with sta-
tistical returns of the United States for
the same period, and as the hon. gentle-
man (Mr. Power) has pointed out, the
comparison of the returns of the two
countries for the long period of twenty-
six years only showed a difference of a
few thousand dollars, strongly establish-
ing the correctness of both.

Hon. Mr. POWER Not one hunthousand dollars.

Hon. Sir ALEX. CAMPBELL With reference to the fisheries returns, they were made up by the Department of Marine and Fisheries, and made up with every desire to be accurate. They were compared with similar information which the Census Commissioners collected and

who would hear the statements to which
the hon. gentleman has referred as hav-dred
ing been made in Congress. If there is
any sound reason to distrust the reliabil-
ity of
any of the evidence offered under
Mr. Ford's direction, it would be for the
Imperial Government to take steps to test
its accuracy,
but we notice that the
Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, Sir
Charles Dilke, when this matter was
brought up in the Imperial House of
Commons, a few days ago, said that he
did not consider the statements of Mr.

Hind as entitled to attention. It would

appear from the statement of the hon. gentleman that copies of Mr. Hind's pamphlets had been sent to Mr. Delfosse, the chairman of the Fisheries Commission, as well as to the Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and in view of the letter to Mr. Hind from Mr. Delfosse, which the hon. gentleman has read, and of the silence of both the English and American Governments, as well as of the statement made by Sir

compiled. It was the only check which
was possible. I ask what more care
could have been done to attain accuracy;
and beyond this the award did not, I
believe, turn on the statistics but on the
oral testimony; but these returns are be-
lieved to be perfectly correct.
gestion that there was any idea or inten-
tion to falsify them is an outrage on
common sense. There is no objection on
the part
of the Government to the papers.
coming down.

The sug

Hon. Dr. ALMON-I have been. appealed to by the senior member for Halifax to express an opinion as to the

accusing the reverend gentleman, through
the press, of stealing his squaw. Any-
body who knows Mr. Grant must be
aware that he would not be guilty of
anything of that kind. The statistics of
the fisheries must have been very diffi-
cult to get hold of. We all know what
fish stories are. The first recorded is that
of Jonah and the whale. Of course I
believe the whole story, as I do any told
me by my friends. When any of my friends
go fishing, they tell me of the big salmon
that they hooked and which escaped, and
those escaped fish are never less than
thirty or forty pounds. How could they
weigh them? They had not
even the
fishes' own scales for the purpose. These
statistics are furnished by local officers,
and I know, during the short time I
represented the County of Halifax, there
were but few of them fit for their situa-
tions, though it must be confessed their
pay was very small.
Their reports
showed more fish caught than there were
in the river. If the hon. Senator from
Lunenburg were asked about the number
of salmon caught in his County we would
believe him, but I have no doubt he
would not put the quantity down at less
than it was, and, therefore, I think the
statistics of the fisheries from the time
of Jonah downward, are to be received
cum grano salis, without any suspicion of
wilful or criminal misrepresentation be-

mental condition of Prof. Hind. I should | copied from a book that he himself had like to know what Mr. Hind was paid written on the North-West, thereby for his attendance on this Commission, and what he claimed. If these facts were placed before me I could understand the animus which induced him to attack his countrymen and his country, and to endeavor to throw on us the blame of having over-reached the Americans, and thereby incurred the same shame that the Americans did in the Ashburton Treaty, in which they concealed the map with the red line, and gained a territory which no American can pass by without a blush of shame at the scandalous manner in which it was obtained. If these statements of Prof. Hind's were true, we should willingly give up all that we have gained by the award of the Fisheries Commission. But I do not think that there was anything unfair about the award. With regard to the speech of the senior member for Halifax, I think the hon. leader of the House has been rather hard on him. My hon. colleague has brought up the matter fairly. I was afraid at first that he was going to endorse the calumnies brought against our public men concerned in the award. Those men are not of the same politics as my self, but I believe that any Nova Scotians, whether they be Grit or Conservative, would scorn to use anything in a treaty with another country which was not fair and above board. When my hon. friend commenced his speech, I thought that the Irish blood in him led him to exem-ing attached to them. With regard to plify the verse of the old song-"He meets with his friend and for love knocks him down" for every statement of Hind's that he read he immediately afterwards proved to be false. As the hon. Senator from Prince Edward Island (Mr. Haythorne) has told us, Prof. Hind has occupied a great many honorable positions, but I think he has always been a very quarrelsome man. The Rev. George Grant, who travelled through the NorthWest, aud published a book on the sub-question of value themselves. Although ject, was, while in Halifax, idolized by men of all religious denominations, and in this part of the Dominion, where he has been living for the past two or three years, he has the same standing that he had with us. In his book, among other illustrations, was a picture of a Cree squaw. What did Prof. Hind accuse him of He stated this engraving was

the value of the fish caught on our coast, we can put Prof. Hind and others out of the question. For one Sunday during which the Americans were prevented from taking fish at Fortune Bay, they claim $103,000. It is possible that the fish might take the bait more freely on Sunday than any other day, but if the claim of the Americans is valid, then I think Prof. Hind may hang up his fiddle and his bow, they having settled the

the senior member for Halifax introduced this matter very fairly before the House, I do not think it would be worth while to give an importance to Professor Hind's statements which I assure you is not attached to them in Nova Scotia, and 1 think we can take up our time with more useful matters than the statements of this disappointed man who, doubtless, thinks

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

that he did not get as much as he was to believe there must have been some
entitled to receive for his services.
fraud or unfair means used to prevent
them having the success which had al-
ways attended them in former negotia-
tions with the British Government. 1
think that is probably the way the mat-

Hon. Mr. POWER The hon. Senator from Lunenburg thought proper to in troduce the political element into the discussion, which I had carefully avoided. He tried to represent that if anything

wrong

had been done it was done under the late Administration, and that the late Minister of Marine and Fisheries was the responsible man. Professor Hind does not contend that the Minister himself falsified the documents. He spoke of the subordinates in the Departments of Cus subordinates in the Departments of Cus toms and Marine and Fisheries having done it. Consequently, my hon. friend's point was altogether astray. I am sorry that this matter has come up; but I do not think it has been brought up any too soon, and I cannot at all agree with the hon. knight who leads the Government in this House in thinking there is anything improper in bringing the matter before the Senate.

Hon. Sir ALEX. CAMPBELL

ter will be looked at by the bulk of the

American people. I do not consider that is a matter of little consequence. We have spent hours in discussing the appointment of officers whose pay did not exceed a dollar or a dollar and a-half per day. This is a matter of very much greater importance, not only as regards the past, but because the value of the award is that it will be the basis for future negotiations. I fail to see, then, that there is anything improper or innotice of the matter, and getting an judicious in this House taking some authoritative and satisfactory reply to the

statements of Professor Hind. There is

another matter which may not be considered important, but still deserves consideration. There are officers of the Government in whose probity I have

said I regretted it being a matter of dis- the utmost confidence. I would no more

cussion.

The motion was agreed to.

The Senate adjourned at 5.35 p.m.

believe them capable of falsifying public Hon. Mr. POWER The hon. gen- documents than of cutting their own tieman says we should not give this man throats. These men are in some cases an importance which he does not deserve. mentioned, and in others pointed out by The fact is that almost every newspaper Professor Hind. I do not want it to be you take up has something about Profes-understood that I am acting on their sor Hind's statements. I do not know behalf at all, but it seems to me it is only Professor Hind; I have not the good fair to them that they should be cleared fortune to be acquainted with him; but of any suspicion of having acted improthe people of the United States do not perly. Their characters should be like know him at all. They only know that Caesar's wife. he is a man who has held a certain number of important positions under this Government, and that he held a position. of trust in connection with the Fisheries Commission, having been employed both by the United States and Canadian agents. The natural inference would be that Professor Hind is a respectable man. This man, who occupied that comparatively independent and impartial position with reference to the two parties,having been appointed by both, makes the statement that in the papers put into his hands he discovered certain falsifications. That is a serious charge; and the people of the United States, not having come out of this inquiry before the Halifax Commission in the same triumphant manner they came ont of other dealings with the British Government, would naturally be inclined

THE SENATE.
Wednesday, January 19th, 1881.
The Speaker took the chair at 3.30
p.m.

Prayers and routine proceedings.

LAVAL UNIVERSITY.

RETURN.

Hon. Sir ALEX. CAMPBELL laid on the table of the House a further return to an address for papers relative to Laval University, and in doing so desired to state that the motion of the hon. Senator from La Valliere (Dr.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »