March 26, 1901

CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

Would it not increase the number ? Do you object to increasing the number ? If your immigration agents can go over to the United States and tell the people that if a man comes to Canada he will have 5 per cent more for his produce than those who remain in the United States, it will be one of the strongest arguments that they could preach to them.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   MAECI-I 26,1901
Permalink
LIB

Onésiphore Ernest Talbot

Liberal

Mr. TALBOT.

The hon. gentleman says that if butter, exported from the United States, was taxed in the English market 5 per cent, it would be a large benefit to the Canadian producer.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   MAECI-I 26,1901
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

I say that the Canadian farmer would have that much advantage over tiie American farmer.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   MAECI-I 26,1901
Permalink
LIB

Onésiphore Ernest Talbot

Liberal

Mr. TALBOT.

If the American butter is taxed in the English market, it would be an Mr. FIELDING.

American producer who would lose it, and the Canadian producer would not get any benefit at all.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   MAECI-I 26,1901
Permalink
CON

Nathaniel Clarke Wallace

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. WALLACE.

If the Englishman did not have to pay the duty, he would have no objection.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   MAECI-I 26,1901
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

I maintain that if this system were introduced, it would be a great benefit to the people of Canada, and especially to our farmers. No intelligent man can successfully contravene that proposition. Why, the Prime Minister stated in London, Ont., that it would be a great benefit to Canada, and that if elected he would try to get it. But when lie was elected, he did not try. He got a Cobden medal instead, and that quieted his ambition. I believe that mutual preferential trade would not only be a benefit to the people of Canada, but that it would be a benefit to the empire, because after a while it would cause the empire to be self-supporting within herself. It would stimulate our industries, and the acreage under crop would be increased, because of the better market, so that, in time, the colonies could supply England with nearly all she needs, and relieve her from the necessity of depending on foreign countries. To that extent it would consolidate the colonies in the empire, it would draw the colonies and the mother country more closely together, and it would make the people more loyal in every respect. The last clause of the amendment is in favour of countervailing duties against those countries which unfairly discriminate against us. Are we to sit idly by while Germany one day, and some other country the next, puts tariff barriers against us. and are we not to move hand or foot to help ourselves ? Are we not sent here by our constituents to look after the interests of our own country, and when we find nations raise high tariff walls against us. will we not have countervailing duties against them ? If we fail in this we neglect our duty to our country. I believe the principle enunciated in the latter part of this amendment to be the correct principle, and I suppose it from the bottom of my heart. It only requires a maximum and a minimum tariff, and the minimum tariff we can apply to every country that wishes to have preferential trade with us. I believe. Sir, that there is embodied in this amendment the true economic principle in connection with the ways and means of raising a revenue and conducting government in this country, and in that belief I shall vote for the I amendment with all my heart.

Mr. TURGERON moved the adjournment of the debate.

Topic:   WAYS AND MEANS-THE BUDGET.
Subtopic:   MAECI-I 26,1901
Permalink

Motion agreed to, and debate adjourned. On motion of the Minister of Finance, House adjourned at 12.35 a.m. Wednesday.


MAKCH 27, 1901 HOUSE OF COMMONS.


Wednesday, March 27, 1901.


March 26, 1901