IMAGE EVALUATION
TEST TARGET (MT-S)

/^ .<%

1.0 ^'^ ■- ilM

I.I

ill 1.8

1.25 1.4

1.6

-m 6" —

►

"♦V^

/!^

Photographic

Sciences
Corporation

33 <iST MAIN STREET

WEBSTER, NY 14580

(716) 872-4S03

CIHM/ICMH

Microfiche

Series.

CIHM/ICMH
Collection de
microfiches.

Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut canadien de microreproductions historiques

Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques

The Institute has attempted to obtain the best
original copy available for filming. Features of this
copy which may be bibliographically unique,
which may alter any of the images in the
reproduction, or which may significantly change
the usual method of filming, are checked below.

Coloured covers/
Couverture de couleur

I I Covers damaged/

Couverture endommagda

Covers restored and/or laminated/
Couverture restaur6e et/ou pellicul6e

n Cover title missing/
Le titre de couverture manque

□ Coloured maps/
Cartes gdographiques en couleur

□ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/
Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bieue ou noire)

□ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/
Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur

Bound with other material/
Reli6 avec d'autres documents

Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion
along interior margin/

La reliure serrde peut causer de I'ombre ou de la
distortion le long de la marge intdrieure

Blank leaves added during restoration may
appear within the text. Whenever possible, these
have been omitted from filming/
II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes
lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte,
mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont
pas M film6es.

Additional comments*/
Commentaires supplf mentaires;

L'Institut a microfilm* le meilleur exemplaire
qu'il lui a 4t6 possible de se procurer. Les details
de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du
point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier
une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une
modification dans la mAthode normale de filmage
sont indiquAs ci-dessous.

□ Coloured pages/
Pages de couleur

Pagas damaged/
Pages endommagies

Pages restored and/or laminated/
Pages restaurdes et/ou pellicul^es

Pag- s discoloured, stained or foxed/
Payes ddcolordes, tachet^es ou piquies

P'^ges detached/
Pfjges ddtachdes

Showthrough/
Transparence

Quality of print varies/
Qualiti indgaie de i'impression

Includes supplementary material/
Comprend du materiel suppldmentaire

Only edition available/
Seule Edition disponible

Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata
slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to
ensure the best possible image/
Les pages totalement ou partiellement
obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure,
etc., ont 6X6 filmies 6 nouveau de fapon 6
obtenir la meilleure image possible.

The
tot

Th€
poi

Ofl

filn

Orii
bet
the
sioi
oth
firs
sioi
or!

Th«
she

Ma
difl
ent
be{
rigl
req
me

This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/

Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqu* ci-dessous.

10X 14X 18X 22X

26X

30X

12X

16X

20X

24X

28X

32X

ails

idifier

une

nage

The copy ffilmad hara haa baan raproducad thanka
to tha ganarosity of:

Library of the Public
Archives of Canada

The images appearing hare are the best quality
possible considering the condition end legibility
of the original copy and In keeping with the
filming contract specifications.

L'exemplaira f llmA fut reproduit grice A la
^AnArosIt* de:

La bibliothAque des Archives
pubiiques du Csnada

Las images suivantes ont At* raprodultes avac la
plus grand soln. compta tenu de la condition et
de la nettetA de rexemplaire film*, et en
conformity avac las conditions du contrat de
filmage.

Original copies In printed paper covers are filmed
beginning with the front cover and ending on
the last page with a printed or illustrated Impres
sion. or the back cover when appropriate. All
other original copies are filmed beginning on the
first page with a printed or Illustrated impres-
sion, and ending on the last page with e printed
or illustrated impression.

Les exemplalras orlginaux dont la couverture en
papier est imprlmAe sont fllmto en commenpent
par la premier plat et en terminant solt par la
darnlAre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustrstion, soit par la second
plat, salon ie cas. Tous les autras exemplaires
orlginaux sont fllmAs en commen^ant par la
pramlAre page qui comporte une empreinte
d'impression ou d'illustratlon at en terminant par
la darnlAre page qui comporte une telle
empreinte.

The last recorded frame on each microfiche
shall contain the symbol — ^ (meaning "CON-
TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"),
whichever applies.

Kin des symboles sulvants appsraltra sur la
dernlAre image de cheque microfiche, selon Ie
cas: la symbols — •» signlfie "A SUIVRE", ie
symbols V signlfie "FIN".

Maps, plates, charts, etc., mey be filmed at
different reduction ratios. Those too lerge to be
entirely included in one exposure are filmed
beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to
right end top to bottom, as many frames as
required. The following diagrams illustrate the
method:

Les certes, pisnches, tableaux, etc., peuvent 6tre
filmAs 4 des taux de reduction diffirents.
Lorsque Ie document est trop grand pour Atre
reproduit en un seul clichA, il est film* A partir
de i'engle supArieur geuche, de gauche A droite,
et de haut en bes, en prenent Ie nombre
d'imeges nAcesseire. Les diegrammes sulvants
illustrant Ie mAthode.

'rata
o

>elure.
Id

32X

1 %

f^'

FLBAaB KBHP FOB BBFBMWOa

Mapoh 1st, 1896.

Facts fop the People, No. 8.

Tariff Reform, FREEf Trade,

Reduced UxAm/i'

OOTTa7B3ITTS.

PAOI.

Resolution No. 1, Lib«nl Pl»tfonn .... 2-

Failure of the N. P 2

ProoiiMi and Perf ormanoe 3

Debt Expenditure, Deficits 3

Taxes 4

Tupper's Promises 4

Traae with Britain 4

Reduce the Duties on Britinh Doods. . . 6

Reciprocity and Tall Chimneys 6

The Exodus 6

The Census 6, 7

Sample " Manufacturers " 8

Bow the Fanner is Taxed 8

Articles Free or Lightly Taxed 9

r.\oi.

Cotton and Cotton Oooda 10

The Rice Question 10

Protection on Iron 11, 19

Unfair to Manufacturers 18

Increased Duty on Goods 12

Under Liberal Tariff, under Tory Tariff 13

Specific Duties 18

The Issue Defined 14

Mr. Laurior on Pr<>teotion 14

Tariff for Revenue 14

Oradunlly Abolish Protection 16

Conservatives SiMuderinK England 15

Scheduling Canadian Oattlo 15

Boast of (lovemment >Supporters 16

V.*''

Copw of this Pamphlet can be had from ALEXAJfDER SMITHt Sec-
retary Ontario Liberal Association, 3 A Victoria St., Toronto, Ont.

MMMsnauHillNlilii*" - itum intiiMni i -

2- 2/5-/

TAEZFF BSFORIC-FBESE TBADS-aSDUCflD

TAZATZOlfT.

^' That the customs tariff of the Dominion should be based, not as it is now,
npon the protective principle, but upon the requirements of the public service ;

" That the existing tariff, founded upon an unsound principle, and used as it
has been used by the Government, as a corrupting agency wherewith to keep
themselves in office, has developed monopolies, trusts and combinations ;

" It has decreased the value of farm and other landed property ;

" It has oppressed the masses to the enrichment of a few ;

" It has checked immigration ;

" It has caused great loss of population ;

" It has impeded commerce ;

" It has discriminated against Qreat Britain.

" In these and in many other ways :t has occasioned great public and pri-
vate injury, all of which evils must continue to grow in intensity as long as the
present tariff system remains in force.

"That the highest interests of Canada demand a removal of this obstacle to
our country's progress by the adoption of a sound fiscal policy, which, while not
doing injustice to any class, will promote domestic and foreign trade, and hasten
the return of prosperity to our people ;

" That to that end the tarin should be reduced to the needs of honest, econ-
omical and efficient government ;

" That it should be so adjusted as to make free, or to bear as lightly as possible
upon the necessaries of life, and should be so arranged as to promote freer traJe
with the whole world, more particularly with Qreat Britain and the United
States.

" We believe that the results of the protective system have greviously dis-
appointed thouHands of persons who honestly supported it, and that the country,
in the light of experience, is now prepared to declare for a sound fiscal policy.

" The is%ue between the two political parties on this question is now clearly
defined.

" The Qovemment themaelve admit the failure of their fiscal policy, and
now profess their willingness to make some changes ; but they say that such
changes must be based only on the principle of protection.

" We denounce the principle of protection as radically unsound, and unjust
to the masses of the people, and we declare our couviction that any tariff changes
based on that principle must fail to afford any substantial relief from the burdens
under which tne country labors.

" This issue we unhesitatingly accept, and upon it we await with the fullest
confidence the verdict of the electors of Canada." — Resolution No. 1 in the Lib-
eral Platform.

Failure of tlie National Polioy.

When the trade policy of this country was changed from a tariff for revenue
to a protective tariff, the change was based upon a resolution moved by the leader
of the Conservative party, Sir John A. Macdonald, in the House of Commons, as
follows :

" That this House is of opinion that the welfare of Canada requires the adop-
tion of a national policy, which, by judicious re-adjustment of the tariff will
benefit and prosper the agricultural, the mining, the manufacturing and other in-
terests of the Dominion ; that such a policy will retain in Canada thousands of
our fellow countrymen, now obliged to expatriate themselves in search of the
employment now denied them at home, will restore prosperity to our struggling

>5'5^5'

industries now so Hadly depressed ; will puvent Canada from being a sacritice
market ; will encourage and develop an active inter-provinciai trade, and moving
(as it ought to do) in the direction of reciprocity of tariffs with our neighbors,
so far as the varied interests of Canada may demand, will greatly tend to pro-
cure for this country eventually a reciprocity of trade." See Hansard, 1878, vol.
I., p. 854.)

Promises and Performanoe.

The authors of the National Policy, ejs anyone may nee from their speeches
during the election of 1878 and in the budget speeches or the Finance Ministers
in subsequent years, made those promises, amongst others :

To abolish business depression.

To stop the exodus.

To turn the " balance of trade " in our favor.

To tax British goods in the bulk less than foreign.

To give the farmer a home market.

To develope our mineral wealth.

To obtain reciprocity with the United States.

To reduce the debt to 8100,000,000 bv 1890.

To place a million people in the North- west by 1891.

The last feat was to bo accomplished only in part by the National Policy.
" We have vast territories to till up in the North-west and British Columbia,
that glorious land which Lord Dutferin lately visited and spoke so approvingly
of. It is our duty to till up these tesritories, to develop their wonderful re-
sources, and we can best assist in doing so by the adoption of a policy which
will tend to improve the condition of the manufacture and in the nature of
things materially benetit all classes of the community." — Speech by Mr. Thomas
White.

Insteail of the N. P. bjnetiting the people who have gone into the territories
and western provinces the loudest protests against it have come from them. The
settlers, irrespective of party, have declared that it has been a burden without
any compensating advantage whatsoever. Instead of immigration having been
increased, resolutions of public meetings of farmers and townsfolk, agricultural
organizations and boards of trade bear testimony that by making the settlers' lot
harder the settlement of the country has been retarded. It is notorious that
instead of a million persons in the North-west there are only 250,000.

The reduction of the debt to Si (H) ,000,000 was one of the promises in the
budget speech of 1882. It was to be brought about by the immense receipts
from North-west lands.

Debt and Expenditure.

Instead of reduction the net debt has ri en from S140,3G3,06!» in 1878 to
^263,074,927, and the ordinary expenditure from 323,50;^, 1 58, which the Conser-
vatives said was exces-sive, to S38, 132,000 in lb95.

Deficits.

It is the fashion to sneer at the Liberal administration of the iiuances as an
" era of deficits," but Liberals have no cause to fear comparisons as to deficits.
The fact is that the Conservative administration, which replaced Mr. Mackenzie's,
had a larger deficit in one year than the Reform administration had during the
whole five years of its existence. The Ijiberal Government had a surplus both in
1874 and 1875 of $888,000 and 8935,000 respectively. There were deficits in 187G,
1877 and 1878, amounting in all to 84,489,000 The Conservative deficits since
Mr. Mackenzie'^ time have been as follows :

1879 $1,937,999

1880 1.543,227

1885 2,240.058

1886 5,834^71

1888 $ 810.031

189-? 1,210,3:^2

1895 4,153,875

These deficits show that though taxation is high, euflBcient revenue is not
raised to meet the annual expenditure.

Tazes.

The taxes from both customs and excise collected during 1890-94 amounted
to SI 47,247 ,423, and during the five years of Liberal rule, 1874-78, they amounted
to $94,rJ9,083.

This shows an increase under five years of Conservative rule of $53,048,34.0
For five years of Libeml nile (see Inland Revenue and Trade and Navigation
returns.)

Custom taxes five years, 1890-94 $108,408,000

Custom taxes Liberal five years 67.960,000

Increase niider N. P. for period of five years alone $4O,448»00O

Tupper's Promises.

The development of the mines was promised in Sir John Macdonald's resolu"
tions of 1877 and 1878 and in the budget of 1879, but more particularly in the
budget of 1887. In that year, when imposing heavy iron duties, Sir Charles
Tupper looked with confidence to the erection of blast furnaces at Cobourg, Wel-
ler's Bay and Kingston, and also to the establishment " at an early date of indus-
tries for the manufacture of iron in the North-west." Moreover, " by the adoption
of this policv you will give permanent employment to an army of men numbering
at least '20,000, increasing our population from 80^000 to 100,000 souls, and afford-
ing the means of supporting them in comfort and prosperity." Furthermore,
"this estimate of au increased population of 100,000 souls does not take into
account the manufacture of castings and forgings, cutlery and edged tools, hard-
ware, machinery and engines or steel rails. Were we to manufacture these articlas
now imported — and there is no reason why we should not steadily progress to
that point — the population I have mentioned of 100,000 souls would be no less
than trebled."

In the year in which Sir Charles made the changes in the duties which were
to bring about his prophecies, the production of pig iron in Canada was 40,000
tons. Last year, according to the iron men's own statement, the production was
60,000 tons. To achieve this result, the term for which the bounties were granted
has been extended until 1899. Instead of an army of 20,000 men, there are,
according to the iron men's statement, only one-twentieth of that number. There
has been no mineral development to speak of, and the iron duties liave confess-
edly failed.

The adverse balance of trade was cited by Sir Leonard Tilley in his budget
speech of 1879 as one ot the prime causes of hard times, and lie proposed to turn
it the other way. But since 1879 the so-called balance of trade has been against
us to the tune of over $200,000,000, as necessarily must happen to a borrowing
country situated as this is.

Trade with Britain.

As to the taxation of British goods, Sir Leonard in 1879 declared: "It may
be said we shall receive from the imports from foreign countries a larger share of
the $20,000,000 we reqxiire than we shall icceive from the mother countrj'. I
believe such will be the effect. But I think that in making such a statement to

the House, belonging as we do to, an«l forming a part of that great country —a
country that reeoives our natural products without any taxation, everything we
have to send her — apart from our national feelings, I think this House will not
object, if in the propositions before ine the duties touch more heavily the imports
trom foreign countries then from our fatherland "

The fact is the reverse of what was promised. British goods in the bulk are
taxed more severely tlian American. The duty levied upon the whole of the
country's imports of British goods amounted in the fiscal, year ending 30th June,
1893, to twenty-two per cent., while the duty levied U[)on the whole of the im-
ports of Vmerican goods amounted to thirteen and one-quarter per cent., a dis-
crimination against England on the whole volume of trade of more than eight
per cent. A large amount of the importation from the United States was of
goods that are imported free of duty for the benefit of manufacturers. Writing
these off, nine and a half millions of dollars was levied on thirty-two millions of
dollars of imports from Britain, equivalent to thirty per cent. ; and seven and
three-fifths millions was levied in duty upon the twenty-eight and one-half millions
of dollars imported from the United States, equivalent to twenty-seven per cent.
So there was three per cent, of a straight discrimination against our trade with
Great Britain. One million dollars was taken in duty on the import from Great
Britain beyond that on the same quantity from the United States.

REOVCE THE UITIES ON BRITIHH fiOO»!4.

In April. 1892, the following wao moved by Hon. L. H. Davies, Liberal M.P.,
and voted for by the Liberals and opposed by the Conservatives : —

" Inasmuch as Great Britain admits the products of Canada into her ports
free of duty, this House is of the opinion that the present scale of duties exacted
on goods mainly imported from Great Britain should be reduced."
.ECIPROCITY AND TALL i'HIMNEYH.

That the N. P. would tend to secure reciprocity with the United States
through reciprocity of tariffs wah .sot forth in Sir John Macdonald's resolution of
1878 and elsewhere. We have not got reciprocity. The false position into which
the Government has put this country in connection with the sham negotiations
which were entered into for the purpose of extricating themselves from the con-
sequences of their misrepresentations prior to and during the general elections of
1891 are dealt with in another place in this pamphlet. It is sufficient to say
that subsequent events have shown not only that in this promise the authors of
the N. P. have failed, but also that they were opposed to accepting reciprocity
when the opportunity presented itself.

The exodus was to be stopped and tall chimneys were promised, and an all-
absorbing lucrative home market for th(; farmer. " Our workmen," Sir John
Macdonald declared in one of his pic-nic speeches, " can be fully employed if we
encourage our manufactures ; they need not go over to the States to add strength
and wealth to a foreign country and to deprive us of that strength and wealth."
In his resolution of 1878 he said : " Such a policy will retain in Canada thous-
ands of our fellow-countrymen now obliged to expatriate themselves in search of
the employment denied them at home." The removal of depression, the inaug-
uration of an era of prosperity, was another standard promise. Lord Lome, a
free trader, was made to say in the speech from the tlnone in 1879 that the N.
P. would " aid in removing the commercial and financial depression which unhap-
pily ccmtinues to exist." In 1882 the return of the Conservative party was asked
in order to assure foreign investors, who were waiting to place their millions,
that they might safely do so. In his budget speech that year Sir Leonard Tilley
told the manufacturers to " clap on all sail," and looked for a boom period of in-
definite duration.

None of these pronii.se.s liave been realized. Instead of a home market ab-
sorbing their surplus products at high prictis the farmers export more than ever
and prices were never so low.

THE EXODl'H. (Sev the ri'iiMUS RctiirnM.)

The census destroy.s any pretence that the exodus has been stopped. So far
from fulfilling this promise the faet is the exodus during the ten years ending
1891 w»v.s more than double what it whs l)etween 1871 and 1881, and it was three
times as much as the Cxodus wiiich took place in Mr. Mackenzie's time. The
total annual exodus during the Mackenzie regime, according to the United States
statistics, was probably not more than 82,000 all told from 1874 to 1878 ; cer-
tainly it did not exceed 42,000 taking into account the entire foreign-born immi-
gration which camo into Canada <luring that period. What has been the loss
under the protective policy ! If we may count the natural increase in Canada a-s
great as in the United States, and the general rule is that families in this country
are larger than over there, the natural increase of our population was GO+.OOO
between 1881 and 1891. In addition, unless the Government's own immigration
stiitistics have been a sham and a fraud, there were brought 'into Canada in the
last census decade 880,000 immigrants. Add that number to the 004,000 of a
natural increase and the total is 1,490,000. That is what the increase of our
population should have been according to the Government's own blue V)ooks.
Subtra(!t from that the actual increase, which w..9 504,000, and there remiins
986,000 souls missing. Where are they ? All these who went away were prob-
ably not native-born Canadians. There may have been only ,'}<>0,000 of them
who belonged to our native-born population. But the total loss w.i« 98,600 per
annum during the ten years of th'; National Policy, as compared with an extreme
estimate af 42,000 a year in Mr. Mackenzie's time.

In place of their natural increase New Brunswick only gained sixty-three
souls in the decade ending 1891 ; Prince Edward Island 190, and Nova Scotia
9,900, while the total increase for the Maritime Provinces, witli Ontario and Que-
bec, wa> about eight per cent, (including a considerable number of emigrauts).
This is scarcely more than half the increase which took place in those of the
Southern States which suffered most severely from the civil war in the decade fiom
1800 to 1870. These gained fourteen per c«;ut. in those ten years. It is consid-
erably less than the luc.ease in England and Wales in the ten years from 1881 to
1891, in spite of the fact that there was a large emigration from those countries.
The rural population is decreasing. Tlie practical etf'ect of the protective policy
is to attract industries and population from villages and towns to largo centres.
The whole of the increase, such as it is, has been in the towns, and at least two-
thirds of it in the two cities of Toronto and Montreal and their suburbs. Innni-
grution has cost two millions and been a failure. Our returns allege tliat we
brought in 880,000 emigrants from 1881 to 18^1 who declared their intention
of settling in Canada. Our censu.s shows that of these scarcely 1 50,000 remained.
The United States census returns ft)r 1890 show that there were then about 980,000
per.sons born in Canada then resident in the United States, and about 1,500,000
of chiMren born of (-'anatlian parents. It is to be noted that of these 980,000,
a very largo proportion, were men in the prime of life. Furthermore, facts have
been recently laid before the House of (Commons which prove that there are
grounds for believing that gross frauds were committed by our census envnuerat-
ors, esj)ecially in Nova Scotia, and many persons who had left Canada several
year.s ago were returned as residents.

The Zodustrial Census.

What is called the industrial census, or that branch of the census professing
to give the industrial returns to the countrj', meaning the manufacturing concerns,

>. i;i^>l-iir>»*'«^f ■f^#.^i.^i;tia**«tSfiia^^

was procured by the offer tha^ each census enumerator would receive 15 cents
for every industrial establishment he returned, whether it had an existence in
fact or only in his imagination ; consequently one of the biggest industries of that
year wa.s the hunt for industries by the 4,300 enumerators. TheJr reports, com-
pared with 1881, were as follows:

1H81,

Proviiict'i.

EstithliHh-
nients.

Em
pluyeea.

OnUrio 3.058

gueboc 15,848

Nova Sootin 5,459

New Brunswick 3,117

Other provincea | 2,441

4!),<.>23

118,308
85,673
20,390
19,922
10,ti42

254,935

1891.

Establiah-
inentM.

32,028

23,112

10,873

5,419

4,836

Em-
pi I >yee8.

165,326

116,830

34,2<>6

26,609

24,835

r6,768 ! 367,865

If each enumerator only discovered 10 '' industrial establishments," of whose
existence the ordinary inhabitants of the town were unaware, the result would
have been an addition of 43,000 establishments throughout the Dominion. The
addition, therefore, of 25,000 establishments is very moderate indeed.

There were 9,395 establishments with an average number of employees of
li ; 3,962 esUiblishments with 5^ ; 6,384 with iU ; 3,337 with 3 ; 1,653 with 3 ;
4,321 with 2 ; 2,468 with 2A ; 1,480 with 2^ ; 1,734 with 2 ; and any number of
establishments with 1.

The way the returns were stuffed, first by the enumerator for a sordid
purpose, and next by the census office for a political purpose, intended to magnify
the N.P., can be imagined when the Minister of Finance was compelled, amid the
laughter of the House, to read long lists of establishments where the number of
employees was given as one. So keenly did Mr. Foster feel the exposure of his
industrial census methods that he finally refused to read these li>ts, and handed
them unread to the official reporter. Every cobbler who mended shoes, every
milliner, every dressmaker who made frocks for her neighbors, every old woman
who had a spinning wheel, every person who had a cider press, every cobbling
tailor who mended garments and occasionally made one, every jobbing carpenter,
every photographer, everyone who kept watches and jewellery were all returned
as " manufacturing establishments." A number of these lists can be seen in the
Hansard of 1893.

In the town of St. Mary's there were 20 "establishments," with one employee
to each. There was a pump factory where the owner employed himself and the
total number employed wa-s one. There was a carriage factory with the same
number. There was a weaving "establishment" which consisted of one old
womeui. (See page 2,460, Commons Hansard, 1893.)

In Milverton village, out of 23 "establishments" returned, 11 employed no
hands at all besides the owner. There was a cider factory with one hand, a
carriage-building establishment with one hand, a boot and shoe establishment
with one hand, a tannery with one hand, and so on. In Mornington township,
Ont., out of 35 "indu.strial establishments" there were 15 employing nobody
besides the owner, and 12 employing 1 hand.

In the cities the exaggeration was in proportion. In the town of Sorel 56
" establishments " were returned as employing nobody but the owner. No fewer
than 20 of these " industrial establishments " were dressmakers and milliners and

13 were bUekamiths, giving empioi/meni altoffeiher to 17 hands. In the town
of Stimihroy, Ont, 23 of the "industriAl estabUahment* " were dreannaken and
BliUinen, and in Mount Forest, 19.

Sampli " XaanfftotnrtM.*'

Here is a sample list of the way in which the 76,000 industrial estoblish-
menta of the census are made up :

Number. Employees.

Dentiiits 154 iOS

Dyeing and scouring 72 S93

Photographers 327 706

Patent medicines 116 807

P Dressmaking and millmery 7,066 17,197

Seamstresses 10,088

Carpentering 4,618 10,187

Watchmaking and jewellery .... 615 1,619

Plumbing and gasfittiog 144 1,268

Butchers 7,252

Blacksmiths 9,423 17,986

Compositors and pressmen 6,066

Piunters and glaziers 10,017

None of these look to a protective tariff and nearly all of them have no claim
whatever to be termed manufacturing establishments. A plumber manufactures
nothing ; there is a special column for the maker of plumbers' supplies. The 7,000
botchers who sell meat lure not manufacturers. The farmer who fattens the
animal the butcher cuta up is the real manufacturer

The simple fact is that the census returns are a fraud. They have been
stufied in the most atrocious fashion, partly for the purpose of deceiving the
people as to the results of the policy of protection and partly becautte the enum-
erators rtere paid a small fee for each " Industrial Establishment " they were
able to discover.

What has the National Policy ever done for village carpenters, village black-
smiths, village shoemakers or village dressmakers, except to make their tools and
raw materials deanr and to impoverish their customers, and yet nearly on^-half
of the (allied) new 25,000 factories are simply the increase in these several oallinos.

For instance, the census reports an increase of blacksmiths. 1,437 ; carpen-
ters, 2,124 ; shoemakers. 958 ; dressmakers, 4,920 ; bakers, 600, and carpet he-
tories and knitting factories and hosiery factories all employing on the average
about one hand each.

Sov the Famer is Taand*

The object of a protective tariff in its initial sta^ is to give a yanta^
ground, and in giving it I frankly admit that in the initial stages the price will

be raised to a certain degree I say that in the initial years of the

National Policy with a protective principle in it that it will have the effSsot of
enhancing the cost of goods, and that at the first the COBt of the goods will
be very closely up to the measure of the protection which was given.
If it does not nave that effect why should it ever be adopted at all.
and what is the good of it 9--Hon. Oeorge Foster, vn budget epeeoh, Marek
97th, 1894, Hansard, page HIO.

This admission, from the highest authority in the country, that the manufao-
turer takes advantage of the duty almost to the full extent by adding it on to
the price of his goodA, should be borne in mind.

Under the revised tariff of 1894 the following articles, necessaries of the
farmer, are taxed as follows ;

Threshing machines 30 p. cent.

Lubricating oi) 6c. a gal.

Axle grease 25 p. cent.

Drain tiles 20 "

Leather belting 20 "

Harness 30 '*

Cut nails (75c. per 100 lbs.) ..70 "

Scythes, etc 35 "

Shovels and spades 35 "

Pumps and windmills .... 30 "

Wire fencing (|c. lb.) 30 "

Pails and tubs 20 "

Waggons 25 "

Buggies 35 "

Binder-twine '.12^ "

Eorse blankets 32| "

Fertilizers 10 "

Builders' hardware 32^ "

Iron 45 "

Chopping axes 35 p- cent.

Coal oil 6c. a gal. .

Window glass 20 p. cent-
Hats and caps 80 "

Mitts 35 "

Fireams 20 "

Umbrellas and parasols. . . .35 "

Woollens 30 "

Cottons 32i "

Furniture 30 "

Carpets 30 "

FJour 75c. brl.

Ready-made clothing 35 p. cent.

Rice 60 to 70 "

Jugs.crocks, churn.s,(2c.a gal.)45 "

Stoves 30 "

Sewing machines 30 "

Woollen socks 35 "

Children's clothing 32^ '

Tools 30 and 25 "

What does the free list contain for the farmer ? It contains thoroughbred
•^tock and fowls, tea and coffee, timber, com for ensilage and some kinds of
lumber partly manufactured. There is nothing else in the three hundred arii-
cles on the free list which can be construed as of any benefit at all to th^^
farmer.

Articles Free or Lightly Tazed-

Lest it should be said that all the articles on the free list are not for the
express benefit of the manufacturers the following list of other articles is given :

Moss and seaweed Free,

Musk "

Oil or water color paintings,

copies old ma3toi3 "

Phosphorus "

Precious stones in the rough . . "

Quicksilver "

Quills "

Rags "

Roots "

Sand «

Sausage skins "

Mother of pearl shells "

Silver in sheet "

Skins of birds "

Tails, undressed "

Tobacco, unmanufactured .... "

Turtles "

Horse hair "

Sawdust "

Ar.enic Free

Dragon's blood "

Curling stones "

Ice "

Hair • "

Ivory tusks "

Leeches '

Skeletons "

Collections of coin "

Crude bones "

Collections of postage stamps. "

Unset diamonds "

Palms, orchids, cacti "

Imported labor "

Yankee protection theories.. "
American gerrymanders .... "

Watch movements 1 p. e.

F-anch pomades 15 "

Precious stones 10 "

Manufacturesof gold and silvor.20 "

Grass "

It is not convenient to publish the tariff here in detail, but if the reader
has a copy of one of the number of almanacs publishing the tarifi he can more
fully inform himsell' of the details of the tariff enactments.

Cotton and Cotton Ooods-

Mr. Edgar stated in the House of Commons and the correctness of his state-
ments has never been challenged, that the I'aw cotton fell in cost between 1890
and 1893, one cent six mills a pound. This on the enormous quantity imported
of about forty millions of pounds, amounted alone to a profit of S660,000. The
wages of the operatives were not raised, and the prices charged to the consumer
instead oi being lowered were raised from ten to twenty-five per cent., during
those three years. But the dividends and the reserve funds set apart by the
companies were raised.

Mr. Edgar further stated that thirteen million dollars worth of cotton is
manufactured by the Canadian Cotton Companies, and that the duty paid by the
importers last year on all cotton goods brought into the country was a trifle over
twenty-eight per cent. Supposing there was no other profit on that $13,000,000
than the twenty-eight per cent, paid by the actual importers, who paid that in
a-ldition to the freight and profits paid to the Engligh manufacturer of cotton
goods, that would make a sum of $3,640,000 paid by the people to the combine,
under the protection given by the tarifif.

In other words, on the $'1<,500,000 worth imported a tax of $1,200,000 is paid,
which goes into the treasury, and on the $13,000,000 worth of cottons manufa<j-
tured, an equivalent tax of $3,640,000 is paid, which goes into the coffers of the
combines. •

Take the history of these combines to see how the people are fleeced and the
facts hidden from them. In 1892 the Dominion Cotton Company, one of the
combines which controls eleven mills of the country, had a capital of $1,500,000.
They decided to double that capital. They issued the new stock to themselves.
They only paid of the new stock ten per cent., or $150,000 and the balance of
$1,350,000 was watered. On April 14th, 1893, the annual report of that com-
panj'^ was published. It stated that the eax-nings for that year were about twenty
per cent, on the capital of $3,000,000 but as on the last $1,500,000 the share-
holders only paid ten per cent., or $160,000, while the company paid a profit of
ten per cent, on the whole oncj and one-half millions, those gentlemen actually
received WO per cent, on all the money they paid in.

The Eioe Questioo.

By a similar leger-de-main the people are compelled to pay about $300,000
yearly in the shape of taxes upon rice, while only about $50,000 finds its way
into *,he Treasury.

The feat is worked in this way: —

Cleaned rice pays a duty of one and one-quarter cents per pound ; uncleaned
pays about ono-quarter of a cent per pound. There is consecjuently a protection
of one cent a pound given to those who import the paddy or uncleaned rice, and
hull and clean it.

The Trade and Nav. Returns for 1894, page sixteen, show that in the year
1893-4 there was imported over three and a naif million pounds of cleaned rice,
which paid a duty to the Treasury of about $44,000 ; while of uncleaned rice there
was imported close on 23.000,000 pounds, which only paid about $53,000 to the
Treasury. This 23,000,000 pounds of uncleaned rice made about 22,000,000 pounds
when cleaned ready for sale.

The cleaner being protected one cent a pound would of course charge that or
nearly all to the consumer to whom he sold the rice.

The consumer therefore paid the tax of one and one-quarter cents for each
pound of rice he consumed, but ho paid one-quarter cent each pound, or in all
$53,000, to the Treasury, while he paid one cent per pound, or $220,000 to the
cleaner.

)

In this way out of every $5 of taxes the consumer paid, the Treasury got $1
and the manufacturer $4.

Last session Mr. Foster tried to remedy this gross injustice, and when he
introduced his new tariff he proposed to reduce the duty on cleaned rice and raise
it oi. unhulled, so that the Treasury might receive more of tlie taxes paid by the
rice consumers.

The rice cleaners, however, sent a deputation to the capital, took the Finance
Minister by the throat and made him abandon his reform, and leave the consumer
at the mercy of the cleaner of rice. It was discovered that the proposed reform
was a "clencal error," and the tariff was restored to what it had originally been.

Cost to the Consumers of Canada by reason of the

Protection on Iron

Pi^ Iron Imported.

There was imported in 1894 46,000 tons. The daty paid was,

at $4 per ton ;818*.424

Impcn-ters' profit on the duty paid, .say 2.t per cent 46,106

Retailers' profit on duty and importers' profit, say 25 per cent r)7,632

Total duty with importers' and retailors' profits $282,162

Pite Iron Maiiiiraotiired in Canada.

There wiis manufactured in Canada in 1S94 56,000 tons of pig iron,

bounty paid p^ S2 per ton $112,000

Increased price to the consumer, by reason of duty on imported pig

iron, say $4 per ton 224,000

Total cost to the consumer on account of duties, bounties,

importers' and retailers' profits, and increased prices to man-
ufacturers $618,162

For every ton of pig iron produced in Canada it cost the consumer $11.04
to protect it. The cost of imported pig iron i.s $10.40. So it cost the people cl
this country G4c. a ton more to protect the iron industry than the cost of the
imported aiticle, or over 100 per cent.

Iron and Steel G-oodg.

There was imported in 1894, of iron and steel goods, !?8,844,000 worth.

The duty paid w»is $2,457,000

This duty being a part of the original cost to the importer, his profit

on duty at ?.5 per cent 614,250

The retailer would have added to his original cost the du.,y and im-
porters' profit, and therefore his profit of that amount would
be, at say 25 p«r k L 767,812

Total cost to the consumer, bj' reason of duty and profits

on the duty $3,839,062

Then, in addition to this, tho consumers of home manufactured iron

and steel goods pay increased prices to the extent of at least. . 2,500,000

Grand total tax on the people ou account of duty and in-
creased prices and profits, at 72 per cent $0,339,062

In ten years $63,390,000 would be taken from the people of Canada, as the
results of the duty upon iron alone.

$24,670,000 would go to the Treasury, and the balance of $38,820,000 would
^o into the hands of the manufacturers as bounties and increased prices, and
into the pockets of the middlemen.

This amount of $38,820,000 would pay the municipal tax of all the farmers
of Ontario for six years.

It would purchase over five million sheep.

The reader will bear iu mind that this extraordinary amount is over and
B^ " ve that whirh goes into the Treasury for the purposes of State, and doe»
not include in any way the price of the articles purchased.

Prices-

At a low estimate (including nails for buildings, the erection of fences, etc.)
every farmer on an average would use 100 lbs. of cut nails every year. That
would be one dollar for every farmer, or $240,000 for the farmers of Ontario.

Unfair to Manufaoturers.

This duty is also unfair to the manufacturers who use iron. Why should
manufacturing be hindered by such duties ?

Znoreased Duties on Dry Qoods-

The National Policy has imposed very heavy duties on dry goods. Careful
examination by large importers has shown that the average duty on dry goods is
about tliirty-three per cent, against seventeen and a half per cent, under the
Liberal Government. But many articles in common use by the middle and
poorer classes pay very much higher duties. Cloth, of which the clothing of
working people is largely made, has been taxed forty, fifty, and even sixty per
cent. The consumer has to pay not only the increased duty, but a good deal
more, as will be seen by the following calculation :

Comparison of cost — $100 worth of Dry Goods.

UNDER LIBERAL TARIFF,

Cost of goods in England $100 00

Importation, freight, insurance, etc., 8 per cent 8 00

Duty, 17 J per cent 17 50

Cost to importer < $125 60

Wholesaler's profit, 16 per cent 18 82

Cost to retailer $144 32

Betailer's profit, 25 per cent .^6 08

Cost to consumer $180 40

Thus, even under the Liberal tariff", it cost $80 to place $100 worth of gooda<
from England in the hands of the consumer. Now let us make a similar calcu-
lation under the National Policy, with average duty on dry goods thirty-
three per cent.

UNDER TORY TARIFF.

Cost of dry goods in England 8100 00

Cost of importation 8 00

Duty, 33 per cent 33 00

Cost to importer $141 00

Wholesaler's profit, 15 per cent 21 15

Cost to retailer $162 16

Betailer's profit, 25 per cent 40 51

Coat to consumer $202 65

Cost of $100 worth of goods under Liberal tariff $180 40

Cost of $100 worth of goods under National Policy 202 65

Increased cost to consumer $ 22 25

A similar calculation applied to a parcel of cloth used for clothing, and
paying 60 per cent, duty, would be as follows :

Cost of goods $100 00

Cost of importation 8 00

Duty, 60 per cent 60 00

Cost to importer $168 00

Wholesaler's profit, 16 per cent. . , 25 20

Cost to retailer $193 20

Retailer's profit, 25 per cent 48 30

Cost^to consumer $241 50

Cost of $100 worth of goods under Liberal tarift' $180 49

Cost of $100 worth of goods under National Policy 241 50

lucreased cost to consumer $ 61 10

Under the system of an ad valorem and specific duties there are many cases
in which articles of dry goods are taxed as high as sixty por cent.

Specific Duties

Among the many promises of the tariff revision (in 1894) was the total or
partial abolition of specific duties. These duties, levied on the pound, the yard,
the bushel, or the dozen, are unfairly heo vy on consumers of cheaper grades of
goods. To tax a yard of cheap cloth the same amount as a yard of cloth of
superior quality is a manifest injustice to consumers of coarser lines. This in-
justice pertains to all specific duties, and as in other objectional features of the
Canadian tariff' the revision has left matters little or no better than before. The
injustice is in proportion to the fiuctuation and range of prices. As an instance,
the tax of two cents per pound on raspberrios, cherries, strawberries, etc., is trifling
when such small fruit are expensive luxuries. But, when the price falls and they
become articles of common use, it may be as high as fifty por cent. The Govern-
ment has a two-fold object in retaining this class of duties. They lessen the bur-

den on wealthy consumers, who are able most effectually to oppose the protective
system, and they keep the public in ignorance of the extent to which they are
taxed. An innocent-looking tax of a few cents per pound or per yard may, and
does, conceal duties of more than 100 per cent.

Th.e Issue Defined.

{See also Resolution No. 1 in the Liberal Platform.)

Hon. Wilfrid Laurier, speaking at the great Ottawa Convention of the
Liberal party of the Dominion, spoke as follows :

" The Government want a reform of the tariff only to retain the system of
protection. I submit to you that the ideal fiscal system is the British system of
free trade. (Cheers.) Sir, my loyalty, as I stated, does not ooze from the pores
of my body, but I do want to go for an example to the Mother Country and not
to the United States, much as I respect the people on the other side of the line.
1 say the policy should be a policy of free trade, such as they have in England,
but I am sorry to say that the circumstances of the country cannot admit at
present of that policy in its entirety, but I propose to you that from this day
henceforward it should be the goal to which we aspire. I propose to you from
this day, although we cannot adopt the policy itself, to adopt the principle which
regulates it, that is to say, that though it should be our misfortune for many
years to come to have to raise a revenue by customs duties these duties should
be levied only so far as is necessaiy to carry on the business of the Government.
(Cheers.) I submit to you that not a cent should be extracted from the pockets
of the people except every cent goes into the Treasury of the people and not into
the pockets of anybody else. (Cheers.) I submit to you that no duty should be
levied for protection's sake but levied altogether and for the purpose of filling
the Treasury to the limits requiied. I submit to you that every cent that is levied
should be levied, first and foremost, upon the luxuries of the people. I submit
to you, therefore, that the system of protection which is to be maintained by the
Government, that is to say, of levying tribute upon the people not for the legiti-
mate expenses of the Government but for a private and privileged class, is to be
condemned without any qualification. fCheers.) Let it be wel' understood then
that from this moment we have a distinct issue with the party in power. Their
idi al is protection ; our ideal is free trade ; their immediate object is protection ;
01 s a tariff for revenue and for revenue only. (Cheers.) Upon this issue we
engage in battle."

Mr. Laurier en Protection-

" There is taken out of the people of Canada over $20,000,000 every year in
customs taxes. If every cent collected through the operation of the protective
"policy went into the Treasury it could be borne, but for every $1 that goes into
the public coffers S2 or 83 go into the pockets of the protected manufacturer.
I, said Mr. Laurier, object to this. (Cheers.) I say that not a cent should be
collected beyond what is required to meet the country's necessities." — Hon.
Wilfred Laurier' a Convention Hpeech.

* I

Tariff for Eevenue.

Wm. Paterson, M.P., South Brant, in seconding the tariff reform resolution
at the convention at Ottawa, said : "You have laid down and emphazied again
the principle held by the Liberal party in thiH matter of trade and commerce,

. \

that in the levying of the taxes of the country, regard should be had only to the
necessities of the revenue, and that the Government should not seek by tariff
legislation to favor any particular class in the community. I say this is no new

Erinciple. A revenue tanfl was in force when our late leader, Alexander Mac-
enzie, who has gone to his long rest, held the reins of power ; and he and his
Government fell because he would not yield to the cry for a protective tarifi.
From that day to this the Liberal party have not ceased to proclaim that they
believed that it was not right or just that protection, as a principle, should be
recognized by the Government of the country, and that they believed that the
duty of the Government was to raise the necessary revenue to discharge the
duties devolving upon the Government and to leave the people free to work out
their own destiny, giving no undue advantage to any one portion of the com-
munity over another."

Gradually Abolish Froteotion.

" I would not be the man to say, much as I depreciate the protective systemi
much as I believe it to be injurious to the well-being of the country — I would
not be the man to say that it should be wiped out at one fell swoop."

Some hon. MEMBERS. " Hear, hear."

Mr. LAURIER. " I am surprised at these exclaminations. I say that pro-
tection should not be removed at one fell swoop ; but the difference between the
hon. gentlemen and myself is that they are not prepared to remove it even at a
gradual swoop." — ffon. Wilfrid Laurier ^n the Budget, 1894-

Conservatives Slandering; Eng^land.

" He, (Sir Charles Hibbsrt Tupper) told us that the British nation under free
trade is no longer able to compete with the civilized nations of Europe, but that
she is driven to spend millions upon her army and her navy in order to force her
trade upon unwilling savages in the uncivilized countries of the world."

Some hon. MEMBERS. " Oh, oh."

Mr. LAURIER. " Yes ; here is the language used by the hon. gentleman
(Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper) :

Driven from the civilized niarlcets of tlie world, steadily and every year
flnding their outputs to those marketn decreasinK, they spend millions on
their navy, and millions on their army, to force their wares, and their goods,
and their merchandise, into the uncivilized markets of the world.

Sir, I never yet heard the fair name of the great nation so slandered and
insulted. At least I never heard the name of England so insulted by a man
of English blood." — Hon. Wilfred Laurier on the Budget, 1894.

Scheduling Canadian Cattle-

Up to a recent date Canada was permitted to export cattle into Great
Britain, a privilege denied to the United States because of the existence of
pleuro-pneumonia there. In July, 1893, Great Britain took away this privilege
from Canada because of the bad faith and negligence of tho Canadian Govern-
ment. The result is tremendous loss to Canada, amounting to at least one
f)enny a pound, as reported by the Deputy-Minister of Agriculture at Ottawa,
ive weight, on all cattle shipped to England or tit for the English market. This

amounts to an avenge of $25 a head on each beast, or a loss of over $2,000,000
<m the cattle actually shipMd to England, and a corresponding loss on those sold
in the Canadian market JBefore Canada was sehedaled our cattle bronght pound
for pound as much as the English cattle in the English market The moment
the scheduling took plaoe our cattle dropped in price, because having to be
slauehtered before passing out of the control of the Qovemmeni There are on
the Thames, near London, two cattle markets a couple of miles apart Canadian
cattle are landed at the Canadian market there, called the Deptford market, and
sold there, and must be slaughtered before removal. The British cattle are
brought for sale to the other market, and the prices, because of the scheduling,
differ to the extent that c 1,500 pound beast will not bring within six poun£i
sterling, or $30, of the price of an English beast of the same weight and quality.
This terrible blow to the Canadian cattle industry was brought about by the
carelessness, ne^^iect and bungling of the Dominion Qovemment

Boast of QoTemment Supporters.

Supporters of the Oovemment at Ottawa boast that protection ideas are
growing in England, and Hon. Wilfrid Laurier speaking in the House cf Com-
mons, Jan. 16tb, 1S96, as reported in Hansard, said : " Have we not been told by
the hon. gentleman, amidst the cheers of his fHends beside him, that Great Britain
is going back to protection — that England is to be for the English as Canada is
for the Canadians. Why, if the eighty men in the English House of Commons
who are in favor of protection can impose their will on that House, England will
be a protectionist country such as Canada is now. And, in such event, what kind
of a market will England be for our products, if our products are treated there as
British products are treated in this c^juntry ? What kind of a market will that
be for us where the products of Canadian farmers are met by a wall in Eng-
land just as the products of English manufacturers are met by a wall in Canada ?
This is the policy which is cheered by hon. gentlemen opposite, a policy which, if
adopted by Great Britain, they would forever deplore, and the unfortunate day
when it was adopted forever rue."

The farmers will agree with Mr. Laurier that a duty on what they sell to
England would be very injurious to them, just as the scheduling of Canadian
cattle has been.

** Tbe customs tariff of the Dominion should be based, not as It is now,
vian the protective principle, bat upon the requirements of the public
gMvlce I and it should be so adjusted as to make free, or to bear as lightly
as possible upon the, necessaries of life, and should be so arranKed as to
promote f^er trade with the whole world, more particularly with Great
Jlritain and the Tnited States."

" """Sjjt V*