IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) V / O <° «'. . (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grAce A la g6n6rositA de: Library Division Provincial Archives of British Columbia L^s images suivantes ont At6 reproduites avoc le plus grand soin, compttf tenu de la condition et de la nettetA de I'exemplcire film*, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimie sont filmAs en commenpant par le premier pint et en terminant soit par la derniire page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les eutres exemplaires originaux sont filmis en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole — •»► signifie "A SUIVRE ", le symbols V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds A des taux de r^Juction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 A partir de I'angle supArieur gauche, de gauche A droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mithode. rrata to pelure. □ 32X 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 '■^.'^ AN ADDRESS TO THE Electors of Yancouver District iS /Y^4; ■T-^ that 3'ou will be able to secure the necessary politi- cal infiuence at Ottawa to have attention paid to the more special needs of our District, do hereby re- spectfully re(|uest that you allow your name to be placed in nomination as a candidate to contest this constituency at tbe forthcoming Dominion elections; and we do hereby pledge you our hearty support, and do promise to use all fair and honorable meth- ods to secure your election, should you see tit to accept this requisition. Dr. R. E. McKechnie, James Pattekson, , Arthur Wilson, E. E. Taylor, John Bannerman, R. JoJlNSON, C. E. Stevenson, Rl( HARD IllLRERT, C. C. M( Kenzie, Chas. McCutcheon, H. J. ROHIE, David IloutiAN, J. E. R. Tagart, Rali'I[ Smith, James Bhadlev, Tiio.MAs Haudv, And 'M'l Others. n. M'KKY, I'KINTKU, NANAIMO. 'S^SiO AN ADDRESS J To the Electors of Vancouver District: Gentlemen, — You will shortly be called upon to again elect a member to represent you in the Dominion House of Commons. In response to the generous requisition printed opposite, I consented to become a candidate for that office, and in a publish- ed reply took an early opportunity of expressing my views on the issues of the coming campaign. Since then I have endeavored to personally discuss with as many of you as possible, the questions of pecuHar interest to this district, and my efforts in this way will be redoubled from now till the election. In view, however of the great extent of our Electoral Distsict, there will doubtless be many with whom I can- not have this pleasure, and to such especially, I beg to present tlie following more extended outline of my views. The question which is now probably uppermost in the pub- lic mind is THE MANITOBA SCHOOL QUESTION; and to this I beg to draw your attention first, not only because of its peculiar importance, but also because it is a question properly outside of party politics, and can be best considered before enter- ing upon a discussion of the other issues of the ensuing campaign. On this question I take a stand thoroughly indep lie. 7. The Catholic minority thereupon laid the matter before the Governor- , General-in-Conncilj whit^h is the Cabinet of the Dominion Government. 8. The Dominion- Government heard the appeal, and on March 21, 1805,. decided that the Catholics had a grievance; that the grievance should be remedied by re-establishing separate schools, and issued the celebrated Remedial Order commanding the Manitobans to re-establish separate schools,, and threatening Ddminion legislation on the subje<;t if they disobeyed. 9. The Manitoba Government, after consideration, firmly refused to comply with the order, but at the same time offered to compensate the Catholics for any capital invested in their separate schools. 10. The Dominion House was assemble'd in early January, 1896, to enforiie the Remedial Order by passing legislation, restoring the system of separate schools in Manitoba. 11. The Remedial Bill was duly introduced for this purpose, and at this writing is being debated on its Hecond reading. These in brief are the salient facta of the question up to the present time. There may be subsequent developments as yet unforeseen, but I trust the following declaration of principles will be found sufficiently indicative of my position, even under such changes. , In the first place I believe in PROVINCIAL RIGHTS. The fullest scope should be given locallegislaturesin making laws within their jurisdiction, and when their acts are constitu- tional and the undoubted expression of the people, they should not be subject to any federal interference. I consequently hold that, when the Privy Council of Great Britain decided that the Manitoba Government had a right to abolish separate schools, then and there the question should have received its quietus. But the advocates of separate schools did not stop with that defeat. They went on another tack. Having been routed before K judicial tribunal, they resorted to a political court and appealed to the Dominion Government. And what great grievance' did this minority have ? Wherein had their rights and feelings been outraged? If they claimed that they had lost any enormous amount of capital already invested in their separates Sjehools, the Dominion might have requested Manitoba to mrfke compensation, and this Mantoba is .prepared to do. If they allea^ that, under the pretext of establishing non-sectarian state sehools, the Mani- OF VANCOUVER DISTRICT. 3 toba Legislature had really thrust a system of Protestant schools upon them, then no fair-minded man would have objected had the Dominion required Manitoba to run her state schools on purely non-sectarian principles. This far the Dominion Government might have gone. Had they acted judicially, this far they could only have gone, for therein ample relief would have been afforded to all pretended grievances. , . In the second place I believe in NON-SECTARIAN STATE SCHOOLS, and do not approve of public separate schools for any denomina- tion. Our public school system \^as created to give the rudiments of secular knowledge to every prospective citizen, to the end that all may be prepared for the struggles of life and the general duties of citizenship. If a religious training is necessary, let it be given in the home or church. In these new provinces, especially, where the united efforts of the^ whole community are necessary to sustain even one system of efficient schools, it is manifestly impossible to retain a high educational standard if our resources are divided. Our own brief history amply affirms the wigdom of abolishing from these public institutions all religious instruction. In schools where it obtains the educational standard is low. The pupils are disunited, the seeds of subsequent social dissension are sown, and I doubt if any lasting moral benefit ever results. It is an encumbrance on our school system, an element of constant danger, and the sooner it is cut off will our children grow up in those bonds of friendship and community of thought which are the chief corner stone of national unity. , i . . , Holding the above views I contend that the decision and action of the Dominion Government was extreme, hasty and un- wise, so much so that I doubt if the Government ever contem- plated their present action. They probably expected that their imperious order and bullying threats would over-powerthe Man- itobans. In this they seriously miscalculated. The sturdy men of the prairie province refused to be bluffed by such proceedings, with the result that to-day the country is in a turmoil of religious strife, merely because of the unstatesmanlike conduct then exhib- ited by the government. Instead of threats, bluffs and coercion, methods of conciliatioii should have been employed But the support of Quebec was of more importance to the federal minis- ters than the welfare of Manitoba, and for this reason we are face to face with the greatest menace that ever confronted our confed- eration. Indeed, the gravity of the situation has impressed those mni AN ADDRK8S TO THE KLKCTORS who brought it about, and they who errti, while commanded, bluJBPed and blustered, now plead for peace. What will be the result of this imminent backdown by the Dominion Government, or how this eleventh hour attempt at conciliation will operate, or what is to be the final upshot of the whole trouble — time alone can tell. This much, however, is cer- tain, if the Remedial Bill is insisted upon and passes parliament, it will be of none effect and the whole agitation will end in utter futility, because any attempt to enforce such en obnoxious system on Manitoba against the open protest of nine.tenths of her citi- zens, would be such an outrage on the freedom of a self-governing people as would not only meet with local resistance, but would ultimately DISRUPT OUR DOMINION. To many of you this question will be paramount in the ensu- ing campaign and to no one can it be unimportant. A great principle is at stake; the freedom of a sister western province is attacked; the very future of our national life is threat- ened,. Let the result, therefore, of the coming elections convince all that there is in this Conada, and in our own British Columbia a mighty latent element that will uphold the hands of a young province in its progress, and will not stand idly by and see it bull-dozed into accepting the effete methods of by-gone days. Then will the intriguers at Ottawa awake on the afterraorn to the fullness of their folly, and Manitoba will be able to pursue its onward course untrammelled by any medseval minded opponents of that greatest bulwark of our liberty — the public school. With reference to THE TRADE QUESTION I think a clear idea of the situation in Canada and the relative positions of the Liberals and Conservatives on the matter cannot be better obtained , than from a reference to the origin of the present protective system in Canada, and a consideration of its results on our commercial and social life. It is necessary for this purpose to go back to the year 1878. In that year there was a general election. For four years pre- vious the Liberals were in power, under the leadership of Hon. ^l^x. MacKenzie. Up to that time the tariff was not protective, ii was, in fact, a tariff for revenae only. As to the wisdom of »uch a tariff the Conservatives then agreed with the Liberals. So much so that in 1876 when the Liberals ventured to raise the tariff from 15 to 17i percent, to meet the requirements of a grow- ing country, Sir John Macdonald from the opposition benches bluffed by the »nipt at ; of the is cer- iament, n utter system ler cili- verning would tie ensu- western ) threat- onvince [>lumbia I young d see it e days, n to the rsue its ponents relative cannot of the 1 of its r 1878. irs pre- )f Hon. tective, dom of iberals. ise t*e a grow- >enches OF VAN';OUVKR DISTRICT. protested that the increase of 2^ per cent, would afford an "inci- dental protection" to the manufacturers, and in so far was un- wise and to be deprecated. About this time also the Liberal governm'ent endeavored to renew the old reciprocity treaty with the United States. In this attempt the Conservatives heartily assisted, although they characterized a similar movement in 1891 as evidencing the rankest disloyalty. The United States, how- ever, which wns then governed by ardent protectionists, would not concede reciprocity on the terms suggested by-Canada. This was the condition* of affairs in 1878 when the election took place. At first the Conservatives were at a loss for an election cry, for they had hitherto endorsed the Liberal trade policy, and on other matters there setmed to be little room for attack, as the Premier, Hon. Alex. MacKenzie, in power as in private, proved himself an honest, sturdv man. Under him the countrv had been well governed. Its finances had beon economically manag- ed, and not a breath of scandal could be raised against his ad- nnnistration. The conservatives were in a desperate dilemma. They required a desperate remedy. Sir John A. Maedonald saw the possibility of political life in the failure of the reciprocal trade negotiations, and with a bold disregard for consistency and a frothy appeal to Canadian loyalty, he characteristically announc- ed, "If we cannot have reciprocity in trade, let us have recipro- city in tariffs." The cry was soon taken up by his despondent followers, ane adopted at all, and what is the good of it?" It might be supposed that with this incro^se in the cost of living, that wages would have correspondirgly increased. But such, unfortunately, was not tlie case. The reason being that those who introduced protection into Canada were not consistent in the application of that principle. They protected tiie manu- facturer but gave no protection to the laborer, and the conse- (luence was that while the former was enabled to Increase the price of his wares in a sheltered market, the latter found that the price of his labor continued to be regulated by competition with the whole world. Not only so, they actualh^ aggiavated the in- justice of this inconsistency by assisting nearly 1,000,000 immi- grants into direct competition with the home laborer, but with this phase of the question I will deal later. As soon as these early results of Protection began to be felt the people began to realize the true nature of the change, and see that under the fascinating cloak of "a National Policy" they had wedded a system of class Je^gislation which ENRICHED THE FEW AT THE EXPENSE OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC. And that the Protective Tariff does operate in this way, can readily be demonstrated. In proof of this assertion, let us refer again to the illustration of the dealer in threshing machines, charging $390 for the machine he formerly sold for $300. In such a case it is clear that the $90 additional, which he i.s enabled bv Hiiliili AN ADDRESS TO THE ELECTORS OP the- tariflF to charge, goes to the dealer. Take another il- lustration: suppose that threshing machines are manufactured in Detroit and Windsor, two cities only one mile apart, but the for- mer in the United States and the latter in Canada. Now, there is no good reason why, under natural conditions, the cost of pro- ducing a threshing machine should be more in one city than in the other. The fact is, however, that the price of such a machine in Detroit is $300, and of a similar machine in Windsor about $390. The question now is, who gets the extra $90 paid by the Canadian consumer? Let us see. If the machine is bought in Detroit and shipped into Canada, the machine would cost the Canadian buyer as follows: t Price in Detroit $300.00 Duty paid— 30 per cent 90.00 Cost of machine . . $390.00 without adding freight, and in such a case the $90 would clearly go- to the government. If, however, the machine is bought in Windsor (Canada) and this is the more frequent case, the result is very different. The Windsor dealer has to compete, not dguinst a machine at $300, but at a figure including fi eight and duty of about $400. He therefore offers his machine for just a trifle under that for which the Detroit dealer can sell his in Carada, and asks $390. This reduction gives him the Canadian trade, and at the same time on everv $300 machine he sells he puts an unearned $90 in his pocket. it is obvious, therefore, that under the existing high tariff, a large part of the tax on the Canadian consumer goes direct to the purse of the manufacturer, and not to the treasury of the government. Various calculations on this matter have been made by e/id- nent Canadian statisticians with the following startling result: — They find that $2.50 is paid to the manufacturer in this way for every $1 that goes to the revenue, or in other words, that while the people of Canada ptty into the revenue $30,000,000 as taxes on goods imported, they have to pay annually to the niunufaeturers, over and above all fair profits, $75,000,000 in the shape of increas- ed prices they ure privileged to demand. Under8tllchasystemimmen.se fortunes wer<> soon amassed by the maniH^x^turers. Their field was so full of golden oppor- tunities and e,xtraornnrr.Tf^"'^"^ The facUs that the hoife marke to-dayis poorandthati*ices,arel0werthan they have been for the last forty y.6ars Th« price of the best wheat ki Eastern Canada fli!^ * I ?^^ f'^af<>a for this unfortunate condition, of «f commodlSt t*^^^^^ "^^f»« P^^*^"^*^' like all other, commodities;^ j8 regulated by. .supply and demand. As soon therefoiie as the city, factories became sluggish Jb their !opera.' tion«,^a«d activity in the ln«,ber camps and mine? lessenedTh; fel? C"" .^ fa«»» produce deerfea^ed and price, consequentjy >«OTEpTtON iMPOVERrSHED THE FARMER in a^r^ ^ire(^ way/ Having weakened his. home market it not cplyfaiH to compensate him for that loss, but it actulllv hai^pered his effprts against the, nevy unfavomb^e condition^ For undprthe new tariff as the.price of what he "had tHell dT crea^g^theprice of allhe had & buy iiicrea«edyin ot^r wlit while his income became smaller. he found to his sorrow that the purchasing power of that income also becam^ srtiallS fi* 7*k P^^^^ctive tariff was. not fraiiied in Canada for the bene fit of the farm jr. It placed, a^, average duty of nearly 40^ '^^^^^ cen*^on axes, ho^bindeVs, reapers,a^d alLthat aSr mi^! Th -^"^ ^^.!^ ^^l^S^ duty of 22 per cent, on his produce The lesuHjvas th^t whereas he had.'trpay about 40 perS* more for hi., necrssaries, he could pnly charge aOhe fttermT4 22 per gent, more for what he sol^. ''xt follows, therefore X^ even If his loca market hud retained its old tim^ vtoVThit ht" profi^ would still have been necessarily 18 per cent less ■ *^ - Bu. tae ftiHnerVdisadv^ntage did Vo' ^nd S rwe«ke„«d tllT^^'r?^^ t discouraging tariff discrim nation tg^i^^ husbandry. They have furthermore to compete under the^un fair couditwns «gai„st the produce of the cheapest produrrs in ^ff£*'* *^^'' *^" S^T^"^^''* '^^^i'*** it to Sur Ckets -In " mUk^ m^mimmtf^nimiif^ed the steamers that 7un between >in 1876 to correspond- atectlon, it life in the « class that armer'a lot good local >ine market leen for the m Canada protectJoh, , tiou. of ufr 9 all other . As soon, leir iopera- isened, the nsequently ER market, it t actually :onditions. to sell de- ler words, w that the the bene- y ,40 per ler requir- I , produce, per cent, uttermost fore, that , , that his 3. weakenod ' • > against these un- iucers in kets. -In between . mmm^ OF VANCQUVJSH DISTWOT^ 15 Australia and here to the extent of $125,000 annually for a monthly service.,. The pretext for assisting this line was to give Canadian manufacturers a market in Australia. And I believe it is a fact that the manufaQturer of farming implement;i in Canada, although he requires the greatest prptection at home, . does find a gpod market in Australia, and can compete success- fully against all producers, after taking his goodsover 8000 miles> But passing by that glaring incousistency, let us see what these steamers bring ^.u return cargo to British Columbia. The freigh^ir lists shaiy mutton,, bvitter, cheese, tallow, W90I, eggs, beefj poultry, honey, etc. 'these, of tjourse,. are flooded upon our mar- kets in most unequal cjompetitioia with our own home produce! The meaning of all this is tbat the. unnecessary, increase iii the costof farming in Canada, exapted'frora the farmers by the pro- tection to manufacturers, is use,d.by the government to assis|;, to Canada the. cheap, produce of tlje Orient, and thereby destroy the . I home market for the Canadian farmer. And tjiis is done by the same government that promised to keep a vigorous home iparket for the Canadian farmer, all f0r the further berieifft of their mas- ters-r-the liianufftcturers. . . , . Farming. under such conditions beeame unprofitable and . country property depreciated in value. Farmers forsook their old homi?steads and rushed to the cities. Ther^ they found busi- ness dull, competition keen, and employment scarce. .' For a time they, moved with, the gi^eat array of the unein ployed up and down the 9ity- streets. Finding no employnient and with iio prospects in the future, niany of th^m, fiiMly ,, un willingly and' discoui>&g^d joined . .' ' ' ' • tHH%XOpUS TO tHE UNITED SPATES. The enormous number who, in like manner, have been driv- . en from their Canadian home by the adverse conditions result- ing from a false system of national deveiopmeht, oanrbe^gathered. from tbe following figures, taken from the ofilicial census report: Population ijtf Canada in 1881 was, .... . . . . 4,324,801 The natural increase between 1881 and 1891 reckoned at 2 pfer cent a year. , .-. . . . .... . 900,000 Immigrants: imported into Canada, between 1881 and '91. 886,000 The popuiati*>n of Canada in: 1891 should.have been?... .6,110,801 The actual population in 1891 however was only. 4,882,679 Ims OH populatieaii 1«814891 . . . , .j .1,278,122 An«l these figures are verified by the official Report of the 10 AN ADDRSSft TO THK B1.RCT0B8 III Census in the United States, 1890, whi«h shows that in that year there were 973,752, nearly' one million horn Canadians in that« country. The ahove figures were keenly disappointing to all interest- ed in Canadian welfare, and especially to those in the Mother^ land. The following typical expression of Bnglish regret is taken from the St Jamet Qaztttt (London, Conservative): "While America its filling up and brimming over and increasing its pop- ulation by millions, Canada, if not exactly stationery, is increas- ing very slowly indeed. It had been commonly supposed that Canada shoula have showed an increase of at least three millions in the last decade, but all such hopes have been dashed by the census. The increase of population spills over the border— the men who were born in Canada and should become citisens of the £mpire; grow and die under the stars and stripes. Whether we like it or not Canada is not doing well and has not been doing well for some time past/' ' Too true, Canada is not doing well. And this appalling de- population of our country seems to me to be the most lamentable feature of the situation. It is evidence that something is seri- o'usly wrong with the conditions of life in Canada. It furnishes the crowning proof of the utter failure of Protection as a National Policy, and brands it rather ar a most denationalizing system. Do you doubt it ? Then look around you after these 18 years of protection in Canada and tell me, where are the promised manu- facturing centres with their hurrying hordes of workers? Where are the prosperous farmers ? Where are the promised fleets that were to carry our natural produce over the world ? Where are the promised millions that were to people our broad prairies and en- joy our natural opportunities ? Where in fine, is that promised national prosperity that was to attract the attention of the world and fill Canadians with pardonable pride ? You will search In vain for these promised benefits — ^they are nowhere to be found. The reason is that our eflforts have been misguided; we have worked under a wrong principle. We have endeavored to transplant industries to our country that are, by nature, foreign to our surroundings, and in so doing have sacnficed those industries which are native with us, and in which we could not but excel. Wo have acted like a Canadian farmer who would forsake his wheat and hay and potatoes and expect to profitably raise bananas. In the same way Canada can no more rely for prosperity on protected btanufacturers than can Canadian fatiii^rs on hothouse bananas. that year s in thatt interest* Mother' Bt is taken "While 1^ its pop- increas- osed that e millions by the rder-^the ens of the lether we sen doing ailing de- imentable g is seri. furnishes I Nationnl ? system. \ years of ed manu- ? Where leets that ire are the s and en- promised ;he world Sts— they )rt8 have pie. We that are, ing have in which a farmer )xpeet to no more [Canadian OP VANCOUVER IMSTBIOT 17 For the past 18 years we have flown in the face of nature, Eind as a result are living under the most unnatural and there^ fore ruinous conditions. This course has thrust further from the toiler the products of his toil, and placed them in the hands of a favored few. It has reared up a plutocracy that overshadows the ;overnmcnt and threatens the independence of the free elector- ite. Under it the manufacturers have amassed enormous for- unes, and corruf^tionists have glutted themselves at the public treasury', while the burden of taxes fell heavy and heavier on the masses, and the worried face and sunken eye became more famil- iar. It has driven froin our homes the hope of our country to seek an existence in a foreign land. It has even failed to retain with us the unhappy European immigrants that we assist to our shores. In a word, this policy has perverted our national ener- gies and culminated in the unparalleled depression we experience, to-day. That the Protective Policy has so failed is scarcely open to doubt. Its failure has been fr( ,uently admitted by many of those who were prominent and instrumental in introducing it into Canada;. Among such is the clear sighted D'alton McCarthy, Q.. C, M. P., and I.make the following quotations from his recent speeches, as typical of the complete change on the Trade Question experienced by a multitude of similar conscientious Conserva- tives. "We adopted the N. P.,. and we told you, at least I did, be- cause I was very young and simple at the time, that we were going to make everybody rich . . . . .^ was, as you all know, a National Policy man and now I tell you that I am for as much free trade as we can get. I say that what this country needsnow is to get down to a tariff for revenue only. I came to the conclu- sion a year ago that I could no longer remain an advocate of the N. P. I saw what was going on. I could not, unless I was blind, help seeing it." A CHANGE IS REQUIRED. The policy that has produced these disastrous results ..lUst be overturned, before we can expect a better condition • of sMaiss in Canada. What is that change to be? Let us see what is the most feasible. I believe that free trade is in accord with natural law, and the best economic reasoning, and therefore will prove conducive to the healthiest commercial condition of a country. The introduction of free trade, however, necessitates the abolition of the present method of raising a revenue. The question then comes to be, if free trade were introduced, how would the revenue 18 AN ADDRESS TO THE ELECTORR ill! IP n ilii! 11! I it ill be derived. And it must be remembered here that Canada re- quires a large revenue, for apart from the actual expenses of government, we have to pay $9,763,000 in interest alone, annually, for the money borrowed and extravagantly squandered by the present government. There are only two other ways of raising the revenue — either by direct taxation or by placing all taxes on land. Now while ak a free trader I might be prepared to pay taxes in either of these ways, yet I know that the former method is repugnant to the great majority of our people, and the latter method, although satisfactory in many respects, has as yet rer ceived only a limited endorsation. As a fact the majority of Canadians seem to prefer the tariff as a means of taxation, al- though they deplore the consequent evils of protection. I, there- fore, accommodate my theories to existing conditions. My posi- tion then on the Trade Question, is tliis: If we cannot get rid of protection, root and branch, let us prune it of its most objection- able parts — if we must have a tariff, let us have it free from the abuses at present rampant, that is to say, let us have A TARIFF FOR REVENUE ONLY. Under such a tariff all farming implements should be admit- ted free. All mining, lumbering and fishing accessories should also be on the free list. All the ordinary necessaries of life should be practically free, and the great bulk of the revenue should be derived from the import tax on those luxuries that are strangers to a poor man's home. Under such a tariff every cent paid in addition to the actual value of an article would go to the public treasury, and not to the pockets of a protected manufac- turer. Under such a- system, it is true, some bolstered up factor- ies would collapse, but with them would fall a corrupting com- binacion that has enervated all that was independent and vigor- ous in Canadian political and commercial life. Under such a policy living would become cheap, and the cost of production, therefore, less. Under these favorable conditions our mining, fishing and lumbering industries would wonderfully develop, and Mith the renewed vigor in the unlimited field of these industries, and under the new conditions, farming would again become profitable and country properties- become valuable. Such factor- ies also as are natural to the country would thrive the better, and give to the cities a more steady foundation. And thus in a na- tural way commerce would wake up, confidence would revive, prosperity would return, Canadians again would rejoice in their native land, and our country would once more bo fairly started for that prominent position among the nations which its people and resources iiistifv. T.Txsm'-m^ OF VANOOnVKR mSTRK'T. 19 anada re- pensea of annually, Ejd by the oi raising 1 taxes on ed to pay ir method the latter as yet re- ajority of cation, al- I, there- My posi- get rid of objection- from the be ad mit- es Hhould 38 of life } revenue s that are very cent go to the manufrtc- up factor- ting coni- nd vigor- er such a roduction, r mining, velop, and ndustries, 1 become 3h factor- tetter, and in a na- d revive, > in their iy started its people I 1 furthermore belipve that if a reasonable reciprocity treaty buld be consumated between the United States and Canada, it wnXd do much to hasten and enhance these desirable results. Concluding this discussion of the trade question 1 would say hat I have treated it at such length because of its supreme im^- ' ortance in this election. Other questions may overshadow it br the moment but I doubt if any other question so dierctly at- Wects our permanent interests. The arguments I have advanced tre responsible for my convictions on the question and while here are bound to be many differences of opinion on such, a .omprehensive ^^^^^^^ make bold to assert, and submit •or your approval that the principles I have enunciated are un- ioubtedly jTest calculated to develop the wonderful wealth of this District. From a consideration of the Trade Question and the method of raisine a revenue it is natural to enquire in the next place, ho^the ^revenue has been administered. I will therefore now briefly review , THE FINANCIAL CONDITION OF CANADA. con.se- This is a subject necessarily of figures, and I will quently place before you at the outset the follow jiig comparative ?ab/e showing the financial cond-._on in 1878, the last year the Libe;als"^erMn power, and the subsequent change under the Conservative rule. « ' 1878. f 22,375,001 00 $ 23,503,158 00 1,128,140 00 6 76 144,000,000 00 1895. »4,847,000 00 36,000,000 00 4,153,000 00 8 00 318,000,000 00 253,000,000 00 49 00 Total taxation [Total expenditure Deficit... ■ Taxation per capita i Oro88 Natioual debt 140,000,000 00 Net Nation debt ^ , ' .^^^ ^^ National debt per capita • • Increase in gross National debt over 100 per cent. . Increase in net National delit nearly 100 per cent. Increase in National debt per t apita, 45 per cent. * Increase in population only 11 per cent. By way of comparison it is interesting to note the NeOional Debt and annual taxation percapita in foreign ««^;;^*"^«; .^^^ *^^ following table, many of the countries referred to maintain a large naval and military equipment, the enormous expense of which Canada is, spared: 20 AN ADDBBSS TO THE KLKCT0R8 Hnl' I!' Ill National Debt Annual Taxation per Capita. per Capita. Germany M 90 • $6 32 Swltaerland 4 26 2 68 Turkey 18 98 2 82 Russia 28 68 8 16 Denraaric 21 94 6 90 Great Britain 88 60 9 47 Norway and Sweden 16 86 3 91 Japan 6 04 1 24 Mexico , 16 41 3 28 United States 16 00 411 There is little necessity to supplement these figures with any extendNEBE COMPUET^ , THE CONSERVATIVES ^^^ ^„on, »»" .i^es; in '''such widespread terro^ .^^^ f,om the ^w ^^,,,ething to ■•••"St"'. -I I-'''—"' power till u»« 30 AN ADPRBSS TO TH£ ELECTORS 26, 1896, but they moreover suggest straining the constitution by retaining office after that date. And it may be that in despera- tion at parting fortune they will only release their DEATH CLUTCH ON THE TREASURY BENCHES when compelled by the Governor-General. In this fear to face the electorate there is the consciousness of certain defeat. And that the government will be defeated in the coming campaign is an irresistible conclusion from recent events. Victory has cer- tainly perched on the Liberal banner. Under the inspiring lead of Hon. Wilfred Laurier, the Liberals display a hopeful enthusiasm, a consciousness of right, and stand on an invincible platform o* popular principles that can augur but one result, the TRIUMPHANT RETURN OF LIBERALISM IN CANADA. Such a change is a preliminary necessity before we can have pure public administration and a return of general prosperity. I'he long lease of power to the present government has made them desperate, corrupt and withal inclined to run the country as its owners and not its servants. But whatever may be your views as to the certainty of a change or its desirability, I submit that one thing is beyond dis- pute and that is the necessity for a change in the representation of this district. Finally, in conclusion, gentlemen, 1 am a British Columbian. I am familiar with our province and have unbounded confidence in its future greatness. I come before you as the • NOMINEEQF NO CORPORATION, SECT OR CLIQUE and rely for election on no* such influences. I prefer to appeal to you upon the merits of the positions taken and principles declar- ed herein, as I fully believe they are best calculated to develop our district and restore general prosperity to our country; and that after the fullest discussion they will be so endorsed by you on election day. K Yours faithfully, Ns«*>airao, B. C, March 14, 1896. W, W. B. McINNES. 1 wrTTIiiiWWiWSBa