The Chung Collection

Chung Logo

The Chung Collection

Canadian national problems American Academy of Political and Social Science 1913

Item Metadata

Download

Media
chungpub-1.0056209.pdf
Metadata
JSON: chungpub-1.0056209.json
JSON-LD: chungpub-1.0056209-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): chungpub-1.0056209-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: chungpub-1.0056209-rdf.json
Turtle: chungpub-1.0056209-turtle.txt
N-Triples: chungpub-1.0056209-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: chungpub-1.0056209-source.json
Full Text
chungpub-1.0056209-fulltext.txt
Citation
chungpub-1.0056209.ris

Full Text

Array mum
^k^i^uiU. t-^M*  (&£<sf^Lj?   A/> -^^^^$W-
THE ANNALS OF
THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL
AND SOCIAL SCIENCM
■  ■      .    - ■,     ■   ■
Vol.XLVl JANUARY, 1913 Whole No. 134
Canadian
National -M
Problems
Issued    Bi-monthly   by   the   American   Academy   of political   and   Social   Science,'
Philadelphia, Pa.     PER YEAR, $6.00, PER NUMBER, $1.00
Entered at the poet-office at Philadelphia at eecond-claee matter, I860
w assgK,
*',"$S?3r/$$!
IMPORTANT PERSONAL NOTICE TO MEMBERS
American Academy of  Political and  Social Science
Seventeenth Annual Meeting
Friday and Saturday, April 4 and 5, 1913
:t"SIhr (gnat nf ffihring"
The Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science promises to be the most important in the history of our organization. The
officers of the Academy are most anxious to have a full representation of members
from all parts of the United States.
There will be six sessions, each devoted to some important phase of the subject,
aad leading authorities from all sections of the United States will be present to
participate in the discussions. Furthermore, official delegations will be present from
most of the states of the Union as well as from the more important trade and
commercial organizations. <t?«K
In addition to the importance of the sessions, this Annual Meeting will afford
aa opportunity to the members of the Academy to meet one another. Through such
personal acquaintance, and the development of the spirit of cooperation resulting .
therefrom, the national influence of the Academy will be greatly strengthened. We hope,
therefore, that if it is at all possible you will arrange your engagements so as to be in
Philadelphia, on Friday and Saturday, April fourth and fifth. We will much appreciate
it if you wil| let us know whether there is any likelihood that we may welcome you
at this Annual Meeting.   An early reply is earnestly requested, '
Very sincerely yours
L S. ROW^ President
West Philadelphia Post Office Station
Philadelphia, Pa.
Some of the Special Volumes
Recently Sent to Members
Chinese and Japanese in America
The New South
Political and Social Progress in Latin-America
China: Social and Economic Conditions
Country Life
Efficiency in City Government
Industrial Competition and Combination
The Initiative, Referendum and Recall
The Outlook for Industrial Peace
For particulars regarding membership a.'dress
American Academy of Political and Social Science
West Philadelphia Post Office Station
H-Jfibiladelphia. Pa.
m 7S'
The University of British Columbia Library
THE
CHUNG
COLLECTION Wm. CANADIAN
NATIONAL PROBLEMS
THE   ANNALS
Volume xlv
January, 1913
Editor: EMORY R. JOHNSON
Assistant Editor: CLYDE L. KING
Editor Book Department: ROSWELL C. McCREA
Associate Editors: THOMAS CONWAY, Jr.,  G. G. HUEBNER, S. S. HUEBNER
CARL KELSEY, J. P. LICHTENBERGER, L. S. ROWE, ELLERY C. STOWELL
American Academy of Political and Social Science
36th and Woodland Avenue, Philadelphia
EUROPEAN AGENTS
England.   P. S. King & Son, 2 Great Smith St., Westminster, London, S. W.
France:   L. Larose, Rue Soufflot, 22, Paris
Germany:   Mayer & Muller, 2 Prinz Louis Ferdinandstrasse, Berlin, N. W.
Italy:    Giornale Degli Economisti, via Monte Savello, Palazzo Orsini, Rome
Spain:   E. Dossat, 9 Plaza de Santa Ana, Madrid r
Copyright, 1913, by
The American Academy of Political and Social Science
All rights reserved. *«w
CONTENTS
PAGE
BRITISH COLUMBIA AND  BRITISH  INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS      i
E. R. Gosnell, Victoria, B. C.
RECIPROCITY     20
Clifford Sifton, Ottawa, Canada
CANADA AND THE PREFERENCE; CANADIAN TRADE WITH GREAT
BRITAIN  AND THE UNITED STATES      29
S. Morley Wickett, Ph.D., Of  Wickett   and   Craig,   Ltd.,   Toronto,
Canada
THE LEGAL STATUS OF HUDSON'S  BAY     47
Thomas Willing Balch, Of the Philadelphia Bar
THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA IN THEIR HUNDRED YEARS OF
PEACE     56
James L. Tryon, New England Director of the American Peace Society,
Boston
THEOCRATIC QUEBEC     69
E. M. Sait, Ph.D., Department of Politics, Columbia University
CANADIANS  IN THE UNITED STATES     83
S. Morley Wickett, Ph.D., Toronto, Canada
CANADA AND THE CHINESE: A COMPARISON WITH THE UNITED
STATES     99
Paul H. Clements, A.M., Harrison Fellow in Political Science, University
of Pennsylvania
THE MINERAL  RESOURCES OF CANADA   131
G. A. Young, Of Department of Mines, Geological Survey, Ottawa,
Canada
MINING  LEGISLATION   IN  CANADA   151
J. M. Clark, LL.B., K.C., Toronto, Canada
CANADIAN   BANKING    158
H. M. P. Eckardt, Author of "A Rational Banking System" and "Manual
of Canadian Banking"
CANADA AND HER ART   171
Eric Brown, Director of National Art Gallery, Ottawa, Canada
(Hi)
.';;:>*
&
10 IV
Contents
PAGE
SOME CANADIAN  TRAITS    '77
W. A Chapple, M.P., London, England
CANADIAN  LITERATURE    l89'
J. Castell Hopkins, F.S.S., Author of "The Canadian Annual Review
of Public Affairs," Toronto, Canada
CANADIAN  STATISTICS  2l6'
COMMUNICATION—FUNCTIONS AND NEEDS OF OUR GREAT MARKETS  245-
Willet M. Hays, Assistant Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.
BOOK  DEPARTMENT  263.
INDEX  289.
BOOK DEPARTMENT
Conducted by ROSWELL C. McCREA
Bacon and Wyman—Direct Elections and Law Making by Popular Vote (p. 263),~
Balch—Christianity and the Labor Movement (p. 263); Bateson—Biological Fact
and the Structure of Society (p. 264); Berolz-heimer—The World's Legal Philosophies
(p. 264); Butler—The International Mind (p. 265); Clark—The Control of Trusts
(p. 265); Clopper—Child Labor in City Streets (p. 266); Commission of Conservation, Canada—Sea Fisheries of Eastern Canada (p. 266); Committee of the City
Club of Chicago—A Report on Vocational Training in Chicago and in Other Cities
(p. 266); Dealey—The Family in its Sociological Aspects (p. 267); Dewey—Financial History of the United States (p. 267); Dilla—The Politics of Michigan (p. 267);
Doty—The Mosquito, Its Relation to Disease and Its Extermination (p. 268); Fagan—
The Autobiography of an Individualist (p. 268); Higby—The Government of Pennsylvania and the Nation (p. 268); Lowry and Lambert—Himself (p. 269); Morse—
Causes and Effects in American History (p. 269); Ogburn—Progress and Uniformity
in Child Labor Legislation (p 269); Partridge—The Genetic Philosophy of Education
(p. 270); Pratt—The IVork of Wall Street (p. 270); The Princess—Traveller's Tales
(p. 270); Rosenau—The Milk Question (p. 270); Ross—Changing America (p. 271);
Shelton—The Lakes-to-the-Gulf Deep Waterway (p. 271); Speer—South American
Problems (p. 271); Stoddart—Mind and Its Disorders (p. 272); Todd—Tripoli,
the Mysterious (p. 272); Whetham—An Introduction to Eugenics (p. 272); Whitin—
Penal Servitude (p. 273). Contents v
REVIEWS
Braithwaite—The Beginnings of Quakerism (p. 273) R. W. Kelsey
Bryce—South America, Observations and Impressions (p. 274) L. S. Rowe
Carola Woerishoffer, Her Life and Work (p. 275) G. S. White
Cleveland and Powell—Railroad Finance (p. 276) F. H. Schrenk
Cutting—The Church and Society (p. 277) B. D. Mudgett
Ellis—The Task of Social Hygiene (p. 278) B. D. Mudgett
Fleming—General W. T. Sherman as College President (p. 279) E. D. Fite
•Gerson and Deardorff—Studies in the History of English Commerce
(p. 280) A. P. Usher
•Grice—National and Local Finance (p. 280) C. L. Jones
Hyde—Newspaper Reporting and Correspondence (p. 281) T. D. O'Bolger
Leuba—A Psychological Study of Religion (p. 282) W. P. Wallis
Munroe—New Demands in Education (p. 283) A. H. Yoder
Nitobe—The Japanese Nation: Its Land, Its People and Its Life
(p. 284) W. A. Houghton
Parkhurst—Applied Methods of Scientific Management and Addresses
and Discussions at the Conference on Scientific Management (p. 285).. W. S. Stevens
Rees—Current Political Problems (p. 286) W. E. Lunt
Vineberg—Provincial and Local Taxation in Canada (p. 287) C. L. Seiler
Winter—Chile and Her People of To-day (p. 288) W. S. Tower V-v   .ft" ■
THE   PAPERS   IN   THIS   PUBLICATION   WERE
COLLECTED  and  edited   by
Ellery C Stowell, Ph.D.,
associate editor. BRITISH COLUMBIA AND BRITISH INTERNATIONAL
RELATIONS
By E. R. Gosnell,
Victoria, B. C
The political status of a province in the Canadian confederation
is clearly defined in the British North America act and relates solely
to matters of property and private rights. It is not strictly permissible to speak of British Columbia and British international
affairs, for the reason that provinces, as provinces, have no international relations. The people of British Columbia are affected by
external affairs only as Canadians and through their local forms of
administration have no rights of interference. In such matters the
federal authorities are very jealous of even advice from local authorities. It is tendered sometimes by resolution of the legislature and is
only effective to the extent in which it may be regarded as indicative
of local sentiment. If it should happen that the local administration
is in political accord with the federal administration—that is, in
respect to conservatives and liberals, as parties are constituted—the
former will naturally exercise a much stronger influence with the
latter in matters affecting a particular province than if the opposite
was the case. This is especially true if the local leader of an administration happens to be, as in the case in British Columbia at the present
time, a man of outstanding and commanding position. Sir Richard
McBride, the prime minister of the Pacific province, is in political
accord with the Right Hon. R. L. Borden, prime minister of Canada,
and, for instance, has taken a very positive stand on the question
of naval defense, now agitating the whole of the Dominion of Canada,
in so far as it relates to the defense of the Pacific coast. It is not
too much to assume that the attitude of the former has had a good
deal to do with the attitude of the latter in respect to that phase of
his naval policy, an outline of which he has just presented to the
House of Commons.
While, however, it is true that British Columbia qua British
Columbia can have no international status or interests, there is a
sense in which any province is interested in and affected by inter-
(i) 2 The Annals op the American Academy
national issues, of the empire. Each province, by reason of physical
or economic conditions, has, or may have, interests affected by considerations of an international character, peculiarly its own. These,
in a country so wide in extent and diversified in resources, can be
easily imagined. A treaty affecting fishery rights would naturally
affect the maritime provinces in a special way and would have only
an academic or purely national interest for the people of Ontario,
or the provinces of the Middle West. Or by reason of some special
feature, or purpose, of the treaty, it might have a special interest
for the people of one coast and not for those of another. A tariff
may rest more heavily upon the people of one province than upon
those of another. A naval programme has a keener interest for those
who live on the Atlantic or the Pacific seaboard than for those who
occupy the interior parts of the country. It is in this sense that the
caption of the article here being indited has been chosen.
British Columbia is peculiarly affected by, and interested in,
several international issues of great moment. Although, as stated,
it is a province of Canada, it has interests which are sui generis in
a degree greater perhaps than is true of any other province of Canada.
It is, in this sense, so far apart from the rest of Canada, that in Great
Britain particularly the expression is often used, " Canada and British
Columbia." It is true that the Middle West, on account of its extent
and the homogeneity of its physical conditions, is essentially unlike
other parts of the Dorninion and is so to speak a law unto itself in the
matter of political and economic requirements; but the very uniformity of conditions greatly lessens if it does not indeed simplify
the problems which confront the people of the prairies. British
Columbia, on the other hand, by the diversity of its resources, the
ruggedness of its surface and the isolation created by its mountains,
by the long extent of its serrated coast line, its position on the western
seaboard of the Dominion, and its geographical relation to the Orient,
multiplies its problems and widens the scope of its interests. Its
coast is separated from the rest of Canada not only by one range but
by ranges of mountains and the province is segregated by the Middle
West from the political and as yet the potential center of Canada's
activities. It has characteristics similar in most respects to those
of Washington, Oregon and California and is strikingly differentiated
in nearly all its aspects from eastern Canada just as the states mentioned are from eastern America, presenting differences of climate, -    British Columbia and British International Relations    3
atmosphere, flora, fauna,, economic requirements, resources, etc.,
with which all students of conditions in their respective countries
. are familiar. If the divinity which shapes our ends had been guided
by considerations which nature alone would suggest we should have
had, not two, but three or four nations in the North American continent. Following the lines of similar environment and least resistance, the boundaries of these nations would have been coincident
with those of three or four distinct natural zones—the Pacific, or
Cordilleran, the Middle West, or prairies, and the country east of
them to the Atlantic, the latter, of course, being capable of a further
subdivision. It was upon conditions suggested by physiography that
Goldwin Smith founded his theory of a single American nation,
because bis philosophy could not reconcile itself with a successful
conflict against geography in the attempt made by Canada to remain
a political entity, more especially as the people inhabiting both Canada and the United States were mainly of one language and of one
blood. We need not stop to discuss the factors which have intervened so far, to upset the successful operations of his theory. As
psychic forces are greater than material forces in the evolution of
destiny, so there are elements in nationality more subtle and elusive
of control than those contained in purely physiographical or even
ethnographical conditions.
The principal differences between the Pacific divisions of Canada
and of the United States at present are those created by exploitation
and land development. The Pacific states, owing to the discovery of
gold in California in 1849 and to railway construction, were earlier
in the race and have made greater advances in the same time. The
social substratum of the population and the character of the political:
institutions have also had something to do with the general divergences observable. We have Biblical authority and the authority
of experience for the statement that as man thinketh so is he, and this
is true in the collective as well as in the individual sense. Similarity
of conditions, however, in the long run will produce a somewhat
general similarity of results, and the problems of British Columbia,
political and otherwise, are not unlike those of the country immediately to the south. If the Panama Canal is of special interest
to the seaports of British Columbia so it is to those of Washington,
Oregon, and California; if the yellow peril menaces British Columbia
so also it does the Pacific coast states; if reciprocity would benefit or 4 The Annals of the American Academy
injure the former it should, according to circumstances, have some
corresponding effect in the latter; if British Columbia requires
naval protection on the Pacific, the exigencies of the situation created
by war from whatever source are equally great along the coast south
of the boundary line. Broadly speaking, these are the problems
of an international character which are uppermost in the minds of
the people of British Columbia and which politically have had the
greatest amount of attention of recent years. I, therefore, propose to discuss them in the following order suggested by their priority
as public issues:
1. The tariff on a basis of reciprocity.
2. The dangers of Oriental invasion.
3. The alternative route to eastern Canada, Great Britain and
the continent of Europe afforded by the construction of the
Panama Canal.
4. The requirements of naval defense on the British Pacific.
In what follows, I do not profess to offer solutions solely in accord
with local sentiment; because the exigencies of politics, in its
restricted sense, do not always suggest the wisest remedies to be
adopted and very often obscure the atmosphere for the better understanding of the merits of the disputes involved. I shall, however,
endeavor to present as fairly as I can the nature of local sentiment
in each case.
First, as to the tariff: That question is, I was going to say, as
old as the hills— the mountains for which British Columbia is famous.
In the very early days, Victoria, the capital of the colony of Vancouver Island, was a free port and the Hudson's Bay Company,
'then in control, was fully imbued with the free trade sentiments of
Great Britain. Curiously enough, Sir James Douglas, governor, in
his "speech from the throne" in the first legislature in 1856, made
reference to the impending reciprocity treaty between Canada and
the United States and expressed the hope that Vancouver Island
(then an independent crown colony) would be included in its provisions. Of course, Vancouver Island then had only about two hundred
settlers, mostly servants of the Hudson's Bay Company, or its auxiliary, the Puget Sound Agricultural Company; and Victoria itself
was only a stockaded fort. There was a nice academic touch to
this sentiment which does credit to the modernity of a governor of a
fur-trading colony, born as it was in the shadow of a great wilderness, British Columbia and British International Relations    5
and still in its puling infancy. The colony of British Columbia on
the mainland, which was established in 1858, had a tariff, and after
the union of the two colonies in 1866 the tariff wah was still maintained. One of the big issues at the time of Confederation with
Canada in 1871 was the tariff, especially in respect to agricultural
products. The British Columbia schedule was higher than that of
Canada. The colony then was and, as a province, has continued to
be protective in sentiment. Hence in the reciprocity campaign of
1911, British Columbia was solidly against the proposed pact, not
only from sentimental but from economic reasons. Sentimentally,
the people of British Columbia are British almost to a man. From
an economic point of view, they are very un-British. That is to
say, they have not imbibed British traditional love of free trade.
The situation economically can be explained very briefly. Our most
important industry, prospectively, at least, is fruit growing. It is
commercially still in the stage of infancy, as compared with the
fruit-growing industry south of the line, which is thoroughly established, splendidly organized, and highly productive. It can be easily
seen that the Pacific coast states, with their relative superiority as
to present position, under reciprocity, could absolutely control the
market in fruits, green and preserved, from Vancouver to Winnipeg
and greatly hamper the development of the industry in British
Columbia, an industry now mainly dependent upon the Middle West
for its market and requiring at least another ten years to catch up with
its southern competitors. Even at present a very large percentage
of the requirements of the fruit market of Vancouver and Victoria
is supplied from the American side. What is true of fruit is also
true of agricultural produce generally and it is absolutely certain
that under the proposed arrangement the commission houses of
Seattle, Portland and San Francisco would be supreme on this coast
and, in respect to much of the business done there, in the Middle
West as well. If the farmers of the prairies had been given access
to the doubtful benefits of the markets of one hundred million people, they would have lost the market in British Columbia in which
they have had a monopoly in certain products and which has been
more profitable to them than any other market as yet available.
Our mineral products were not affected by the proposed arrangement, except very slightly in the matter of coal, notwithstanding
that it professed to be a pact based upon an interchange of natural 6 The Annals op the American Academy
products. The export of lead ores to the United States free of duty
would have been of substantial advantage to the mining community;
and it was to compensate the miners of the southern interior for the
loss of the United States market that the Dominion government
some years ago placed a bounty upon the production of lead in order
to encourage the industry and to keep the silver-lead mines open.
With reference to coal, the Pacific state ports, and especially San
Francisco, have been the principal market for Vancouver Island coal
from the very outset, and of recent years the smelters of Idaho,
Montana and Washington have been getting their supply of coke
from British Columbia ovens. The removal of duty on coal would
have been an advantage to producers and consumers in both countries, and why the duties on the minerals referred to were not proposed to be taken off in accordance with the general features of the
scheme remains inscrutable. Free coal for California would, as a
matter of course, have carried with it free oil for British Columbia
for fuel purposes.
Naturally, the supposition would be that British Columbia
would have been greatly benefited by obtaining a free market in
the United States for fish and fishery products and timber and timber
products. But here conditions not theories govern the situation.
In regard to fisheries products, except in the matter of salmon canning, Americans control the supply out of our waters as it is. The
New England Fish Company, doing business in British Columbia
ports, has a practical monopoly of the halibut fisheries, industrially and commercially. The halibut industry has for some time
assumed very important proportions and the removal of the duties
would simply have facilitated the operations of that company without any special advantage to the fishermen of this province. The
New England fish combine controls the fish market of eastern America, and outside companies have but little chance of doing business
in competition. American boats fish along the entire coast of
British Columbia, as often within as without the three-mile limit,
and by making Seattle headquarters have a very big advantage over
local fishermen. In timber and timber products, on the face of
it, the case would seem still stronger in favor of reciprocity, inasmuch as certain classes of lumber are already admitted to Canada
duty free; but in my humble opinion, at least, the timber products
of British Columbia have but little prospect of enlarging their mar- British Columbia and British International Relations    7
ket in the United States in competition with the mills of the Puget
Sound, which, under the proposed arrangement, would have had
British Columbia logs to draw upon for a supply of raw material.
This is demonstrable in a practical way under existing conditions.
The mills of British Columbia, for instance, apparently have equal
opportunities in the export markets of the world; but it is a fact
that for one ship loading lumber in British Columbia waters for
foreign parts at least half a dozen load in Puget Sound ports. If
this be the case in regard to markets abroad in which there are equal
opportunities and advantages, how much truer it would be in the
home market of the United States. Washington lumbermen undersell British Columbia milhnen in Winnipeg and other points in the
Canadian Middle West. They have taken large railway contracts
even in British Coumbia away from their British Columbia rivals.
This is the result, as I have already intimated, of a condition not a
theory. The sawmilling industry in the Puget Sound country is
more highly organized and specialized, and under modern methods
the more highly organized and specialized an industry becomes the
better chance it has, even in the face of tariff obstructions. With
the depletion of timber in Washington and Oregon, British Columbia
logs are more and more in demand, a fact which as far back as
1903—4 induced the British Columbia government to place an
embargo upon their export. This is a general condition in Canada
now, except in respect to timber on federal limits, and were it not
for that saving clause (the only clause of the reciprocity treaty left
intact in the United States act of confirmation) the mills of the latter
country would very soon exhaust our raw material and ship back
the finished product to Canada in competition with her own mills.
It would not have paid Canada in the long run, and on the other
hand would have been disastrous to her best interests.
Moreover, it should be pointed out that a great deal of fallacy
has existed and still exists about the effect of free interchange of
products of nations in lowering prices to the consumer and in dealing
a blow at the trusts. I am not a protectionist in theory and only
believe in protective tariffs in so far as they enable Canada or the
United States to develop industries under the most favorable conditions in the face of the competition from more highly organized and
older established industries of other countries. I believe in Canada
for Canadians in so far as Canada can be benefited by such a policy. 8 The Annals of the American Academy
All policies and theories are subject to modifications according to
the actual facts to be faced. A scientific tariff is one that, as nearly
as possible, adjusts itself to the economic requirements of the country,
being either high or low or not at all as conditions dictate, our own
general prosperity and the weal of the greatest number being the
object to be kept steadily in view; but we can easily see that such
a policy may be made and is being made the subject of serious abuse
both in Canada and the United States. Now, the fallacy referred
to is that trusts in America may be regulated or controlled by tearing down the tariff barriers between the two countries. Trusts in
Canada and elsewhere have been created as the result of modern
facilities of transportation and intercomrnunication—railways, steamships and telegraph lines and general reduction in postal rates. By
these means the area of the producers' operations has been extended
throughout the forty-eight states of the Union among which there
is free trade. The same is true of Canada, with its nine provinces.
By the aggregation and combination of capital and the superior
organization of industry and commerce and finance in connection
therewith a single firm or combination of firms comes to control
the entire area in the line of its particular production or sale. If
you sweep away the tariff obstructions to trade between Canada
and the United States you simply extend the area of trust operations,
and instead of forty-eight states you have forty-eight states and nine
provinces. The greater force in commerce and industry, as in war,
must prevail, and the danger to Canada in reciprocity was that the
trusts would have swallowed up the continent as a whole. Canada
must inevitably become Americanized in trade and commerce.
Under reciprocity, for instance, within five or ten years the com-
merical end of the fruit, fishery and timber industries in British
Columbia would be in the hands of Americans. Political control
follows commerical control as certainly as night follows day, and
President Taft spoke truly when he said that through reciprocity
Canada would become "an adjunct" of the United States. Canada,
and especially British Columbia, realized that fact at the outset
and rejected reciprocity. It was not an expression of ill-will; it
was a demonstration of the desire of Canadians to work out their
own destiny in their own way, as the people of the United States
have done, without entangling commercial alliances that might
divorce their future from the line of British affiliations upon which British Columbia and British International Relations    9
they long ago set their hearts, and towards which all their aspirations tend. So far, therefore, as the general result was concerned,
national sentiment and national economics went hand in hand and
cannot be disassociated. To preserve their allegiance to the Empire
and to achieve their ambition to become full partner in its affairs,
Canadians must maintain their commercial independence. Canada
does not object to doing business with the United States; but it
wants to do business under conditions which will best further its own
interests and those larger interests which he in the direction of
imperial federation.
Alien inrmigration and especially the immigration of Orientals
has always been a question of vital interest in British Columbia.
Her problems in that respect are unique in Canada. The opposition
to*Chinese had its genesis with the labor organizations many years
ago. It later extended to the Japanese and the Hindus. Doubtless the feeling in the ranks of labor on this subject was considerably
influenced by what occurred in the Pacific coast states and by the
agitation there which led to the total exclusion of the Chinese.
As population increased in the towns of British Columbia and in
the mining and lumbering camps the labor unions increased in
number and influence, until politicians felt bound to give effect to
their demands, if not fully at least substantially—not that politicians in their heart of hearts were in sympathy with the movement or cared much about the "heathen Chinee." To them activity
in opposition to the Oriental was the easiest road to popular favor.
In one way and another antagonism to all forms of Asiatic immigration has become crystallized into a settled policy of resistance.
No public man in the province dare raise his voice in its favor, unless
perchance he happen to represent a truly rural constituency, and
even then his sentiments would be quoted against the party with
which he was allied and would as surely be repudiated by his political associates. For forty years anti-Chinese or anti-Asiatic resolutions, or legislation in some form has appeared in the provincial
parliament as regularly as parliament sat. In other words, the
question has proved to be a robust plant of unfailing bloom. At
an early stage the legislature assumed the right to impose a head
tax upon Chinese, but the measure was promptly vetoed by the
Dominion authorities as being ultra vires. In 1886, the federal
parliament adopted this method of restriction by imposing a tax 10
The Annals of the American Academy
of fifty dollars per head, with little practical effect. This was subsequently raised to one hundred dollars per head, also without
materially checking immigration. Then, as the result of strenuous
agitation in British Columbia, the head tax was raised to five hundred
dollars, with the effect for a time of practical exclusion. These
restricted measures had curious results. From long before Confederation, housewives, farmers, millmen and others depended upon
Chinese labor to a considerable extent. It was obtainable according
to age at from five dollars to twenty-five dollars per month. Later
on railways and salmon canneries employed Chinese extensively,
and they competed with white labor as tailors and in factories.
In fact, they were in competition with white labor in all kinds of
work.
The effect of restriction was to raise the price of wages among
the Chinese each time it was increased, until after the five hundred
dollars was imposed, the Chinamen, secure in the labor market against
more Chinamen, advanced their own wages by some method of
combination until the scale now runs from twenty-five dollars to
fifty dollars and sixty dollars per month. This lucrative wage
attracted the cupidity of the Japanese, upon whom there was and
could be no legal embargo, and they increased very rapidly in numbers in a very, short space of time. Then, five or six years ago,
Hindus, similarly attracted, also came in large numbers. They were
principally Sikhs, discharged soldiers, and, as British subjects, could
not very well be objected to. A temporary depression in 1907,
owing to the slump in the money markets and the failure of crops
in the Middle West, brought about a slackness in the labor market,
and feeling against these importations culminated in riots. The
Chinese, except that they were generally in demand, as a problem,
were comparatively easily dealt with; but with the Japanese and
Hindus the case was quite different. The proud Japanese nation
resented discrimination against its subjects. In the case of Japanese, therefore, delicate diplomacy had to be resorted to and on the
grounds of the well-being of both races, the Japanese government
voluntarily agreed to limit the numbers to come to Canada each
year to a comparatively harmless rnindhnum. In the case of the
Hindus, it was hard to find justification for exclusion that would
satisfy Hindu, shall I say, prejudices. At the time they began to
come in numbers, the state of unrest in India was giving the British British Columbia and British International Relations 11
government great anxiety. For a few representatives of the British
Empire to exercise sovereignty over 150,000,000 of racially alien
peoples, and then the rights of citizenship to be denied to these peoples
on British territory elsewhere, was what the Englishman would call
"a little thick," and the two facts taken together required some
effort to make them fit in with Hindu logic, not to refer to the feat
involved of skating on very thin moral ice. Ethically it could not
stand the test of metaphysical treatment; but all matters of ethics
to be reasonably applicable must conform in practice to the requirements of common sense, and the problem really resolves itself, in
the final analysis, into, not a question of ethical fiddling, but the
primal law of necessity—self-preservation.
An Oriental standard of living, of sociology, inbred by the
pressure on each other, of generations of millions of population,
cannot be grafted upon an Occidental stock nurtured in the free,
open, elbow-room atmosphere of the West without serious injury to
the latter. Admit the principle of unrestricted irnmigration from
the teeming fields of Asia, upon the grounds of morality and pure
ethics, and you commit the greater crime of swamping the white man
in his own territory. If it be held that this is a case in which the law
of the survival of the fittest should hold, it must also be held that it
involves a principle which provokes the primal instinct of resistance of the white man as an animal to five as he has lived and is
wont to live. To races of diametrically opposed standards and culture the law must be to remain each within his own biological
sphere, or the ultimate result must be disaster to one or both
races. If Great Britain disregards the theory on Indian soil, it is
because she proceeds on the principle of ruling the country for
the country's good, a country which otherwise would be delivered
over to the woes of "internecine tribal strife, and incidentally for the
commercial profits of occupation, the possibilities of which were
revealed to the early semi-sovereign trading corporations of gentlemen adventurers—as she rules Egypt and large areas of the African
continent, and as she once ruled Canada, Australasia and Cape
Colony. With these motives, however, we have nothing to do.
British Columbia has asserted the right to be essentially a white
man's country and the right extends equally against all Asiatic
races which stand geographically a menace to her on the thither
shores of the Pacific. 12 The Annals of the American Academy
To speak frankly, the Japanese are a greater danger and the
least desirable of the three racial elements to which the province
is opposed and that because of their enterprise and aggressiveness,
their determination to get a foothold on equal terms with the Anglo-
Saxon, a desire, which by the way, the Japanese government resists
on the part of the citizens of other nations in Japan. In their
public policy the Japanese nation is the perfect embodiment of the
principle of Japan for the Japanese and as much of the rest of the
world as possible. Their moral standards, however justifiable from
the Japanese standpoint, are not ours and in matters of daily contract are not reliable. Their word is not dependable and their
motives always ulterior. They have the gloss of politeness and
extreme courtesy, a Frenchified exterior of conduct; but remove ever
so little of cuticle and you reveal the Tartar. It has often been
remarked that their absorption of western civilization is only skin
deep. The Chinese, on the other hand, are as a rule industrious,
honest, faithful to their employers, cleanly in person, and without
desire to assimilate or to establish themselves in the land. While
in unlimited competition, on account of the very qualities I have
enumerated, they are the natural enemies of the white laboring
interests, they are admirably useful as servants, as economic
machines, and I, personally, always have held that their free admission for the restricted purposes of domestic service and farm labor
would be highly beneficial and advantageous to the country. It
is legally and constitutionally practicable and feasible to permit and
regulate this without infringing upon the rights, prerogatives or
advantages of white labor, which, if class prejudice did not intervene,
would be distinctly benefited. It imparts to the white laborer
immediately the status of aristocracy in his field. No one in his
senses would advocate the reduction of the standard now" enjoyed
by organized labor, because the wealth of the unit is the true
standard by which to measure the wealth of the nation; but one
of our greatest economic problems in the province of British Columbia, and a similar condition obtains in Washington and Oregon,
is the development of the land, the essential element of which is
cheap labor and effective mechanical devices. Land clearing, the
handling of fruit, dairying specifically, and small farming generally, for which agriculturally the province is particularly adapted
and upon which lines it must evolve successfully, demand plentiful British Columbia and British International Relations 13
labor at low prices at all seasons of the year, which white labor,
so far as my experience and observation go, is neither anxious nor
desirous of affording. Nor do I think it particularly desirable that
the white laborer should become a hewer of wood and a drawer of
water for his white fellows. It is contrary to the genius of the Anglo-
Saxon race.
With Chinese labor to assist our wives, who demand every
consideration in a country of high prices, and to work in our fields
and do the drudgery of development, skilled white labor, male and
female, has a wide scope for usefulness and profit, greatly enlarged
in consequence of what willing and satisfied Chinese can make
possible. Of what use, however, in discussing the proposal! The
iron, relentless hand of the politician will smash every such suggestion
upon its very first appearance. The Hindu, newly imported, with
his skinful of prejudice and traditional occultism and caste, is impossible. Physically and mentally he has qualities which in the second
generation would perhaps beneficially assimilate with the white
race; but the process is fraught with danger. Undoubtedly, the
yellow or brown or dusky peril of the Orient is imminent and economically is real and menacing. British Columbia and Canada are
right in resisting at the outset the danger which may some day have
to be faced on sea and land in mihtary and economic warfare. One
necessary precaution, apart from the economic situation of industrial
and commercial competition from the Orient, is to prevent a foothold being obtained now or at any time in the future on this coast.
The danger is in numbers not in individuals and a half a million whites
in a territory so large as British Columbia would be as one against
a host. A million or two in the Middle West would have just as
little chance against a horde of Asiatics, The safe principle is the
recognition of racial rights within racial or biological spheres, each
race being equal and dominant in its own territory. The proper
solution of the immigration problem in respect to Japan is based
upon reciprocal entry of citizens back and forth. In this way,
national pride is not wounded and equal rights are maintained without loss of national dignity.
The effect of the Panama Canal on the general trend of the
world's trade and commerce no one has been able to definitely predict. The outcome is quite problematical. That it will be revolutionary in character no one can doubt.    It is an alternative route 14 The Annals of the American Academy
to the Suez Canal and means cutting the earth in half to reach the
Pacific Ocean by a more direct route. Its completion may fairly
be regarded as epochal and it means a general readjustment of
conditions and a re-partition of trade as between East and West.
In British Columbia, in common with other portions of the Pacific
coast, expectations have been very high and the contemplated early
opening of the Panama Canal has greatly influenced the policy of
the local and federal governments with respect to increasing harbor
accommodation and providing ample transportation facilities. The
Panama Canal from a provincial point of view, I cannot help thinking will not be an unmixed good, a possibility which people in their
enthusiasm are apt to overlook in their calculations. Its effects,
as already indicated, must in any event be problematical, but there
are several things which must appear as obviously inevitable. First,
a very considerable amount of Oriental traffic, instead of going to
and fro by way of Vancouver or Seattle or Portland or San Francisco,
as in the past, will pass direct from points of shipment to points of
destination, without breaking bulk and at a cheaper rate than would
be possible by rail and water. This will be true of all traffic regarding which speed is not an element.of advantage, either as to the
carriage under contract in which time is the essence, or the saving of
interest on the value of expensive consignments. This new condition
will obviously apply to shipments to and from Australasia. It is possible, of course, that railways will reduce their rates on through shipments to meet the competition, but even then it only seems possible in
a limited way. Another result will be that the manufactures of eastern
Canada, the United States and of Europe will be brought into closer
competition with local manufactures all along the Pacific coast.
This may have the result of discouraging local industiral development in certain lines—for instance, in the manufacture of iron and
steel, although on the other hand it may make the conditions more
favorable by equalizing the factors as between East and West. It
is always very difficult to say what new factors may enter into a
new field, and the Pacific from this time forth must be regarded for
practical purposes a new sphere of commercial action.
Taking the anticipated advantages, about which there seems to
be but little doubt, the Panama Canal should greatly stimulate the
development of industries based on all natural resources, such as
timber, fish, fruit, and certain minerals.    In timber, particularly, British Columbia and British International Relations 15
the export trade should be greatly increased to all parts of the eastern
hemisphere, and if the United States in its own interests should
decide to permanently remove the duty on rough lumber and pulp,
the market in the eastern half of America for British Columbia timber
should be of immense proportions. The demand for paper and pulp
in the United States is daily increasing and the supply of pulp wood
is daily becoming a matter of greater concern. The pulp industry
on the British Columbia coast is just beginning to take shape, but
with the Panama Canal and a free market in the United States there
should be practically no limit to the demand for its products. By
modern methods, it is entirely possible to ship fish and fruit in a
fresh state in cold storage to Great Britain and the continent through
the canal at all seasons of the year. Shipments of halibut and salmon
could be laid down in Boston and New York via the Isthmus at a
cheaper rate than across the continent by rail in iced boxes. A good
deal of mineral matter and possibly certain classes of ores might go
the same route to refineries and smelters in Great Britain and elsewhere.
From a Canadian and also from a British Columbia point of
view, the most important effect of the canal will be the transport
of grain from the Middle West of Canada to the markets of Great
Britain and the continent. All our railway experts before the railway
commission have declared that grain cannot be carried at present
through Pacific ports around the Horn to the old country in competition with the established routes eastward, and we may assume that
they know their own business best. The completion of the canal,
however, will reduce the distance from Vancouver to Liverpool
approximately from 15,000 miles to 8,836 miles, and ought to reduce
the present ocean rates by at least a third; or, in other words, it
makes Vancouver and Victoria from 23 to 25 days nearer to Liverpool
by steamer. It is estimated—I am now taking the figures prepared
by the Vancouver Board of Trade—that from points of the Middle
West in Saskatchewan and Alberta west of Moosejaw on the Canadian
Pacific Railway the rate via Panama will not exceed 22 cents per
bushel of grain to Liverpool, while the present cost of transportation
from similar points via Fort William and the Atlantic is from 25
to 26 cents in summer and as high as 36 cents in the winter. It is
obvious that from the almost coincident completion of the canal
the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Canadian Northern Pacific Railway 16 The Annals of the American Academy
to the coast, there is room almost immediately thereafter for an enormous traffic in grain, especially in wheat, taking advantage of an
alternative route to Europe, not unlikely to attain to a volume of
150,000,000 bushels of grain per annum within the next decade.
During the past three years Vancouver exported approximately
750,000 bushels of wheat and 500,000 bushels of oats mainly to Mexico
and the Philippine Islands. A very small experimental business
only has been done with China and Japan, notwithstanding that
Puget Sound ports, Portland and San Francisco export large quantities of wheat there. This is due to the fact that the Oriental market
demands soft wheat, or pastry, flour and is unused to the hard wheat
flour of the prairies. Whether that condition will change in time one
cannot say, but in any event our big market is in Great Britain and
the continent, to which places Tacoma and Portland have shipped
largely, and in 1911 as high as 12,000,000 bushels. The production
of grain in the Middle West is increasing enormously per annum
and reached 400,000,000 bushels in 1911. So great indeed is the
volume of grain grown that it cannot all be shipped in one season
through Canadian channels. During 1911 over 25,000,000 bushels
of Canadian wheat found an outlet through Buffalo and New York
to the ocean. The following distances by rail give an idea of saving
on grain freights possible over the western route:
Calgary to St. John  2,637 miles
Calgary to Fort William   1,260     "
Calgary to Vancouver      644     "
Edmonton to Fort William    1,451     "
Edmonton to Vancouver      735     "
Moosejaw to St. John  2,396     "
Moosejaw to Vancouver   1,085     "
It will be seen, therefore, what intense interest the people of
British Columbia have in the opening of the Panama Canal apart
altogether from the effect of the recent action of Congress in exempting American coasting vessels from tolls in passing through. In
regard to the latter, it is almost needless to remark that British
Columbia sentiment reflects strongly general British sentiment on
the question. One result of such differentiation would be to deflect
a good deal of purely Canadian traffic that would otherwise belong
to British vessels. A very important question arises here as to
what is a coasting vessel in such circumstances.    There is nothing British Columbia and British International Relations 17
in law to distinguish a coasting vessel in tonnage and equipment
from an ocean-going vessel, and its status must be determined by
the law governing coastwise trade, and that is more or less identical
in the United States and Canada. I take it according to regulations
in force on this coast that an American vessel could carry a consignment of freight and passengers from Vancouver to New York, for
instance, and on her return carry a consignment from the latter place
to the former. Or an American vessel could take passengers and
freight from St. John or Halifax to San Francisco, Portland or Seattle,
passing through the canal without paying tolls. To say the least,
it is rather an abuse of the term coastwise or coasting vessel by which
to describe a steamer trading between two such points, as a glance
at the map will reveal. One might as well describe a vessel trading
between Calcutta and Liverpool as a coasting vessel, because, forsooth, she is sailing between two British ports without making intermediate calls at foreign ports. The voyage from Seattle to St.
John is a tolerably long one and crosses long stretches of ocean to
make the trip, and except for the diplomatic fiction that the canal
zone is American territory is made through waters that are not in
any sense territorial. Apart from that, however, it must be clear
that the new law of Congress exempting coastwise American vessels
is a technical evasion of the terms of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty,
which did not contemplate any discrimination as among the ships
of all nations using the canal, and it may be taken for granted that it
would not have been signed by the British minister if the American
intention had been declared in advance. It cannot affect the grain
trade, but with the opening of the canal a considerable reciprocal
trade of the nature suggested to be done by "coasting vessels" will
be developed, and if the United States, to speak frankly, do not agree
to refer the question to international arbitration it must be regarded
as doubtful practice and would deepen an impression, already to some
extent existent, which a great nation cannot afford to allow to become
current among other nations.
Among the greatest of the international problems in which
British Columbia is interested is that of naval defense. It is not
strictly international, but has international bearings of a most
momentous character. It is a question which is now in the political
limelight throughout Canada. Sir Richard McBride, Premier of
British Columbia, has emphasized our peculiar position on the Pacific 18 The Annals of the American Academy
seaboard, exposed as it is to attack from the United States, Russia,
China and Japan, in particular, without a single effective fighting
ship, either Canadian or British, within striking reach. His frequent
references to the subject have drawn the attention of the federal and
imperial authorities to the necessity of a fleet unit on the Pacific to
guard British possessions and British shipping in time of war and to
avoid the possibility of advantage being taken of the weakness of
that position. What a Pacific fleet unit is I need not discuss. It
means, in plain language, a naval defense armament being created
or transferred to British Columbia waters. Both political parties,
locally at least, profess to believe in that policy as desirable and necessary; but political opinion is divided as to whether that fleet should
be Canadian, part of a distinctively Canadian navy, or a division
of the British navy assigned to the Pacific coast in our waters for
purposes of defense. Whether there should be a Canadian navy
operating in a prescribed area, designated Canadian, as advocated
by Sir Wilfred Laurier, and the preliminary steps towards which
were taken by him, or an empire navy contributed to by all the
dorninions and under one central control, as is supposed to be the
policy of the Conservative government at Ottawa, I am safe in saying
that the great mass of the people of British Columbia would support
the latter scheme, as being the most effective and the cheapest to all
concerned. The naval policy just submitted by the Right Hon.
R. L. Borden at Ottawa, with the full concurrence and support of
the imperial authorities, is not intended to be a final or even partial
settlement of the question. It cannot even be described as a policy
at all, so far as the ultimate intentions of the government in
respect to a permanent naval programme, are concerned. If the idea
is, as we must assume it to be, to secure the cooperation of all the
dominions to a policy of cooperative defense, all the other dominions
must first be consulted and out of the various views on the subject
will be evolved a scheme that, if unanimity can be secured, will
finally, in the course of two or three years, be submitted to the
electors for approval. In the meantime, the people of British Columbia are enthusiastically in favor of the emergency contribution of
$35,000,000 in support of the British navy as it now exists, which
will include temporary provision, at least, for a fleet unit on the
Pacific. If my personal views were of any value I should have no
hesitation in saying that such a solution has appeared to me for years British Columbia and British International Relations  19
to be the only true solution' of the empire's destiny—a solution based
on the cooperation with the mother country of all the daughter
dominions and parts of the empire, not only in respect to defense,
but in mutual trade relations and in a comprehensive, general form
of political organization following the lines of existing British representative national institutions. RECIPROCITY
By Clifford Sifton,
Ottawa, -Canada.
I have been asked to give my views in regard to the trade
arrangement which was made last year between the governments
of the United States and Canada and which is popularly known as
the Reciprocity Treaty.
I shall not attempt to recapitulate the arguments which have
been used upon both sides of the line for and against the suggested
arrangement. It would be impossible within any reasonable space
to do justice to the arguments in detail and if it were possible it
would be wholly futile so far as arriving at an intelligent view of
the case is concerned. I shall therefore simply present the case as
it appears to my mind in general terms.
A treaty of reciprocity relating to natural products only, as
everyone knows, existed between Canada and the United States
from 1855 to 1865. That treaty was admittedly of great value
to Canada, and its abrogation by the United States against the
wishes of Canada brought extreme hardship, loss of markets, loss
of employment and much consequent loss of wealth and population.
Thenceforward from time to time efforts continued to be made
by Canada to bring about better relations, but every application
for reciprocal trade arrangements was promptly rejected by the
United States.
Finally, in 1897, a last effort was made by Sir Wilfred Laurier's
government. A joint high commission had been appointed to
consider and, if possible, to settle matters in dispute between the
United States and Canada. The trade question was brought up
in these discussions, but the American representatives refused to
make even the slightest concessions in the way of opening the United
States markets to Canadian natural products.
Shortly after the failure of these negotiations Sir Wilfrid
Laurier made an unequivopal pronouncement that Canada would
no longer look to the American market. The country accepted
that pronouncement as made in- good faith and settled down to the
(20) Reciprocity 21
idea that we must develop our trade independently, and by our
fiscal legislation, our foreign trade arrangements and our transportation system make ourselves as far as possible independent, of the
fiscal measures of the United States.
This policy was followed with great vigor and success during
the subsequent years and in consequence thereof the condition of
general prosperity which existed in Canada in the year 1910 was
such as twenty years before would have been regarded as quite unattainable.
Our position of late years had been singularly satisfactory.
Nothing that could be called a serious financial crisis had been known
in our country for many years. Poverty in the sense in which it
is understood in other countries was and is practically unknown in
Canada. The prices of manufactures had risen somewhat, but the
prices of farm products had risen much more, so that, in the general
prosperity, the farmer, whose interests are predominant with us,
had been getting his full share. The revenue was growing rapidly,
trade was increasing, mineral and agricultural production was expanding and a great volume of immigration of the highest class
was pouring into the country and increasing its productive capacity.
Our fiscal system had in the course of thirty-five years been well
adapted to the peculiar circumstances of the country. That system
was based upon the idea of moderate protection, but not such a
protection as to be oppressive, nor such as to encourage or foster
the formation of large trusts or combinations with power to oppress
the people. Some such abuses no doubt had arisen, but both under
the Conservative revision of the tariff in 1894 and the Liberal revision in 1897 objectionable features were removed, and the few
possibilities of abuse that still remained under our tariff might
easily be rectified if the people would take the trouble to ask for relief.
Under this fiscal system we have, broadly speaking, moderate
taxation, a measurable amount of competition varying in different
industries and an abundant, buoyant and elastic revenue.
In the campaign which took place last year I made a statement
that so far as our information went there was not a country in the
world, the population of which, man for man, was upon the average
so well situated as that of Canada. I have no doubt that the statement was thoroughly justifiable when it was made and it is quite
as true now as it was then. 22 The Annals of the American Academy
Upon this stage and under these conditions the reciprocity
agreement was suddenly and unexpectedly introduced. It is not
too much to say that the whole proposition came as a complete surprise to both political parties in the country. No one was looking
for or anticipating any such results from the negotiations. There
had been a few public deliverances by men more or less prcaninent,
nearly all of which, I think, were hostile to the idea of reciprocity,
and a few business men had in a semi-jocular way expressed the
hope that our negotiators would get back safely from Washington.
I think, however, that I am quite within the mark when I say that
there was no serious anticipation of anything important in the
way of a treaty or agreement being arrived at. When, therefore,
this far-reaching and revolutionary arrangement was announced
it came as a complete surprise.
It was somewhat unfortunate in its introduction. In Canada
all such matters are made the subject of a parliamentary statement
by a member or members of the government of the day. In this
case the business was in the hands of Mr. Fielding, Minister of
Finance, and Mr. Patterson, Minister of Customs. No one doubts
the ability of either of these experienced parliamentary debaters
to bring to bear the necessary industry and capacity and to make
the very most out of any case committed to their charge, but, strange
as it may appear, neither Mr. Fielding nor Mr. Patterson nor the
other members of the government ever seemed to realize that they
were engaged in the fight of their lives, and that it was necessary
for them to get to work and really argue the case. From the very
first all of these gentlemen seemed to have been placed at a serious
disadvantage by reason of the fact that they apparently thought
a mere statement of the terms of the treaty to be sufficient to carry
it without any backing of facts or arguments. This idea was due
to what appeared to be a lack of realization of the changed conditions of commerce and industry as a result of what had taken place
during the previous eighteen or twenty years. There was a time,
for instance, when the cry of "free fish" would have swept the
Maritime Provinces and when the cry of an enlarged market for hay,
potatoes, barley, cattle and dairy products would have swept Ontario and Quebec, but conditions had changed in twenty years and
the case had to be argued from new premises altogether. My observation led me to the conclusion that there was a very consider- Reciprocity 23
able lack of appreciation of this fact on the part of the government.
As a result of this, while no doubt there was a fillip of favorable
public sentiment on the first statement of the terms of the agreement, yet so soon as issue was joined in serious argument the impression went abroad that the government side was getting the
worst of it. So far as the discussion in the press was concerned,
the government side was not well served. The Liberal press, speaking generally, excels rather in attack than in defense. In this case,
with one or two exceptions, there was a noticeable lack of thoroughness' and vigor in the defense put forward in the Liberal organs.
Naturally these papers took their cue from the government, and
went in the early stages of the game too much upon the assumption
that the mere statement of the terms would win approval. When
in the middle of the campaign they found that this idea was fallacious, it was too late to retrieve the position, even if they had
the weight of merit upon their side.
A considerable number of Liberals prominent in business
openly and unequivocally attacked the reciprocity agreement.
In the House of Commons, however, only three Liberal members
broke away. The government was able to hold its following in
the house and senate almost unbroken.
In the campaign which followed and terminated on the twenty-
first of September, 1911, there was practically no serious discussion
of any other subject than reciprocity. The government went into
the campaign with a majority of about fifty. It came out in a
minority of about fifty. There was no reason in the world to suppose that the opposition had any prospect of immediately defeating the government until this question came up. In fact, the opposition had in 1908 exhausted every possible effort and used every
available weapon without success. At the beginning of the session
of 1911 the opposition was to all appearances hopelessly out of the
running and the government very strongly entrenched in office.
The reciprocity issue arose. The government forced it forward
in a general election. The opposition accepted the issue and won
the election upon it and upon it alone. There has been much talk
about other influences affecting the election. It has been said that
the Ne Temere Decree affected the Protestant vote and that Protestants generally were disaffected toward Laurier. I think I know
how far this idea prevailed.     In my judgment, while no doubt i
24 The Annals of the American Academy
a few hundreds of voters were affected by these arguments, as
in every election there will be little eddies of sentiment which
have nothing to do with the main issue, I am perfectly satisfied
that these side issues were of comparatively little importance
and that the victory of the Conservative party in the election was
practically due to the reciprocity issue and to it alone. The reason
that the Conservative party swept the Province of Ontario, where
in fact the victory was won, was because the people of that Province
were thoroughly and whole-heartedly opposed to the trade agreement.
What were the reasons?
The short recital given above affords the key to the most important arguments used in favor of the winning side.
Canada had time and again been refused any consideration
by the United States and had finally, at great sacrifice and with
tremendous efforts, made herself commercially independent. Her
products went to widely scattered markets, but there was little or
no chance that she would ever be put to serious inconvenience by
the closing of these markets. A careful survey of her position
showed a degree of commercial independence which under the
circumstances was rather surprising and very gratifying to the
national pride of Canadians. It was felt that if we consummated the
proposed treaty with the United States our trade would follow the
line of least resistance. As stated by a New York paper, the reciprocity agreement would check the east and west development
of Canada and make that country a business portion of the United
States with the lines of traffic running to the north and south rather
than to the east and west. The immediate and inevitable result
of this would be that Canada would become absolutely dependent
upon the -fiscal policy of the United States and at the mercy of
American tariff changes. It might be said that the United States
would be equally interested in our fiscal policy, but the conclusive
answer to that argument was that what might be vital to Canada
with its eight million people and its small productions, would be
of comparatively trifling importance to the United States with its
ninety million people and its enormous volume of production. It
would be, in fact, a case of partnership with one partner so undeniably predominant that the weaker partner would be in the position of the Roman philosopher who feared to press his argument Reciprocity 25
with Augustus too far because it was not wise to press too hardly
in argument upon "the master of thirty legions."
In a word, the judgment of the business men of Canada was
that the reciprocity agreement, if carried into effect, would mean
a commercial alliance which would of necessity have to be carried
further, and that as a necessary result of such an alliance the United
States, being the greater, wealthier, stronger and more populous
country, would dominate Canada's commercial policy and development.
It was, and is, believed that reciprocity in natural products
would lead to reciprocity in manufactures. It was, and is, believed
that the predominance of the United States in commercial legislation would lead to loss of control on our part of our undeveloped
natural resources and especially of our water powers. It was, and
is, believed that these results would not only affect us in the matters
particularly mentioned, but would subordinate Canada to the United
States in such a way as to interfere with her national independence.
Following this idea, it will be readily seen that Canadians
who take seriously the idea of Canada's position in the British
Empire had every cause to be alarmed. To place the most important unit of the British Empire, outside of the British Isles, under
the domination of a foreign though friendly power would be a long
step toward disintegration. Your publicists who said that this
trade agreement would bind Canada to the United States and strike
a blow at the consolidation of the British Empire were absolutely
right and we who fought against it realized that fact and had a full
appreciation of its importance.
Taking the Dominion by sections, the result was that Nova
Scotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick were on the
whole slightly but still decidedly unfriendly to the agreement.
In Quebec, strange as it may appear, I can find no evidence that
reciprocity seriously affected the rural voters or influenced them
in the exercise of their franchise. On the other hand, the manufacturers, financiers, railway men and commercial men of Montreal
and vicinity were practically a unit against reciprocity and their
influence undoubtedly accounted directly or indirectly for fifteen
or eighteen of the Quebec constituencies which were carried by the
opposition.
The Province of Ontario was almost solidly opposed to the
agreement.    My own belief is that even the election returns which 26 The Annals of the American Academy
gave seventy-three seats to the Conservatives and thirteen to the
Liberals did not represent the real sentiment against the agreement. I knew fairly well the sentiment of Ontario as it was just
previous to the election and I now believe that quite one-half of those
who voted in favor of the Liberal government were at heart opposed
to its policy. In fact, there was no heart in the contest on the
part of the Liberal party in the Province of Ontario and there was
apparently no mourning in its camp so far as the rank and file of
the voters were concerned when it was defeated.
Winnipeg and the urban centers of the prairie provinces were
generally opposed to reciprocity. The farmers were strongly in
favor of it.
British Columbia was lost to the Liberals in any event on
account of party disorganization and incompetent leadership, but
it is fairly safe to say that the Province as a whole is against
reciprocity.
Summarizing the case, we have the fact that a government,
strongly entrenched and well organized, led by a man who is perhaps
the most striking and brilliant personality in the British Empire,
with a record of statesmanlike achievement behind it, went into a
fight on the question of reciprocity and was hopelessly routed. No
single portion of the Dominion, except the farmers of the three
prairie provinces, showed the slightest enthusiasm for the policy
of the government, while in the other parts of the country thousands
of ardent Liberals went over to the opposition.
The opposition remains unchanged and unchangeable to-day.
It is a deliberate, calculated and determined opposition. I am
perfectly satisfied that if the House of Commons were dissolved
to-morrow and Sir Wilfrid Laurier proclaimed in unmistakable
terms his intention of going to Washington to negotiate a new treaty
or to consummate the old one, he would be disastrously defeated.
In fact, his defeat would be more decisive than it was last fall.
But it is difficult to see how such a case can again arise. The
proffer of reciprocity on what seemed very liberal terms by the
government of the United States was undoubtedly a high political
play on the part of that government. The play was made to meet
a most unusual and embarrassing condition of affairs within the
ranks of the Republican party. The measure was supported by the
Democrats in congress, because to support it was at once the simple,
straightforward and politic thing to do.    But circumstances have Reciprocity 27
changed and it may safely be said now that the conditions which
brought the offer of reciprocity from the United States are not likely
to recur.
Under all the circumstances, therefore, I conclude that reciprocity is not any longer in the least degree a practical political
question. The question is not likely to return to the people of
Canada in the form in which it was presented last year, but if it
does so return it will undoubtedly be answered in precisely the
same manner in which it was answered then.
Something should be said with regard to the ideas which in
the main actuated the great body of those who were led to take an
unusually active and determined part in the election. It should
be stated in the most emphatic terms that there was no idea of
hostility or unfriendlinesss to the United States at the root of their
action. I think that most people thought that the treaty was a
very liberal one from the standpoint of the United States. I never
heard very much in the way of suggestion that the United States
should have offered more or that our negotiators should have demanded more. The underlying motive was of a different character
altogether. The people believed that the development of the two
countries under the reciprocity policy was bound to interfere with
the commercial independence of Canada and that idea was fatal
to the success of the policy proposed.
Our people thoroughly recognize the greatness of the United
States and its phenomenal success along many lines of human
endeavor. It is, however, the opinion of our most thoughtful people
that your constitution is now approaching its supreme test. We
look with some apprehension upon your labor difficulties. We
think also that your attempt to regulate the great monopolies which
have arisen will tax the energies of the nation to the utmost. We
most sincerely wish you well in the efforts which you are so manfully
'making. Nowhere has the tree of Liberty borne more glorious
fruit than in the United States, and it is the sincere hope of every
true lover of freedom that you may go from triumph to triumph
exhibiting to the world a shining and mspiring example.
Your present problems, however, are vastly more complicated
and difficult of solution than our own. We shall have in one way
or another all these problems to solve, but they will come in smaller
volume and in a form much less difficult to handle. We anticipate
no serious difficulty in curbing any trusts or combinations that 28 The Annals of the American Academy
may arise in Canada and in placing production upon a legitimate
and proper basis. We feel also quite able to deal with questions
affecting our great transportation systems. In fact, most of the
machinery is already provided and working well. We, however,
wish to deal with these questions and to regulate them in our own
way without pressure from abroad and without feeling that great
financial interests outside of our jurisdiction are being exerted to
influence our decision.
There remains a word or two to be said upon a phase of the
question which still remains as a tax upon the statesmanship of
Canada. I refer now to the apparently conflicting interests of the
farmers of the prairie provinces and the financial and manufacturing
people of the East. There is little doubt that the majority of our
western farmers desire a modification of the fiscal system. They
consider themselves unjustly treated by the tariff upon manufactured goods and their ideas of relief run largely toward greater freedom of commercial intercourse with the States which He to the
south of them. In point of fact a close analysis shows that most
of the disadvantages under which they labor are incidental to the
very rapid development of the country and are likely to disappear in
a comparatively short time with the progressive improvement of
facuities and commercial and industrial organization. It is quite
certain, however, that the farmers of the West are and will continue
to be favorable to low tariff and the fewest possible restrictions upon
trade. Their political influence may be permanently counted on in
that direction. Particularly it may be said that if the present
government, which is avowedly a protection government, should
be tempted to raise the tariff upon manufactured goods so as to
foster further combinations and enhancement of prices, thus resulting in an increased tax upon the western farmer, his voice will
be heard with no uncertain sound and a tariff war of vigorous proportions will undoubtedly follow. There is, I am free to say, no
indication as yet that Mr. Borden and his colleagues have any
intention of following such a policy. But whatever may be the
policy of the government, the predominant sentiment of the western prairie farmer will be for low tariff and the fewest possible restrictions. These sentiments will be modified by the knowledge
that no one section of the country can have its own way entirely
and that fiscal policy in a country of great extent and diversified
interests must of necessity be a matter of compromise. CANADA AND THE PREFERENCE1
CANADIAN TRADE WITH GREAT BRITAIN AND THE
UNITED STATES
By S. Morley Wickett, Ph.D.,
Of Wickett & Craig, Ltd., Toronto, Canada.
Probably most Canadians still associate their trade with the
United States and with Great Britain with possible political consequences. Under such circumstances tariff and party politics inevitably go hand in hand, and because the tariff has its political side
it remains an object of popular interest, an interest which is doubtless
shared by students of Canadian political development generally.
Particularly at the present epoch new tariff relations might mean a
great deal for future affiliations.
The History of Preference
The preference which has since become more or less of an intra-
imperial policy dates back many years to pre-confederation days,
and the times of colonial policy. What may be called the present
phase began April 23, 1897, on the initiative of the late Sir Richard
Cartwright, as a flank attack on protection. Sir Richard, then
Minister of Trade and Commerce, so explained it on the floor of the
House of Commons. The initial preference rate was one-eighth
and by virtue of their trade treaties with Great Britain, Germany,
Belgium, France and Spain enjoyed its privileges. But following
the denunciation of the Belgian and German treaties and their
expiration in July, 1898, the preference was increased to one-fourth
from August 1st, and confined to goods from the United Kingdom and
those British Colonies giving Canada as favorable terms as they
received from her. A further increase from one-fourth to one-third
was made on July 1, 1900. From the remarks of Sir Richard and
other evidence it is clear that the preference must be regarded as a
measure of tariff reform at the hands of a political party traditionally
pledged to a lower tariff. Incidentally it constituted a clever reply
to the Tory cry of disloyalty—a cry that had long been thrown at
iThis article appeared originally as a series of letters in the London Times, but has since
been considerably revised and brought down to date.—Editor.
(29) 30 The Annals of the American Academy
the Liberal party because of its platform of reciprocity with the United
States. For a while it looked as if the idea of a preference had passed
from the hands of the political parties to become, as far as such
things can be, a fixed principle of the Canadian tariff. And so it
seemed until the negotiation of the French treaty in 1907, followed
a couple of years later by the removal of the German surtax, the
Belgian treaty, and the announcement that the government would
shortly enter once more into trade negotiations with the United
States.
The important r61e played by those of French descent in Canadian life makes it readily understood, quite aside from the possible
value to Canada of the French market, why a commercial treaty
with France was negotiated. Apart, however, from comparatively
few lines (more particularly embroideries, gloves, silks, soaps and
cheese) the items given most favorable rates do not compete seriously
with British goods. Belgium being a country convenient for transhipment from the continent, the treaty with her raises other considerations, especially as Canada's exarnination of European customs
declarations is superficial and inadequate. Under the circumstances
there is grave danger that the granting to her of the intermediate
tariff on numerous items not produced largely or at all in Belgium
may in practice extend the same low rates much more widely than
intended.
The Popular Attitude
It may be argued that it would have been highly impolitic
on the part of Canada to refuse to discuss tariff matters with the
United States when for the first time in her history she was invited
to do so. To this there is no adequate answer, particularly as the
two countries have many important international matters to settle
from time to time. Though as regards the tariff Canadians cannot
forget that the whole history of the Dominion has been fought out
in the face of a singularly hostile legislation on the part of the United
States, resulting in a tariff admittedly sharpened to force Canada
into commercial union with her. It is too soon to forget it. And
recently the remarkable publication by President Taft of an interchange of views with Mr. Roosevelt on the probable effect on Canada
of closer trade relations with the United States serves to confirm
susceptible Canadians in their fears: Canada and the Preference 31
Canada's rapid growth, it must be remembered, dates only from
the nineties; and has been the outcome of the opening up of the country and of the policy of developing trade routes east and west instead
of north and south. Brilliantly successful as this development has
been, it is not yet completed. The recent rejection of the trade
overtures from Washington will doubtless postpone any further
serious trade negotiations for some years. But the fact that the
cabinet possesses the extraordinary power by mere order-in-council
to reduce the tariff from the general to the intermediate rate without
reference to Parliament, and the further fact that the government
has still no tariff board for expert reference, such as exists in the
United States and in effect in other countries, unite to make Canadian
business men sensitive to possible political exigencies. In addition
is to be borne in mind the provisional character of present trade agreements.
Canadian Protection
As a distinct policy Canada's protective tariff dates from 1879;
but the Canadian Pacific Railway did not string the provinces together
from coast to coast for another seven years. In the meantime, and,
for another eight years, it must be admitted the tariff did little more
than allow Canada to maintain a separate existence from the United
States. Only with the gradual opening up and development of the
country and the improvement of the trade routes east and west was
an assured future realized. In other words the British market
relieved Canada from her over-weaning dependence on the United
States; it was her salvation; and it is very largely still, (^ming as it
did at this stage the preferential tariff fitted in with the natural course
of evolution, and it gained additional support from the outburts
of Imperial sentiment at the time of the South African war and subsequently.
The Meaning of Preference
As regards the preference, both British and Canadian business
men have come to understand better its real meaning. The ordinary
citizen not in close touch with trade conditions appeared to regard
it as something little more than a toy. In any event it was in his
mind not to be taken very seriously. For a time the sentimental
aspects appeared to bulk prominently. But business men now view
it both as a business and as a political policy.' It is not a mandate 32 The Annals of the American Academy
for mutual sacrifices. On that everyone will agree. Nor is it a
medium to work out single-handed a revolution in trade relations.
Rather is it an important object-lesson in political and constitutional
relations; a partial offset to British geographical remoteness; and a
measure of tariff modification.
Canadian Opinion on Tariff Revision
Canada is undoubtedly moderately protectionist. But as regards
present public opinion on tariff revision it is impossible to speak with
certainty. It is probably in a waiting mood; and will probably
remain so until the promised tariff board has been tried out. Certainly business conditions and prospects are very different from what
they were in the eighties and early nineties when the ccrmmercial
union movement disturbed the country; they are different from
what they were in the year when the successive stings of the McKinley, Wilson and Dingley tariffs were fresh in the popular mind.
As for the farmer, generally speaking, he is well-off, at least if he has
not neglected his opportunities. In addition to the foreign demand
for his farm produce, the home market has increased so rapidly that
local prices are often as high as, if not higher than, in Great Britain.
Already the home market consumes a high percentage of many lines
of Canadian produce, and is rapidly growing. Of the wheat, barley
and oat crop, 80 per cent, and of the total product of the farm, nearly
90 per cent is consumed locally. For the time being Canada is an
egg-importing country; her butter exports are disappearing; the
export of cheese has fallen markedly, and the export of bacon has
been cut in two.
The Application of Preference
It is to be pointed out that the preferential principle has still
not been tested thoroughly. To lop off 12$ or 25 or 33$ per cent on
the whole tariff list is not necessarily to adapt preference to the
conditions of the British market. It may and it may not. At best
it is a hit or miss method. To test its possibilities the amount and
extent of preference should be decided from a British as well as from
a Canadian point of view. It should be the result of a careful investigation of conditions and possibilities. In other words, and this is
vital, it should be confined to classes of goods that are actually
produced within the Empire and in which there is a likelihood of Canada and the Preference
33
larger trade. As yet this has not been done. If it is not so restricted
but is norninally extended to lines not produced or manufactured
within the empire it is an invitation to false customs declarations and
to fiscal and industrial confusion. In the revision of the tariff in 1906
the principle of a uniform preferential cut was abandoned, it is true;
but the observation still holds in that the revision was made from a
purely Canadian standpoint.-
Canadian Trade
As a young and growing country Canada has large exports
and still larger imports. Most of her exports go to Great Britain;
most of her imports come from the United States. With a population
of less than 8,000,000 she ranks next to Great Britain and Germany
in the list of United States customers. For the year ending with
March, 1911, the figures are (exclusive of coins and bullion):
Million S
Percentage
Exports to—
132.2
104.1
56
44
236.3
100
Million $
Free
Dutiable
Total
Percentage
Imports from—
Great Britain	
25.4
121.8
84.5
153.1
109.9
274.9
28
United States	
72
147.2
237.6
384.8
100
Possibilities of Directing It
The question at once arises how far the current of this trade
can be deflected by preferential and related legislation. In forming
our judgment we must not overlook certain permanent conditions
of Canadian trade. No amount of rational legislation could make
Canada buy from England agricultural produce, timber, raw cotton,
tobacco, petroleum and a host of other things not classed as manufactures.    Great Britain's sales to Canada are chiefly manufactured 34 The Annals of the American Academy
goods.   Sometimes public speakers, wishing to discover the '' natural
trade relation of Canada and Great Britain draw lessons from the
totals of duty-free imports; but such a practice is misleading in that
a great part of so-called raw materials is dutiable, and the free list
is a reflection of something very different from the ''Divine Order."
That Canada and the United States are geographically interdependent to an important degree is obvious. The United States
looks to Canada for nickel, copper, asbestos, spruce, pulp, timber, fish
and in certain contingencies for agricultural produce. Canada looks
to the United States for raw cotton, tobacco, hard coal, hardwoods,
Indian corn and a long list of manufactured wares, especially those
subject to quick, and taken singly, rather small orders. In a recent
average year (1911), apart from settlers' effects and bullion, what may
be called a raw material made up thirty-three per cent of the imports,
as against seven per cent from Great Britain. In both cases there are
remarkably few items. Five-sixths of that coming from the United
States is represented by the following (in million dollars): Coal,
36.1; Indian corn, 7.3; lumber, 12.4; fruits, 6.5; undressed furs,
hides and skins, 3.3; raw tobacco, 1.9; iron ore, 2.5; bar and pig iron,
2.4. Apart from the last item these purchases are more or less fixed;
whereas of the British seven per cent none of the items can be so
regarded.
Look now at the course of trade from another point of view.
Imports from Great Britain covering the produce of the farm, forest,
mine and fisheries, raw and slightly manufactured goods, were only
$6,500,000, as against over $83,000,000 from the United States.
Tariff legislation could not be expected to disturb this division to
the advantage of Great Britain. In fact, direct ocean steamship
service between foreign ports and Canada would cut off some of the
British trade in southern products and reduce by that much the imports now returned as British. Omitting bullion, settlers' effects
and tea, and allowing $5,000,000 of British goods credited erroneously
to the United States, by reason of re-invoidng, etc., this leaves
$90,000,000 of manufactured goods from Great Britain, as against
$160,000,000 from the United States. This $160,000,000 is the possible target for preferential legislation, and I think will approximate
the actual business situation. All things considered, these figures do
not place British trade in a very unfavorable light, though improvement is undoubtedly possible.    To what extent, now, is this trade Canada and the Preference 35
in manufactures and in other lines natural and fixed?   One can only
answer by describing conditions.
As regards the possibilities of tariff legislation there may be
perhaps an inclination to draw conclusions from the striking results
of the German surtax. But this is dangerous, for Germany's economic
relations with Canada are very different from those of the United
States, her Canadian sales being much more amenable to legislative
influence.
The American Tariff
The United States tariff being, as a rule, prohibitive of Canadian
manufactured goods, Canada's sales to the United States are upwards
of nine-tenths raw or nearly raw material. Apart from the products
of the farm, forest and mine, practically in their rough state, drugs
and medicines, whiskey, pig iron, fertilizers, coke, cement and tea,
there are only a few scattered items of importance. The extended
and subtle sub-divisions of the United States tariff, with a view
to securing protective efficiency on particular items, are only appreciated by the foreign manufacturer attempting to develop a market
in the United States. That tariff has been aptly described as a
"tricky one." What can a Canadian manufacturing jeweler with
35 per cent protection do against a United States duty on jewelry of
60 per cent and on enamelled jewelry of 85 per cent? Sole leather
is now 5 per cent, upper leather 10 per cent, but leather belting and
footballs 40 per cent, leather cases and pouches 60 per cent, threshing machines 15 per cent, but steam engines, which must accompany
them, 30 per cent (if the engine is a gasoline engine the duty is 45
per cent), and all repair parts 45 per cent.
With a view to determining the average rate of customs duty
levied by the United States on Canadian imports most writers take
the total dues collected in relation to the bulk of trade done. But
this is a fallacious basis, in that the question here hangs really not on
the amount of duty collected, but on the protective or prohibitive
efficiency of the tariff. For example, the importation of ships to
be registered in the United States is prohibited outright; the duty
on carpets is roughly 75 per cent, which is prohibitive as far as
Canada is concerned; pianos, 45 per cent; watch chains, 60 per cent;
machinery, 45 per cent; tweeds and serges, 100 to 150 per cent, etc.
"I have made up a list of somewhat over forty staple commodities 36 The Annals of the American Academy
produced or manufactured in both countries, which one might expect
in the natural course of affairs could be mutually traded in. On
these items the average United States duty is 44 per cent, as against
24 per cent charged by Canada, which is probably sufficiently typical
of the relative tariffs of the two countries in actual practice. On the
theory of infant industries one might have expected the percentages
to be reversed.
In fact, the whole United States system seems conceived in
protection. With a view to facilitating trade Canada has customs
ports of entry in all towns of any importance throughout the country;
the United States, on the contrary, besides specifying that consular
certificates shall accompany all shipments of over $100 value, requires
that entries be passed at the frontier in a very small number of places
—which means also the employment of customs brokers—a system
causing delays and frequently considerable annoyance and extra
expense to the importer.
The Recent Negotiations
That after establishing such a high tariff, and in return for
not levying a still higher one, the United States should ask, for a
still lower one on Canada's part, as she did a couple of years ago,
immediately subsequent to Canada's treaty with France, can only
be described as a resort to the policy of the big stick. That the
Canadian Minister of Finance yielded must be explained by the view
that the smaller people should humor the bigger one to some extent.
The call for a lower tariff at present making itself heard in the United
States may not bear much fruit for several years yet. It will then
be time after Canadian development has reached a higher stage of
industrial maturity for Canada to re-consider seriously and generally
her trade relations with the United States. At present every Canadian knows that a generally lower tariff against the United States
would mean the end of much of our British trade and the yoking
of Canadian industry to the characteristic speculative ups and downs
of the United States market—a feature of which the English buyer,
too, has reason to know something. The Anti-Dumping Act passed by
Canada in 1904 was itself a recognition of the desirabiHty of checking
this very result. According to this act, duties have to be paid under
heavy penalties, on the basis of current prices in the exporting country;  and in case of a lower quotation the government itself appro- Canada and the Preference 37
priates the difference up to 15 per cent of the value, providing the
difference is at least 1\ per cent. In the opinion of the late manager
of the tariff department of the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, this legislation has served to check dumping when trade in
the United States is good, but has not been and could not be effective
when business was bad. Secret rebates, too, are probably not an
uncommon means of dodging the act. But on the whole it seems to
have proved to be a wise bit of protective legislation, especially
under a moderate tariff.
Protection and Export
As regards the relation of tariffs to export trade it must not
be forgotten that in the event of imported goods being made into
finished wares and exported, both the United States and Canada
allow a rebate of 99 per cent of all duties paid. This partly explains
how it is sometimes possible to quote lower prices for export than for
home consumption. It also explains why United States goods are
sometimes shipped to Canada via England; for the Canadian duty
is levied on the price current in the country of sale, not in the country
of origin.
Accuracy of Trade Statistics
Ck>ming more directly to the question of trade in manufactures
between Great Britain and Canada, it is to be noted in the first
place that Canadian trade statistics need a great deal of amplification and editing. For example, large importations of free goods are
made through United States brokers acting as British agents. It
is the old-established practice of many English houses to give the
agency for Canada along with that of the United States. Fortunately,
the tendency is now slowly working towards the creation of separate
agencies for Canada. On the other hand, large export sales are made
by Canada through United States export houses, and such exports
are placed to the credit of the United States. Sometimes there is a
special reason, as, for example, when in the case of cut lumber a United
States firm will take the output of special cuts of a great many
Canadian and domestic mills, sorting these specialized cuts to the
market. Thus, while American builders demand 8-inch, 10-inch
and  12-inch boards, English architects call for 7-inch, 9-inch and 38 The Annals of the American Academy
11-inch cuts, and only in this way could such orders be  filled
conveniently.
United States Advertising
That prevailing tastes in Europe and America are different
needs no argument. Outlook on life and ways of living are not the
same. United States industries have, therefore, an initial advantage
in catering to their own continent, especially when aided by the
greatest mania for advertising of specialties and novelties characteristic of any country or any time. England sends into Canada more
Bibles and prayer books than United States, but far fewer
periodicals. On catalogues Canada levies a customs duty of 15
per cent, but many United States houses get catalogue-substitutes
in free in the form of magazine advertisements; and the suggestion
has been made to the Minister of Finance that the unusual and altogether unique situation of literature and advertisements being bound
up together should be met by a specific duty per pound on foreign
periodicals. The. proposal appeals to some for the reason (which
one may repeat without disrespect) that the United States magazines flood the public mind with a glorification of their own country,
and, more or less often, with a disparagement of people and tilings
not American.
Character of New World Demand
Of the new-world citizen it can be said he is often contented
with less substantial goods than the Englishman; thinks much of
neat appearance and loves change. Witness the, at times, amusing
extremes of the American shoe, the lightness of carpenters' tools
(probably because the American carpenter works more on soft woods),
bicycles, automobiles, brass goods, jewelry, etc. The styles in traveling bags have run the gamut of half a dozen colors and a still greater
number of shapes and sizes, while the Englishman has stood by his
essentially satisfactory tan or brown bag. The stress of competition,
the desire to catch the consumer's eye and to extend sales drive the
American manufacturer on. A faddy market may be expensive; as
Americans say, it may "come high" and be economically wrong,
but it means a monopoly for the local manufacturer. It is not necessarily a question of quality, but of something else.    New devices, Canada and the Preference 39
new processes perhaps break up old connections, and the high cost
of labor places the manufacturers of both Canada and the United
States in the same boat as regards their interest in mechanical
appliances. The frequent discarding of the old by United States
industry may at times fall into prodigality; and in any event it
increases overhead expenses as compared with Canada, and still
more so with England.
Conditions of Market Supply
Some of the circumstances under which goods reach the consumer through the great expanses of America have an important
influence. For example, the most remote rural jeweler may handle
a Waltham or an Elgin or a Swiss watch, and through the one make
he selects can allow his patron to choose from 120 or more classes or
grades. No British watch-house can offer more than a fraction of
this range. It is not necessary to seek for explanations from the
instructive history of the British watch-trade. Here the preference
of the country jeweler is decided not necessarily by a question of
quality but of ease in doing business. He can satisfy almost any
demand by the one catalogue and a letter or a wire to the one address.
It is a condition created by external circumstances and fostered by
advertisements and by repeated and effective "drunrming.'' The
wide range in styles of shoes, half-sizes in tmderclothing, etc., help
in the same direction as does the fact that United States quotations
are always in dollars and cents. The more frequent use of mercantile
and other agencies for reports on the financial reliability of houses,
and greater elasticity of credit are also characteristic of United States
business dealings. This is of particular importance, looking to the
inception of business relations. Thus American industry adapts
itself to, and grows with, the country, and eventually is hard to
dislodge. Imperial penny postage, which Canada arranged for in
1898 through the splendid work of Sir William Murlock, has proved
a distinct aid to communications with Great Britain, as has also the
later lowering of the postage on British magazines. If low cable
rates could be secured it would be a still more important aid in holding
British trade connections. So infinitely important to business is a
low cable tariff that the whole cable situation should be given special
study by Great Britain.
J 40 The Annals of the American Academy
Importance of Warehouse Facilities
But no degree of improved communications can alone counterbalance geographical remoteness. Quick deliveries, quick repairs
from stock of adjustable parts mean well-equipped local supply
houses at strategic points. Thus far British manufacturers have had.
their eyes on too many markets to specialize on the scattered and
divided Canadian demand. But the situation takes on a different
aspect when it is noted that if business methods mean anything,
an effort for Canada's business is at the same time an effort for greater
trade over all North America.
The Needs of the Moment
The large amounts of British capital sent yearly to Canada are
frequently pointed to as a means of securing business for Great
Britain. But the great bulk of these investments go into public
securities and railway and industrial bonds, comparatively little into
industrial stocks, which carry the technical management. The
number of cases where Canadian factories are in charge of British
managers and British foremen is remarkably small. From an investigation made by The Monetary Times of Toronto a couple of years
ago, British investments in Canada during the previous five years
totaled up to $605,000,000, of which only $22,500,000 were of a specifically industrial nature. On the other hand, the United States, the
same journal estimated, had invested some $279,000,000, only a
comparatively small amount of which was in public securities. The
figures given were as follows:
British Investments in Canada for Five Years (1905-1910)
Canadian bank shares purchased  $1,125,000
Investments with loan and mortgage companies  5,719,774
British insurance companies' investments  9,731,742
Municipal bonds sold privately  10,000,000
Industrial investments  22,500,000
Land and timber investments  19,000,000
Mining investments  56,315,500
Canadian public flotations in London  481,061,836
,453,852 Canada and the Preference 41
Present United States Investments in Canada
175 Companies, average capital $600,000 $105,000,000
United States investments in British Columbia mills
and timber       58,000,000
United States investments in British Columbia mines     50,000,000
Land deals, Alberta, etc       20,000,000
United States investments,  lumber  and  mines  in
Alberta         5,000,000
Packing plants         5,000,000
Implement distributing houses        6,575,000
Land deals, British Columbia         4,500,000
Municipal bonds, sold privately       25,000,000
$279,075,000
These figures only illustrate what is a matter of common knowledge in Canada—that in contrast with British capital the great bulk
of United States capital enters the country as branch factories and
other outright industrial investments. With superintendents and
foremen from the United States it is not surprising that English
travelers and goods have often a poor chance of a market. Whatever
fault may be found with citizens of the American Republic they can
never be accused of unbelief in the peculiar virtues of American
ideas, methods, men and industrial products. It is worthy of remark
that of the recent presidents of the Canadian Manufacturers' Association three were heads of branches of United States houses; but
in these cases it need hardly be said they were none the less Canadian.
Trade Agents
Of the influence of the nationalities of the new settlers in the
West and elsewhere it is too soon to speak. With actual trade
conditions and prospects the United States keeps in remarkably
close touch by newspaper correspondents and by means of consuls
located in the chief towns throughout the country and making
frequent reports to Washington. At present there are no less than
seventy-six United States consuls and consular agents as against
one British trade commissioner located at Montreal, with a few trade
correspondents, who cannot be compared with the consuls. It
would also seem as if Canada should take a leaf from the United States
and definitely develop a trade consular system the beginnings of
which are seen to-day in the Canadian trade agents.    If Washing- 42 The Annals of the American Academy
ton's example were followed in this respect Canada would collect
the incidental expenses as fees from the foreign exporters. Such
fees give a certain amount of additional direct protection, and serve
also as a medium for checking customs' undervaluations.
Transportation Routes
Behind these and other influences stands the problem of transportation. New York to Toronto or to Montreal, St. Paul to Winnipeg-, Seattle to Vancouver are but over-night runs. The Liverpool
merchant ships to Canada by four routes:
1. To Halifax (2,342 miles), or Montreal (2,800 miles), thence
rail, or from Montreal river steamer to head of Great
Lakes. To Vancouver by this route is 5,800 miles; time
required for freight 8 to 12 days to Montreal, thence 14
to 30 days to Vancouver.
2. Via Mexico to Vancouver by the Tehuantepec route (190
miles), across the peninsula (8,000 miles), 42 to 45 days.
3. Via the Suez (15,522 miles), 70 to 80 days.
4. By tramp steamer via the Horn (14,317 miles), 70 to 90 days.
From Vancouver inland the distribution is by rail.
How Rates are Fixed
Through rates from both Eastern Canada and Europe are
governed by those via the Suez. This water competition, to which
latterly the Mexican route has been added, has been disturbing to
existing trade. If the Panama project is successful the results may
be still more marked. One may be pardoned for suggesting a doubt
as to the permanent commercial feasibility of a canal across a dangerous earthquake belt, the approach to which moreover, on the Atlantic
side at least, is said to be closed to sailing vessels. Panama is also
1,000 miles further south than the Tehuantepec line. Already
shipments from Eastern Canada to British Columbia are sent via
Mexico simply because this route is at times able to underbid the
all-rail route. But if this relief to Eastern Canada is to be permanent
it must be conditional on the vessels securing return cargoes to
English ports, thence fresh ones back to Canada. A policy of diverting Canadian exports from Great Britain to the United States would
thus seriously rnilitate against the success of this new and important
commercial development. Certainly in improving Canadian shipping facilities British trade has been and is worth much to Canada. Canada and the Preference 43
Shipments via Chicago
It may be said that for freight traffic for Western Canada
there is close competition between Canadian lines and lines via and
from Chicago. As is to be expected in a new country the rate per
ton per mile is somewhat higher on manufactures and merchandise
in Canada than in the United States. The manager of the transportation department of the Canadian Manufacturers' Association estimates that probably fifteen per cent of Eastern Canada's
shipments to the Canadian West go in bond via Chicago—a percentage that will doubtless lower when the Canadian Northern and the
Grand Trunk Pacific railways are completed. Here it should be
mentioned promptness of delivery or "efficiency of service," as it is
called, is often as important as a favorable freight rate; for example,
in the delivery of Ontario fresh fruit in Manitoba, etc. To competitive points in Western Canada the rate from Chicago is usually
somewhat lower than from Eastern Canada, to non-competing points
proportionately higher. For through carload shipments from Chicago
to the Pacific the greater industrial specialization of the United
States rnanufacture and the larger size of United States warehouses
on the coast admit often of closer rates than those quoted from competing points in Canada. Just how these differentials affect trade is
only known fully to those directly concerned. In the case of free
goods they obviously count heavily; and mean more with goods of
low specific value than with goods of higher value. Particularly in the
former case a dfference in freight charge may convert a profit into a
loss.
Rates to Eastern Canada
From Great Britain and Continental ports to Ontario and
Eastern Canada through rates are arrived at by adding the ocean
rates as fixed by the North Atlantic Freight Conference to what
are known as "import" rates, these rates being somewhat lower
than the domestic rates from the seaboard. And as regards the
"import" rail rates they are a matter of agreement between the
lines operating from Canadian and Eastern United States Atlantic
poits.
Rates to Western Canada
To points west of Port Arthur, that is west of the Great Lakes,
to the Rockies, special through freight rates are published from 44 The Annals of the American Academy
Europe. These rates are also fixed by the North Atlantic Freight
Conference, and there has been a gradual increase in some of them
in the last year or two. To some extent they are governed by competition via United States routes.2 It may be said that any increase
in through rates to the Canadian interior operates to that extent
adversely to British and favorably to United States freight.
The Pacific Coast as a New Distributing Center
With the completion of the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Canadian Northern Railway, now under construction, to the Pacific
Ocean, the Pacific slope will become a more and more important
distributing center for Canada. Even now European freight rates
via the Suez to Vancouver are lower than those direct from Montreal.
It means new- and important problems for the broad Dominion.
It means that already Canada is divided like all Gaul into three parts
—east, west and center; the center being, so to speak, a neutral zone
where freight charges bulk more largely and are the objects of keen
comparison. The matter is not closed there. Protected by these
higher freight costs local industries may be expected to spring up,
and actually they are already springing up, at different points, particularly at the head of the Great Lakes where there is admirable
water-power.
Canada's Great Problem
Thus to keep the Dominion contentedly united is one of the
great reasons why plans are being carefully studied for improving
the canals to the head of the Great Lakes, for building a railway from
Hudson's Bay to Winnipeg (to make effective the Hudson's Bay
route to England), for local waterways in the great prairie country,
and for supporting fresh railway connections between the Pacific
and the interior. That there is no time for delay is evident from the
fact that while in 1890 there were three United States railway lines
crossing the boundary west of Lake Superior, to-day lines cross at
over a dozen points. Many United States stub lines, moreover,
run up to the border, and with little additional cost could be extended
to tap any given locality. As railway men know, local lines of this
class are subject to much lower costs of transportation than the main
2 The Spokane rate case as settled by the Interstate Commerce Commission is not important
in this connection. Canada and the Preference 45
lines of a great system. And if, in order to secure return cargoes,
United States railway and other interests should find it necessary
to secure control of a certain number of newspapers and inaugurate
in this way or otherwise a campaign for tariff modifications, the situation might become more than interesting. So often the real moving
force behind political campaigns is hidden. It is such conditions
and possibilities that make the tariff problem of Canada so overwhelmingly important.
The Importance of Shipping Facilities
Through her splendid shipping facilities, and aided by the
preferential tariff, Great Britain has now the big end of the through
western coast trade. Without the preference the Canadian Pacific
Railway would be able to handle considerably more of this trade
originating in Eastern Canada than it does at present. In other
words, if the preference were less through Canadian freight rates could
be higher. Tariff and freight rates are thus indissolubly connected.
Another illustration of the practical identity of freights and customs
tariffs is the working of the French treaty. The tariff reductions
under this treaty apply only to shipments made from France or via
Great Britain direct to a Canadian port. With but one line of
steamers running between France and Canada this shipping becomes
more or less of a monopoly; and when, following the treaty, freight
rates were advanced it was claimed that the increases were made
possible by the French preference which they to that extent reduced.
Not having steamship connection with the Pacific coast the French
are severely handicapped in that trade. Should at any time the
British preference be confined to shipments direct to Canadian ports,
as the Canadian Maritime Boards of Trade have urged, it is to be
expected that the ocean steamship companies would endeavor to secure
a share of the preference by advancing their rates unless such rates
were fixed beforehand and rigorously controlled by international
agreement.
Some Conclusions
From this brief survey certain conclusions with regard to the
preference can be drawn:
1. A simple tariff modification may not be effective unless
it applies to cases and conditions admitting of success.    As yet the 46 The Annals of the American Academy
powers of the preferential tariff have not been tested out. The
preference is not merely Canadian; it is Imperial. As it is, it has
certainly diverted considerable trade in some lines to Great Britain,
buttressed British trade in other lines and been a big influence in
arousing British manufacturers to the conditions of the Canadian
market. It may mean much more if it is realized that an effort for
Canada's market is an effort for North America, as the characteristics of Canadian and United States' demands are very similar.
2. The problem of transportation (railway, steamship, post
and cable) and the related ones of free harbors, and greater British
warehouse facilities in Canada demand much more attention.
3. Freight rates are in practice an important and integral part
of custom tariffs.
4. Present trade statistics are not sufficient to disclose conditions.
5. The preferential tariff has probably had much to do with the
expansion in Canadian shipping.
6. A thorough investigation of these conditions is desirable;
and this is the task of the Imperial Trade Commission now at work.
The results of its investigations should be an invaluable guide for
all parts of the empire in regard to the possibilities of free-trade,
preference and protection.
7. Canada's trade with the United States is largely independent
of the preference and as far as the customs tariffs go has been hampered and checked much more seriously by the United States tariff
than it has been by the Canadian. THE  LEGAL STATUS OF HUDSON'S BAY
By Thomas Willing Balch,
Of the Philadelphia Bar.
Among the early explorers of North America who have left
their names clearly fixed upon the map of the world was Henry
Hudson. This has happened in a threefold way: for by his name
are designated a majestic river, a wide strait and a great sea. An
Englishman, he navigated not only under the flag of his own
country, but likewise at times he served the States General of the
Netherlands.
In 1607, in command of the Dutch ship, the Half Moon, Hudson
entered the Hudson River. Three years later, with the English
vessel, the Discovery, he passed through and explored Hudson's
Strait. In June, 1610, he entered and discovered the great sea that
ever since has been known as Hudson's Bay, which was to be alike
his tomb and his chief monument.
Until comparatively recently, Hudson's Bay has been accepted
by the international jurisconsults of the world at large as forming,
according to the tests of the rules of the law of nations, a part of the
high seas. Within the last few years, however, a desire has begun
to grow up in Canada to annex to the territorial waters of the
Dominion in toto that great sea which bears Hudson's name. For
example, in the last edition of the "Encyclopaedia Britannica"
(1910), it is stated that Canada is anxious to declare Hudson's Bay
a mare clausum on account of the whale fishery. Let us consider
very briefly the legal status of the waters of the Hudsonian Sea.1
Hudson entered that sea at a time when the struggle between
the principle of mare liberum and mare clausum was becoming an
active factor in the political relations between the English and the
Dutch. In earlier times, under the Tudors and other more ancient
sovereigns, England had pursued a liberal policy as regards commerce upon and fishery in the sea.   Indeed, the greatest of the Tudors,
i For a more extended and detailed consideration of this important international question than
can be presented within the space of this short article, see an essay by the present writer, "La baie
d'Hudson, est elle une mer libre ou une mer fermee?" in the Revue de Droit International et de Legislation Comparee, Brussels, 1911, voL xm, new series, pages 539-586.
(47) 48 The Annals of the American Academy
Queen Elizabeth, in a famous answer to the Spanish ambassador
at her court, Mendoza, supported the freedom of the seas. After
Drake's return in September, 1580, from a voyage around the world,
with a mass of plunder that he had captured from Spanish vessels
and settlements on the coast of South America, the Ambassador
of Philip II made a complaint directly to England's Queen herself.
Af tes pointing out in her reply that Drake was amenable to a personal
action in the courts of England if he had injured any one, the Queen
continued that the Spaniards had no right to justify them in excluding the English from trading with the West Indies. Then, as Camden
tells us, Elizabeth went on to say:2
"Moreover all are at liberty to navigate that vast ocean, since
the use of the sea and the air is common to all. No nation or private
person can have a right to the ocean, for neither the course of nature
nor public usage permits any occupation of it."
With the advent of the Stuarts to the English throne the liberal
policy of England as regards the sea was reversed. She laid claim
to more and more exclusive rights over the seas surrounding her
and ultimately forced and fought three bloody naval wars with the
Dutch for the control of the narrow seas and the right of exclusive
fishery in them.
In reply to Grotius's essay, mare liberum, printed at Leyden
in 1609, King Charles I of England caused Selden's mare clausum
to be published at London in 1635. While most nations have supported sometimes one side, sometimes the other, of this contention,
as accorded best at the given moment with their respective policies,
the opinion of the world has mclined finally to the view advanced
by Grotius. The famous Hollander in his larger and more mature
work, De jure Belli ac Pacis (1625), however, recognized that a state
has the right to exercise its authority over a strip of sea along its
coast line. At the beginning of the eighteenth century, another
Dutch jurisconsult, Bynkershoek, expounded more precisely the
extent of this sovereignty of nations over the sea washing their shores.
As a general maxim, he taught, imperium terra finiri ubi finitur
armorum potestas?
Applying this principle to things as they were in his time, Bynker-
2 Camden: Annates, s. a. 1580 (edition of 1605), 309.
8 Bynkershoek: Jcti et Praesidis, Quaeslionum Juris Publici, libri duo,  Leyden, 1737, liber I,
cap. vm, folio 59. The Legal Status of Hudson's Bay 49
shoek limited the extent of the exclusive sovereignty of states over
the sea to the range of a cannon shot.
In deciding whether the waters of a bay or other sinuosity were
territorial or part of the open seas, the test advanced by publicists
and international jurisconsults came to be whether the entrance
of any embayed body of water could be defended and controlled
from the opposite shores.
In 1758, the Swiss, Emer de Vattel, wrote:4
"All we have said of the parts of the sea near the coast may
be said more particularly, and with much greater reason, of the
roads, bays and straits, as still more capable of being occupied and
of greater importance to the safety of the country. But I speak
of the bays and straits of small extent and not of those great parts
of the sea to which these names are sometimes given, as Hudson's
Bay and the Straits of Magellan, over which the empire cannot
extend, and still less a right of property. A bay whose entrance
may be defended may be possessed and rendered subject to the laws
of the sovereign, and it is of importance that it should be so, since
the country may be much more easily insulted in such a place than
on the coast open to the winds and the impetuosity of the waves."
Thus Vattel insists that in order that a bay may be considered
to be a mare clausum, its entrance from the sea must be so narrow
that it can be dominated and controlled from the opposing shores.
Hudson's Strait, which connects Hudson's Bay with Baffin's Bay
and the Atlantic Ocean, is at all points forty-five miles wide, and in
general it extends to a width far greater, generally of about one
hundred miles.6 According to the above formulated test of Vattel,
Hudson's Bay is an open sea. And in addition, Vattel specifically
names Hudson's Bay as an open sea.
. With the passage of time before and after Vattel had given
the above cited opinion that Hudson's Bay was an open sea, the
extent of the territorial sea was gradually fixed at the distance of a
cannon shot from the land, which was translated by degrees into
one marine league or three miles.
The three-mile limit was consecrated by the United States and
Great Britain in the first article of the treaty of 1818.    It was sub-
' Emer de Vattel: Le Droit des Gens ou Prindpes de la loi natureUe, Amsterdam, 1775, vol. i,
p.  142.
6 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Cambridge, England, eleventh edition, 1910, voL xrn, page 851. 50 The Annals of the American Academy
sequently recognized in many treaties between various nations
until it became very generally adopted. It is not, however, universally recognized. For instance, Norway claims that her jurisdiction extends four miles seaward from her furthest seaward islands,
and Spain asserts that her sovereignty extends six miles from her
coast.8 In 1894 the British government protested against this
claim of Spain.7
Applying this three-mile limit as the extent of the zone of territorial waters to bays and gulfs and other sinuosities, there gradually
arose as a corollary, the rule of international law that, where the
three-mile zones advancing from each shore at the entrance of the
bay or other kind of sinuosity meet and form a line six miles across
from land to land, that line of six miles should be taken as the
base from which to measure the three-mile zone seaward, and that
the sovereignty of the state, master of the surrounding land, did
not extend further outward towards the sea, but that all the expanse
of the bay inside of that six-mile line, no matter how wide and large
the bay further within might become, should belong to the encircling
nation, because the entrance was effectually occupied where the
shores were not more than six miles apart. But the center of bays
and other sinuosities whose entrance from the high seas was wider
than six miles, form, with some historic exceptions, part of the open
sea. Many publicists, such as Ortolan8and Hautefeuille,9for example,
can be cited in support of the above rule.
This six-mile rule, however, has been modified in the case of
many bays by treaty agreements between individual states. Thus
by formal treaty between Great Britain and France in 1839, those
two nations agreed as between themselves, that all bays along certain
parts of their respective coasts which were ten miles or less wide at
their entrance, should be territorial in their entirety. That ten-mile
line has been adopted in many subsequent treaties and it would seem
that the ten-mile rule is in process of displacing and superseding the
six-mile rule.
Whether tested by the six-mile or the ten-mile rule, however,
»Sir Thomas Barclay, Armuairt de I'Insiitut de Droit International, vol. xrr (1892-^94), p. 125-
Richard Kleen. ibid., p. 140.
1 Lord Derby to Mr. R. G. Watson, September 25, 1894. Ex. Doc., 1875-76, Washington,
Government Printing Office (1876), p. 641.
8 Theodore Ortolan: Diplomatie de la Mer, Paris, 1856, vol. I, p. 157.
»L. B. Hautefeuille: Des droits et des devoirs des nations neutrcs en temps de guerre maritime,
Paris, 1868, third edition, vol. I, p. 60. The Legal Status of Hudson's Bay 51
the great sea named in honor of Henry Hudson clearly forms a part
of the open sea and does not fall within the category of the territorial
waters of Canada, excepting of course the band of three miles that
follows the contour of its shores. For the entrance to Hudson's Bay
and its connection with the ocean ranges in width from forty-five
miles up to more than double that distance across from land to land.10
In considering the legal status of Hudson's Bay, the fact that
it is called a bay should not be allowed to cloud the question in issue.
For though it is called a bay, it is in reality a large sea. Not only
is Hudson's Bay several times as large as the area of Great Britain,
but in addition it is much larger than such seas as the Baltic and the
Adriatic, both of which were in former centuries closed but are now
open seas. In fact, it is larger than the North Sea and the Sea of
Japan, and compares favorably in its area with Bering Sea, all
of which form part of the high seas.
Especially, however, a comparison of the size and legal status
of Hudson's Bay and the Gulf of St. Lawrence are instructive and
ihuminating as to any exclusive claims of Canada over the former
body of water. The area of Hudson's Bay amounts to 1,222,610
square kilometers, while that of the Gulf of St. Lawrence amounts
only to 219,300 square kilometers. Both these seas are encircled
by lands of the British Empire, the former by the Dominion alone,
the latter by Newfoundland as well as Canada. The connection
of Hudson's Bay with the ocean is not less than forty-five miles
in width, and in general it is more than twice that distance. The
Laurentian Sea, besides its connection with the ocean through the
Strait of Belleisle which is ten miles wide between Newfoundland
Island and the mainland of Labrador, is joined to the Atlantic Ocean
by Cabot Strait, sixty miles in width. This is not only ten times
as much as the usual six-mile test—in the absence of a treaty providing another measure as to whether bays are territorial or not in their
entirety—but also besides, the center of Cabot Strait is far beyond
the reach of shore batteries. By all the usual tests of the law of
nations the Laurentian Sea is a part of the high seas. The distinguished British jurist, Dr. Westlake holds that the Gulf of St. Lawrence is an open sea.11 And in the North Atlantic Coast Fisheries
Arbitration case, which was argued before and decided by The Hague
10 The Encyclopaedia Britannica, Cambridge, England, eleventh edition, 1910, vol. xm, p. 851.
u John Westlake: International Law: second edition, 1910, vol. i, p. 197. 52 The Annals of the American Academy
Judicial International Court in 1910, the Gulf of St. Lawrence was
recognized by implication as an open sea by all parties concerned.
It has been so regarded from time immemorial by the nations of
the world.
Why then should Hudson's Bay, which is five and a half times
as large as the Laurentian Sea, at this late day in the development
of the doctrine of the freedom of the sea, be classed suddenly as
a mare clausum? If that great northern sea named after Henry
Hudson is to be ranked'as a closed sea, it must be so classified on
some other grounds than its geographical limits unless at the same
time many other seas of lesser extent are withdrawn from the category
of open seas.
As has been said above, Vattel, the leading authority upon the
law of nations for all the world in the second half of the eighteenth
century, whose treatise still carries weight to-day and is cited with
respect, held that Hudson's Bay formed a part of the open sea. But
also in more recent times other distinguished publicists and jurisconsults have recognized Hudson's Bay specifically as an open sea.
Thus for instance the Briton, Phillimore,12 the German, Bluntschli,18
the Russian, Fedor de Martens,14 the Swiss-Belgian, Rivier,15 have
declared that Hudson's Bay forms a part of the high seas. And
in the well-known "Encyclopaedia Britannica," eleventh edition,
published in 1910, though it is said in the article on Hudson's Bay
that Canada desires to make of Hudson's Bay a mare clausum, yet
that large sea is acknowledged in that article to be a mare liberum.
The writer says:16 "The bay abounds with fish, of which the chief
are cod, salmon, porpoise and whales. The last have long been
pursued by American whalers, whose destructive methods have so
greatly depleted the supply that the government of Canada is
anxious to declare the bay a mare clausum."
There is a notable instance in the struggle for the maintenance
of the freedom of the seas that supports that freedom for the waters
of Hudson's Bay. In the early part of the last century, by an ukase
issued in 1821 by the Emperor Alexander I, the Russian Government laid claim to an absolute dominion over Bering Sea, and also
u Sir Robert Phillimore: International Law, London, 1879, second edition, vol. i, p. 284.
u J. C Bluntschli: Le Droit International Codifie, traduction de C. Lardy, Paris, 1886, sec. 309.
" F. de Martens: Traile de Droit International, Paris, 1883, vol. I, p. 504.
"Alphonse Rivier: Principes de Droit des Gens, Paris, 1896, vol. I, p. 155.
" The Encyclopaedia Britannica, Cambridge, England, eleventh edition, 1910, vol. xni, p. 851. The Legal Status of Hudson's Bay 53
a large portion of the northern part of the Pacific Ocean. Against
this claim of exclusive jurisdiction beyond the usual narrow band
of territorial waters following the contour of the coast line, the
Government of Great Britain as well as that of the United States
protested emphatically. The difference between America and Russia
was arranged by the treaty of 5/17 of April, 1824, which recognized
among other things the freedom of the North Pacific Ocean. The
negotiations between Great Britain and Russia were more protracted,
but were finally arranged by treaty in 1825.
George Canning, Foreign Secretary of Great Britain, wrote on
September 27, 1822, to the British premier, the Duke of Wellington,
with respect to the claims advanced by the Moscovite Government
over the waters of Bering Sea and the extreme northern part of the
Pacific Ocean. Concerning the pretensions advanced by Russia
in the ukase of 1821, Canning maintained that such claims were,
according to the best legal authorities, "positive innovations on the
rights of nayigation." By common usage, "an accessorial boundary," he said, had been added for a limited distance to the shores
of a state in order to secure to that nation sufficient protection,
without interfering with the rights of the subjects of other states
to navigate and trade freely. As stated in the ukase, the Russian
claims, he maintained, disregarded this important qualification,
and consequently were "an encroachment on the freedom of navigation, and the inalienable rights of nations." Continuing, Canning
referred to an exchange of views that he had had with the Russian
Ambassador and said that he thought that Russia would rescind
that portion of her public notification whereby she had announced
that she would "consider the portions of the ocean included between
the adjoining coasts of America and the Russian Empire as a mare
clausum, and to extend the exclusive territorial jurisdiction of Russia
to 100 Italian miles." Thus Canning in a communication to his
chief, the Duke of Wellington, the executive head at that time of
the British Empire, maintained that the claim of Russia to exercise,
to the exclusion of others, her sovereignty over a large portion of
the Pacific Ocean and also over Bering Sea, which was bounded
exclusively by her coasts, though with many passages more than
six miles wide connecting the main ocean with Bering.Sea, was not
justified by the law of nations, either as taught by the jurists learned
in that science or by the actual practice of nations. 54 The Annals of the American Academy
The principal object of the British Government during the
negotiations with Russia from 1821 to 1825, that resulted in the
Treaty of 1825, was to maintain the freedom of the waters of the
Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea. This we know from the instructions
that George Canning, British Foreign Secretary, gave to his cousin,
Sir Stratford Canning, as the latter was about starting to resume
negotiations with the Russian Government, at the point where they
had been suspended at an earlier date. In the latter part of the
instructions to Sir Stratford, the British Foreign Secretary said:17
It remains only, in recapitulation, to remind you of the origin and principles
of this whole negotiation.
It is not on our part essentially a negotiation about limits.
It is the demand of the repeal of an offensive and unjustifiable arrogation
of exclusive jurisdiction over an ocean of unmeasured extent; but a demand
qualified and mitigated in its manner, in order that its justice may be acknowledged and satisfied without soreness or humiliation on the part of Russia.
We negotiate about territory to cover up the remonstrance upon principle.
But any attempt to take undue advantage of this voluntary facility, we
must oppose.
Thus, the British Empire sought for her chief object, during
the negotiations over her conflicting interests with those of the
Russian Empire concerning land and sea in Northwestern America
and Bering Sea, to obtain from the Moscovite Government a public
disclaimer of the claim advanced by Russia in 1821 that Bering
Sea and large parts of the northern Pacific Ocean were Russian
territorial waters.
In the Anglo-Russian treaty of February 16/28, 1825, concluded
by Sir Stratford Canning for Great Britain and Count Nesselrode
and M. de Poletica for Russia, the latter nation gave up her pretensions to absolute jurisdiction over the waters of the North Pacific
Ocean or Bering Sea beyond the usual limit along the coasts.18 At
the same time the two nations agreed upon a land frontier that was
to separate their North American land possessions.19
Hudson's Bay and Bering Sea much resemble one another.
Those two large seas are in great measure surrounded by land. Before
and at the time of the signing of the Anglo-Russian treaty of 1825,
and afterwards until Russia sold Alaska to the United States in 1867,
17 Pur Seal Arbitration, British Case, Washington, vol. rv, p. 448.
w Fur Seal Arbitration: Washington, vol. IV, p. 42.
19 Thomas Willing Balch: The Alaska Frontier, Philadelphia, 1903, pp. 5-f. The Legal Status of Hudson's Bay 55
the land encasing those two seas was possessed by a single nation.
If the entrance from the main ocean to those two seas, one called a
sea and the other a bay, were six miles or less in width, both of them,
at the time the Anglo-Russian Treaty of February, 1825, was signed,
would have been classified according to the doctrine of mare clausum
as closed seas. Russia had proclaimed openly to all the world her
right of exclusive jurisdiction over the waters of Bering Sea, as well
as part of the Pacific Ocean further toward the south. Russia wished
very much to include Bering Sea within her own domain as a mare
clausum. Like the United States, however, Great Britain contested
this proposed extension of Russian jurisdiction over all of Bering
Sea on the plea that, according to the accepted rules of international
law, Bering Sea formed a part of the high seas and consequently
was an open sea. And as the Russian Government gave up in 1824
to the United States, it likewise yielded in 1825 before the protest
of Great Britain the Moscovite claim that Bering Sea was a mare
clausum. But if Bering Sea was a mare liberum as the government
of Great Britain asserted with so great success in 1825 against the
contrary claim of the Russian Government, why then, according
to the same line of argument, is not Hudson's Bay also a mare liberum?
Surely the strong presentation of facts and the able arguments made
with such success by the official representatives of Great Britain
in the first quarter of the last century against the attempt of Russia
to withdraw Bering Sea from the area of the high seas, by declaring
it a closed sea, are applicable to the analogous status of the waters
of Hudson's Bay. Surely if Bering Sea was an open sea in 1825,
so also was Hudson's Bay. When, since that time, have either or
both of them become closed seas?
From the foregoing brief survey of some of the historic facts
and rules affecting the international status of the waters of the Hud-
sonian Sea, it is evident that that great body of salt water forms,
like Bering Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Adriatic Sea and many other
similar large sinuosities, part of the high seas. And that consequently
Hudson's Bay is still what it was when Vattel wrote in the middle
of the eighteenth century, an open sea.
J THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA IN THEIR
HUNDRED  YEARS  OF  PEACE
By James L. Tryon,
New England Director of the American Peace Society, Boston.
The proposition to have a celebration of the Hundred Years
of Peace, 1814-1914, recalls the relations between the United States
and Canada since the signing of the Treaty of Ghent. The question
naturally arises, Have their relations been pleasant? Are they in
any way unique?    Is there anything about them to celebrate?
That the relations of these countries are unique is attested
by the fact that to a large extent their people are descended from
the same ancestry, speak the same language, enjoy the same
inheritance of the English common law, and have developed side by
side a successful democracy. Quebec may have her French Roman
law—so has Louisiana; neither affects the common law of other
jurisdictions. French is one of the official languages of the Dominion
of Canada, and here may be an exception that we cannot parallel,
but the French Canadian is an integral part of Canadian life, and
Sir Wilfrid Laurier has declared in the same loyal spirit as Sir John
A. Macdonald, that he is a British subject. We have in the United
States nearly a million and a half loyal French Canadians, many ofr
whom can say, "I am an American citizen." And so, although
the parallel may not be exact, a resemblance exists. More than
that, it is impossible oftentimes to distinguish a British Canadian
from an American by his dress or his accent. All these facts indicate
the oneness of the two peoples.
It does not necessarily follow, however, that, because these
peoples are closely related, they are exempt from disagreement.
The very closeness of their relation and their geographical nearness to
each other have often caused controversies that would never have
occurred had they lived farther apart; but, whenever there has been
irritation, it has, except in one instance, ended in a friendly understanding. All the more reason, then, is there for a day of rejoicing
over the long peace that, in spite of international complications,
has prevailed.
(56) United States and Canada—Hundred Years of Peace     57
A lesson, at once most timely and encouraging in this age when
nations that are outwardly friendly are armed to the teeth, can be
learned from the experience of the United States and Canada.
It will show that, in one instance of very great importance, an agreement for the limitation, reduction, and disuse of armaments has been
a practical success. By an exchange of notes that took place in 1817
between Great Britain and the United States, with the approval
of the United States Senate, Sir Charles Bagot, minister representing
the mother country, and Richard Rush, acting for the American
Department of State, an agreement1 for the limitation of naval
armaments was made to the effect that each nation should maintain
not more than one warship apiece on Lake Ontario and Lake Cham-
plain, or more than two each on the Great Lakes, none of which ships
should exceed one hundred tons in burden, or be armed with larger
than an eighteen-pounder cannon. It was understood by the contracting parties that this agreement might be terminated on six
months' notice from either power to the other. The agreement has
been subjected to considerable strain at times, but in spirit it has
never been broken. That it could ever have been literally kept was
impossible, except at the start, because of the low standard of tonnage
and armament in the early days of the nineteenth century, as compared with the enormous tonnage and armaments of to-day. Mr.
Root once referred to this singular compact as having become "an
antiquated example of naval literature." There was a period about
1838, during the Canadian rebellion, when the British government
exceeded the limit agreed upon and justified its position to the United
States on the ground of public danger; and there were one or two
occasions when the United States was called to account by the British
minister for exceeding the limit as to the size of ships, but these technical departures from the stipulations have never been deemed serious.
There was, however, an attempt made by the United States to have
the arrangement terminated towards the close of the civil war,
when the Federal government was compelled to take measures
for the defense of its territory from Confederate invasions made,
or expected to be made, from Canada. But the end of the war came
before the six months required for notice actually expired, and the
United States decided to let the contract remain in force.
i For a history of the naval agreement, see I Moore's International Law Digest, section 143,
Consent of the Senate given April 16, 1818; proclaimed April 28, 1818. 58 The Annals of the American Academy
But the point that the experience illustrates, and the same thing
is practically true of the land as well as the lakes boundary, is that
on a border line of more than three thousand miles—the longest
in the world—there is no appreciable menace by either nation from
forts or warships, and the expense for their maintenance, when
compared with that of the armaments of European countries in
like situations, is hardly worth consideration. The Canadian border
line has aptly been called the safest border line in the world.
Most of the questions that have arisen between the United
States and Great Britain in relation to Canada have been questions
of boundary or of fishing rights. Nearly all questions relating to
boundaries have arisen in consequence of obscure passages in or mistakes in maps used by the makers of the Treaty of 1783. Fisheries
questions have turned chiefly upon the interpretation of the convention of 1818. All disputes have been settled by arbitration or diplomacy. Although sometimes the decisions rendered and the settlements made have been unsatisfactory to the losing party, the conduct
of the two peoples has been highly honorable and left no sting of
international resentment that abides to this day; and, to prepare
for the future, these countries have now entered upon an arrangement
that is quite as unique as the "Truce of Armaments." They have
constituted an international boundaries commission that is capable
of dealing with every question that may come up, arising from
interests pertaining either to the frontier or elsewhere.
The first question of importance between Canada and the United
States is related to the northeastern boundary. A commission was
provided for in the Jay Treaty to determine what river was meant
by the St. Croix in the Treaty of 1783. This commission, composed
of two arbitrators, each of whom was a citizen of the contending countries, and an umpire, also a national of one of them, chosen by the two
commissioners, fixed upon the Schoodic, or Schoodiac, River, according to the American claim, instead of the Magaguadavic as contended
for by Great Britain. This settlement, the story of which is appreciatively told in the first volume of John Bassett Moore's "International Arbitrations,"2 was made by men of the highest personal
* For the history of international arbitrations between the United States and other countries,
see generally Professor John Bassett Moore's International Arbitrations, 6 volumes, with maps.
The first volume relates especially to arbitrations between Great Britain and the United States,
including those in which Canada has been interested. There is no other work of equal authority
on the subject.    The writer combines with historical accuracy a respect for international justice United States and Canada—Hundred Years of Peace     59
character and legal fitness, who, though their sympathies had been
with one side or the other in the revolutionary struggle, were rejoiced
that they could perform their duties to this controversy as brothers
rather than as enemies. James Sullivan, of Massachusetts, agent
of the United States, in concluding his report on this arbitration in
1797, wrote: "Why shall not all the nations on earth determine their
disputes in this mode rather than choke the rivers with their carcasses,
and stain the soil of continents with their slain? The whole business
has been proceeded upon with great ease, candor, and good humor."3
When the war of 1812 had demonstrated to Great Britain the
necessity of a clear title to the route from Halifax to Quebec overland,
south of the St. Lawrence, an effort was made to secure it as of right
under the Treaty of 1783; but the peace commissioners of the
United States, to whom the matter was referred at the time of the
negotiation of the Treaty of Ghent, resisted the British claim.
An agreement was then made, however, that a special commission
should be appointed by the British and American governments to
survey and determine the line. If the commissioners failed to agree,
the question was to be submitted to a friendly arbitrator. The commissioners disagreed and the King of the Netherlands was requested
to arbitrate. Failing to find an unmistakable line according to the
maps and information laid before him, he recommended a compromise
boundary, which was calculated to suit the convenience of both parties
but to cause serious loss to neither. This award, or recommendation,
being in excess of the arbitrator's powers, was not accepted, and
after considerable correspondence the dispute was settled by Daniel
Webster and Lord Ashburton, who, in 1842, met at Washington
and agreed upon a conventional line. This line gave to the United
States about seven-twelfths of the twelve thousand square miles of
land in dispute, and to Great Britain for Canada five-twelfths, which
was more than the arbitrator had allowed to her. The treaty further
confirmed to the United States its claim to Rouse's Point, which was
found to be a little north of parallel 45°, the accepted line between
and a high regard for the public services of the men of all nations who have helped to adjust the
differences described.
See also an address by Justice William R. Riddell, on "Arbitration Treaties affecting the
United States and Canada," in the report of the Lake Mohonk Conference on International Arbitration, 1912, page 75. See the same writer, in Judicial Settlement of International Disputes,
p. 14, in which report he is equally happy in his account of the relations between the two countries.
To both Professor Moore and Justice Riddell I am indebted for my summary of facts.
* Moore's International Arbitrations, I, 17. 60 The Annals of the American Academy
the two countries at that point, and granted the right to citizens
of the United States to use the St. John River in the British dominions
for floating down lumber and other produce, on the same terms as
allowed to citizens of Canada. The general government of the United
States compensated the states of Maine and Massachusetts, proprietary owners of the land in controversy, for their losses, by payments
of $150,000 each, and gave to Maine, in addition, a considerable
sum to reimburse her for expenses incurred in defending her claims
to the territory, the jurisdiction over which she had exercised.
The Webster-Ashburton treaty had been preceded by great
public excitement on both sides of the line. The State of Maine had
appropriated $800,000 for military purposes, and the United States
government $10,000,000 in the form of extra credit to support the
assertion of the American claims. Arrests and counter-arrests had
been made by the governments of Maine' and New Brunswick.
Maine had a civil posse on the scene and had equipped regiments
for war. Forts were built and military roads constructed to anticipate hostilities. In fact, the controversy was called "the Aroostook
war;" but this was a misnomer—there was no war. General Scott
was sent to the border to effect an armistice between Maine
and New Brunswick. The situation was further complicated by
the affair of the Caroline, the destruction of an American vessel
on the Niagara River, and the accidental killing of an American citizen by a British-Canadian force. This force, the public character
of which Great Britain afterwards acknowledged, thus succeeded in
preventing supplies from reaching some revolutionists on Navy
Island; but, to placate outraged national feeling, the destruction of
the Caroline was made the subject of an apology in a letter from
Lord Ashburton to Mr. Webster. Other events, like the case of the
Creole, afterwards (1853) adjusted by arbitration, also endangered
the situation, but the diplomacy of the two distinguished commissioners was equal to the emergency.
At a critical stage in the negotiations relating to the boundary
line, Lord Ashburton and Mr. Webster ceased to keep written protocols of their work, and informally reached their conclusions. Both
were afterwards severely criticised for making concessions, and in
England the settlement was contemptuously spoken of as "the
Ashburton capitulation" by political opponents like Lord Palmerston.
Webster justified himself in an able speech on the Treaty of Wash- United States and Canada—Hundred Years of Peace     61
ington. But no statesmen of Great Britain and America were ever
more patriotic, or ever had the larger interests of their two peoples
more at heart than these great men. After his appointment as
commissioner, Lord Ashburton, in a private letter to Mr. Webster,
wrote: "The principal aim and object of that part of my life devoted to public objects during the thirty-five years that I have had
a seat in one or the other House of Parliament, has been to impress
on others the necessity of, and to promote myself, peace and harmony
between our countries; and although the prevailing good sense of
both prevented my entertaining any serious apprehensions on the
subject, I am one of those who have always watched with anxiety
at all times any threatening circumstances, any clouds which, however small, may, through the neglect of some or the malevolence of
others, end in a storm the disastrous consequences of which defy
exaggeration.' '*
The peace that has prevailed between Great Britain and
America is to a large degree due to the fact that we have had men
like Webster and Ashburton to meet every warlike situation.
The fixing of the national ownership of islands in Passama-
quoddy Bay was the work of a commission in 1817, authorized by
the Treaty of Ghent. But afterwards it was found that the title
to a few small islands was not settled and the boundary line in
Passamaquoddy Bay was finally determined by a treaty signed
May 21, 1910; ratifications exchanged August 20, 1910. Doubts
as to the boundaries of the United States and Canada in the St.
Lawrence, Lakes Ontario, Erie and Huron, were peacefully solved
by two commissioners in 1822. Under the Treaty of 1854, a dispute
as to places reserved respectively to Americans and Canadians for
their fisheries in that treaty was adjusted by a commission with the
aid of an umpire.
In 1846 another question of almost equal importance with that
of the northeastern boundary arose in the Northwest; where, however, at that time the national life of Canada was undeveloped and
Great Britain, as the mother country, was the chief British party
concerned. By the assertion of long cherished rights, both the
United States and Great Britain laid claim to land near the Columbia
River. To prevent a clash of arms, the debatable land was by
treaty occupied in common, without prejudice to claims of either
' Van Tyne's Letters of Daniel Webster, p. 253. 62 The Annals of the American Academy
country, from 1818 for ten years. Attempts to settle the question
in 1824 failed, and in 1827 the joint occupation was ^definitely
renewed. The excitement of the political campaign of 1844 in
America is remembered by the cry, "Fifty-four forty or fight!"
which helped to secure the presidential office for Mr. Polk. England
at that time claimed down to the mouth of the Columbia River,
between 46° and 47°. This question was settled shortly afterward
by an agreement made by James Buchanan, Secretary of State,
and Mr. Pakenham, the British minister, who compromised on the
line of 49° and kept the peace. A question of comparatively no
importance from the point of view of international excitement was
settled in 1869, when a commission adjusted claims of the Hudson's
Bay Company and the Puget's Sound Agricultural Company.
In practically all the negotiations between the United States
and Great Britain affecting Canada up to 1871, Canada was represented solely by Great Britain; but in the making of the Treaty of
Washington, signed May eighth of that year, she was specially represented by Sir John A. Macdonald,6 her distinguished premier. After
the rejection by the United States of the Johnson-Clarendon Convention, which had made provision for the settlement of claims
between the two countries, but met with almost unanimous opposition in the American Senate, the two governments were brought
together by the instrumentahty of Sir John Rose,6 a member of the
Canadian ministry. Sir John Rose, as British commissioner in the
settlement of the Hudson's Bay and Puget's Sound Agricultural
companies' claims, made the acquaintance of some of the leading
men in, and connected with, the American Department of State;
and  "as one-half American, one-half English, enjoying the   confi-
6 The signers of the treaty were, on the part of the United States, Hamilton Fish, Robert C
Schenck, Samuel Nelson, Ebenezer Rockwood Hoar, and George H. Williams; on the part of-
Great Britain, the Earl de Grey and Ripon, Sir Stafford H. Northcote, Sir Edward Thornton,
Sir John A. Macdonald, and Montague Bernard.
For the important part taken by Sir John A. Macdonald in the making of the treaty, see
Joseph Pope, Memoirs of the Right Honorable Sir John Alexander Macdonald, G.C.B., First Prime
Minister of the Dominion of Canada, and Lieutenant-Colonel J. P. Macpherson, Life of Sir
J. A. Macdonald.
It is interesting to note that this statesman, like Mr. Webster and Lord Ashburton, was
criticised by some of his people for making concessions. His remarkable defense of himself, which
in its way is quite equal to the speech made by Mr. Webster many years before, will be found in
II Macpherson, p. 110. This speech was made in the Canadian House of Commons May 3, 1872,
and reported in its records.
•See Moore's International Arbitrations, 1,519-30; and, in that connection also, J. C. Bancroft Davis' Mr. Fish and the Alabama Claims; Frank Warren Hackett's Reminiscences of the
Geneva Tribunal; Charles Francis Adams' Lee at Appomattox, and other Papers. United States and Canada—Hundred Years of Peace     63
denceof both governments," had been asked by the British government to see what could be done informally towards settling the
questions at issue. He exercised his good offices with tact and
ability. The Treaty of Washington was the most important ever
made in respect to the number and character of the arbitrations for
which it provided. The chief of these, and the most important in
the history of the world, was the Geneva Arbitration, which dealt
with the Alabama claims, in which however Canada was not especially concerned, as the questions were between the United States
and the home government of Great Britain. The award rendered
gave the United States $15,500,000. The Treaty of Washington
made an arrangement for the settlement by commission of claims
for damages by citizens of the United States against Great Britain,
and by British subjects against the United States, arising out of
occurrences during the period of the civil war, entirely apart from
the Alabama claims. These included claims connected with the
St. Albans, Vt., raid, which was alleged to have been made by
Confederate soldiers who came by way of Canada. There were a
few other matters of damages that also related to Canada. In the
Treaty of Washington provision was made for fixing the amount of
compensation due from the United States to Canada for fishing
privileges conceded by Great Britain under that treaty. The commission met at Halifax and awarded $5,500,000. For a time, the
payment of this money, the amount of which was deemed to be
excessive, provoked discussion in the United States; but a right
feeling prevailed and the debt was honorably discharged.
The San Juan boundary, the question as to the location of the
channel between Vancouver Island and the continent, was, under the
Treaty of Washington, referred to Emperor William I of Germany,
who decided in favor of the contention of the United States, which
claimed the de Haro Channel.
The Bering Sea controversy arose in connection with the
seizure of Canadian vessels in waters wrongly claimed as jurisdictional by the United States. The decision rendered by a commission at Paris, 1893, made an award favorable to Great Britain,
Which obtained for Canada by a commission, under a treaty made
in 1896, about $473,000 damages. The first commission made
protective regulation for the sealing industry to be observed in the
future.    The question had threatened serious trouble to the respon- 64 The Annals of the American Academy
sible heads of government, but they kept it within their own confidence and did not permit it to embroil international relations.
One of the greatest questions of boundary, that between Alaska
and British Columbia, failed of adjustment by diplomacy and was
referred to a joint high commission of British and American citizens. Two of the British delegation were Canadians. By vote of
four to two, the Canadian members dissenting, the English member
joining with the three Americans, the case was decided at London
in 1903 in favor of the contention of the United States. There was
much dissatisfaction in Canada over the results, and Lord Alver-
stone, the English member of the tribunal, was severely criticised
for sacrificing the interests of Canada to those of the Empire, but the
award was accepted.
The most important arbitration of modern times, except that
of the Alabama claims, was really between Canada and the United
States, though nominally between this country and Great Britain.
Newfoundland was also concerned in it. This was'the fisheries
question, which had been dragging on latterly under a modus
vivendi, but formerly under other temporary arrangements, none
of them very satisfactory, for seventy years. At times there was
friction which was due to the enforcement by naval patrols of provincial laws against American fishermen who were in direct rivalry
with Newfoundland and Canadian fishermen on what appeared to
be their own ground. By the treaty made in 1909, which related
back to the general arbitration treaty negotiated in 1908, the case,
in the form of seven vital questions, was submitted to a tribunal
at The Hague which rendered its decision in 1910. The American
judge was George Gray, of Delaware. The British judge was a
Canadian, Sir Charles Fitzpatrick, Chief Justice of Canada. The
neutral judges were Professor Lammasch, of Austria; Dr. Savornin-
Lohman, of the Netherlands, and Dr. Drago, of the Argentine
Republic. Professor Lammasch served as president of the tribunal.
No dispute that has ever been tried by the British and American
governments, unless it was the claims litigation presided over by
Joshua Bates in 1853, has ever been settled to better satisfaction
for both parties than the fisheries case. It has proved to be powerful
evidence among the English-speaking peoples, and before the world,
of the efficiency of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague.
By a treaty made in 1909 for the United States and Canada, United States and Canada—Hundred Years of Peace     65
an international joint boundary commission of six members was
created to deal for the future with all disputes affecting Canadian
and American rights, obligations, or interests on the frontier or
elsewhere, either in the relations of these countries to each other
as governments or between their respective peoples. The arrangement provides that the commission may act either as a board of
inquiry to make a report, or as a tribunal; but in the latter case
agreement to submit a dispute to the commission must have the
consent of both the Canadian and American governments.7 This
commission has been described by Mr. Justice Riddell, of Toronto,
as "a miniature Hague tribunal" between Canada and the United
States. It makes all outside intervention unnecessary and the
resort to force inconceivable.
Upon the question of reciprocity it is not the purpose of the
present writer to enter other than to observe its relation to questions of war and peace. International friendship and reciprocal
trade between these two countries are usually kept apart by intelligent peace workers. In 1854 a reciprocity treaty was made which,
until its expiration by notification by the United States in 1866,
gave general satisfaction to both countries. This was followed by
a standing offer on the part of Canada for a similar treaty for many
years afterwards, but to no avail, as the United States would not
respond to it. When, however, reciprocity was proposed by the
United States in 1911, it was declined on the part of Canada. A
campaign in which reciprocity was the leading question was fought
out in Canada in 1912, mainly on commercial issues, but effective
appeal was also made to Canadian national sentiment on the
ground that the arrangement might lead at some future time to
the absorption of Canada by the United States, or at least it would
place Canadian trade at the mercy of the United States. The
refusal of Canada, though a disappointment in some quarters in
this country, did not deeply, or indeed at all, affect the friendly feeling that had long prevailed between the Canadian and American
peoples, but was regarded on this side of the line as perfectly legitimate, and the relations between the two countries are as cordial
to-day as ever. '' Believe me," said Premier Borden, speaking before
the American Society of International Law in April of last year,
i See rv Supplement American Journal of International Law, 239. In case of equal division
of the commission an umpire shall be chosen. 66' The Annals of the American Academy
"I do not need to assure you of it—that the result in Canada on that
occasion was not dictated in any respect, in any degree whatever,
not in the slightest degree, by any feeling of unfriendliness toward
the people of the United States; because we know that the relations between the two countries during the past twenty-five years
have been most friendly and cordial in every way, and I do not
doubt that in all the years to come that friendliness and cordiality
will be maintained to the full."
There have been in the past some occasions when men like
Goldwin Smith have proposed the political union of Canada and
the United States and insisted that, although retarded for a time by
secondary forces, union is destined inevitably to come; but there
is no such tendency at present, rather all signs point to the contrary. The only union that is likely, as Mr. Justice Riddell has well
said, is that of the heart. Each country prefers its own form of
government—the one a democracy under a monarchy, the other a
democracy in a republic; the "crowned and the uncrowned republics," Mr. Carnegie, a true lover of both, once happily characterized
them. Talk of merging the interests of these two countries is seldom heard in the United States, and when made is usually regarded
either as a joke or as the dream of a visionary. In Canada the proposal of a merger might be taken as an affront or, charitably viewed
as the suggestion of a person uninformed as to Canadian sentiment.
.       . . .
At this point there lies a difficulty in the relations between the
two peoples that historical students ought to remedy. It must be
admitted that the American, as a rule, is absorbed in his own affairs,
which, at the enormous rate at which his country is developing,
give him much to think about at home. He is indifferent to Canada;
he is ignorant of Canadian history and institutions. A student in
a Canadian college learns considerable of the history and institutions
of the United States. Historical courses on Canada are practically
unheard of in American colleges. The average Canadian school
boy knows the names of the states of the American Union. The
average American school boy could probably not name the provinces of the Dominion of Canada. The average Canadian college
student has an intelligent conception of the Constitution of the
United States. The average American college student knows
nothing of the British North America Act; he knows, of course, all
the glorious traditions of the Pilgrim Fathers, but he has never United States and Canada—Hundred Years of Peace     67
heard of the Fathers of the Confederation who laid the foundations
of a new political union that is destined, in the minds not only of
men like Sir Wilfrid Laurier, but of well-informed Americans, to
become in the twentieth century one of the most prosperous and
influential commonwealths of the world. The average Canadian
knows American poets like Longfellow, philosophers like Emerson,
and novelists of various types; but the average American has little
idea of Canadian literature, whether in the form of poetry, philosophy, or novels. A large, though not increasing, number of Canadian students come to the United States to study in our colleges and
universities, but comparatively few American students go to Canada
for collegiate training. That there has been an interchange between
school teachers and college professors by means of conventions and
otherwise, and that there is a mutual debt in the establishment of
representative educational institutions of the two countries, there
can be no doubt. President Lowell of Harvard has proposed that
this mutual debt be recognized at the time of the celebration of
the Century of Peace. But this does not consciously affect the
average man in America, or cause him to study Canadian history
and institutions. If he is studious, he knows much more about
France than about Canada, and still more about England. As to
industry, excepting the knowledge that certain enterprising American farmers have of the Canadian Northwest, the American is
poorly informed as to Canadian conditions, and has little conception, for example, of the wonderful railway systems stretching across
the continent from St. John and Halifax to the Pacific and connecting the shipping of England and the Orient with continuous
Lines. All this deficiency on the part of the average American citizen
and student will, it is hoped, be made up in the next few years.
There will be a strong effort made, in connection with the
celebration of the Hundred Years of Peace, to bring about a better
understanding in the United States of Canadian history and institutions. Preparations for the Centenary of Peace will inevitably
correct many false impressions, and will give the people of both
countries a larger point of view. It may cause history to be rewritten. Some passages in the text-books that retain the spirit of
old-time prejudice that is now unworthy of us ought to be removed,
particularly in the narratives of the revolution and the war of
1812.    Although the peoples of our two countries have in these two r
68 The Annals of the American Academy
memorable conflicts been enemies, it must be remembered that it
is our business to be friends to-day and in the future. Courage and
devotion may well be commemorated in patriotic anniversaries.
Then each nationality should stand by its own revered principles
of government and put a halo of glory around the names of its own
worthies, whether military or civic. But at the time of the anniversary of the Treaty of Ghent, let all animosities be forgotten and
memorials of our unhappy conflicts give place to rejoicings over
our long period of fraternity and peace. THEOCRATIC QUEBEC
By E. M. Sait, Ph.D.,
Department of Politics, Columbia University.
It has been said that the privileges which the Catholic church
enjoyed in the France of the old regime were conferred upon her
as a reward for services against the barbarians. The same may be
said of the Catholic church in Quebec, only that the barbarians in
this case are the English. From the time of the conquest to the time
of Papineau's rebellion competent observers believed that the French-
Canadians would lose their nationality. Tocqueville, when he
visited America in the early thirties, regarded them as "the wreck
of an old people lost in the flood of a new nation.'' We are told that
Garneau, as he "heard the dull booming of the rising tide of the
Anglo-Saxon race," wondered if his history of Canada were not after
all a funeral oration. That the prophets have been confounded, that
the French-Canadians have remained French and clung to the
language which they brought from their Norman and Breton homes,
is largely the result of clerical leadership.
After the conquest the church became the natural leader of the
people. Now that the military and civil officials, the merchants and
capitalists, had returned to France, the peasants had nowhere else
to look for guidance. Poor, illiterate, altogether untrained in the
conduct of public affairs, they confided their future to men who were
accustomed to wield authority and to exact obedience and who had
every reason to oppose Anglicizing influences. The Catholic clergy
were anxious to keep the peasants free from contact with the Protestant English. It was in this way that the peculiarly intimate alliance
between clergy and people came about, destined to leave a deep
impress upon the institutions and literature of the country. Patriotism and religion were joined together.
Before inquiring what the church has done to justify her assumption of leadership, something must be said of the numerical increase
and the distribution of the French-Canadians. Without some
knowledge of their phenomenal development it is impossible to
appreciate the practical value of clerical leadership or to understand
(69) 70 The Annals of the American Academy
the gratitude of the people and the tangible form which that gratitude
has taken. In 1765 there were, within the present boundaries of
Canada, less than 80,000 Frenchmen, descendants of the six thousand
settlers who came from the mother country during the century and
a half of the old regime. They were a conquered people, deprived
of their leaders and without material resources. Since that time
they have received no accession of strength from immigration; in
the whole of Canada there were less than eight thousand "Francais
de France" at the opening of this century. Nevertheless, the handful of peasants have increased to more than three millions.1 Dominant in the province of Quebec, where they constitute eighty per
cent of the population (1,322,115 in 1901), they have thrust themselves westward into Ontario, where they control several border
countries; eastward to join the resurgent Acadians who now form
a quarter of the population of New Brunswick and more than half
the population of the six northern counties of that province; and
southward into New England where, drawn by economic forces which
have now ceased to be operative, they settled in the factory towns,
and now form something like a fifth of the population of Vermont,
New Hampshire and Rhode Island. Careful estimates have shown
that there are a million and a half French-Canadians in the United
States. But, scattered among a rapidly-increasing population of
different origin and no longer fortified by new blood from Quebec,
there is little chance of their persistence as a separate nationality
even in those parts of New England where they are most numerous.
It is in the cradle of the race, upon the banks of the St. Lawrence, that the hope of the future lies. Quebec is not an English-
speaking province and presumably never will be. Nowhere else,
in Canada or the United States, is there a people who can so fairly
claim to be autochthonous. The French-Canadians, whose blood
runs substantially pure and whose language is more nearly that of
the seventeenth century than is the language of modern France,
have built up in the last three centuries one of the vital resources
of a people, a history of which they are proud. They cherish the
days of Frontenac and La GaHssionniere, of Brehiceuf and Daulac
des Ormeaux, in a peculiarly intimate way. Those who know the
songs they sing and the literature they have produced will under-
1 The figures given here are based upon the Canadian census of 1901, as the tables showing the distribution of races under the last census are not yet available. Theocratic Quebec 71
stand how deep their love of the soil goes.    As their poet Crehoazie
wrote in his "Le Canada":
Tu fais rayonner la lumiere
De tes souvenirs glorieux,
Et tu racontes a la terre
Les grands exploits de nos aieux.
All that has happened in Quebec since its cession to the English
seems to indicate that assimilation will never take place. Sheltered
behind a national organization which has called to its service religion,
education, language, literature and national societies, and which
is everywhere informed by a deep consciousness of race, the French-
Canadians have preserved their distinctive characteristics and have
contested successfully with their conquerors for possession of the
soil. In the second half of the nineteenth century the English element declined from twenty-five to twenty per cent of the population.
In five counties an English population does not exist; in a score of
others it falls below five per cent, usually well below. In the country
districts the tendency has been for the English majorities, where
such existed, to become minorities and sink gradually into insignificance. "The danger of assimilation has completely disappeared,"
says M. Thomas C6t6; "we are the masters of our destinies." The
process by which the English have been supplanted upon the soil
is best exemplified by the history of the Eastern Townships, the
eleven counties which He between Montreal and the American
frontier and which were originally settled by immigrants from Great
Britain and the United States. By 1851 the French had become a
third of the population of the Townships; by 1861 nearly a half;
by 1901 two-thirds. In many an old English center all that remains
to show the past is a ruined Protestant church and an overgrown
graveyard. If the present tendencies continue, the soil of the Townships will pass entirely to the invader.
What has brought about this movement? Aside from the
superior fecundity of the French-Canadians (there is an authentic
case of thirty-six children in a family), it cannot be ascribed to their
superior energy. Those who know the obstinate conservatism and
routine methods of the habitant would scout the idea. The truth
is that the displacement was voluntary at first, the English-speaking
farmer going elsewhere to better his condition, and was afterwards 72 The Annals of the American Academy
enforced; and it was enforced, not by any survival of the fittest,
but by the organization and activity of the Roman Catholic church.
In fact, the church is the main factor in rooting the habitant to the
soil and keeping him there. Her clearly developed plan, as the cure
tells his flock in the country parishes, is to make the English and
Protestant parts of the province Catholic and French. Colonization
societies, in which the clerical element predominates, give assistance
to poor colonists, contribute to the cost of churches and schools,
and open up new roads. They act as bureaus of information. They
know of every farm which has been offered for sale and have one of
the faithful ready to occupy it. -Behind the church stands the government, subsidizing the societies and contributing to the cause in
other ways. The Papal Zouaves were rewarded with a block of
township land.
In each locality the same thing happens. One by one the English
families leave. One by one, directed by the church, the French
families arrive. Finally a time comes when the English, losing their
predominance, feel the pressure of the invasion. Left more and more
in the minority, they find it hard, then actually impossible, to maintain the one Protestant church which ministers to the various denominations. The children, playing with French children, are in danger
of becoming French. Thus the retreat, which was gradual and
voluntary at first, finally develops into a frightened rout. Those
who remain behind become, like the Highlanders of the county of
Charlevoix, French in everything but name. From all parts of the
province the English have been converging on the island of Montreal.
In the twenty years preceding the census of 1901, although their increase for theprovince was only 41,500,theyadded38,700 to the population of the city alone. To the population of the whole island, which
is becoming more and more a mere suburb of the city, they added
over 60,000—at the expense, of course, of other English districts.
As long as conditions are unaltered this movement will continue.
Only in Montreal have the English a position of apparent security
and permanence. It is a curious situation. Perhaps in defending
Montreal they feel unconsciously that they are defending the last
ditch.
■ Equally notable have been the services of the church in the
revival of the Acadian people. With the misfortunes of the Acadians
everyone is familiar, whether from the poetry of Longfellow or the Theocratic Quebec 73
narrative of Parkman. It was generally believed, as late as the
middle of the last century, that those misfortunes had destroyed
them; in fact the story of their astonishing survival was first
recounted to the world in 1887 when Casgrain wrote his " Pelerinage
au Pays d'Evangeline.'' The few hundred peasants who were driven
from their homes and scattered over the Atlantic seaboard in 1755
have developed into a vigorous people, proud of their history and
confident of the future. They have their own flag, their own national
holiday, their own newspapers; and in the public schools they are
allowed French books and French teachers. All this is very remarkable; and it was accomplished entirely under the leadership of the
church. It has given the church one more claim upon the gratitude
of the French-Canadians, because the struggle to preserve a common
nationality has obliterated the differences in origin and history
which formerly separated the two French peoples of Canada and
Acadie.
In order to give the French race and the French language (or,
in other words, the Catholic church), a secure position in Quebec,-
the clergy have unceasingly combated the dangers of assimilation.
They have sought to reduce as far as possible the points of contact
between English and French. In 1910 the first Plenary Council
of Quebec urged parents to keep their children free from dangerous
association with Protestants. Some years ago Archbishop Fabre
declared that "Catholics who understand their duties and responsibilities toward their children should aim at cutting the evil at the
root by discouraging intimate relations with Protestants." His
successor, Archbishop Bruchesi, has spoken in the same sense.
Excommunication lies against any Catholic contracting a marriage
before a Protestant minister; and no priest may officiate at a "mixed
marriage" between a Catholic and a Protestant unless an episcopal
dispensation has been granted. In 1907 Archbishop Bruchesi
announced that'' we will no longer, as in the past, grant dispensations
for mixed marriages. Let them not hope to obtain these dispensations because they bring forward the weighty reasons of temporal
advantage or mutual affection." For her own reasons the church
prevented the establishment of a public library in Montreal in 1903,
just as she struck down, a half century ago, the Institut Canadien
where English and French radicals met together. Not only has a
system of education been developed in which the French have their 74 The Annals of the American Academy
own schools and colleges, but attendance at the Protestant English
schools, which usually provide a better course of studies and more
efficient instruction, is strictly prohibited. The penalty, established by the Councils of Quebec and approved by the Holy See, is
refusal of the sacraments; and once a year the attention of the faithful is drawn to this point. The clergy have given every encouragement to the work of purifying the language of intrusive " Anglicisms,"
a movement which resembles the classical revival in Greece about
a century ago. Among French-Canadian authors they have been
represented by such men as Ahb6 Ferland and Abb^ Casgrain.
For such notable services against the barbarians the church
has received equally notable rewards. Above all, she has received
the loyal support and affection of the people she has served. Cardinal
VanutelH, as he passed up the St. Lawrence to represent the Pope
at the Eucharistic Congress of 1910, received from every parish
on its shores a welcome which could have been equaled in no other
country in the world. He said that it reminded him of a day in the
Middle Ages. No better description could have been given to the
spirit which animates Catholic Quebec. In no way has the church
demonstrated her influence so impressively as in supervising the
people's theatrical amusements. and their reading. In the r61e of
public censor she has destroyed powerful newspapers and muzzled
others, disciplined the managers of theaters, forced authors to withdraw their books,and banished from the shops and libraries the novels
of Honore Balzac and the poems of Alfred de Musset. Why do
newspapers like La Presse publish edifying discourses on the eucharist?
Why is Montreal, the metropolis of Canada, unprovided with a public
library? Why is the Theatre de Nouveautes, once the home of good
drama, given over to the exhibition of moving pictures ? It is because
episcopal interdicts, even at this day, are enforced by a sanction as
effective as that which stands behind the laws of the state. The
interdict may be dead in other countries, but it flourishes in Quebec.
Observing the results of its employment, the mind travels back to
the days of Innocent III.
Innumerable illustrations of this clerical censorship might be
given. Allusion has been made to the Theatre des Nouveautes. A
few years ago, after being censured by the Archbishop on account
of an objectionable production, the manager gave his word that no
immoral play would ever be given in the theatre again.    Not long Theocratic Quebec 75
afterwards Bernstein's La Rafale was announced. This play, according to the Archbishop, "is nothing but a display of low sensuality
and an apology for suicide." The theatre was promptly interdicted,
not only for the week during which the play was to run, but indefinitely. All the French papers refrained from criticism of the play.
An audience which was almost entirely English attended on the
first evening; on the second the doors were closed; on the third
the manager wrote to the Archbishop asking to have the interdict
removed. It was removed, but on condition that the posting of
plays should henceforth beapproved by acommitteeof clerical censors.
Shortly afterwards legitimate drama gave way to moving pictures.
Among the many newspapers which have fallen under archi-
episcopal displeasure may be noted Les Debats, Le Combat, and L'Action which appeared successively between 1899 and 1904. They
were managed and edited by Edouard Charlier, an old-country
Frenchman, who had little knowledge of the limitations placed upon
the freedom of the press in Quebec. He spoke violently against "the
brutal invasion of the Transvaal," and was not molested. But when
he eulogized certain dangerous French authors, mocked the Syllabus,
attacked the memory of Archbishop Bourget at the moment when
the diocese was erecting a monument to him, and ridiculed a letter
of Archbishop Bruchesi regarding Sunday observance, he found the
church less patient under criticism than the state had been. The
faithful were prohibited from buying Les Debats, selling it, or having
it in possession. The paper ceased publication. Immediately afterwards Charlier launched another weekly called Le Combat. "It
resembles its brother," cried a clerical organ in Montreal; "we are
forced to believe in metempsychosis!" Indeed, in its short and
merry career Le Combat gave good evidence that it possessed the
spirit of the departed. There was little disguise of the fact that its
dominating idea was hatred of the clergy and that it wished to warn
the people against everything which savored of clerical control.
Again the thunderbolt fell. And again, after reading the Archbishop a little lecture, M. Charlier managed to transfer the old spirit
to a new body. L'Action, however, did not survive its first number.
More famous was the case of Le Canada-Revue which, ruined by the
interdict in 1892, carried its grievances to the courts only to find that
no redress could be obtained. The Archbishop was held to have
acted within his rights. 76 The Annals of the American Academy
Much may be said in justification of clerical censorship. The
church has undertaken a responsibility which the state has failed
to assume. She has labored conscientiously to keep the people
clean, to protect home life, to preserve simple manners and innocent
tastes; and the high level of morality—using the word in its narrower
sense—which prevails among the French population of Quebec
bears good testimony to her services in the discharge of a great trust.
Too often, in the clamor raised over her mistakes and her selfish
behavior, that achievement has been overlooked. But it would
be quite as wrong to overlook instances of excessive zeal and unnecessary oppression, acts of violence done where no public interest
appeared to be at stake and where the battle was fought from the
questionable motive of preserving power or punishing leze majesty.
The dangers of clerical censorship must be fairly obvious, even to
those who are not familiar with its actual operation. The church is an
irresponsible organization, asserting over civil society an authority
ordained by divine will, resisting with all herpower any attempt to diminish that authority, and resenting every word of criticism and every
act of resistance. The educational system of Quebec, for instance,
having fallen under the control of the clergy, is invested by them
with a quasi-religious character; and to touch "the sacred arch of
education," as Senator Poirier ironically calls it, or to discuss glaring
defects and pressing reforms with any degree of frankness requires
a good deal of courage; the church will at once assume that the
criticism is leveled against herself. How then will it fare with those
who throw discredit upon the teaching of the church,—as was impliedly done in Bernstein's Rafale—or bring to light scandals in the ranks
of the clergy themselves, as was done by Le Canada-Revue? "Prick
Hghtly the skin of an ecclesiastic, even in his first year," said Arthur
Buies; "and the whole church puffs out, makes a great noise, and
launches her thunderbolts."
That these thunderbolts are effective is due, of course, to the
attitude of obedience and acquiescence which prevails among the
people. But to many acts of the clergy the state has undertaken
to give a legal sanction. Thus, parish priests are not supported by
voluntary offerings, but by payment of the tithe which the civil
courts will enforce; and churches are not built by popular subscription, but by levying a regular tax upon the freeholders of the parish
and collecting it by legal process if necessary.   The tithe, which has Theocratic Quebec 77
always existed in Canada, amounts to a twenty-sixth of the harvested
cereals; in some parts of the province it has been extended to include
hay. In cases where it is insufficient to support the priest or where
the heads of families pay no tithe at all, which applies particularly
to towns and cities, it is customary to levy a kind of personal tithe
known as the capitation; and apparently the courts will enforce
its payment. It should also be noted that the organization of the
parish and its administration are regulated by statute. There is
no real separation of church and state in Quebec.
In the same way the state has legalized the ascendancy of the
church in educational matters. Under the system of separate schools
which was established- nearly three-quarters of a century ago the
control of Catholic schools has been entrusted to a committee which
the bishops of the province absolutely dominate. The bishops are
directly responsible, therefore, for the studies which are prescribed
and for the books which are authorized. Under their hands the
main purpose of the primary schools seems to be to prepare children
for their first communion. "Religious instruction shall hold the
principal place among the subjects of the course," the regulations
say, "and shall be regularly given in every school. The catechism
lessons of children preparing for their first communion shall receive
special attention. When it is deemed necessary, children preparing
for their first communion shall be exempted from a part of their
other class exercises." As the parish priest has the right to visit
the school, inspect all documents, and both choose the books and
direct the teacher in all matters of religion and morals, the regulations are well enforced. In the language of a competent observer
the catechism "forms the staple of the course of study, with a little
of the three R's in the intervals between it and prayers." After
the first communion few—of the boys at least—continue to attend
school.
The inefficiency of the primary schools is patent, even appalling. "We are ready to acknowledge," says the Montreal Witness,
"that, compared with ideal conditions, our attitude toward education
is disgraceful and, further, that in these days of necessary competition with all other peoples it involves a national peril." The incompetency of the teachers may be proved sufficiently from the reports
of the school inspectors. "One-half the teachers seem ignorant
of the first ideas of the course of studies," we read.    "There are w&
78 The Annals of the American Academy
thirty-seven who have no diplomas and who, with few exceptions,
teach only a little reading and writing as well as the catechism to
the children preparing for the first communion." "There are too
many persons who have no vocation for teaching and are accepted
because no better ones can be got." It should be noted that 4,600
monks and nuns are teaching in the public schools without diplomas.
They are exempted by statute from the necessity of securing diplomas,
an exemption for which they give no guarantee of efficiency. In
the primary schools where the teachers are almost entirely women -
the average salary of a woman teacher possessing a diploma is $177
in the towns and $125 in the country. A bricklayer earns in an hour
twice as much as one of these teachers earns in a day.
In higher education the French-Canadians seldom go afield from
their own university, Laval, and the nineteen classical colleges which
are affiliated with it. These are entirely under clerical domination.
Laval, though raised to the status of a university only in the middle
of the nineteenth century, can boast of a long history, beginning
with the foundation of the Petit Seminaire in 1668. It does not belie
its ecclesiastical origin. The final supervision of doctrine and discipline rests with a Superior Council composed of the archbishops
and bishops of the civil province, under the presidency of the Archbishop of Quebec, who, besides being Apostolic Chancellor and
Visitor, enjoys the power of veto over all rules and nominations.
At the opening of the year the professors go to the archiepiscopal
palace and deposit at the feet of the Visitor their oath of fidelity.
Frenchmen who have come out to occupy the chairs of French literature established through the efforts of Abbe" Colin, Superior of the
Sulpicians in Montreal, have found their position intolerable. One,
beginning his course with the nineteenth century, was forced to
change to the seventeenth. There was great scandal when de
Labriolle delivered a eulogy on Paul Louis Courier, and when M.
Leger made references to Zola and Anatole France. In 1904, when
a medical congress holding its sessions at Laval resolved that all
teachers, even those in orders, ought to have a certificate of health,
the vice-rector at first closed the doors against the doctors, though
he was finally prevailed upon to rescind the order. The students
are forbidden to make use of any library other than that of the
university itself, which is certainly not calculated to undermine their
morals or their orthodoxy.    Laval has a branch at Montreal which Theocratic Quebec 79
was founded in 1876 and has outgrown the mother institution,
becoming practically independent.
The classical colleges are formed after a pattern taken from
the old world. Children may enter at the age of seven and eventually proceed to the bachelor's degree or enter the church. Little
more than forty per cent of the students are above sixteen years
of age. Practically all the instructors are in orders. The students
are all formed in the same mold, and subjected to a discipline that
too often breaks their spirit and initiative. Their education is
classical, even to the point of having classes conducted in Latin.
Modern literature and modern philosophy are eschewed.
Already criticism, insistent criticism, is being directed against
these homes of obscurantism, not only by radical reformers, but
also by men whose temperament is conservative and whose attachment to the church still survives. Their assault on the school system
is fundamental. It is in the schools that the clergy take hold of the
young and mold them to obedience. They exercise almost complete
control; prescribing the studies, authorizing the books, and bringing to bear upon the students influences which are calculated to
leave a permanent impress. In fact, the schools of Quebec develop
loyalty to the church in the same way that the schools of other
countries develop loyalty to the state. The radicals, who wish to
break the spell of clerical ascendancy over the people, aim more
irnmediately at modernizing the schools and reHeving the French-
Canadians of the handicap of inferior education. Hence the agitation
for a Minister of Education, in the place of the bishops, and for free
and obligatory instruction. "It is indisputably established," said
the clerical organ La VeriU, "that obligatory instruction is preached
by the Freemasons especially, and that the countries which have
allowed this measure to be imposed on them have demonstrated
its failure. . . . It is by means of obligatory instruction above
all that the adversaries of religious instruction hope to take the
child from paternal authority and the salutary influence of the
church, in order to throw him into the arms of the state." It must
be admitted that "the salutary influence of the church" is the chief
point of attack. That salutary influence, far from taking the lead
in effecting necessary reforms, has thrown its mantle about the
schools and made criticism a sacrilege. It is dangerous to criticise
or even to suggest improvements; and so a growing number of radi- fflS^i
80 The Annals of the American Academy
cals believe that the schools must be laicized before they can be
made efficient.
It is in Montreal, where Protestant and Catholic schools stand
side by side inviting comparison and where competition in commerce
and industry makes the French feel the inadequacy of their training,
that the reform movement has gathered most headway. The Board
of School Commissioners, though the ecclesiastical members dissented, established a short while ago practical freedom of instruction
and uniformity of books. Previously the religious orders had made
some profit, ad maiorem dei gloriam, as Le Pays remarked irreverently,
by getting authorization for the books which they printed and sold
without any taxation by the state. But the great victory of the
radical programme, apparently the first step in a revolution, was the
founding of the Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales in 1908.
It is true that an Abb6 of the church blessed the corner-stone; but
the ceremony was strangely free from the usual clerical tone, and
the school itself is entirely under lay control. The members of the
governing corporation are nominated by the French-Canadian
Chamber of Commerce and appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor.
The significance of this will appear best from the comments of
the clerical papers. Said La VeriU: "We see in the constitution
of the Ecole des Hautes Etudes that the representatives of religious
authority have been completely overlooked. They have been
excluded from an institution in which, however, they ought to have
a voice in certain branches of the prescribed programme of studies.
There is an unfortunate tendency to exaggerate the rights of the
state in education to the detriment of the rights of the church."
What "the rights of the state" are may be gathered from the declaration of the Superintendent of Public Instruction that the sole right
of the state in matters of education is to furnish the funds. "Before
sending their children to this school," said UAction Sociale, "Catholics will wish to assure themselves that its atmosphere is not deleterious. If the atmosphere is poisoned with neutrality, parents and
children will go elsewhere. . . . The church has the right to
complain if she and all religion are excluded positively from an establishment where neither the director nor the professors admit her
influence and her authority."
In still another direction the authority of the church has been
clothed with legal sanction.    In their interpretation of the Civil Theocratic Quebec
Code of the province the courts have long recognized her full pretensions in the regulation of the marriage tie. Down to the year 1901
it seemed thoroughly established that, in deciding on the vahdity
of an alleged marriage between two Catholics, the courts.should be
guided by the decision of the competent ecclesiastical tribunal and
reserve to themselves only the right of pronouncing as to the civil
effects,—marriage portion, right of succession, etc. In that year,
however, the case of Delpit v. Cote came before the Superior Court.
The parties, though both Catholic, had been married before a Unitarian minister in Montreal. The plaintiff, claiming that, in accordance with ecclesiastical rules, the marriage should have been celebrated in a Catholic church and before the proper priest of one of
the parties, secured a decree of nullity from the Archbishop. He
then demanded, and in the light of precedent had every right to
expect, annulment by the court as to the civil effects. The court
took a very different view, a view which was received with consternation by the clergy. It held that "the marriage upon a license of
two Roman Catholics by a Protestant minister is not illegal as having
been solemnized by an incompetent official." This decision was
rendered by Judge Archibald, an English judge. But although a
French judge rendered a contrary judgment ona similar point a month
and a half later, it seems from a very recent decision that through
the force of its argument and its reliance on broad principles of law
that Delpit v. C6U will leave its impress upon the jurisprudence of
the future. The slowly-developing spirit of anti-clericalism has
begun to make itself felt upon the bench.
Anti-clerical sentiment is growing in Quebec. Excessive pretensions, intemperate craving for power, the determination of the
clergy to make their will dominant where modern practice allows
freedom of choice to the individual—these things have raised up
enemies. "If the chiefs of the church heard the talk to which
these abuses give rise," wrote Senator David, "if they knew what
good Catholics and irreproachable parents are repeating freely,
they would be frightened. Unhappily the truth reaches them
with difficulty, through the smoke of the incense which envelops
them; respect and fear of displeasing them or giving them pain
too often close the mouths of the worthy men who surround them.
. . . The danger which menaces the influence of the clergy and
of religion itself is great, serious, incontestable."   French-Canadians 82
The Annals of the American Academy
are beginning to wonder if clerical dictatorship has not become an
anachronism; if the large powers which were entrusted to the church
at a time when the very existence of the nationality was in peril
should not be recalled now that the circumstances have changed.
To-day their danger is mainly economic; and the church has shown
no disposition to meet the danger by raising the standard of education
and giving it the practical character which would prepare the students
for industrial or commercial careers. She is too much concerned
with the preservation of her powers and with the enforcement of
obedience at the expense of individual initiative and self-reliance.
She is not disposed to lay down her dictatorship like a Garibaldi or
a Cincinnatus. The result is that the French-Canadian Freemasons,
converted by missionaries from France and possessed of all the
conviction of early Christians, are meeting secretly in the catacombs
to plot her destruction. CANADIANS IN THE UNITED STATES1
By S. Morley Wickett, Ph.D.,
Of Wickett & Craig, Ltd., Toronto, Canada.
It was the French Canadian coureurs de bois who opened up
the western trade routes from Hudson's Bay to Louisiana. That was
two centuries ago, before the United States was yet a dream of the
future. These French Canadians laid the first foundations of a
line of great cities, among which may be named Detroit, Sault Ste.
Marie, Chicago, St. Paul, Pittsburgh and New Orleans. That
early chapter is, however, long since closed, except for the faint traces
of race one still notices occasionally on the Mississippi. As regards population, the United States more than repaid the debt
after the peace of 1783, when United Empire Loyalists founded
Upper Canada and New Brunswick and settled the eastern townships of Quebec. For the subject in hand we come down to much
closer years, of which we have more or less exact information, and
need not run our eye further back than a few years before British
North America became the Dominion of Canada. But both the
earlier and the later ends of this great story of interchange of population between the two countries, still await the historian's pen.
To put results bluntly, during the second half of last century
at least 1,800,000 Canadians moved across the border into the
United States. The exodus stands as one of the notable facts in
Canada's history. For a time it dismayed a large section of the
Canadian people and brought them almost to despair of a political
future. But that chapter is closed. Canada is now attracting
population alike from Europe and the United States, and is progressing so rapidly that its growth has come to be one of the outstanding
events in the recent history of the new world. Accordingly it will
be of interest to look back and review briefly the great Canadian
exodus, the localities the emigrants have selected for their new
homes, the occupations they are following, and their intermarriage
with citizens of the United States.
1 This paper, here revised and reprinted, first appeared in the Political Science Quarterly in 1906,
vol. xxi— Editor.
(83) I
84
The Annals of the American Academy
The whole topic of the movement of populations—local as well
as international—is indeed instructive, for it tells the life-story
of a people. It is an epitome of conditions. In a measure migrations
reflect the course of affairs at home and at times relations between
countries as well. Not infrequently they result from mistaken
notions or imperfect knowledge, but wholly blind are they rarely;
and whatever their causes, they offer much to interest and to instruct. Modern migrations appear to differ from those of earlier
centuries. In ancient times whole peoples, entire tribes, pushed
and pressed from east to west in search of fresh lands. Such was
the origin of nationalities in Europe. Later on, in the middle ages,
when life had become more settled, only particular classes wandered
widely, such as knights on crusades or on chivalrous errands,
journeymen craftsmen, jugglers, minstrels and merchants. At
present, if there be any rule, it is that, irrespective of class, migrations
have come to be a matter of private concern. We see individuals
and single families changing their homes. A great variety of motives
are operative; but through them all runs one common characteristic;—the desire to secure a better market for abilities. The nation
of origin loses a certain amount of energy which would have been
spent in developing its resources; the individual gains what he
regards as a better chance.
Levasseur, the French geographer and economist, has attempted
to formulate a law of migration. He points out that, as in the world
of matter, the bigger the mass the greater the force of attraction,
which is only another way of saying that people flock to the cities
and generally seek out the largest market for their labor. This
law, if law it may be called, must be stated guardedly, since, for
example, a densely populated country may more often repel than
attract. It will suffice perhaps simply to say that migration is the
attempt to adjust population to opportunity—a process of adaptation, a phase of industrialism.
Geographical influences on shiftings of population must not
be lost sight of. Climate counts. Though the point has not yet been
argued, there is much to support the view that, apart from economic
considerations, northern peoples tend to be more mobile than
southern. Not that winter drives the northerner into exile. To
one enjoying a fair measure of health, few delights are keener than
the feelings of exhilaration and the sports of a northern, let us say
mm Canadians in the United States
85
of an average Canadian winter. The tingling climate and the stimulating procession of the seasons arouse one into habits of vigorous
action. As for Canadians, there is a sprinkling on every continent.
For instance in England and Wales there are nearly 19,000; in
Australia over 3,000; nearly 1,500 in New Zealand, and in Alaska
2,000 more.
The migration of Canadians to the more developed market
of the United States is of two kinds, temporary and permanent,
the one shading imperceptibly into the other. With the coming
of settled industrial conditions in the republic temporary migration
fell away sharply; but in spite of "alien labor" laws they are still
important along the border and in such centers as New York, Boston,
Pittsburgh, Chicago and San Francisco.
In 1900 there were 10,356,644 foreigners who had become
domiciled in the United States. Of these 1,181,255, or 11.4 per
cent, were Canadian-born. Out of this number 785,958 were English, and 395,297 were French Canadians. By "Canadian" the
census always means "born either in Canada or Newfoundland"
although Newfoundland is not yet part of the Dominion. In estimating the number of Canadians we must take it into account
that many British-born Canadians, after living in Canada for a
number of years, have moved south and have been enumerated
there as British, not as Canadians. One may hazard the estimate
that their number is one-eighth of that of the Canadian-born English-
speaking immigrants, i. e., 100,000. With 450,000 children born
in the United States of these Canadian parents the total thus becomes
1,731,000; 995,000 (57 per cent) being English Canadians, and
736,000 (43 per cent) French Canadians.2 There is still another
group of 813,350 who have one Canadian-born parent. But in fairness these cannot be called Canadians and may therefore be left
out of count. An allowance, however, will have to be made for the
many other Canadians by birth, who, report has it, prefer to report
themselves as British and are so enumerated. They bring the grand
total up to at least 1,800,000 Canadians at present living in the
United States, that is one-third of the population of the Dominion
as it stood in 1901.3
*"To allow a contrast with these percentages it is to be noted that in Canada the French Canadians form 30.7 per cent of the total population.
s If we include those with one Canadian parent the sum total would be upwards of 2,600,000,
one million of these being "French.'^the balance "English" Canadians. 86
The Annals of the American Academy
But how may one estimate the number of those who have
emigrated to the United States between 1850 and 1900? The
census gives a return showing the decennial increase in the number
of foreigners. We may assume the average age of the Canadian
immigrants to be twenty-five years. Using then an ordinary mortality table we may calculate the number of those from each decennial
increase who should be living to-day:
Decade
Canadian Emigrants
to U. S., according
to U. S. Census
Alive. 1900,
according to
Mortality Table
1850-60	
102,000
243,000
224,000
264,000
200,000
41,786
1860-70	
153,710
1870-80	
175,054
1880-90	
233,426
1890-00	
193,132
Total
1,033,000
797,108
These figures mean that an immigration of 1,033,000 persons
yields a present population of 797,108. The problem is to know
how many are necessary to produce the present population of
1,800,000, less their 450,000 children. This number we find to be
1,750,000. Adding the 450,000 children the grand total loss of population to Canada is found to be 2,200,000 for the half century, one
and three-quarters or more millions being lost directly, the balance
through immediate natural increase. Of the 2,200,000 the English
compose approximately 1,200,000, the French approximately
1,000,000.
Every adult costs his native country at least $1,000 to nourish
and educate. So, after making allowance for the 100,000 of British
birth and education, Canada may be said to have invested in the
American Republic living capital assessable at $1,650,000,000—
a sufficiently severe drain on a young nation! This enormous loss
Canada has withstood, although at the same time it has been steadily
carrying on extensive public works. It makes one marvel at the
recuperative power of young fertile countries. The loss amounts
to half Mr. Giffen's estimate of the crushing burden placed on France
by the Franco-Prussian war. There is a contra account, of course,
for United States emigration into Canada.    The Canadian census Canadians in the United States
87
of 1901 places their number at 127,899. At $1,000 per head this
means $128,000,000, or, with an additional allowance of one-third
for the years back to 1850, $170,000,000, which is about 10 per cent
of Canada's loss.
Canadian emigration to the United States has been remarkably constant. The United States census records periodical increases for the previous ten years of 102,259 in 1860; of 243,494 in
1870; of 223,693 in 1880; of 263,781 in 1890, and of 200,317 in
1900. The largest exodus from Canada seems to have occurred
therefore during the ten years 1880-90, or perhaps more precisely
1875-85. The steady flow has resulted in Canadians constituting
a growing percentage of the whole body of foreigners in the United
States. In 1850 they formed 6.6 per cent of all foreigners; in 1860,
6 per cent; in 1870, 8.9 per cent; in 1880, 10.7 per cent; in 1890,
10.6 per cent, and in 1900, 11.4 per cent. The increase, as the
following table shows, is paralleled by the Scandinavians alone.
Between 1850 and 1900 the percentage of Germans amongst the
foreign-born fell slightly—from 26 to 25.8 per cent; of Irish, from
42.8 to 15.6 per cent; of British, from 16.8 to 11.3 per cent; but
the percentage of Scandinavians jumped from .9 to 10.3 per cent;
and that of Canadians from 6.06 to 11.04 per cent. The relative
increase of Canadians, even between 1890 and 1900, is marked,
as the following table shows:
Canadians in the United States, 1890-1900
1890
1900
Increase from
1890-1900
Per Cent
Increase
English Canadians	
678,442
302,496
785,958
395,297
107,516
92,801
15.8
30.7
Total	
980,938
1,181,255
200,317
20.4
Swedes (next highest)	
Foreigners generally	
478,041
9,249,547
573,040
10,356,644
94,999
1,107,097
19.7
12.0
The United States immigration statistics give only 3,064 Canadians as settling in that country between 1891-1900; but the census
returns show these figures to be entirely astray. In fact the insuperable difficulties in the way of counting people who enter the States
by way of Canada make the United States annual returns of Cana- 88 The Annals of the American Academy
dian immigrants unreliable, and of late years the attempt to compile
them has been abandoned. The official immigration figures may
be worth giving, however, for purpose of comparison with other
nationalities.
Immigrants to the United States
1821-1900
Per
Cent
1891-1900
Per
Cent
1881-1890
Per
Cent
Aggregate	
Canada & Newf'l'd
Ireland	
Great Britain	
Germany	
19,115,221
1,049,939
3,871,253
3,024,222
5,009,280
100.0
3,687,564
3,064
390,179
270,019
505,152
100.0
. 1
10.6
7.3
13.7
5,246,613
392,802
655,482
807,357
1,452,970
100.0
7.5
12.5
15.4
27.7
1871-1880
Per
Cent
1861-1870
Per
Cent
1851-1860
Per
Cent
Aggregate	
Canada & Newf'l'd
TrplanH
2,812,191
383,269
436,871
548,043
718,182
100.0
13.6
15.5
2,314,824
153,871
435,778
100.0
6.7
18.8
26.2
34.0
2,598,214
59,309
914,119
423,974
851,667
100.0
2.3
35.2
Great Britain	
Germany	
19.5
25.6
606,896
787 468
16.3
36.6
General Distribution of the Canadians
And now as to the localities chosen by Canadians for their
new home. Of the English Canadians 88 per cent are divided
equally between the North Atlantic and the North Central states,
10 per cent are in the West, 2 per cent in the South. The North
.Atlantic section will include a large number of "Blue Noses" (Nova
Scotians and Brunswickers); though, as the "wise old Nova Scotian
owl" Tramp Abroad hints, there is many a Nova Scotian miner
in the mining camps of the West. Of the French Canadians 77
per cent five along the Atlantic, nearly three-fourths of these being
found in seven cities, Manchester, N. H., Fall River, Holyoke,
Lowell, New Bedford, Worcester and Lawrence, Mass. Upwards
of 20 per cent are in the North Central regions, less than 3 per cent
in the West and less than 1 per cent in the South. The small percentage of Canadians in the Southern states (2 per cent of the English, 1 per cent of the French), hardly does justice to the cordiality
between Southerners and Canadians which is dated from the time
of the civil war.
It is to be remembered that, if regard is had to British Canadians Canadians in the United States
89
and children of immigrant Canadians, the numbers in each of these
divisions may probably be safely increased one-half.
Division and State
North Atlantic States
Massachusetts	
New York	
Maine	
Vermont	
Pennsylvania	
South Atlantic States.
Florida	
Maryland	
Virginia	
North Central States.
Michigan	
Illinois	
Ohio	
North Dakota	
South Dakota	
Minnesota	
Wisconsin	
Kansas	
South Central States.
Texas	
Oklahoma	
Kentucky	
Louisiana	
Arkansas	
Western States	
California	
Washington	
Montana	
Colorado	
Oregon	
Idaho	
Utah	
English
Canadians
345,342
158,753
90,336
36,169
10,616
13,292
6,284
1,014
1,143
1,026
345,304
151,915
41,466
19,864
25,004
5,906
35,515
23,860
7,053
8,802
2,549
1,248
1,072
781
932
79,098
27,408
18,385
10,310
8,837
6,634
2,528
1,203
French
Canadians
Total
305,160
134,416
27,199
30,908
14,924
1,468
636
88
87
104
77,019
32,483
9,129
2,903
3,162
1,138
12,063
10,091
1,485
1,460
400
179
136
253
161
10,791
2,410
1,899
3,516
960
874
395
128
650,502
293,169
117,535
67,077
25,540
14,760
6,920
1,102
1,230
1,130
422,323
184,398
50,595
22,767
28,166
7,044
47,578
33,951
8,538
10,262
2,949
1,427
1,208
1,034
1,093
89,800
29,818
20,284
13,826
9,797
7,508
2,923
1,331
Canadians in United States Cities in igoo
It is usually taken for granted that most Canadians go to the
great commercial centers. The reverse is the case. Over half
are to be found in the country and in the smaller towns. Only
40 per cent of the English and 37.7 per cent of the French Canadians five in the 160 largest cities, that is in cities with 25,000 or more
population. I give here a selection of cities that have the largest
Canadian constituencies.    But, as already pointed out, the British 90
The Annals of the American Academy
Canadian and pure Canadian stock would probably raise the number
in each city fifty per cent.
City of v
Residence, 1900
Boston	
Cambridge	
Chicago	
Detroit	
Buffalo	
New York	
Jersey City	
Newark	
Paterson	
Cleveland	
Philadelphia	
Cincinnati	
Rochester	
Lowell	
Worcester	
Pall River	
Providence	
New Haven	
Minneapolis	
St. Paul	
Milwaukee	
St. Louis	
Pittsburgh	
Washington, D. C
New Orleans	
Louisville	
San Francisco
English Canadians
.o
s
7,374
9,613
9,472
5,403
6,509
9,399
907
802
385
7,839
2,989
928
7,746
4,485
3,163
2,329
3,882
754
5,637
3,557
1,687
2,151
994
809
310
365
4,770
o SI
MS
.9>
24.0
31
26
15
1
1
0
3
8
5
6
1.1
1.0
6.3
1.0
1.6
19.0
11.0
8.4
4.6
6.9
2.4
9.2
7.6
1.9
1.9
1.2
4.0
1.0
1.7
4.1
French Canadians
U   C
k<
J3
90
3
.9fc
£
fflo
2,908
1,483
5,307
3,541
733
2,527
134
160
174
772
294
103
553
14,674
5,204
20,172
3,850
416
1,706
1,015
217
339
79
97
85
45
429
1.5
4.9
.9
3.7
.7
.2
.2
,2
.5
.6
.1
.2
1.4
35.8
13.8
40.3
6.9
1.3
2.8
2.2
.2
.3
.1
.5
.3
.2
.4
!•-
Ho
50,282
11,096
34,779
28,944
17,242
21,926
1,041
962
559
8,611
3,283
1,031
8,299
19,159
8,367
22,501
7,732
1,170
7,343
4,572
1,904
2,490
1,073
906
385
410
5,199
** Pro
lis
8 °a
'■3 h S
H.oO
65,000
16,000
55,000
45,000
30,000
38,000
1,500
1,300
800
13,000
5,000
1,500
12,000
30,000
12,000
33,000
11,000
1,700
11,000
6,800
2,800
3,600
1,500
1,300
600
600
8,000
The proportion of farmers among the Canadians in the United
States is shown by the following figures. Briefly upwards of one-
fourth of the English Canadians and one-sixth of the French Canadians live on farms. The census accounts for 367,170 Canadian
families, 207,580 being English and 159,590 French. Twenty-four
per cent of the one, and 16 per cent of the other live on farms. It is a
remarkable fact that such a large percentage lead a rural life when Canadians in the United States 91
one considers that Canada is itself so largely an agricultural country.
On the whole, if we contrast the two Canadian races, there are
proportionately more French Canadians in the smaller towns, and
proportionately more English Canadians carrying on farming or
living' in the large cities.
The Occupations of Canadians
A comparison of the occupations of Canadians in the United
States and in Canada, brings home the significance of the migration and sets it in a new light. The United States census takes
note of 819,264 Canadians ten years of age or over. Forty per cent
follow manufacturing; 30 per cent personal service; between 17
and 18 per cent trade and transportation; about the same percentage agriculture; and somewhat over 4 per cent professions.
The last percentage is approximately the same as for the native-
born white population in the United States. The large numbers
in any one occupation compared with the number left behind, as
shown in the adjoined table, throw light on conditions in Canada;
for example, the number of expatriated Canadian teachers and college professors, lawyers and clergymen. Curious is the number
of Canadians as government officials, soldiers and marines, as is
also the great number of Canadian girls of a superior class who have
gone to the United States as nurses. Rumor has it that many of
these are enumerated as Americans "from northern New York"
for which one might venture to say there is geographically a show
of reason!
Of the 300,000 Canadians engaged in business or following
professional pursuits in the United States many hold prominent
posts. Indeed one hears at times the statement that the English
Canadians enjoy an exceptionally high reputation. Some reasons
occur why this should be the case, and, without suggesting comparison, why the average English Canadian in the United States is a
good type. (1) Those who go to seek their fortune in a foreign
country are presumably hardy and ambitious, the result of a process
of natural selection. (2) They have been bred under invigorating
climatic influences. (3) They find a wider market for their abilities.
(4) They are. in a country where traditionally greater responsibility
is placed on young shoulders than has been usual in Canada down m
92
The Annals of the American Academy
z
(A
O
pq
z
■<
3
z
•<
O
H
Z
«
Ph
W
H
O
PQ
a
H
o
H
W
2
Ph
w
Z
O
M
§
«
w
S>
O
o
w
o
<J
I
o
1
M
{*
Z
W
H
I?
o
in
«
w
Ph
1061
'BpBtreQ m uoi^dnooo
ps^otpuj ui *ps3B3u3
sooAoiduig; jo jaqum^
91681 rn •epBUBQ m Snt
oiuus SujA-eq isqum^i
tnao .raj;
o ov —< oo
rt   -H  O VO
cTcn'o'io'
C\ rt CN rt
HNS
O O 00
VO 00 O
00 CO VO
CN CN CN CN »0
OvOOtCO-
lOr<f)HO\
niOHH
io Tf< cn tH
O Q\ t-h CN
rt 00
VO CN
CN
m°x
CN
TH
CO
<N
.
00
CN
vn
00
.
r*.
00
O
CN
O
^H
cs
CO -*
CN
CN
—H
r-^
(—I
i—i
o
\0 o
ON
to
lO
rt\
o
r^-
On
i—*
00
o\
Ov
T-H
T-H
tJ*
»o
o o
00 vO
r-^
»o
^
■*
•—i
cn
i-i
r*.
vo
T-H
^
T-H
^
00
i-H
r-.
VO
•—'
U">
CO
CO
r*-
CO
00
Q\
■^
"*>
■<*<
CO
^
T-H
O
T-H
CO
o
VO
CO
T-H
CN
•^
CO
r^
■—I
Uv
CO
i-H
i-H
VO
1—1
CO
s9jBuxa£
CO CN CA r-1 tOfOOV >-irfOVT-HVO'^O'—< U*) CN O CJ\
Cv t^ -^ CO^OtOHlt^HVOONN
t-o        t^. VO        iO'-hocO^OO'^t-i        C00\*0
S3|BJ^
rsCN^^'tVO^lNVOMrNOOCOCOiOOCSCAtsCviO^
\0^00CN(Nt*»OI>>0\rs^Tt(O0A^V000'tvOOCMC0
CNOOcOlOOvOONCNONCO'—ih^\OhOOCMO CO »0 -—I
Tt* CN O CN
CO  O  i-H
•<*« CO
iO Ov
<
o
SSfBUia^
S0IB]\
iO vO <-i^iOVOHOOH(S^(NiOfOOiO'-'fO
VO t-iOO vOtt'OOOOCN^hOOcOVOVOO
•-h O        CNvO'-HVOCOcOO ht|<0
©* cn* ioi-T <-T .-T^u-f
»OcOOOO'-<r->'0\00000'-HO\0\—"cO»OCNCNOvCNCOtO
^J«CN>—<O\vOiOC0r^.*^t^«—iiOOiOt-N.CN'^'-^t— OCNON
vOMiOONN^fOcO(NiO(S»-<0        CN © Ov •<*< <Jv ON Ov
t^.io^»ocN,^H,^»-*co^i-4 i-h* r-T \o"     cn"
ON        i—i to
crj   o   w   0
8   8   ?   S   rTSO
3
Q4J   IhH O
r w ^ * g !^ rCj
"T3
z
<!
tl
o
o
14
c
B
tu
o
fe
Irt
5
Z
°^a "IIS s?
a a w
cd tit)
a B 3 s z fe«
*5 •,« 5 a! ai C a>
§ Ph PP CO Pm Ph H
a
o
PH13 3 c3
g ce o
r- t^r3
gun
Q (D
»i-£;'S .
> c5 fe «
' H   °   k. -P
CO
| C3
fill
i^ S5
V   <W   C ^-i   X   d   *h
OWco^OfflO
vp
ft
^   n   -  iv  <U
5 * w-jS-*
., as iu J S
2 M+> o
l^tflfflco Canadians in the United States
93
s
O
z
O
pq
z
a
(—f
q
z
<!
O
03
H
Z
W
3
H
o
PQ
es
o
H
z
a
es
<!
Ph
a
z
O
w
H
l-H
es
es
o
H
o
<1
o
III
z
a
z
o
cn
eS
«
Ph
1061
•BpBtreQ in snoi^Bdnoon
patBoipuj ire
paS^Sug
saaAojduig; jo
Jaqum^
CO CO IO CO CO     'CNCNVOCOiOONCO     • ih 00 CS fO VO VON ^ CO
91681 rn BpBireQ ut 3ni
-nrettra-g no;iBdnDOO
»0 ON ON CN i-H
• t—i io vO 00 CN t->. io
• tJ<,^co»OCQiovovO,<**
IO  VO VO ON ON
' t"- t^. CN & CO CN ON
^■^COl^t^*C0»O^HC0
auibs SuiABti'jaqtnn^i
T-H             VO
00
! »-H ON VO*CN CO*
CN «-h CN
"tf1 *****         cn     r^
*""'
t-H
VO
CN
n80 ^d
t^
■^
fTONtNCOOOtOOOOCO^M^cOH^HHO^CO
C0CNOv00Nr^OiO-^c0CNCNCNiOCN0N0N»-H000NOv0>O
iOONvOCNCOOOONt-^ONONOOiOt^CNI>.OOOOCNrN.'-HO-<^00
r^oj.
CN        "^i-it-ccO       10 t^ CN CN              t-<i-hcOt-i^h        ,_( (NJ <-q
VO 00 co 1—1 vo
NCO'H^C^NOCNMHIOVO
>o <N c?\
co
CO co
C0^r,*0*-<^»0c0-tf<
i—i
ES
CN
CN vO CO
<
S
1
O
^^nia^
*£
oT»-*r
c^^^iOVOvOvOCO'^i^fNOO^'^tNiOCO'-'iO'H^h'N
<3
OvT!^vO^^^^^^COiO\OCvl\OrlcO'N^O\iOVDl7\^
CNCNt^CNCNONCN'^'vOCNCN              CNCNt^CN'—f        hco^h
SS|BJ\I
h        VO*                          lO CO
g
CO
rt
Z
COvOMVOrvl^^fSCOOrO(V|'H^N^NOi<Cv|OvOtN
i-ct^.         CO                r^iOi-HNVO^iON-^McOts         i-h <N CN
Hf^                                     cOCNiO'-HCOCN'—cCN                                     <—<
S
S3|BUI9j;
in                          cn On t-h
5
z
0
m
VOCNi—lO^OO-—iiO'^OONCNcOOOOOCOvOO'—'ONVO
to
T-iCOONONOONOOr^-COOO'-HOOt^cO'^OOCOcOO'^fCNCN^
coiOvOONvOOOVOCNI>»t-^VOCNCNt^CNOOvOOvOOvooOVO
ssjbj^
_T     r-T     t-h"cn*     <S^o^                   t-T cn* >-<* i-T     QQ|Q|
2
00                    p$ *-"
w
rt
9
r/
JH
^
ir
a)
CO
+»
0
z
3
Sz
C
'
O
O
Xf
c
c
>
1
O
CO
Ui
a
o
o tr
O
■3
a"
CO
o
>,
m
cij
•rj
§
«
ffl
J
a
2
H
01
D
v
<! to "2 {2 "^
« S ojO rt g<
".2^51-6 8
s-0 3^ £ feat) .o. ci « 2
CD
M
CD
o
o tf
13 +> P<+= 5
CO
3
CO
3
cl)   ./
CO
■
a
'to
CD
m
j—1
.2* S'S'Sg3
!    U
>3
1  r!   (-   rt     9
,3 s S »
?Pt! s- °
C  O  P   n
d  •!  n  ™ t^   « »-_. iS  *i  (U *—4 •»-(   H   M   V eH   Co Jr   o -r? ^^ »—h   *h
3                   5
j*                   es
|
i
I
'ft
o
H B m
94
The Annals of the American Academy
to recent years. (5) Race and language are in their favor, especially
in the West. (6) They have had the benefits of a good common
school and, in special cases, of a thorough collegiate education.
(7) Coming from a more agricultural country they may be expected
to be healthy and thrifty. (8) In old Canada religious influences
are strong. (9) Finally it is just possible that the comparative
absence down to quite recently of the marked influence of corporate
organization of business in Canada has instilled into the Canadian
youth a lively sense of personal responsibility.
Who's Who in America mentions 245 Canadians. To this
number we would have to add the allowance already made of one-
eighth for those born in Great Britain but brought up in, and therefore rightly to be credited to Canada. This would make the number
of Canadians according to the standards of this publication 276
or 2.3 for every 10,000 Canadians in the United States. This compares favorably with the British rate of 2.2 per 10,000, 2.1 for the
Dutch, .5 for Swedes aftd .9 for native Americans (black and white)
or 1.9 for native white Americans. The record made by the Canadians seems particularly notable when it is remembered that nearly
60 per cent (58.4 per cent of the French Canadians and 56.5 per
cent of the English Canadians) are under twenty-one years of age as
against 10 per cent for all foreign-born and 52 per cent for all
native-born. The railway magnate of the West is a Canadian,
as was the late Erastus Wiman. Edison received his first schooling
in telegraphy in Ontario. The inventor of the Bell telephone also
lived a while in the same province, lecturing for two years at Queen's
University; and the first Atlantic cable was promoted in the United
States by a Nova Scotian. Canadians preside over two of the
foremost American universities; while Harvard and many other
seats of learning have a goodly array of Canadian talent in their
faculties. Professor Osier who left Baltimore to grace the chair of
medicine in Oxford is a Canadian, as is also his successor. At least
one of the great national banks of the United States has a Canadian president; and a number of prominent banking and financial
houses have Canadian vice-presidents, cashiers and other officials.
A full list of distinguished Canadians in the United States would
indeed have to include also litterateurs, cleigymen, actors, members
of Congress and even one diplomatic representative of the
Republic. Canadians in the United States
95
The Intermarriage of Canadians and Americans
The marriages of Canadian immigrants show interesting variations. Most of the English-speaking Canadians "cross the line"
unmarried and after estabUshing themselves take wives from among
their new acquaintances. The majority of the French Canadians
migrate after marrying or marry one of their own race in the United
States. This is evident from the fact that three-fourths of the 812,-
350 children one of whose parents is a Canadian have English Canadian parents. Grouping all Canadians of the present generation
together, 48.1 per cent have married in the United States. This
is a large proportion compared with other nationalities. For example, only 36 per cent of the English marry in the United States;
36 per cent of the French and 32 per cent of the Scotch. The Canadians, in the great majority of instances when they do not marry
native Americans, marry people of British extraction. The actual
intermarriage of the 135,521 Canadian men was as follows:
Marriage of Canadian Men in United States with Women of Foreign
Birth
Nationality of Women
Irish	
English	
Scotch	
Welsh	
Canadian	
German	
Scandinavian	
French	
Swiss	
Russians, Bohemians and Poles....
Austro-Hungarian	
Italian	
Others	
Number of Men
Per Cent
71
"i
9
9
2,
It is worth noting that in 1900 as many as 90.8 per cent of
the English Canadians had become naturalized and 84 per cent of
the French Canadians. A student of the French Canadians in New
England,6 writing in 1898, comes to the conclusion that the French
6 Win. MacDonald "The French Canadians in New England," Quarterly Journal of Economics,
vol. xii. See also Rev. E. Hamon's " Les Canadiens-Prancaisdela Nouvelle-Angleterre". (Quebec,
1891), and "Growth of the French Canadian Race in America," by Professor John Davidson in
The Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science (1896). 96 The Annals of the American Academy
Canadians in New England are gradually losing their identity and
coalescing with other nationalities, especially the Irish. I have
myself heard French Canadians say they were ashamed to speak
French in their United States home. The birth-rate among them
is lower than in Quebec; child mortality, especially up to five years,
remains high; immigration has greatly declined and solicited immigration has ceased altogether. The influence of industrial life and
of free public schools is doing the rest. The comparative youth-
fulness of the Canadians, already referred to, is here of moment.
A word as to the effect of all this emigration on Canada's population. During the half century Canada made up one and one-
quarter milHons of her loss by settlers crossing the water from Great
Britain. This and other European immigration together with her
natural increase have enabled Canada to show a slight advance
in population from decade to decade.
The meager growth has given rise to assertions of a declining
birth-rate in some of the older provinces. During the last few decades
later marriages and a slightly lower birth-rate are in evidence both
in Europe and in America. Agricultural sections especially have
lost in population on account of the introduction of machinery.
The constituents of the rural population have changed: there are
now relatively more children and old folk than formerly, fewer of
middle age, those in the prime of life being drawn into the great
stream of people migrating to the cities, and in Canada to the new
West or to the United States. This is largely the situation in Ontario
and in "the provinces down by the sea." That there are now not
so many births in proportion to the whole population is in itself
natural. But available returns do not allow one to speak of an unusual decline in the birth rate in relation to the people of marriageable age. The assertion of a lower birth rate can accordingly be
little more than surmise. Yet it is doubtless true that families
are smaller than formerly. Speaking of Ontario one can even notice
that families are smaller in the old settled parts than in northern
or "New" Ontario. The result is that for many years Ontario,
as well as the maritime provinces little more than held their own
in population. This is evident from the following table. This
does not hold for Quebec province, where families with fifteen to
twenty-five children are not uncommon and where the population
has gone on doubling itself since 1680 on the average every thirty Canadians in the United States
97
years, elbowing out moreover the comparatively few English residents from the country parts.7
The relations between Canada and the United States have
been in some points not unlike those between Scotland and England. There is the great difference, however, that Canada has a
back country with a varied wealth of natural resources which is
now attracting a larger population and creating a wider home-
market for men and goods. And in spite of the heavy net losses of
population in the past,   there is probably no part of the world
Population
of Canada by Provinces
Province
1871
1881
1901
1911
Ontario	
1,620,351
1,191,516
387,800
285,594
94,021
25,228
48,000
36,427
1,923,228
1,359,027
440,572
• 321,233
108,891
62,260
56,446
49,454
2,182,947
1,648,898
459,574
331,120
103,259
255,211
211,649
178,657
2,523,274
Quebec	
2,002,712
492,338
Nova Scotia	
New Brunswick	
Prince Edward Island	
351,889
93,728
Manitoba	
455,614
Territories	
892,808s
British Columbia	
392,480
Total	
3,688,937
4,321,111
5,371,315
7,204,843
where the average comfort is so high, and where since 1900 a rapid
progress in agriculture, industry and population is so evident as
in "The Great Dominion." During the five years ending with
July, 1905, upwards of 550,000 people are reported to have settled
here. One hundred and eighty-two thousand of these have come
from the United States, 60 to 75 per cent of whom are said to
be returning Canadians. The immediate future promises even
more impressive results. While the emigration of Canadians to-day
appears to be still not unimportant the northward trekking of settlers into Canada has assumed large proportions. American capital
is also showing more and more interest in Canadian industry. I
refrain from giving further figures as the published statistics on
emigration and immigration appear to me unreliable.
7 Professor Davidson, in his article already cited, finds that the French Canadians have been
doubling since 1763 every twenty-seven years.
» Made up of the two new provinces of Alberta with 374,663, Saskatchewan with 92,434,
Yukon Territory with 8,512, and the unorganized Northwest Territory with 17,196. 98
The Annals of the American Academy
The effect of all this interchange of blood and capital one can
only say lies hidden in the mists of the future. This much may
be ventured, however: the presence of many Canadians in the United
States and of Americans in the Dominion is as a pledge of amity
and peace, a pledge of all the greater value in North America, where,
unlike Europe, two great nations practically divide the continent,
and where for this very reason it is conceivable that in moments
of popular excitement these nations might forget that even a selfish
national policy is not necessarily hostile in intent. It is well, too,
in the interests of the pax americana that both countries are finding
responsibilities beyond their continent, though with his theory of
the "manifest destiny" of Canada, the late Mr. Goldwin Smith
was of another mind. As for the United States, it is changing from
an American republic to an empire with a world-wide outlook. Canada also is passing on from the stage of self-contemplation to the
prospect of imperial interests. CANADA AND THE CHINESE:  A COMPARISON WITH
THE UNITED STATES
By Paul H. Clements, A.M.,
Harrison Fellow in Political Science, University of Pennsylvania.
Canada, although a dependency of the British Empire, has been
wisely left alone by the mother country to work out her own destinies
and to solve her own difficulties in whatever manner she may determine. Through that unrivaled system of colonial government, the
most successful the world has ever seen, England has granted the
Dominion practical independence with but passive adherence to a
superior sovereignty, and the result of this policy of confederation
has been the expansion of our neighbor of the north into the Greater
Canada of to-day, sharing with us an active participation in the
economic problems peculiar to North America in its relations with
the Old World.
For over a century the industries, trade and commerce of Canada
were what might almost be expressed as the "short and simple
annals of the poor." The popular fallacy the world over was that the
Dominion consisted of a vast region of ice and snow, relieved only by
a narrow strip of fertile territory bordering on the United States.
To the average uninquisitive reader the names of Alberta, Saskatchewan and British Columbia induced a mental picture identical with
the climatic and topographical conditions of Labrador, Alaska and
Greenland. Canada was looked upon as the Siberia of the Western
Hemisphere, and, like Siberia, according to the same unreasoning
fancy, was arbitrarily condemned in the popular imagination as a
barren waste, unproductive, undesirable, its greatest value lying
in increasing the aggregate number of square miles comprising the
British Empire to an astonishing total.
Until a comparatively recent date the possibilities of Canada
were unknown to the world, being overshadowed by the unprecedented
growth and prosperity of the United States, but with international
rivalries dominating trade and commerce, with the scramble of the
great Powers for the last few acres of unclaimed land, and with the
intensive development of colonies and dependencies already in pos-
(.99) 100
The Annals of the American Academy
session, Canada has at last deservedly come to her own. The
history of Canada for the last thirty years reads like a reflex American
movement. It is punctuated throughout by the same steady growth,
the kind that never declines, the same railroad activities, the same
beginnings of manufacture, the same problems of pushing the frontier
further west or further north as has been the history of the United
States up to the last half century.
However, with the development of her immense potentialities,
it did not take Canada long to discover that progress, however
natural and continuous, has its attendant difficulties. Of these the
race question is by far the most fragile to handle and the most
puzzling to solve, of undue importance politically because of the
complications ensuing in foreign relations, and serious sociologically
because of the influences, sometimes uplifting, more often retarding,
upon national characteristics. While Canada was in her pristine
stages of development she was spared this vexatious problem which
has proved so damaging to the United States, but with her consequent
economic advance it was inevitable that sooner or later races other*
than Caucasian would be attracted to her shores to participate in
the material advantages which prosperity in a new country invariably offers to old civilizations.
Like our own country Canada faces, Janus-like, the Occident
and the Orient, and similarly the waves of exploitation and settlement
flowed from east to west. Thus, with one coastline extending along
the Pacific, opposite the most populous area of the earth's surface,
it was but natural that as soon as Canada's advantages became
known to the world, the races of the Far East would find here a strong
incentive for immigration in the desire, alike in all peoples, of bettering their economic conditions. The pioneer Chinese came in the
beginning sixties, actuated by the same impulses which caused their
first invasion of the United States, namely, the discovery of gold
in the mines of Cassiar and Caribou. Later in the eighties began the
construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway, by which the provinces
of the Dominion were knit together with transcontinental lines
of steel. The era of railroad building meant the same problems to
Canada as it meant to the United States in the previous decade, and
here again the Chinese, the best laborers in the world for such purpose,
were called upon to make the transportation dream of Canada's
statesmen a reality.    But more laborers came than were wanted, Canada and the Chinese 101
and it was found necessary to impose such restrictions, hitherto
none, as would keep the non-assimilative portion of the population
within reasonable bounds. The Canadian of the Pacific coast
feared, and rightly so, an Asiatic flood that might easily have submerged the few thousand inhabitants that represented the dominant
race. Therefore, in 1884, the Dominion government appointed a
royal commission to investigate the question and the result was the
imposition, in 1886, of a tax of $50 per head upon mcoming Chinese.
By the census of 1891 there was a total of 9,129 Chinese in
Canada, and of this number 8,910 resided in British Columbia.
The capitation tax of $50 was, however, too low to appreciably
lessen the influx of Orientals; therefore an increase to $100 was
determined upon, to take effect in 1901. Even this was declared
by the people of British Columbia, the province most affected by
the immigration, to be utterly inadequate, and a second commission
was ordered by the government to make a thorough investigation.
It was this commission of 1900 which recommended the increase of
the capitation tax to $500, the present ratio, and a law was accordingly enacted by the Canadian Parliament, to come into force
January, 1904, whereby the tax was raised to the specified amount,
where it has since remained.
By January 1, 1904, there were approximately 30,000 Chinese
in Canada, and of these 16,007 arrived from June, 1900, to the above
mentioned date.1 With the increase of the tax to $500 the immigration became for a few years a negligible quantity,2 and it was hoped
that