"CONTENTdm"@en . "http://resolve.library.ubc.ca/cgi-bin/catsearch?bid=1557095"@en . "Wallace B. Chung and Madeline H. Chung Collection"@en . "Stowell, Ellery C. (Ellery Cory), 1875-1958"@en . "American Academy of Political and Social Science"@en . "2015-06"@en . "1913"@en . "https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/chungpub/items/1.0056209/source.json"@en . "1 unnumbered volume, 292 pages ; 25 cm"@en . "application/pdf"@en . " mum\n^k^i^uiU. t-^M* (&\u00C2\u00A3 -^^^^$W-\nTHE ANNALS OF\nTHE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF POLITICAL\nAND SOCIAL SCIENCM\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0 \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 . - \u00E2\u0096\u00A0, \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 \u00E2\u0096\u00A0\nVol.XLVl JANUARY, 1913 Whole No. 134\nCanadian\nNational -M\nProblems\nIssued Bi-monthly by the American Academy of political and Social Science,'\nPhiladelphia, Pa. PER YEAR, $6.00, PER NUMBER, $1.00\nEntered at the poet-office at Philadelphia at eecond-claee matter, I860\nw assgK,\n*',\"$S?3r/$$!\nIMPORTANT PERSONAL NOTICE TO MEMBERS\nAmerican Academy of Political and Social Science\nSeventeenth Annual Meeting\nFriday and Saturday, April 4 and 5, 1913\n:t\"SIhr (gnat nf ffihring\"\nThe Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Political and Social\nScience promises to be the most important in the history of our organization. The\nofficers of the Academy are most anxious to have a full representation of members\nfrom all parts of the United States.\nThere will be six sessions, each devoted to some important phase of the subject,\naad leading authorities from all sections of the United States will be present to\nparticipate in the discussions. Furthermore, official delegations will be present from\nmost of the states of the Union as well as from the more important trade and\ncommercial organizations. *\n&\n10 IV\nContents\nPAGE\nSOME CANADIAN TRAITS '77\nW. A Chapple, M.P., London, England\nCANADIAN LITERATURE l89'\nJ. Castell Hopkins, F.S.S., Author of \"The Canadian Annual Review\nof Public Affairs,\" Toronto, Canada\nCANADIAN STATISTICS 2l6'\nCOMMUNICATION\u00E2\u0080\u0094FUNCTIONS AND NEEDS OF OUR GREAT MARKETS 245-\nWillet M. Hays, Assistant Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.\nBOOK DEPARTMENT 263.\nINDEX 289.\nBOOK DEPARTMENT\nConducted by ROSWELL C. McCREA\nBacon and Wyman\u00E2\u0080\u0094Direct Elections and Law Making by Popular Vote (p. 263),~\nBalch\u00E2\u0080\u0094Christianity and the Labor Movement (p. 263); Bateson\u00E2\u0080\u0094Biological Fact\nand the Structure of Society (p. 264); Berolz-heimer\u00E2\u0080\u0094The World's Legal Philosophies\n(p. 264); Butler\u00E2\u0080\u0094The International Mind (p. 265); Clark\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Control of Trusts\n(p. 265); Clopper\u00E2\u0080\u0094Child Labor in City Streets (p. 266); Commission of Conservation, Canada\u00E2\u0080\u0094Sea Fisheries of Eastern Canada (p. 266); Committee of the City\nClub of Chicago\u00E2\u0080\u0094A Report on Vocational Training in Chicago and in Other Cities\n(p. 266); Dealey\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Family in its Sociological Aspects (p. 267); Dewey\u00E2\u0080\u0094Financial History of the United States (p. 267); Dilla\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Politics of Michigan (p. 267);\nDoty\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Mosquito, Its Relation to Disease and Its Extermination (p. 268); Fagan\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nThe Autobiography of an Individualist (p. 268); Higby\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Government of Pennsylvania and the Nation (p. 268); Lowry and Lambert\u00E2\u0080\u0094Himself (p. 269); Morse\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nCauses and Effects in American History (p. 269); Ogburn\u00E2\u0080\u0094Progress and Uniformity\nin Child Labor Legislation (p 269); Partridge\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Genetic Philosophy of Education\n(p. 270); Pratt\u00E2\u0080\u0094The IVork of Wall Street (p. 270); The Princess\u00E2\u0080\u0094Traveller's Tales\n(p. 270); Rosenau\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Milk Question (p. 270); Ross\u00E2\u0080\u0094Changing America (p. 271);\nShelton\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Lakes-to-the-Gulf Deep Waterway (p. 271); Speer\u00E2\u0080\u0094South American\nProblems (p. 271); Stoddart\u00E2\u0080\u0094Mind and Its Disorders (p. 272); Todd\u00E2\u0080\u0094Tripoli,\nthe Mysterious (p. 272); Whetham\u00E2\u0080\u0094An Introduction to Eugenics (p. 272); Whitin\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nPenal Servitude (p. 273). Contents v\nREVIEWS\nBraithwaite\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Beginnings of Quakerism (p. 273) R. W. Kelsey\nBryce\u00E2\u0080\u0094South America, Observations and Impressions (p. 274) L. S. Rowe\nCarola Woerishoffer, Her Life and Work (p. 275) G. S. White\nCleveland and Powell\u00E2\u0080\u0094Railroad Finance (p. 276) F. H. Schrenk\nCutting\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Church and Society (p. 277) B. D. Mudgett\nEllis\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Task of Social Hygiene (p. 278) B. D. Mudgett\nFleming\u00E2\u0080\u0094General W. T. Sherman as College President (p. 279) E. D. Fite\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2Gerson and Deardorff\u00E2\u0080\u0094Studies in the History of English Commerce\n(p. 280) A. P. Usher\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2Grice\u00E2\u0080\u0094National and Local Finance (p. 280) C. L. Jones\nHyde\u00E2\u0080\u0094Newspaper Reporting and Correspondence (p. 281) T. D. O'Bolger\nLeuba\u00E2\u0080\u0094A Psychological Study of Religion (p. 282) W. P. Wallis\nMunroe\u00E2\u0080\u0094New Demands in Education (p. 283) A. H. Yoder\nNitobe\u00E2\u0080\u0094The Japanese Nation: Its Land, Its People and Its Life\n(p. 284) W. A. Houghton\nParkhurst\u00E2\u0080\u0094Applied Methods of Scientific Management and Addresses\nand Discussions at the Conference on Scientific Management (p. 285).. W. S. Stevens\nRees\u00E2\u0080\u0094Current Political Problems (p. 286) W. E. Lunt\nVineberg\u00E2\u0080\u0094Provincial and Local Taxation in Canada (p. 287) C. L. Seiler\nWinter\u00E2\u0080\u0094Chile and Her People of To-day (p. 288) W. S. Tower V-v .ft\" \u00E2\u0096\u00A0\nTHE PAPERS IN THIS PUBLICATION WERE\nCOLLECTED and edited by\nEllery C Stowell, Ph.D.,\nassociate editor. BRITISH COLUMBIA AND BRITISH INTERNATIONAL\nRELATIONS\nBy E. R. Gosnell,\nVictoria, B. C\nThe political status of a province in the Canadian confederation\nis clearly defined in the British North America act and relates solely\nto matters of property and private rights. It is not strictly permissible to speak of British Columbia and British international\naffairs, for the reason that provinces, as provinces, have no international relations. The people of British Columbia are affected by\nexternal affairs only as Canadians and through their local forms of\nadministration have no rights of interference. In such matters the\nfederal authorities are very jealous of even advice from local authorities. It is tendered sometimes by resolution of the legislature and is\nonly effective to the extent in which it may be regarded as indicative\nof local sentiment. If it should happen that the local administration\nis in political accord with the federal administration\u00E2\u0080\u0094that is, in\nrespect to conservatives and liberals, as parties are constituted\u00E2\u0080\u0094the\nformer will naturally exercise a much stronger influence with the\nlatter in matters affecting a particular province than if the opposite\nwas 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\ntime, a man of outstanding and commanding position. Sir Richard\nMcBride, the prime minister of the Pacific province, is in political\naccord with the Right Hon. R. L. Borden, prime minister of Canada,\nand, for instance, has taken a very positive stand on the question\nof naval defense, now agitating the whole of the Dominion of Canada,\nin so far as it relates to the defense of the Pacific coast. It is not\ntoo much to assume that the attitude of the former has had a good\ndeal to do with the attitude of the latter in respect to that phase of\nhis naval policy, an outline of which he has just presented to the\nHouse of Commons.\nWhile, however, it is true that British Columbia qua British\nColumbia can have no international status or interests, there is a\nsense in which any province is interested in and affected by inter-\n(i) 2 The Annals op the American Academy\nnational issues, of the empire. Each province, by reason of physical\nor economic conditions, has, or may have, interests affected by considerations of an international character, peculiarly its own. These,\nin a country so wide in extent and diversified in resources, can be\neasily imagined. A treaty affecting fishery rights would naturally\naffect the maritime provinces in a special way and would have only\nan academic or purely national interest for the people of Ontario,\nor the provinces of the Middle West. Or by reason of some special\nfeature, or purpose, of the treaty, it might have a special interest\nfor the people of one coast and not for those of another. A tariff\nmay rest more heavily upon the people of one province than upon\nthose of another. A naval programme has a keener interest for those\nwho live on the Atlantic or the Pacific seaboard than for those who\noccupy the interior parts of the country. It is in this sense that the\ncaption of the article here being indited has been chosen.\nBritish Columbia is peculiarly affected by, and interested in,\nseveral international issues of great moment. Although, as stated,\nit is a province of Canada, it has interests which are sui generis in\na degree greater perhaps than is true of any other province of Canada.\nIt is, in this sense, so far apart from the rest of Canada, that in Great\nBritain particularly the expression is often used, \" Canada and British\nColumbia.\" It is true that the Middle West, on account of its extent\nand the homogeneity of its physical conditions, is essentially unlike\nother parts of the Dorninion and is so to speak a law unto itself in the\nmatter of political and economic requirements; but the very uniformity of conditions greatly lessens if it does not indeed simplify\nthe problems which confront the people of the prairies. British\nColumbia, on the other hand, by the diversity of its resources, the\nruggedness of its surface and the isolation created by its mountains,\nby the long extent of its serrated coast line, its position on the western\nseaboard of the Dominion, and its geographical relation to the Orient,\nmultiplies its problems and widens the scope of its interests. Its\ncoast is separated from the rest of Canada not only by one range but\nby ranges of mountains and the province is segregated by the Middle\nWest from the political and as yet the potential center of Canada's\nactivities. It has characteristics similar in most respects to those\nof Washington, Oregon and California and is strikingly differentiated\nin 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\natmosphere, flora, fauna,, economic requirements, resources, etc.,\nwith which all students of conditions in their respective countries\n. are familiar. If the divinity which shapes our ends had been guided\nby considerations which nature alone would suggest we should have\nhad, 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\nwith those of three or four distinct natural zones\u00E2\u0080\u0094the Pacific, or\nCordilleran, the Middle West, or prairies, and the country east of\nthem to the Atlantic, the latter, of course, being capable of a further\nsubdivision. It was upon conditions suggested by physiography that\nGoldwin Smith founded his theory of a single American nation,\nbecause bis philosophy could not reconcile itself with a successful\nconflict against geography in the attempt made by Canada to remain\na political entity, more especially as the people inhabiting both Canada and the United States were mainly of one language and of one\nblood. We need not stop to discuss the factors which have intervened so far, to upset the successful operations of his theory. As\npsychic forces are greater than material forces in the evolution of\ndestiny, so there are elements in nationality more subtle and elusive\nof control than those contained in purely physiographical or even\nethnographical conditions.\nThe principal differences between the Pacific divisions of Canada\nand of the United States at present are those created by exploitation\nand land development. The Pacific states, owing to the discovery of\ngold in California in 1849 and to railway construction, were earlier\nin the race and have made greater advances in the same time. The\nsocial substratum of the population and the character of the political:\ninstitutions have also had something to do with the general divergences observable. We have Biblical authority and the authority\nof experience for the statement that as man thinketh so is he, and this\nis true in the collective as well as in the individual sense. Similarity\nof conditions, however, in the long run will produce a somewhat\ngeneral similarity of results, and the problems of British Columbia,\npolitical and otherwise, are not unlike those of the country immediately to the south. If the Panama Canal is of special interest\nto the seaports of British Columbia so it is to those of Washington,\nOregon, and California; if the yellow peril menaces British Columbia\nso also it does the Pacific coast states; if reciprocity would benefit or 4 The Annals of the American Academy\ninjure the former it should, according to circumstances, have some\ncorresponding effect in the latter; if British Columbia requires\nnaval protection on the Pacific, the exigencies of the situation created\nby war from whatever source are equally great along the coast south\nof the boundary line. Broadly speaking, these are the problems\nof an international character which are uppermost in the minds of\nthe people of British Columbia and which politically have had the\ngreatest amount of attention of recent years. I, therefore, propose to discuss them in the following order suggested by their priority\nas public issues:\n1. The tariff on a basis of reciprocity.\n2. The dangers of Oriental invasion.\n3. The alternative route to eastern Canada, Great Britain and\nthe continent of Europe afforded by the construction of the\nPanama Canal.\n4. The requirements of naval defense on the British Pacific.\nIn what follows, I do not profess to offer solutions solely in accord\nwith local sentiment; because the exigencies of politics, in its\nrestricted sense, do not always suggest the wisest remedies to be\nadopted and very often obscure the atmosphere for the better understanding of the merits of the disputes involved. I shall, however,\nendeavor to present as fairly as I can the nature of local sentiment\nin each case.\nFirst, as to the tariff: That question is, I was going to say, as\nold as the hills\u00E2\u0080\u0094 the mountains for which British Columbia is famous.\nIn the very early days, Victoria, the capital of the colony of Vancouver Island, was a free port and the Hudson's Bay Company,\n'then in control, was fully imbued with the free trade sentiments of\nGreat Britain. Curiously enough, Sir James Douglas, governor, in\nhis \"speech from the throne\" in the first legislature in 1856, made\nreference to the impending reciprocity treaty between Canada and\nthe United States and expressed the hope that Vancouver Island\n(then an independent crown colony) would be included in its provisions. Of course, Vancouver Island then had only about two hundred\nsettlers, mostly servants of the Hudson's Bay Company, or its auxiliary, the Puget Sound Agricultural Company; and Victoria itself\nwas only a stockaded fort. There was a nice academic touch to\nthis sentiment which does credit to the modernity of a governor of a\nfur-trading colony, born as it was in the shadow of a great wilderness, British Columbia and British International Relations 5\nand still in its puling infancy. The colony of British Columbia on\nthe mainland, which was established in 1858, had a tariff, and after\nthe union of the two colonies in 1866 the tariff wah was still maintained. One of the big issues at the time of Confederation with\nCanada in 1871 was the tariff, especially in respect to agricultural\nproducts. The British Columbia schedule was higher than that of\nCanada. The colony then was and, as a province, has continued to\nbe protective in sentiment. Hence in the reciprocity campaign of\n1911, British Columbia was solidly against the proposed pact, not\nonly from sentimental but from economic reasons. Sentimentally,\nthe people of British Columbia are British almost to a man. From\nan economic point of view, they are very un-British. That is to\nsay, they have not imbibed British traditional love of free trade.\nThe situation economically can be explained very briefly. Our most\nimportant industry, prospectively, at least, is fruit growing. It is\ncommercially still in the stage of infancy, as compared with the\nfruit-growing industry south of the line, which is thoroughly established, splendidly organized, and highly productive. It can be easily\nseen that the Pacific coast states, with their relative superiority as\nto present position, under reciprocity, could absolutely control the\nmarket in fruits, green and preserved, from Vancouver to Winnipeg\nand greatly hamper the development of the industry in British\nColumbia, an industry now mainly dependent upon the Middle West\nfor its market and requiring at least another ten years to catch up with\nits southern competitors. Even at present a very large percentage\nof the requirements of the fruit market of Vancouver and Victoria\nis supplied from the American side. What is true of fruit is also\ntrue of agricultural produce generally and it is absolutely certain\nthat under the proposed arrangement the commission houses of\nSeattle, Portland and San Francisco would be supreme on this coast\nand, in respect to much of the business done there, in the Middle\nWest as well. If the farmers of the prairies had been given access\nto the doubtful benefits of the markets of one hundred million people, they would have lost the market in British Columbia in which\nthey have had a monopoly in certain products and which has been\nmore profitable to them than any other market as yet available.\nOur mineral products were not affected by the proposed arrangement, except very slightly in the matter of coal, notwithstanding\nthat it professed to be a pact based upon an interchange of natural 6 The Annals op the American Academy\nproducts. The export of lead ores to the United States free of duty\nwould have been of substantial advantage to the mining community;\nand it was to compensate the miners of the southern interior for the\nloss of the United States market that the Dominion government\nsome years ago placed a bounty upon the production of lead in order\nto encourage the industry and to keep the silver-lead mines open.\nWith reference to coal, the Pacific state ports, and especially San\nFrancisco, have been the principal market for Vancouver Island coal\nfrom the very outset, and of recent years the smelters of Idaho,\nMontana and Washington have been getting their supply of coke\nfrom British Columbia ovens. The removal of duty on coal would\nhave 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\nscheme remains inscrutable. Free coal for California would, as a\nmatter of course, have carried with it free oil for British Columbia\nfor fuel purposes.\nNaturally, the supposition would be that British Columbia\nwould have been greatly benefited by obtaining a free market in\nthe United States for fish and fishery products and timber and timber\nproducts. But here conditions not theories govern the situation.\nIn regard to fisheries products, except in the matter of salmon canning, Americans control the supply out of our waters as it is. The\nNew England Fish Company, doing business in British Columbia\nports, has a practical monopoly of the halibut fisheries, industrially and commercially. The halibut industry has for some time\nassumed very important proportions and the removal of the duties\nwould simply have facilitated the operations of that company without any special advantage to the fishermen of this province. The\nNew England fish combine controls the fish market of eastern America, and outside companies have but little chance of doing business\nin competition. American boats fish along the entire coast of\nBritish Columbia, as often within as without the three-mile limit,\nand by making Seattle headquarters have a very big advantage over\nlocal fishermen. In timber and timber products, on the face of\nit, the case would seem still stronger in favor of reciprocity, inasmuch as certain classes of lumber are already admitted to Canada\nduty free; but in my humble opinion, at least, the timber products\nof British Columbia have but little prospect of enlarging their mar- British Columbia and British International Relations 7\nket in the United States in competition with the mills of the Puget\nSound, which, under the proposed arrangement, would have had\nBritish Columbia logs to draw upon for a supply of raw material.\nThis is demonstrable in a practical way under existing conditions.\nThe mills of British Columbia, for instance, apparently have equal\nopportunities in the export markets of the world; but it is a fact\nthat for one ship loading lumber in British Columbia waters for\nforeign parts at least half a dozen load in Puget Sound ports. If\nthis be the case in regard to markets abroad in which there are equal\nopportunities and advantages, how much truer it would be in the\nhome market of the United States. Washington lumbermen undersell British Columbia milhnen in Winnipeg and other points in the\nCanadian Middle West. They have taken large railway contracts\neven in British Coumbia away from their British Columbia rivals.\nThis is the result, as I have already intimated, of a condition not a\ntheory. The sawmilling industry in the Puget Sound country is\nmore highly organized and specialized, and under modern methods\nthe more highly organized and specialized an industry becomes the\nbetter chance it has, even in the face of tariff obstructions. With\nthe depletion of timber in Washington and Oregon, British Columbia\nlogs are more and more in demand, a fact which as far back as\n1903\u00E2\u0080\u00944 induced the British Columbia government to place an\nembargo upon their export. This is a general condition in Canada\nnow, except in respect to timber on federal limits, and were it not\nfor that saving clause (the only clause of the reciprocity treaty left\nintact in the United States act of confirmation) the mills of the latter\ncountry would very soon exhaust our raw material and ship back\nthe finished product to Canada in competition with her own mills.\nIt would not have paid Canada in the long run, and on the other\nhand would have been disastrous to her best interests.\nMoreover, it should be pointed out that a great deal of fallacy\nhas existed and still exists about the effect of free interchange of\nproducts of nations in lowering prices to the consumer and in dealing\na blow at the trusts. I am not a protectionist in theory and only\nbelieve in protective tariffs in so far as they enable Canada or the\nUnited States to develop industries under the most favorable conditions in the face of the competition from more highly organized and\nolder established industries of other countries. I believe in Canada\nfor Canadians in so far as Canada can be benefited by such a policy. 8 The Annals of the American Academy\nAll policies and theories are subject to modifications according to\nthe actual facts to be faced. A scientific tariff is one that, as nearly\nas possible, adjusts itself to the economic requirements of the country,\nbeing either high or low or not at all as conditions dictate, our own\ngeneral prosperity and the weal of the greatest number being the\nobject to be kept steadily in view; but we can easily see that such\na policy may be made and is being made the subject of serious abuse\nboth in Canada and the United States. Now, the fallacy referred\nto is that trusts in America may be regulated or controlled by tearing down the tariff barriers between the two countries. Trusts in\nCanada and elsewhere have been created as the result of modern\nfacilities of transportation and intercomrnunication\u00E2\u0080\u0094railways, steamships and telegraph lines and general reduction in postal rates. By\nthese means the area of the producers' operations has been extended\nthroughout the forty-eight states of the Union among which there\nis free trade. The same is true of Canada, with its nine provinces.\nBy the aggregation and combination of capital and the superior\norganization of industry and commerce and finance in connection\ntherewith a single firm or combination of firms comes to control\nthe entire area in the line of its particular production or sale. If\nyou sweep away the tariff obstructions to trade between Canada\nand the United States you simply extend the area of trust operations,\nand instead of forty-eight states you have forty-eight states and nine\nprovinces. The greater force in commerce and industry, as in war,\nmust prevail, and the danger to Canada in reciprocity was that the\ntrusts would have swallowed up the continent as a whole. Canada\nmust inevitably become Americanized in trade and commerce.\nUnder reciprocity, for instance, within five or ten years the com-\nmerical end of the fruit, fishery and timber industries in British\nColumbia would be in the hands of Americans. Political control\nfollows commerical control as certainly as night follows day, and\nPresident Taft spoke truly when he said that through reciprocity\nCanada would become \"an adjunct\" of the United States. Canada,\nand especially British Columbia, realized that fact at the outset\nand rejected reciprocity. It was not an expression of ill-will; it\nwas a demonstration of the desire of Canadians to work out their\nown destiny in their own way, as the people of the United States\nhave done, without entangling commercial alliances that might\ndivorce their future from the line of British affiliations upon which British Columbia and British International Relations 9\nthey long ago set their hearts, and towards which all their aspirations tend. So far, therefore, as the general result was concerned,\nnational sentiment and national economics went hand in hand and\ncannot be disassociated. To preserve their allegiance to the Empire\nand to achieve their ambition to become full partner in its affairs,\nCanadians must maintain their commercial independence. Canada\ndoes not object to doing business with the United States; but it\nwants to do business under conditions which will best further its own\ninterests and those larger interests which he in the direction of\nimperial federation.\nAlien inrmigration and especially the immigration of Orientals\nhas always been a question of vital interest in British Columbia.\nHer problems in that respect are unique in Canada. The opposition\nto*Chinese had its genesis with the labor organizations many years\nago. It later extended to the Japanese and the Hindus. Doubtless the feeling in the ranks of labor on this subject was considerably\ninfluenced by what occurred in the Pacific coast states and by the\nagitation there which led to the total exclusion of the Chinese.\nAs population increased in the towns of British Columbia and in\nthe mining and lumbering camps the labor unions increased in\nnumber and influence, until politicians felt bound to give effect to\ntheir demands, if not fully at least substantially\u00E2\u0080\u0094not that politicians in their heart of hearts were in sympathy with the movement or cared much about the \"heathen Chinee.\" To them activity\nin opposition to the Oriental was the easiest road to popular favor.\nIn one way and another antagonism to all forms of Asiatic immigration has become crystallized into a settled policy of resistance.\nNo public man in the province dare raise his voice in its favor, unless\nperchance he happen to represent a truly rural constituency, and\neven then his sentiments would be quoted against the party with\nwhich 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\nparliament as regularly as parliament sat. In other words, the\nquestion has proved to be a robust plant of unfailing bloom. At\nan early stage the legislature assumed the right to impose a head\ntax upon Chinese, but the measure was promptly vetoed by the\nDominion authorities as being ultra vires. In 1886, the federal\nparliament adopted this method of restriction by imposing a tax 10\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nof fifty dollars per head, with little practical effect. This was subsequently raised to one hundred dollars per head, also without\nmaterially checking immigration. Then, as the result of strenuous\nagitation in British Columbia, the head tax was raised to five hundred\ndollars, with the effect for a time of practical exclusion. These\nrestricted measures had curious results. From long before Confederation, housewives, farmers, millmen and others depended upon\nChinese labor to a considerable extent. It was obtainable according\nto age at from five dollars to twenty-five dollars per month. Later\non railways and salmon canneries employed Chinese extensively,\nand they competed with white labor as tailors and in factories.\nIn fact, they were in competition with white labor in all kinds of\nwork.\nThe effect of restriction was to raise the price of wages among\nthe Chinese each time it was increased, until after the five hundred\ndollars was imposed, the Chinamen, secure in the labor market against\nmore Chinamen, advanced their own wages by some method of\ncombination until the scale now runs from twenty-five dollars to\nfifty dollars and sixty dollars per month. This lucrative wage\nattracted the cupidity of the Japanese, upon whom there was and\ncould be no legal embargo, and they increased very rapidly in numbers in a very, short space of time. Then, five or six years ago,\nHindus, similarly attracted, also came in large numbers. They were\nprincipally Sikhs, discharged soldiers, and, as British subjects, could\nnot very well be objected to. A temporary depression in 1907,\nowing to the slump in the money markets and the failure of crops\nin the Middle West, brought about a slackness in the labor market,\nand feeling against these importations culminated in riots. The\nChinese, except that they were generally in demand, as a problem,\nwere comparatively easily dealt with; but with the Japanese and\nHindus the case was quite different. The proud Japanese nation\nresented discrimination against its subjects. In the case of Japanese, therefore, delicate diplomacy had to be resorted to and on the\ngrounds of the well-being of both races, the Japanese government\nvoluntarily agreed to limit the numbers to come to Canada each\nyear to a comparatively harmless rnindhnum. In the case of the\nHindus, it was hard to find justification for exclusion that would\nsatisfy Hindu, shall I say, prejudices. At the time they began to\ncome in numbers, the state of unrest in India was giving the British British Columbia and British International Relations 11\ngovernment great anxiety. For a few representatives of the British\nEmpire to exercise sovereignty over 150,000,000 of racially alien\npeoples, and then the rights of citizenship to be denied to these peoples\non British territory elsewhere, was what the Englishman would call\n\"a little thick,\" and the two facts taken together required some\neffort to make them fit in with Hindu logic, not to refer to the feat\ninvolved of skating on very thin moral ice. Ethically it could not\nstand the test of metaphysical treatment; but all matters of ethics\nto be reasonably applicable must conform in practice to the requirements of common sense, and the problem really resolves itself, in\nthe final analysis, into, not a question of ethical fiddling, but the\nprimal law of necessity\u00E2\u0080\u0094self-preservation.\nAn Oriental standard of living, of sociology, inbred by the\npressure on each other, of generations of millions of population,\ncannot be grafted upon an Occidental stock nurtured in the free,\nopen, elbow-room atmosphere of the West without serious injury to\nthe latter. Admit the principle of unrestricted irnmigration from\nthe teeming fields of Asia, upon the grounds of morality and pure\nethics, and you commit the greater crime of swamping the white man\nin his own territory. If it be held that this is a case in which the law\nof the survival of the fittest should hold, it must also be held that it\ninvolves a principle which provokes the primal instinct of resistance of the white man as an animal to five as he has lived and is\nwont to live. To races of diametrically opposed standards and culture the law must be to remain each within his own biological\nsphere, or the ultimate result must be disaster to one or both\nraces. If Great Britain disregards the theory on Indian soil, it is\nbecause she proceeds on the principle of ruling the country for\nthe country's good, a country which otherwise would be delivered\nover to the woes of \"internecine tribal strife, and incidentally for the\ncommercial profits of occupation, the possibilities of which were\nrevealed to the early semi-sovereign trading corporations of gentlemen adventurers\u00E2\u0080\u0094as she rules Egypt and large areas of the African\ncontinent, and as she once ruled Canada, Australasia and Cape\nColony. With these motives, however, we have nothing to do.\nBritish Columbia has asserted the right to be essentially a white\nman's country and the right extends equally against all Asiatic\nraces which stand geographically a menace to her on the thither\nshores of the Pacific. 12 The Annals of the American Academy\nTo speak frankly, the Japanese are a greater danger and the\nleast desirable of the three racial elements to which the province\nis opposed and that because of their enterprise and aggressiveness,\ntheir determination to get a foothold on equal terms with the Anglo-\nSaxon, a desire, which by the way, the Japanese government resists\non the part of the citizens of other nations in Japan. In their\npublic policy the Japanese nation is the perfect embodiment of the\nprinciple of Japan for the Japanese and as much of the rest of the\nworld as possible. Their moral standards, however justifiable from\nthe Japanese standpoint, are not ours and in matters of daily contract are not reliable. Their word is not dependable and their\nmotives always ulterior. They have the gloss of politeness and\nextreme courtesy, a Frenchified exterior of conduct; but remove ever\nso little of cuticle and you reveal the Tartar. It has often been\nremarked that their absorption of western civilization is only skin\ndeep. The Chinese, on the other hand, are as a rule industrious,\nhonest, faithful to their employers, cleanly in person, and without\ndesire to assimilate or to establish themselves in the land. While\nin unlimited competition, on account of the very qualities I have\nenumerated, they are the natural enemies of the white laboring\ninterests, they are admirably useful as servants, as economic\nmachines, and I, personally, always have held that their free admission for the restricted purposes of domestic service and farm labor\nwould be highly beneficial and advantageous to the country. It\nis legally and constitutionally practicable and feasible to permit and\nregulate this without infringing upon the rights, prerogatives or\nadvantages of white labor, which, if class prejudice did not intervene,\nwould be distinctly benefited. It imparts to the white laborer\nimmediately the status of aristocracy in his field. No one in his\nsenses would advocate the reduction of the standard now\" enjoyed\nby organized labor, because the wealth of the unit is the true\nstandard by which to measure the wealth of the nation; but one\nof our greatest economic problems in the province of British Columbia, and a similar condition obtains in Washington and Oregon,\nis the development of the land, the essential element of which is\ncheap labor and effective mechanical devices. Land clearing, the\nhandling of fruit, dairying specifically, and small farming generally, for which agriculturally the province is particularly adapted\nand upon which lines it must evolve successfully, demand plentiful British Columbia and British International Relations 13\nlabor at low prices at all seasons of the year, which white labor,\nso far as my experience and observation go, is neither anxious nor\ndesirous of affording. Nor do I think it particularly desirable that\nthe white laborer should become a hewer of wood and a drawer of\nwater for his white fellows. It is contrary to the genius of the Anglo-\nSaxon race.\nWith Chinese labor to assist our wives, who demand every\nconsideration in a country of high prices, and to work in our fields\nand do the drudgery of development, skilled white labor, male and\nfemale, has a wide scope for usefulness and profit, greatly enlarged\nin consequence of what willing and satisfied Chinese can make\npossible. Of what use, however, in discussing the proposal! The\niron, relentless hand of the politician will smash every such suggestion\nupon its very first appearance. The Hindu, newly imported, with\nhis skinful of prejudice and traditional occultism and caste, is impossible. Physically and mentally he has qualities which in the second\ngeneration would perhaps beneficially assimilate with the white\nrace; but the process is fraught with danger. Undoubtedly, the\nyellow or brown or dusky peril of the Orient is imminent and economically is real and menacing. British Columbia and Canada are\nright in resisting at the outset the danger which may some day have\nto be faced on sea and land in mihtary and economic warfare. One\nnecessary precaution, apart from the economic situation of industrial\nand commercial competition from the Orient, is to prevent a foothold being obtained now or at any time in the future on this coast.\nThe danger is in numbers not in individuals and a half a million whites\nin a territory so large as British Columbia would be as one against\na host. A million or two in the Middle West would have just as\nlittle chance against a horde of Asiatics, The safe principle is the\nrecognition of racial rights within racial or biological spheres, each\nrace being equal and dominant in its own territory. The proper\nsolution of the immigration problem in respect to Japan is based\nupon reciprocal entry of citizens back and forth. In this way,\nnational pride is not wounded and equal rights are maintained without loss of national dignity.\nThe effect of the Panama Canal on the general trend of the\nworld'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\nto the Suez Canal and means cutting the earth in half to reach the\nPacific Ocean by a more direct route. Its completion may fairly\nbe regarded as epochal and it means a general readjustment of\nconditions and a re-partition of trade as between East and West.\nIn British Columbia, in common with other portions of the Pacific\ncoast, expectations have been very high and the contemplated early\nopening of the Panama Canal has greatly influenced the policy of\nthe local and federal governments with respect to increasing harbor\naccommodation and providing ample transportation facilities. The\nPanama Canal from a provincial point of view, I cannot help thinking will not be an unmixed good, a possibility which people in their\nenthusiasm are apt to overlook in their calculations. Its effects,\nas already indicated, must in any event be problematical, but there\nare several things which must appear as obviously inevitable. First,\na very considerable amount of Oriental traffic, instead of going to\nand fro by way of Vancouver or Seattle or Portland or San Francisco,\nas in the past, will pass direct from points of shipment to points of\ndestination, without breaking bulk and at a cheaper rate than would\nbe 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\ncarriage under contract in which time is the essence, or the saving of\ninterest on the value of expensive consignments. This new condition\nwill 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\na limited way. Another result will be that the manufactures of eastern\nCanada, the United States and of Europe will be brought into closer\ncompetition with local manufactures all along the Pacific coast.\nThis may have the result of discouraging local industiral development in certain lines\u00E2\u0080\u0094for instance, in the manufacture of iron and\nsteel, although on the other hand it may make the conditions more\nfavorable by equalizing the factors as between East and West. It\nis always very difficult to say what new factors may enter into a\nnew field, and the Pacific from this time forth must be regarded for\npractical purposes a new sphere of commercial action.\nTaking the anticipated advantages, about which there seems to\nbe but little doubt, the Panama Canal should greatly stimulate the\ndevelopment of industries based on all natural resources, such as\ntimber, fish, fruit, and certain minerals. In timber, particularly, British Columbia and British International Relations 15\nthe export trade should be greatly increased to all parts of the eastern\nhemisphere, and if the United States in its own interests should\ndecide to permanently remove the duty on rough lumber and pulp,\nthe market in the eastern half of America for British Columbia timber\nshould be of immense proportions. The demand for paper and pulp\nin the United States is daily increasing and the supply of pulp wood\nis daily becoming a matter of greater concern. The pulp industry\non the British Columbia coast is just beginning to take shape, but\nwith the Panama Canal and a free market in the United States there\nshould be practically no limit to the demand for its products. By\nmodern methods, it is entirely possible to ship fish and fruit in a\nfresh state in cold storage to Great Britain and the continent through\nthe canal at all seasons of the year. Shipments of halibut and salmon\ncould be laid down in Boston and New York via the Isthmus at a\ncheaper rate than across the continent by rail in iced boxes. A good\ndeal of mineral matter and possibly certain classes of ores might go\nthe same route to refineries and smelters in Great Britain and elsewhere.\nFrom a Canadian and also from a British Columbia point of\nview, the most important effect of the canal will be the transport\nof grain from the Middle West of Canada to the markets of Great\nBritain and the continent. All our railway experts before the railway\ncommission have declared that grain cannot be carried at present\nthrough Pacific ports around the Horn to the old country in competition with the established routes eastward, and we may assume that\nthey know their own business best. The completion of the canal,\nhowever, will reduce the distance from Vancouver to Liverpool\napproximately from 15,000 miles to 8,836 miles, and ought to reduce\nthe present ocean rates by at least a third; or, in other words, it\nmakes Vancouver and Victoria from 23 to 25 days nearer to Liverpool\nby steamer. It is estimated\u00E2\u0080\u0094I am now taking the figures prepared\nby the Vancouver Board of Trade\u00E2\u0080\u0094that from points of the Middle\nWest in Saskatchewan and Alberta west of Moosejaw on the Canadian\nPacific Railway the rate via Panama will not exceed 22 cents per\nbushel of grain to Liverpool, while the present cost of transportation\nfrom similar points via Fort William and the Atlantic is from 25\nto 26 cents in summer and as high as 36 cents in the winter. It is\nobvious that from the almost coincident completion of the canal\nthe Grand Trunk Pacific and the Canadian Northern Pacific Railway 16 The Annals of the American Academy\nto the coast, there is room almost immediately thereafter for an enormous traffic in grain, especially in wheat, taking advantage of an\nalternative route to Europe, not unlikely to attain to a volume of\n150,000,000 bushels of grain per annum within the next decade.\nDuring the past three years Vancouver exported approximately\n750,000 bushels of wheat and 500,000 bushels of oats mainly to Mexico\nand the Philippine Islands. A very small experimental business\nonly has been done with China and Japan, notwithstanding that\nPuget Sound ports, Portland and San Francisco export large quantities of wheat there. This is due to the fact that the Oriental market\ndemands soft wheat, or pastry, flour and is unused to the hard wheat\nflour of the prairies. Whether that condition will change in time one\ncannot say, but in any event our big market is in Great Britain and\nthe continent, to which places Tacoma and Portland have shipped\nlargely, and in 1911 as high as 12,000,000 bushels. The production\nof grain in the Middle West is increasing enormously per annum\nand reached 400,000,000 bushels in 1911. So great indeed is the\nvolume of grain grown that it cannot all be shipped in one season\nthrough Canadian channels. During 1911 over 25,000,000 bushels\nof Canadian wheat found an outlet through Buffalo and New York\nto the ocean. The following distances by rail give an idea of saving\non grain freights possible over the western route:\nCalgary to St. John 2,637 miles\nCalgary to Fort William 1,260 \"\nCalgary to Vancouver 644 \"\nEdmonton to Fort William 1,451 \"\nEdmonton to Vancouver 735 \"\nMoosejaw to St. John 2,396 \"\nMoosejaw to Vancouver 1,085 \"\nIt will be seen, therefore, what intense interest the people of\nBritish Columbia have in the opening of the Panama Canal apart\naltogether from the effect of the recent action of Congress in exempting American coasting vessels from tolls in passing through. In\nregard to the latter, it is almost needless to remark that British\nColumbia sentiment reflects strongly general British sentiment on\nthe question. One result of such differentiation would be to deflect\na good deal of purely Canadian traffic that would otherwise belong\nto British vessels. A very important question arises here as to\nwhat is a coasting vessel in such circumstances. There is nothing British Columbia and British International Relations 17\nin law to distinguish a coasting vessel in tonnage and equipment\nfrom an ocean-going vessel, and its status must be determined by\nthe law governing coastwise trade, and that is more or less identical\nin the United States and Canada. I take it according to regulations\nin force on this coast that an American vessel could carry a consignment of freight and passengers from Vancouver to New York, for\ninstance, and on her return carry a consignment from the latter place\nto the former. Or an American vessel could take passengers and\nfreight from St. John or Halifax to San Francisco, Portland or Seattle,\npassing through the canal without paying tolls. To say the least,\nit is rather an abuse of the term coastwise or coasting vessel by which\nto describe a steamer trading between two such points, as a glance\nat the map will reveal. One might as well describe a vessel trading\nbetween 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.\nJohn is a tolerably long one and crosses long stretches of ocean to\nmake the trip, and except for the diplomatic fiction that the canal\nzone is American territory is made through waters that are not in\nany sense territorial. Apart from that, however, it must be clear\nthat the new law of Congress exempting coastwise American vessels\nis a technical evasion of the terms of the Hay-Pauncefote treaty,\nwhich did not contemplate any discrimination as among the ships\nof all nations using the canal, and it may be taken for granted that it\nwould not have been signed by the British minister if the American\nintention had been declared in advance. It cannot affect the grain\ntrade, but with the opening of the canal a considerable reciprocal\ntrade of the nature suggested to be done by \"coasting vessels\" will\nbe developed, and if the United States, to speak frankly, do not agree\nto refer the question to international arbitration it must be regarded\nas doubtful practice and would deepen an impression, already to some\nextent existent, which a great nation cannot afford to allow to become\ncurrent among other nations.\nAmong the greatest of the international problems in which\nBritish Columbia is interested is that of naval defense. It is not\nstrictly international, but has international bearings of a most\nmomentous character. It is a question which is now in the political\nlimelight throughout Canada. Sir Richard McBride, Premier of\nBritish Columbia, has emphasized our peculiar position on the Pacific 18 The Annals of the American Academy\nseaboard, exposed as it is to attack from the United States, Russia,\nChina and Japan, in particular, without a single effective fighting\nship, either Canadian or British, within striking reach. His frequent\nreferences to the subject have drawn the attention of the federal and\nimperial authorities to the necessity of a fleet unit on the Pacific to\nguard British possessions and British shipping in time of war and to\navoid the possibility of advantage being taken of the weakness of\nthat position. What a Pacific fleet unit is I need not discuss. It\nmeans, in plain language, a naval defense armament being created\nor transferred to British Columbia waters. Both political parties,\nlocally at least, profess to believe in that policy as desirable and necessary; but political opinion is divided as to whether that fleet should\nbe Canadian, part of a distinctively Canadian navy, or a division\nof the British navy assigned to the Pacific coast in our waters for\npurposes of defense. Whether there should be a Canadian navy\noperating in a prescribed area, designated Canadian, as advocated\nby Sir Wilfred Laurier, and the preliminary steps towards which\nwere taken by him, or an empire navy contributed to by all the\ndorninions and under one central control, as is supposed to be the\npolicy of the Conservative government at Ottawa, I am safe in saying\nthat the great mass of the people of British Columbia would support\nthe latter scheme, as being the most effective and the cheapest to all\nconcerned. The naval policy just submitted by the Right Hon.\nR. L. Borden at Ottawa, with the full concurrence and support of\nthe imperial authorities, is not intended to be a final or even partial\nsettlement of the question. It cannot even be described as a policy\nat all, so far as the ultimate intentions of the government in\nrespect to a permanent naval programme, are concerned. If the idea\nis, as we must assume it to be, to secure the cooperation of all the\ndominions to a policy of cooperative defense, all the other dominions\nmust first be consulted and out of the various views on the subject\nwill be evolved a scheme that, if unanimity can be secured, will\nfinally, in the course of two or three years, be submitted to the\nelectors for approval. In the meantime, the people of British Columbia are enthusiastically in favor of the emergency contribution of\n$35,000,000 in support of the British navy as it now exists, which\nwill include temporary provision, at least, for a fleet unit on the\nPacific. If my personal views were of any value I should have no\nhesitation in saying that such a solution has appeared to me for years British Columbia and British International Relations 19\nto be the only true solution' of the empire's destiny\u00E2\u0080\u0094a solution based\non the cooperation with the mother country of all the daughter\ndominions and parts of the empire, not only in respect to defense,\nbut in mutual trade relations and in a comprehensive, general form\nof political organization following the lines of existing British representative national institutions. RECIPROCITY\nBy Clifford Sifton,\nOttawa, -Canada.\nI have been asked to give my views in regard to the trade\narrangement which was made last year between the governments\nof the United States and Canada and which is popularly known as\nthe Reciprocity Treaty.\nI shall not attempt to recapitulate the arguments which have\nbeen used upon both sides of the line for and against the suggested\narrangement. It would be impossible within any reasonable space\nto do justice to the arguments in detail and if it were possible it\nwould be wholly futile so far as arriving at an intelligent view of\nthe case is concerned. I shall therefore simply present the case as\nit appears to my mind in general terms.\nA treaty of reciprocity relating to natural products only, as\neveryone knows, existed between Canada and the United States\nfrom 1855 to 1865. That treaty was admittedly of great value\nto Canada, and its abrogation by the United States against the\nwishes of Canada brought extreme hardship, loss of markets, loss\nof employment and much consequent loss of wealth and population.\nThenceforward from time to time efforts continued to be made\nby Canada to bring about better relations, but every application\nfor reciprocal trade arrangements was promptly rejected by the\nUnited States.\nFinally, in 1897, a last effort was made by Sir Wilfred Laurier's\ngovernment. A joint high commission had been appointed to\nconsider and, if possible, to settle matters in dispute between the\nUnited States and Canada. The trade question was brought up\nin these discussions, but the American representatives refused to\nmake even the slightest concessions in the way of opening the United\nStates markets to Canadian natural products.\nShortly after the failure of these negotiations Sir Wilfrid\nLaurier made an unequivopal pronouncement that Canada would\nno longer look to the American market. The country accepted\nthat pronouncement as made in- good faith and settled down to the\n(20) Reciprocity 21\nidea that we must develop our trade independently, and by our\nfiscal legislation, our foreign trade arrangements and our transportation system make ourselves as far as possible independent, of the\nfiscal measures of the United States.\nThis policy was followed with great vigor and success during\nthe subsequent years and in consequence thereof the condition of\ngeneral prosperity which existed in Canada in the year 1910 was\nsuch as twenty years before would have been regarded as quite unattainable.\nOur position of late years had been singularly satisfactory.\nNothing that could be called a serious financial crisis had been known\nin our country for many years. Poverty in the sense in which it\nis understood in other countries was and is practically unknown in\nCanada. The prices of manufactures had risen somewhat, but the\nprices of farm products had risen much more, so that, in the general\nprosperity, the farmer, whose interests are predominant with us,\nhad been getting his full share. The revenue was growing rapidly,\ntrade was increasing, mineral and agricultural production was expanding and a great volume of immigration of the highest class\nwas pouring into the country and increasing its productive capacity.\nOur fiscal system had in the course of thirty-five years been well\nadapted to the peculiar circumstances of the country. That system\nwas based upon the idea of moderate protection, but not such a\nprotection as to be oppressive, nor such as to encourage or foster\nthe formation of large trusts or combinations with power to oppress\nthe people. Some such abuses no doubt had arisen, but both under\nthe Conservative revision of the tariff in 1894 and the Liberal revision in 1897 objectionable features were removed, and the few\npossibilities of abuse that still remained under our tariff might\neasily be rectified if the people would take the trouble to ask for relief.\nUnder this fiscal system we have, broadly speaking, moderate\ntaxation, a measurable amount of competition varying in different\nindustries and an abundant, buoyant and elastic revenue.\nIn the campaign which took place last year I made a statement\nthat so far as our information went there was not a country in the\nworld, the population of which, man for man, was upon the average\nso well situated as that of Canada. I have no doubt that the statement was thoroughly justifiable when it was made and it is quite\nas true now as it was then. 22 The Annals of the American Academy\nUpon this stage and under these conditions the reciprocity\nagreement was suddenly and unexpectedly introduced. It is not\ntoo much to say that the whole proposition came as a complete surprise to both political parties in the country. No one was looking\nfor or anticipating any such results from the negotiations. There\nhad been a few public deliverances by men more or less prcaninent,\nnearly all of which, I think, were hostile to the idea of reciprocity,\nand a few business men had in a semi-jocular way expressed the\nhope that our negotiators would get back safely from Washington.\nI think, however, that I am quite within the mark when I say that\nthere was no serious anticipation of anything important in the\nway of a treaty or agreement being arrived at. When, therefore,\nthis far-reaching and revolutionary arrangement was announced\nit came as a complete surprise.\nIt was somewhat unfortunate in its introduction. In Canada\nall such matters are made the subject of a parliamentary statement\nby a member or members of the government of the day. In this\ncase the business was in the hands of Mr. Fielding, Minister of\nFinance, and Mr. Patterson, Minister of Customs. No one doubts\nthe ability of either of these experienced parliamentary debaters\nto bring to bear the necessary industry and capacity and to make\nthe very most out of any case committed to their charge, but, strange\nas it may appear, neither Mr. Fielding nor Mr. Patterson nor the\nother members of the government ever seemed to realize that they\nwere engaged in the fight of their lives, and that it was necessary\nfor them to get to work and really argue the case. From the very\nfirst all of these gentlemen seemed to have been placed at a serious\ndisadvantage by reason of the fact that they apparently thought\na mere statement of the terms of the treaty to be sufficient to carry\nit without any backing of facts or arguments. This idea was due\nto what appeared to be a lack of realization of the changed conditions of commerce and industry as a result of what had taken place\nduring the previous eighteen or twenty years. There was a time,\nfor instance, when the cry of \"free fish\" would have swept the\nMaritime Provinces and when the cry of an enlarged market for hay,\npotatoes, barley, cattle and dairy products would have swept Ontario and Quebec, but conditions had changed in twenty years and\nthe case had to be argued from new premises altogether. My observation led me to the conclusion that there was a very consider- Reciprocity 23\nable lack of appreciation of this fact on the part of the government.\nAs a result of this, while no doubt there was a fillip of favorable\npublic 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\nworst of it. So far as the discussion in the press was concerned,\nthe government side was not well served. The Liberal press, speaking generally, excels rather in attack than in defense. In this case,\nwith one or two exceptions, there was a noticeable lack of thoroughness' and vigor in the defense put forward in the Liberal organs.\nNaturally these papers took their cue from the government, and\nwent in the early stages of the game too much upon the assumption\nthat the mere statement of the terms would win approval. When\nin the middle of the campaign they found that this idea was fallacious, it was too late to retrieve the position, even if they had\nthe weight of merit upon their side.\nA considerable number of Liberals prominent in business\nopenly and unequivocally attacked the reciprocity agreement.\nIn the House of Commons, however, only three Liberal members\nbroke away. The government was able to hold its following in\nthe house and senate almost unbroken.\nIn the campaign which followed and terminated on the twenty-\nfirst of September, 1911, there was practically no serious discussion\nof any other subject than reciprocity. The government went into\nthe campaign with a majority of about fifty. It came out in a\nminority 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\navailable weapon without success. At the beginning of the session\nof 1911 the opposition was to all appearances hopelessly out of the\nrunning and the government very strongly entrenched in office.\nThe reciprocity issue arose. The government forced it forward\nin a general election. The opposition accepted the issue and won\nthe election upon it and upon it alone. There has been much talk\nabout other influences affecting the election. It has been said that\nthe Ne Temere Decree affected the Protestant vote and that Protestants generally were disaffected toward Laurier. I think I know\nhow far this idea prevailed. In my judgment, while no doubt i\n24 The Annals of the American Academy\na few hundreds of voters were affected by these arguments, as\nin every election there will be little eddies of sentiment which\nhave nothing to do with the main issue, I am perfectly satisfied\nthat these side issues were of comparatively little importance\nand that the victory of the Conservative party in the election was\npractically due to the reciprocity issue and to it alone. The reason\nthat the Conservative party swept the Province of Ontario, where\nin fact the victory was won, was because the people of that Province\nwere thoroughly and whole-heartedly opposed to the trade agreement.\nWhat were the reasons?\nThe short recital given above affords the key to the most important arguments used in favor of the winning side.\nCanada had time and again been refused any consideration\nby the United States and had finally, at great sacrifice and with\ntremendous efforts, made herself commercially independent. Her\nproducts went to widely scattered markets, but there was little or\nno chance that she would ever be put to serious inconvenience by\nthe closing of these markets. A careful survey of her position\nshowed a degree of commercial independence which under the\ncircumstances was rather surprising and very gratifying to the\nnational pride of Canadians. It was felt that if we consummated the\nproposed treaty with the United States our trade would follow the\nline of least resistance. As stated by a New York paper, the reciprocity agreement would check the east and west development\nof Canada and make that country a business portion of the United\nStates with the lines of traffic running to the north and south rather\nthan to the east and west. The immediate and inevitable result\nof this would be that Canada would become absolutely dependent\nupon the -fiscal policy of the United States and at the mercy of\nAmerican tariff changes. It might be said that the United States\nwould be equally interested in our fiscal policy, but the conclusive\nanswer to that argument was that what might be vital to Canada\nwith its eight million people and its small productions, would be\nof comparatively trifling importance to the United States with its\nninety million people and its enormous volume of production. It\nwould 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\nwith Augustus too far because it was not wise to press too hardly\nin argument upon \"the master of thirty legions.\"\nIn a word, the judgment of the business men of Canada was\nthat the reciprocity agreement, if carried into effect, would mean\na commercial alliance which would of necessity have to be carried\nfurther, and that as a necessary result of such an alliance the United\nStates, being the greater, wealthier, stronger and more populous\ncountry, would dominate Canada's commercial policy and development.\nIt was, and is, believed that reciprocity in natural products\nwould lead to reciprocity in manufactures. It was, and is, believed\nthat the predominance of the United States in commercial legislation would lead to loss of control on our part of our undeveloped\nnatural resources and especially of our water powers. It was, and\nis, believed that these results would not only affect us in the matters\nparticularly mentioned, but would subordinate Canada to the United\nStates in such a way as to interfere with her national independence.\nFollowing this idea, it will be readily seen that Canadians\nwho take seriously the idea of Canada's position in the British\nEmpire had every cause to be alarmed. To place the most important unit of the British Empire, outside of the British Isles, under\nthe domination of a foreign though friendly power would be a long\nstep toward disintegration. Your publicists who said that this\ntrade agreement would bind Canada to the United States and strike\na blow at the consolidation of the British Empire were absolutely\nright and we who fought against it realized that fact and had a full\nappreciation of its importance.\nTaking the Dominion by sections, the result was that Nova\nScotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick were on the\nwhole slightly but still decidedly unfriendly to the agreement.\nIn Quebec, strange as it may appear, I can find no evidence that\nreciprocity seriously affected the rural voters or influenced them\nin the exercise of their franchise. On the other hand, the manufacturers, financiers, railway men and commercial men of Montreal\nand vicinity were practically a unit against reciprocity and their\ninfluence undoubtedly accounted directly or indirectly for fifteen\nor eighteen of the Quebec constituencies which were carried by the\nopposition.\nThe Province of Ontario was almost solidly opposed to the\nagreement. My own belief is that even the election returns which 26 The Annals of the American Academy\ngave seventy-three seats to the Conservatives and thirteen to the\nLiberals did not represent the real sentiment against the agreement. I knew fairly well the sentiment of Ontario as it was just\nprevious to the election and I now believe that quite one-half of those\nwho voted in favor of the Liberal government were at heart opposed\nto its policy. In fact, there was no heart in the contest on the\npart of the Liberal party in the Province of Ontario and there was\napparently no mourning in its camp so far as the rank and file of\nthe voters were concerned when it was defeated.\nWinnipeg and the urban centers of the prairie provinces were\ngenerally opposed to reciprocity. The farmers were strongly in\nfavor of it.\nBritish Columbia was lost to the Liberals in any event on\naccount of party disorganization and incompetent leadership, but\nit is fairly safe to say that the Province as a whole is against\nreciprocity.\nSummarizing the case, we have the fact that a government,\nstrongly entrenched and well organized, led by a man who is perhaps\nthe most striking and brilliant personality in the British Empire,\nwith a record of statesmanlike achievement behind it, went into a\nfight on the question of reciprocity and was hopelessly routed. No\nsingle portion of the Dominion, except the farmers of the three\nprairie provinces, showed the slightest enthusiasm for the policy\nof the government, while in the other parts of the country thousands\nof ardent Liberals went over to the opposition.\nThe opposition remains unchanged and unchangeable to-day.\nIt is a deliberate, calculated and determined opposition. I am\nperfectly satisfied that if the House of Commons were dissolved\nto-morrow and Sir Wilfrid Laurier proclaimed in unmistakable\nterms his intention of going to Washington to negotiate a new treaty\nor to consummate the old one, he would be disastrously defeated.\nIn fact, his defeat would be more decisive than it was last fall.\nBut it is difficult to see how such a case can again arise. The\nproffer of reciprocity on what seemed very liberal terms by the\ngovernment of the United States was undoubtedly a high political\nplay on the part of that government. The play was made to meet\na most unusual and embarrassing condition of affairs within the\nranks of the Republican party. The measure was supported by the\nDemocrats in congress, because to support it was at once the simple,\nstraightforward and politic thing to do. But circumstances have Reciprocity 27\nchanged and it may safely be said now that the conditions which\nbrought the offer of reciprocity from the United States are not likely\nto recur.\nUnder all the circumstances, therefore, I conclude that reciprocity is not any longer in the least degree a practical political\nquestion. The question is not likely to return to the people of\nCanada in the form in which it was presented last year, but if it\ndoes so return it will undoubtedly be answered in precisely the\nsame manner in which it was answered then.\nSomething should be said with regard to the ideas which in\nthe main actuated the great body of those who were led to take an\nunusually active and determined part in the election. It should\nbe stated in the most emphatic terms that there was no idea of\nhostility or unfriendlinesss to the United States at the root of their\naction. I think that most people thought that the treaty was a\nvery liberal one from the standpoint of the United States. I never\nheard very much in the way of suggestion that the United States\nshould have offered more or that our negotiators should have demanded more. The underlying motive was of a different character\naltogether. The people believed that the development of the two\ncountries under the reciprocity policy was bound to interfere with\nthe commercial independence of Canada and that idea was fatal\nto the success of the policy proposed.\nOur people thoroughly recognize the greatness of the United\nStates and its phenomenal success along many lines of human\nendeavor. It is, however, the opinion of our most thoughtful people\nthat your constitution is now approaching its supreme test. We\nlook with some apprehension upon your labor difficulties. We\nthink also that your attempt to regulate the great monopolies which\nhave arisen will tax the energies of the nation to the utmost. We\nmost sincerely wish you well in the efforts which you are so manfully\n'making. Nowhere has the tree of Liberty borne more glorious\nfruit than in the United States, and it is the sincere hope of every\ntrue lover of freedom that you may go from triumph to triumph\nexhibiting to the world a shining and mspiring example.\nYour present problems, however, are vastly more complicated\nand difficult of solution than our own. We shall have in one way\nor another all these problems to solve, but they will come in smaller\nvolume and in a form much less difficult to handle. We anticipate\nno serious difficulty in curbing any trusts or combinations that 28 The Annals of the American Academy\nmay arise in Canada and in placing production upon a legitimate\nand proper basis. We feel also quite able to deal with questions\naffecting our great transportation systems. In fact, most of the\nmachinery is already provided and working well. We, however,\nwish to deal with these questions and to regulate them in our own\nway without pressure from abroad and without feeling that great\nfinancial interests outside of our jurisdiction are being exerted to\ninfluence our decision.\nThere remains a word or two to be said upon a phase of the\nquestion which still remains as a tax upon the statesmanship of\nCanada. I refer now to the apparently conflicting interests of the\nfarmers of the prairie provinces and the financial and manufacturing\npeople of the East. There is little doubt that the majority of our\nwestern farmers desire a modification of the fiscal system. They\nconsider 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\nsouth of them. In point of fact a close analysis shows that most\nof the disadvantages under which they labor are incidental to the\nvery rapid development of the country and are likely to disappear in\na comparatively short time with the progressive improvement of\nfacuities and commercial and industrial organization. It is quite\ncertain, however, that the farmers of the West are and will continue\nto be favorable to low tariff and the fewest possible restrictions upon\ntrade. Their political influence may be permanently counted on in\nthat direction. Particularly it may be said that if the present\ngovernment, which is avowedly a protection government, should\nbe tempted to raise the tariff upon manufactured goods so as to\nfoster further combinations and enhancement of prices, thus resulting in an increased tax upon the western farmer, his voice will\nbe heard with no uncertain sound and a tariff war of vigorous proportions will undoubtedly follow. There is, I am free to say, no\nindication as yet that Mr. Borden and his colleagues have any\nintention of following such a policy. But whatever may be the\npolicy 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\nthat no one section of the country can have its own way entirely\nand that fiscal policy in a country of great extent and diversified\ninterests must of necessity be a matter of compromise. CANADA AND THE PREFERENCE1\nCANADIAN TRADE WITH GREAT BRITAIN AND THE\nUNITED STATES\nBy S. Morley Wickett, Ph.D.,\nOf Wickett & Craig, Ltd., Toronto, Canada.\nProbably most Canadians still associate their trade with the\nUnited 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\nit remains an object of popular interest, an interest which is doubtless\nshared by students of Canadian political development generally.\nParticularly at the present epoch new tariff relations might mean a\ngreat deal for future affiliations.\nThe History of Preference\nThe preference which has since become more or less of an intra-\nimperial policy dates back many years to pre-confederation days,\nand the times of colonial policy. What may be called the present\nphase began April 23, 1897, on the initiative of the late Sir Richard\nCartwright, as a flank attack on protection. Sir Richard, then\nMinister of Trade and Commerce, so explained it on the floor of the\nHouse of Commons. The initial preference rate was one-eighth\nand by virtue of their trade treaties with Great Britain, Germany,\nBelgium, France and Spain enjoyed its privileges. But following\nthe denunciation of the Belgian and German treaties and their\nexpiration in July, 1898, the preference was increased to one-fourth\nfrom August 1st, and confined to goods from the United Kingdom and\nthose British Colonies giving Canada as favorable terms as they\nreceived from her. A further increase from one-fourth to one-third\nwas made on July 1, 1900. From the remarks of Sir Richard and\nother evidence it is clear that the preference must be regarded as a\nmeasure of tariff reform at the hands of a political party traditionally\npledged to a lower tariff. Incidentally it constituted a clever reply\nto the Tory cry of disloyalty\u00E2\u0080\u0094a cry that had long been thrown at\niThis article appeared originally as a series of letters in the London Times, but has since\nbeen considerably revised and brought down to date.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Editor.\n(29) 30 The Annals of the American Academy\nthe Liberal party because of its platform of reciprocity with the United\nStates. For a while it looked as if the idea of a preference had passed\nfrom the hands of the political parties to become, as far as such\nthings can be, a fixed principle of the Canadian tariff. And so it\nseemed until the negotiation of the French treaty in 1907, followed\na couple of years later by the removal of the German surtax, the\nBelgian treaty, and the announcement that the government would\nshortly enter once more into trade negotiations with the United\nStates.\nThe important r61e played by those of French descent in Canadian life makes it readily understood, quite aside from the possible\nvalue to Canada of the French market, why a commercial treaty\nwith France was negotiated. Apart, however, from comparatively\nfew lines (more particularly embroideries, gloves, silks, soaps and\ncheese) the items given most favorable rates do not compete seriously\nwith 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\ndeclarations is superficial and inadequate. Under the circumstances\nthere is grave danger that the granting to her of the intermediate\ntariff on numerous items not produced largely or at all in Belgium\nmay in practice extend the same low rates much more widely than\nintended.\nThe Popular Attitude\nIt may be argued that it would have been highly impolitic\non the part of Canada to refuse to discuss tariff matters with the\nUnited States when for the first time in her history she was invited\nto do so. To this there is no adequate answer, particularly as the\ntwo countries have many important international matters to settle\nfrom time to time. Though as regards the tariff Canadians cannot\nforget that the whole history of the Dominion has been fought out\nin the face of a singularly hostile legislation on the part of the United\nStates, resulting in a tariff admittedly sharpened to force Canada\ninto commercial union with her. It is too soon to forget it. And\nrecently the remarkable publication by President Taft of an interchange of views with Mr. Roosevelt on the probable effect on Canada\nof closer trade relations with the United States serves to confirm\nsusceptible Canadians in their fears: Canada and the Preference 31\nCanada's rapid growth, it must be remembered, dates only from\nthe 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\nof north and south. Brilliantly successful as this development has\nbeen, it is not yet completed. The recent rejection of the trade\novertures from Washington will doubtless postpone any further\nserious trade negotiations for some years. But the fact that the\ncabinet possesses the extraordinary power by mere order-in-council\nto reduce the tariff from the general to the intermediate rate without\nreference to Parliament, and the further fact that the government\nhas still no tariff board for expert reference, such as exists in the\nUnited States and in effect in other countries, unite to make Canadian\nbusiness men sensitive to possible political exigencies. In addition\nis to be borne in mind the provisional character of present trade agreements.\nCanadian Protection\nAs a distinct policy Canada's protective tariff dates from 1879;\nbut the Canadian Pacific Railway did not string the provinces together\nfrom coast to coast for another seven years. In the meantime, and,\nfor another eight years, it must be admitted the tariff did little more\nthan allow Canada to maintain a separate existence from the United\nStates. Only with the gradual opening up and development of the\ncountry and the improvement of the trade routes east and west was\nan assured future realized. In other words the British market\nrelieved Canada from her over-weaning dependence on the United\nStates; it was her salvation; and it is very largely still, (^ming as it\ndid at this stage the preferential tariff fitted in with the natural course\nof evolution, and it gained additional support from the outburts\nof Imperial sentiment at the time of the South African war and subsequently.\nThe Meaning of Preference\nAs regards the preference, both British and Canadian business\nmen have come to understand better its real meaning. The ordinary\ncitizen not in close touch with trade conditions appeared to regard\nit as something little more than a toy. In any event it was in his\nmind not to be taken very seriously. For a time the sentimental\naspects appeared to bulk prominently. But business men now view\nit both as a business and as a political policy.' It is not a mandate 32 The Annals of the American Academy\nfor mutual sacrifices. On that everyone will agree. Nor is it a\nmedium to work out single-handed a revolution in trade relations.\nRather is it an important object-lesson in political and constitutional\nrelations; a partial offset to British geographical remoteness; and a\nmeasure of tariff modification.\nCanadian Opinion on Tariff Revision\nCanada is undoubtedly moderately protectionist. But as regards\npresent public opinion on tariff revision it is impossible to speak with\ncertainty. It is probably in a waiting mood; and will probably\nremain so until the promised tariff board has been tried out. Certainly business conditions and prospects are very different from what\nthey were in the eighties and early nineties when the ccrmmercial\nunion movement disturbed the country; they are different from\nwhat they were in the year when the successive stings of the McKinley, Wilson and Dingley tariffs were fresh in the popular mind.\nAs for the farmer, generally speaking, he is well-off, at least if he has\nnot neglected his opportunities. In addition to the foreign demand\nfor his farm produce, the home market has increased so rapidly that\nlocal prices are often as high as, if not higher than, in Great Britain.\nAlready the home market consumes a high percentage of many lines\nof Canadian produce, and is rapidly growing. Of the wheat, barley\nand oat crop, 80 per cent, and of the total product of the farm, nearly\n90 per cent is consumed locally. For the time being Canada is an\negg-importing country; her butter exports are disappearing; the\nexport of cheese has fallen markedly, and the export of bacon has\nbeen cut in two.\nThe Application of Preference\nIt is to be pointed out that the preferential principle has still\nnot been tested thoroughly. To lop off 12$ or 25 or 33$ per cent on\nthe whole tariff list is not necessarily to adapt preference to the\nconditions of the British market. It may and it may not. At best\nit is a hit or miss method. To test its possibilities the amount and\nextent of preference should be decided from a British as well as from\na Canadian point of view. It should be the result of a careful investigation of conditions and possibilities. In other words, and this is\nvital, it should be confined to classes of goods that are actually\nproduced within the Empire and in which there is a likelihood of Canada and the Preference\n33\nlarger trade. As yet this has not been done. If it is not so restricted\nbut is norninally extended to lines not produced or manufactured\nwithin the empire it is an invitation to false customs declarations and\nto fiscal and industrial confusion. In the revision of the tariff in 1906\nthe principle of a uniform preferential cut was abandoned, it is true;\nbut the observation still holds in that the revision was made from a\npurely Canadian standpoint.-\nCanadian Trade\nAs a young and growing country Canada has large exports\nand still larger imports. Most of her exports go to Great Britain;\nmost of her imports come from the United States. With a population\nof less than 8,000,000 she ranks next to Great Britain and Germany\nin the list of United States customers. For the year ending with\nMarch, 1911, the figures are (exclusive of coins and bullion):\nMillion S\nPercentage\nExports to\u00E2\u0080\u0094\n132.2\n104.1\n56\n44\n236.3\n100\nMillion $\nFree\nDutiable\nTotal\nPercentage\nImports from\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nGreat Britain\t\n25.4\n121.8\n84.5\n153.1\n109.9\n274.9\n28\nUnited States\t\n72\n147.2\n237.6\n384.8\n100\nPossibilities of Directing It\nThe question at once arises how far the current of this trade\ncan be deflected by preferential and related legislation. In forming\nour judgment we must not overlook certain permanent conditions\nof Canadian trade. No amount of rational legislation could make\nCanada buy from England agricultural produce, timber, raw cotton,\ntobacco, 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\ngoods. Sometimes public speakers, wishing to discover the '' natural\ntrade relation of Canada and Great Britain draw lessons from the\ntotals of duty-free imports; but such a practice is misleading in that\na great part of so-called raw materials is dutiable, and the free list\nis a reflection of something very different from the ''Divine Order.\"\nThat Canada and the United States are geographically interdependent to an important degree is obvious. The United States\nlooks to Canada for nickel, copper, asbestos, spruce, pulp, timber, fish\nand in certain contingencies for agricultural produce. Canada looks\nto the United States for raw cotton, tobacco, hard coal, hardwoods,\nIndian corn and a long list of manufactured wares, especially those\nsubject to quick, and taken singly, rather small orders. In a recent\naverage year (1911), apart from settlers' effects and bullion, what may\nbe called a raw material made up thirty-three per cent of the imports,\nas against seven per cent from Great Britain. In both cases there are\nremarkably few items. Five-sixths of that coming from the United\nStates is represented by the following (in million dollars): Coal,\n36.1; Indian corn, 7.3; lumber, 12.4; fruits, 6.5; undressed furs,\nhides and skins, 3.3; raw tobacco, 1.9; iron ore, 2.5; bar and pig iron,\n2.4. Apart from the last item these purchases are more or less fixed;\nwhereas of the British seven per cent none of the items can be so\nregarded.\nLook now at the course of trade from another point of view.\nImports from Great Britain covering the produce of the farm, forest,\nmine and fisheries, raw and slightly manufactured goods, were only\n$6,500,000, as against over $83,000,000 from the United States.\nTariff legislation could not be expected to disturb this division to\nthe advantage of Great Britain. In fact, direct ocean steamship\nservice between foreign ports and Canada would cut off some of the\nBritish trade in southern products and reduce by that much the imports now returned as British. Omitting bullion, settlers' effects\nand tea, and allowing $5,000,000 of British goods credited erroneously\nto the United States, by reason of re-invoidng, etc., this leaves\n$90,000,000 of manufactured goods from Great Britain, as against\n$160,000,000 from the United States. This $160,000,000 is the possible target for preferential legislation, and I think will approximate\nthe actual business situation. All things considered, these figures do\nnot 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\nin manufactures and in other lines natural and fixed? One can only\nanswer by describing conditions.\nAs regards the possibilities of tariff legislation there may be\nperhaps an inclination to draw conclusions from the striking results\nof the German surtax. But this is dangerous, for Germany's economic\nrelations with Canada are very different from those of the United\nStates, her Canadian sales being much more amenable to legislative\ninfluence.\nThe American Tariff\nThe United States tariff being, as a rule, prohibitive of Canadian\nmanufactured goods, Canada's sales to the United States are upwards\nof nine-tenths raw or nearly raw material. Apart from the products\nof the farm, forest and mine, practically in their rough state, drugs\nand medicines, whiskey, pig iron, fertilizers, coke, cement and tea,\nthere are only a few scattered items of importance. The extended\nand subtle sub-divisions of the United States tariff, with a view\nto securing protective efficiency on particular items, are only appreciated by the foreign manufacturer attempting to develop a market\nin the United States. That tariff has been aptly described as a\n\"tricky one.\" What can a Canadian manufacturing jeweler with\n35 per cent protection do against a United States duty on jewelry of\n60 per cent and on enamelled jewelry of 85 per cent? Sole leather\nis now 5 per cent, upper leather 10 per cent, but leather belting and\nfootballs 40 per cent, leather cases and pouches 60 per cent, threshing machines 15 per cent, but steam engines, which must accompany\nthem, 30 per cent (if the engine is a gasoline engine the duty is 45\nper cent), and all repair parts 45 per cent.\nWith a view to determining the average rate of customs duty\nlevied by the United States on Canadian imports most writers take\nthe total dues collected in relation to the bulk of trade done. But\nthis is a fallacious basis, in that the question here hangs really not on\nthe amount of duty collected, but on the protective or prohibitive\nefficiency of the tariff. For example, the importation of ships to\nbe registered in the United States is prohibited outright; the duty\non carpets is roughly 75 per cent, which is prohibitive as far as\nCanada is concerned; pianos, 45 per cent; watch chains, 60 per cent;\nmachinery, 45 per cent; tweeds and serges, 100 to 150 per cent, etc.\n\"I have made up a list of somewhat over forty staple commodities 36 The Annals of the American Academy\nproduced or manufactured in both countries, which one might expect\nin the natural course of affairs could be mutually traded in. On\nthese items the average United States duty is 44 per cent, as against\n24 per cent charged by Canada, which is probably sufficiently typical\nof the relative tariffs of the two countries in actual practice. On the\ntheory of infant industries one might have expected the percentages\nto be reversed.\nIn fact, the whole United States system seems conceived in\nprotection. With a view to facilitating trade Canada has customs\nports of entry in all towns of any importance throughout the country;\nthe United States, on the contrary, besides specifying that consular\ncertificates shall accompany all shipments of over $100 value, requires\nthat entries be passed at the frontier in a very small number of places\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094which means also the employment of customs brokers\u00E2\u0080\u0094a system\ncausing delays and frequently considerable annoyance and extra\nexpense to the importer.\nThe Recent Negotiations\nThat after establishing such a high tariff, and in return for\nnot levying a still higher one, the United States should ask, for a\nstill lower one on Canada's part, as she did a couple of years ago,\nimmediately subsequent to Canada's treaty with France, can only\nbe described as a resort to the policy of the big stick. That the\nCanadian Minister of Finance yielded must be explained by the view\nthat the smaller people should humor the bigger one to some extent.\nThe call for a lower tariff at present making itself heard in the United\nStates may not bear much fruit for several years yet. It will then\nbe time after Canadian development has reached a higher stage of\nindustrial maturity for Canada to re-consider seriously and generally\nher trade relations with the United States. At present every Canadian knows that a generally lower tariff against the United States\nwould mean the end of much of our British trade and the yoking\nof Canadian industry to the characteristic speculative ups and downs\nof the United States market\u00E2\u0080\u0094a feature of which the English buyer,\ntoo, has reason to know something. The Anti-Dumping Act passed by\nCanada in 1904 was itself a recognition of the desirabiHty of checking\nthis very result. According to this act, duties have to be paid under\nheavy 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\npriates the difference up to 15 per cent of the value, providing the\ndifference is at least 1\ per cent. In the opinion of the late manager\nof the tariff department of the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, this legislation has served to check dumping when trade in\nthe United States is good, but has not been and could not be effective\nwhen business was bad. Secret rebates, too, are probably not an\nuncommon means of dodging the act. But on the whole it seems to\nhave proved to be a wise bit of protective legislation, especially\nunder a moderate tariff.\nProtection and Export\nAs regards the relation of tariffs to export trade it must not\nbe forgotten that in the event of imported goods being made into\nfinished wares and exported, both the United States and Canada\nallow a rebate of 99 per cent of all duties paid. This partly explains\nhow it is sometimes possible to quote lower prices for export than for\nhome consumption. It also explains why United States goods are\nsometimes shipped to Canada via England; for the Canadian duty\nis levied on the price current in the country of sale, not in the country\nof origin.\nAccuracy of Trade Statistics\nCk>ming more directly to the question of trade in manufactures\nbetween Great Britain and Canada, it is to be noted in the first\nplace that Canadian trade statistics need a great deal of amplification and editing. For example, large importations of free goods are\nmade through United States brokers acting as British agents. It\nis the old-established practice of many English houses to give the\nagency for Canada along with that of the United States. Fortunately,\nthe tendency is now slowly working towards the creation of separate\nagencies for Canada. On the other hand, large export sales are made\nby Canada through United States export houses, and such exports\nare placed to the credit of the United States. Sometimes there is a\nspecial reason, as, for example, when in the case of cut lumber a United\nStates firm will take the output of special cuts of a great many\nCanadian and domestic mills, sorting these specialized cuts to the\nmarket. Thus, while American builders demand 8-inch, 10-inch\nand 12-inch boards, English architects call for 7-inch, 9-inch and 38 The Annals of the American Academy\n11-inch cuts, and only in this way could such orders be filled\nconveniently.\nUnited States Advertising\nThat prevailing tastes in Europe and America are different\nneeds no argument. Outlook on life and ways of living are not the\nsame. United States industries have, therefore, an initial advantage\nin catering to their own continent, especially when aided by the\ngreatest mania for advertising of specialties and novelties characteristic of any country or any time. England sends into Canada more\nBibles and prayer books than United States, but far fewer\nperiodicals. On catalogues Canada levies a customs duty of 15\nper cent, but many United States houses get catalogue-substitutes\nin free in the form of magazine advertisements; and the suggestion\nhas been made to the Minister of Finance that the unusual and altogether unique situation of literature and advertisements being bound\nup together should be met by a specific duty per pound on foreign\nperiodicals. The. proposal appeals to some for the reason (which\none may repeat without disrespect) that the United States magazines flood the public mind with a glorification of their own country,\nand, more or less often, with a disparagement of people and tilings\nnot American.\nCharacter of New World Demand\nOf the new-world citizen it can be said he is often contented\nwith less substantial goods than the Englishman; thinks much of\nneat appearance and loves change. Witness the, at times, amusing\nextremes of the American shoe, the lightness of carpenters' tools\n(probably because the American carpenter works more on soft woods),\nbicycles, automobiles, brass goods, jewelry, etc. The styles in traveling bags have run the gamut of half a dozen colors and a still greater\nnumber of shapes and sizes, while the Englishman has stood by his\nessentially satisfactory tan or brown bag. The stress of competition,\nthe desire to catch the consumer's eye and to extend sales drive the\nAmerican manufacturer on. A faddy market may be expensive; as\nAmericans say, it may \"come high\" and be economically wrong,\nbut 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\nnew processes perhaps break up old connections, and the high cost\nof labor places the manufacturers of both Canada and the United\nStates in the same boat as regards their interest in mechanical\nappliances. The frequent discarding of the old by United States\nindustry may at times fall into prodigality; and in any event it\nincreases overhead expenses as compared with Canada, and still\nmore so with England.\nConditions of Market Supply\nSome of the circumstances under which goods reach the consumer through the great expanses of America have an important\ninfluence. For example, the most remote rural jeweler may handle\na Waltham or an Elgin or a Swiss watch, and through the one make\nhe selects can allow his patron to choose from 120 or more classes or\ngrades. No British watch-house can offer more than a fraction of\nthis range. It is not necessary to seek for explanations from the\ninstructive history of the British watch-trade. Here the preference\nof the country jeweler is decided not necessarily by a question of\nquality but of ease in doing business. He can satisfy almost any\ndemand by the one catalogue and a letter or a wire to the one address.\nIt is a condition created by external circumstances and fostered by\nadvertisements and by repeated and effective \"drunrming.'' The\nwide range in styles of shoes, half-sizes in tmderclothing, etc., help\nin the same direction as does the fact that United States quotations\nare always in dollars and cents. The more frequent use of mercantile\nand other agencies for reports on the financial reliability of houses,\nand greater elasticity of credit are also characteristic of United States\nbusiness dealings. This is of particular importance, looking to the\ninception of business relations. Thus American industry adapts\nitself to, and grows with, the country, and eventually is hard to\ndislodge. Imperial penny postage, which Canada arranged for in\n1898 through the splendid work of Sir William Murlock, has proved\na distinct aid to communications with Great Britain, as has also the\nlater lowering of the postage on British magazines. If low cable\nrates could be secured it would be a still more important aid in holding\nBritish trade connections. So infinitely important to business is a\nlow cable tariff that the whole cable situation should be given special\nstudy by Great Britain.\nJ 40 The Annals of the American Academy\nImportance of Warehouse Facilities\nBut no degree of improved communications can alone counterbalance geographical remoteness. Quick deliveries, quick repairs\nfrom stock of adjustable parts mean well-equipped local supply\nhouses at strategic points. Thus far British manufacturers have had.\ntheir eyes on too many markets to specialize on the scattered and\ndivided Canadian demand. But the situation takes on a different\naspect when it is noted that if business methods mean anything,\nan effort for Canada's business is at the same time an effort for greater\ntrade over all North America.\nThe Needs of the Moment\nThe large amounts of British capital sent yearly to Canada are\nfrequently pointed to as a means of securing business for Great\nBritain. But the great bulk of these investments go into public\nsecurities and railway and industrial bonds, comparatively little into\nindustrial stocks, which carry the technical management. The\nnumber of cases where Canadian factories are in charge of British\nmanagers and British foremen is remarkably small. From an investigation made by The Monetary Times of Toronto a couple of years\nago, British investments in Canada during the previous five years\ntotaled 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\nsame journal estimated, had invested some $279,000,000, only a\ncomparatively small amount of which was in public securities. The\nfigures given were as follows:\nBritish Investments in Canada for Five Years (1905-1910)\nCanadian bank shares purchased $1,125,000\nInvestments with loan and mortgage companies 5,719,774\nBritish insurance companies' investments 9,731,742\nMunicipal bonds sold privately 10,000,000\nIndustrial investments 22,500,000\nLand and timber investments 19,000,000\nMining investments 56,315,500\nCanadian public flotations in London 481,061,836\n,453,852 Canada and the Preference 41\nPresent United States Investments in Canada\n175 Companies, average capital $600,000 $105,000,000\nUnited States investments in British Columbia mills\nand timber 58,000,000\nUnited States investments in British Columbia mines 50,000,000\nLand deals, Alberta, etc 20,000,000\nUnited States investments, lumber and mines in\nAlberta 5,000,000\nPacking plants 5,000,000\nImplement distributing houses 6,575,000\nLand deals, British Columbia 4,500,000\nMunicipal bonds, sold privately 25,000,000\n$279,075,000\nThese figures only illustrate what is a matter of common knowledge in Canada\u00E2\u0080\u0094that in contrast with British capital the great bulk\nof United States capital enters the country as branch factories and\nother outright industrial investments. With superintendents and\nforemen from the United States it is not surprising that English\ntravelers and goods have often a poor chance of a market. Whatever\nfault may be found with citizens of the American Republic they can\nnever be accused of unbelief in the peculiar virtues of American\nideas, methods, men and industrial products. It is worthy of remark\nthat of the recent presidents of the Canadian Manufacturers' Association three were heads of branches of United States houses; but\nin these cases it need hardly be said they were none the less Canadian.\nTrade Agents\nOf the influence of the nationalities of the new settlers in the\nWest and elsewhere it is too soon to speak. With actual trade\nconditions and prospects the United States keeps in remarkably\nclose touch by newspaper correspondents and by means of consuls\nlocated in the chief towns throughout the country and making\nfrequent reports to Washington. At present there are no less than\nseventy-six United States consuls and consular agents as against\none British trade commissioner located at Montreal, with a few trade\ncorrespondents, who cannot be compared with the consuls. It\nwould also seem as if Canada should take a leaf from the United States\nand definitely develop a trade consular system the beginnings of\nwhich are seen to-day in the Canadian trade agents. If Washing- 42 The Annals of the American Academy\nton's example were followed in this respect Canada would collect\nthe incidental expenses as fees from the foreign exporters. Such\nfees give a certain amount of additional direct protection, and serve\nalso as a medium for checking customs' undervaluations.\nTransportation Routes\nBehind 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\nmerchant ships to Canada by four routes:\n1. To Halifax (2,342 miles), or Montreal (2,800 miles), thence\nrail, or from Montreal river steamer to head of Great\nLakes. To Vancouver by this route is 5,800 miles; time\nrequired for freight 8 to 12 days to Montreal, thence 14\nto 30 days to Vancouver.\n2. Via Mexico to Vancouver by the Tehuantepec route (190\nmiles), across the peninsula (8,000 miles), 42 to 45 days.\n3. Via the Suez (15,522 miles), 70 to 80 days.\n4. By tramp steamer via the Horn (14,317 miles), 70 to 90 days.\nFrom Vancouver inland the distribution is by rail.\nHow Rates are Fixed\nThrough rates from both Eastern Canada and Europe are\ngoverned by those via the Suez. This water competition, to which\nlatterly the Mexican route has been added, has been disturbing to\nexisting trade. If the Panama project is successful the results may\nbe still more marked. One may be pardoned for suggesting a doubt\nas to the permanent commercial feasibility of a canal across a dangerous earthquake belt, the approach to which moreover, on the Atlantic\nside at least, is said to be closed to sailing vessels. Panama is also\n1,000 miles further south than the Tehuantepec line. Already\nshipments from Eastern Canada to British Columbia are sent via\nMexico simply because this route is at times able to underbid the\nall-rail route. But if this relief to Eastern Canada is to be permanent\nit must be conditional on the vessels securing return cargoes to\nEnglish ports, thence fresh ones back to Canada. A policy of diverting Canadian exports from Great Britain to the United States would\nthus seriously rnilitate against the success of this new and important\ncommercial development. Certainly in improving Canadian shipping facilities British trade has been and is worth much to Canada. Canada and the Preference 43\nShipments via Chicago\nIt may be said that for freight traffic for Western Canada\nthere is close competition between Canadian lines and lines via and\nfrom Chicago. As is to be expected in a new country the rate per\nton per mile is somewhat higher on manufactures and merchandise\nin 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\nshipments to the Canadian West go in bond via Chicago\u00E2\u0080\u0094a percentage that will doubtless lower when the Canadian Northern and the\nGrand Trunk Pacific railways are completed. Here it should be\nmentioned promptness of delivery or \"efficiency of service,\" as it is\ncalled, is often as important as a favorable freight rate; for example,\nin the delivery of Ontario fresh fruit in Manitoba, etc. To competitive points in Western Canada the rate from Chicago is usually\nsomewhat lower than from Eastern Canada, to non-competing points\nproportionately higher. For through carload shipments from Chicago\nto the Pacific the greater industrial specialization of the United\nStates rnanufacture and the larger size of United States warehouses\non the coast admit often of closer rates than those quoted from competing points in Canada. Just how these differentials affect trade is\nonly known fully to those directly concerned. In the case of free\ngoods they obviously count heavily; and mean more with goods of\nlow specific value than with goods of higher value. Particularly in the\nformer case a dfference in freight charge may convert a profit into a\nloss.\nRates to Eastern Canada\nFrom Great Britain and Continental ports to Ontario and\nEastern Canada through rates are arrived at by adding the ocean\nrates as fixed by the North Atlantic Freight Conference to what\nare known as \"import\" rates, these rates being somewhat lower\nthan the domestic rates from the seaboard. And as regards the\n\"import\" rail rates they are a matter of agreement between the\nlines operating from Canadian and Eastern United States Atlantic\npoits.\nRates to Western Canada\nTo points west of Port Arthur, that is west of the Great Lakes,\nto the Rockies, special through freight rates are published from 44 The Annals of the American Academy\nEurope. These rates are also fixed by the North Atlantic Freight\nConference, and there has been a gradual increase in some of them\nin 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\nin through rates to the Canadian interior operates to that extent\nadversely to British and favorably to United States freight.\nThe Pacific Coast as a New Distributing Center\nWith the completion of the Grand Trunk Pacific and the Canadian Northern Railway, now under construction, to the Pacific\nOcean, the Pacific slope will become a more and more important\ndistributing center for Canada. Even now European freight rates\nvia the Suez to Vancouver are lower than those direct from Montreal.\nIt means new- and important problems for the broad Dominion.\nIt means that already Canada is divided like all Gaul into three parts\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094east, west and center; the center being, so to speak, a neutral zone\nwhere freight charges bulk more largely and are the objects of keen\ncomparison. The matter is not closed there. Protected by these\nhigher freight costs local industries may be expected to spring up,\nand actually they are already springing up, at different points, particularly at the head of the Great Lakes where there is admirable\nwater-power.\nCanada's Great Problem\nThus to keep the Dominion contentedly united is one of the\ngreat reasons why plans are being carefully studied for improving\nthe canals to the head of the Great Lakes, for building a railway from\nHudson's Bay to Winnipeg (to make effective the Hudson's Bay\nroute to England), for local waterways in the great prairie country,\nand for supporting fresh railway connections between the Pacific\nand the interior. That there is no time for delay is evident from the\nfact that while in 1890 there were three United States railway lines\ncrossing the boundary west of Lake Superior, to-day lines cross at\nover a dozen points. Many United States stub lines, moreover,\nrun up to the border, and with little additional cost could be extended\nto tap any given locality. As railway men know, local lines of this\nclass are subject to much lower costs of transportation than the main\n2 The Spokane rate case as settled by the Interstate Commerce Commission is not important\nin this connection. Canada and the Preference 45\nlines of a great system. And if, in order to secure return cargoes,\nUnited States railway and other interests should find it necessary\nto secure control of a certain number of newspapers and inaugurate\nin this way or otherwise a campaign for tariff modifications, the situation might become more than interesting. So often the real moving\nforce behind political campaigns is hidden. It is such conditions\nand possibilities that make the tariff problem of Canada so overwhelmingly important.\nThe Importance of Shipping Facilities\nThrough her splendid shipping facilities, and aided by the\npreferential tariff, Great Britain has now the big end of the through\nwestern coast trade. Without the preference the Canadian Pacific\nRailway would be able to handle considerably more of this trade\noriginating in Eastern Canada than it does at present. In other\nwords, if the preference were less through Canadian freight rates could\nbe higher. Tariff and freight rates are thus indissolubly connected.\nAnother illustration of the practical identity of freights and customs\ntariffs is the working of the French treaty. The tariff reductions\nunder this treaty apply only to shipments made from France or via\nGreat Britain direct to a Canadian port. With but one line of\nsteamers running between France and Canada this shipping becomes\nmore or less of a monopoly; and when, following the treaty, freight\nrates were advanced it was claimed that the increases were made\npossible by the French preference which they to that extent reduced.\nNot having steamship connection with the Pacific coast the French\nare severely handicapped in that trade. Should at any time the\nBritish preference be confined to shipments direct to Canadian ports,\nas the Canadian Maritime Boards of Trade have urged, it is to be\nexpected that the ocean steamship companies would endeavor to secure\na share of the preference by advancing their rates unless such rates\nwere fixed beforehand and rigorously controlled by international\nagreement.\nSome Conclusions\nFrom this brief survey certain conclusions with regard to the\npreference can be drawn:\n1. A simple tariff modification may not be effective unless\nit applies to cases and conditions admitting of success. As yet the 46 The Annals of the American Academy\npowers of the preferential tariff have not been tested out. The\npreference is not merely Canadian; it is Imperial. As it is, it has\ncertainly diverted considerable trade in some lines to Great Britain,\nbuttressed British trade in other lines and been a big influence in\narousing British manufacturers to the conditions of the Canadian\nmarket. It may mean much more if it is realized that an effort for\nCanada's market is an effort for North America, as the characteristics of Canadian and United States' demands are very similar.\n2. The problem of transportation (railway, steamship, post\nand cable) and the related ones of free harbors, and greater British\nwarehouse facilities in Canada demand much more attention.\n3. Freight rates are in practice an important and integral part\nof custom tariffs.\n4. Present trade statistics are not sufficient to disclose conditions.\n5. The preferential tariff has probably had much to do with the\nexpansion in Canadian shipping.\n6. A thorough investigation of these conditions is desirable;\nand this is the task of the Imperial Trade Commission now at work.\nThe results of its investigations should be an invaluable guide for\nall parts of the empire in regard to the possibilities of free-trade,\npreference and protection.\n7. Canada's trade with the United States is largely independent\nof the preference and as far as the customs tariffs go has been hampered and checked much more seriously by the United States tariff\nthan it has been by the Canadian. THE LEGAL STATUS OF HUDSON'S BAY\nBy Thomas Willing Balch,\nOf the Philadelphia Bar.\nAmong the early explorers of North America who have left\ntheir names clearly fixed upon the map of the world was Henry\nHudson. This has happened in a threefold way: for by his name\nare designated a majestic river, a wide strait and a great sea. An\nEnglishman, he navigated not only under the flag of his own\ncountry, but likewise at times he served the States General of the\nNetherlands.\nIn 1607, in command of the Dutch ship, the Half Moon, Hudson\nentered the Hudson River. Three years later, with the English\nvessel, the Discovery, he passed through and explored Hudson's\nStrait. In June, 1610, he entered and discovered the great sea that\never since has been known as Hudson's Bay, which was to be alike\nhis tomb and his chief monument.\nUntil comparatively recently, Hudson's Bay has been accepted\nby the international jurisconsults of the world at large as forming,\naccording to the tests of the rules of the law of nations, a part of the\nhigh seas. Within the last few years, however, a desire has begun\nto grow up in Canada to annex to the territorial waters of the\nDominion in toto that great sea which bears Hudson's name. For\nexample, in the last edition of the \"Encyclopaedia Britannica\"\n(1910), it is stated that Canada is anxious to declare Hudson's Bay\na mare clausum on account of the whale fishery. Let us consider\nvery briefly the legal status of the waters of the Hudsonian Sea.1\nHudson entered that sea at a time when the struggle between\nthe principle of mare liberum and mare clausum was becoming an\nactive factor in the political relations between the English and the\nDutch. In earlier times, under the Tudors and other more ancient\nsovereigns, England had pursued a liberal policy as regards commerce upon and fishery in the sea. Indeed, the greatest of the Tudors,\ni For a more extended and detailed consideration of this important international question than\ncan be presented within the space of this short article, see an essay by the present writer, \"La baie\nd'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.\n(47) 48 The Annals of the American Academy\nQueen Elizabeth, in a famous answer to the Spanish ambassador\nat her court, Mendoza, supported the freedom of the seas. After\nDrake's return in September, 1580, from a voyage around the world,\nwith a mass of plunder that he had captured from Spanish vessels\nand settlements on the coast of South America, the Ambassador\nof Philip II made a complaint directly to England's Queen herself.\nAf tes pointing out in her reply that Drake was amenable to a personal\naction in the courts of England if he had injured any one, the Queen\ncontinued that the Spaniards had no right to justify them in excluding the English from trading with the West Indies. Then, as Camden\ntells us, Elizabeth went on to say:2\n\"Moreover all are at liberty to navigate that vast ocean, since\nthe use of the sea and the air is common to all. No nation or private\nperson can have a right to the ocean, for neither the course of nature\nnor public usage permits any occupation of it.\"\nWith the advent of the Stuarts to the English throne the liberal\npolicy of England as regards the sea was reversed. She laid claim\nto more and more exclusive rights over the seas surrounding her\nand ultimately forced and fought three bloody naval wars with the\nDutch for the control of the narrow seas and the right of exclusive\nfishery in them.\nIn reply to Grotius's essay, mare liberum, printed at Leyden\nin 1609, King Charles I of England caused Selden's mare clausum\nto be published at London in 1635. While most nations have supported sometimes one side, sometimes the other, of this contention,\nas accorded best at the given moment with their respective policies,\nthe opinion of the world has mclined finally to the view advanced\nby Grotius. The famous Hollander in his larger and more mature\nwork, De jure Belli ac Pacis (1625), however, recognized that a state\nhas the right to exercise its authority over a strip of sea along its\ncoast line. At the beginning of the eighteenth century, another\nDutch jurisconsult, Bynkershoek, expounded more precisely the\nextent of this sovereignty of nations over the sea washing their shores.\nAs a general maxim, he taught, imperium terra finiri ubi finitur\narmorum potestas?\nApplying this principle to things as they were in his time, Bynker-\n2 Camden: Annates, s. a. 1580 (edition of 1605), 309.\n8 Bynkershoek: Jcti et Praesidis, Quaeslionum Juris Publici, libri duo, Leyden, 1737, liber I,\ncap. vm, folio 59. The Legal Status of Hudson's Bay 49\nshoek limited the extent of the exclusive sovereignty of states over\nthe sea to the range of a cannon shot.\nIn deciding whether the waters of a bay or other sinuosity were\nterritorial or part of the open seas, the test advanced by publicists\nand international jurisconsults came to be whether the entrance\nof any embayed body of water could be defended and controlled\nfrom the opposite shores.\nIn 1758, the Swiss, Emer de Vattel, wrote:4\n\"All we have said of the parts of the sea near the coast may\nbe said more particularly, and with much greater reason, of the\nroads, bays and straits, as still more capable of being occupied and\nof greater importance to the safety of the country. But I speak\nof the bays and straits of small extent and not of those great parts\nof the sea to which these names are sometimes given, as Hudson's\nBay and the Straits of Magellan, over which the empire cannot\nextend, and still less a right of property. A bay whose entrance\nmay be defended may be possessed and rendered subject to the laws\nof the sovereign, and it is of importance that it should be so, since\nthe country may be much more easily insulted in such a place than\non the coast open to the winds and the impetuosity of the waves.\"\nThus Vattel insists that in order that a bay may be considered\nto be a mare clausum, its entrance from the sea must be so narrow\nthat it can be dominated and controlled from the opposing shores.\nHudson's Strait, which connects Hudson's Bay with Baffin's Bay\nand the Atlantic Ocean, is at all points forty-five miles wide, and in\ngeneral it extends to a width far greater, generally of about one\nhundred miles.6 According to the above formulated test of Vattel,\nHudson's Bay is an open sea. And in addition, Vattel specifically\nnames Hudson's Bay as an open sea.\n. With the passage of time before and after Vattel had given\nthe above cited opinion that Hudson's Bay was an open sea, the\nextent of the territorial sea was gradually fixed at the distance of a\ncannon shot from the land, which was translated by degrees into\none marine league or three miles.\nThe three-mile limit was consecrated by the United States and\nGreat Britain in the first article of the treaty of 1818. It was sub-\n' Emer de Vattel: Le Droit des Gens ou Prindpes de la loi natureUe, Amsterdam, 1775, vol. i,\np. 142.\n6 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Cambridge, England, eleventh edition, 1910, voL xrn, page 851. 50 The Annals of the American Academy\nsequently recognized in many treaties between various nations\nuntil 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,\nand Spain asserts that her sovereignty extends six miles from her\ncoast.8 In 1894 the British government protested against this\nclaim of Spain.7\nApplying this three-mile limit as the extent of the zone of territorial waters to bays and gulfs and other sinuosities, there gradually\narose as a corollary, the rule of international law that, where the\nthree-mile zones advancing from each shore at the entrance of the\nbay or other kind of sinuosity meet and form a line six miles across\nfrom land to land, that line of six miles should be taken as the\nbase from which to measure the three-mile zone seaward, and that\nthe sovereignty of the state, master of the surrounding land, did\nnot extend further outward towards the sea, but that all the expanse\nof the bay inside of that six-mile line, no matter how wide and large\nthe bay further within might become, should belong to the encircling\nnation, because the entrance was effectually occupied where the\nshores were not more than six miles apart. But the center of bays\nand other sinuosities whose entrance from the high seas was wider\nthan six miles, form, with some historic exceptions, part of the open\nsea. Many publicists, such as Ortolan8and Hautefeuille,9for example,\ncan be cited in support of the above rule.\nThis six-mile rule, however, has been modified in the case of\nmany bays by treaty agreements between individual states. Thus\nby formal treaty between Great Britain and France in 1839, those\ntwo nations agreed as between themselves, that all bays along certain\nparts of their respective coasts which were ten miles or less wide at\ntheir entrance, should be territorial in their entirety. That ten-mile\nline has been adopted in many subsequent treaties and it would seem\nthat the ten-mile rule is in process of displacing and superseding the\nsix-mile rule.\nWhether tested by the six-mile or the ten-mile rule, however,\n\u00C2\u00BBSir Thomas Barclay, Armuairt de I'Insiitut de Droit International, vol. xrr (1892-^94), p. 125-\nRichard Kleen. ibid., p. 140.\n1 Lord Derby to Mr. R. G. Watson, September 25, 1894. Ex. Doc., 1875-76, Washington,\nGovernment Printing Office (1876), p. 641.\n8 Theodore Ortolan: Diplomatie de la Mer, Paris, 1856, vol. I, p. 157.\n\u00C2\u00BBL. B. Hautefeuille: Des droits et des devoirs des nations neutrcs en temps de guerre maritime,\nParis, 1868, third edition, vol. I, p. 60. The Legal Status of Hudson's Bay 51\nthe great sea named in honor of Henry Hudson clearly forms a part\nof the open sea and does not fall within the category of the territorial\nwaters of Canada, excepting of course the band of three miles that\nfollows the contour of its shores. For the entrance to Hudson's Bay\nand its connection with the ocean ranges in width from forty-five\nmiles up to more than double that distance across from land to land.10\nIn considering the legal status of Hudson's Bay, the fact that\nit is called a bay should not be allowed to cloud the question in issue.\nFor though it is called a bay, it is in reality a large sea. Not only\nis Hudson's Bay several times as large as the area of Great Britain,\nbut in addition it is much larger than such seas as the Baltic and the\nAdriatic, both of which were in former centuries closed but are now\nopen seas. In fact, it is larger than the North Sea and the Sea of\nJapan, and compares favorably in its area with Bering Sea, all\nof which form part of the high seas.\nEspecially, however, a comparison of the size and legal status\nof Hudson's Bay and the Gulf of St. Lawrence are instructive and\nihuminating as to any exclusive claims of Canada over the former\nbody of water. The area of Hudson's Bay amounts to 1,222,610\nsquare kilometers, while that of the Gulf of St. Lawrence amounts\nonly to 219,300 square kilometers. Both these seas are encircled\nby lands of the British Empire, the former by the Dominion alone,\nthe latter by Newfoundland as well as Canada. The connection\nof Hudson's Bay with the ocean is not less than forty-five miles\nin width, and in general it is more than twice that distance. The\nLaurentian Sea, besides its connection with the ocean through the\nStrait of Belleisle which is ten miles wide between Newfoundland\nIsland and the mainland of Labrador, is joined to the Atlantic Ocean\nby Cabot Strait, sixty miles in width. This is not only ten times\nas much as the usual six-mile test\u00E2\u0080\u0094in the absence of a treaty providing another measure as to whether bays are territorial or not in their\nentirety\u00E2\u0080\u0094but also besides, the center of Cabot Strait is far beyond\nthe reach of shore batteries. By all the usual tests of the law of\nnations 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\nArbitration case, which was argued before and decided by The Hague\n10 The Encyclopaedia Britannica, Cambridge, England, eleventh edition, 1910, vol. xm, p. 851.\nu John Westlake: International Law: second edition, 1910, vol. i, p. 197. 52 The Annals of the American Academy\nJudicial International Court in 1910, the Gulf of St. Lawrence was\nrecognized by implication as an open sea by all parties concerned.\nIt has been so regarded from time immemorial by the nations of\nthe world.\nWhy then should Hudson's Bay, which is five and a half times\nas large as the Laurentian Sea, at this late day in the development\nof the doctrine of the freedom of the sea, be classed suddenly as\na mare clausum? If that great northern sea named after Henry\nHudson is to be ranked'as a closed sea, it must be so classified on\nsome other grounds than its geographical limits unless at the same\ntime many other seas of lesser extent are withdrawn from the category\nof open seas.\nAs has been said above, Vattel, the leading authority upon the\nlaw of nations for all the world in the second half of the eighteenth\ncentury, whose treatise still carries weight to-day and is cited with\nrespect, held that Hudson's Bay formed a part of the open sea. But\nalso in more recent times other distinguished publicists and jurisconsults have recognized Hudson's Bay specifically as an open sea.\nThus for instance the Briton, Phillimore,12 the German, Bluntschli,18\nthe Russian, Fedor de Martens,14 the Swiss-Belgian, Rivier,15 have\ndeclared that Hudson's Bay forms a part of the high seas. And\nin the well-known \"Encyclopaedia Britannica,\" eleventh edition,\npublished in 1910, though it is said in the article on Hudson's Bay\nthat Canada desires to make of Hudson's Bay a mare clausum, yet\nthat large sea is acknowledged in that article to be a mare liberum.\nThe writer says:16 \"The bay abounds with fish, of which the chief\nare cod, salmon, porpoise and whales. The last have long been\npursued by American whalers, whose destructive methods have so\ngreatly depleted the supply that the government of Canada is\nanxious to declare the bay a mare clausum.\"\nThere is a notable instance in the struggle for the maintenance\nof the freedom of the seas that supports that freedom for the waters\nof Hudson's Bay. In the early part of the last century, by an ukase\nissued in 1821 by the Emperor Alexander I, the Russian Government laid claim to an absolute dominion over Bering Sea, and also\nu Sir Robert Phillimore: International Law, London, 1879, second edition, vol. i, p. 284.\nu J. C Bluntschli: Le Droit International Codifie, traduction de C. Lardy, Paris, 1886, sec. 309.\n\" F. de Martens: Traile de Droit International, Paris, 1883, vol. I, p. 504.\n\"Alphonse Rivier: Principes de Droit des Gens, Paris, 1896, vol. I, p. 155.\n\" The Encyclopaedia Britannica, Cambridge, England, eleventh edition, 1910, vol. xni, p. 851. The Legal Status of Hudson's Bay 53\na large portion of the northern part of the Pacific Ocean. Against\nthis claim of exclusive jurisdiction beyond the usual narrow band\nof territorial waters following the contour of the coast line, the\nGovernment of Great Britain as well as that of the United States\nprotested emphatically. The difference between America and Russia\nwas arranged by the treaty of 5/17 of April, 1824, which recognized\namong other things the freedom of the North Pacific Ocean. The\nnegotiations between Great Britain and Russia were more protracted,\nbut were finally arranged by treaty in 1825.\nGeorge Canning, Foreign Secretary of Great Britain, wrote on\nSeptember 27, 1822, to the British premier, the Duke of Wellington,\nwith respect to the claims advanced by the Moscovite Government\nover the waters of Bering Sea and the extreme northern part of the\nPacific Ocean. Concerning the pretensions advanced by Russia\nin the ukase of 1821, Canning maintained that such claims were,\naccording to the best legal authorities, \"positive innovations on the\nrights of nayigation.\" By common usage, \"an accessorial boundary,\" he said, had been added for a limited distance to the shores\nof a state in order to secure to that nation sufficient protection,\nwithout interfering with the rights of the subjects of other states\nto navigate and trade freely. As stated in the ukase, the Russian\nclaims, he maintained, disregarded this important qualification,\nand consequently were \"an encroachment on the freedom of navigation, and the inalienable rights of nations.\" Continuing, Canning\nreferred to an exchange of views that he had had with the Russian\nAmbassador and said that he thought that Russia would rescind\nthat portion of her public notification whereby she had announced\nthat she would \"consider the portions of the ocean included between\nthe adjoining coasts of America and the Russian Empire as a mare\nclausum, and to extend the exclusive territorial jurisdiction of Russia\nto 100 Italian miles.\" Thus Canning in a communication to his\nchief, the Duke of Wellington, the executive head at that time of\nthe British Empire, maintained that the claim of Russia to exercise,\nto the exclusion of others, her sovereignty over a large portion of\nthe Pacific Ocean and also over Bering Sea, which was bounded\nexclusively by her coasts, though with many passages more than\nsix miles wide connecting the main ocean with Bering.Sea, was not\njustified by the law of nations, either as taught by the jurists learned\nin that science or by the actual practice of nations. 54 The Annals of the American Academy\nThe principal object of the British Government during the\nnegotiations with Russia from 1821 to 1825, that resulted in the\nTreaty of 1825, was to maintain the freedom of the waters of the\nPacific Ocean and Bering Sea. This we know from the instructions\nthat George Canning, British Foreign Secretary, gave to his cousin,\nSir Stratford Canning, as the latter was about starting to resume\nnegotiations with the Russian Government, at the point where they\nhad been suspended at an earlier date. In the latter part of the\ninstructions to Sir Stratford, the British Foreign Secretary said:17\nIt remains only, in recapitulation, to remind you of the origin and principles\nof this whole negotiation.\nIt is not on our part essentially a negotiation about limits.\nIt is the demand of the repeal of an offensive and unjustifiable arrogation\nof exclusive jurisdiction over an ocean of unmeasured extent; but a demand\nqualified and mitigated in its manner, in order that its justice may be acknowledged and satisfied without soreness or humiliation on the part of Russia.\nWe negotiate about territory to cover up the remonstrance upon principle.\nBut any attempt to take undue advantage of this voluntary facility, we\nmust oppose.\nThus, the British Empire sought for her chief object, during\nthe negotiations over her conflicting interests with those of the\nRussian Empire concerning land and sea in Northwestern America\nand Bering Sea, to obtain from the Moscovite Government a public\ndisclaimer of the claim advanced by Russia in 1821 that Bering\nSea and large parts of the northern Pacific Ocean were Russian\nterritorial waters.\nIn the Anglo-Russian treaty of February 16/28, 1825, concluded\nby Sir Stratford Canning for Great Britain and Count Nesselrode\nand M. de Poletica for Russia, the latter nation gave up her pretensions to absolute jurisdiction over the waters of the North Pacific\nOcean or Bering Sea beyond the usual limit along the coasts.18 At\nthe same time the two nations agreed upon a land frontier that was\nto separate their North American land possessions.19\nHudson's Bay and Bering Sea much resemble one another.\nThose two large seas are in great measure surrounded by land. Before\nand at the time of the signing of the Anglo-Russian treaty of 1825,\nand afterwards until Russia sold Alaska to the United States in 1867,\n17 Pur Seal Arbitration, British Case, Washington, vol. rv, p. 448.\nw Fur Seal Arbitration: Washington, vol. IV, p. 42.\n19 Thomas Willing Balch: The Alaska Frontier, Philadelphia, 1903, pp. 5-f. The Legal Status of Hudson's Bay 55\nthe land encasing those two seas was possessed by a single nation.\nIf the entrance from the main ocean to those two seas, one called a\nsea and the other a bay, were six miles or less in width, both of them,\nat the time the Anglo-Russian Treaty of February, 1825, was signed,\nwould have been classified according to the doctrine of mare clausum\nas closed seas. Russia had proclaimed openly to all the world her\nright of exclusive jurisdiction over the waters of Bering Sea, as well\nas part of the Pacific Ocean further toward the south. Russia wished\nvery much to include Bering Sea within her own domain as a mare\nclausum. Like the United States, however, Great Britain contested\nthis proposed extension of Russian jurisdiction over all of Bering\nSea on the plea that, according to the accepted rules of international\nlaw, Bering Sea formed a part of the high seas and consequently\nwas an open sea. And as the Russian Government gave up in 1824\nto the United States, it likewise yielded in 1825 before the protest\nof Great Britain the Moscovite claim that Bering Sea was a mare\nclausum. But if Bering Sea was a mare liberum as the government\nof Great Britain asserted with so great success in 1825 against the\ncontrary claim of the Russian Government, why then, according\nto the same line of argument, is not Hudson's Bay also a mare liberum?\nSurely the strong presentation of facts and the able arguments made\nwith such success by the official representatives of Great Britain\nin the first quarter of the last century against the attempt of Russia\nto withdraw Bering Sea from the area of the high seas, by declaring\nit a closed sea, are applicable to the analogous status of the waters\nof Hudson's Bay. Surely if Bering Sea was an open sea in 1825,\nso also was Hudson's Bay. When, since that time, have either or\nboth of them become closed seas?\nFrom the foregoing brief survey of some of the historic facts\nand rules affecting the international status of the waters of the Hud-\nsonian Sea, it is evident that that great body of salt water forms,\nlike Bering Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Adriatic Sea and many other\nsimilar large sinuosities, part of the high seas. And that consequently\nHudson's Bay is still what it was when Vattel wrote in the middle\nof the eighteenth century, an open sea.\nJ THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA IN THEIR\nHUNDRED YEARS OF PEACE\nBy James L. Tryon,\nNew England Director of the American Peace Society, Boston.\nThe proposition to have a celebration of the Hundred Years\nof Peace, 1814-1914, recalls the relations between the United States\nand Canada since the signing of the Treaty of Ghent. The question\nnaturally arises, Have their relations been pleasant? Are they in\nany way unique? Is there anything about them to celebrate?\nThat the relations of these countries are unique is attested\nby the fact that to a large extent their people are descended from\nthe same ancestry, speak the same language, enjoy the same\ninheritance of the English common law, and have developed side by\nside a successful democracy. Quebec may have her French Roman\nlaw\u00E2\u0080\u0094so has Louisiana; neither affects the common law of other\njurisdictions. French is one of the official languages of the Dominion\nof Canada, and here may be an exception that we cannot parallel,\nbut the French Canadian is an integral part of Canadian life, and\nSir Wilfrid Laurier has declared in the same loyal spirit as Sir John\nA. Macdonald, that he is a British subject. We have in the United\nStates nearly a million and a half loyal French Canadians, many ofr\nwhom can say, \"I am an American citizen.\" And so, although\nthe parallel may not be exact, a resemblance exists. More than\nthat, it is impossible oftentimes to distinguish a British Canadian\nfrom an American by his dress or his accent. All these facts indicate\nthe oneness of the two peoples.\nIt does not necessarily follow, however, that, because these\npeoples are closely related, they are exempt from disagreement.\nThe very closeness of their relation and their geographical nearness to\neach other have often caused controversies that would never have\noccurred had they lived farther apart; but, whenever there has been\nirritation, it has, except in one instance, ended in a friendly understanding. All the more reason, then, is there for a day of rejoicing\nover the long peace that, in spite of international complications,\nhas prevailed.\n(56) United States and Canada\u00E2\u0080\u0094Hundred Years of Peace 57\nA lesson, at once most timely and encouraging in this age when\nnations that are outwardly friendly are armed to the teeth, can be\nlearned from the experience of the United States and Canada.\nIt will show that, in one instance of very great importance, an agreement for the limitation, reduction, and disuse of armaments has been\na practical success. By an exchange of notes that took place in 1817\nbetween Great Britain and the United States, with the approval\nof the United States Senate, Sir Charles Bagot, minister representing\nthe mother country, and Richard Rush, acting for the American\nDepartment of State, an agreement1 for the limitation of naval\narmaments was made to the effect that each nation should maintain\nnot more than one warship apiece on Lake Ontario and Lake Cham-\nplain, or more than two each on the Great Lakes, none of which ships\nshould exceed one hundred tons in burden, or be armed with larger\nthan an eighteen-pounder cannon. It was understood by the contracting parties that this agreement might be terminated on six\nmonths' notice from either power to the other. The agreement has\nbeen subjected to considerable strain at times, but in spirit it has\nnever been broken. That it could ever have been literally kept was\nimpossible, except at the start, because of the low standard of tonnage\nand armament in the early days of the nineteenth century, as compared with the enormous tonnage and armaments of to-day. Mr.\nRoot once referred to this singular compact as having become \"an\nantiquated example of naval literature.\" There was a period about\n1838, during the Canadian rebellion, when the British government\nexceeded the limit agreed upon and justified its position to the United\nStates on the ground of public danger; and there were one or two\noccasions when the United States was called to account by the British\nminister for exceeding the limit as to the size of ships, but these technical departures from the stipulations have never been deemed serious.\nThere was, however, an attempt made by the United States to have\nthe arrangement terminated towards the close of the civil war,\nwhen the Federal government was compelled to take measures\nfor the defense of its territory from Confederate invasions made,\nor expected to be made, from Canada. But the end of the war came\nbefore the six months required for notice actually expired, and the\nUnited States decided to let the contract remain in force.\ni For a history of the naval agreement, see I Moore's International Law Digest, section 143,\nConsent of the Senate given April 16, 1818; proclaimed April 28, 1818. 58 The Annals of the American Academy\nBut the point that the experience illustrates, and the same thing\nis practically true of the land as well as the lakes boundary, is that\non a border line of more than three thousand miles\u00E2\u0080\u0094the longest\nin the world\u00E2\u0080\u0094there is no appreciable menace by either nation from\nforts or warships, and the expense for their maintenance, when\ncompared with that of the armaments of European countries in\nlike situations, is hardly worth consideration. The Canadian border\nline has aptly been called the safest border line in the world.\nMost of the questions that have arisen between the United\nStates and Great Britain in relation to Canada have been questions\nof boundary or of fishing rights. Nearly all questions relating to\nboundaries have arisen in consequence of obscure passages in or mistakes in maps used by the makers of the Treaty of 1783. Fisheries\nquestions 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\nof the two peoples has been highly honorable and left no sting of\ninternational resentment that abides to this day; and, to prepare\nfor the future, these countries have now entered upon an arrangement\nthat is quite as unique as the \"Truce of Armaments.\" They have\nconstituted an international boundaries commission that is capable\nof dealing with every question that may come up, arising from\ninterests pertaining either to the frontier or elsewhere.\nThe first question of importance between Canada and the United\nStates is related to the northeastern boundary. A commission was\nprovided for in the Jay Treaty to determine what river was meant\nby the St. Croix in the Treaty of 1783. This commission, composed\nof 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\ncommissioners, fixed upon the Schoodic, or Schoodiac, River, according to the American claim, instead of the Magaguadavic as contended\nfor 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\n* For the history of international arbitrations between the United States and other countries,\nsee generally Professor John Bassett Moore's International Arbitrations, 6 volumes, with maps.\nThe first volume relates especially to arbitrations between Great Britain and the United States,\nincluding those in which Canada has been interested. There is no other work of equal authority\non the subject. The writer combines with historical accuracy a respect for international justice United States and Canada\u00E2\u0080\u0094Hundred Years of Peace 59\ncharacter and legal fitness, who, though their sympathies had been\nwith one side or the other in the revolutionary struggle, were rejoiced\nthat they could perform their duties to this controversy as brothers\nrather than as enemies. James Sullivan, of Massachusetts, agent\nof the United States, in concluding his report on this arbitration in\n1797, wrote: \"Why shall not all the nations on earth determine their\ndisputes in this mode rather than choke the rivers with their carcasses,\nand stain the soil of continents with their slain? The whole business\nhas been proceeded upon with great ease, candor, and good humor.\"3\nWhen the war of 1812 had demonstrated to Great Britain the\nnecessity of a clear title to the route from Halifax to Quebec overland,\nsouth of the St. Lawrence, an effort was made to secure it as of right\nunder the Treaty of 1783; but the peace commissioners of the\nUnited States, to whom the matter was referred at the time of the\nnegotiation of the Treaty of Ghent, resisted the British claim.\nAn agreement was then made, however, that a special commission\nshould be appointed by the British and American governments to\nsurvey and determine the line. If the commissioners failed to agree,\nthe question was to be submitted to a friendly arbitrator. The commissioners disagreed and the King of the Netherlands was requested\nto arbitrate. Failing to find an unmistakable line according to the\nmaps and information laid before him, he recommended a compromise\nboundary, which was calculated to suit the convenience of both parties\nbut to cause serious loss to neither. This award, or recommendation,\nbeing in excess of the arbitrator's powers, was not accepted, and\nafter considerable correspondence the dispute was settled by Daniel\nWebster and Lord Ashburton, who, in 1842, met at Washington\nand agreed upon a conventional line. This line gave to the United\nStates about seven-twelfths of the twelve thousand square miles of\nland in dispute, and to Great Britain for Canada five-twelfths, which\nwas more than the arbitrator had allowed to her. The treaty further\nconfirmed to the United States its claim to Rouse's Point, which was\nfound to be a little north of parallel 45\u00C2\u00B0, the accepted line between\nand a high regard for the public services of the men of all nations who have helped to adjust the\ndifferences described.\nSee also an address by Justice William R. Riddell, on \"Arbitration Treaties affecting the\nUnited 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,\np. 14, in which report he is equally happy in his account of the relations between the two countries.\nTo both Professor Moore and Justice Riddell I am indebted for my summary of facts.\n* Moore's International Arbitrations, I, 17. 60 The Annals of the American Academy\nthe two countries at that point, and granted the right to citizens\nof the United States to use the St. John River in the British dominions\nfor floating down lumber and other produce, on the same terms as\nallowed to citizens of Canada. The general government of the United\nStates compensated the states of Maine and Massachusetts, proprietary owners of the land in controversy, for their losses, by payments\nof $150,000 each, and gave to Maine, in addition, a considerable\nsum to reimburse her for expenses incurred in defending her claims\nto the territory, the jurisdiction over which she had exercised.\nThe Webster-Ashburton treaty had been preceded by great\npublic excitement on both sides of the line. The State of Maine had\nappropriated $800,000 for military purposes, and the United States\ngovernment $10,000,000 in the form of extra credit to support the\nassertion of the American claims. Arrests and counter-arrests had\nbeen made by the governments of Maine' and New Brunswick.\nMaine had a civil posse on the scene and had equipped regiments\nfor war. Forts were built and military roads constructed to anticipate hostilities. In fact, the controversy was called \"the Aroostook\nwar;\" but this was a misnomer\u00E2\u0080\u0094there was no war. General Scott\nwas sent to the border to effect an armistice between Maine\nand New Brunswick. The situation was further complicated by\nthe affair of the Caroline, the destruction of an American vessel\non the Niagara River, and the accidental killing of an American citizen by a British-Canadian force. This force, the public character\nof which Great Britain afterwards acknowledged, thus succeeded in\npreventing supplies from reaching some revolutionists on Navy\nIsland; but, to placate outraged national feeling, the destruction of\nthe Caroline was made the subject of an apology in a letter from\nLord Ashburton to Mr. Webster. Other events, like the case of the\nCreole, afterwards (1853) adjusted by arbitration, also endangered\nthe situation, but the diplomacy of the two distinguished commissioners was equal to the emergency.\nAt a critical stage in the negotiations relating to the boundary\nline, Lord Ashburton and Mr. Webster ceased to keep written protocols of their work, and informally reached their conclusions. Both\nwere afterwards severely criticised for making concessions, and in\nEngland the settlement was contemptuously spoken of as \"the\nAshburton capitulation\" by political opponents like Lord Palmerston.\nWebster justified himself in an able speech on the Treaty of Wash- United States and Canada\u00E2\u0080\u0094Hundred Years of Peace 61\nington. But no statesmen of Great Britain and America were ever\nmore patriotic, or ever had the larger interests of their two peoples\nmore at heart than these great men. After his appointment as\ncommissioner, Lord Ashburton, in a private letter to Mr. Webster,\nwrote: \"The principal aim and object of that part of my life devoted to public objects during the thirty-five years that I have had\na seat in one or the other House of Parliament, has been to impress\non others the necessity of, and to promote myself, peace and harmony\nbetween our countries; and although the prevailing good sense of\nboth prevented my entertaining any serious apprehensions on the\nsubject, I am one of those who have always watched with anxiety\nat all times any threatening circumstances, any clouds which, however small, may, through the neglect of some or the malevolence of\nothers, end in a storm the disastrous consequences of which defy\nexaggeration.' '*\nThe peace that has prevailed between Great Britain and\nAmerica is to a large degree due to the fact that we have had men\nlike Webster and Ashburton to meet every warlike situation.\nThe fixing of the national ownership of islands in Passama-\nquoddy Bay was the work of a commission in 1817, authorized by\nthe Treaty of Ghent. But afterwards it was found that the title\nto a few small islands was not settled and the boundary line in\nPassamaquoddy Bay was finally determined by a treaty signed\nMay 21, 1910; ratifications exchanged August 20, 1910. Doubts\nas to the boundaries of the United States and Canada in the St.\nLawrence, Lakes Ontario, Erie and Huron, were peacefully solved\nby two commissioners in 1822. Under the Treaty of 1854, a dispute\nas to places reserved respectively to Americans and Canadians for\ntheir fisheries in that treaty was adjusted by a commission with the\naid of an umpire.\nIn 1846 another question of almost equal importance with that\nof the northeastern boundary arose in the Northwest; where, however, at that time the national life of Canada was undeveloped and\nGreat Britain, as the mother country, was the chief British party\nconcerned. By the assertion of long cherished rights, both the\nUnited States and Great Britain laid claim to land near the Columbia\nRiver. To prevent a clash of arms, the debatable land was by\ntreaty occupied in common, without prejudice to claims of either\n' Van Tyne's Letters of Daniel Webster, p. 253. 62 The Annals of the American Academy\ncountry, from 1818 for ten years. Attempts to settle the question\nin 1824 failed, and in 1827 the joint occupation was ^definitely\nrenewed. The excitement of the political campaign of 1844 in\nAmerica is remembered by the cry, \"Fifty-four forty or fight!\"\nwhich helped to secure the presidential office for Mr. Polk. England\nat that time claimed down to the mouth of the Columbia River,\nbetween 46\u00C2\u00B0 and 47\u00C2\u00B0. This question was settled shortly afterward\nby an agreement made by James Buchanan, Secretary of State,\nand Mr. Pakenham, the British minister, who compromised on the\nline of 49\u00C2\u00B0 and kept the peace. A question of comparatively no\nimportance from the point of view of international excitement was\nsettled in 1869, when a commission adjusted claims of the Hudson's\nBay Company and the Puget's Sound Agricultural Company.\nIn practically all the negotiations between the United States\nand Great Britain affecting Canada up to 1871, Canada was represented solely by Great Britain; but in the making of the Treaty of\nWashington, signed May eighth of that year, she was specially represented by Sir John A. Macdonald,6 her distinguished premier. After\nthe rejection by the United States of the Johnson-Clarendon Convention, which had made provision for the settlement of claims\nbetween the two countries, but met with almost unanimous opposition in the American Senate, the two governments were brought\ntogether by the instrumentahty of Sir John Rose,6 a member of the\nCanadian ministry. Sir John Rose, as British commissioner in the\nsettlement of the Hudson's Bay and Puget's Sound Agricultural\ncompanies' claims, made the acquaintance of some of the leading\nmen in, and connected with, the American Department of State;\nand \"as one-half American, one-half English, enjoying the confi-\n6 The signers of the treaty were, on the part of the United States, Hamilton Fish, Robert C\nSchenck, Samuel Nelson, Ebenezer Rockwood Hoar, and George H. Williams; on the part of-\nGreat Britain, the Earl de Grey and Ripon, Sir Stafford H. Northcote, Sir Edward Thornton,\nSir John A. Macdonald, and Montague Bernard.\nFor the important part taken by Sir John A. Macdonald in the making of the treaty, see\nJoseph Pope, Memoirs of the Right Honorable Sir John Alexander Macdonald, G.C.B., First Prime\nMinister of the Dominion of Canada, and Lieutenant-Colonel J. P. Macpherson, Life of Sir\nJ. A. Macdonald.\nIt is interesting to note that this statesman, like Mr. Webster and Lord Ashburton, was\ncriticised by some of his people for making concessions. His remarkable defense of himself, which\nin its way is quite equal to the speech made by Mr. Webster many years before, will be found in\nII Macpherson, p. 110. This speech was made in the Canadian House of Commons May 3, 1872,\nand reported in its records.\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2See 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\nGeneva Tribunal; Charles Francis Adams' Lee at Appomattox, and other Papers. United States and Canada\u00E2\u0080\u0094Hundred Years of Peace 63\ndenceof both governments,\" had been asked by the British government to see what could be done informally towards settling the\nquestions at issue. He exercised his good offices with tact and\nability. The Treaty of Washington was the most important ever\nmade in respect to the number and character of the arbitrations for\nwhich it provided. The chief of these, and the most important in\nthe history of the world, was the Geneva Arbitration, which dealt\nwith the Alabama claims, in which however Canada was not especially concerned, as the questions were between the United States\nand the home government of Great Britain. The award rendered\ngave the United States $15,500,000. The Treaty of Washington\nmade an arrangement for the settlement by commission of claims\nfor damages by citizens of the United States against Great Britain,\nand by British subjects against the United States, arising out of\noccurrences during the period of the civil war, entirely apart from\nthe Alabama claims. These included claims connected with the\nSt. Albans, Vt., raid, which was alleged to have been made by\nConfederate soldiers who came by way of Canada. There were a\nfew other matters of damages that also related to Canada. In the\nTreaty of Washington provision was made for fixing the amount of\ncompensation due from the United States to Canada for fishing\nprivileges conceded by Great Britain under that treaty. The commission met at Halifax and awarded $5,500,000. For a time, the\npayment of this money, the amount of which was deemed to be\nexcessive, provoked discussion in the United States; but a right\nfeeling prevailed and the debt was honorably discharged.\nThe San Juan boundary, the question as to the location of the\nchannel between Vancouver Island and the continent, was, under the\nTreaty of Washington, referred to Emperor William I of Germany,\nwho decided in favor of the contention of the United States, which\nclaimed the de Haro Channel.\nThe Bering Sea controversy arose in connection with the\nseizure 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,\nWhich obtained for Canada by a commission, under a treaty made\nin 1896, about $473,000 damages. The first commission made\nprotective regulation for the sealing industry to be observed in the\nfuture. The question had threatened serious trouble to the respon- 64 The Annals of the American Academy\nsible heads of government, but they kept it within their own confidence and did not permit it to embroil international relations.\nOne of the greatest questions of boundary, that between Alaska\nand British Columbia, failed of adjustment by diplomacy and was\nreferred to a joint high commission of British and American citizens. Two of the British delegation were Canadians. By vote of\nfour to two, the Canadian members dissenting, the English member\njoining with the three Americans, the case was decided at London\nin 1903 in favor of the contention of the United States. There was\nmuch dissatisfaction in Canada over the results, and Lord Alver-\nstone, the English member of the tribunal, was severely criticised\nfor sacrificing the interests of Canada to those of the Empire, but the\naward was accepted.\nThe most important arbitration of modern times, except that\nof the Alabama claims, was really between Canada and the United\nStates, though nominally between this country and Great Britain.\nNewfoundland was also concerned in it. This was'the fisheries\nquestion, which had been dragging on latterly under a modus\nvivendi, but formerly under other temporary arrangements, none\nof them very satisfactory, for seventy years. At times there was\nfriction which was due to the enforcement by naval patrols of provincial laws against American fishermen who were in direct rivalry\nwith Newfoundland and Canadian fishermen on what appeared to\nbe their own ground. By the treaty made in 1909, which related\nback to the general arbitration treaty negotiated in 1908, the case,\nin the form of seven vital questions, was submitted to a tribunal\nat The Hague which rendered its decision in 1910. The American\njudge was George Gray, of Delaware. The British judge was a\nCanadian, Sir Charles Fitzpatrick, Chief Justice of Canada. The\nneutral judges were Professor Lammasch, of Austria; Dr. Savornin-\nLohman, of the Netherlands, and Dr. Drago, of the Argentine\nRepublic. Professor Lammasch served as president of the tribunal.\nNo dispute that has ever been tried by the British and American\ngovernments, unless it was the claims litigation presided over by\nJoshua Bates in 1853, has ever been settled to better satisfaction\nfor both parties than the fisheries case. It has proved to be powerful\nevidence among the English-speaking peoples, and before the world,\nof the efficiency of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague.\nBy a treaty made in 1909 for the United States and Canada, United States and Canada\u00E2\u0080\u0094Hundred Years of Peace 65\nan international joint boundary commission of six members was\ncreated to deal for the future with all disputes affecting Canadian\nand American rights, obligations, or interests on the frontier or\nelsewhere, either in the relations of these countries to each other\nas governments or between their respective peoples. The arrangement provides that the commission may act either as a board of\ninquiry to make a report, or as a tribunal; but in the latter case\nagreement to submit a dispute to the commission must have the\nconsent of both the Canadian and American governments.7 This\ncommission has been described by Mr. Justice Riddell, of Toronto,\nas \"a miniature Hague tribunal\" between Canada and the United\nStates. It makes all outside intervention unnecessary and the\nresort to force inconceivable.\nUpon the question of reciprocity it is not the purpose of the\npresent writer to enter other than to observe its relation to questions of war and peace. International friendship and reciprocal\ntrade between these two countries are usually kept apart by intelligent peace workers. In 1854 a reciprocity treaty was made which,\nuntil its expiration by notification by the United States in 1866,\ngave general satisfaction to both countries. This was followed by\na standing offer on the part of Canada for a similar treaty for many\nyears afterwards, but to no avail, as the United States would not\nrespond to it. When, however, reciprocity was proposed by the\nUnited States in 1911, it was declined on the part of Canada. A\ncampaign in which reciprocity was the leading question was fought\nout in Canada in 1912, mainly on commercial issues, but effective\nappeal was also made to Canadian national sentiment on the\nground that the arrangement might lead at some future time to\nthe absorption of Canada by the United States, or at least it would\nplace Canadian trade at the mercy of the United States. The\nrefusal of Canada, though a disappointment in some quarters in\nthis country, did not deeply, or indeed at all, affect the friendly feeling that had long prevailed between the Canadian and American\npeoples, but was regarded on this side of the line as perfectly legitimate, and the relations between the two countries are as cordial\nto-day as ever. '' Believe me,\" said Premier Borden, speaking before\nthe American Society of International Law in April of last year,\ni See rv Supplement American Journal of International Law, 239. In case of equal division\nof the commission an umpire shall be chosen. 66' The Annals of the American Academy\n\"I do not need to assure you of it\u00E2\u0080\u0094that the result in Canada on that\noccasion was not dictated in any respect, in any degree whatever,\nnot in the slightest degree, by any feeling of unfriendliness toward\nthe people of the United States; because we know that the relations between the two countries during the past twenty-five years\nhave been most friendly and cordial in every way, and I do not\ndoubt that in all the years to come that friendliness and cordiality\nwill be maintained to the full.\"\nThere have been in the past some occasions when men like\nGoldwin Smith have proposed the political union of Canada and\nthe United States and insisted that, although retarded for a time by\nsecondary forces, union is destined inevitably to come; but there\nis no such tendency at present, rather all signs point to the contrary. The only union that is likely, as Mr. Justice Riddell has well\nsaid, is that of the heart. Each country prefers its own form of\ngovernment\u00E2\u0080\u0094the one a democracy under a monarchy, the other a\ndemocracy in a republic; the \"crowned and the uncrowned republics,\" Mr. Carnegie, a true lover of both, once happily characterized\nthem. Talk of merging the interests of these two countries is seldom heard in the United States, and when made is usually regarded\neither 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\nas the suggestion of a person uninformed as to Canadian sentiment.\n. . . .\nAt this point there lies a difficulty in the relations between the\ntwo peoples that historical students ought to remedy. It must be\nadmitted that the American, as a rule, is absorbed in his own affairs,\nwhich, at the enormous rate at which his country is developing,\ngive him much to think about at home. He is indifferent to Canada;\nhe is ignorant of Canadian history and institutions. A student in\na Canadian college learns considerable of the history and institutions\nof the United States. Historical courses on Canada are practically\nunheard of in American colleges. The average Canadian school\nboy knows the names of the states of the American Union. The\naverage American school boy could probably not name the provinces of the Dominion of Canada. The average Canadian college\nstudent has an intelligent conception of the Constitution of the\nUnited States. The average American college student knows\nnothing of the British North America Act; he knows, of course, all\nthe glorious traditions of the Pilgrim Fathers, but he has never United States and Canada\u00E2\u0080\u0094Hundred Years of Peace 67\nheard of the Fathers of the Confederation who laid the foundations\nof a new political union that is destined, in the minds not only of\nmen like Sir Wilfrid Laurier, but of well-informed Americans, to\nbecome in the twentieth century one of the most prosperous and\ninfluential commonwealths of the world. The average Canadian\nknows American poets like Longfellow, philosophers like Emerson,\nand novelists of various types; but the average American has little\nidea 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\nuniversities, but comparatively few American students go to Canada\nfor collegiate training. That there has been an interchange between\nschool teachers and college professors by means of conventions and\notherwise, and that there is a mutual debt in the establishment of\nrepresentative educational institutions of the two countries, there\ncan be no doubt. President Lowell of Harvard has proposed that\nthis mutual debt be recognized at the time of the celebration of\nthe Century of Peace. But this does not consciously affect the\naverage man in America, or cause him to study Canadian history\nand institutions. If he is studious, he knows much more about\nFrance than about Canada, and still more about England. As to\nindustry, excepting the knowledge that certain enterprising American farmers have of the Canadian Northwest, the American is\npoorly informed as to Canadian conditions, and has little conception, for example, of the wonderful railway systems stretching across\nthe continent from St. John and Halifax to the Pacific and connecting the shipping of England and the Orient with continuous\nLines. All this deficiency on the part of the average American citizen\nand student will, it is hoped, be made up in the next few years.\nThere will be a strong effort made, in connection with the\ncelebration of the Hundred Years of Peace, to bring about a better\nunderstanding in the United States of Canadian history and institutions. Preparations for the Centenary of Peace will inevitably\ncorrect many false impressions, and will give the people of both\ncountries a larger point of view. It may cause history to be rewritten. Some passages in the text-books that retain the spirit of\nold-time prejudice that is now unworthy of us ought to be removed,\nparticularly in the narratives of the revolution and the war of\n1812. Although the peoples of our two countries have in these two r\n68 The Annals of the American Academy\nmemorable conflicts been enemies, it must be remembered that it\nis our business to be friends to-day and in the future. Courage and\ndevotion may well be commemorated in patriotic anniversaries.\nThen each nationality should stand by its own revered principles\nof government and put a halo of glory around the names of its own\nworthies, whether military or civic. But at the time of the anniversary of the Treaty of Ghent, let all animosities be forgotten and\nmemorials of our unhappy conflicts give place to rejoicings over\nour long period of fraternity and peace. THEOCRATIC QUEBEC\nBy E. M. Sait, Ph.D.,\nDepartment of Politics, Columbia University.\nIt has been said that the privileges which the Catholic church\nenjoyed in the France of the old regime were conferred upon her\nas a reward for services against the barbarians. The same may be\nsaid of the Catholic church in Quebec, only that the barbarians in\nthis case are the English. From the time of the conquest to the time\nof Papineau's rebellion competent observers believed that the French-\nCanadians would lose their nationality. Tocqueville, when he\nvisited America in the early thirties, regarded them as \"the wreck\nof an old people lost in the flood of a new nation.'' We are told that\nGarneau, as he \"heard the dull booming of the rising tide of the\nAnglo-Saxon race,\" wondered if his history of Canada were not after\nall a funeral oration. That the prophets have been confounded, that\nthe French-Canadians have remained French and clung to the\nlanguage which they brought from their Norman and Breton homes,\nis largely the result of clerical leadership.\nAfter the conquest the church became the natural leader of the\npeople. Now that the military and civil officials, the merchants and\ncapitalists, had returned to France, the peasants had nowhere else\nto look for guidance. Poor, illiterate, altogether untrained in the\nconduct of public affairs, they confided their future to men who were\naccustomed to wield authority and to exact obedience and who had\nevery reason to oppose Anglicizing influences. The Catholic clergy\nwere anxious to keep the peasants free from contact with the Protestant English. It was in this way that the peculiarly intimate alliance\nbetween clergy and people came about, destined to leave a deep\nimpress upon the institutions and literature of the country. Patriotism and religion were joined together.\nBefore inquiring what the church has done to justify her assumption of leadership, something must be said of the numerical increase\nand the distribution of the French-Canadians. Without some\nknowledge of their phenomenal development it is impossible to\nappreciate the practical value of clerical leadership or to understand\n(69) 70 The Annals of the American Academy\nthe gratitude of the people and the tangible form which that gratitude\nhas taken. In 1765 there were, within the present boundaries of\nCanada, less than 80,000 Frenchmen, descendants of the six thousand\nsettlers who came from the mother country during the century and\na half of the old regime. They were a conquered people, deprived\nof their leaders and without material resources. Since that time\nthey have received no accession of strength from immigration; in\nthe whole of Canada there were less than eight thousand \"Francais\nde 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\ncent of the population (1,322,115 in 1901), they have thrust themselves westward into Ontario, where they control several border\ncountries; eastward to join the resurgent Acadians who now form\na quarter of the population of New Brunswick and more than half\nthe population of the six northern counties of that province; and\nsouthward into New England where, drawn by economic forces which\nhave now ceased to be operative, they settled in the factory towns,\nand now form something like a fifth of the population of Vermont,\nNew Hampshire and Rhode Island. Careful estimates have shown\nthat there are a million and a half French-Canadians in the United\nStates. But, scattered among a rapidly-increasing population of\ndifferent origin and no longer fortified by new blood from Quebec,\nthere is little chance of their persistence as a separate nationality\neven in those parts of New England where they are most numerous.\nIt 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-\nspeaking province and presumably never will be. Nowhere else,\nin Canada or the United States, is there a people who can so fairly\nclaim to be autochthonous. The French-Canadians, whose blood\nruns substantially pure and whose language is more nearly that of\nthe seventeenth century than is the language of modern France,\nhave built up in the last three centuries one of the vital resources\nof a people, a history of which they are proud. They cherish the\ndays of Frontenac and La GaHssionniere, of Brehiceuf and Daulac\ndes Ormeaux, in a peculiarly intimate way. Those who know the\nsongs they sing and the literature they have produced will under-\n1 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\nstand how deep their love of the soil goes. As their poet Crehoazie\nwrote in his \"Le Canada\":\nTu fais rayonner la lumiere\nDe tes souvenirs glorieux,\nEt tu racontes a la terre\nLes grands exploits de nos aieux.\nAll that has happened in Quebec since its cession to the English\nseems to indicate that assimilation will never take place. Sheltered\nbehind a national organization which has called to its service religion,\neducation, language, literature and national societies, and which\nis everywhere informed by a deep consciousness of race, the French-\nCanadians have preserved their distinctive characteristics and have\ncontested successfully with their conquerors for possession of the\nsoil. In the second half of the nineteenth century the English element declined from twenty-five to twenty per cent of the population.\nIn five counties an English population does not exist; in a score of\nothers it falls below five per cent, usually well below. In the country\ndistricts the tendency has been for the English majorities, where\nsuch existed, to become minorities and sink gradually into insignificance. \"The danger of assimilation has completely disappeared,\"\nsays M. Thomas C6t6; \"we are the masters of our destinies.\" The\nprocess by which the English have been supplanted upon the soil\nis best exemplified by the history of the Eastern Townships, the\neleven counties which He between Montreal and the American\nfrontier and which were originally settled by immigrants from Great\nBritain and the United States. By 1851 the French had become a\nthird of the population of the Townships; by 1861 nearly a half;\nby 1901 two-thirds. In many an old English center all that remains\nto show the past is a ruined Protestant church and an overgrown\ngraveyard. If the present tendencies continue, the soil of the Townships will pass entirely to the invader.\nWhat has brought about this movement? Aside from the\nsuperior fecundity of the French-Canadians (there is an authentic\ncase of thirty-six children in a family), it cannot be ascribed to their\nsuperior energy. Those who know the obstinate conservatism and\nroutine methods of the habitant would scout the idea. The truth\nis that the displacement was voluntary at first, the English-speaking\nfarmer going elsewhere to better his condition, and was afterwards 72 The Annals of the American Academy\nenforced; and it was enforced, not by any survival of the fittest,\nbut by the organization and activity of the Roman Catholic church.\nIn fact, the church is the main factor in rooting the habitant to the\nsoil and keeping him there. Her clearly developed plan, as the cure\ntells his flock in the country parishes, is to make the English and\nProtestant parts of the province Catholic and French. Colonization\nsocieties, in which the clerical element predominates, give assistance\nto poor colonists, contribute to the cost of churches and schools,\nand open up new roads. They act as bureaus of information. They\nknow of every farm which has been offered for sale and have one of\nthe faithful ready to occupy it. -Behind the church stands the government, subsidizing the societies and contributing to the cause in\nother ways. The Papal Zouaves were rewarded with a block of\ntownship land.\nIn each locality the same thing happens. One by one the English\nfamilies leave. One by one, directed by the church, the French\nfamilies arrive. Finally a time comes when the English, losing their\npredominance, feel the pressure of the invasion. Left more and more\nin 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\nof becoming French. Thus the retreat, which was gradual and\nvoluntary at first, finally develops into a frightened rout. Those\nwho remain behind become, like the Highlanders of the county of\nCharlevoix, French in everything but name. From all parts of the\nprovince the English have been converging on the island of Montreal.\nIn 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\nis becoming more and more a mere suburb of the city, they added\nover 60,000\u00E2\u0080\u0094at the expense, of course, of other English districts.\nAs long as conditions are unaltered this movement will continue.\nOnly in Montreal have the English a position of apparent security\nand permanence. It is a curious situation. Perhaps in defending\nMontreal they feel unconsciously that they are defending the last\nditch.\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Equally notable have been the services of the church in the\nrevival of the Acadian people. With the misfortunes of the Acadians\neveryone is familiar, whether from the poetry of Longfellow or the Theocratic Quebec 73\nnarrative of Parkman. It was generally believed, as late as the\nmiddle of the last century, that those misfortunes had destroyed\nthem; in fact the story of their astonishing survival was first\nrecounted to the world in 1887 when Casgrain wrote his \" Pelerinage\nau Pays d'Evangeline.'' The few hundred peasants who were driven\nfrom their homes and scattered over the Atlantic seaboard in 1755\nhave developed into a vigorous people, proud of their history and\nconfident of the future. They have their own flag, their own national\nholiday, their own newspapers; and in the public schools they are\nallowed French books and French teachers. All this is very remarkable; and it was accomplished entirely under the leadership of the\nchurch. It has given the church one more claim upon the gratitude\nof the French-Canadians, because the struggle to preserve a common\nnationality has obliterated the differences in origin and history\nwhich formerly separated the two French peoples of Canada and\nAcadie.\nIn order to give the French race and the French language (or,\nin other words, the Catholic church), a secure position in Quebec,-\nthe clergy have unceasingly combated the dangers of assimilation.\nThey have sought to reduce as far as possible the points of contact\nbetween English and French. In 1910 the first Plenary Council\nof Quebec urged parents to keep their children free from dangerous\nassociation with Protestants. Some years ago Archbishop Fabre\ndeclared that \"Catholics who understand their duties and responsibilities toward their children should aim at cutting the evil at the\nroot by discouraging intimate relations with Protestants.\" His\nsuccessor, Archbishop Bruchesi, has spoken in the same sense.\nExcommunication lies against any Catholic contracting a marriage\nbefore a Protestant minister; and no priest may officiate at a \"mixed\nmarriage\" between a Catholic and a Protestant unless an episcopal\ndispensation has been granted. In 1907 Archbishop Bruchesi\nannounced that'' we will no longer, as in the past, grant dispensations\nfor mixed marriages. Let them not hope to obtain these dispensations because they bring forward the weighty reasons of temporal\nadvantage or mutual affection.\" For her own reasons the church\nprevented the establishment of a public library in Montreal in 1903,\njust as she struck down, a half century ago, the Institut Canadien\nwhere English and French radicals met together. Not only has a\nsystem of education been developed in which the French have their 74 The Annals of the American Academy\nown schools and colleges, but attendance at the Protestant English\nschools, which usually provide a better course of studies and more\nefficient instruction, is strictly prohibited. The penalty, established by the Councils of Quebec and approved by the Holy See, is\nrefusal 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,\"\na movement which resembles the classical revival in Greece about\na century ago. Among French-Canadian authors they have been\nrepresented by such men as Ahb6 Ferland and Abb^ Casgrain.\nFor such notable services against the barbarians the church\nhas received equally notable rewards. Above all, she has received\nthe loyal support and affection of the people she has served. Cardinal\nVanutelH, as he passed up the St. Lawrence to represent the Pope\nat the Eucharistic Congress of 1910, received from every parish\non its shores a welcome which could have been equaled in no other\ncountry in the world. He said that it reminded him of a day in the\nMiddle Ages. No better description could have been given to the\nspirit which animates Catholic Quebec. In no way has the church\ndemonstrated her influence so impressively as in supervising the\npeople's theatrical amusements. and their reading. In the r61e of\npublic censor she has destroyed powerful newspapers and muzzled\nothers, disciplined the managers of theaters, forced authors to withdraw their books,and banished from the shops and libraries the novels\nof Honore Balzac and the poems of Alfred de Musset. Why do\nnewspapers like La Presse publish edifying discourses on the eucharist?\nWhy is Montreal, the metropolis of Canada, unprovided with a public\nlibrary? Why is the Theatre de Nouveautes, once the home of good\ndrama, given over to the exhibition of moving pictures ? It is because\nepiscopal interdicts, even at this day, are enforced by a sanction as\neffective as that which stands behind the laws of the state. The\ninterdict may be dead in other countries, but it flourishes in Quebec.\nObserving the results of its employment, the mind travels back to\nthe days of Innocent III.\nInnumerable illustrations of this clerical censorship might be\ngiven. Allusion has been made to the Theatre des Nouveautes. A\nfew years ago, after being censured by the Archbishop on account\nof an objectionable production, the manager gave his word that no\nimmoral play would ever be given in the theatre again. Not long Theocratic Quebec 75\nafterwards Bernstein's La Rafale was announced. This play, according to the Archbishop, \"is nothing but a display of low sensuality\nand an apology for suicide.\" The theatre was promptly interdicted,\nnot only for the week during which the play was to run, but indefinitely. All the French papers refrained from criticism of the play.\nAn audience which was almost entirely English attended on the\nfirst evening; on the second the doors were closed; on the third\nthe manager wrote to the Archbishop asking to have the interdict\nremoved. It was removed, but on condition that the posting of\nplays should henceforth beapproved by acommitteeof clerical censors.\nShortly afterwards legitimate drama gave way to moving pictures.\nAmong the many newspapers which have fallen under archi-\nepiscopal displeasure may be noted Les Debats, Le Combat, and L'Action which appeared successively between 1899 and 1904. They\nwere managed and edited by Edouard Charlier, an old-country\nFrenchman, who had little knowledge of the limitations placed upon\nthe freedom of the press in Quebec. He spoke violently against \"the\nbrutal invasion of the Transvaal,\" and was not molested. But when\nhe eulogized certain dangerous French authors, mocked the Syllabus,\nattacked the memory of Archbishop Bourget at the moment when\nthe diocese was erecting a monument to him, and ridiculed a letter\nof Archbishop Bruchesi regarding Sunday observance, he found the\nchurch less patient under criticism than the state had been. The\nfaithful were prohibited from buying Les Debats, selling it, or having\nit in possession. The paper ceased publication. Immediately afterwards Charlier launched another weekly called Le Combat. \"It\nresembles its brother,\" cried a clerical organ in Montreal; \"we are\nforced to believe in metempsychosis!\" Indeed, in its short and\nmerry career Le Combat gave good evidence that it possessed the\nspirit of the departed. There was little disguise of the fact that its\ndominating idea was hatred of the clergy and that it wished to warn\nthe people against everything which savored of clerical control.\nAgain the thunderbolt fell. And again, after reading the Archbishop a little lecture, M. Charlier managed to transfer the old spirit\nto a new body. L'Action, however, did not survive its first number.\nMore famous was the case of Le Canada-Revue which, ruined by the\ninterdict in 1892, carried its grievances to the courts only to find that\nno redress could be obtained. The Archbishop was held to have\nacted within his rights. 76 The Annals of the American Academy\nMuch may be said in justification of clerical censorship. The\nchurch has undertaken a responsibility which the state has failed\nto assume. She has labored conscientiously to keep the people\nclean, to protect home life, to preserve simple manners and innocent\ntastes; and the high level of morality\u00E2\u0080\u0094using the word in its narrower\nsense\u00E2\u0080\u0094which prevails among the French population of Quebec\nbears good testimony to her services in the discharge of a great trust.\nToo often, in the clamor raised over her mistakes and her selfish\nbehavior, that achievement has been overlooked. But it would\nbe quite as wrong to overlook instances of excessive zeal and unnecessary oppression, acts of violence done where no public interest\nappeared to be at stake and where the battle was fought from the\nquestionable motive of preserving power or punishing leze majesty.\nThe dangers of clerical censorship must be fairly obvious, even to\nthose who are not familiar with its actual operation. The church is an\nirresponsible organization, asserting over civil society an authority\nordained by divine will, resisting with all herpower any attempt to diminish that authority, and resenting every word of criticism and every\nact of resistance. The educational system of Quebec, for instance,\nhaving fallen under the control of the clergy, is invested by them\nwith a quasi-religious character; and to touch \"the sacred arch of\neducation,\" as Senator Poirier ironically calls it, or to discuss glaring\ndefects and pressing reforms with any degree of frankness requires\na good deal of courage; the church will at once assume that the\ncriticism is leveled against herself. How then will it fare with those\nwho throw discredit upon the teaching of the church,\u00E2\u0080\u0094as was impliedly done in Bernstein's Rafale\u00E2\u0080\u0094or bring to light scandals in the ranks\nof the clergy themselves, as was done by Le Canada-Revue? \"Prick\nHghtly the skin of an ecclesiastic, even in his first year,\" said Arthur\nBuies; \"and the whole church puffs out, makes a great noise, and\nlaunches her thunderbolts.\"\nThat these thunderbolts are effective is due, of course, to the\nattitude of obedience and acquiescence which prevails among the\npeople. But to many acts of the clergy the state has undertaken\nto give a legal sanction. Thus, parish priests are not supported by\nvoluntary offerings, but by payment of the tithe which the civil\ncourts will enforce; and churches are not built by popular subscription, but by levying a regular tax upon the freeholders of the parish\nand collecting it by legal process if necessary. The tithe, which has Theocratic Quebec 77\nalways existed in Canada, amounts to a twenty-sixth of the harvested\ncereals; in some parts of the province it has been extended to include\nhay. In cases where it is insufficient to support the priest or where\nthe heads of families pay no tithe at all, which applies particularly\nto towns and cities, it is customary to levy a kind of personal tithe\nknown as the capitation; and apparently the courts will enforce\nits payment. It should also be noted that the organization of the\nparish and its administration are regulated by statute. There is\nno real separation of church and state in Quebec.\nIn the same way the state has legalized the ascendancy of the\nchurch in educational matters. Under the system of separate schools\nwhich was established- nearly three-quarters of a century ago the\ncontrol of Catholic schools has been entrusted to a committee which\nthe bishops of the province absolutely dominate. The bishops are\ndirectly responsible, therefore, for the studies which are prescribed\nand for the books which are authorized. Under their hands the\nmain purpose of the primary schools seems to be to prepare children\nfor their first communion. \"Religious instruction shall hold the\nprincipal place among the subjects of the course,\" the regulations\nsay, \"and shall be regularly given in every school. The catechism\nlessons of children preparing for their first communion shall receive\nspecial attention. When it is deemed necessary, children preparing\nfor their first communion shall be exempted from a part of their\nother class exercises.\" As the parish priest has the right to visit\nthe school, inspect all documents, and both choose the books and\ndirect the teacher in all matters of religion and morals, the regulations are well enforced. In the language of a competent observer\nthe catechism \"forms the staple of the course of study, with a little\nof the three R's in the intervals between it and prayers.\" After\nthe first communion few\u00E2\u0080\u0094of the boys at least\u00E2\u0080\u0094continue to attend\nschool.\nThe inefficiency of the primary schools is patent, even appalling. \"We are ready to acknowledge,\" says the Montreal Witness,\n\"that, compared with ideal conditions, our attitude toward education\nis 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\nof the school inspectors. \"One-half the teachers seem ignorant\nof the first ideas of the course of studies,\" we read. \"There are w&\n78 The Annals of the American Academy\nthirty-seven who have no diplomas and who, with few exceptions,\nteach only a little reading and writing as well as the catechism to\nthe children preparing for the first communion.\" \"There are too\nmany persons who have no vocation for teaching and are accepted\nbecause no better ones can be got.\" It should be noted that 4,600\nmonks and nuns are teaching in the public schools without diplomas.\nThey are exempted by statute from the necessity of securing diplomas,\nan exemption for which they give no guarantee of efficiency. In\nthe primary schools where the teachers are almost entirely women -\nthe average salary of a woman teacher possessing a diploma is $177\nin the towns and $125 in the country. A bricklayer earns in an hour\ntwice as much as one of these teachers earns in a day.\nIn higher education the French-Canadians seldom go afield from\ntheir own university, Laval, and the nineteen classical colleges which\nare affiliated with it. These are entirely under clerical domination.\nLaval, though raised to the status of a university only in the middle\nof the nineteenth century, can boast of a long history, beginning\nwith the foundation of the Petit Seminaire in 1668. It does not belie\nits ecclesiastical origin. The final supervision of doctrine and discipline rests with a Superior Council composed of the archbishops\nand bishops of the civil province, under the presidency of the Archbishop of Quebec, who, besides being Apostolic Chancellor and\nVisitor, enjoys the power of veto over all rules and nominations.\nAt the opening of the year the professors go to the archiepiscopal\npalace and deposit at the feet of the Visitor their oath of fidelity.\nFrenchmen who have come out to occupy the chairs of French literature established through the efforts of Abbe\" Colin, Superior of the\nSulpicians in Montreal, have found their position intolerable. One,\nbeginning his course with the nineteenth century, was forced to\nchange to the seventeenth. There was great scandal when de\nLabriolle delivered a eulogy on Paul Louis Courier, and when M.\nLeger made references to Zola and Anatole France. In 1904, when\na medical congress holding its sessions at Laval resolved that all\nteachers, even those in orders, ought to have a certificate of health,\nthe vice-rector at first closed the doors against the doctors, though\nhe was finally prevailed upon to rescind the order. The students\nare forbidden to make use of any library other than that of the\nuniversity itself, which is certainly not calculated to undermine their\nmorals or their orthodoxy. Laval has a branch at Montreal which Theocratic Quebec 79\nwas founded in 1876 and has outgrown the mother institution,\nbecoming practically independent.\nThe classical colleges are formed after a pattern taken from\nthe old world. Children may enter at the age of seven and eventually proceed to the bachelor's degree or enter the church. Little\nmore than forty per cent of the students are above sixteen years\nof age. Practically all the instructors are in orders. The students\nare all formed in the same mold, and subjected to a discipline that\ntoo often breaks their spirit and initiative. Their education is\nclassical, even to the point of having classes conducted in Latin.\nModern literature and modern philosophy are eschewed.\nAlready criticism, insistent criticism, is being directed against\nthese homes of obscurantism, not only by radical reformers, but\nalso by men whose temperament is conservative and whose attachment to the church still survives. Their assault on the school system\nis fundamental. It is in the schools that the clergy take hold of the\nyoung and mold them to obedience. They exercise almost complete\ncontrol; prescribing the studies, authorizing the books, and bringing to bear upon the students influences which are calculated to\nleave a permanent impress. In fact, the schools of Quebec develop\nloyalty to the church in the same way that the schools of other\ncountries develop loyalty to the state. The radicals, who wish to\nbreak the spell of clerical ascendancy over the people, aim more\nirnmediately at modernizing the schools and reHeving the French-\nCanadians of the handicap of inferior education. Hence the agitation\nfor a Minister of Education, in the place of the bishops, and for free\nand obligatory instruction. \"It is indisputably established,\" said\nthe clerical organ La VeriU, \"that obligatory instruction is preached\nby the Freemasons especially, and that the countries which have\nallowed this measure to be imposed on them have demonstrated\nits failure. . . . It is by means of obligatory instruction above\nall that the adversaries of religious instruction hope to take the\nchild from paternal authority and the salutary influence of the\nchurch, in order to throw him into the arms of the state.\" It must\nbe admitted that \"the salutary influence of the church\" is the chief\npoint of attack. That salutary influence, far from taking the lead\nin effecting necessary reforms, has thrown its mantle about the\nschools and made criticism a sacrilege. It is dangerous to criticise\nor even to suggest improvements; and so a growing number of radi- fflS^i\n80 The Annals of the American Academy\ncals believe that the schools must be laicized before they can be\nmade efficient.\nIt is in Montreal, where Protestant and Catholic schools stand\nside by side inviting comparison and where competition in commerce\nand industry makes the French feel the inadequacy of their training,\nthat the reform movement has gathered most headway. The Board\nof School Commissioners, though the ecclesiastical members dissented, established a short while ago practical freedom of instruction\nand uniformity of books. Previously the religious orders had made\nsome profit, ad maiorem dei gloriam, as Le Pays remarked irreverently,\nby getting authorization for the books which they printed and sold\nwithout any taxation by the state. But the great victory of the\nradical programme, apparently the first step in a revolution, was the\nfounding of the Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales in 1908.\nIt is true that an Abb6 of the church blessed the corner-stone; but\nthe ceremony was strangely free from the usual clerical tone, and\nthe school itself is entirely under lay control. The members of the\ngoverning corporation are nominated by the French-Canadian\nChamber of Commerce and appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor.\nThe significance of this will appear best from the comments of\nthe clerical papers. Said La VeriU: \"We see in the constitution\nof the Ecole des Hautes Etudes that the representatives of religious\nauthority have been completely overlooked. They have been\nexcluded from an institution in which, however, they ought to have\na voice in certain branches of the prescribed programme of studies.\nThere is an unfortunate tendency to exaggerate the rights of the\nstate in education to the detriment of the rights of the church.\"\nWhat \"the rights of the state\" are may be gathered from the declaration of the Superintendent of Public Instruction that the sole right\nof the state in matters of education is to furnish the funds. \"Before\nsending 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\nchildren will go elsewhere. . . . The church has the right to\ncomplain if she and all religion are excluded positively from an establishment where neither the director nor the professors admit her\ninfluence and her authority.\"\nIn still another direction the authority of the church has been\nclothed with legal sanction. In their interpretation of the Civil Theocratic Quebec\nCode of the province the courts have long recognized her full pretensions in the regulation of the marriage tie. Down to the year 1901\nit seemed thoroughly established that, in deciding on the vahdity\nof an alleged marriage between two Catholics, the courts.should be\nguided by the decision of the competent ecclesiastical tribunal and\nreserve to themselves only the right of pronouncing as to the civil\neffects,\u00E2\u0080\u0094marriage portion, right of succession, etc. In that year,\nhowever, the case of Delpit v. Cote came before the Superior Court.\nThe 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\nthe parties, secured a decree of nullity from the Archbishop. He\nthen demanded, and in the light of precedent had every right to\nexpect, annulment by the court as to the civil effects. The court\ntook a very different view, a view which was received with consternation by the clergy. It held that \"the marriage upon a license of\ntwo Roman Catholics by a Protestant minister is not illegal as having\nbeen solemnized by an incompetent official.\" This decision was\nrendered by Judge Archibald, an English judge. But although a\nFrench judge rendered a contrary judgment ona similar point a month\nand a half later, it seems from a very recent decision that through\nthe force of its argument and its reliance on broad principles of law\nthat Delpit v. C6U will leave its impress upon the jurisprudence of\nthe future. The slowly-developing spirit of anti-clericalism has\nbegun to make itself felt upon the bench.\nAnti-clerical sentiment is growing in Quebec. Excessive pretensions, intemperate craving for power, the determination of the\nclergy to make their will dominant where modern practice allows\nfreedom of choice to the individual\u00E2\u0080\u0094these things have raised up\nenemies. \"If the chiefs of the church heard the talk to which\nthese abuses give rise,\" wrote Senator David, \"if they knew what\ngood Catholics and irreproachable parents are repeating freely,\nthey would be frightened. Unhappily the truth reaches them\nwith difficulty, through the smoke of the incense which envelops\nthem; respect and fear of displeasing them or giving them pain\ntoo often close the mouths of the worthy men who surround them.\n. . . The danger which menaces the influence of the clergy and\nof religion itself is great, serious, incontestable.\" French-Canadians 82\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nare beginning to wonder if clerical dictatorship has not become an\nanachronism; if the large powers which were entrusted to the church\nat a time when the very existence of the nationality was in peril\nshould not be recalled now that the circumstances have changed.\nTo-day their danger is mainly economic; and the church has shown\nno disposition to meet the danger by raising the standard of education\nand giving it the practical character which would prepare the students\nfor industrial or commercial careers. She is too much concerned\nwith the preservation of her powers and with the enforcement of\nobedience at the expense of individual initiative and self-reliance.\nShe is not disposed to lay down her dictatorship like a Garibaldi or\na Cincinnatus. The result is that the French-Canadian Freemasons,\nconverted by missionaries from France and possessed of all the\nconviction of early Christians, are meeting secretly in the catacombs\nto plot her destruction. CANADIANS IN THE UNITED STATES1\nBy S. Morley Wickett, Ph.D.,\nOf Wickett & Craig, Ltd., Toronto, Canada.\nIt was the French Canadian coureurs de bois who opened up\nthe western trade routes from Hudson's Bay to Louisiana. That was\ntwo centuries ago, before the United States was yet a dream of the\nfuture. These French Canadians laid the first foundations of a\nline of great cities, among which may be named Detroit, Sault Ste.\nMarie, Chicago, St. Paul, Pittsburgh and New Orleans. That\nearly chapter is, however, long since closed, except for the faint traces\nof race one still notices occasionally on the Mississippi. As regards population, the United States more than repaid the debt\nafter the peace of 1783, when United Empire Loyalists founded\nUpper Canada and New Brunswick and settled the eastern townships of Quebec. For the subject in hand we come down to much\ncloser years, of which we have more or less exact information, and\nneed not run our eye further back than a few years before British\nNorth America became the Dominion of Canada. But both the\nearlier and the later ends of this great story of interchange of population between the two countries, still await the historian's pen.\nTo put results bluntly, during the second half of last century\nat least 1,800,000 Canadians moved across the border into the\nUnited States. The exodus stands as one of the notable facts in\nCanada's history. For a time it dismayed a large section of the\nCanadian people and brought them almost to despair of a political\nfuture. But that chapter is closed. Canada is now attracting\npopulation alike from Europe and the United States, and is progressing so rapidly that its growth has come to be one of the outstanding\nevents in the recent history of the new world. Accordingly it will\nbe of interest to look back and review briefly the great Canadian\nexodus, the localities the emigrants have selected for their new\nhomes, the occupations they are following, and their intermarriage\nwith citizens of the United States.\n1 This paper, here revised and reprinted, first appeared in the Political Science Quarterly in 1906,\nvol. xxi\u00E2\u0080\u0094 Editor.\n(83) I\n84\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nThe whole topic of the movement of populations\u00E2\u0080\u0094local as well\nas international\u00E2\u0080\u0094is indeed instructive, for it tells the life-story\nof a people. It is an epitome of conditions. In a measure migrations\nreflect the course of affairs at home and at times relations between\ncountries as well. Not infrequently they result from mistaken\nnotions or imperfect knowledge, but wholly blind are they rarely;\nand whatever their causes, they offer much to interest and to instruct. Modern migrations appear to differ from those of earlier\ncenturies. In ancient times whole peoples, entire tribes, pushed\nand pressed from east to west in search of fresh lands. Such was\nthe origin of nationalities in Europe. Later on, in the middle ages,\nwhen life had become more settled, only particular classes wandered\nwidely, such as knights on crusades or on chivalrous errands,\njourneymen craftsmen, jugglers, minstrels and merchants. At\npresent, if there be any rule, it is that, irrespective of class, migrations\nhave come to be a matter of private concern. We see individuals\nand single families changing their homes. A great variety of motives\nare operative; but through them all runs one common characteristic;\u00E2\u0080\u0094the desire to secure a better market for abilities. The nation\nof origin loses a certain amount of energy which would have been\nspent in developing its resources; the individual gains what he\nregards as a better chance.\nLevasseur, the French geographer and economist, has attempted\nto formulate a law of migration. He points out that, as in the world\nof matter, the bigger the mass the greater the force of attraction,\nwhich is only another way of saying that people flock to the cities\nand generally seek out the largest market for their labor. This\nlaw, if law it may be called, must be stated guardedly, since, for\nexample, a densely populated country may more often repel than\nattract. It will suffice perhaps simply to say that migration is the\nattempt to adjust population to opportunity\u00E2\u0080\u0094a process of adaptation, a phase of industrialism.\nGeographical influences on shiftings of population must not\nbe lost sight of. Climate counts. Though the point has not yet been\nargued, there is much to support the view that, apart from economic\nconsiderations, northern peoples tend to be more mobile than\nsouthern. Not that winter drives the northerner into exile. To\none enjoying a fair measure of health, few delights are keener than\nthe feelings of exhilaration and the sports of a northern, let us say\nmm Canadians in the United States\n85\nof an average Canadian winter. The tingling climate and the stimulating procession of the seasons arouse one into habits of vigorous\naction. As for Canadians, there is a sprinkling on every continent.\nFor instance in England and Wales there are nearly 19,000; in\nAustralia over 3,000; nearly 1,500 in New Zealand, and in Alaska\n2,000 more.\nThe migration of Canadians to the more developed market\nof the United States is of two kinds, temporary and permanent,\nthe one shading imperceptibly into the other. With the coming\nof settled industrial conditions in the republic temporary migration\nfell away sharply; but in spite of \"alien labor\" laws they are still\nimportant along the border and in such centers as New York, Boston,\nPittsburgh, Chicago and San Francisco.\nIn 1900 there were 10,356,644 foreigners who had become\ndomiciled in the United States. Of these 1,181,255, or 11.4 per\ncent, were Canadian-born. Out of this number 785,958 were English, and 395,297 were French Canadians. By \"Canadian\" the\ncensus always means \"born either in Canada or Newfoundland\"\nalthough Newfoundland is not yet part of the Dominion. In estimating the number of Canadians we must take it into account\nthat many British-born Canadians, after living in Canada for a\nnumber of years, have moved south and have been enumerated\nthere as British, not as Canadians. One may hazard the estimate\nthat their number is one-eighth of that of the Canadian-born English-\nspeaking immigrants, i. e., 100,000. With 450,000 children born\nin the United States of these Canadian parents the total thus becomes\n1,731,000; 995,000 (57 per cent) being English Canadians, and\n736,000 (43 per cent) French Canadians.2 There is still another\ngroup of 813,350 who have one Canadian-born parent. But in fairness these cannot be called Canadians and may therefore be left\nout of count. An allowance, however, will have to be made for the\nmany other Canadians by birth, who, report has it, prefer to report\nthemselves as British and are so enumerated. They bring the grand\ntotal up to at least 1,800,000 Canadians at present living in the\nUnited States, that is one-third of the population of the Dominion\nas it stood in 1901.3\n*\"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.\ns If we include those with one Canadian parent the sum total would be upwards of 2,600,000,\none million of these being \"French.'^the balance \"English\" Canadians. 86\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nBut how may one estimate the number of those who have\nemigrated to the United States between 1850 and 1900? The\ncensus gives a return showing the decennial increase in the number\nof foreigners. We may assume the average age of the Canadian\nimmigrants to be twenty-five years. Using then an ordinary mortality table we may calculate the number of those from each decennial\nincrease who should be living to-day:\nDecade\nCanadian Emigrants\nto U. S., according\nto U. S. Census\nAlive. 1900,\naccording to\nMortality Table\n1850-60\t\n102,000\n243,000\n224,000\n264,000\n200,000\n41,786\n1860-70\t\n153,710\n1870-80\t\n175,054\n1880-90\t\n233,426\n1890-00\t\n193,132\nTotal\n1,033,000\n797,108\nThese figures mean that an immigration of 1,033,000 persons\nyields a present population of 797,108. The problem is to know\nhow many are necessary to produce the present population of\n1,800,000, less their 450,000 children. This number we find to be\n1,750,000. 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\nand three-quarters or more millions being lost directly, the balance\nthrough immediate natural increase. Of the 2,200,000 the English\ncompose approximately 1,200,000, the French approximately\n1,000,000.\nEvery adult costs his native country at least $1,000 to nourish\nand educate. So, after making allowance for the 100,000 of British\nbirth and education, Canada may be said to have invested in the\nAmerican Republic living capital assessable at $1,650,000,000\u00E2\u0080\u0094\na sufficiently severe drain on a young nation! This enormous loss\nCanada has withstood, although at the same time it has been steadily\ncarrying on extensive public works. It makes one marvel at the\nrecuperative power of young fertile countries. The loss amounts\nto half Mr. Giffen's estimate of the crushing burden placed on France\nby the Franco-Prussian war. There is a contra account, of course,\nfor United States emigration into Canada. The Canadian census Canadians in the United States\n87\nof 1901 places their number at 127,899. At $1,000 per head this\nmeans $128,000,000, or, with an additional allowance of one-third\nfor the years back to 1850, $170,000,000, which is about 10 per cent\nof Canada's loss.\nCanadian 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\n1870; of 223,693 in 1880; of 263,781 in 1890, and of 200,317 in\n1900. The largest exodus from Canada seems to have occurred\ntherefore during the ten years 1880-90, or perhaps more precisely\n1875-85. The steady flow has resulted in Canadians constituting\na growing percentage of the whole body of foreigners in the United\nStates. In 1850 they formed 6.6 per cent of all foreigners; in 1860,\n6 per cent; in 1870, 8.9 per cent; in 1880, 10.7 per cent; in 1890,\n10.6 per cent, and in 1900, 11.4 per cent. The increase, as the\nfollowing table shows, is paralleled by the Scandinavians alone.\nBetween 1850 and 1900 the percentage of Germans amongst the\nforeign-born fell slightly\u00E2\u0080\u0094from 26 to 25.8 per cent; of Irish, from\n42.8 to 15.6 per cent; of British, from 16.8 to 11.3 per cent; but\nthe percentage of Scandinavians jumped from .9 to 10.3 per cent;\nand that of Canadians from 6.06 to 11.04 per cent. The relative\nincrease of Canadians, even between 1890 and 1900, is marked,\nas the following table shows:\nCanadians in the United States, 1890-1900\n1890\n1900\nIncrease from\n1890-1900\nPer Cent\nIncrease\nEnglish Canadians\t\n678,442\n302,496\n785,958\n395,297\n107,516\n92,801\n15.8\n30.7\nTotal\t\n980,938\n1,181,255\n200,317\n20.4\nSwedes (next highest)\t\nForeigners generally\t\n478,041\n9,249,547\n573,040\n10,356,644\n94,999\n1,107,097\n19.7\n12.0\nThe United States immigration statistics give only 3,064 Canadians as settling in that country between 1891-1900; but the census\nreturns show these figures to be entirely astray. In fact the insuperable difficulties in the way of counting people who enter the States\nby way of Canada make the United States annual returns of Cana- 88 The Annals of the American Academy\ndian immigrants unreliable, and of late years the attempt to compile\nthem has been abandoned. The official immigration figures may\nbe worth giving, however, for purpose of comparison with other\nnationalities.\nImmigrants to the United States\n1821-1900\nPer\nCent\n1891-1900\nPer\nCent\n1881-1890\nPer\nCent\nAggregate\t\nCanada & Newf'l'd\nIreland\t\nGreat Britain\t\nGermany\t\n19,115,221\n1,049,939\n3,871,253\n3,024,222\n5,009,280\n100.0\n3,687,564\n3,064\n390,179\n270,019\n505,152\n100.0\n. 1\n10.6\n7.3\n13.7\n5,246,613\n392,802\n655,482\n807,357\n1,452,970\n100.0\n7.5\n12.5\n15.4\n27.7\n1871-1880\nPer\nCent\n1861-1870\nPer\nCent\n1851-1860\nPer\nCent\nAggregate\t\nCanada & Newf'l'd\nTrplanH\n2,812,191\n383,269\n436,871\n548,043\n718,182\n100.0\n13.6\n15.5\n2,314,824\n153,871\n435,778\n100.0\n6.7\n18.8\n26.2\n34.0\n2,598,214\n59,309\n914,119\n423,974\n851,667\n100.0\n2.3\n35.2\nGreat Britain\t\nGermany\t\n19.5\n25.6\n606,896\n787 468\n16.3\n36.6\nGeneral Distribution of the Canadians\nAnd now as to the localities chosen by Canadians for their\nnew home. Of the English Canadians 88 per cent are divided\nequally between the North Atlantic and the North Central states,\n10 per cent are in the West, 2 per cent in the South. The North\n.Atlantic section will include a large number of \"Blue Noses\" (Nova\nScotians and Brunswickers); though, as the \"wise old Nova Scotian\nowl\" Tramp Abroad hints, there is many a Nova Scotian miner\nin the mining camps of the West. Of the French Canadians 77\nper cent five along the Atlantic, nearly three-fourths of these being\nfound in seven cities, Manchester, N. H., Fall River, Holyoke,\nLowell, New Bedford, Worcester and Lawrence, Mass. Upwards\nof 20 per cent are in the North Central regions, less than 3 per cent\nin 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\nbetween Southerners and Canadians which is dated from the time\nof the civil war.\nIt is to be remembered that, if regard is had to British Canadians Canadians in the United States\n89\nand children of immigrant Canadians, the numbers in each of these\ndivisions may probably be safely increased one-half.\nDivision and State\nNorth Atlantic States\nMassachusetts\t\nNew York\t\nMaine\t\nVermont\t\nPennsylvania\t\nSouth Atlantic States.\nFlorida\t\nMaryland\t\nVirginia\t\nNorth Central States.\nMichigan\t\nIllinois\t\nOhio\t\nNorth Dakota\t\nSouth Dakota\t\nMinnesota\t\nWisconsin\t\nKansas\t\nSouth Central States.\nTexas\t\nOklahoma\t\nKentucky\t\nLouisiana\t\nArkansas\t\nWestern States\t\nCalifornia\t\nWashington\t\nMontana\t\nColorado\t\nOregon\t\nIdaho\t\nUtah\t\nEnglish\nCanadians\n345,342\n158,753\n90,336\n36,169\n10,616\n13,292\n6,284\n1,014\n1,143\n1,026\n345,304\n151,915\n41,466\n19,864\n25,004\n5,906\n35,515\n23,860\n7,053\n8,802\n2,549\n1,248\n1,072\n781\n932\n79,098\n27,408\n18,385\n10,310\n8,837\n6,634\n2,528\n1,203\nFrench\nCanadians\nTotal\n305,160\n134,416\n27,199\n30,908\n14,924\n1,468\n636\n88\n87\n104\n77,019\n32,483\n9,129\n2,903\n3,162\n1,138\n12,063\n10,091\n1,485\n1,460\n400\n179\n136\n253\n161\n10,791\n2,410\n1,899\n3,516\n960\n874\n395\n128\n650,502\n293,169\n117,535\n67,077\n25,540\n14,760\n6,920\n1,102\n1,230\n1,130\n422,323\n184,398\n50,595\n22,767\n28,166\n7,044\n47,578\n33,951\n8,538\n10,262\n2,949\n1,427\n1,208\n1,034\n1,093\n89,800\n29,818\n20,284\n13,826\n9,797\n7,508\n2,923\n1,331\nCanadians in United States Cities in igoo\nIt is usually taken for granted that most Canadians go to the\ngreat commercial centers. The reverse is the case. Over half\nare to be found in the country and in the smaller towns. Only\n40 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\npopulation. I give here a selection of cities that have the largest\nCanadian constituencies. But, as already pointed out, the British 90\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nCanadian and pure Canadian stock would probably raise the number\nin each city fifty per cent.\nCity of v\nResidence, 1900\nBoston\t\nCambridge\t\nChicago\t\nDetroit\t\nBuffalo\t\nNew York\t\nJersey City\t\nNewark\t\nPaterson\t\nCleveland\t\nPhiladelphia\t\nCincinnati\t\nRochester\t\nLowell\t\nWorcester\t\nPall River\t\nProvidence\t\nNew Haven\t\nMinneapolis\t\nSt. Paul\t\nMilwaukee\t\nSt. Louis\t\nPittsburgh\t\nWashington, D. C\nNew Orleans\t\nLouisville\t\nSan Francisco\nEnglish Canadians\n.o\ns\n7,374\n9,613\n9,472\n5,403\n6,509\n9,399\n907\n802\n385\n7,839\n2,989\n928\n7,746\n4,485\n3,163\n2,329\n3,882\n754\n5,637\n3,557\n1,687\n2,151\n994\n809\n310\n365\n4,770\no SI\nMS\n.9>\n24.0\n31\n26\n15\n1\n1\n0\n3\n8\n5\n6\n1.1\n1.0\n6.3\n1.0\n1.6\n19.0\n11.0\n8.4\n4.6\n6.9\n2.4\n9.2\n7.6\n1.9\n1.9\n1.2\n4.0\n1.0\n1.7\n4.1\nFrench Canadians\nU C\nk<\nJ3\n90\n3\n.9fc\n\u00C2\u00A3\nfflo\n2,908\n1,483\n5,307\n3,541\n733\n2,527\n134\n160\n174\n772\n294\n103\n553\n14,674\n5,204\n20,172\n3,850\n416\n1,706\n1,015\n217\n339\n79\n97\n85\n45\n429\n1.5\n4.9\n.9\n3.7\n.7\n.2\n.2\n,2\n.5\n.6\n.1\n.2\n1.4\n35.8\n13.8\n40.3\n6.9\n1.3\n2.8\n2.2\n.2\n.3\n.1\n.5\n.3\n.2\n.4\n!\u00E2\u0080\u00A2-\nHo\n50,282\n11,096\n34,779\n28,944\n17,242\n21,926\n1,041\n962\n559\n8,611\n3,283\n1,031\n8,299\n19,159\n8,367\n22,501\n7,732\n1,170\n7,343\n4,572\n1,904\n2,490\n1,073\n906\n385\n410\n5,199\n** Pro\nlis\n8 \u00C2\u00B0a\n'\u00E2\u0096\u00A03 h S\nH.oO\n65,000\n16,000\n55,000\n45,000\n30,000\n38,000\n1,500\n1,300\n800\n13,000\n5,000\n1,500\n12,000\n30,000\n12,000\n33,000\n11,000\n1,700\n11,000\n6,800\n2,800\n3,600\n1,500\n1,300\n600\n600\n8,000\nThe proportion of farmers among the Canadians in the United\nStates is shown by the following figures. Briefly upwards of one-\nfourth of the English Canadians and one-sixth of the French Canadians live on farms. The census accounts for 367,170 Canadian\nfamilies, 207,580 being English and 159,590 French. Twenty-four\nper cent of the one, and 16 per cent of the other live on farms. It is a\nremarkable fact that such a large percentage lead a rural life when Canadians in the United States 91\none considers that Canada is itself so largely an agricultural country.\nOn the whole, if we contrast the two Canadian races, there are\nproportionately more French Canadians in the smaller towns, and\nproportionately more English Canadians carrying on farming or\nliving' in the large cities.\nThe Occupations of Canadians\nA comparison of the occupations of Canadians in the United\nStates and in Canada, brings home the significance of the migration and sets it in a new light. The United States census takes\nnote of 819,264 Canadians ten years of age or over. Forty per cent\nfollow manufacturing; 30 per cent personal service; between 17\nand 18 per cent trade and transportation; about the same percentage agriculture; and somewhat over 4 per cent professions.\nThe last percentage is approximately the same as for the native-\nborn white population in the United States. The large numbers\nin any one occupation compared with the number left behind, as\nshown in the adjoined table, throw light on conditions in Canada;\nfor example, the number of expatriated Canadian teachers and college professors, lawyers and clergymen. Curious is the number\nof Canadians as government officials, soldiers and marines, as is\nalso the great number of Canadian girls of a superior class who have\ngone to the United States as nurses. Rumor has it that many of\nthese are enumerated as Americans \"from northern New York\"\nfor which one might venture to say there is geographically a show\nof reason!\nOf the 300,000 Canadians engaged in business or following\nprofessional pursuits in the United States many hold prominent\nposts. Indeed one hears at times the statement that the English\nCanadians enjoy an exceptionally high reputation. Some reasons\noccur why this should be the case, and, without suggesting comparison, why the average English Canadian in the United States is a\ngood type. (1) Those who go to seek their fortune in a foreign\ncountry are presumably hardy and ambitious, the result of a process\nof natural selection. (2) They have been bred under invigorating\nclimatic influences. (3) They find a wider market for their abilities.\n(4) They are. in a country where traditionally greater responsibility\nis placed on young shoulders than has been usual in Canada down m\n92\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nz\n(A\nO\npq\nz\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0<\n3\nz\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2<\nO\nH\nZ\n\u00C2\u00AB\nPh\nW\nH\nO\nPQ\na\nH\no\nH\nW\n2\nPh\nw\nZ\nO\nM\n\u00C2\u00A7\n\u00C2\u00AB\nw\nS>\nO\no\nw\no\n\nCO\nCO\nr*-\nCO\n00\nQ\\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0^\n\"*>\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0<*<\nCO\n^\nT-H\nO\nT-H\nCO\no\nVO\nCO\nT-H\nCN\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2^\nCO\nr^\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\u00E2\u0080\u0094I\nUv\nCO\ni-H\ni-H\nVO\n1\u00E2\u0080\u00941\nCO\ns9jBuxa\u00C2\u00A3\nCO CN CA r-1 tOfOOV >-irfOVT-HVO'^O'\u00E2\u0080\u0094< U*) CN O CJ\\nCv t^ -^ CO^OtOHlt^HVOONN\nt-o t^. VO iO'-hocO^OO'^t-i C00\*0\nS3|BJ^\nrsCN^^'tVO^lNVOMrNOOCOCOiOOCSCAtsCviO^\n\0^00CN(Nt*\u00C2\u00BBOI>>0\rs^Tt(O0A^V000'tvOOCMC0\nCNOOcOlOOvOONCNONCO'\u00E2\u0080\u0094ih^\OhOOCMO CO \u00C2\u00BB0 -\u00E2\u0080\u0094I\nTt* CN O CN\nCO O i-H\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2<*\u00C2\u00AB CO\niO Ov\n<\no\nSSfBUia^\nS0IB]\\niO vO <-i^iOVOHOOH(S^(NiOfOOiO'-'fO\nVO t-iOO vOtt'OOOOCN^hOOcOVOVOO\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2-h O CNvO'-HVOCOcOO ht|<0\n\u00C2\u00A9* cn* ioi-T <-T .-T^u-f\n\u00C2\u00BBOcOOOO'-'0\00000'-HO\0\\u00E2\u0080\u0094\"cO\u00C2\u00BBOCNCNOvCNCOtO\n^J\u00C2\u00ABCN>\u00E2\u0080\u0094\n\u00C2\u00A7 Ph PP CO Pm Ph H\na\no\nPH13 3 c3\ng ce o\nr- t^r3\ngun\nQ (D\n\u00C2\u00BBi-\u00C2\u00A3;'S .\n> c5 fe \u00C2\u00AB\n' H \u00C2\u00B0 k. -P\nCO\n| C3\nfill\ni^ S5\nV o\nl^tflfflco Canadians in the United States\n93\ns\nO\nz\nO\npq\nz\na\n(\u00E2\u0080\u0094f\nq\nz\n. io\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 tJ<,^co\u00C2\u00BBOCQiovovO,<**\nIO VO VO ON ON\n' t\"- t^. CN & CO CN ON\n^\u00E2\u0096\u00A0^COl^t^*C0\u00C2\u00BBO^HC0\nauibs SuiABti'jaqtnn^i\nT-H VO\n00\n! \u00C2\u00BB-H ON VO*CN CO*\nCN \u00C2\u00AB-h CN\n\"tf1 ***** cn r^\n*\"\"'\nt-H\nVO\nCN\nn80 ^d\nt^\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0^\nfTONtNCOOOtOOOOCO^M^cOH^HHO^CO\nC0CNOv00Nr^OiO-^c0CNCNCNiOCN0N0N\u00C2\u00BB-H000NOv0>O\niOONvOCNCOOOONt-^ONONOOiOt^CNI>.OOOOCNrN.'-HO-<^00\nr^oj.\nCN \"^i-it-ccO 10 t^ CN CN t-o \u00C2\u00BBt-^VOCNCNt^CNOOvOOvOOvooOVO\nssjbj^\n_T r-T t-h\"cn* -<* i-T QQ|Q|\n2\n00 p$ *-\"\nw\nrt\n9\nr/\nJH\n^\nir\na)\nCO\n+\u00C2\u00BB\n0\nz\n3\nSz\nC\n'\nO\nO\nXf\nc\nc\n>\n1\nO\nCO\nUi\na\no\no tr\nO\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A03\na\"\nCO\no\n>,\nm\ncij\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2rj\n\u00C2\u00A7\n\u00C2\u00AB\nffl\nJ\na\n2\nH\n01\nD\nv\n P<+= 5\nCO\n3\nCO\n3\ncl) ./\nCO\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\na\n'to\nCD\nm\nj\u00E2\u0080\u00941\n.2* S'S'Sg3\n! U\n>3\n1 r! (- rt 9\n,3 s S \u00C2\u00BB\n?Pt! s- \u00C2\u00B0\nC O P n\nd \u00E2\u0080\u00A2! n \u00E2\u0084\u00A2 t^ \u00C2\u00AB \u00C2\u00BB-_. iS *i (U *\u00E2\u0080\u00944 \u00E2\u0080\u00A2\u00C2\u00BB-( H M V eH Co Jr o -r? ^^ \u00C2\u00BB\u00E2\u0080\u0094h *h\n3 5\nj* es\n|\ni\nI\n'ft\no\nH B m\n94\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nto recent years. (5) Race and language are in their favor, especially\nin the West. (6) They have had the benefits of a good common\nschool and, in special cases, of a thorough collegiate education.\n(7) Coming from a more agricultural country they may be expected\nto be healthy and thrifty. (8) In old Canada religious influences\nare strong. (9) Finally it is just possible that the comparative\nabsence down to quite recently of the marked influence of corporate\norganization of business in Canada has instilled into the Canadian\nyouth a lively sense of personal responsibility.\nWho's Who in America mentions 245 Canadians. To this\nnumber we would have to add the allowance already made of one-\neighth for those born in Great Britain but brought up in, and therefore rightly to be credited to Canada. This would make the number\nof Canadians according to the standards of this publication 276\nor 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\nDutch, .5 for Swedes aftd .9 for native Americans (black and white)\nor 1.9 for native white Americans. The record made by the Canadians seems particularly notable when it is remembered that nearly\n60 per cent (58.4 per cent of the French Canadians and 56.5 per\ncent of the English Canadians) are under twenty-one years of age as\nagainst 10 per cent for all foreign-born and 52 per cent for all\nnative-born. The railway magnate of the West is a Canadian,\nas was the late Erastus Wiman. Edison received his first schooling\nin telegraphy in Ontario. The inventor of the Bell telephone also\nlived a while in the same province, lecturing for two years at Queen's\nUniversity; and the first Atlantic cable was promoted in the United\nStates by a Nova Scotian. Canadians preside over two of the\nforemost American universities; while Harvard and many other\nseats of learning have a goodly array of Canadian talent in their\nfaculties. Professor Osier who left Baltimore to grace the chair of\nmedicine in Oxford is a Canadian, as is also his successor. At least\none of the great national banks of the United States has a Canadian president; and a number of prominent banking and financial\nhouses have Canadian vice-presidents, cashiers and other officials.\nA full list of distinguished Canadians in the United States would\nindeed have to include also litterateurs, cleigymen, actors, members\nof Congress and even one diplomatic representative of the\nRepublic. Canadians in the United States\n95\nThe Intermarriage of Canadians and Americans\nThe marriages of Canadian immigrants show interesting variations. Most of the English-speaking Canadians \"cross the line\"\nunmarried and after estabUshing themselves take wives from among\ntheir new acquaintances. The majority of the French Canadians\nmigrate after marrying or marry one of their own race in the United\nStates. This is evident from the fact that three-fourths of the 812,-\n350 children one of whose parents is a Canadian have English Canadian parents. Grouping all Canadians of the present generation\ntogether, 48.1 per cent have married in the United States. This\nis a large proportion compared with other nationalities. For example, only 36 per cent of the English marry in the United States;\n36 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\nnative Americans, marry people of British extraction. The actual\nintermarriage of the 135,521 Canadian men was as follows:\nMarriage of Canadian Men in United States with Women of Foreign\nBirth\nNationality of Women\nIrish\t\nEnglish\t\nScotch\t\nWelsh\t\nCanadian\t\nGerman\t\nScandinavian\t\nFrench\t\nSwiss\t\nRussians, Bohemians and Poles....\nAustro-Hungarian\t\nItalian\t\nOthers\t\nNumber of Men\nPer Cent\n71\n\"i\n9\n9\n2,\nIt is worth noting that in 1900 as many as 90.8 per cent of\nthe English Canadians had become naturalized and 84 per cent of\nthe French Canadians. A student of the French Canadians in New\nEngland,6 writing in 1898, comes to the conclusion that the French\n6 Win. MacDonald \"The French Canadians in New England,\" Quarterly Journal of Economics,\nvol. xii. See also Rev. E. Hamon's \" Les Canadiens-Prancaisdela Nouvelle-Angleterre\". (Quebec,\n1891), and \"Growth of the French Canadian Race in America,\" by Professor John Davidson in\nThe Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science (1896). 96 The Annals of the American Academy\nCanadians in New England are gradually losing their identity and\ncoalescing with other nationalities, especially the Irish. I have\nmyself heard French Canadians say they were ashamed to speak\nFrench in their United States home. The birth-rate among them\nis lower than in Quebec; child mortality, especially up to five years,\nremains high; immigration has greatly declined and solicited immigration has ceased altogether. The influence of industrial life and\nof free public schools is doing the rest. The comparative youth-\nfulness of the Canadians, already referred to, is here of moment.\nA word as to the effect of all this emigration on Canada's population. During the half century Canada made up one and one-\nquarter milHons of her loss by settlers crossing the water from Great\nBritain. This and other European immigration together with her\nnatural increase have enabled Canada to show a slight advance\nin population from decade to decade.\nThe meager growth has given rise to assertions of a declining\nbirth-rate in some of the older provinces. During the last few decades\nlater marriages and a slightly lower birth-rate are in evidence both\nin Europe and in America. Agricultural sections especially have\nlost in population on account of the introduction of machinery.\nThe constituents of the rural population have changed: there are\nnow relatively more children and old folk than formerly, fewer of\nmiddle age, those in the prime of life being drawn into the great\nstream of people migrating to the cities, and in Canada to the new\nWest or to the United States. This is largely the situation in Ontario\nand in \"the provinces down by the sea.\" That there are now not\nso many births in proportion to the whole population is in itself\nnatural. 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\nlittle more than surmise. Yet it is doubtless true that families\nare smaller than formerly. Speaking of Ontario one can even notice\nthat families are smaller in the old settled parts than in northern\nor \"New\" Ontario. The result is that for many years Ontario,\nas well as the maritime provinces little more than held their own\nin population. This is evident from the following table. This\ndoes not hold for Quebec province, where families with fifteen to\ntwenty-five children are not uncommon and where the population\nhas gone on doubling itself since 1680 on the average every thirty Canadians in the United States\n97\nyears, elbowing out moreover the comparatively few English residents from the country parts.7\nThe relations between Canada and the United States have\nbeen in some points not unlike those between Scotland and England. There is the great difference, however, that Canada has a\nback country with a varied wealth of natural resources which is\nnow attracting a larger population and creating a wider home-\nmarket for men and goods. And in spite of the heavy net losses of\npopulation in the past, there is probably no part of the world\nPopulation\nof Canada by Provinces\nProvince\n1871\n1881\n1901\n1911\nOntario\t\n1,620,351\n1,191,516\n387,800\n285,594\n94,021\n25,228\n48,000\n36,427\n1,923,228\n1,359,027\n440,572\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 321,233\n108,891\n62,260\n56,446\n49,454\n2,182,947\n1,648,898\n459,574\n331,120\n103,259\n255,211\n211,649\n178,657\n2,523,274\nQuebec\t\n2,002,712\n492,338\nNova Scotia\t\nNew Brunswick\t\nPrince Edward Island\t\n351,889\n93,728\nManitoba\t\n455,614\nTerritories\t\n892,808s\nBritish Columbia\t\n392,480\nTotal\t\n3,688,937\n4,321,111\n5,371,315\n7,204,843\nwhere the average comfort is so high, and where since 1900 a rapid\nprogress in agriculture, industry and population is so evident as\nin \"The Great Dominion.\" During the five years ending with\nJuly, 1905, upwards of 550,000 people are reported to have settled\nhere. One hundred and eighty-two thousand of these have come\nfrom the United States, 60 to 75 per cent of whom are said to\nbe returning Canadians. The immediate future promises even\nmore impressive results. While the emigration of Canadians to-day\nappears to be still not unimportant the northward trekking of settlers into Canada has assumed large proportions. American capital\nis also showing more and more interest in Canadian industry. I\nrefrain from giving further figures as the published statistics on\nemigration and immigration appear to me unreliable.\n7 Professor Davidson, in his article already cited, finds that the French Canadians have been\ndoubling since 1763 every twenty-seven years.\n\u00C2\u00BB Made up of the two new provinces of Alberta with 374,663, Saskatchewan with 92,434,\nYukon Territory with 8,512, and the unorganized Northwest Territory with 17,196. 98\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nThe effect of all this interchange of blood and capital one can\nonly say lies hidden in the mists of the future. This much may\nbe ventured, however: the presence of many Canadians in the United\nStates and of Americans in the Dominion is as a pledge of amity\nand peace, a pledge of all the greater value in North America, where,\nunlike Europe, two great nations practically divide the continent,\nand where for this very reason it is conceivable that in moments\nof popular excitement these nations might forget that even a selfish\nnational policy is not necessarily hostile in intent. It is well, too,\nin the interests of the pax americana that both countries are finding\nresponsibilities beyond their continent, though with his theory of\nthe \"manifest destiny\" of Canada, the late Mr. Goldwin Smith\nwas of another mind. As for the United States, it is changing from\nan American republic to an empire with a world-wide outlook. Canada also is passing on from the stage of self-contemplation to the\nprospect of imperial interests. CANADA AND THE CHINESE: A COMPARISON WITH\nTHE UNITED STATES\nBy Paul H. Clements, A.M.,\nHarrison Fellow in Political Science, University of Pennsylvania.\nCanada, although a dependency of the British Empire, has been\nwisely left alone by the mother country to work out her own destinies\nand to solve her own difficulties in whatever manner she may determine. Through that unrivaled system of colonial government, the\nmost successful the world has ever seen, England has granted the\nDominion practical independence with but passive adherence to a\nsuperior sovereignty, and the result of this policy of confederation\nhas been the expansion of our neighbor of the north into the Greater\nCanada of to-day, sharing with us an active participation in the\neconomic problems peculiar to North America in its relations with\nthe Old World.\nFor over a century the industries, trade and commerce of Canada\nwere what might almost be expressed as the \"short and simple\nannals of the poor.\" The popular fallacy the world over was that the\nDominion consisted of a vast region of ice and snow, relieved only by\na narrow strip of fertile territory bordering on the United States.\nTo the average uninquisitive reader the names of Alberta, Saskatchewan and British Columbia induced a mental picture identical with\nthe climatic and topographical conditions of Labrador, Alaska and\nGreenland. Canada was looked upon as the Siberia of the Western\nHemisphere, and, like Siberia, according to the same unreasoning\nfancy, was arbitrarily condemned in the popular imagination as a\nbarren waste, unproductive, undesirable, its greatest value lying\nin increasing the aggregate number of square miles comprising the\nBritish Empire to an astonishing total.\nUntil a comparatively recent date the possibilities of Canada\nwere unknown to the world, being overshadowed by the unprecedented\ngrowth and prosperity of the United States, but with international\nrivalries dominating trade and commerce, with the scramble of the\ngreat Powers for the last few acres of unclaimed land, and with the\nintensive development of colonies and dependencies already in pos-\n(.99) 100\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nsession, Canada has at last deservedly come to her own. The\nhistory of Canada for the last thirty years reads like a reflex American\nmovement. It is punctuated throughout by the same steady growth,\nthe kind that never declines, the same railroad activities, the same\nbeginnings of manufacture, the same problems of pushing the frontier\nfurther west or further north as has been the history of the United\nStates up to the last half century.\nHowever, with the development of her immense potentialities,\nit did not take Canada long to discover that progress, however\nnatural and continuous, has its attendant difficulties. Of these the\nrace question is by far the most fragile to handle and the most\npuzzling to solve, of undue importance politically because of the\ncomplications ensuing in foreign relations, and serious sociologically\nbecause of the influences, sometimes uplifting, more often retarding,\nupon national characteristics. While Canada was in her pristine\nstages of development she was spared this vexatious problem which\nhas proved so damaging to the United States, but with her consequent\neconomic advance it was inevitable that sooner or later races other*\nthan Caucasian would be attracted to her shores to participate in\nthe material advantages which prosperity in a new country invariably offers to old civilizations.\nLike our own country Canada faces, Janus-like, the Occident\nand the Orient, and similarly the waves of exploitation and settlement\nflowed from east to west. Thus, with one coastline extending along\nthe Pacific, opposite the most populous area of the earth's surface,\nit was but natural that as soon as Canada's advantages became\nknown to the world, the races of the Far East would find here a strong\nincentive for immigration in the desire, alike in all peoples, of bettering their economic conditions. The pioneer Chinese came in the\nbeginning sixties, actuated by the same impulses which caused their\nfirst invasion of the United States, namely, the discovery of gold\nin the mines of Cassiar and Caribou. Later in the eighties began the\nconstruction of the Canadian Pacific Railway, by which the provinces\nof the Dominion were knit together with transcontinental lines\nof steel. The era of railroad building meant the same problems to\nCanada as it meant to the United States in the previous decade, and\nhere again the Chinese, the best laborers in the world for such purpose,\nwere called upon to make the transportation dream of Canada's\nstatesmen a reality. But more laborers came than were wanted, Canada and the Chinese 101\nand it was found necessary to impose such restrictions, hitherto\nnone, as would keep the non-assimilative portion of the population\nwithin reasonable bounds. The Canadian of the Pacific coast\nfeared, and rightly so, an Asiatic flood that might easily have submerged the few thousand inhabitants that represented the dominant\nrace. Therefore, in 1884, the Dominion government appointed a\nroyal commission to investigate the question and the result was the\nimposition, in 1886, of a tax of $50 per head upon mcoming Chinese.\nBy the census of 1891 there was a total of 9,129 Chinese in\nCanada, and of this number 8,910 resided in British Columbia.\nThe capitation tax of $50 was, however, too low to appreciably\nlessen the influx of Orientals; therefore an increase to $100 was\ndetermined upon, to take effect in 1901. Even this was declared\nby the people of British Columbia, the province most affected by\nthe immigration, to be utterly inadequate, and a second commission\nwas ordered by the government to make a thorough investigation.\nIt was this commission of 1900 which recommended the increase of\nthe capitation tax to $500, the present ratio, and a law was accordingly enacted by the Canadian Parliament, to come into force\nJanuary, 1904, whereby the tax was raised to the specified amount,\nwhere it has since remained.\nBy January 1, 1904, there were approximately 30,000 Chinese\nin Canada, and of these 16,007 arrived from June, 1900, to the above\nmentioned 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\nthat the solution of the perplexing problem had been reached. Nevertheless a new difficulty arose, curiously enough the logical resultant\nof this exorbitant head-money.\n1 Fiscal year, June, 1900, to 1901 2,518\nFiscal year, June, 1901, to 1902 3,525\nFiscal year, June, 1902, to 1903 5,245\nJune, 1903, to January 1, 1904 4,719\n16,007\nFrom Report by W. L. Mackenzie King, C.M.G., of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire\ninto the methods by which Oriental laborers have been induced to come to Canada. Ottawa, 1908,\np. 70.\n'Ibid., p. 70:\nJanuary 1, 1904, to June 30, 1904 0\nJune 30, 1904, to June 30, 1905 8\nJune 30, 1905, to June 30, 1906 22\nJune 30, 1906, to June 30, 1907 91\n121 102\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nTo all intents and purposes Canada had become a closed country\nto the average Chinaman. Immigration had been effectively discouraged, and the fortunate Orientals who had succeeded in coming\nto Canada prior to the enactment of the prohibitive tax were apparently the only ones who would be able to enter the happy land. This\nled, however, to an immediate readjustment of labor according to\nthe conditions as they now existed, which contingency the legislators had no doubt failed to take into account. As the available\nsupply was momentarily at a standstill the people of British Columbia,\nof both races, awoke to the fact that Chinese labor in Canada was\nnow limited, practically a static quantity and subject only to slight\nincrease. The peculiar economic advantages thus accruing to the\nChinese are ably expressed by the Royal Commissioner. Said Mr.\nKing: \"The Chinaman who had landed in this country prior to January, 1904, discovered that the state, unwittingly perhaps, had,\nby restricting further competition from without, created of his labor\na huge monopoly; without organization, without expense, without\neven agitation, every Chinaman became a unit in a labor group\nmore favored than the most exclusive and highly protected trade\nunion.' 's Coupled with this was the fact, admitted by all unprejudiced\ncritics, that the Chinese were the best laborers obtainable for many\nindustries. Their mode of hving, ingrained through necessity by\ncenturies of limited food supply almost down to the starvation\npoint, their astomshing endurance, the result of intermittent labor\nin China necessary to keep body and soul together, their submissive-\nness and lack of aggressive action, an outgrowth of Confucianism\nwhich our West never understood, their cheerfulness, their fatalistic\nphilosophy and their extraordinary aptitude for grinding toil, a vice\ninstead of a virtue according to the weaker Caucasian standards,\nall of these qualities have made them well-nigh indispensable for the\nrapid development of a new country. Considering these traits,\napplicable to the entire race, it was but natural, with the further\nsupply almost cut off, at least to any appreciable extent, that their\nlabor should increase in demand, and with this increase, at variance\nwith the stationary, even diminishing number available, it can readily\nbe seen that the monetary value of their services advanced tremen-\n8 From Report by W. L. Mackenzie King, C.M.G., of the Royal Commission appointed to\ninquire into the methods by which Oriental laborers have been induced to come to Canada. Ottawa,\n1908, p. 71. Canada and the Chinese 103\ndously. It operated, in fact, as a \"huge monopoly.\" The fortunate\nOriental in Canada discovered that the state had, innocently enough,\ndoubled and even trebled his earning capacity. It was revealed\nby testimony before the Royal Commission that by the inauguration\nof the $500 tax the average wage for even such ordinary work as packing fish arose from $25 to $40 with food to $60 and $70. With wages\nin China for unskilled labor at 5 or 10 cents per day and wages in\nCanada at first $20 to $40, and now double, the Chinaman already\nresident in the Dominion saw here the golden opportunity which\ncomes but rarely in a lifetime. A few years of welcomed hardships\nand he would be able to return to the Orient burdened with excessive\nwealth, to become the Carnegie of his native village, honored, envied\nand execrated by all.\nThe passage of this high tax rate was not received with unanimity\nof opinion by the Canadian people. Although beneficial and desirable in the main, it was inevitable, according to the law governing\ntaxation and economic restrictions, that the act would cause some\nhardship somewhere. Foremost among those that suffered were the\nfruit growers who had taken up land in the extreme western provinces,\nin many cases direct from the government, with the reasonable\nexpectation that they could depend upon Chinese labor to garner\nthe immense crops. From gathering fruit, however, the Chinaman,\nwith his ready adaptability, turned to the more profitable fields of\nindustry, and this caused a shortage of necessary hands which\noccasioned acute distress. The owners of the fruit ranches, undergoing the same experiences as their brethren in California, but more\nsensible in seeking a solution, held meetings, made speeches and\npresented petitions to the Canadian Parliament praying for relief,\nat least for a sufficient number of Chinese as would move the annual\ncrops, but without result, which shows, nevertheless, that there were\ntwo sides to this question.\nNor can the Chinese be blamed for making the most of their\nopportunities. The various lines of industry in which they were\npre-eminent, indeed, desired above all other races, increased their\nadvantages and made more rapid their change from one field to\nanother where the monetary inducement was greater. They have\nbeen severely censured for resorting unduly to \"French leave,\"\ntheir enemies even trying to make this out as a national characteristic, but that is unfair, for such is human nature the world over 104 The Annals of the American Academy\nwherever there is a chance for a greater financial consideration.\nNevertheless this kaleidoscopic change from one employment to\nanother caused many a hardship in the staid Canadian homes in\nBritish Columbia and gave a new aspect to the universally vexatious\nservant problem. As one writer remarked: \"For instance, in\nsummer Vancouver, it is nearly impossible to get servants because\nthey all go off to the canneries; but when the salmon have all gone\ndown to the sea the cooks come back to their kitchens and the households of Vancouver run smoothly again.\"4 It has been experienced\nsince, by the people of both Canada and the United States that the\nJapanese laborers are prone to take \"French leave,\" in the original\nmeaning of the term, far more than the Chinese at their worst.\nThe greatest benefit resulting from the imposition of the increased\ntax was the abolition at one blow of the labor agencies and contractors\nthat had made Chinese immigration a highly specialized field of investment. This undesirable traffic had continued under the $50 tax\nand even under the $100 tax, but with the necessary sum increased\nto $500 the risks involved were too great to further consider the\nChinese laborer a safe business proposition. The $500 tax struck\nat the very root of the system, abolished it completely and ruined\nonce for all this hitherto profitable trade in humanity, and this while\nthe United States is still trying, with varying degrees of success, to\nbreak up the padrone and other contract labor systems by summary\nlegislation, and devising schemes whereby the trade in Mexican\npeons in the Southwest can be similarly reduced and ultimately\ndestroyed.\nWithin about three years the economic results of the increased\ntax had become fully apparent to the Chinese. Having prospered\nexceedingly because of the peculiar conditions outlined above, a\nlarge number of Orientals took advantage of their good fortune to\nreturn home for a visit, and this number grew so large that the steamship companies had difficulty in affording the required accommodations. While in China the news was spread around of the new land\nof riches beyond the seas and the wonderful remunerations for labor\nthere obtainable. Moreover, Chinamen who had accumulated a\nsufficient surplus were able to secure for their relatives and* friends,\nby advancing the money necessary for the tax, the same opportunities\nwhich they themselves had enjoyed. The Chinese who remained\n* Living Age, No. 3268, February 23, 1907, p. 503, from article in Macmillan's Magazine. Canada and the Chinese 105\nin Canada wrote home flattering accounts, in most persuasive terms,\nin order to induce their former comrades to join them in the New\nWorld. It is worthy to note that the immigrants were generally\nmales, for, wealthy though the Chinese now were according to their\nown standards through their stay in British Columbia, yet this was\nbut a temporary residence, an exile voluntarily endured; almost\nwithout exception they were passionately desirous of returning to\ntheir nativity at the most convenient time, so as to enjoy among their\nown kind the fruits of their labor. Thus, at a bound, immigration\nagain went up to respectable figures, and from June 30, 1907, to\nMarch 31, 1908, there were 1,482 new arrivals in the Dominion,\nwhereas in the entire preceding year but 91 had gained admission.\nMany Canadians deprecated this undue increase of Orientals,\ntheir apprehensions directed not only against the Chinese, but including equally the Japanese and Hindus, who had made their appearance in corresponding numbers. It was feared that the influx of\naliens might become so great as to impair the safety of the commonwealth, and during the year 1907 racial feeling rah high in British\nColumbia. Unfortunately this feeling of hatred, anti-Asiatic in\norigin and purpose, grew until a certain element of the white population of Vancouver proceeded to take matters in their own hands, the\nresult of which was the deplorable September riots, in which much\nproperty belonging to Chinese and Japanese residents was destroyed.\nThe situation was a new one for the Dominion, although an old\nstory, and a sordid one at that, in the United States. It was a critical\nmoment in the history of Canada, for not only her own policy hinged\nupon the outcome, but the foreign policy of the entire British Empire,\npenetrating every corner of the globe and on especially delicate\nfoundations in the Far East, was similarly involved. It is now the\nwriter's pleasure to comment on the magnanimous spirit, the truly\nBritannic sense of fair play, with which Canada met the difficulty\nand solved it, in a way which leaves a warm regard for this people\nwho can successfully engage in what is perhaps the most momentous\nquestion of modern times, namely, the conflict of color, the hatred\nof race for race, of nation for nation, which, curiously enough, instead\nof growing less with the spread of international law and comity, and\nthe establishment of The Hague tribunals, seems to become greater\nyear after year. There was but one thing for Canada to do, and that\nwas to do the right thing, to face the situation fairly and squarely, \u00E2\u0096\u00A0\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\u00E2\u0080\u00A2:\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\n106 The Annals of the American Academy\nto submerge self-interest in the interests of humanity and the world's\npeace. Accordingly the Dominion government appointed the Hon.\nW. L. Mackenzie King, C.M.G., as commissioner to inquire into the\ncauses and results of the September outrages and to determine the\nnecessary damages to be paid, for Canada had actually resolved to\nreimburse the Asiatic population for its losses, the noblest act of which\nshe was capable. A searching investigation was the result, a large\nnumber of witnesses were examined, every penny of loss, actual and\nresultant, was carefully tabulated, and the total loss incurred by the\nChinese alone6 at Vancouver was thereupon found to be $25,990.\nThis sum was reported by the Hon. Mr. King to the Minister of\nLabor, with the additional recommendation that an extra thousand\ndollars be given the Chinese to repay them for the legal expenses of\nthe investigation. The total sum, $26,990, was paid without quibble\nby Parliament.\nThis was applying the principles of Christianity in sincerity.\nWhat a contrast is this Canadian method of dispensing justice to\naliens to our delightful American system of shifting the responsibility\nfor outrages against helpless foreigners from state government to\n6 A similar careful investigation was made of the losses sustained by the Japanese residents\nof Vancouver, which claims, presented by the Japanese consul-general, amounted to $13,519.45.\nof which $2,405.70 was given as actual and $11,113.75 as resultant. Through the searching inquiries\nof Mr. King, it was found, however, that \"there was a difference of some 54,500 between the total\namount claimed and the total amount awarded,\" which was accounted for \"by somewhat exorbitant claims made by one or two merchants for alleged losses in business, and more or less excessive\nclaims made by some of the Japanese boarding-house keepers.\" In settling the Chinese claims to\na penny, the commissioner had remarked that \"the claimants appear almost without exception\nto have exercised moderation and a sense of fairness in the amount at which their respective\nbusiness losses were estimated. In only two cases was a claim made for losses beyond a period of six\ndays. Some of the claimants took account only of losses on account of expenditure for the time\nduring which their places of business had been closed, and omitted any reference to loss of profit\nduring the same.\" The only difficulty experienced with the Chinese was in approximating the\nclaims for guards who had protected their property in the days following the riot. The fact that\nevery claim was allowed as presented illustrates again the proverbial honesty and commercial\nintegrity of the Chinaman.\nThe Japanese consulate at Vancouver ably assisted the commissioner in ascertaining the\ndamages to Japanese property. Mr. King sent a check for $1,600, authorized by order in council,\nto the consulate for its efficient help, which was returned by the consul with the courteous information that, \"while appreciating the high and honourable motives which have prompted you and\nyour government ... I regret that it is impossible for my government to accept a reward\nfor protecting the interests and property of the subjects of Japan.\" An extra S189 was also recommended by Mr. King to reimburse the Japanese for the expense of declaring their claims.\nAs the various amounts were settled the individual Japanese affected were required to give\na quit-claim to the Dominion government, which declaration of release, it seems, was not demanded\nof the Chinese.\nSee Reports by W. L. Mackenzie King, C.M.G., as to the losses of the Chinese and Japanese\npopulation of Vancouver; 7-8 Edward VII, Sessional Paper No. 74 f, A. 1908; 7-8 Edward VII,\nSessional Paper No. 74 g, A. 1908, Ottawa, 1908. Canada and the Chinese 107\nfederal and from federal government back to state, a continual\nseesaw ending only when the foreign government retires in disgust\nor when the United States is forced to make amends by a power\nsufficiently belligerent and capable to enforce its claims, as did\nJapan in the humiliating episode of the San Francisco school question,\nwhich ended in a diplomatic defeat for the government at Washington. Another casein point is the New Orleans riots of 1891, where\nthe United States attempted to make Louisiana pay indemnity for\nthe violation of treaty rights to Italy. Louisiana flatly refused, and\nthe federal government was forced to settle the Italian claims through\nthe national treasury, and not until this onerous duty had been\nperformed was the United States able to wheedle Louisiana into\nrepaying the sum. But with China all the absurdities of our system\n\"worked beautifully. China, being without money or military\nresources, and consequently outside the pale of justice, was unable\nto exact compensation. She was unable in the majority of instances\neven to secure enforcement of the law and legal responsibiHty for the\ndestruction of her citizens' property and the murder of her nationals\nin California, Wycomng and Colorado. Chen Lan Pin, her able\nrepresentative, in his efforts to secure satisfaction for the outrages\ncommitted in the last-named state, was referred by the national\ngovernment to Colorado and from Colorado back to the national\ngovernment, although the latter had no jurisdiction in the matter,\nbecause, according to our peculiar code of state rights, which should\nhave been obsolete a century ago, this was a case for the local judiciary.\nNeedless to say, after a wearisome exchange of negotiations, in which\nit developed that the United States had little control over territory\nand none whatever over state in these instances, the Chinese minister\nfailed in his purpose.6 The concealed justice lurking in such an\n* The following curious arguments were used by Secretary of State Evarts to Minister Chen\nin defending the United States. Said the Secretary:\n\"It seems superfluous to recall to your attention the fact, but too well attested by history,\nthat on occasions, happily infrequent, often without motive in their inception, and always without\nreason in their working, lawless persons will band together and make up a force in the character\nof a mob, of sufficient strength todefy, for themoment, the denunciations of the law and the power\nof the local authorities. Such incidents are peculiar to no country. Neither the United States\nnor China is exempt from such disasters. In the case now under consideration (the Denver riot)\nit is seen that the local authorities brought into requisition all the means at their command for\nthe suppression of the mob, and that these means proved so effective that within twenty-four hours\nregular and lawful authority was re-established, the mob completely subdued and many of the ringleaders arrested.\n\"Under circumstances of this nature when the government has put forth every legitimate\neffort to suppress a mob that threatens or attacks alike the safety and security of its own citizens 108 The Annals of the American Academy\narrangement of equity and international obligations was impossible\nof discernment even to this Oriental brain schooled in the nicest\nsubtleties of Confucius and Mencius. Although at the present\nand the foreign residents within its borders, I know of no principle of national obligation, and there\ncertainly is none arising from treaty stipulation, which renders it incumbent on the government\nof the United States to make indemnity to the Chinese residents of Denver, who, in common with\ncitizens of the United States, at the time residents in that city, suffered losses from the operations\nof the mob. Whatever remedies may be afforded to the citizens of Colorado or to the citizens of\nthe United States from other states of the Union resident in Colorado for losses resulting from that\noccurrence, are equally open to the Chinese residents of Denver who may have suffered from the\nlawlessness of the mob. This is all that the principles of international law and the usages of national\ncomity demand.\n\"This view of the subject supersedes any discussion of the extent or true meaning of the treaty\nobligations on the part of this government toward Chinese residents, for it proceeds upon the proposition that these residents are to receive the same measure of protection and vindication under\njudicial and political administration of their rights as our own citizens.\"\nThis is all very well and very neatly expressed, but the question arises, how are the Chinese\ngoing to obtain this \"same measure of protection and vindication under judicial and political'\nadministration,\" at the hands of local courts, under local control and influenced by local prejudice?\nThe arguments of Mr. Evarts, however sincere he may have been in stating them, are entirely\nbeside the point at issue, and instead of solving the difficulty, only make it plainer that the enforcement of treaty rights and obligations is a duty of the federal government to perform and not the\nduty of the state courts.\nOn September 2, 1885, occurred the riot at Rock Springs, in the Territory of Wyoming, in\nwhich twenty-eight Chinese were killed and property valued at $147,748.74 was destroyed or\nappropriated. The Chinese Minister Cheng Tsao Ju, made it clear to Secretary Bayard that the\nriot had been unprovoked by the Chinese, that no attempt had been made by the authorities to\nquell the disturbance, and that it was unlikely, \"according to the reports of the consuls,\" that any\nof the rioters would be brought to punishment by either the territorial or local officers. He\ndemanded full indemnity for the Chinese losses and injuries, and also measures that would in the\nfuture protect his countrymen in the United States. Minister Cheng also proved himself to be\nfamiliar with the arguments used by Secretary Evarts and Secretary Blaine, who had succeeded\nMr. Evarts, in denying the legal liability of the United States to make reparation in the Colorado\ncase, but this, he pointed out, had been concerned with a state, whereas the present disturbance\nhad taken place in a territory of the United States and over which the government at Washington\npresumably had complete control. Therefore in this Wyoming outrage he demanded full indemnity from the national government and an admission of federal responsibility. Secretary Bayard\nreplied by lengthy and tedious arguments in an effort to show that, by the treaties and conventions\nwith China, the United States had fully performed its part, that the Chinese were not discriminated\nagainst any more than other aliens, and that they enjoyed equally with other nationalities the sane\nprivileges and protection of the law. He concluded with the recommendation, as \"the circumstances of the case now under consideration contain features which I am disposed to believe may\ninduce the President to recommend to the Congress, not as under obligation of treaty or principle\nof international law, but solely from a sentiment of generosity and pity to an innocent and unfortunate body of men, subjects of a foreign power, who, being peaceably employed within our jurisdiction, were so shockingly outraged,\" that, therefore, \"it may reasonably be a subject for the\nbenevolent consideration of Congress,\" with the \"distinct understanding,\" however, \"that no\nprecedent is thereby created, or liability for want of proper enforcement of police jurisdiction in\nthe territories.\" By the act of February 24, 1887, Congress granted the sum of $147,748.74 to be\ndistributed at the \"discretion of the Chinese government\" among the victims of the Wyoming\nriot. During the debate in Congress, Senator Edmunds, himself of the majority, took occasion\nto remark, however, that \"there can be negligence between nations on the part of governments.\n. . . One nation as between itself and another is not bound by the internal autonomy of that\nstate, but it looks to the body of the nation to carry out its obligations, and if they have not the\njudicial means to do it, for one reason or another, the nation that is injured is not bound by the Canada and the Chinese 109\nmoment it must be admitted that quite a rapprochement has been\nreached between our dual governments as to responsibilty for violat-\n-ing \"the highest law of the land,\" yet at the first outbreak where\nracial passions run riot against various nationalities as in the past,\noutbreaks which will surely occur again because of the complexities\nof our population, we will probably experience a repetition of the old\nstory, and with what results no one can foretell. Mr. Roosevelt,\nwhile President, did much toward strengthening the power of the\nexecutive and emphasizing the central government in the application and enforcement of treaty rights and obligations, and it is hoped\nthat the present tendency will continue.\nIt is interesting to analyze the Canadian Chinese Immigration\nAct by a comparison with the '' Exclusion Laws'' of the United States.\nIn section 43 of the general American code for aliens7 it is expressly\nprovided \"that this act shall not be construed to repeal, alter or amend\nexisting laws relating to the immigration or exclusion of Chinese\npersons or persons of Chinese descent,\" Consequently by the latest\nexpression of our immigration policy the Chinese are not included in\nthe benefits enumerated, but share only in the general restrictions,\nremaining as heretofore a race apart, singled out and the only exception, from all the rest of mankind. According to section 79 of the\nCanadian act,8 \"all provisions not repugnant to The Chinese Immigration Act shall apply as well to persons of Chinese origin as to other\npersons.\" The distinction here made by the writer may seem trivial\nto the general reader but to the student of Far Eastern affairs it\nis significant enough. Canada does not segregate, the Chinese into\na class by themselves as we do, neither does she foolishly offend their\nrace susceptibiHties, but instead takes care not to cause them to\n\"lose face,\" that inexplicable emotion which is in itself an epitome\nof the Chinese character, individually and nationally. The Chinese,\non the other hand, feel that we purposely discriminate against\nfailure of the nation whose people committed the injury.\" Nevertheless the federal government\npersisted in denying that it was legally responsible even for outrages committed within the\nterritories.\nBy the Deficiency Appropriations Act of October 19, 1888, Congress authorized a further\nsum of $276,619.75 to be paid in settlement of Chinese claims for earlier disturbances.\nSee Moore, John Bassett, A Digest of International Law, 8 vols., Washington, 1906, vol. vi,\npp. 820-837.\n7 Act of February 20, 1907; 34 Stat., 898, as amended by act of March 26,1910; 36 Stat., 263,\nan act to regulate the immigration of aliens into the United States.\n8 Act respecting immigration, assented to May 4, 1910, and an act to amend the act respecting\nimmigration, assented to April 4, 1911. f\n110\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nthem and feel it keenly. It is their common complaint that we hold\nthem to account for every act and characteristic of which we disapprove, whereas the shortcomings of all other nationalities, no\nmatter how glaring, are deliberately overlooked. |\nCanada specifies no excluded class of Chinese except the kind\napplicable to all races necessarily found in the general immigration\nlaws of both countries, namely, paupers, idiots or insane, immoral\npersons or persons suffering from loathsome, infectious or contagious\ndiseases. All normal Chinese are freely admitted upon the payment\nof the tax. The United States definitely excludes all Chinese except\nthose specifically exempted from the operation of the act, the same in\nCanada from paying the tax, as the diplomatic and consular corps,\nteachers, merchants, students9 and travelers. The general tone of\nthe Canadian act is conciliatory, of the American act hostile. Canada\nexempts, the United States excludes, and between these two terms\nlies the greatest difference. Canada has found out that excluding and thereby irritating the coming power of the Far East is not\nnecessary. The $500 tax easily cuts down immigration to the desired\nlevel, aided as it is by the requirement that no vessel can carry more\nimmigrants than one to every fifty tons burden. Why cannot we have\nthe same clause and thus at one stroke sever the greatest and most\nlasting cause for misunderstanding between America and China?\nA $500 head-tax would operate as satisfactorily here as in Canada.\nThat is beyond argument. Or if $500 be deemed too low the price\nfor entry could be raised to $1,000. That surely would be prohibitive.\nBy the imposition of this burdensome tax, necessarily so in order\nto prevent the undesirable coolie element from migrating to our\nPacific coast, the situation would be saved by a technicahty, and the\nUnited States would be released from the constant embarrassments\noccasioned by the application and enforcement of the present acts.\nIf this proposal were accepted and put into legislation it would not\nbe necessary for China further to \"lose face,\" it would not be neces-\n\u00C2\u00BBAs to students (7-8 Edward VII, Chap. 14, Sec. 3): \"A student of Chinese origin who upon\nfirst entering Canada has substantiated bis status as such to the satisfaction of the controller,\nsubject to the approval of the minister, and who is the bearer of a certificate of identity, or other\nsimilar document issued by the government or a recognized official or representative of the government whose subject he is, and who at that time satisfies the controller that he is entering Canada\nfor the purpose of securing a higher education in one of the recognized universities, or in some other\neducational institution approved by thegovernorin council for the purposes of this section, and who\nafterwards furnishes satisfactory proof that he has been a bona fide student in such university or\neducational institution for a period of one year, shall be entitled to a refund of the tax paid by him\nupon his entry into Canada.\" Canada and the Chinese in\nsary for the Chinese to realize as now that the greatest nation of the\nWestern Hemisphere is a closed nation to them, as impossible to\nenter legally as for us to enter the holy City of Mecca, for such are\nthe popular suppositions in China regarding our \"Exclusion Laws.\"\nThere is no need to elaborate on the amount of the tax herein proposed; that is beside the argument. It is certain, however, that\nby such an arrangement the present serious misunderstandings and\nharsh criticisms on both sides of the water would be removed,\nand even if a few hundred more Chinese would enter yearly\nwe could use them to the greatest advantage in California and\nelsewhere.\nThere is no restriction whatever in the Canadian act against\nthe Chinese otherwise than limiting their number. In the act of\nthe United States,10 however, we read that, \"hereafter no state\ncourt or court of the United States shall admit Chinese to citizen-\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0ship; and all laws in conflict with this act are hereby repealed.\"\nNow the naturalization of any other foreigner is permissible by\nfulfilling the requirements, namely, five years of continuous residence,\ndeclaration of intention two years in advance, renouncing allegiance\nto the native government, ability to speak English and intention to\nreside permanently in the United States. The result of such discrimination was amply illustrated in the history of the West since\nthe exclusion laws were enacted; everyone despised the Chinaman\nfor his inability to become a citizen and saw in him just prey for mob\nviolence. Any other foreigner of whatever standard of morals or\nbrains had and still has the inherent right by law to become naturalized, but the Chinaman, by the same law, no matter how superior\nin morals or brains, cannot rise above the status of the alien, the lowest\nstratum in the political community. This clause is unnecessary.\nPassed in the heat of labor controversies, it has remained in force,\ntogether with exclusion, because of the strange inability of the\naverage American to comprehend his country in an international\nlight. The denial of the right of expatriation is an affront which the\nUnited States dares not offer to any capable power; furthermore,\nit is useless in this instance, as few Chinese would avail themselves\nof the privilege. In repealing this offensive stipulation against the\nworld's latest republic, the entente between the two nations, now\n\u00C2\u00BB Sec. 14 of act of May 6, 1882; 22 Stat., p. 58, as amended and added to by act of July 5,\n1884; 23 Stat., p. 115. 112 The Annals of the American Academy\nlargely alike in government, would be materially increased.11 As\nit is, China is well aware of the fact that by refusing citizenship to\nher nationals, the United States has put her people on an immeasurably lower plane than any other races here residing, and has kept\nthem there; but in spite of the boycotts against American trade by\nwhich the United States lost millions of dollars and a corresponding\nproportion of commercial and political prestige, the lesson has not\nyet been driven home.\nThe Canadian law is free from all the vexations and spiteful\nrestrictions which hedge in the Chinese by the law of the United\nStates as regards entry and registration. By the Canadian act,\n\"the chief controller, and such controllers as are by him authorized\nso to do, shall keep a register of all persons to whom certificates of\nentry have been granted.\"12 The American system is a maze of\ntortuous qualifications too tedious to enumerate, resulting of course\nfrom the fact that the immense majority of the Chinese nation is*\nabsolutely excluded,.and through the fear of the United States that\none of them might slip in by mistake in the guise of an exempt or\nreturning laborer and thus evade the Chinese wall of restrictions\nagainst him. The greatest fault of our system of entry and registration lies in the fact that too many times the best and noblest of\nthe Chinese race are actually put in the detention sheds and, pending\ntrial, subjected to the same indignities which the stolid coolie accepts\nwith equanimity but which create in the Chinese of the higher classes\na deep-seated hatred for this government and its institutions, which\nis immediately put into play upon their return to China. The\nconsequent effect of this hatred on the American diplomatic and\ncommercial policy in the Far East is familiar to every one who has\nstudied the situation.\nThe Canadian law provides that the certificate which the\n11A good beginning was made, but soon discarded, by the Burlingame treaty of July 8, 1868,\nwhich stated in Article V that \"the United States of America and the Emperor of China cordially\nrecognize the inherent and unalienable right of man to change his home and allegiance, and also\nthe mutual advantage of the free migration and emigration of other citizens and subjects respectively from the one country to theotherf orpurposes of curiosity, of trade or as permanent residents.\"\nThis treaty, however, it must be remembered, was ratified while the United States, and all the\nworld for that matter, gave China credit for having enormous military strength which made imperative an exchange of benefits. Not until the Chino-Japanese war of 1894-5 was the astonishing\nweakness of the former Chinese Empire fully revealed.\nFor the text of the Burlingame treaty see Moore's Digest, vol. v, p. 430; Treaties and Conventions, etc., of the United States and foreign powers, 2 vols.,Washington, 1910, vol. i, p. 235.\nSee also Moore, Ibid., vol. iii, p. 587; vol. iv, p. 187, 551; volv v, p. 429.\n>*3 Edward VII, c. 8, s. 14; Rev. Stat., 1906, ch. 95, s. 17. Canada and the Chinese 113\nChinese immigrant receives \"shall be prima facie evidence that the\nperson presenting it has complied with the requirements of the act,\"\nwith the reservation that \"such certificate may be contested by\nHis Majesty or by any officer charged with the duty of carrying\nthis act into effect, if there is reason to doubt the validity or authenticity thereof, or of any statement therein contained;\" furthermore,\n\"such contestation shall be heard or determined in a summary manner by any judge of a superior court of any province of Canada where\nsuch certificate is produced.\"13 By the regulations of the United\nStates, \"any Chinese person, other than a Chinese laborer, having\nthe right to remain in the United States, desiring such certificate\nof such right, may apply for and receive the same without charge.\"14\nThus the American specification as regards the exempt classes actually\nseems at first glance to be the fairer, but it must be remembered that\nour law has not in the majority of instances worked smoothly, first,\nbecause of the exclusion feature which in every case is necessarily\ninvolved; second, because of the inabihty of occasional immigration\nofficers, past and present, to distinguish one Chinaman from another,\nor a scholar, merchant or \"high-class\" Oriental from the ordinary\ncoolie. Consequently the result has been that too many times in\nthis country the certificate of an undeniable exempt has been unjustly\ncontested, or the Chinaman legally residing here or visiting this\ncountry for pleasure has been subjected to indignities by irresponsible\nofficers in the preliminary investigation even before receiving his\ncertificate. The entire attitude of the United States toward the\nChinese has been necessarily colored by the policy of exclusion, and\nthe constant misunderstandings and ill feeling will continue until\nthe laws are modified in some satisfactory manner.\nAs regards the laborer, he must indeed be a man of more than\nordinary brains to evade the seemingly impenetrable meshes of\nrestrictions guarding against him, and should one so manage to enter\nthis country and later be found wanting, he ought straightway\nreceive his certificate of residence as a reward for his feat of accomplishing the impossible.\nThe application of a returning merchant claiming domicile in\nthe United States must be established \"by the testimony of two\ncredible witnesses other than Chinese,\" to prove that \"he conducted\nu 3 Edward VII, c. 8, s. 13; Rev. Stat., 1906, ch. 95, s. 8.\n\"Act of May 5, 1892; 27 Stat., p. 25, Sec. 6. 114 The Annals of the American Academy\nsuch business as hereinbefore defined for at least one year before\nhis departure from the United States, and that during such year he\nwas not engaged in the performance of any manual labor, except\nsuch as was necessary in the conduct of his business as such merchant\nand in default of such proof shall be refused landing.\"15 If he was to\nundergo deportation he was to suffer arrest and was \"not to be\nadmitted to bail.\" If the certificate were by chance granted to him\nit must contain \"the photograph of the applicant, together with\nhis name, local residence' and occupation.\" The photograph must\nbe furnished \"in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary\nof Commerce and Labor,\" and the special work of art necessary to\nsatisfy the requirements is made clear by painstaking detail.16\nAnyone who is acquainted with the proverbial honesty of the\nChinese merchant, and who has visited the enormous bazaars of\nOriental art in San Francisco and Los Angeles, where the treasures of\nthe Far East are gathered with loving care and in perfect taste,\nmust know that these stipulations do not tend to inculcate a good'\nunderstanding or a reciprocity of interests between the Chinese\nmercantile classes and the United States, and that whenever a\nmerchant returns to China and recites to an indignant audience the\nstory of his humiHating experiences in America, by so much in every\ninstance is the commercial opportunity of the United States in the\nFar East lessened and put to greater disadvantage. The race is\nnot infallible, yet the entire world concedes that the integrity of the\naverage Chinese merchant is beyond criticism, and he is trusted by\nEuropean bankers and establishments to an extent denied to any\nother nationality. This is because his religion and system of philosophy successfully teach him that honesty in business is one of the\ncardinal virtues. Even the humblest merchant with the smallest\n\u00C2\u00BB Act of November 3, 1893; 28 Stat., p. 7, Sec. 2.\nM Some interesting Bertillon measurements are given in the Regulations as to photographs,\nwhich were to be unmounted, \"of suitable quality,\" and \"printed from a negative that has not\nbeen retouched, representing the subject without hat, full front view, showing both ears, measuring 1 yi inches from top of head to point of chin. The photograph shall be attached to the certificate\nwith great care to insure permanency and prevent warping.\" Furthermore the stature of the applicant \"shall be carefully taken and inserted in feet and inches, and in recording physical marks and\npeculiarities those which are the most prominent and the least likely to be obliterated by lapse of\ntime shall be selected.\"\nRegarding the exempt who wishes to travel, it is provided that the photograph must be taken\n\"from a negative that has not been retouched, full front view, showing both ears, about 3 by 3\ninches square, head IK inches long from top of head to point of chin.\" The Chinese are of course,\nunable to see the humor in these stipulations.\nSee Regulations governing the admission of Chinese, Rule 19, Section (E); Rule 21, Section (10). Canada and the Chinese 115\nkind of a store is invariably courteous without being ostentatious,\nkindly, cheerful, indifferent to sales and ignorant of the manifold\nschemes by which other merchants enhance the price of an article\nwhich the tourist, by an unwise display of emotion, shows that he\nwishes to possess. It would be a good thing for our country if we\nhad a few of these types of Chinese in some of our lines of industry,\nespecially in those that cater to the poor, who pay a higher price for\nthe necessaries of life of inferior quality, as every social settlement\nworker knows, than any other class. Yet these merchants are of\nthe race which our laws stigmatize as undesirable, to be kept down\nto a minimum which might as well be total expulsion.\nThe Canadian law respecting re-entry, on the other hand, is\nbeautiful in its simplicity. As regards this section of the act, it is\nprovided that \"every person of Chinese origin who wishes to leave\nCanada, with the declared intention of returning thereto, shall give\nwritten notice of such intention to the controller at the port or place\nwhence he proposes to sail or depart, in which notice shall be stated\nthe foreign port or place which such person wishes to visit, and the\nroute he intends to take both going and returning, and such notice\nshall be accompanied by a fee of one dollar.\n\"The controller shall thereupon enter in a register to be kept\nfor the purpose, the name, residence, occupation and description\nof the said person, and such other information regarding him. as is\ndeemed necessary, under such regulations as are made for the\npurpose.\n\"The person so registered shall be entitled on his return, if\nwithin twelve months of such registration, and as proof of his identity\nto the satisfaction of the controller, as to which the decision of the\ncontroller shall be final, to free entry as an exempt or to receive from\nthe controller the amount of the tax, if any, paid by him on his return;\nbut if he does not return to Canada within twelve months from the\ndate of such registration he shall, if returning after that date, be\nsubject to the tax of five hundred dollars imposed by this act in the\nsame manner as in the case of a first arrival.\" 17\nHere again it is necessary to remark that Canada's task is far\nsimpler than ours because Canada has no excluded class of Chinese\nother than those undesirables of all races, which are debarred likewise\nby both nations. The question of exemption from or payment of\n\u00C2\u00AB 3 Edward VII, c. 8, s. 18; Rev. Stat., 1906, ch. 95, s. 20, 21. f\n116 The Annals of the American Academy\nthe $500 tax is all that concerns the above-quoted sections of the\nCanadian act. Our laws are and must be extremely more technical,\ninvolved and severe because of our policy of exclusion. The only\nway to make our regulations just as brief and effective as those of\nour northern neighbor and thus remove all clauses prejudicial to\nChina, is to eradicate the exclusion feature and imitate Canada by\nsubstituting instead a sufficiently prohibitive head-tax, by which,\naccording to all reason, better results would be obtained both at\nhome and abroad and in a far more satisfactory manner. As our acts\nstand they are cumbersome and unwise, the lingering results of a\nperiod of lawlessness which should be conveniently forgotten and\nblotted from our legislation as soon as possible. Canada has had\nthe advantage of profiting by our mistakes and therefore is in a better\nposition to-day than we to command the good will and respect of the\nnew Asiatic power.\nIt may be offered in extenuation of the United States that Canada\nhas not been confronted with the entire gravity of the so-called\nChinese question. That would be erroneous; if at all, Canada has\nhad a situation of far greater complexity to solve than ever we were\nsubject to even in the most grievous days of our mob riots. Canada\nhad, however, one great advantage, her legislative task being made\nfar easier because by a study of comparative politics she was able to\navoid and to profit by our lack of judgment. Also, the immigration\nof the Chinese to Canada did not begin until after the United States, >\nby the exclusion law, had practically denied them entrance. With\nsuch a shining example of the violation of international comity before\nthem, it was quite natural that the Dominion government elected\nto steer in the opposite direction to the policy of the United States,\nand that not even the most bitter opponents of the Chinese in British\nColumbia were in favor of exclusion, for that would have been a\nhazardous course which in all likelihood would have involved the\nentire British Empire. It must be remembered that Canada, though\nto all intents and purposes a seh-governing commonwealth, is nevertheless not a sovereign entity. The Dominion is, and proudly so,\nan integral part of the vast possessions over which the British rule,\nand of which the nerve center is in the Foreign Office at London.\nIn that empire is found a more complex aggregation of races and\nnationalities than in the Roman Empire, even at the height of its\npower. The task of assimilating, nay, of even conciliating such Canada and the Chinese 117\nheterogeneous peoples is a titanic duty which the United States has\nnever been called upon to perform. One mistake in this task of ruling this greatest empire the world has ever seen, such as the exclusion\n.of the Chinese from Canada, and the flames of racial and sectional\nhatred, combined with religious antagonism, which unfortunately has\nbeen the incentive for the bloodiest wars of history, would have been\nkindled throughout the British possessions, especially in India,\nBurmah and the Soudan, where racial discontent is often seething\nat the boiling-point. Had England and her colonial governments\nallowed race hatred to dominate reason and national policy, as we\ndid during the Kearney regime and after, the. British Empire long\nago would have been shattered into fragments.\nFrom India, the most restive and unmanageable of all the British\npossessions, Canada found a problem on her hands of greater magnitude than the difficulty experienced with the Chinese. Here again\nit was necessary to proceed with extreme caution, for the English\nregeneration of India has largely proven to be a thankless performance\nso far as the benefited inhabitants are concerned. The more liberty\ngranted the more liberty wanted, to which must be added the vexatious questions arising from conforming religions and customs centuries old to meet the new conditions, together with the awakened\nnational consciousness which inevitably would be brought into\nvigorous life and quickened by the British programme. Thus it\ncan readily be seen that many times the Anglo-Indian methods of\nadministration had to be adjusted to the most sensitive balance.\nCanada was not blind to her responsibilities, and her scheme for\nrestricting the entry of immigrants from India without giving offense\nto the inhabitants thereof, was pronounced by the Hon. Mr. King\nas \"a dovetailing, so to speak, of Great Britain's well-known policy\nin the protection of the native races in India, and Canada's policy\nin the matter of immigration.\"18 In pursuance of such purpose\nis Report on immigration to Canada from the Orient and immigration from India in particular,\nby W. L. Mackenzie King, C. M. G.; 7-8 Edward VII, Sessional Paper No. 36 a, A. 1908. Ottawa,\nMay 4, 1908.\nMr. King said further: \"The liberty of British subjects in India is safeguarded rather than\ncurtailed, the traditional policy of Great Britain in respect to the native races of India has been\nkept in mind, and the necessity of enacting legislation either in India or in Canada which might\nappear to reflect on fellow British subjects in another part of the empire has been wholly avoided.\nNothing could be more unfortunate or misleading than that the impression should go forth that\nCanada, in seeking to regulate a matter of domestic concern, is not deeply sensible of the obligation\nwhich citizenship within the empire entails. It is a recognition of this obligation which has caused\nher to adopt a course which by removing the possibilities of injustice and friction, is best calculated\nJ 118\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nCanada found it necessary to make a thorough investigation of the\nmeans by which East Indian immigrants were induced to come to\nthe Dominion. It was soon uncovered in this inquiry that contract\nlabor was flourishing among the laborers of this people as it had\nflourished among the Chinese before the imposition of the $500\nhead-tax. The British Indian Emigration Act (xxi, 1883), enacted\nto protect the Indian laborer from contract labor agencies, provided,\nhowever, that departure from India \"under an agreement to labor for\nhire\" was not lawful except to countries specified in the act or where\nnotification to that effect had been made. It developed that such\nimmigration \"in the sense defined\" was illegal by the operation of\nthis Indian emigration act in applying to Canada and that such immigration could not be made lawful unless the Dominion government,\nby the declaration of the governor general in council, would make\nnotification allowing it, which was not done. This in itself solved\nthe problem, but Canada pushed the inquiry further and discovered\nthat few natives from India emigrated of their own accord but had\nbeen unduly influenced by steamship agents, and persons and manufacturing establishments interested in exploiting the irnrnigrant\nbecause of his ability to work at a lower wage than that demanded\nby native Canadian laborers. To offset these causes and render\nthem inoperative in the future the government of India, at the request\nof the Canadian government, gave sufficient warning that literature\nscattered broadcast through India describing Canada as a land of\nfortune must be discontinued; the steamship companies were notified\nthat neither the British nor the Dominion government looked with\nfavor upon their activities to increase immigration; a continuous\njourney from India to Canada was demanded, and each immigrant\nwas required to have cash on hand to the amount of at least twenty-\nfive dollars. Through such beneficial requirements was the \"dovetailing\" of the policies of Great Britain and Canada accomplished\nand by these simple and effective remedies each country was able\nto respect the obligations of the other and to enforce regulations\nwhich saved the situation without danger to the empire.\nWe have acquired on quite a respectable scale a colonial empire,\nincreased without effort by the Spanish-American war, which to-day\nto strengthen the bonds of association with the several parts, and to promote the general harmony\nof the whole. In this, as was to be expected, Canada has had not only the sympathy and understanding, but the hearty cooperation of the authorities in Great Britain and India as well.\" Ibid.,\np. 10. Canada and the Chinese 119\ntotals an area of 716,555 square miles in extent and includes Alaska,\nPorto Rico, the Panama Canal Zone, Hawaii, the Philippines, two\nlittle specks in the Tutuila Group and the Ladrones which cannot\nbe seen on the map without the aid of a microscope. \" It was not long\nuntil we were confronted in our Pacific possessions, in Hawaii and\nthe PhiHppines, with difficulties similar to those which are almost\nan annual occurrence in the British dominions the world over and\nwhich cause the Foreign Office at Downing Street ceaseless anxieties.\nAs the result of the war with Spain we found ourselves, whether we\nwished or no, a world power, with international relations involving\ninternational responsibilities in all the minute distinctions which\nthose terms imply. Like Canada, necessarily forced to harmonize\nher foreign policy in accordance with that of the mother country,\nwe were now compelled to deal with questions of grave significance,\nnot as a nation selfishly wrapped up within our four boundaries\nbut occupying, by virtue of our outlying dependencies, a position which\ncarried with it all the unique obligations of comity and' reciprocity\nto be associated with the other great powers, involving diplomacy\nand national conduct of an entirely different nature than that to\nwhich we heretofore had been accustomed. It was not surprising,\ntherefore, that the Chinese problem should again come up for consideration, and here we proved ourselves to be painfully consistent\nwith our past legislation by disposing of the matter in a way which\nmight aptly be termed a lack of international foresight.\nBy a joint resolution of July 7, 1898, it was declared that \"there\nshall be no further immigration of Chinese into the Hawaiian Islands,\nexcept upon such conditions as are now or may hereafter be allowed\nby the laws of the United States; and no Chinese, by reason of anything herein contained, shall be allowed to enter the United States\nfrom the Hawaiian Islands.\"19 By the act of April 30, 1900,20 \"all\npersons who were citizens of the Republic of Hawaii on August\ntwelfth, eighteen hundred and ninety-eight, are hereby declared to\nbe citizens of the United States and citizens of the Territory of\nHawaii.\"21 Chinese residing in these Islands were given one year\nin which to obtain certificates of residence, and if at the end of the\nsaid year they had provided themselves with such certificates, they\n\"shall not be deemed to be unlawfully in the United States,\" but it\n\"30 Stat., p. 751.\n2\" 31 Stat., pp. 141-161.\n21 Ibid., Sec. 4. 120\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nwas expressly stipulated that \"no Chinese laborer, whether he shall\nhold such certificate or not, shall be allowed to enter any state,\nterritory or district of the United States from the Hawaiian Islands.\"22 Thus by the last clause, whether the Chinese laborer were\nregistered or not, he was denied entrance to the mainland of the\nUnited States or'any possession thereof.23 As regards the exempt\nclasses of Chinese \"who are citizens or subjects of other insular\nterritority of the United States than the Territory of Hawaii,\" these\nwere permitted \"to go from such insular territory to the mainland\nor from one insular territory to another,\" provided that they obtained\nthe required certificate, but with the saving clause that \"the privilege\nof transit shall be extended to all persons other than laborers,\" and\nshould not apply to one of the excluded class, even if he were registered. Furthermore, \"subjects of the Chinese Empire of the exempt\nclasses residing in Hawaii must obtain certificates from the representative of their own government (the Chinese consul, Honolulu), and\nsuch certificates must be visaed by the inspector in charge of the\nimmigration service in said Islands instead of by a diplomatic or consular officer.\"\nIn the Phihppines we started off badly. By an order of General\nOtis, September 26, 1898, all Chinese were prohibited from coming\nto the Islands except the exempt classes who were lawfully able to\nenter the United States and laborers who had formerly resided in\nManila and for the time being were absent. This order was characterized by the Department of State as \"incident to the military\nadministration,\" and allowed because \"it seems appropriate and\ndesirable not to interfere with the discretion of the military commander,\" but that \"the measure he (Otis) had adopted should not be\nregarded as in pursuance of a settled policy on the part of the United\nStates government.\"24 Minister Wu, at Washington, protested,\nhowever, on the grounds that the order was not needed as a military\nmeasure, that the determination of the status of these new possessions\nwas thus taken from Congress and that the friendly relations with\nChina were thereby disturbed. Acting Secretary of State Hill, in\n22 31 Stat., Sec. 101.\n23 However, \"as all persons who were citizens of the Republic of Hawaii on August 12, 1898,\nare citizens of the United States, persons of the Chinese race claiming such status may be admitted\nat either mainland or insular ports of entry upon producing evidence sufficient to establish such\nclaim.\" Regulations, Rule 11, (6). Thus such a laborer could not be excluded, as he was a citizen\n23 Op. Atty. Gen., 345 and 509.\n24 U. S. Foreign Relations, 1899, pp. 209, 211, 212; Moores Digest, vol. iv, pp. 234, 235. Canada and the Chinese 121\na communication to Lord Pauncefote, as to whether \"Chinese\npersons who are British subjects are permitted to travel in the\nPhilippine Islands,\" replied as follows:\n\"1. Chinese persons are to be excluded from the Philippines,\n'whether subjects of China or any other foreign power.\n\"2. That such exclusion is a military measure adopted to meet\nexisting military necessity. Being a military expedient, it is not\nto be considered as in any way affecting the permanent policy of the\ngovernment of the Islands under the conditions of peace.\n\"3. The military order relating to said exclusion did not extend\nthe Chinese-exclusion acts of the United States Congress to and over\nthe Philippine Islands as a law of the United States; the provisions\nof said acts were adopted as appropriate remedies for the military\nnecessity, and made operative independently of the statute by\nauthority resulting from military occupation.\"25\nThe halfway concession to China contained in the last paragraph of the above could not have been expected to continue, as the\nUnited States, considering the popular ignorance of the real Chinese\nquestion at home, necessarily had to be consistent in its policy in\nthe PhiHppines as in Hawaii and the mainland, and this it proceeded\nto do, in spite of the fact that the Asiatic possessions were next door\nto China and largely under Chinese influence. Therefore, by the\nact of April 27, 1904, it was stipulated that the exclusion laws \"are\nhereby re-enacted, extended, and continued, without modification,\nlimitation, or condition; and said laws shall also apply to the island\nterritory under the jurisdiction of the United States, and prohibit\nthe immigration of Chinese laborers, not citizens of the United States,\nfrom such island territory to the mainland territory of the United\nStates, whether in such island territory at the time of cession or not,\nand from one portion of the said island territory of the United States\nto another portion of said island territory,\" but it was provided that\nthe \"said laws shall not apply to the transit of Chinese laborers\nfrom one island to another island of the same group.\"26 Thus the\npolicy of exclusion was now rounded out and completed in all the\nlands governed by the United States, even to those in Asiatic waters,\nand once more the Chinese arguments and appeals for the suspension\n\u00C2\u00BB Acting Secretary of State Hill to Lord Pauncefote, May 7, 1901, Foreign Relations, 1901,\np. 214; Moore's Digest, vol. iv, pp. 235, 236.\n26 Act of April 29, 1902, as amended and re-enacted by section 5 of the Deficiency Act of April\n27, 1904; 32 Stat., Part 1, p. 176; 33 Stat., pp. 394-^28. 122\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nof this objectionable discrimination, or at least a diminution as far\nas the Philippine Islands were concerned, met with disregard and\nfailure.\nThere is another contrast worthy of mention between the United\nStates and Canada and that is in regard to the settlement of the opium\nquestion. England, as is well known, has been making strenuous\nefforts within the past* years to atone for the calamitous results of\nthe war of 1840 with China, and in this she has been ably seconded\nby her dependencies, notably Canada, which passed an act in 1911\n\"to prohibit the improper use of opium and other drugs.\"27 This\ncomprehensive statute made it a \"aininal offense\" for anyone\nwho, \"without lawful or reasonable excuse, imports, sells, offers\nfor sale, has in his possession, or takes or carries, or causes to be taken\nor carried, from any place in Canada to any other place in Canada,\nany drug for other than scientific or medicinal purposes.\" As\nto the vicious use of the compound, \"every person who smokes\nopium, or who, without lawful or reasonable excuse, has in his possession opium prepared or being prepared for smoking, shall be\nguilty of a CTiminal offense,\" and furthermore, \"any person who,\nwithout lawful and reasonable excuse, is found in any house, room or\nplace to which persons resort for the purpose of smoking or inhaling\nopium,\" is liable, as in all these infractions, to conviction, fine, and\nimprisonment, or both, by law. Those who are by the act competent\nto deal in the fearful narcotic are carefully enumerated, and its use\nfor medicinal prescriptions is similarly defined. So serious is the\nopium danger regarded, and rightly so, that search warrants are\nallowed in suspected cases, and the drugs and receptacles, if found,\nare to be seized and the owners punished.\nThe Canadian law is applicable to the entire Dominion, and as\nsuch is capable of universal enforcement, in Ontario as in British\nColumbia. Now a word as to the difficulties confronting American\nlegislation on this same evil, one of the most deplorable and degrading of human vices. There is a general federal law which prohibits\ninterstate traffic in opium, but further than this the national government cannot proceed, and the necessary enactments to purge the\ncountry of this appalling danger is left by virtue of the constitution\nto the various state governments. The latest illustration of how\nthis division of power really works, in questions affecting the vitality\n271-2 George V, Chap. 17, assented to 19th May, 1911. Canada and the Chinese 123\nof the entire nation as in the one under consideration, is found in a\nrecent case in Philadelphia, where the police magistrate discharged\nthree merchants arraigned on the charge of selling opium. These\nwere released from custody because the present law of Pennsylvania,\none of the most progressive states of the Union, forbids the possession\nof an opium pipe but does nothing more, not even forbidding the\nsale or the use of the opiate. The only way that convictions can be\nsecured is in accordance with the drug law, which prohibits the sale\nof drugs having a sufficient percentage of poison to kill the consumer.\nDr. Koch, vice-president of the State Pharmaceutical Board, said:\n\"We knew that the legal aspects of opium prosecutions would\nbecome public sooner or later. We did not wish to make any public\nannouncement because we desired to have enacted a flawless law.\n. . . An opium bill, just and applicable to traffic in opium in\nevery form, was presented to the last general assembly, but was\ndefeated.\" Magistrate Gorman made the announcement, after\nreleasing the three merchants, that \"it is perfectly legal for anyone\nto sell or purchase opium in this state. And as far as the law is\nconcerned, anyone has a right to smoke opium, in a store, .in the\nstreets, or in their homes.\"28\nSuch is the status of the opium question at the present time of\nwriting in the State of Pennsylvania, one of the bulwarks of the\nAmerican Union, whose law, enacted some thirty years ago, forbids\nneither the sale nor the use of the drug, nothing but \"a pearl inlaid\npipe and a peanut oil burning lamp.\" In contrast to this we have\nthe excellent example of Canada's successful legislation before\nus, a comprehensive law applicable over the entire Dominion without\npreliminary hair-spHtting arguments as in the United States, whether\nthe statute is constitutional or not, or might by some legal twist\nof language violate one of the sacred prerogatives of our forty-eight\nalmost sovereign states. If we wish to be successful in our foreign\nrelations in all their various aspects, it will be necessary for us first\nof all to put our house in order, to reach some understanding among\nourselves whereby all problems touching upon international relations\nin whatever form would be successfully treated either by our forty-\neight governments alike, which is impossible, or solely by the central\nauthority, which is the logical and ultimate solution. A situation\nsuch as the one cited gives weight to the desire already strongly\n28 Philadelphia Public Ledger, November 25, 1912, p. 1. 124\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nexpressed that all questions dealing with the moral and physical\nwelfare of the people be delegated by the states to the federal government, so that by one law, as in Canada, all evils and corruptions\nsimilar to the above can be dealt with promptly, uniformly and\nefficaciously, covering equally and without discrimination every\nphase and character of our complex national Ufe.\nBy the comparisons herein set forth it must be admitted that\nCanada has solved the Chinese question, which is by no means as\nserious as some American publicists would have us believe, in a manner\nfar more satisfactory than the entire record of our legislation on the\nsubject. Beginning with the agitation for exclusion our laws have\nbeen consistently a series of petty irritations and discriminations\nwhich do not speak well J\"or our vaunted ideals on race equality\nand opportunity; and as far as the Chinese nation is concerned our\nDeclaration of Independence might as well have been a dead letter.\nOf course the situation is above the ordinary international complications, but it is far from being a \"yellow peril\" or a menace to our\nsocial and industrial institutions. What we need to do is to make\nat least an effort to understand the Orient, to try to appreciate the\nChinese viewpoint. What is still more urgent and in need of\nimmediate attention is the thorough overhauling of our regulations\nconcerning the Chinese on the basis of an intelligent, equitable and\nscientific treatment, which, if done long ago, would have produced\nan immense amount of good and would have prevented the greater\namount of harm which has resulted from these self-same restrictions.\nChina has at last reached the definite parting of the ways\nbetween the old and the new, and the Orient, self-sufficient for\ncenturies, is now merging with the Occident to an extent unappreciated in America. Though there was nothing spectacular about\nthe Chinese revolution, yet it accomplished its purpose, and to-day\na new republic is waiting to be received into the family of nations.\nCoincident with this change of government, or rather antedating\nit by a decade at least, is the tremendous revival of Chinese learning,\nnot the antiquated style of canonical aphorisms which had been followed for ages but an intensely absorbing study of world politics,\nof world economics, of all matters which are vital to a world power\nof the twentieth century. Under such a system of national scrutiny\nit was inevitable that the American policy of exclusion should be\nsubjected to keen criticism and disparaging judgment, which will Canada and the Chinese 125\ncause a further decided retrogression of American prestige and commerce if our unwise attitude towards China and the Chinese is not\nmaterially altered. Young China has ceased to be a theory and is\nnow a fact, a living, dynamic force of enormous potentialities. What\nthe ultimate results will be when this undeveloped energy which has\nlain dormant for a thousand years is fully awakened only the future\ncan reveal. Therefore it stands all the more to reason that our\nhackneyed system will not bear analysis in the face of this modern\nChinese renaissance, and that if we wish to regain the position we\nonce held, or even retain what we have, it will be necessary for us\nto act quickly and decisively. We have a splendid opportunity\noffered us, which carries with it however the ultimatum that we must\nconform our national policy to the actualities of the present day, and\nfor this necessary readjustment the writer advances the following\npropositions:\nI. Recognition of the Chinese Republic.\nII. Abrogation of the treaties and conventions in force with\nChina and immediate legislation embracing mutual\ncomity, reciprocity and most-favored-nation clauses.\nIII. Repeal of the exclusion laws and regulations and the\nsubstitution of a sufficiently prohibitive head-tax to keep\nout undesirable immigration.\nIt has been the national dictum of our republic ever since its\nfoundation, and thoroughly grounded into us by the Genet experience,\nto avoid all entangling alliances with other powers and to keep our\nforeign affairs distinct and separate from the interests of Europe.\nThus every act which might have some bearing upon international\nrelations has been carefully weighed by the State Department before\nreceiving the sanction of the government. But this undue caution,\n'while entirely laudable in itself, yet reacts to our detriment in certain instances where there is little or no justification for such a\ncourse. An example of how we are injuring ourselves by relying too\nmuch upon our past conduct is in delaying the recognition of the\nChinese republic, which, beyond a doubt, is to-day an accomplished\nfact and gives every indication of growing strength and increasing\nactivity. Of course, this reticence on our part is perfectly understandable by a review of our history, being the logical resultant of that\nperiod when the fear of Napoleon, of Metternich and the so-called\nHoly Alliance lay heavily upon us. But it is not to be expected that f\n126\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nthe Chinese know American history, consequently our ingrained\nattitude is incomprehensible to them and our continued passivity\nin this matter of recognition has been received by them with\npained surprise which is rapidly being changed to anger and a desire\nin some way to retaliate.\nWe are looked upon by China and other nations, even by Europe,\nas the leading exponent of republican institutions by virtue of the\nfact that our form of government, a dubious experiment at its inception, has proven itself to mankind, and, besides accelerating the\ngreatest revolution the world has ever seen, has resulted in numerous\nduplications, the latest of which is China. Therefore the Chinese\nturn first to us for our approval because of our exalted position, but\nas yet we have failed to give the least sign of official encouragement.\nWe made the same blunder with the South American republics in\ntheir struggle for liberty and at the time when their independence\nhad become an indisputable reality, and in spite of the incalculable\nbenefits of the Monroe Doctrine, they have not forgotten nor forgiven\nour lack of judgment, our want of tact, our inability to foresee\nthe future by delaying this comparatively simple matter of recognition, which, after a certain stage in the affairs of the revolted people\nhas been reached, is hardly more than a mere expression of sentiment,\nespecially when a powerful nation confers it, yet which gives the\ngrateful recipients an international status, and more than often results\nin a return of friendship and commercial benefits from them out of\nall proportion to the original risks involved. There is no doubt,\nfor it is admitted by the Chinese themselves, that should we bestow\nthis act of grace immediately upon the Republic of China, by this\nhappy stroke of diplomacy we would add milHons upon millions to\nour commerce and would re-establish ourselves in that enviable\nposition which we once held, as the foremost friends and counsellor\nof this Asiatic power. What makes our bourbon attitude all the more\nun-American is that in the Far East there is absolutely no valid\nexcuse for delay. The United States has everything to gain and\nnothing to lose, without the least fear of international complications.\nSuch act cannot affect our diplomatic relations with Europe regarding\nthe Orient because as it is we have been practically isolated for the\npast few years, having incurred the covert hostility of the powers,\nwith the possible exception of England, through our open-door\npolicy. This consistent antagonism to the American programme Canada and the Chinese 127\nwas sufficiently illustrated by the dismal reception given the Knoz\nproposals to neutralize the Manchurian railways, and this temporary defeat proved that our ideas as to Chinese integrity and inviolability of sovereignty were not looked upon with favor by nations\ninterested in obtaining their share of China when the drama of dissolution should finally occur. All danger of the latter contingency,\nhowever, has been removed by the astonishing rejuvenation of the\nintended victim, and in the place of the decrepit empire of the\nManchus stands a young, vigorous, virile republic, waiting for our\nformal nod of recognition and unable to understand what reason we\nmay have for hesitancy because there is none.\nThe abrogation of the present treaties and conventions in force\nwith China is a comparatively easy matter, because we may by\ninternational law regard the change of government in China as\nsufficiently violent in form to justify ourselves in considering the\nrelations entered into with the Manchu monarchy at an end, without\nwaiting to resort to the customary diplomatic procedure. The next\nstep would be the promulgation of a new treaty of mutual comity\nand reciprocity, which, however, must be supported by a national\npolicy that would faithfully observe these stipulations, and would\ncarry them into effect, instead of the combinations of meaningless\nphrases which constitute our present documents. It is difficult, in\nfact impossible, for us to orientate ourselves enough to appreciate the\nemotions of the Chinese in reading that by treaty they are given the\nright \"to go and come of their own free will,\" and that \"all the rights,\nprivileges, immunities, and exemptions which are accorded to the\ncitizens and subjects of the most-favored nation,\" M shall likewise\nbe extended to them, and that \"if Chinese laborers, or Chinese of any\nother class, now either permanently or temporarily residing in the\nterritory of the United States, .meet with ill-treatment at the hands\nof any other persons, the government of the United States will exert\nall its power to devise measures for their protection and to secure to\nthem the . . . rights ... to which they are entitled by\ntreaty.\" 30 Such articles, well meant at the time of ratification,\nhave since become obsolete through consistent violations on the part\nof the United States by the statutory development of its exclusion\npolicy, and the resulting temper of the Chinese is clearly brought\na Treaty of 1880; 22 Stat., 826, Art. ii.\n*> Ibid, Art. iii. 128 The Annals of the American Academy .\nout by the denunciation of the treaty of i894 ten years later, which\nconsequently expired by reason of such action. Therefore, to\nre-establish mutual and friendly relations with China, it will be\nnecessary to draw up an entirely new treaty, one Which would annul\nall present treaties and conventions in force and which would embody\na real instead of an apparent mutuality of interests. This, if done\nwithout further hesitation, will again secure for us that primacy\nin the foreign affairs of China which we once held but forfeited through\nour inexcusable indifference and delay in adjusting existing wrongs,\nand which, unless we act quickly, will be extremely difficult to regain.\nPatriotism is one of the few universal virtues. It is found alike\nin the great powers as in nations that have been neutralized to preserve their identity. China possesses this inestimable quality no\nless than the United States, though in a far different degree. The\npatriotism of the Chinese is that higher patriotism which stimulates\na Christian love for peace and a Roman love for order and for stability.\nBy the teachings of their philosophy and their religion they hold\nthe soldier in contempt, whereas we cover him with tinsel, set him\nupon a pedestal and worship him. In return we regard their abhor-\nrance for war as an evidence of weakness and want of national character, yet, according to the religion which we ourselves profess to\nfollow, the Chinese are right and we are wrong.\nWhat has this to do with exclusion? Simply that by our regulations against the Chinese we have failed to take into account a proper\nappreciation of their national characteristics; that we have refused\nto recognize in them this essence of patriotism which has been so\nbrilliantly illustrated within the last two years and in that quarter\nof the world where it was least expected. Not alone have we singled\nthem out for exclusion from all the rest of mankind, but by the same\nlaws we have denied them the right to citizenship, which act, unjustifiable in any sense whatsoever, is the sum total of indignity which\none nation can heap upon another. All of this was very well in the\ndays when China, under the Empress-Dowager was supremely\ncontent with herself and chose to be non-existent to Europe and\nAmerica, but the days of seclusion, however, are past. This is an\nage of international stress and rivalry in commerce, politics and\ndiplomacy, and which was made clear to China by the bitter humiliations of the Japanese war, the territorial aggressions of the powers\nand the Boxer rebellion. Forced to accept modern conditions or Canada and the Chinese 129\nsuffer dissolution, China cast aside the shell of antiquity and by rapid,\nheartbreaking efforts has succeeded in attaining a position of eminence which henceforth will demand respect to this republic as a\nnation, a race, and a sovereign entity. No longer will it be possible\nto insult the Chinese with impunity, and the power that has the most\nto learn in this regard is the United States.\nOur exclusion laws have proven a failure, not through the fault\nof the Bureau of Immigration, which is composed of excellent and\nefficient officers, but from the very nature of the regulations. The\nfact that our country is barred to them naturally makes the excluded\nclass of Chinese all the more eager to enter, and to attain this purpose\nthey resort to bribery, fraud, deceit, cunning, to all the manifold\ntricks which Americans themselves would employ if China were\nstill the forbidden land. The result means disregard and contempt\nfor the law in every successful instance, of which there are legion,\nfor when an Oriental matches his wits against the Anglo-Saxon, it\nis a foregone conclusion who will get the better of the argument.\nAccording to the Commissioner General of Immigration, there \"are\nsome causes for congratulation and optimism, but many more reasons\nfor feeling that the present statutes are wholly insufficient to maintain\nthe long and frequently avowed policy of excluding from this country\nlaborers of the Chinese race,\" and, \"it must be realized and conceded\nthat, unless some change is made in the law, such inxmigration will\nconstantly increase in the future.\" 31 Thus by the admission of\nthe highest officer in authority it is seen that our laws have failed\nin total exclusion, and by reason of such failure have nullified the\nonly motive for their existence. Yet for this discredited system,\nincapable of rigid enforcement, and therefore useless, we are endangering our commerce, our friendly relations, our entire future in the\nFar East. It must not be supposed that China desires the coolie\nto emigrate. The republic, for the sake of its own prestige and interests abroad, prefers to keep him at home. But it is not to be expected\nthat China will give a helping hand in solving our difficulties in\nthe face of the unfair discriminations and colossal blunders that\nstill remain on our statute books. The remedy is clear and simple;\nby following the suggestions discussed above by the writer, of\nrepealing these ineffective laws and emulating Canada in imposing\na sufficiently burdensome head-tax to keep out undesirable immi-\n21 Annual Report of Commissioner General of Immigration, 1911. Washington, 1912, p. 143. 130\nThe Annals of the American Academy\ngration, and by further limiting the number of arrivals on each ship\nor for each year, the question would rapidly solve itself, besides securing the hearty cooperation and good-will of both nations concerned.\nThe result would be not only a cause for gratification but the knowledge that by such conciliatory and equitable means we have safely\naccomplished our purpose without giving offense to the Republic\nof China and without apology for or blemish to our national ideals. THE MINERAL RESOURCES OF CANADA1\nBy G. A. Young,\nOf Department of Mines, Geological Survey, Ottawa, Canada.\nThe mines and quarries of Canada during 1910, the latest\nyear for which complete figures are available, yielded an output\nvalued at $106,823,623 and furnished employment to, exclusive\nof those engaged in the production of placer gold and petroleum,\nover 62,000 men earning more than $37,000,000 in wage- For\n1911 the total value of the mineral production has been estimated\nat $102,291,686, the decrease, as compared with the figures for\n1910, being probably due to labor troubles in certain mining centers.\nThe following table indicates the rapid growth of the mineral\nindustry since 1886, the first year for which complete figures are\navailable:\nTable 1.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Value of Annual Mineral Production of Canada\nYear\nValue\n1886 \t\n$10,221,255\n1890\t\n16,763,353\n1895 \t\n20,605,917\n1900\t\n64,420,877\n1905 \t\n69,078,999\n1910\t\n106,823,633\nDuring the period of twenty-four years in part covered by the\nabove table, the annual rate of mineral production increased tenfold\nand marked changes took place in the proportional amounts furnished by the regions now leading in mineral bearing. In 1886\nover one-half of the value of the total mineral production was furnished by the region lying east of the St. Lawrence River, that is,\nby southeastern Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. If\nthe figures for structural materials and clay products are excluded,\n1 Published by permission of the Director of the Geological Surrey of Canada.\n2 For these and other statistics see Annual Report of the Mineral Production of Canada during\nthe Calendar Year iqio, by J. McLeish. Canada: Department of Mines.\n(131) 132 The Annals of the American Academy\nthe eastern region contributed two-thirds of the total, while only\none-seventh came from British Columbia in western Canada.\nIn 1886 the coal production of the country amounted to only\nslightly over 2,000,000 tons. Of this total less than one-seventh\nwas produced in western Canada and this small proportion was\nalmost entirely furnished by the long-established coal mines of Vancouver Island. In the same year British Columbia yielded placer\ngold to the value of nearly $1,000,000, but in this province lode\nmining was practically non-existent. In Ontario, in 1886, a small\namount of copper was produced for the first time from the Sudbury\ndeposits then being developed purely as copper mines, the valuable nickel contents of the ores not having yet been discovered.\nThe petroleum and salt industries were firmly established in the\nsouthwestern part of the same province. In southeastern Quebec,\nasbestos deposits were being mined, but the total production was\nstill comparatively low. The copper and sulphide ores of the same\nregion were also being mined. In the Atlantic provinces of New\nBrunswick and Nova Scotia, the mining of gypsum, of gold and of\ncoal was being actively prosecuted.\nBy 1895 the value of the total annual mineral production had\ndoubled that of 1886. The mineral yield of each of the three chief\nmineral regions had increased, but at different rates. The output\nof the region lying east of the St. Lawrence amounted to only\none-quarter instead of one-half of the total value of the mineral\nproduction, while British Columbia furnished one-third instead of\none-seventh, and the output of the mmeral-bearing, northern and\nwestern, portion of Ontario amounted in value to nearly one-tenth\nof the total.\nThe marked changes in the relative productions, for the year\n1895, of the eastern and western parts of the country had been\npartly brought about by the discovery in British Columbia of the\nrich copper-gold ores of Rossland and of the widely distributed\nsilver-lead deposits of the southeastern part of the same province.\nThe changes in the proportion of the totals furnished by the different\nregions were due also in part to coal production, for though the coal\nmines of the eastern region still lead and yielded nearly three-fifths\nof the total tonnage, yet the higher prices received in the West raised\nthe value of the coal produced on Vancouver Island to an amount\nnearly equal to that of Nova Scotia's yield. By 1895 the metaUif- The Mineral Resources of Canada 133\nerous region of northern and western Ontario had become more\nimportant, largely because of the impetus added to the development of the Sudbury region owing to the recognition of the valuable\nnickel contents of its copper ores.\nIn the five years from the close of 1895 to 1900, the mineral\noutput of Canada trebled in value. In 1900 the eastern region\nfurnished less than one-quarter, while the western region produced\nnearly two-thirds of the value of Canada's mineral output. The\nproportion furnished by northern Ontario had decreased to about\none-twelfth. The marked advance in the production of 1900 over\nthat of 1895 was due almost altogether to the notable increase of\nnearly $25,000,000 in the value of the gold production; to an increase of $6,500,000 in the value of the coal output; to an increase\nof over $2,000,000 in the value of copper produced, and of nearly\nthe same amounts in the case of lead and of nickel; and of about\n$1,700,000 in the case of silver. The great increase in gold production was due very largely to the Klondike placer gold field discovered\nin 1897, the yield from this and adjacent fields amounting to'$22,-\n275,000. The remaining increase in gold production was furnished\nmainly by the copper-gold mines of British Columbia. The main\nincrease in the coal output came from the Nova Scotian fields,\nthough the production of the western coal fields had increased at\na greater rate. Nearly three-quarters of the increase of the copper\noutput, and the whole of the increased output of lead and of silver\nwas attributable to the development of the mining centers of southern\nBritish Columbia.\nIn 1910 the value of the total mineral production was over ten\ntimes larger than that of 1886 and was greater than that of 1900 by\nabout $42,000,000, an advance of over 60 per cent. In 1910, the\nproportion of the total value of the mineral output (excluding,\nas before, building materials and clay products) furnished by the\nabove-mentioned three regions was very different from that of the\nearlier periods. Western Canada, including British Columbia and\nYukon Territory, together with northern Ontario, furnished in\nvalue three-quarters of the mineral output of the country, and this\nlarge proportion was equally divided between the two regions. The\ncountry east of the St. Lawrence contributed only about one-fifth,\nnot, as in 1886, two-thirds, of the total.\nThe increase in the value of the mineral production of 1910 134\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nover that of 1900 was due largely to the following increases: an\nincrease of above $13,000,000 in the value of structural materials\nand clay products; of nearly $8,000,000 in the case of nickel; of\nabout $4,000,000 in the case of copper; of over $15,000,000 in silver;\nof nearly $2,000,000 in that of asbestos and of about $17,000,000\nin coal. Against these increases must be set a decrease in the gold\nproduction of over $17,000,000, due to the greatly lowered output\nof the Yukon placer fields.\nThe marked decrease in the gold production of the western\nregion of Canada combined with the large yield of silver from northern Ontario, derived almost entirely from the rich Cobalt field,\nand the increased copper and nickel production of the Sudbury\ncamp in the same general district, had elevated the northern region\nto a rank equal with that of the western field. The great increase\nin the metalliferous output of these two regions had placed both of\nthem far in advance of the eastern region whose chief product in\n1910, as in 1886, was coal. But whereas in 1886 nearly the whole\nof Canada's coal production, then amounting to about 2,000,000\ntons, was furnished by Nova Scotia, in 1910 almost exactly one-\nhalf of the total production of nearly 13,000,000 tons came from\nwestern Canada and in a large measure from coal fields unknown\nor unworked in 1886.\nAs may be seen from the tabular statement of the production\nfor 1910 (see page 135), nearly one-third of the total value is to be\ncredited to coal, a seventh to silver, a tenth to nickel and a tenth\nto gold. Approximately one-sixth of the total represents the value\nof structural materials and clay products which, though rightly\ncredited to the mineral production of Canada, yet more nearly reflects the commercial development rather than the nxining progress\nof the country.\nThough the value of the annual production has now reached\nthe large sum of over $100,000,000 per year, yet there are reasons\nfor beheving that these figures very inadequately indicate the potential mineral wealth of Canada. By far the greater-part of the country\nis still practically unprospected, its mineral wealth untouched.\nHow little is actually known regarding the mineral possibilities of\nCanada has recently been clearly indicated by Mr. R. W. Brock,\nDirector of the Geological Survey of Canada. He pointed out\nby way of an illustration that the country lying to the north of The Mineral Resources of Canada\n135\nToronto would probably have been considered in 1902 as having\nbeen prospected considerably further north than Lake Timiskam-\ning, yet at that date only a few miles west of this lake lay the undiscovered silver veins of Cobalt, whose production at the present\nday places Canada third in rank amongst the silver producing\ncountries of the world.\nThe following is quoted from the same writer:\nTo realize the unprospected nature of the country, it is only necessary to\nremember that the greatest asbestos deposits of the world were brought to notice\nby blasting the Quebec Central Railway through them; that the greatest corundum deposits extending in a belt a hundred miles long, were found in a settled\ndistrict by an officer of the Survey only twelve years ago (written in 1909);\nthat the Sudbury nickel deposits were discovered by putting a railway through\nthem; that Cobalt, now the premier silver camp, although only a few miles\nfrom one of the earliest routes of travel in the country, and only a few miles\nfrom a silver-lead deposit known a hundred and fifty years ago, was discovered\nless than six years ago, and then only by means of a railway cutting through\na rich vein.\nTable 2.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Mineral Production of Canada for 1910\nProduct\nGold\t\nSilver\t\nCopper\t\nNickel\t\nLead\t\nPig iron and iron ore\t\nCoal\t\nAsbestos\t\nPetroleum and natural gas\t\nGypsum\t\nStructural materials and clay products\nAll others\t\n$10\n17\n7\n11\n1\n1\n30\n2\n1\n19\n1\n205,835\n,580,455\n,094,094\n,181,310\n,216,249\n,975,035\n,909,779\n,573,603\n735,021\n934,446\n,627,592\n,790,204\n$106,823,623\nPer cent of\nTotal Value\n9.55\n16.45\n6.64\n10.46\n14\n83\n28.93\n2.49\n1.61\n0.86\n18.37\n1.67\n100.00\nFrom what has been stated it is apparent that even the districts over which mining is now in progress can scarcely be said to\nbe prospected and these districts form only a very small fraction\nof the 3,729,665 square miles of Canadian teritory. In the imperfectly prospected and unprospected regions there is an almost unlimited area over which the geological conditions are similar to those 136\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nof districts of known mineral wealth. The presence of like geological conditions implies the existence of like mineral deposits, for\nexperience has demonstrated that the mineral deposits of any given\ndistrict have resulted, directly or indirectly, from the action of the\nsame general forces that gave rise to the broader geological structures and features of the region. Therefore, in order to indicate\napproximately only the probable extent and value of the mineral\nresources of a country, it is necessary to give at least a broadly\ngeneralized description of its geological features.\nCanada may be divided into six great regions, each distinguished\nby a certain uniformity of broadly developed physical and geological features and characterized by the presence of special types of\nmineral deposits. One region, known as the Laurentian Plateau,\nincludes approximately one-half of the area of Canada. It extends,\nwith constantly diverging east and west boundaries, from the districts about Lake Superior, northward to the Arctic Ocean. This\ngreat expanse of country, situated towards the center of Canada,\nis occupied almost exclusively by rocks of pre-Cambrian age, that\nis, belonging to the oldest of the great systems of strata exposed over\nthe surface of the earth. Over considerable areas the ancient measures are preserved with many of their original characters, but over\nother great stretches of country the strata have been folded, contorted and greatly altered. They have also been penetrated and\nenclosed by large and small bodies of granitic rocks now laid bare\nover the greater part of the region as the result of great cycles of\nerosion that have largely swept away the original covering of pre-\nCambrian strata. The region of the Laurentian Plateau is, on the\nwhole, an unknown country, but it is presumably rich in mineral\nwealth, since within the relatively narrow limits of the southern,\nbetter known portions, are situated many mines producing nickel,\ncopper, silver, gold, iron, mica, graphite, etc.\nThe great central area of the Laurentian Plateau is bounded,\nexcept along the North Atlantic coast of Labrador, by stretches\nof plain-like country in some places lying at sea level, in others rising\nto a considerable altitude. All of these areas are underlaid by\nnearly flat-lying, relatively undisturbed, sedimentary strata. These\nmeasures, during successive geological eras, were formed either\nin seas that surrounded and in part swept over the area of the Laurentian Plateau, or else were deposited in large bodies of fresh or The Mineral Resources of Canada 137\nbrackish water or over flood plains during intervals of time while\nthe regions in question were temporarily freed from the invading seas.\nThe areas encircling the Laurentian Plateau are divisible into\nthree geological provinces. On the north, the Arctic Archipelago\nextends far northwards towards the North Pole. On the west\nside, is the region of the Interior Continental Plain, the great wheat\nfield of Canada. On the east side, he the St. Lawrence Lowlands,\nbordering the lower Great Lakes and forming the valley of the\nSt. Lawrence River. Within these three regions metalliferous\ndeposits are almost entirely wanting, but their absence is in a measure\ncompensated by the presence of petroleum, natural gas and salt\ndistricts and, in the Interior Continental Plain region, of immense\nstores of coal.\nThe two still undescribed major geological provinces form\nrespectively the eastern and western portions of Canada. Both\nare mountain-built provinces characterized by the presence of\nsedimentary and volcanic strata which, laid down with horizontal\nattitudes during various eras from pre-Cambrian time onwards,\nhave since been flexed and faulted and invaded by bodies of igneous\nrocks. The eastern geological province is known as the Appalachian region, and though much of the country may be truly termed\nmountainous, yet when compared with the western counterpart,\nit is more appropriately described as hilly. The western province\nis known as the Cordilleran region and includes the Canadian portion\nof the lofty, rugged, mountain systems that form the Pacific border\nof the whole length of the North American continent.\nBoth the Appalachife. region on the east and the Cordilleran\nregion on the west contain metalliferous deposits and coal-bearing\nstrata, but the Cordilleran region is not only of much greater area,\nbut is also much richer in mineral wealth. Within its bounds, in\nthe northern portion, he the world-famous gold fields of the Klondike.\nIn the southern, better known portion of the region are many mining centers producing gold, copper, silver, lead, zinc, etc., while\nthe region as a whole is rich in coal. The Appalachian region,\nthough it is much poorer in coal than the western mountain province,\nyet annually produces nearly the same amount. The eastern region\nis also poorer in other respects, but contains the most important\nasbestos producing area in the world as well as notable deposits Of\ncopper, gold, iron, etc. 138\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nOf the six major geological provinces, all, except the Arctic\nArchipelago, at the present time contribute to the mineral production\nof the country. In the following table is presented a statement showing for each division the approximate value of the mineral yield, exclusive of structural materials and clay products. These figures should\nnot be taken as directly indicating the relative mineral wealth of\nthe various regions, for the annual production of a district depends\nlargely on conditions that are in a considerable measure independent of the extent and value of its mineral resources. Among\nsuch governing factors may be mentioned the presence or absence\nof transportation facilities and all the long series of implied conditions.\nTable 3.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Mineral Production (Exclusive of Structural Materials and\nClay Products) by Geological Provinces, for 1910\nProduct\nAppalachian\nRegion\nSt. Lawrence\nLowlands\nLaurentian\nPlateau\nInterior\nContinental\nPlain\nCordilleran\nRegion\nGold\t\n55166,456\n4,061\n111,757\n$63,849\n$1,850\n$9,973,680\n1,334,639\nSilver '.\t\n16,241,755\n2,453,213\n11,181,310\nCopper\t\nNickel\t\n4,529,124\nLead\t\n1,216,249\nPig iron and iron ore.\nCoal\t\n123,849\n13,030,615\n2,573,603\n1,826\n672,217\n169,226\n1,851,186\n2,069,000\n15 810,164\nAsbestos\t\nPetroleum and natural gas\t\n$1,658,027\n67,229\n593,951\n75,168\n195,000\nGypsum\t\nAll others\t\n908,784\n118,243\nTotal\t\n16,853,610\n19.3\n2,319,207\n2.6\n32,700,097\n37.6\n2,341,018\n2.7\nPer cent of total for\nCanada\t\n32,982,099\n37.8\nOne striking feature brought out by means of the above table\nis the practically complete absence of metalliferous deposits in the\nregions of the St. Lawrence Lowlands and the Interior Continental\nPlain, for the trifling gold production credited to the latter region\nis placer gold, whose ultimate source lies outside of this geological\nprovince. A second point worthy of emphasis is the large coal\nproductions credited to the Appalachian region in the east and the\nCordilleran region in the west. The Interior Continental Plain\nregion in the near future will take rank as a coal-producing area The Mineral Resources of Canada 139\nwith these two regions; for the present active development of this\ngreat wheat-growing region will inevitably lead to an energetic\nexploitation of its extensive coal resources.\nThe Appalachian Region has an area of approximately 80,000\nsquare miles and includes the three Atlantic provinces of Nova\nScotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick, and also a large\npart of that portion of the adjoining province of Quebec situated\non the southeast side of the St. Lawrence River. The extent of the\nmineral resources of a not inconsiderable portion of this region is\nstill practically unknown, although the area in general was colonized\nat an early date and was the scene of some of the earliest attempts\nat mining in Canada.\nIn the Appalachian region coal is by far the most important\nproduct of the mine, for it furnishes slightly over three-quarters\nof the total annual value of the mineral production of the region\nexclusive of building materials and clay products. The coal is all\nof the bituminous variety and in distribution is confined to Nova\nScotia and New Brunswick. In 1910 these two provinces produced\nslightly more than 6,500,000 tons, or a little over one-half of the\ntotal tonnage produced in all Canada. Of the total production,\nabout the whole came from four comparatively limited coal fields\nsituated in Nova Scotia and nearly three-quarters of the amount\nwas furnished by the Sydney coal field.\nThe presence of coal in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick was\nrecognized by the French early in the seventeenth century, but\nit was not for a hundred years or more, or until about 1720, that\nserious mining operations were commenced. Since then the Nova\nScotian fields have furnished more than 125,000,000 tons of coal,\nof which total over one-half was produced during the last twelve\nyears.\nIt has been estimated that the reserves of easily mineable\ncoal in the Nova Scotian fields exceed 6,000,000,000 tons and that\nthe New Brunswick fields may contain about 150,000,000 tons.\nFuture developments may show a greater reserve of coal in the\ndifferent fields or even lead to the recognition of new fields, but\nit seems entirely probable that the total coal resources will eventually\nbe proven to be of the above-stated order of magnitude, and that\nthe present Nova Scotian fields will continue to be the chief producers.\nNext to coal, asbestos is at present the most important mineral 140\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nproduct of the Appalachian region. The mining of this mineral\nis centered about the town of Thetford in southeastern Quebec,\nand from an area of a very few square miles is furnished the greater\npart of the total asbestos supply of the world. The commercial\nexploitation of the asbestos deposits commenced in 1878 and since\nthen approximately 780,000 tons of asbestos valued at nearly $30,-\n000,000 have been produced. Though the present fairly constant\nyearly rate of production entails the annual quarrying of approximately 1,500,000 tons of asbestos-bearing rock, yet the deposits\ngive no indications of failing and a long future life seems assured.\nClosely connected with the asbestos deposits, both geographically and geologically, are two other classes of deposits, one yielding chromium, the other copper, sulphur, and minor amounts of\ngold and silver. The chromite deposits occur in the same district\nand in the same rocks as the asbestos. Though the ore bodies are\nin many cases of considerable magnitude, yet the annual production has never been large.\nThe copper and sulphur producing ore bodies are confined to\na belt of igneous rocks extending in a northeasterly direction through\nsouthern Quebec for a distance of over 150 miles. At many points\nin this general district important deposits of this class are known\nto occur. The mining of these ores has been long established and,\nin the last twenty-five years the region has yielded over 65,000,000\npounds of copper. The present comparatively low annual production does not by any means indicate an approaching exhaustion of\nthe field.\nThe gypsum deposits of the Appalachian region, according\nto the value of the present annual production, rank third amongst\nthe mineral resources of the region. The production is largely\nfrom two centers, one in Nova Scotia, the other in New Brunswick, but.large deposits occur in a number of other districts in\nthese two provinces and also in the Magdalen Islands in the Gulf\nof St. Lawrence. In 1910 about 490,000 tons with a value of $670,-\n000 was mined, while in the last twenty-five years the total tonnage\nwon from these almost inexhaustible deposits has been nearly\n6,000,000 tons.\nThe gold production of the Appalachian region is derived\nalmost entirely from the Nova Scotian gold fields. A trifling amount\nis obtained from the copper-bearing deposits of southeastern Quebec The Mineral Resources of Canada 141\nand a small amount from certain placer deposits in the same general\ndistrict. In the past, however, these placer deposits were a comparatively important source of the precious metal and the field\neven now is by no means exhausted. As already stated, the main\ngold production of the Appalachian region comes from the gold\nfields of the Atlantic seaboard of Nova Scotia. The gold occurs\nin quartz veins developed with a wonderful regularity of structure\nin very many districts over a general region of approximately\n8,500 square miles. Since the discovery of the precious metal in this\narea in 1860, over 2,000,000 tons of quartz have been crushed, from\nwhich gold to the value of about $17,500,000 has been extracted.\nThe annual rate of production reached a maximum in 1898 and\nsince then has rapidly declined, not because of dwindling ore reserves,\nbut from a variety of other causes.\nThe above-described classes of deposits furnish nearly the\nwhole of the mineral output of the Appalachian region. Though\nin Nova Scotia there are large iron and steel plants, yet of the iron\nore required by these industries only a trifling proportion is supplied\nby the region itself. Iron ore deposits, however, exist at many\npoints in Nova Scotia and have been worked for very many years.\nComparatively recently a group of large iron ore bodies have been\ndiscovered in northeastern New Brunswick. These bodies, now\nbeing developed, are situated on the outskirts of a large tract of\ncountry that still remains practically unknown.\nAmong the minor amounts contributing to the total value of\nthe production of the Appalachian region for 1910, that credited\nto petroleum represents the production of a natural gas field then\nin the course of development. The value of this gas and oil field\nhas since been established and gives promise of developing into\nan important center. In the same district are large deposits of oil\nshales of known great value.\nTo the above-described list of deposits many other classes\nmight be added, many of which are of much more importance than\nthe figures of production would indicate. Some of these, such\nas the tungsten deposits recently discovered, associated with the\ngold-bearing veins in Nova Scotia, are of importance, not only because of their actual commercial value, but as indicating that the\nfull value of the region as a niineral-bearing territory is not yet\nknown. 142\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nA considerable production of manganese ores of exceptional\npurity was at one time furnished by Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Ores of antimony have been produced from two centers.\nValuable deposits of barite, also of talc, occur at widely separated\npoints and have been mined to a certain extent. Lead ores occur\nin many districts.\nMany valuable deposits of clay, shale, etc., suitable for the\nmanufacture of brick, tile and other clay products, occur throughout the region. Slate, building and ornamental stones of many\nkinds occur in numerous districts and have, in places, long been\nworked.\nThe St. Lawrence Lowland region lies to the west of the Appalachian region, between it and the Laurentian Plateau. The region\nis the smallest of the six major geological provinces of Canada and\nhas an area of approximately only 35,000 square miles. It consists of a series of plain-like areas situated in the provinces of Quebec\nand Ontario, and extending from Quebec City on the east, up the\nSt. Lawrence valley and along the northern sides of Lakes Ontario\nand Erie.\nAs already pointed out, the St. Lawrence Lowlands neither\n\"contain metalliferous deposits nor coal. But the region is by no\nmeans lacking in mineral wealth, for from the relatively small area\nof Ontario projecting as a peninsula between Lakes Huron and\nErie, there are annually produced gypsum, salt, natural gas and\npetroleum of the value of above $2,000,000. The gypsum deposits\nare relatively the least important of these, though the annual production is steadily increasing and in 1910 amounted to a value of\n$67,000.\nThe first oil field of the above-mentioned district was found\nin 1862 and since that date there has been a very large total production. The annual yield reached a maximum in 1894, when\napproximately 29,000,000 gallons of crude petroleum were refined.\nSince then the annual production has notably decreased and in 1910\nwas less than one-half of the above amount. While some of the\nsmaller districts or oil pools have been comparatively short lived,\nthe one first discovered, nearly fifty years ago, still produces a large\nproportion of the total annual yield.\nThe natural gas fields of Ontario are situated in the same general district as the oil-producing centers, but extend over a greater The Mineral Resources of Canada 143\narea. Unlike the petroleum industry, the production of natural\ngas in recent years has shown a very marked advance. The yield\nin 1910 was estimated to have had a value to the producers of an\namount exceeding $1,300,000.\nThe salt beds of Ontario are known to underlie, though not\ncontinuously, an area of about 2,500 square miles bordering Lake\nHuron and Detroit River. The salt occurs at considerable depths\nbeneath the surface. The amount present in the district in general\nmust be enormous, for in places the beds are known to attain a thickness of 200 feet. The salt is secured in the form of brine by forcing\nfresh water down bore-holes to the salt beds. In 1910 the amount\nof salt produced from this area reached above 80,000 tons valued\nat over $400,000.\nThe region of the St. Lawrence Lowlands contains large deposits\nsuitable for the manufacture of brick, tile, cement and other structural and clay products. The value of the annual production of such\nmaterials is above $10,000,000.\nThe Laurentian Plateau borders the St. Lawrence Lowlands\non the west and is the largest of the great geological provinces,\nits area being approximately 2,000,000 square miles. This region\nincludes the greater part of the provinces of Quebec, Ontario and\nManitoba, a part of Saskatchewan and a very large part of the Northwest Territories. It centers about Hudson's Bay and is triangular\nin outline, the base of the triangle fronting on the Arctic Ocean\nwhile the apex lies far to the south in United States territory south\nof Lake Superior.\nThe region is still practically a wilderness and within its bounds\nare great stretches of territory that have been traversed only by the\nexplorer perhaps along a single water route. The portions that\nwith any reasonable degree of accuracy may be claimed to be known,\nmerely form a narrow fringe along the southern margin of the region.\nWithin this better, though very imperfectly known, portion are situated the greatest nickel-producing mines and the premier silver\ncamp of the world. The possibilities in the way of mineral resources\nof this region will be further appreciated if it be added that in the\nlimited portion of the region extending southwards into the United\nStates are situated the richest copper camp and the most important\niron ore producing area of the world.\nOf the total mineral production of the Laurentian Plateau 144 The Annals of the American Academy\nin 1910, nearly one-half, or above $16,000,000, is credited to silver\nproduced from the Cobalt field of northern Ontario. Discovered\nas recently as 1903, this field has already produced silver to the\nvalue of $65,000,000 and the annual rate of production continues\nto increase, though possibly nearing a maximum. The ores of the\ncamp occur in exceedingly rich, narrow veins. From one vein,\nin no place more than eight inches wide, there was extracted from an\nopen cut 50 feet long and 25 feet deep, ore to the approximate value\nof over $200,000. The ores, besides containing native silver and\ncompounds of silver with other elements, also contain large amounts\nof nickel, cobalt and arsenic. For 1910 it is estimated that the ore\nmined contained besides silver, 604 tons of nickel, 1,098 tons of\ncobalt and 4,897 tons of arsenic. It is stated that these ores form the\nprincipal source of the world's supply of cobalt. Some portion of\nthe nickel contents is conserved, and in 1910 about 1,500 tons of\narsenic were produced.\nNearly 500 miles west of Cobalt there is another silver-bearing\nregion bordering Lake Superior. Though mining and development work has been carried on intermittently for nearly half a\ncentury, there is at present little or no silver being produced in the\ndistrict. In the past the greater part of the production came from\none mine which in a few years produced silver to the value of above\n$3,000,000. As pointed out by various writers, the mode of ocur-\nrence of the ores of silver in this western district is not altogether\nunlike the condition holding at Cobalt, and this similarity has given\nrise to the not unreasonable expectation that ultimately other\nsilver-bearing deposits will be discovered within the 500 miles of\ncountry intervening between the two silver-bearing districts.\nNext in rank to the silver mines of Cobalt are the nickel and\ncopper-producing mines of Sudbury. Noticed in 1856 and re-discovered in 1883, the Sudbury field has since produced above 150,-\n000 tons of nickel and 100,000 tons of copper. The ores also carry\nsmall amounts of platinum and palladium. These mines produce\na very large part of the world's annual supply of nickel and the\nknown ore reserves are very great.\nThe two districts of Cobalt and Sudbury in 1910 furnished\nminerals to the value of nearly $30,000,000, or approximately 90\nper cent of the mineral production of the Laurentian Plateau. The\nremaining 10 per cent is derived from a large number of sources The Mineral Resources of Canada 145\nrepresenting various products the present annual rate of production\nof which is not commensurate with their known value.\nChief amongst the relatively minor products is that of iron\nore. In 1910 about 230,000 tons of iron ore were produced from the\nregion, coming from widely separated fields, the most westerly one\nlying west of Lake Superior and the most easterly being situated\nto the north of the eastern end of Lake Ontario. Bodies of iron\nore are known to occur in scores of districts in the southern portion\nof the area of the Laurentian Plateau; they have also been found\nalong the east coast of Hudson's Bay, in the center of the Labrador\nPeninsula and indications of their existence are recorded from the\ngreat region lying west of Hudson's Bay. The known occurrences,\nthough very numerous, are undoubtedly only a small proportion\nof the total number of such deposits. Although under present\nconditions the ores in general are not of grade and quality high\nenough to encourage extensive development works, yet there can\nbe no doubt that in the near future many of the now neglected deposits will be mined.\nGold-bearing deposits have been found and worked at many\npoints in the southern portion of the region over an area stretching\nfor 650 miles in an east and west direction. The first discovery\nwas made as early as 1866, but the total production since then has\nbeen considerably smaller than $3,000,000. Recently new fields\nhave been discovered and renewed interest is being taken in the\nolder districts.\nThe Laurentian Plateau is a region especially rich in pyritic\nores valuable for their sulphur contents. Some of the known deposits are very large though untouched. In 1910 the output of\npyritic ores was valued at about $84,000.\nCorundum, valuable as an abrasive, occurs in large amounts\nover a district seventy-five miles long, in southeastern Ontario.\nOnly recently discovered, the deposits in 1910 produced an amount\nvalued at nearly $200,000.\nA large district bordering both sides of the lower Ottawa River\ncontains many deposits of graphite, apatite and mica. The mining\nof these minerals has been long established, though the total production at present is not very large. In 1910 approximately 1,400\ntons of graphite were produced, while the mica mined was valued\nat $190,000. 146 The Annals of the American Academy\nBesides the copper deposits of Sudbury, copper ores are known\nto occur at various points, particularly in the districts bordering\nLake Superior and Lake Huron. One such occurrence in the past\nproduced a large amount of copper.\nOres of lead and of zinc occur at widely separated points. Deposits of exceptionally pure feldspar, of actinolite, of quartz and other\nvaluable products are known and, in places, are being worked.\nThe territory in general is rich in building and ornamental stones,\nincluding marbles of many varieties, and the beautiful blue mineral,\nsodalite, which occurs and is worked in eastern Ontario.\nThe region of the Interior Continental Plain borders the Laurentian Plateau on the west. It includes portions of the provinces\nof Manitoba and Saskatchewan, nearly the whole of Alberta, part\nof British Columbia, and extends northwestward through the Northwest Territories towards the Arctic Ocean. Along the international boundary this geological province has a width of approximately\n750 miles and, with converging boundaries, it extends northwards\nfor more than 1,100 miles. Its area is approximately 500,000 square\nmiles.\nLike the St. Lawrence Lowlands, the region lacks metalliferous\nwealth, but, on the other hand, is very rich in coal, it having been\nestimated that within the region there is at least 500,000,000,000\ntons of mineable lignite. The lignite seams occur in various districts\nover the southern part of Saskatchewan and in many areas over\nnearly the whole of Alberta. In all, the areas containing mineable\ncoal have been estimated to extend over 24,000 square miles, but\ncoal seams doubtless underlie a total area much larger than this,\nthough perhaps too deeply buried to be profitably mined. In 1910\napproximately 900,000 tons of coal, all Hgnite, were produced from\nthe region. The rate of annual production will undoubtedly show\nvery marked increases for some time to come, concurrent with the\nrapid settlement of the territory now taking place.\nGypsum and natural gas are the only two products besides coal\nand structural materials that now contribute to the annual yield\nof the region. Deposits of salt occur and have been worked from\ntime to time. Indications of the existence of petroleum are widespread over the western part of the region, and in the north, tar\nimpregnated sands outcrop along the rivers for miles at a time.\nThe gypsum-producing area is situated in Manitoba, and in The Mineral Resources of Canada 147\n1910 the output was valued at $195,000. Natural gas to the value\nof about $75,000 was produced in 1910, but the production is being\nrapidly increased and as yet is practically confined to one small\ndistrict in southern Alberta. The present production in no way\nindicates the capacity of the region in general, for large reservoirs\nof natural gas undoubtedly exist at many places throughout the\nwhole length of Alberta.\nDeposits suitable for the production of brick, tile, cement,\netc., occur at many points and, as a result of the rapid growth of\npopulation, are becondng of increasing importance.\nThe Cordilleran Region bounds the Interior Continental Plain\non the west and extends to the Pacific. The region has an average\nwidth of about 400 miles and stretches from the international boundary northwards for 1,500 miles to the Arctic Ocean. The region\nincludes nearly the whole of British Columbia, all of Yukon Territory and part of the Northwest Territories; its area is approximately\n650,000 square miles.\nThe Cordilleran region furnishes two-fifths of the total tonnage\nof coal annually mined in Canada; almost all the gold; practically\nall the lead and nearly three-fifths of the copper. Like its great\nrival, the Laurentian Plateau, the Cordilleran region is exceedingly\nrich in metalliferous deposits, but, unlike the eastern geological\nprovince, it also possesses vast stores of coal. As in the case of the\nLaurentian Plateau, the western geological province is essentially\nan undeveloped, unprospected region. As yet only over a very\nlimited area in the extreme south, and to a lesser degree along the\nPacific coast and the eastern border of the region, has prospecting\nadvanced beyond the initial stages. Though much of the territory\nis still virtually unknown, the broader geological features have\nbeen determined and sufficient knowledge has been gained to firmly\nestablish and warrant the belief that the region must be extremely\nrich in mineral wealth. Even at present, when traveling facilities,\nand therefore prospecting, are limited within relatively narrow\nlimits, not a year passes without the discovery of deposits or mineral\ndistricts of importance.\nThe annual production of coal furnishes, in value, nearly one-\nhalf of the mineral production of the region, and in 1910 amounted\nto nearly $16,000,000. Of this amount less than one-quarter was\nfurnished by the coal fields of Vancouver Island. Nearly the whole 148 The Annals of the American Academy\nof the remainder came from coal fields situated in the east, in the\nRockies or the foothills. Coal basins have been found at intervals\nfrom the international boundary northward along the range of the\nRockies for a distance of 675 miles. The coal of these basins is\nbituminous in quality except in one limited field, where it is an-\nthracitic. Many of these eastern coal basins are of large size and\ncontain a number of thick seams. In one field the width of the outcropping coal is measured in terms of hundreds of feet. Basins\ncontaining lignite, and in one large district anthracite, occur throughout the length of the central part of the Cordilleran region. As\nalready mentioned, coal basins occur on Vancouver Island; coal\nalso occurs on the Queen Charlotte Islands. In all it has been estimated that the Cordilleran region contains 50,000,000,000 tons\nof mineable coal (mainly bituminous), but even these figures are\nprobably much too small, for each year sees the discovery of a new\nfield or the further extension of an old one.\nThe Cordilleran region has long been, and probably always\nwill continue to be, the great gold-producing area of Canada. Much\nof the gold has come from placer deposits and, in all, the region has\nproduced in the neighborhood of $220,000,000 in gold. Since the\ndiscovery of the first placer fields between 1855 and 1857, there\nhas been a long series of discoveries of auriferous gravels, the most\nimportant of recent years being that of the Klondike in the Yukon\nTerritory. This northern field was discovered or announced in 1896\nand in the following years took place a rush of gold seekers from all\nparts of the world. In 1900 the Klondike produced its maximum\nyield, amounting to $22,275,000. Of late years the total production\nof this and other relatively minor fields in the Yukon, has annually\namounted to about $4,500,000, while the yield of the British Columbian placers has been somewhat less than $500,000.\nThe present annual gold yield from placer fields is almost\nequaled by the gold produced by lode mining. A considerable\npart of this is the product of free milling ores chiefly from one field\nin the neighborhood of Nelson, B. C. But about three-quarters\nof the total is from mines producing ores containing copper and\nsome silver as well as gold. The mining of such ores commenced\nonly as late as 1893, but since that date gold to the value of $70,-\n000,000 and copper of about the same total value have been produced.\nOf this large total, a very large proportion is the product of a single\nI The Mineral Resources of Canada 149\ngroup of mines at Rossland in southern British Columbia. A second\ngreat copper-gold producing district is that of the Boundary district, centering about Phoenix, which in 1910 produced over 1,660,-\n000 tons of ore containing gold to the value of above $1,500,000\nand copper worth $3,800,000. Another large copper-producing\ndistrict is situated on Howe Sound on the Pacific coast. In 1911,\nfrom one mine in this field, more than $1,000,000 of copper besides\nconsiderable silver was produced.\nNumerous other properties producing chiefly copper and gold,\nor copper and silver, occur in the better known portions of the region\nin southern British Columbia, along the Pacific coast, in the northern portion of British Columbia and in Yukon Territory. Not a\nyear passes but new discoveries of importance are made.\nAn important element in the production of the Cordilleran\nregion is the silver lead ores of a very large area, in southeastern\nBritish Columbia, that stretches eastward for many miles from the\nArrow Lakes. One district, the Slocan district, produces annually\nabove 6,000,000 pounds of lead and from 700,000 to 900,000 ounces\nof silver. Another district, the Fort Steele district, produces over\n23,000,000 pounds of lead and nearly 600,000 ounces of silver.\nSome of the deposits in this general area are rich in zinc ores and a\nconsiderable, though not very large, production of zinc is furnished\nby the various districts. Practically all the lead produced in Canada\ncomes from this Cordilleran area. The annual production has\nranged during the last few years from above 60,000,000 pounds\nto less than 20,000,000 pounds, and the total production since 1893\namounts to above 650,000,000 pounds.\nIn the silver-lead districts, especially in the territory about\nKootenay Lake, are many deposits rich in silver with minor amounts\nof copper, etc. Deposits of this general class also occur in northern\nBritish Columbia and Yukon Territory.\nIron ore deposits of value occur in the region and have been\nmined to a limited extent. Ores of mercury have also been mined.\nPlatinum occurs in some of the placer deposits and a small amount\nis annually produced. Tin deposits have been reported. The\nregion is undoubtedly rich in building and ornamental stone and\nthe necessary material for the production of clay products and\ncement.\nThe Arctic Archipelago is the only one of all the major geologi- 150\nThe Annals of the American Academy\ncal provinces of Canada that at present does not contribute to the\nannual mineral production. It embraces a very large region believed to be geologically not unlike the Interior Continental Plain.\nIt is known to contain deposits of coal and presumably is lacking\nin metalliferous deposits.\nIn conclusion, it may again be pointed out and as the above\nbrief review indicates, that the mineral industry of Canada as a\nwhole is still in an initial stage. Only in the comparatively limited\narea extending eastward from the St. Lawrence valley is the annual\nproduction in any way commensurate with the known mineral\nresources of the country. And even in this eastern region, the\ndiscoveries of recent years have indicated the existence of previously unsuspected classes of mineral deposits. Over nearly the\nwhole of the vast area of Canada the mineral resources at present\nbeing developed are confined to very limited areas bordering the\nmain routes of travel. Even within these circumscribed areas it\nis indisputably known that great stores of mineral wealth still lie\nuntouched or undiscovered. MINING LEGISLATION IN CANADA\nBy J. M. Clark, LL.B., K.C.,\nToronto, Canada.\nMany of the disputes between the United States and Canada\nconcerned fishing rights, and the fisheries of Canada are certainly\nvaluable. Few, however, realize that the mines of the Dominion\nare already entitled to credit for a production exceeding that of the\nfisheries and lumber industry combined.\nFor some years past, those interested in the development of the\nincreasingly important mining industry of Canada have urged the\nadoption by the Dominion Parliament of a federal mining law, which\nwould have the force and stability of statutory enactment. At\npresent, placer mining in the Yukon Territory is governed by the\nDominion statute known as the Yukon placer-mining act. All other\nmining under federal jurisdiction is governed by orders in council\nand ministerial regulations.\nIn the earlier stages of development, it is perhaps inevitable that\nthese important matters should be so dealt with; but it is now felt\nthat the time has come when mining rights in the extensive regions\nunder federal control should be put on a permanent basis, and that\nany changes required from time to time should be made only after\nfull and open discussion in Parliament.\nA short sketch will suffice to indicate how vast and varied the\ninterests affected really are.\nWhen the Dominion of Canada was constituted by the imperial\nstatute known as the British North America act of 1867, which\ncame into force by proclamation on July 1st of that year, it comprised\nonly the Provinces of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick; but provision was made for the subsequent inclusion of Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, British Columbia, Rupert's Land\nand the Northwest Territories. Subsequently Rupert's Land and\nthe Northwest Territories were acquired, the Crown Colonies of\nBritish Columbia and Prince Edward Island were admitted, and\nall the other British territories and possessions in North America,\n(151) 152\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nwith the islands adjacent thereto, except Newfoundland and its\ndependencies, were annexed to Canada by Great Britain.\nCanada, consequently, now comprises the whole of the northern\n. half of North America, except Alaska, Newfoundland and that portion of Labrador which constitutes a dependency of Newfoundland.\nAll lands, mines, minerals and royalties belonging at the time of the\nunion to the several provinces of Canada (Ontario and Quebec),\nNova Scotia and New Brunswick, are declared to belong to that\none of the said provinces of Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and New\nBrunswick, in which the same are situated or have their legal origin\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nsubject, however, to any trusts existing in respect thereof or any\ninterest therein other than that of the province.\nEach of the provinces named has exclusive jurisdiction to make\nlaws for the management and sale of its public lands and of the timber\nand wood thereon, and also as to property and civil rights in the\nprovince.\nWhen discussing the extent of this jurisdiction, Mr. Justice\nRiddell, in Florence v. Cobalt, said:\n\"This is a matter of property and civil rights, by the B. N. A.\nact this is wholly within the jurisdiction of the legislature of the\nprovince; in matters within their jurisdiction, the legislatures have\nthe same powers as Parliament, and the power ... of Parliament is so transcendent and absolute, that it can not be confined,\neither for causes or persons within any bounds. ... It has\nsovereign and uncontrollable authority in the making, confirming,\nenlarging, restraining, abrogating, repealing, reviving, and expounding of laws concerning matters of all possible determinations. (Black-\nstone, Commentaries I, p. 160.) . . . 'Within the jurisdiction\ngiven the legislature of the province, no power can interfere with\nthe legislature, except of course the Dominion authorities, which\ninterference may occasion disallowance. There is no need of speaking of the paramount power of the imperial Parliament.'\"\n\"In short, the legislature within its jurisdiction can do everything that is not naturally impossible, and is restrained by no rule,\nhuman or divine\": and later in his judgment the learned judge\nsaid, \"We have no such restriction upon the power of the legislature\nas is found in some of the States.\"\nWith some exceptions, not necessary to be here specified, the\nsame rules were made applicable to Prince* Edward Island and Mining Legislation in Canada 153\nBritish Columbia. But very different conditions and regulations\nobtain in the remaining parts of Canada.\nUnder the sanction of an imperial statute, the Dominion of\nCanada obtained a surrender of the lands and territories granted by\nCharles II in 1670 to the Governor and Company of Adventurers\ntrading into Hudson's Bay, known as the Hudson's Bay Company;\nand Rupert's Land and the Northwest Territories were consequently\nadmitted into the Dominion as of July 15, 1870.\nWhen the Provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta\nwere formed, the lands, mines and minerals, with slight exceptions,\nwere not transferred to the provinces, but remained the property\nof the Dominion of Canada and subject to federal jurisdiction and\ncontrol.\nThe proposed federal mining law must deal with the mines and\nminerals of these three provinces, of all the territories, including the\nYukon Territory, and of certain areas of the older provinces, principally the Indian lands and railway belts of British Columbia. It\nmust, therefore, deal with placer-mining, coal, natural gas, oil, petroleum, gold, silver, copper and the other minerals. The whole field\nmust be covered and every problem of mining law solved.\nThe framing of this general law is regarded by mining men\nas supremely important, not only on account of the great interests actually and potentially involved, but also because it is looked\nupon as the first step towards the unification of the mining laws of\nCanada. The vital importance of such completeness, wisdom and\npractical convenience being embodied in the federal statute as will\nrecommend it to the several provinces for voluntary adoption is\ntherefore self-evident.\nWhile the Dominion has no jurisdiction over the nrining laws\nof the provinces which own mining lands, it is hoped that the provisions of the federal law, by reason of their excellence and efficiency,\nwill gradually be adopted by the various provinces.\nIn this connection a striking instance of concerted action by\nindependent jurisdictions may be mentioned. Some years.ago an\nexceedingly well-drawn act, which had become law in Great Britain,\ndealing with bills of exchange and promissory notes, was passed by\nthe Dominion Parliament, which in Canada has jurisdiction over\nthe subject matter, and by a majority of the state legislatures of the\nUnited States, so that it may now be said that this statute governs\nthe greater part of the Enghsh-speaking world. 154\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nThere is no reason why advantages similar to those which have\nbeen thus secured by the mercantile communities of Great Britain,\nthe United States and Canada should not be obtained by the mining\nworld.\nAt the present time, a discussion of the fundamental principles\nupon which such a mining law as is proposed should be based, and of\nthe merits and deficiencies of such codes as that of Mexico, would be\ninteresting and instructive, as bringing together, in useful form, the\nresults of close observation and varied experience with the mining\nlaws of the world.\nThere is no danger that any form of the so-called \"apex law\"\nwill be again introduced into Canada. That law was copied under\nthe influence of miners from the Pacific states, by British Columbia,\nbut was finally abohshed April 23, 1892, since which date the rights\nof the holder of a mineral claim are confined, in British Columbia,\nas in all other parts of Canada, to the ground bounded by vertical\nplanes drawn through its surface boundary lines. The vested rights\nof claim-owners who had located their claims under former acts were\nprotected; and the \"apex law\" in British Columbia, as elsewhere,\nhas given rise to costly litigation, which seems inherent in the system\nof extra-lateral rights.\nThere are, however, other important questions to be discussed,\nsuch as how adequately to protect the prospector without at the same\ntime introducing the danger of \"blanketing;\" the function of discovery in the acquistion of mining title; the most useful forms of\nworking conditions, and the most efficient methods of enforcing such\nregulations. Last, but not least, the ever-present and ever-troublesome questions of taxation and royalties must be considered.\nIn dealing with these problems, Canada has, fortunately, the\nopportunity of taking full advantage of the results of mining codes\nin other countries and of her own unique experience of various systems\nof law.\nThe common law of England was introduced into the greater\npart of Canada. Space will not permit even a bald outline of the\nqueenly features of My Lady of the Common Law. Her virtues have\nrecently been eloquently commended by one of her most distinguished Knights, Sir Frederick Pollock, in his most recent publications.\nSuffice it now to say that she has ever been the faithful friend Mining Legislation in Canada 155\nof liberty and justice, which, as Alexander Hamilton well said, is the\nend of government.\nOne must, however, lament that on this continent the gladsome\nlight of her jurisprudence is often darkened by crude technicalities\nand by multiplying statutes of multitudinous legislatures, amended\nuntil the confusion of ill-considered legislation is often rendered more\nconfounded.\nThat the reference to the common law is not merely a matter\nof antiquarian curiosity, but of present practical importance to the\nmining men of Canada, is sufficiently indicated by the fact that the\nrules laid down in the sixteenth century by the Justices of Queen\nElizabeth, in the mines case, were successfully invoked in the nineteenth century, before their lordships of the Judicial Committee\nof Queen Victoria's Privy Council, in the precious metals case from\nBritish Columbia; andin the twentieth century before the judges\nof Queen Victoria's successor, Edward the Peace Maker, in the\nophir case from Ontario.\nIn giving judgments in the latter of these cases, Sir John Boyd,\nChancellor of Ontario, as reported in Ontario Mining Company v.\nSeybold, 31 Ontario Reports (1899), at page 399, used the following\nlanguage:\n\"According to the law of England and of Canada, gold and silver\nmines, until they have been aptly severed from the title of the Crown\nare not regarded as 'partes soli' or as incidents of the land in which\nthey are found. The right of the Crown to waste lands in the colonies\nand the baser metals therein contained, is declared to be distinct\nfrom the title which the Crown has to the precious metals, which\nrests upon royal prerogative. Lord Watson has said in Attorney-\nGeneral of British Columbia v. Attorney-General of Canada (1889),\n14 App. Cas., at pp. 302, 303, these prerogative revenues differ in\nlegal quality from the ordinary territorial rights of the Crown.\nThese prerogative rights, however, were vested in Canada prior to\nthe Confederation by the transaction relating to the civil list which\ntook place between the Province and Her Majesty\u00E2\u0080\u0094the outcome\nof which is found in 9 Vict. ch. 114, a Canadian statue, which being\nreserved for the royal assent, received that sanction in June, 1846.\nThe hereditary revenues of the Crown, territorial and others then at\nthe disposal of the Crown, arising in the United Province of Canada\nwere thereby surrendered in consideration of provisions being made 156\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nfor defraying the expenses of the civil list. So that while the Crown\ncontinued to hold the legal title, the beneficial interest in them as royal\nmines and minerals, producing, or capable of producing revenue,\npassed to Canada. And being so held for the beneficial use of Canada\nthey passed by section 109 of the British North America act to Ontario\nby force of site.\" On appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy\nCouncil, this judgment Was affirmed.\nThe mining laws of Canada have been influenced, not only\nby the common law of England, but also both directly and indirectly,\nthrough the United States, by the customary rights of the bounders\nof Cornwall and Devon, by the sturdily asserted rights of the free\nminers of the Forest of Dean, and the Hundred of St. Briavel in Gloucester, and by the curious local customs according to which the lead\nmines of Derbyshire have been worked from time immemorial.\nThese customs, as declared by the Imperial Parliament, were sanctioned by legislation; and the curious will find an interesting discussion of them in the judgments of the House of Lords in Wake v. Hall,\n8 Appeal Cases, 195.\nThe analogy of one feature of the mining law of Cornwall has\nrecently been followed to a considerable extent in Ontario, with very\nbeneficial results, by the appointment of a judicial officer, known\nas the Mining Commissioner, who is clothed with very extensive\nauthority and jurisdiction to determine mining disputes.\nThe Stannary Court exercised jurisdiction over the tinners in\nCornwall, who forced recognition of their immemorial rights from\nKing John. The jurisdiction of the Stannary Court extended to all\nsuits, with certain exceptions where land, life or limb was involved,\nbetween miners, even though the cause of action did not arise from the\nworking of the mines within the stannaries; and also to actions\nbetween miners and strangers, but in such cases, only to actions arising out of mining within the stanneries, unless the stranger attorned\nto the jurisdiction. The exceptions to the jurisdiction of the Stannaries Court, above referred to, were expressed in the famous Charter\n33 Edward the First, granted to the rniners in the words, \"exceptis\nplacitis terrae et vitae et membrorum.\"\nThe leading rules of the mining law of the Province of Quebec\nwere mainly derived from the French law, which in turn, was founded\non the Roman. The civil law, though greatly modified, is still in\nforce in the Province of Quebec. The rules of the later Roman law Mining Legislation in Canada 157\nwere in force in Gaul at the time of the disruption of the Roman\nEmpire, and were retained by the Gauls, dominating, not by reason\nof imperial power, but by the imperial power of reason.\nThese rules were brought by the French to the peaceful banks of\nthe St. Lawrence, which were not disturbed by the thunders of\nL'Assembled Nationale, or by its law of 1791, which declared,\n\"Les mines sont a la disposition de la nation.\"\nMany mining men came to British Columbia from California,\nwhere parts of Spanish mining laws were still in force; and, beyond\nquestion, the laws of Spain have been indirectly a factor in moulding\nthe mining laws of Canada.\nIn a very able and useful address before the Society of Arts\nin London, England, Dr. James Douglas has discussed the effect\nof the land'and mining laws of the United States upon its marvelous\ndevelopment. One may be allowed to express the hope that Dr.\nDouglas will extend his exposition across the boundary line, so that\nhis native country may, in connection with the revision, consolidation and codification of its mining laws, obtain the benefit of his\npenetrating insight, keen analysis and ripe experience.\nIn Canada there are immense deposits of economic minerals\nto reward the explorer, the miner and the investor. If Canadians\nchoose, in perfecting their mining laws, they have at their disposal\na marvelous wealth of experience, rich with the spoils of time and with\nthe reasoned conclusions of the great systems of jurisprudence which\nhave contributed most to civilization and to human progress.\nThe hope may be expressed that the legislators of this continent\nwill constantly bear in mind the words of one of the greatest hving\nauthorities on jurisprudence, from whom I have already quoted,\nSir F. Pollock, who states as the criteria of just laws in a civilized\ncommunity: \"Generality, equality and certainty,\" these three, but\nfrom the standpoint of the mining industry, the greatest of these is\nsurely \"certainty.\" CANADIAN BANKING\nBy H. M. P. Eckardt,\nAuthor of \"A Rational Banking System\" and \"Manual of Canadian Banking.\"\nIt was remarked by an American writer a few years ago, when\nthe tide of immigration had begun to run strongly towards the\nprairie provinces, that the capacity of the Canadian banking system\nwould be severely tested by the abnormal influx of population.\nRailway construction was active; and many of the newcomers,\nespecially the farmers from the western states, were large-scale\nproducers. So there has been continuous need of extensive banking\nfacilities. The following table shows the growth in ten years of the\nfour western provinces:\nProvinces\nPopu\n1911\nla tion\n1901\nIncrease\nPer cent\nAlberta.. \t\n374,663\n392,480\n455,614\n492,432\n73,022\n178,657\n255,211\n91,279\n413\nBritish Columbia\t\nManitoba\t\n120\n79\nSaskatchewan\t\n439\nTotal\t\n1,715,189\n598,169\n187\nWestern Canada's increase of population in the decade was\n1,117,020, which figure represented about 61 per cent of the increase\nshown by all Canada.\nIt will be interesting now to see whether the banking development in the western half of the Dominion has kept pace with the\ngrowth of population. The banking offices in the four provinces in\n1911 and 1901, respectively, were:\nProvinces\nBanking Offices\nIncrease\nPer cent\n1911\n1901\nBritish Columbia\t\n211\n192\n2201\n320/\n46\n52\n301\n359\nManitoba\t\n269\nAlberta\t\n1.6331\nTotal\t\n943\n128\n637\nxIn 1901 Alberta and Saskatchewan were both comprised in the Northwest Territories.\n(158) Canadian Banking 159\nThis table shows that so far as number of banking offices is\nconcerned, the increase has been relatively greater than the increase\nof population. While the population has scarcely trebled, the number\nof bank offices has increased six-fold.\nIn order that the reader may grasp the full significance of the\ndetails which follow, it is advisable to describe the nature of the\nbanking offices here referred to and the services they perform for\nthe public. It will be remembered that when the western states\nwere passing through the stage in which the western Canadian\nprovinces now are, their financial needs were looked after by a large\nnumber of private bankers and small banks. Many of the small\nbanks were run as side lines by enterprising real estate and.loan\nagents. Rates of interest were very high, If and 2 per cent a month\nbeing the regular charge in most small places. In numberless cases\nthese so-called private bankers amassed wealth through acquiring\non their own terms the land of unfortunate debtors who were crushed\nby the usurious rates of interest. These conditions, be it remembered,\nwere in evidence in many of the small places. In the larger towns\nthere was more competition, the banks possessed a greater capacity\nfor lending and the borrowers had a better chance. But rates were\nhigh there also, as much of the paper had to be rediscounted in the\nEast at seven per cent or thereabouts.\nThe banking offices established in western Canada are not at\nall of this description. Twenty-one banks operate the 900 odd\nbranches established in the western provinces at the end of 1911.\nRoundly one-third of the whole number are accounted for by two\ninstitutions\u00E2\u0080\u0094the Union Bank of Canada and the Canadian Bank of\nCommerce. At the end of 1911 the Union had 160 branches in\nwestern Canada and the Commerce had 147. Since then both have\nestablished a considerable number of new branches, and the Commerce acquired the fifteen western branches of the Eastern Townships Bank when it absorbed that institution on March 1, 1912.\nAccording to the government bank statement, as of October 31, 1912,\nthe total resources of the Commerce were $242,390,445, and the\nresources of the Union were $69,782,860.\nFollowing these two leaders are the Merchants Bank of Canada,\nassets $85,180,283, and seventy-seven western branches as at the end\nof 1911; the Bank of Hamilton, assets $48,445,752, and seventy-seven\nwestern branches; the Northern Crown Bank, assets $21,914,693, and /^\n160\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nseventy-six western branches; the Royal Bank of Canada, assets\n$174,593,141, and sixty-three western branches; the Imperial Bank of\nCanada, assets $79,215,380, and fifty-six western branches; the Bank\nof Montreal, assets $237,182,345, and fifty western branches; the\nBank of British North America, assets $65,762,227, and fifty western\nbranches; the Bank of Toronto, assets $58,731,059, and thirty-one\nwestern branches; the Dominion Bank, assets $76,098,111, and\ntwenty-five western branches; the Bank of Ottawa, assets $51,388,-\n311, and nineteen western branches; the Standard Bank of Canada,\nassets $40,583,318, and fifteen western branches.\nThese thirteen banks accounted for 846 of the western branches;\nthe -remaining ninety-seven were established by ten other banks,\ntwo of which have since been absorbed. By its absorption of the\nTraders Bank of Canada on September 1, 1912, the Royal Bank of\nCanada acquired the twenty-three western branches of the Traders.\nA number of the banks which are assisting to develop the western\nprovinces in the financial way, and which are not included in the\nabove list, are large and powerful concerns. Thus the Bank of\nNova Scotia has assets of $67,279,856; the Molsons Bank, $52,221,-\n410; the Quebec Bank, $12,607,646; the Banque d' Hochelaga,\n$30,610,804; the Home Bank of Canada, $12,899,410. But they\neach had less than ten branches in the West at the end of 1911.\nIt is to be remembered, too, that practically all of the above-named\nbanks have extensive branch systems in the East as well. Not a\nfew of them have more branches in the East than in the West. The\ntotal of bank branches in eastern Canada as yet exceeds the branches\nin western Canada by about seven hundred. Another point to be\ncarefully noted is that the chief executive office and the control lies\nin the East in all cases except two. The Union Bank of Canada and\nthe Northern Crown are the only two banks with head offices in the\nWest. The first-named of these institutions was organized and had\nits head office in the City of Quebec; its stock is held chiefly in the\nEast. But the western business of the bank ultimately assumed\nsuch vast proportions as to cause the removal of the head office to\nWinnipeg a little over a year ago. As the western business of the\nother eastern banks developed to large proportions, they appointed\nwestern superintendents, western inspectors, western supervisors\nand other executive officers to be domiciled at the western centers.\nThe foregoing figures give a clear idea as to the kind of banking Canadian Banking\n161\noffices that have been established in communities of new settlers\nand in the rapidly growing cities and towns of the West. Before\ndescribing the services which the bank branches perform for the\npublic, it will be well to show in what kind of places the bank branches\nare located. It has often been observed that even under the poorest\nof banking systems the large towns and cities will be given fairly\ngood banking facilities. But it is only under the soundest and best\nsystems that the small towns and villages get adequate facilities at\nfair and reasonable cost. Now let us see in what manner the banking\noffices hi western Canada are distributed. A series of tables will\nset out the particulars so as to be most easily understood:\nBank Offices in the Cities\nProvince\nNo. of Cities\nAggregate\nPopulation\nBank\nOffices\nInhabitants\nper Bank\nAlberta\t\nBritish Columbia\t\n6\n25\n4\n4\n90,252\n203,684\n163,249\n62,294\n61\n142\n65\n42\n1,480\n1,434\nManitoba\t\n2,511\nSaskatchewan\t\n1,483,\nWest Canada\t\n39\n519,479\n310\n1,676\nIt will be noted that roughly one-third of the bank offices in\nwestern Canada are in the cities. In this class there is an average\nof 1,676 inhabitants per bank office. In my book \"A Rational\nBanking System,\" thirty-four of the principal cities in the United\nStates were taken as regards their bank offices and population as in\n1908; and the average number of inhabitants per bank office for\nBank Offices in Incorporated Towns\nProvince\nAlberta.\t\nBritish Columbia2\nManitoba\t\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 Saskatchewan.\nWest Canada.\nNo. of\nTowns\n27\n24\n50\n101\nAggregate\nPopulation\n25,881\n26,926\n37,504\n90,311\nBank\nOffices\n47\n97\n199\nInhabitants\nper Bank\n471\n573\n387\n454\n2 British Columbia's population according to census report is all contained in the cities\nand large electoral districts. 162\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nthe thirty-four cities was 9,700. Des Moines, with a bank office\nto every three thousand inhabitants, had the lowest average; and\nthe figures ranged from that up to the average of 27,400 in the case\nof New York.\nTaking the towns next, the table on page 161 shows results.\nRelatively to population, the 101 towns in western Canada,\nhave about four times as many bank offices as the cities. The\naverage town is a place with about nine hundred inhabitants.\nFinally, we arrive at the incorporated villages, which in western\nCanada are usually very small places.\nBank Offices\nin Incorporated Villages\nProvince\nNo. of\nVillages\nAggregate\nPopulation\nBank\nOffices\nInhabitants\nper Bank\nAlberta\t\n82\n21\n195\n26,779\n10,190\n31,596\n70\n20\n151\n383\nBritish Columbia8\nManitoba\t\n509\nSaskatchewan\t\n209\nWest Canada\t\n298\n68,565\n241\n284\nRelatively to population the villages again have more banking\noffices than the towns. Now, bearing in mind the high standing of\neach individual bank office and the vast extent of its potential resources (in every case the signatures of the duly accredited officers\nat the branch, on drafts and other such documents, bind the bank),\ntake particular note of the following.\nThe average incorporated town in western Canada has about\nnine hundred inhabitants and two banks; the average incorporated\nvillage has 230 inhabitants, and, we might say, one bank\u00E2\u0080\u0094for there\nis an average of 284 people to each banking office.\nThat certainly is a remarkable showing. On the average basis\npractically every one of the towns with 900 population has effective\ncompetition in the form of two branch offices of great and powerful\nbanks; and four out of every five villages of 284 souls, have a branch\noffice of a big bank. When these small places in Alberta and Saskatchewan are taken according togactual facts, instead of on the\naverage basis, the showing is even more impressive. Here is a hst\n'See foot note to table on towns. Canadian Banking\n163\nof villages in each of which two great banks were competing for the\nbusiness of the villagers and of the farmers in the surrounding district\nat the end of 1911. The names of the villages will, of course, possess\nno particular meaning or significance for American readers; the\npopulation in each case is the significant thing:\nVillages in Alberta and Saskatchewan with more than One Bank\nVillage\nPopulation\nBanks\nAlberta:\nAlix\t\n267\n227\n540\n486\n286\n270\n1,659\n250\n583\n222\n92\n245\n531\n59\n239\n390\n709\n606\n239\n559\n320\n104\n134\n156\n233\n317\n515\n264\nUnion, Quebec.\nImperial, Royal.\nCommerce, Union.\nMerchants, Union-\nCommerce, Hamilton.\nMerchants, Union.\nAthabasca\t\nBassano\t\nBrooks\t\nCarmangay\t\nCarstaris\t\nCastor\t\nGranum\t\nGleichen '\t\nMerchants, Traders.\nCommerce, Hamilton.\nCommerce, Traders.\nTJoyHminstftr\t\nCommerce, Northern Crown.\nMunson\t\nMerchants, Traders.\nStaveley\t\nfit-rflthmorp.\nCommerce, Hamilton.\nCommerce, Union.\nSaskatchewan:\nBounty\t\nDundwin\t\nCommerce, Union.\nHamilton, Northern Crown\nGovan\t\nQuebec, Northern Crown.\nDominion, TrTflrm1tJ\">ti.\nCSrfinfpl \t\nMerchants, Union.\nHalbrite\t\nStandard, Weyburn.\nHerbert\t\nKerrobert\t\nLuseland\t\nMcTaggart\t\nMidale\t\nRadville\t\nRosetown\t\nWynard\t\nZealandia\t\nCommerce, Union.\nCommerce, Union.\nRoyal, Union.\nStandard, Weyburn.\nStandard, Weyburn.\nCommerce, Weyburn.\nRoyal, Union.\nBritish, Imperial\nRoyal, Union.\nTo complete the picture I am adding a list of the Alberta and\nSaskatchewan villages with population less than 100, each one having\na branch of a big bank. (See page 164.)\nIt will be noted that when the banking offices established in all\nthe cities, towns, and incorporated villages, are taken, they do not\naccount for the whole number of bank branches actually in operation in the four provinces. The total number of offices in the cities,\n. 164\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nBanking Points in Alberta and Saskatchewan with Population less\nthan 100, and not included in the foregoing table\nVillage\nAlberta:\nBarons\t\nIslay\t\nN. Norway..\nPenhold\t\nSaskatchewan:\nAdanac\t\nBelle Plain...\nChurchbridge\nColgate\t\nDuval\t\nGirvin\t\nGoodwater...\nGr. Coulee...\nItuna\t\nJansen\t\nKinley\t\nLampman....\nLaura\t\nMaidstone. ..\nMarquis\t\nNetherhill....\nOsage\t\nPelly\t\nPunnichy\nStornoway. ..\nSummerberry\nTessier\t\nTompkins....\nVenn\t\nViscount\t\nWebb\t\nPopulation\n75\n90\n61\n94\n73\n82\n90\n95\n81\n39\n75\n82\n95\n63\n51\n96\n82\n9?\n88\n80\n72\n82\n73\n52\n79\n65\n90\n58\n72\n75\nBank, with Assets of\nUnion $69,000,000\nMerchants 85,000,000\nMerchants 85,000,000\nStandard 40,000,000\nUnion 69,000,000\nHamilton 48,000,000\nToronto 58,000,000\nWeyburn 1,000,000\nNorthern Crown. ..21,000,000\nBritish 65,000,000\nStandard 40,000,000\nHamilton 48,000,000\nBritish 65,000,000\nUnion 69,000,000\nNorthern Crown. ..21,000,000\nBritish 65,000,000\nNorthern Crown... 21,000,000\nStandard 40,000,000\nHamilton 48,000,000\nUnion 69,000,000\nHamilton 48,000,000\nToronto 58,000,000\nBritish 65,000,000\nNorthern Crown... 21,000,000\nToronto 58,000,000\nUnion 69,000,000\nUnion 69,000,000\nNorthern Crown... 21,000,000\nNorthern Crown... 21,000,000\nUnion 69,000,000\ntowns, and villages is 750; while the total number in the western\nprovinces is 943. The difference, 193, represents the bank branches\nin small places which were not incorporated even as villages at the\nend of 1911. Of these offices Alberta has 34; British Columbia,\n69; Manitoba, 60; Saskatchewan, 30.\nWhere, in all the world, can a similar spectacle be found?\nCanada has no central bank, possessing a monopoly of note issue and\nother exclffive privileges, and which is supposed to have a wonderful\nability to prevent panics and equalize the interest rate. Nevertheless the great mass of the Canadian people outside the cities and large Canadian Banking 165\ntowns have banking facilities which I think are superior to those\npossessed by the people of any European country.\nIn the current number of Banking Reform the editor intimates\nthat the high interest rates in the rural districts of the United States\nrepresent one of the minor causes of the movement of American\nfarmers to Canada. He says, \"Even in the heart of the Canadian\nwilderness, far removed from a railroad, the homesteader need not\npay more than eight per cent for borrowed capital, whereas in sparsely\nsettled parts of the United States he must often pay from 12 to 15\nper cent. The difference in interest is the difference between a\nscientific banking system and a system which is the laughing stock\nof the civilized world.\" And he concludes, \"We do not want a\nbranch banking system, but we can procure its advantages, including\nmore nearly uniform interest rates, by revising our banking laws.\"\nIt seems unlikely that the residents of the small towns and\nvillages of the United States will be placed on anything like an equality with the residents of similar places in Canada until sound, strong\nbanks are at liberty to establish branches where they will. Probably\nthe most scientific and effective parts of the Canadian bank's equipment are its branch machinery and its issue power.\nWe have now learned something about the question of how\"\nlarge a settlement in western Canada must be before it can expect\nto have a chartered bank branch, also something about the size and\npower of the banks which go into these settlements. It is in order\nnext to discuss the nature of the support which is given to the small\ncommunity by the branch bank and to ascertain what it is that\nenables these great banks to place their facilities and services directly\nat the disposal of such humble communities.\nIt will be understood that within a village of less than 100\npopulation the bank will not find much business to transact. There\nwould be perhaps less than thirty families. Of course, everybody\nexpects that \"the town will grow.\" The bank shares in this expectation; and, besides, the head office has probably estimated that for\nthe first year or two after the estabhshment of the branch, it will be\noperated at a loss. However, no bank branch would be established\nin a very small village unless the village was surrounded by a good\nfarming country. The bank expects to derive a large part of its\nbusiness from the farmers\u00E2\u0080\u0094that is the principal reason why it goes\ninto a village of less than 100 souls. 166\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nAs it is a new country, in which land values are rising and\ndevelopment work much in evidence on all sides, fixed or permanent\ndeposits are not plentiful. There is a considerable amount of transient money. The new settlers bring in cash which lies for a little\nwhile; but that is soon expended in equipping the farm. The bank\nalso does some business in exchange\u00E2\u0080\u0094cashing items on other places\nand transferring funds elsewhere. But its principal functions are to\nprovide currency for the transaction of business and to lend to all\nlocal parties worthy of credit. The retail tradesman, as soon as he\nsatisfies the bank that he is an honest, capable man, with perhaps\na little capital of his own, can discount from day to day the notes\ngiven him by good farmers in settlement of their accounts. He can\nalso on occasions procure direct loans from the bank on giving a\ngood endorser or other suitable security.\nThis helps him immensely and enables him to deal with the\nwholesalers on better terms. Everybody in the village who can give\nthe requisite security, down to the blacksmith or tinsmith, can\nborrow for business purposes.\nWhile the branch banks cannot make long-term loans, on mortgages or otherwise, to the farmer, they can and do enable him to\nanticipate the receipt of proceeds of his crop. A responsible man\ncan begin to borrow as soon as his seed is in the ground. The bank\nwill advance funds for the purchase of horses, implements, clothing\nand provisions, for wages, threshing expenses and other expenses\nincidental to the work of the farm\u00E2\u0080\u0094one condition thereof being that\nthe aggregate of loans to an individual farmer must not exceed the\namount which he can repay in full on disposing of his crops in the\nfall or winter. If a good borrower is hailed out or meets with some\nother misfortune which prevents him paying off his loans in full,\nthe bank is obliged to wait for its money until he takes off his next\ncrop. The general rate in the new districts is eight per cent. But the\nlow rate of interest which the editor of Banking Reform referred to in\nhis comparison of conditions in the United States and Canada is not\nthe only good thing conferred on the community by the branch bank.\nIt is a matter of common knowledge that in the United States\nwhere a brand new settlement is dependent on local note-shavers or\nso-called banks, they have various devices, apart from 12 to 15 per\ncent money, for appropriating the hard-earned profits of the settlers.\nBy means of fees for documents, commissions on loans, etc., they\n^samm\nm Canadian Banking 167\nmanage to supplement their earnings to a considerable extent. And,\nas mentioned in an earlier paragraph, there are numberless cases\nwherein a private lender of this type would make an advance to a\nfarmer or another with the ulterior object of dispossessing him of\nhis property.\nAgainst tactics of that kind the borrowers from the branch\nbank in the tiny Canadian village are absolutely safe. In the first\nplace the rate of interest they have to pay, eight per cent, gives them\na chance to make good. Next the manager of the branch bank is\nforbidden to engage in any outside business or activity. He must\ngive his whole attention to the bank's business. For any assignments\nor pledges executed by the borrower on the bank's forms, no charge\nis made; and there are no fees, commissions or extras except the\ncharges on remitted checks, drafts, etc., which vary from one-tenth\nto one-fourth of one per cent.\nWhen misfortune places one of its borrowers in the hands of the\nbranch bank, its rules and traditions forbid its officers from taking\nundue advantage. All they are allowed to do is to recover the funds\nactually advanced by the bank. If the borrower has a good chance to\nrehabiHtate himself in a reasonable time, the bank will not press him.\nUnder certain circumstances, if he can give the necessary security,\nit may even lend him an additional sum. But if his condition is\nhopeless, the bank realizes on its security, and if possible reimburses\nitself for the loan, interest and expenses of realization. Any surplus,\nif unattached, goes to the borrower.\nFinally we arrive at the question: To what characteristics\nof the Canadian banking system are the small agricultural communities indebted for the splendid facuities they enjoy? It is not difficult\nto find the answer. Unrestricted liberty in the matter of estabhshing\nbranch offices is unquestionably the most important factor; the\nsecond is the fact that the power of note issue is not centralized in\nthe government or in a state bank. It is only through the operation\nof the branch system that the small communities can obtain the banking facilities to which they are entitled. Imagine the reception\nthat would be accorded by Comptroller Murray to an application for\na national bank charter corning from a village with but eighty inhabitants. He would say \"No! Certainly not. Your village could not\nsupport a bank.\" And he would be quite right; for a village of that\nsize, even if located in the midst of a good agricultural district, could 168 The Annals of the American Academy\nnot give enough business to support an independent bank with full\ncomplement of directors and officers. The only chance would he\nin the operation of a \"bank\" as a side line by the local loan and\ninsurance agent; and we have seen what that means in many cases.\nUnder the branch system a real banking office can be operated\nat the minimum expense. Two men\u00E2\u0080\u0094a manager and junior\u00E2\u0080\u0094comprise the whole staff. The office is worked on an economical basis, as\na part of a system of perhaps twenty or thirty branches in the province\nor district. As mentioned already, it may be expected to return\na loss for the first year or two; and after that the bank may be satisfied if it returns $100 or $200 per year for a series of years while the\nplace is growing to a respectable size. The right of note issue figures\nconspicuously as a means of economical operation. The notes\nissued by the branch provide the currency in use in the village and\nsurrounding country. The bank has the use of the funds represented\nby the circulation which is outstanding. And a further stock of\nunissued notes, which of course represent no cash investment, suffices\nfor till money. The only actual cash the branch need carry would\nbe $100 or so in silver coins and a few .$1 and $2 bills for change\n(the banks cannot issue notes under $5 denomination). It need not\ncarry anything as reserve against its habihties; the manager need\nnot concern himself about them at all. The head office has to look\nout for the liabilities of all the branches. If the branch needs cash\nof any description, it merely wires the nearest depot branch and the\ncash probably arrives next day.\nWhen the sub-committee of the National Monetary Commission\nvisited Canada two or three years ago, Hon. Mr. Vreelaiid questioned\nMr. Daniel R. WilMe, president of the Imperial Bank of Canada, and\nrecently elected president of the Canadian Bankers' Association,\non the matter of the branch offices and the issue power. In reply\nto a question of Mr. Vreeland's, Mr. WilMe said, \"Without our\nsystem of currency, without the inducement of being able to supply\nthe currency required from the banks' own issues, we could not keep\nthe bulk of our branches open. If our currency laws were changed\nand we were not permitted to issue our own notes, nine-tenths of these\nbranches would be closed. It would not pay us. It is only because\nwe have unlimited till money always available. It is only because\nwe have power to issue our own bills that we are opening branches.\nThat is the crux of the whole matter. It is not only the starting Canadian Banking 169\npoint of our banks, but without it our banking system could never\nhave developed the country to the condition it is in to-day. It\ncould not be done.\"\nIt should be remembered that it is a system of free or plural\nissues that has worked so beneficently in Canada. If there had\nbeen established in the Dominion at a comparatively early day, a\ncentral bank or banking association with monopoly of note issue\nthe development of the ordinary banks would most certainly have\nbeen checked, their usefulness seriously impaired. The great banks\nof the Dominion owe their greatness to their extensive systems of\nbranches. We have seen that the right of note issue has enabled\nthem to extend their branch systems. Therefore it is clear that if\nthe issue power had been confined to a central bank, the branch\nsystems of the ordinary banks could not have been developed as they\nhave been and they would have been hopelessly dwarfed, to the great\ninjury of the whole country. Those small villages of 100 and 200\npopulation would never have been given bank branches if the issue\npower were monopolized by a central bank; and the inhabitants of\nthose villages and of large villages and towns would have been left\nto the tender mercies of the private bankers and the loan sharks.\nUnder the Canadian system there are no intermediaries between\nthe issue banks and the humble borrower. The connection is direct\nand intimate. The bank of issue goes right into the country and\nlends directly to the small people. Mr. H. V. Meredith, the vice-\npresident and general manager of the Bank of Montreal, told the\nstockholders of the bank at the annual meeting on December 2, 1912,\nthat the loans of the Bank of Montreal to farmers and small traders\namount to many millions of dollars. And the heads of the other\ngreat banks\u00E2\u0080\u0094the Commerce, the Royal, the Merchants, Imperial,\nDominion, etc., could say the same thing.\nThe financial system of the country is not complicated by a\nmass of rediscounts. Borrowers have direct access in all parts of\nthe country to the funds of the banks of issue. Of course, Canada\nis a new country in process of very rapid development, and the\ndemand for money and credit is enormous. Under those circumstances it is inevitable that interest rates on the whole should be\nwell above the rates prevailing in Europe. The higher rates are\nnecessary, for one thing, to attract capital to the country. I venture\nto say that if the Canadian banking system had been cut after the m\n170\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nEuropean models, it never would have expanded so easily and\nsmoothly with the great growth of the last decade. The monopolies\nand special privileges would perhaps have been the indirect cause\nof one breakdown after another. Because the banks are free and\nequal, because they have been left in full possession of their natural\nfunctions, they have developed rapidly and strongly; and they\nhave earned the respect of the whole world for the manner in which\nthey have financed the country's growth.\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094 CANADA AND HER ART\nBy Eric Brown,\nDirector of National Art Gallery, Ottawa, Canada.\nThe art of a young nation is a changeling in the home. It is\na daughter born to parents absorbed in the achievement of material\nprosperity, who with all the good will in the world cannot understand\nand know how to educate those qualities which they see developing\nin their child so strongly and so differently from their own. So it is\nthat her childhood is neglected and her youth misunderstood and\nnot until the compelling power of womanhood animates her does\nthat misunderstanding yield to admiration and disdain to applause.\nIt might be said with some truth that it is the first scarce conscious realization of maturity that typifies the development of Canadian art to-day and it is bringing with it such problems as how to\ndevelop and foster an appreciation of that art in due ratio to the\ngrowth of its production and how to encourage the art itself to\ndevelop and expand its ideals along national lines. These are great\nquestions, greater perhaps to those within than to those without, for\nthose within can see that it is largely by means of the arts, esthetics\nand handicrafts that the tremendous material energy of the country must be refined and a right direction given to its surplus wealth.\nTake the crafts, textile and other handicrafts. In addition to\nthe industries preserved among the inhabitants of Quebec, the Scotch\nand Irish peasants of the eastern provinces and the Indian tribes\nscattered throughout the Dominion, which are now being encouraged\nwith good result by guilds and societies of wise and far-seeing people,\nthere is a ceaseless flood of immigrants pouring into western Canada\nevery year, bringing their industrial traditions with them. A large\nproportion of them come from Europe and almost invariably they\nbring with them some native craft which has been a joy and a profit\nto their ancestors and their village since time immemorial. Here,\nin the long winters when the farm work is light, there is leisure and\nincentive to work at the old craft\u00E2\u0080\u0094the skill they inherit\u00E2\u0080\u0094but where\nare the materials, the markets and often the designs? These we\nmust provide or these arts and crafts will be quickly lost, and here,\nagain, it is the surplus wealth of the country wMch needs to be\n(171) 172 The Annals op the American Academy\ndirected into right channels and educated to see more value, satisfaction and beauty in some article, however humble, which is hallowed\nby the individual creative thought rather than stamped and standardized by the patterned perfection of the machine. It is a great\nwork and as yet the laborers are few.\nSo it is or has been with the finer arts. The pioneer in the\nartistic wilderness needs an even greater heart than Ms brother in\nthe forest. He has to meet an obhquity and disdain more cruel\nthan the obstinacy of manimate things or the hardsMps of climate.\nIn Canada he has met them and in a large measure has conquered\nthem, and, as I have said, the situation is that the artistic production\nis increasing in leaps and bounds in quality and quantity, and the\nproblem is now to encourage and foster it and provide a market\nfor it by instilling into those who, during its infancy, satisfied their\ndesires with foreign pictures, the fact that there is now an art in their\nmidst, different but not inferior, crying for recognition and that they\nmust put aside foreign standards and ideals and judge it and appreciate it as one of their most valuable possessions. I would insist\nthat the art of a country, and especially of a young country, is its\nmost valuable national asset because it is the expression of all that\nis most elevating, trathful and permanent in the national acMeve-\nment. No nation can be truly great until it has a great art, and to\nrevert to an earlier simile, the advantage of the parents' study of\nthe child's character is obviously mutual.\nWith regard to the Mstory of Canadian art, there is not a great\ndeal to record. The great hearts, pioneered in the wilderness, broke\nthe roads and laid the foundations and all honor is due to them.\n' About the middle of the nineteenth century, G. T. Berthon\ncame from Vienne, France, to paint portraits in Toronto. His father\nhad been one of the most promising pupils of the great David.\nBerthon's work included portraits of the most eminent Canadians\nof Ms day.\nDarnel Fowler came from England in 1843. For fourteen years\nhe farmed in Ontario. For the next thirty he painted m water-\ncolor under the influence of the great nineteenth century school of\nBritish water-color painters.\nOtto R. Jacobi, court painter to the Duke of Nassau at Wies-\nladen, came to Canada in 1860 and lived and painted there for the\nrest of Ms life. Canada and Her Art 173\nPaul Kane, pioneer in the forest as in Ms art, traveled thousands\nof miles by canoe, horse and snowshoe to obtain Ms pictures and\nportraits of Indians and their customs.\nWyatt Eaton was the friend and biographer of Millet, Fraser,\nO'Brien, Kreighoff, Benom Irwin and many others whose names are\nhousehold words in the tale of early Canadian art.\nFrom these individuals was formed, in 1867, the first organization of Canadian painters, called the Society of Canadian Artists.\nTMs orgamzation was followed by the Ontario Society of Artists,\nthe oldest living organization of artists in the Dominion. It is now\nflourishing vigorously under the presidency of Mr. Wyly Grier, R.C.A.\nIt is the art body that introduces the young talent to the world\nof publicity. It has had a varied career, but of late years its annual\nexMbitions have witnessed a great revival and the foremost artistic\ntalent of Canada is being largely recruited from its ranks.\nThen came the Royal Canadian Academy, founded in 1880,\non the traditions of the Royal Academy of England, by the then\nMarquis of Lome and H. R. H. Princess Louis during the term of\ntheir vice-royalty. It includes in its ranks of academicians and\nassociates, all the foremost artists, sculptors, designers and architects in the Domimon. Its president is Mr. WiMam Brymner,\nand it is good to note that its annual exMbitions, wMch best reflect\nthe artistic progress of the country, are of an ever-improving quality.\nIt is very inadequately supported by the government, but notwithstanding it has for the past thirty years done a great and good work\nin encouragmg and stimulating the artistic endeavor of the Dominion wMch it was wisely created to centralize and express.\nUp to the present its annual exMbitions have been held in Montreal, Toronto and Ottawa in turn, with an occasional exMbition\nin other towns, but the time is coming wMch will demand its presence in the western provinces. Winnipeg has just opened the first\nCanadian Mumcipal Art Gallery with a representative exMbition\nof Canadian art under the auspices of the Royal Canadian Academy.\nTMs will assuredly be followed by the other provinces no less\nprogressive nor unmindful of the needs of their growing population.\nThen there is the Canadian Art Club, with headquarters in\nToronto, a five-year old secession from the Ontario Society of Artists. Its share in the good work is the specialty it is making of\nreumting with Canadians in its exMbitions, the work of those men 174\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nwho in the earlier days were forced to seek recogmtion in the Umted\nStates and in Europe. Homer Watson, R.C.A., is its president,\nand its annual exMbitions hold many mteresting pictures, albeit\nit seems to be somewhat departing from the ideal of an independent\nsecession wMch was the reason of its birth.\nCanada's art museums and art schools are yet in their infancy,\nat least m numbers. Monteal has its art association, due entirely\nto private enterprise. It contains an interesting permanent collection, largely the result of bequests; and the best art school in the\ncountry, whose advanced classes are under the direction of Mr.\nWilliam Brymner, P.R.C.A. To mark its progression and prosperity it has recently moved into a new and most palatial home in the\nfinest section in the city.\nToronto has the Art Museum of Toronto, a magnificent site\nfor wMch was recently bequeathed by the late Dr. Goldwin Smith.\nThe site is in Ms old home, The Grange. Plans are being prepared\nfor the new building and there is no reason to doubt that Toronto\nwill shortly have an art center worthy of the greatest English-\nspeaking city in the Dommion.\nThe Ontario College of Art is also in Toronto, and has recently\npassed tMough a much-needed reorganization. Under the presidency of Mr. George Reid, R.C.A., it may be expected to do even\nbetter work than in the past towards the training of the young idea.\nWinnipeg, as I have mentioned, has just opened the first Mtmi-\ncipal Art Gallery in Canada\u00E2\u0080\u0094a step the importance of wMch can\nhardly be overestimated. It marks that point of development\nwhen the esthetic has become a necessity to the progressive thought,\nand the surplus wealth will thereby be attracted towards that\nelement of the country's production wMch is its greatest refining\ninfluence.\nFor the rest of Canada, however, there is little encouragement\ngiven to art, and the need is great. There is no lack of talent or\nappreciation; it is springing up and bearing fruit on all sides where\nthere is the proper soil and cultivation. Given the art schools and\nart galleries, they will be filled, and it should be the work of each\nprovincial government and each mumcipahty to provide at least\nsome training wMch may convince the aspirant of Ms fitness or\nunfitness to enter the world of artistic production.\nAnd lastly there is the National Art Gallery at Ottawa, the\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2tfbaoMi 'Canada and Her Art 175\ncapital of the Domimon. Founded as the repository of the Royal\nCanadian Academician's diploma pictures in 1880, it has existed\nfor thirty-two years, but oMy lived, it might be said, for the last\nfive, when an Advisory Arts Council was appomted by the government to spend its annual grants and to some extent administer its\naffairs. The president of the Advisory Arts Council is Sir Edmund\nWalker, C.V.O., LL.D., D.C.L. A director was appointed in 1910\nand the National Gallery was granted more spacious though still\ntemporary quarters in the Victoria Memorial Museum, where it\nnow occupies tMee floors m the east wing, the two lower devoted\nto a well-arranged and interesting collection of casts and the top\nfloor to one large picture gallery and seven small ones. Here, at\nleast, one may study the rise and progress of Canadian art in its\nentirety. Every artist of note is represented, and it is the intention\nof the National Gallery to provide a most complete collection of\nCanadian art from its earliest days and at the same time the best\ncollection procurable of the world's artistic endeavor.\nThe five years of systematic government have done much, and\nthere is much more yet to do; but at least it can be said\nthat in addition to the representation of Canadian art the visitor\ncan follow the Mstory of the. world's art from the primitive Italians\nto Caravaggio, the first of the great naturalists, and tMough the\ngreat Dutch and Spamsh schools of the seventeenth century to the\neighteenth century school of English portrait painters, fathered by\nThornhill and Hogarth, and thence to the broken color inlpressioMst\nwho seeks to let the light of Ms picture shine before men by placmg\nMs pure colors side by side mstead of mixing them. Hogarth, Reynolds, Gainsborough, Hoppner, Beechey and Lawrence are finely\nrepresented by portraits; Millais by Ms portrait of The MarqMs\nof Lome, founder of the Royal Canadian Academy; Watts by a\nreplica of Ms \"Time, Death and Judgment;\" Hohnan Hunt by\nMs portrait of Henry Wentworth Monk, Canadian visionary and\nworker for umversal peace; Leighton by a finely painted head;\nthe Barbizon school is represented by both pictures and drawings;\nthe eclectic Italians by a group of drawings from the late Duke of\nRutland's collection; Chardin and De Heem by wonderful examples\nof still life.\nThe National Gallery has lately acquired a collection of a hundred engravings by the greatest of the French portrait engravers, 176\nThe Annals of the American Academy\n1 ;\nNanteuil\u00E2\u0080\u0094a umque and magnificent representation of the master's\ngemus. To a country upon wMch the great French statesmen of the\nseventeenth and eighteenth centuries wielded such influence, the\ncollection is invaluable, both from artistic and historical viewpoints.\nBoudin is there with a magnificent blue Vue D'Etaples; Bauer,\nthe contemporary Dutch painter and etcher, with oil and water color\npaintings and a representative collection of etchings; and among\nrecent purchases are \"The Green Feather,\" by Laura Knight, wMch\ngained distinction at the 1912 mternational exMbition at the Carnegie Institute at Pittsburgh; a fine marine by Paul Dougherty,\nand some others.\nThe future of the National Gallery is the building of a beautiful\nand permanent home on one of the finest sites of the city in wMch\nthere will be adequate room for permanent and loan collections,\nwhere the national portraits may be fittingly exMbited, and where\nthe visitor to the capital, the inhabitant and the student, who will\none day be worMng in a national or mumcipal art school nearby,\nmay study in its entirety the progress and power of Canadian art.\nIt is early to attempt to define the national characteristic of\nCanadian art. A national spirit is being slowly born, one might\nperhaps say it walked abroad, but as yet between the lights. There\nare painters who are finding expression of their thought in the vast\nprairies of the far West, in the silent spaces of the North, by the\nside of torrent and tarn, and in the mighty solitudes of the wmter\nwoods. The appeal of the great land is every year more manifest,\nand is being expressed with an mdefinable solemMty and deference\nwMch is nothing less than the first national utterance of a young\nart awake to a mighty heritage.\nAnd what of the future? The future of Canadian art is development, advancement and recognition until it can be said that no\nCanadian painter needs to seek a hving in another land; until there\nis artistic training to be had in every town; and until, greatest of\nall, the surplus wealth is directed towards supporting and welcoming\nall artistic endeavor with all the pride of the patriot in a great national\nacMevement. SOME CANADIAN TRAITS\nBy W. A. Chapple, M.P.,\nLondon, England.\nThe Canadians are a frank, open, generous people. They are\nall busy, all maMng money, all trying to make more, all in a fair way\nof doing it. But you may stop one anywhere, at any time, and ask\ninformation, and you will get it when he has it to give, in the kindliest\nand most friendly way. There is a fraternity, everywhere. There\nare no class distinctions, at least none readily apparent. Servants\nbecome mistresses, gentlewomen become servants. There is a leveling up, and there is a levehng down. Servants and laborers are\nmenials no more. The gentle born, and there are many in Canada,\ntake to toil within their capacity, and are not degraded.\nI see that a Canadian lady of distinction has said that the country does not want impecumous gentlewomen from Britain. I hesitate\nto differ from one so competent to judge, but I think for the sake\nof the gentlewomen, and for the sake of Canada, that kind of immigration is just what both need.\nThe life of an impoverished gentlewoman in England is hard\nto endure. She is cribbed, cabined, confined by severe and cruel\nconventionalities. There are so many things she dare not do, so\nmany things she must not resemble. She eats, drinks and sleeps\non the edge of degradation from what she and her friends think is\nher Mgh status. Pray let her escape from her prison house, and\nbreathe the freedom of Canada. She will not be despised there if\nshe works. She will be valued for her service, not for what her\nclass and ancestry have \"coralled.\" She will be measured by what\nshe is and does, and will see nothing false in the weights. There\nare many such women in Canada. They are a credit to their caste,\nand class, and country, and are a great gain to Canada. They lose\nnotMng themselves, they confer much on others.\nTheir education, speech, manners, and refinement of thought\nand feeling are a valuable influence, especially with Canadian children\nin the schools. Shakespeare, and Bunyan, and the Bible, are not\nsufficient to check the mutilation of our good old Saxon tongue;\na leaven of culture and refinement will do good to the lump, and no\n(177) 178\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nharm to the leaven. The changes are terrifying to those who cherish\nour literature and speech. \"To law,\" is to go to law; \"to suicide,\"\nis to commit suicide; \"to jail,\" is to lock up; \"to room,\" is to live\nin a room; \"to figure,\" is to calculate. The corruption of the language is in rapid progress; and the newspapers and the preachers\nare the least excusable offenders.\nThere is a constant migration within the boundaries of Canada,\nand there is a constant flow from Europe and America. Of these\ncurrents, the most important and significant is that wMch flows\nnorthwards from the Umted States. There are nearly one hundred\nmillion people within a day or two's railway journey of the Canadian\nboundary fine. Consider what this means.\nThe Americans are an alert and enterprising nomadic people\nHke ourselves. They are getting overcrowded. Their agricultural\nland has risen to from \u00C2\u00A320 to \u00C2\u00A340 per acre and even more. They\nhave been growing much wheat. They are going out of it. They\nhear that virgin land as good as theirs ever was in its unexhausted\ndays can be bought a day or two's journey off, for \u00C2\u00A32 or \u00C2\u00A33 per acre.\nRead this clipping from a Calgary daily paper: \"9-8-12. States\nFacing Famine; Unless soil is improved will have to import products. Chicago, Aug. 9.\u00E2\u0080\u0094That America is facing a famine unless\nagricultural conditions are vastly improved, was the general opimon\nof the speakers at the annual meeting of the National Soil Fertility\nLeague yesterday. 'Statistics show that agriculture in the Umted\nStates has been so neglected that within twenty years we will be\nforced to import our principal products from foreign lands. We are\nfacing an inevitable famine unless the soil is greatly improved,'\nsaid Mr. Gross, President of the Organization.\"\nAmerican land is becoming exhausted, and stands in need of a\nmore expensive fertilization. Owners can sell out at a lower figure\nthan they paid and start again in Canada. If the old people are still\nanchored to the farm, their sons are free to emigrate. And Canada\noffers more inducements than any other state in their Union. The\ncfimate is no worse in Ontario, Saskatchewan or Mamtoba than\nin the central states of the American Umon, even far south of the\ninternational boundary. Their winters are a little shorter but they\nare quite as severe while they last, and infhritely worse than on the\nPacific coast of British Columbia and the foothills of Alberta. And\nthe fame of Canada has spread into these southern lands. I met Very Some Canadian Traits 179\nmany Americans who have settled in Canada, some of many years\nstanding, some of but a few. They have nothing but praise for\neverything Canadian except Canadian apathy in business.\nOne interesting specimen from the central states, in answer to\nmy mquiry as to the attractiveness of Canada to the American,\nleaned toward me, and m a semi-confidential wMsper, as if he were\nimparting to me some knowledge that might be of service to me, said,\n\"Why, if you shoot a man here they hang you.\" He ignored my\nsmile. \"Law's respected here,\" he continued, \"two neighboring\nfarmers near me in Kentucky once lawed about six hogs, and it took\nten years for the courts to settle it, and when they did the two\nlawyers had the two farms. Now here in Canada, I've had two\nlaw cases in two years, and the verdict was given in sixty days.\nThey'd have taken six years in the States. An American here a\nlittle time ago was fined for keepmg a 'bath house.' He took no\nnotice. He was fined again. Still he took no notice. He could\nafford the fine, and had one hundred and fifty thousand dollars\nin real estate here. He got a year's imprisonment and was ordered\nout of the country on Ms release, and wMle he was leisurely going\nround with his dollars, trying to bribe the officials, they were making\narrangements for his deportation. He was conducted to the boundary, and I'm sure he hasn't recovered from Ms stupefaction yet.\nJust fancy,\" he added, \"the States deporting a man with one hundred\nand fifty thousand dollars!\"\nThese facts amaze the Americans. They.have discovered that\nCanada is a country of law and order. They come from a country\nin wMch during the tiiree Boer war years, 1899, 1900 and 1901,\nthere were more people murdered than were killed during that war,\namong the whole British army.\nContemplate these figures with wMch the people of the States\nare familiar: Persons murdered in the Umted States of America\nduring 1899, 1900 and 1901, 18,466; executions of murderers for\nthese murders, 356. The number of murderers unhanged was 18,-\n110. Of those executed an average of two years elapsed before the\nsentence was carried out. In 1896, there were 10,652 murders and\nonly 122 legal executions. The total number of British deaths in\nthe Boer war was under 20,000, including those who died of enteric\nfever. Is it at all surprising that Americans appreciate the respect\nfor law and order that prevails in Canada? The American cannot 180\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nbelieve tMs till he sees it, but when he sees it, he talks about it, he\nwrites about it. It is the one conspicuous difference that he notices.\nAnother thing that he notices and writes back about is the\nabsence of graft, or graft in its worst and most oppressive form.\nHe discovers too that he gets on. He is tMown amongst a people\nwho are virile, but are not hustlers. He can out-run them in business and he does. The Canadian in business and in industry, though\nsolid and successful, is casual and apparently indifferent. His more\naggressive competitor caters more for Ms client, is more eager to\nwin his custom, hustles more on Ms behalf and does more trade.\nThere is notMrig more annoying to a visitor than the casuaMess of\nthe Canadian.\nAsk a tram-guard, a clerk, or a telephone operator, or a railway\nofficial, a question, and you will get an answer, but it is an answer\nwMch requires of him the minimum of response. He will not turn\nto look at you, Ms expression of stolid indifference will not alter,\nMs lips will hardly move, Ms effort may be but a feeble, almost inarticulate grunt; or an ahnost imperceptible nod of the head or turn\nof the eye, will serve as an indication of direction. If the correct\nreply to you be an affirmative, he may make no response whatever,\nleaving it to be assumed by you that if his answer were in the negative he would make one; Ms absolute indifference to your question\nhe means you to take as an affirmative response. The same casual-\nness is observable everywhere, and is very disconcerting to visitors\nused to courteous and definite replies. But there is no incompetence\nor studied incivihty, and the Canadian does not mean to be discourteous. TMs is simply an evidence of Ms independence and jack-\neasy manner. In the public service there is an even greater casual-\nness, but it is often accompamed by a very obvious incompetence.\nIn so new, so varied and so rich a country as Canada, there\nis unlimited scope for private enterprise, so that as a general rule,\noMy the \"leavings\" of private enterprise are available for the public\nservice.\nHere is a reply to an inquiry for particulars of lands for sale\nof a Canadian provincial government. The head of the department writes:\n\"Dear Sir:\n\"I beg to acknowledge receipt of your favour of 20th instant,\naddressed to this Department, and in reply have to say that there Some Canadian Traits 181\nis still about two and a quarter miMons of acres not granted. Some\nof this land is rocky, but some of it is capable of development.\n\"Yours very truly,\"\nI venture to hint that such a reply would have merited, if it\nhad not earned, dismissal from any self-respecting real estate office\nin Canada, anxious to do business and to get clients. I would lay\nmyself open to a charge of being unobservant or inaccurate if I did\nnot here admit that there are exceptions to tMs rule. Still nothing\nis more conspicuous than the apathetic indifference of government officials behind the counter, or the slow serpiginous movements\nof clerks who wander aimlessly amongst other clerks seeking information, which they will lazily pass over the counter without real knowledge or a sense of responsibility.\nThese slow, careless and sleepy movements are characteristic of\nall the officials in Canada, whether in the government or in private\nservice. It takes longer to get a railway or a steamer ticket in\nCanada than in any other place in the world I know, and I have\ncircumnavigated it five times. Now the American sails on to tMs\nsea of casual indifference and he gets a \"move on.\" He hustles, to\nuse Ms own expressive term. He gets the business. He does the\nwork. He receives the patronage. He finds it a happy hunting\nground because the competition is less fierce and his competitor is\nstill asleep.\nI am referring to business enterprises of ah kinds. In the field\nof industry tMs is not true. The manual worker is the most diligent\nin the Anglo-Saxon world. Stand and watch a group of men at work\nahnost anywhere in Canada, on road, or building, or railway construction, or street repair; at any work involving muscular effort,\nand you will be struck by the amount of joint-oil being put into\ntheir task. Where men are attending to machines they must of\ncourse keep pace, but when tMs necessity does not drive, the men\nare nevertheless at work\u00E2\u0080\u0094all at work, and always at work. TMs\nis in conspicuous contrast with the ordinary English worker. But\nthen the Canadian gets about double the wage.\nA briddayer m British Columbia gets 24s. per day, a carpenter\ngets I85. to 20s. per day. An unskilled worker gets 10s. to 12s. per\nday. The homesteaders making roads to their farms in Vancouver\nIsland were getting 12s. a day from the government, and it was 182\nThe Annals of the American Academy\ncurrently reported that they were not watched very closely to see\nwhat days or place they selected for their toil. If a laborer gets the\nfull reward of his labor he gives the full reward of his wage. I\nbelieve that to be true, and I believe the idleness and inefficiency\nof many types of the English workman at home to be due to a sullen\nprotest against the conditions under wMch he has for generations\nbeen forced to labor. The employer has never been willing to share\nMs profits with Ms workers in anything hke a reasonable proportion.\nIn Canada he is, and he does it; and Ms men are diligent, conscientious, self-respecting toilers, who give the full reward of their wage.\nThe Americans then are the real and prospective immigrants\nto Canada. They, too, have discovered Canada. They have formed\nan accurate estimate of her enormous resources, of her virgin forests\nready for the axe, her fertile soil ready for the plow, her coal deposits\nready for the pick, her products and her people ready for the rail;\nand their enterprise has said to them, \"Go ye up and possess the\nland, for it is a goodly land, a land flowing with milk and honey.\"\nThey do not require to take it by conquest. It is theirs for the asking, as much as it is yours and mine. All are welcome at its hospitable board, all are invited to sit down, eat, drink and be merry. Its\ngifts are there for all, and all may share its bounteous fruits. The\ninvitation is being accepted by the Americans, and I am convinced\nthat a big section of that one hundred million people will find their\nway across the forty-ninth parallel of latitude before many years are\nover.\nBut the American is not hked by the Canadian. To the Canadian he is an intruder, and perhaps tMs partly accounts for the very\nobvious prejudice against him. For that prejudice is much stronger\nthan it once was. It does not exist in Britain. It is peculiar to\nCanada, and I cannot see that it is justified. Still, the Canadian\nlikes Ms dollars, and these dollars, and the \"go\" behind them, are\nhelping to push the country ahead.\nCanada will become more and more American in its characteristics, and will ultimately be indistinguishable from its neighbor,\nexcept on the map and in its constitution.\nBritish immigration to Canada will probably lessen as time\ngoes on. The most easily detachable from their British environment\nhave already been detached, and tMs source of supply has been\ngreatly reduced. Moreover, the selective (hscrimination that Some Canadian Traits 183\nCanada has recently undertaken has of itself hmited the supply.\nWith this selective process instituted by Canada in self-protection,\nthe enthusiasm of British immigration societies has to some extent\n(iimiMshed. But Britain is realizmg that tMs selective emigration\nof her best people has about gone far enough. She can spare no more\nof her best workers, the oMy stock that Canada will take. To keep\nthem she must pay better wages and give more and better oppor-\ntumties. And she is domg this. The Scottish Smallholders Land Act\nwas designed to give them opportunities, and one of the cMef arguments that helped to make the bill an urgent measure was the emigration from Scotland's farming districts to Canada.\nAll the social legislation at present in the lap of the liberal\nparty in Britain ready for distribution is designed to make and will\nhave the effect of making the old land more attractive to the working\npeople. All these factors tend against the trend of British emigration to Canada.\nThen there is the competition of the other colomes. The summer\nsuns of South Africa, Australia and New Zealand have their own\npeculiar charm and attraction for those who still dread the winter\nfrost and snow of northern latitudes.\nJust think of it! A wilderness of vast extent in less than a generation is dotted all over, not with homes only, but with cities, and\ncobwebbed with railways. The transformation is amazing. Where\nthey got the material, the artisans, the plumbers, the money and the\nmen is a riddle. A wooden house, a Canadian calls old (but would\nbe considered new in any other country) withers hke Jonah's gourd\nin a single mght, and Hey! Presto! a ten-story steel construction\nsky-scraper rears itself upon the withered ruins. Plains and river-\nbanks grow villages, villages become towns, towns become great\ncities, and all while you wait. No! it is not the country. It is the\npeople. No other race could do it. The tireless energy, the expanding optimism, the skill and capacity of these nation-building giants\nof the West! Their energy and their optimism are infectious. It\nspreads hke a contagion. Everyone is seized with it. And all are\non the same trail. They are working for the same cause. They\nare reaching out to the same goal. And they will all get there!\nThere is an integrity about them, an evidence of honest endeavor.\nAll, all who go there catch the spirit. They fall into fine. They\njoin in the chase. There is no spiteful rivalry. Men after the same The Annals of the American Academy\ndollar will smile to each other by the way, cheer each other's efforts\nand rejoice with the winner, whoever he may be. There is kinship\nrathei^fian hostility; friendly rivalry rather than bitter opposition.\nThere is competition, but it is not cut-tMoat competition. I admired\nthat spirit in Canada and I thmk it is fairly general\u00E2\u0080\u0094most certaiMy\nin the West. The same healthy rivalry exists between towns,\nRegina and Saskatoon, Lethbridge and Medicine Hat, Calgary\nand Edmonton, Victoria and Vancouver, Alberni and Old Alberni.\nThe newspaper correspondents to whom I will refer enter into the\nspirit of it. They do not decry the rival town, they exhaust their\nvocabulary in praise of their own. The most popular work of\nreference in a correspondent's hbrary is the \"Thesaurus of English\nWords and PMases.\" I read an article in praise of Vancouver, and\nit was simply a succession of superlatives culled from this booster's\n\"Vade Vecum.\"\nNow what would you expect from tMs city-building while you\nwait? Plumbers cannot be manufactured in a day hke a tap or a\ngully trap, and plumbing is the most tecMucal and important part\nof a building. You would expect plumbers to be scarce, plumbing\nto be defective, drainage to be scamped and typhoid to be rife. This\nis just what you do find. Ottawa, one of the empire's most beautiful\ncities, had a typhoid epidemic in full blast, when I was there, sixty-\nfour cases \"reported\" on a Saturday and 102 on a Monday. There\nwas one argument in everyone's mouth; and in the mouth of two\nwitnesses shall every word be established. The argument was \"I\ntold you so.\" Now the worst tMng one can say against a man is,\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nwell, you might have been told it already. And the worst thing one\ncan say about a town is that it has typhoid. That is positively the\nlowest character a town can have. What does it mean? It means\njust exactly what the Bible says, and the Bible does not mince\nmatters.\nAnyone but an Ottawan can see the cause of typhoid in the city\nstreets\u00E2\u0080\u0094uneven pavements, depressed footpaths, cracked and tilted\nflagstones. These inequalities in the surface spell even greater\ninequalities in the underlying drains, wMch in their turn spell sewage\ndeposit, stagnant flow, decomposition, sewer gas, defective traps,\nvitiated air, contaminated water and milk\u00E2\u0080\u0094all media, all carriers,\nbut oMy one primary cause, sewer gas regurgitation from defective\ndrains. People persist in gomg miles afield for causes when they Some Canadian Traits 185\nare under their nose. Some want a new water system, others want\nthe supply from another lake or river, others want to exterminate\ndairies, others want to inoculate the cows, others to vaccmate everybody, but nobody wants to clean up.\nThe newspapers of the West are in their infancy. So one does\nnot expect too much. Their paper is bad, their slips numerous and\ntheir matter weak. Their headings are grotesque. Look at tMs:\nEMPEROR ABSOLUTE\nOF DYNAMIC force\nOfficial Who is Playing Havoc\nWith Gorges and Canyons\nThat Give Trouble\nIS WORKING IN SILENCE\nMan Who Scarcely Ever Speaks\nBut Who is Smashing\nUp the Earth.\nThey have telegrapMc news from most places in Canada, but\nI think their local correspondents are nearly all real estate agents.\nTMs news gives the name of new firms starting business, or promising\nto, or have circulated a rumor to tMs effect\u00E2\u0080\u0094the phenomenal and\nunprecedented rise in the price of lots, with a few examples, wMch\nit is left to be implied, are typical. They are what is commoMy\nknown as \"boosting\" messages. To \"boost\" is to crack up, to puff,\nto exercise your bump of wonder and to try and excite that of others.\nAuctioneers or cheap-jacks make the best newspaper correspondents\nin the Canadian West, and if they have a small but growing real\nestate business, just to fill in their spare time, tMs is an additional\nqualification. The empire news service is the worst in the British\nDominions. A few scraps daily, badly placed, not a few obvious\nerrors and often an incoherent jumble. The Rt. Hon. Herbert\nSamuel, the British Postmaster General, is perhaps one of the clearest\nthinkers, and the most concise, explicit and logical speakers in the /\n186\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nHouse of Commons. I will not quote the quarter column the papers\ngave him, lest he might see it, and I would not hke to hurt his feelings. A Chicago paper that I studied about two years ago, when\non a visit there, had tMrty-six columns of reading matter, and seven\nand one-half columns of tMs were cable messages from London.\nThe dailies in the great Australian and New Zealand towns\nprint from four to six columns of world cable news a day, and the\npeople constantly clamor for more and complain of its meagreness.\nIf there were less \"boost\" and more British news, less sensational\ngarbage gathered from anywhere, chiefly in the States, and more\nedifying matter from the world's best writers and journals, the\nCanadians would be a better educated people and the journalistic\nprofession would rise in mfluence, as the proprietary would rise in\nwealth.\nThe people of the world who had a choice and who had the means\nand power of making that choice effective, have never, at any place\nor in any age, selected the torrid zone for their home. No free people\ndoes that now, notwithstanding the spread of knowledge of these\nregions, the ease and cheapness of migration and the comparative\nsecurity of life and property there. The virile people of the Mediterranean chose the north shores rather than the stimmier South;\nthe Phcenecians from the Levant migrated west and northwest;\nthe Mandarin Chinese kept to the northern latitudes; the restless\nwandering Teutons kept their gaze to the west and north; the\nPilgrim Fathers kept to a similar latitude; those of the South African\nand South American colonizing people who were free to choose,\nselected the lower latitude and the temperate zones; and even\nwithin the temperate zones nations free to choose and move, showed\nno disposition to crowd towards the equator. Russia, Germany,\nScandinavia, Britain, China and the Umted States are all witnesses\nwhose evidence is on record; and within the temperate zone those\nraces that have kept furthest from the equator, yet within that\nsphere, are the hardiest people. I call to witness the Scottish Highlanders, the Scandinavian Norsemen, the Russian Moujik, the\nGerman of the North, the Chinese Mandarin, the American Indians,\nand in the Southern Hemisphere, the Patagonian and the Maori.\nLatitude fifty-five is the mother of men.\nThe Umted States has no advantage that Canada does not\nenjoy, no natural resource of any value not found in Canada, no soil Some Canadian Traits 187\nthat Canada cannot match, no power Canada cannot equal, no territory Canada cannot measure with her own. And she has the magic\nlatitude of fifty-five. She has all the advantages, none of the disadvantages, all the prospects, all the example; the same race, the\nsame human reservoir to tap and move, and if Mstory and latitude\ndo not He, she will provide a finer race of men.\nAlthough Canada is an infant nation she is no longer a babe\nin arms. She is growing into sturdy precocity and is anxious and\neager to take her place with kindred nations in the family circle.\nThough Canada is working, and working hard with conspicuous\nsuccess, she is thinking too; and she is thinking for herself. She\nis old enough and she is wise enough, and she needs httle help from\nothers.\nI believe that the next stage in the evolution of Canada will be\nintellectual and spiritual. I do not mean spiritual in the religious\nsense, but spiritual in the national sense\u00E2\u0080\u0094contact of her national\nspirit with the spirit of Mstory, her Mstory, our Mstory; a passion\nfor a more mtimate umty with the spirituality of the Anglo-Saxon\nrace of wMch she is so great and an ever-growing part. She will\nrecognize our common heritage and destiny. She does, but it will\nbe more a passion than a sentiment, and it will express itself on the\nintellectual and spiritual side. She will develop her schools and\ncolleges and extend their influence downwards; she will acquire a\npassion for our common literature; she will pride herself in culture\nand the fine arts, and recognizing her oneness with her race, she will\nblend her spirit with our own. I can hear the ground-rumble in our\nown country of that discontent, on wMch disloyality grows like a\nweed. There is none to be heard in Canada. There is not a disloyal\nfibre in her whole constitution, not even in Quebec. If Britain needed\nthem, legions of warriors would spring from every mountain valley\nand every prairie spot in Canada. There is one danger ahead. The\nStates will spread over Canada. They may Americanize her. TMs\nwill be good for Anglo-Saxondom, but bad for Canada, bad for spiritual Canada, I mean, not for material Canada. American money,\nenergy and enterprise will help to develop her, but they will damage\nthe spirit.\nThe hope is that Canada will prove resistent to tMs spirit, and\nthat Americans invading gradually will catch her spirit as they have\nso far done. I hope and believe that Anglo-Saxon reunion is the m\n188 The Annals of the American Academy\ndestiny of the English-speaMng race. An offensive and defensive\nalliance now is not too wild a dream. Reconcile Ireland, and one\ngreat obstacle is gone forever. Our descent is common\u00E2\u0080\u0094in history,\nin hterature and in religion. Our ideals are one, our hopes and fears\nare one. Our enemies are the enemies of civilization. We stand\nfor progress, peace, and concord among the nations of the earth.\nfj^mmm CANADIAN LITERATURE\nBy J. Castell Hopkins, F.S.S.,\nAuthor of \"The Canadian Annual Review of Public Affairs,\"\nToronto, Canada.\nCanada possesses a literature of wMch it may be reasonably\nproud. It has grown with the growth of the country and reaches its\nMghest point at the present time when the Domimon also attains its\ngreatest stature in external influence and internal umty. The beginning of tMs hterature lies far back in the old French annals of discovery, travel and adventure. The cMef of these works, reaching down\nto the bed-rock of our Mstory as a people, are the cMomcles of Car-\ntier's voyages; the similar narrative concerning Champlain; the\nMstories by Marc L'Escarbot and Gabriel Sagard of De Monts'\nsettlements and of the Hurons, respectively; Father Louis Hennepm's\nCanadian Discoveries and Voyages; the famous Relations des Jesuites;\nthe semi-religious annals of Father Le Clerq; Le Hontan's somewhat\nunreliable works of travel; and the foremost and best of all these\nearly chromcles, the Histoire et Description Generate de la Nouvelle\nFrance, by Pierre Francois Xavier de Charlevoix. Of course, the most\nabundant materials for the Mstory of tMs period are to be found in the\nJesuit Relations, especially in the magnificent publication edited by\nR. G. Thwaites, of Cleveland, U. S., but the six volumes by Charlevoix, first brought out in France in 1744, were the product of a clear,\nable and practised writer, and as such are of the Mghest value.\nThese volumes, taken together, constitute the basis of all Ms-\ntorical literature in Canada and are, therefore, of great importance,\nalthough not written by Canadians in the modern sense of that word.\nEqually important is the splendid series of volumes written by Francis\nParkman1 and forming a veritable mine of brilliantly comprehensive\nMstory of early Canadian events and personages. His picture of the\nIndian is drawn a little too luridly, perhaps, but, apart from that,\nthere is little criticism that one may venture to offer. It is also\n1 They were published as follows: The Oregon Trail (1847); The Conspiracy of Ponliac (1851);\nPioneers of France in the New World (1865); The Jesuits in North America (1867); La Salle and\nthe Discovery of the Great West (1869); The Old Regime in Canada (1874); Frontenac and New\nFrance Under Louis XIV (1877); Montcalm and Wolf (1884); A Half Century of Conflict, (1892)^\n(189) 190\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nobvious that although the author was an American by birth and\nresidence, Ms works can hardly be eliminated from any record of\nCanadian Mstorical literature into wMch they tiirow the searching\nlight of a strong mind and eloquent pen.\nWith the fascmating fur-trade period, the days of exploration\nand adventure in the far Northwest, came a further succession of\nworks by outside pens. Sir Alexander Mackenzie's Voyages, published in 1802, La France's Explorations of the country adjoining\nHudson's Bay (1744), Samuel Hearne's Journey in the same regions\n(1795), and Alexander Henry's Narratives (1809), are vivid reminders\nof the lives and labors of pioneers in a new country. So with The\nRed River Settlement, by Alexander Ross (1856), Lord Selkirk's\nvolumes and pampMets upon the same subject and Sir George\nSimpson's Overland Journey. Following the earlier descriptive works\nof French and English writers came a series of volumes deahng with\ncurrent events or conditions by men hving for a time in British America, or travehng tMough its apparently boundless regions of lakes\nand forest wilderness.\nThe most important of these, from an Mstorical as well as descriptive standpoint, were Francis Maseres' constitutional and controversial publications; Major John Richardson's War of 1812 and\nEight Years in Canada (1847); Mrs. Jameson's Sketches in Canada\n(1838); Colonel Talbot's Five Years in the-Canadas (1824); George\nHeriot's Travels (1807) and those of Isaac Weld (1799) and John\nLambert (1810); John Howison's Sketches of Upper Canada (1821);\nBasil Hall's Travels (1829); Sir R. B. Bonnycastle's Excursions\n(1841) and Canada and the Canadians (1846); Major G. D. War-\nburton's Conquest of Canada (1849); John Gait's Autobiography\nand Ms descriptive work upon The Canadas; Sir George Head's\nForest Scenes in North America; Captain W. Moorsom's Letters\nfrom Nova Scotia (1830) and Lieutenant-Colonel Strickland's Twenty-\nseven Years in Canada West. The following list gives the names of\na number of writers of less important volumes upon Canada wMch\nwere, nevertheless, useful in their day and are now valuable from an\nhistorical point of view:\nJoseph Robson (1752).\nThomas Anbury (1789).\nCaptain G. Cartwright (1792).\nP. Campbell (1793).\nJ. C. Ogden (1797).\nCaptain G. Vancouver (1798).\nSir D. W. Smyth, Bart. (1799).\nDue de la Rochefoucauld-Liancourt. Canadian Literature\n191\nHugh Gray (1809).\nJohn Mill-Jackson (1809).\nJ. Melish (1812).\nDavid Anderson (1814).\nM. Smith (1814).\nJoseph Sansom (1817).\nLieut. Edward Chappell (1817).\nFrancis Hall (1818).\nJohn Palmer (1818).\nE. Mackenzie (1819).\nBenjamin Siliman (1820).\nGabriel Franchere (1820).\nC. Stuart (1820).\nJ. M. Duncan (1823).\nWalter Johnstone (1823).\nJohn McTaggert'(1829).\nHugh Murray (1829).\nRoss Cox (1831).\nJohn McGregor (1832).\nSir James E. Alexander (1833).\nAlfred Hawkins (1834).\nJohn Gait (1836).\nEdward Gibbon Wakefield (1837).\nT. R. Preston (1840).\nJ. S. Buckingham (1843).\nRev. William Haw (1850).\nSir John Richardson (1851).\nW. H. G. Kingston (1855).\nCaptain Palliser (1863).\nCommander R. C. Mayne (1863).\nHon. A. H. Gordon (Lord Stanmore)\n(1864).\nSucceeding volumes of great interest to Canadians are those\nin wMch Sir W. H. Russell, Charles Mackay, Anthony Trollope,\nCaptain Marryatt, Sir Charles Lyell, Sir Charles Dilke and Lady\nVincent refer largely to the Domimon in describing their experiences\nand impressions of American travel, etc. R. Montgomery Martin,\nin Ms work upon the British Empire (1843), and Sir Charles Dilke,\nin Ms well-known Problems of Greater Britain, wrote authoritatively\nupon Canada. J. W. Kaye's Life of Lord Metcalfe, Scrope's Life\nof Lord Sydenham, Walrond's Life and Letters of Lord Elgin and\nWright's Life of Major-General Wolfe were connected with Canadian\nliterature in much the same way as the names mentioned were\nconnected with the national annals. And, while these varied volumes\ncannot be technically claimed as a part of Canadian hterature, if\nby that term we understand works written by Canadians, yet many of\nthem were written in Canada. Some were published there and, taken\ntogether, they constitute a basis of information and description\nwMch any Canadian who desires to study or write of the early Mstory\nof Ms country must be more or less familiar with.\nFor tMee decades following the periods of war with the Umted\nStates,'Canadian distinctive literary ambitions, apart from the contributions of French or English writers, slumbered amid surroundings\nof pioneer activity in field and forest, on lake and river. The axe of\nthe settler, the river rafts of the lumberman, the canoe of the voyageur\nand the musket of the hunter embodied the practical and necessary\naim of the people. With the progress of settlement, the growth of 192\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nthe press and the development of an easier hfe in cities or towns\ncame, however, the gradual production of a strictly native literature.\nOne of the earliest native works and, perhaps, the most important of\nall French-Canadian Mstorical volumes was the Histoire du Canada\nby Francois-Xavier Garneau. Published in the years 1845-48,\ntranslated in 1866, and republished in 1882, tMs work is the accepted\nnational Mstory of the French-Canadian section of our population.\nIt holds the place in their minds and hearts wMch Kingsford's\ngreater and more elaborate work will take amongst English-speaking\nCanadians. Subsidiary to tMs in importance, but of much value,\nwere Michael Bibaud's Histoire du Canada under the French regime\n(1843); Cours d'Histoire du Canada, by Abbe\" J. B. A. Ferland\n(1861-5); Histoire de la Colonie Francaise, by l'Abbe' Etienne M.\nFallon (1865-6); Histoire des Canadians-Francois, by Benjamin\nSuite; Le Canada Sous VUnion, by Louis P. Turcotte; Histoire de\nla Rebellion de 1837-38, by L. 0. David, and various works by l'Abbe\nR. H. Casgrain and F. M. U. M. Bibaud.\nMeanwhile, literary progress in Enghsh-speaking Canada had\nbeen much slower and less productive. The competition of other\ninterests and pursuits was keener and the characteristic physical\nactivity of the race greater. The natural result was comparative\nindifference to anytMng except pohtical controversy, tiirough the\nmedium of popular journals, or to the ever-present charm of English\nstandard works. Hence, The History of Lower Canada, by Robert\nChristie, published in Quebec in six volumes in 1849-55, is one of\nthe few works of importance written by English-Canadians during\nall these years. It is valuable for its statistical and documentary\ndata as well as for the personal experience in the political struggles\nof the time wMch the author brought to bear upon Ms subject.\nAnother notable production was Gilbert Auchinleck's History of the\nWar of 1812, published in 1855. Works upon the same subject\nwere also written by David Thompson, of Niagara, and Lieutenant-\nColonel W. F. Coffin, of Montreal. Dr. Henry H. Miles' History\nof Lower Canada must also be mentioned with appreciation. Bouch-\nette's British Dominions in North America (1831) was a most valuable\ntopograpMcal and statistical work, as were similar volumes published\ntwenty years later by W. H. Smith. William Smith's History of\nCanada up to 1791, was a useful but somewhat one-sided work.\nD'Arcy Boulton, Q.C, published in 1805 a Sketch of Upper Canada, Canadian Literature 193\nwMch is now of Mstorical interest, while Bishop Strachan's Visit\nto Upper Canada (1820), Robert Fleming Gourlay's Statistical Account\nof Upper Canada (1822) and WiMam Lyon Mackenzie's Sketches, published in 1833, possess similar value and interest. Mrs. Catherine\nParr Traill commenced her prolonged Canadian career of literary\nactivity by a volume published in 1835 entitled The Backwoods\nof Canada, and afterwards wrote much upon the natural Mstory and\ncharacteristics of the country. Her sister, Mrs. Susanna Moodie,\nwas equally well known by Roughing it in the Bush and similar works.\nThe Rev. Dr. Adam LiMe published, m 1846, a valuable work entitled\nCanada: Physical, Economical and Social.\nWith the coming of confederation there commenced a most\ndistinct development of literary activity m Upper Canada and the\nMaritime Provinces\u00E2\u0080\u0094ahnost the creation of a new literature. The\nHon. Joseph Howe's Speeches and Public Letters and D'Arcy McGee's\nSpeeches and Addresses were natural and early products of tMs period\nand illustrated that eloquence wMch in all countries takes its place in\nthe permanent literature of the land. The cMef Mstorical work done\nin the ensuing decade was certahiry that of John Charles Dent. In\nMs Last Forty Years (1841-81) and Ms Rebellion of 1837 he produced\nmost carefully written volumes of great value. They are marred by\nan mability, common to nearly all our Canadian writers, to do Mstorical justice to the tories of earlier days, but, aside from that fault,\ndeserve a Mgh place in Canadian literature. Following, or immediately preceding, these works came John Mercier MacMullen's\nHistory of Canada (editions 1855, 1867, 1892), Dr. W. H. WitMow's\nHistory of the Dominion of Canada (1878) and Dr. George Bryce's\nShort History of the Canadian People (1887). Beamish Murdoch,\nDuncan Campbell, Abraham Gesner, Andrew Archer, Alexander\nMunro and James Hannay, meanwhile, surrounded Haliburton's\nbrilliant pen by Mstorical productions of standard value concerning\nNew Brunswick or Nova Scotia. Dr. William Canniff issued Ms work\nupon The Settlement of Upper Canada in 1869, and Dr. Egerton Ryer-\nson published The Loyalists of America in 1881. Hahburton's works\nwere the precursors of a multitude of books in wMch the so-called\nAmerican style of humor was embodied. They had tremendous\npopularity in their day and will always have a place in literature..\nMeanwhile the great Northwest had been coming into prominence, and with its union to Canada in 1871 there grew up a mass of 194\nThe Annals of the American Academy\ndescriptive and historical literature. Not exactly native of the soil\nbut still instinct with the hfe and progress of the prairies, were a\nnumber of works published by travelers, some a short time prior to\nthe above date. Chief of the latter was The North-West Passage by\nLand, written by Lord Milton and Mr. Cheadle. Others of an after-\ntime were General Sir W. F. Butler's Great Lone Land, Stuart Cumberland's Highway from Ocean to Ocean, W. Fraser Rae's Columbia\nand Canada, Captam Huyshe's Red River Rebellion and Charles\nMarshall's The Canadian Dominion. But the promising field was soon\noccupied by Canadians. Paul Kane wrote his Wanderings of an Artist\nin 1859. Archbishop Tach6 in 1870 published a volume entitled\nA Sketch of the North-West of America and Principal Grant soon\nafterwards issued Ms fascinating little book From Ocean to Ocean.\nThe Prairie Province, by J. C. Hamilton; The Creation of Manitoba,\nby Alexander Begg; England and Canada, a volume of travels across\nthe continent by Sir Sandford Fleming; Canada on the Pacific, by\nCharles Horetzky, C.E.; the Hon. Alexander Morris's work upon\nIndian Treaties; From Ontario to the Pacific, by Mrs. Spragge, and\nMountain and Prairie, by the Rev. Dr. D. M. Gordon; Our North\nLand, by C. R. Tuttle; The History of Manitoba, by Messrs. Gunn\nand Tuttle; and\u00E2\u0080\u0094most important to all the seekers after general\ninformation\u00E2\u0080\u0094Professor Macoun's Manitoba and the North West\n(1882) followed.\nFour narratives of the second Northwest Rebellion have been\nwritten by G. Mercer Adam, the Rev. C. P. Mulvaney, M.A., Colonel\nthe Hon. C. A. Boulton and the Rev. R. G. MacBeth, respectively.\nIn 1894-95 appeared an elaborate and valuable, though not well-\narranged work, in tMee volumes, by Alexander Begg, F.S.S., of\nWinmpeg, upon The History of the North-West. At the same time\nthere was published The History of British Columbia, by Alexander\nBegg, of Victoria, B. C.\u00E2\u0080\u0094the pioneer work upon that particular\nsubject. The Selkirk Settlement, by the Rev. R. G. MacBeth, of\nWinnipeg, a work upon the Indians of the North-West, by Dr. John\nMacLean, and narratives of pioneer missionary life by the Rev. E. R.\nYoung and the Rev. George Young, must also be mentioned as of\nsterling interest and value. To return to Ontario, W. J. Rattray's\nScot in British North America showed great ability and Nicholas\nFlood Davin's Irishmen in Canada was a work of unusual brilliancy\nand interest. J. Edmund Colhns wrote a history of the aciministra- Canadian Literature 195\ntion of Lord Lome wMch was marred by the constant intrusion of\nviews peculiar to himself and fatal in their expression to any impartial\npresentation of current annals, while Dr. George Stewart published\nin 1878 a well-written and standard work upon Lord Dufferin's\nadministration. WiMam Leggo, of Winmpeg, was also author of\na volume, full of valuable documents, upon the same subject.\nFrom tMs time on new life was infused into Canadian literature\nby the gradual growth of a Canadian market, and of readers from the\nAtlantic to the Pacific into whose minds had filtered the slow but\ncertain consciousness of a Canadian national sentiment and an appreciation of Canadian Mstory, scenery, acMevements and leaders.\nWithin the next few years several histories of Canada appeared.\nFirst and foremost was the great work of Dr. WiMam Kingsford,\na monument of research, honest effort and patriotic principle. Inspired by the desire to give a broad view of Canadian Mstoric life,\nunmarred by race or religious prejudice, he commenced the work\nin 1887, at the age of sixty-eight, and issued a volume a year until the\nten volumes were completed m 1898. The author gave a distinctly\nnew view of early struggles in Canada based upon deep study of its\ndocumentary annals. The work was not an eloquent one nor was\nit written-in an interesting way, but, with all limitations in tMs\ndirection and all faults of style and arrangement admitted, the work\nremains and must continue for an mdefinite period, to be the standard Mstory of the country up to the umon of 1841. Two single\nvolume Mstories of interest and value were those of Charles G. D.\nRoberts and Sir John George Bourinot. The latter was written for\nthe Story of the Nations series. The Rev. W. P. Greswell, M.A., of\nCambridge, England, published a History of Canada some years ago\nwMch affords a useful summary. School Mstories of Canada were\nwritten in the early sixties by Dr. J. George Hodgins and Mr. (now\nChancellor Sir) J. A. Boyd. Later, Messrs W. J. Robertson and\nG. Mercer Adam published a small volume and still more recently\nthose written by W. H. P. Clement, B.A., of Toronto, and J. B.\nCalkin, M.A., of Truro, N. S., have been issued. D. B. Read, Q.C,\nbesides some serious biographical work, published in 1897 a Mstory\nof that fraitful theme, The Rebellion of 1837.\nOf great value m an historical sense and of importance also as\nindicating the growth of a strong and permanent interest in Canadian\nannals were the local Mstories issued during these years. The following were the most important: 196\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nToronto of Old\nRev. Dr. H. Scadding.\nThe Roman Catholic Church in the\nNiagara Peninsula\nVery Rev. Dean Harris.\nSketches of Upper Canada\nThomas Conant.\nCounties of Leeds and Grenville\nT. W. H. Leavitt.\nHistory of Scarborough\nDavid Boyle.\nHistory of Pictou, N. S.\nRev. Dr. G. Patterson.\nHistory of Glengarry County\nJ. A. Macdonnell, Q.C.\nHistorical Sketch of Dundas\nJames Croil. i\nQuebec, Past and Present\nSir James LeMoine.\nLa Seigneurie de Lauzon\nJ. Edmond Roy.\nThe Parish of Sault au Recollet\nRev. C. P. Beaubien.\nThe County of Lunenbourg, N. B.\nM. D. DesBrisay.\nMontreal, Past and Present\nAlfred Sandham.\nPeterborough and Victoria\nHon. Thomas White.\nL'lle d'Orleans\nAbbe L. E. Bois.\nLouisbourg in 1745 (edited)\nProf. G. M. Wrong.\nHandbook on Montreal\nDr. S. E. Dawson.\nToronto, Past and Present\nG. Mercer Adam.\nOttawa, Past and Present\nC. Roger.\nThe Ontario Parliament Buildings\nFrank Yeigh.\nLandmarks of Toronto (5 vols.)\nJ. Ross Robertson.\nPioneer Sketches of Long Point Settlement\nE. A. Owen.\nThe Eastern Townships\nMrs. C. M. Day.\nHistory of Compton County\nL. S. Channell.\nLake St. Louis: Old and New\nHon. D. Girouard.\nHistory of Annapolis County\nJudge -Savary.\nHistory of Huntingdon County\nRobert Sellar.\nHistory of Gait and Dumfries\nHon. James Young.\nPicturesque Quebec\nSir James LeMoine.\nHistorical Account of Cape Breton\nSir J. G. Bourinot.\nHistory of Halifax City\nT. B. Aikin, D.C.L.\nThe Saguenay and Lake St. John\nArthur Buies.\nHistory of Argenteuil and Prescott\nC. Thomas.\nAnnals of Niagara\nW. Kirby.\nHistory of Northern New Brunswick\nR. Cooney.\nTen Years in Winnipeg\nA. Begg, W. R. Nursey.\nToronto Called Back\nC. C. Taylor.\nHistory of the County of Brant\nC. P. Mulvaney.\nToronto: An Historical Sketch\nJ. Castell Hopkins.\nChronique du Rimouski\nl'Abbe C. Guay.\nEasily first of Canadian writers upon specific locahties was Sir\nJames Macpherson Le Moine, whose busy pen made Ms name a household word in the Province of Quebec. M. Faucher de St. Maurice Canadian Literature 197\nin his day contributed some fascinating pages to the local annals of\nthe same Provmce. Picturesque Canada, edited by Principal Grant,\nwas a notable work m this connection. Minor books of interest upon\ndescriptive subjects were l'Abbe V. A. Huard's work on Labrador\nand Anticosti; the Hon. Thomas White's Chronicles by the Way in\nMamtoba and the Northwest (1879); Alexander Munro's volume\non the resources, etc., of the Dormnion, published in 1879; the Rev.\nDr. A. Sutherland's A Summer in Prairie Land (1881); and Miss\nMary Fitzgibbon's Trip to Manitoba. Turning to later volumes\nupon special periods or events m Canadian history, reference must\nbe made to Lady Edgar's Ten Years of Upper Canada, 1805-15;\nM. Edouard Richard's History of the Acadians; and especially to the\nnumerous valuable pampMets written by Colonel Ernest Cruikshank,\nof Niagara. Alexander MacArthur's volume on The Causes of the\nManitoba Rising in 1869-70; C. R. Tuttle's Illustrated History of\nCanada (1879); the two works by Robma and KatMeen Lizars\nentitled Humours of '37 and In the Days of the Canada Company;\nStories from Canadian History, by T. G. MarqMs, and a similar\nvolume in collaboration with Miss Agnes Maule Machar entitled\nStories of New France; the Rev. R. G. MacBeth's Farm Life in the\nSelkirk Colony must also be mentioned with appreciation.\nFor many years Dr. Douglas Brymner, the keeper of the Canadian arcMves, did a quiet work of value beyond estimate to future\nCanadian Mstorians, authors and statesmen. His annually published\nvolume, or report, contained a mass of documentary data upon our\nearly Mstory of umque interest. George Johnson, as dominion\nstatistician and editor of the Government Year-Book and by such valuable little publications as First Things in Canada also did much to\nextend knowledge of modern Canada as Dr. Brymner did of earlier\nCanada. In this connection another writer deserves attention, though\nhe would be the last to clahn any particular brilliancy of style or\nbeauty of language\u00E2\u0080\u0094Henry J. Morgan. In days when Canadian\nliterature was popularly supposed to be non-existent; when Canadian\nsentiment was a somewhat intangible quantity and was certainly not\napplied to the purchase of the product of Canadian pens, Mr. Morgan\nwrote and published a continuous succession of books, calculated to\npreserve important historical and biographical details and promote\npublic knowledge of matters Canadian. The following list of Ms\nworks may be given here: 198\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nTour of H. R. H. The Prince of Wales\n(1860).\nSketches of Celebrated Canadians\n(1862).\nBuchanan on Industrial Politics (edited) (1864).\nSpeeches of Hon. T. D'Arcy McGee\n(edited) (1865).\nThe Place of British Americans in\nHistory (1865).\nThe Bibliotheca Canadensis (1867).\nThe Canadian Legal Directory (1878).\nCanadian Men and Women of the\nTime (1898).\nCanadian Men and Women of the\nTime (1911).\nCanadian Parliamentary Companion\n(1862-76).\nDominion Annual Register (edited)\n(1878-86).\nAnother author who wrote much about Canada wMch deserved\nappreciation was G. Mercer Adam. His editorial work in connection\nwith the Canadian Monthly and the Canadian Educational Monthly;\nMs History of the Canadian North West and a Canadian novel written\nm conjunction with Miss Wetherald; Ms Outline of Canadian Literature and many hand-books of Canadian cities or districts; Ms continuous contributions in papers, periodicals and works of local\nMstory did much good service to the country. Of great and permanent value in Canadian Mstory is Dr. J. George Hodgins' Documentary History of Education in Upper Canada (28 volumes) and a volume\nmade up of various special contributions entitled Eighty Years\nProgress of British North America, which was published M 1864.\nSpecial reference must also be made to a most exhaustive work upon\nBritish ColumMa by E. R. Gosnell, The Year-Book for 1897. Of a\ndifferent nature but still none the less valuable were the works upon\nPolitical Appointments and Elections in United Canada from 1841\nto 1865 compiled by the late J. 0. Cot6 and continued for the whole\nDormnion up to 1895 by Ms son, N. Omer Cote\ Mention may\nalso be made of A. T. McCord's Canadian Dictionary of Dates, James\nKirby's B. N. A. Almanac (1864) and Arthur Harvey's Year-Book,\nwMch he edited from 1867 to 1870. In tMs connection a word must\nbe said of the valuable literature of specified and special subjects\nwhich is contained in the publications or annual proceedings of the\nNova Scotia Historical Society, the Mamtoba Historical Society,\nthe Quebec Historical and Literary Society, the Royal Society of\nCanada, the Canadian Institute, the Niagara Historical Society,\nthe New Brunswick Historical Society, the Numismatic and Antiquarian Society of Montreal and other similar organizations.\nBiography is an important adjunct of history, and in many Canadian Literature 199\ncases furnishes the most faitMul and interesting form of historic\nwriting. It is only in recent years that Canadian development has\nreached the stage of appreciating tMs particular phase of hterary\nlabor, though it now seems to have taken a strong hold upon popular\nopimon. Condensed and short biograpMes comprise the earlier\nform of tMs branch of our literature, and Dent's Canadian Portrait\nGallery, Fennings Taylor's British Americans, Morgan's Celebrated\nCanadians and Rose's Cyclopedia of Canadian Biography were standard works in this respect. The Canadian Biographical Dictionary,\nDr. CocMane's Men of Canada and LoMs H. Tach\u00C2\u00A3's Men of To-Day\nwere useful volumes for purposes of biograpMcal reference, though\nthe first two works were marred by the mtrusion of names wMch\nshould never have been given space. F. R. E. Campeau's Illustrated\nGuide to the Senate and Commons (1879) and C. H. Mackintosh's\nParliamentary Companion, continued to date by J. A. Gemmill, A.\nJ. Magurn and E. J. Chambers, must also be mentioned. D. B.\nRead's Lives of the Judges, Dr. Mockridge's work upon the Bishops\nof the Church of England in Canada, Fennings Taylor's Last Three\nBishops appointed by the Crown in Canada are of importance. In\nQuebec, the valuable work upon its Roman Catholic Bishops, Les\nEveques de Quebec, by Mgr. Henri Tetu and the Mstorical supplement\nin six volumes entitled Les Managements des Eveques, must be mentioned. L. O. David published a couple of volumes of miscellaneous\nFrench-Canadian biography. Les Canadiens de VOuest, by the Hon.\nJoseph Tass\u00E2\u0082\u00AC and La Genealogie les Families Canadiennes, by Mgr.\nCyprian Tauguay, were both of standard value. The earliest\nbiograpMcal works of an individual character, and of any note,\nincluded Hon. W. Anaund's Letters and Speeches of Joseph Howe\n(1858) and Edward Ermatinger's Life of Colonel Talbot (1859).2\nOther works were as follows:\nTitle and Author\nMemoir of Sir Brenton Haliburton Life of Mgr. Provencher\nRev. George W. Hill. L'AbbS G. Dugas.\nLife of Sir William Logan Life of F. X. Garneau\nProf. B. J. Harrington. Hon. P. J. O. Chauveau.\nLife of Bishop Richardson Life of Sir John Macdonald\nRev. Dr. Thomas Webster. J. Edmund Collins.\n^Though not written by Canadians, reference must be made here to W. L. Stone's Biographies\nof Thayendanegea and Sir William Johnson. 200\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nLife of Egerton Ryerson\nDr. J. George Hodgins.\nLife of Hon. George Brown\nHon. A. Mackenzie.\nLife of Archbishop Lynch\nH. C. McKeown.\nLife of Bishop Strachan\nRt. Rev. Dr. A. N. Bethune.\nLife of Alexander Mackenzie\nHon. G. W. Ross, William Buckingham.\nLife of Hon. W. H. Merritt\nJ. P. Merritt.\nLife of Letellier de St. Just\nP. B. Casgrain.\nLife of Hon. Joseph Howe\nGeorge E. Fenety.\nVie de P. C. de Maissonneuve\nRev. P. Rosseau.\nLife of the Rev. Dr. Fyfe\nDr. J. E. Wells.\nVie de M. Faillon\nL'Abb6 Desmazures.\nLife of Bishop Medley\nRev. W. F. Ketchum.\nMemoir of Bishop G. J. Mountain\nRev. A. W. Mountain.\nMemoir of Rev. Dr. J. McGregor\nRev. G. Patterson.\nMemoir of Rev. Dr. J. Bayne\nRev. G. Smellie.\nBiography of Hon. H. Mercier\nJ. O. Pelland.\nVie de C. F. Painchaud\nN. E. Dionne.\nLife of Sir John Macdonald\nJ. P. McPherson.\nLife of Sir John Macdonald\nJoseph Pope.\nLife of Sir Isaac Brock\nD. B. Read, Q.C.\nLife of J. Graves Simcoe\nD. B. Read, Q.C.\nLife of Sir Leonard Tilley\nJames Hannay.\nLife of Sir John Thompson\nJ. Castell Hopkins.\nMemoirs of Bishop Burke\nArchbishop O'Brien.\nLife of Rev. Robert Burns\nRev. Dr. R. F. Burns.\nLife of Colonel Fitzgibbon\nM. A. Fitzgibbon.\nLife of Hon. R. Cartwright\nRev. E. C. Cartwright.\nVie de Mgr. de Laval\nL'Abbe1 A. H. Gosselin.\nLife of Senator Macdonald\nRev. Dr. H. Johnston.\nLife of Rev. D. J. Macdonell\nProf. J. H. McCurdy.\nLife of Rev. Dr. Mathieson\nRev. Dr. Jenkins.\nMemoir of Rev. Dr. Wilkes\nRev. John Wood.\nLife of Samuel de Champlain\nN. E. Dionne.\nThe most important of these works from an Mstorical standpoint\nwas Sir Joseph Pope's Biography of Sir John Macdonald. Taken in\nconnection with the same writer's volume of Confederation Documents\nit tiirew much valuable light upon the growth of the Canadian constitution and the political records of the last half century. In Lower\nCanada a number of Mstorical volumes of importance have been\nproduced in the form of what may be termed religious biograpMes.\nAmong these works, anonymous in their nature or compiled by the\ncombined labors of the inmates of some religious establishment, Canadian Literature 201\nwere the Lives of Mdle.Mance.La Soeur Bourgeois, Mde. D'Youville,\nMere Marie Rose and the Bishop de St. VaMer. There has not been\nmuch of autobiography in Canadian hterature. The strain.of private\nand public labors upon the prominent men of the country was too\ngreat to permit of it. Sir Francis Hinks' Reminiscences, Dr. Egerton Ryerson's Story of My Life, The Memoirs of P. A. de Gaspe,\nSamuel Thompson's Reminiscences of a Canadian Pioneer were the\ncMef early exceptions. In constitutional hterature Canada holds a\ndistinctive place. The names of Todd and Bourinot rank with the\nbest of English writers upon tMs great subject. Two works by Dr.\nAlpheus Todd, C.M.G., entitled, respectively, Parliamentary Government in England and Parliamentary Government in the British Colonies,\nare still standard volumes of reference in English-speaking communities. Some of Sir John George Bourinot's constitutional works were\nof a similarly high character, while others were intended for popular\nuse. Among them were the followmg:\nParliamentary Procedure and Practice Federal Government in Canada (1889).\n(1884). Canadian Studies in Comparative\nA Manual of the Constitutional Politics (1890).\nHistory of Canada (1888). How Canada is Governed (1897).\nLocal Government in Canada (1888).\nOther works upon the constitution of Canada in different phases\nof its development have been written by CMef Justice Sewell, of\nQuebec (1814), Fennmgs Taylor, the Hon. T. J. J. Loranger, the\nHon. J. S. C Wurtele, the Hon. C C Colby, Samuel J. Watson, Dr.\nD. A. O'SuMvan, Q.C, Joseph Doutre, Q.C, Edmond Lareau, J. R.\nCartwright, Q.C, W. H. P. Clement and A. H. F. Lefroy. Before\nleaving tMs serious, solid and sometimes dull branch of our general\nhterature a word must be said regarding the influence and work of\nDr. Gold win Smith. His books were always briMant and nearly\nalways controversial. During four decades they were mainly written\nin Canada, often published there, and always widely read in other\ncountries. Yet it is difficult to term them a part of Canadian hterature while it is equally impossible to eliminate the reputation of the\nwriter from its Mstoric record. Unhke Parkman, who was yet an\nalien in birth and residence and death, Dr. Goldwm Smith did not\nin Ms works, or in Ms countless contributions to the press and contemporary magazmes, embody in any sense the spirit of Canadian Mstory.\nNor did he ever grasp the springs which moved the minds and directed 202\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nthe policy of the Canadian people. After coming to Canada in 1871\nhe published, among many works, the following more important\nvolumes:\nLife of William Cowper (1880).\nLectures and Essays (1881).\nConduct of England to Ireland (1882).\nFalse Hopes (1883).\nCajjada and the Canadian Question\n(1891).\nA Trip to England (1892).\nHistory of the United States (1893).\nOxford and her Colleges (1894).\nEssays on Questions of the Day (1896).\nGuesses at the Riddle of Existence\n(1896).\nThe United Kingdom.\nEssays on Questions of the Day.\nTurning to a lighter and brighter side of the general subject\nit will be found that romance has not held the place in Canadian\nliterature wMch it should have done. Instinct as Canadian history\nis with myriad themes of romantic interest, it has yet remained to\nthe last few years for Canadian novels and novelists to find their\nway into the hearts of the reading public. The French-Canadians\nwere the first to realize the brilliant, possibilities of fiction lying in the\ngloomy aisles of our primeval forests; amid the sunlit expanses of our\nroMng prairies or towering mountains; in the stirring and vivid pages\nof our national annals. Eugene l'Ecuyer, Patrice Lacombe, Joseph\nMarmette, P. A. de Gasp6, Gerin-Lajoie, P. J. O. Chauveau, Napoleon Bourassa, Jean Talon-Lesperance, Real Angers, each in turn\ncontributed to the evolution of a romantic Hterature. But the public\nwas limited and the appreciation not as pronounced as might have\nbeen desired. Perhaps the best of these volumes was The Bastonnais\n(1877), by Talon-Lesperance and Jean Rivare, by Gerin-Lajoie.\nIn Upper Canada among the earliest efforts was Mrs. Moodie's\nFlora Lindsay. In 1886 appeared the Canadian story An Algonquin\nMaiden, by G. Mercer Adam and Ethelwyn Wetherald. In Nova\nScotia Professor James De Mille published a number of stories wMch\nhad a wide popularity in their day.\nProfessor Comant, by the Hon. L. S. Huntingdon, and For King\nand Country, by Miss Machar, of Kingston, followed, together with\nsundry novels and tales of Canadian fife by Mrs. Leprohon, Miss\nLoMsa Murray, Mrs. J. V. Noel, Mrs. Annie Rothweh Christie, Watson Griffin, Mrs. S. Frances Harrison, W. D. Lighthall, and others,\nwhich were usually published m the magazines or journals of the time.\nIn later years clever short stories were written by the Rev. Arthur\nWentworth Eaton, Majory MacMurchy, Maud Ogilvy, C L. Betts, Canadian Literature 203\nthe Rev. F. G. Scott, Stuart Livmgston, Mrs. John E. Logan, Grace\nDean McLeod Rogers, the Rev. W. H. WitMow, Miss F. G. Gwilt\nand F. Blake Crofton. W. A. Fraser won considerable reputation\nin tMs direction, while E. W. Thompson made a distinct mark by\nMs Old Man Savarin and similar stories. But the central work of\nCanadian romance up to a very few years ago, and one wMch will\nhold a permanent place despite admitted faults of style, was William\nKirby's Le Chien D'or (1877). TMs novel brought before the reader\nmuch of the early stirring life of French Canada and made Mr. Kirby\nthe founder of a school of wMch Sir Gilbert Parker is the most famous\nexponent.\nIt was Sara Jeannette Duncan (Mrs. Evefard Cotes), however,\nwho in 1890 first really came before the reacting world as a Canadian\nnovelist, with her charming volume entitled A Social Departure.\nOther more or less popular works from her pen have since been steadily\nissued. Her example was followed in 1891 by Miss Lily Dougall,\nof Montreal, with Beggars All. A number of well-received volumes\nhave smce been written by Miss Dougall and been read far from the\nshores of her native land. Edmund E. Sheppard had meanwhile\nwritten tMee novels, notable for their clever character and dialect\nsketches: Dolly, Widower Jones and A Bad Man's Sweetheart. Grant\nAllen, a Canadian by birth, made himself generally popular by a\nnumber of novels, but as they m no sense touched Canada or Canadian\nlife and Mstory and were neither written nor published there, they\ncan hardly be included in Canadian hterature. So, in a great measure,\nwith the works of Robert Barr (\"Luke Sharpe\") and those of Margaret M. Robinson, author of Christie Redfern's Troubles and other\npopular stories. Very different has it been with Sir Gilbert Parker.\nIntensely proud of Ms country and mspired to the point of enthusiasm\nby its picturesque and peculiar annals he has produced a series of\nnovels wMch have not only made him famous in Enghsh-speaMng\ncountries but have illustrated Canadian Mstory and adorned its\nnative hterature. The foUowmg are Ms cMef works:\nA Lover's Diary (Poetry). Around the Compass in Australia.\nThe Wedding Day (A Drama). Pierre and His People.\nAn Adventurer of the North. The Translation of a Savage.\nThe Chief Factor. A Trespasser; Mrs. Falchion.\nThe Trail of the Sword. When Valmond Came to Pontiac.\nThe Seats of the Mighty. The Pomp of the Lavillettes.\nThe Battle of the Strong. Donovan Pasha; The Weavers.\nThe Ladder of Swords. Cummer's Son; Northern Lights. 204\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nIt is safe to say that the Canadian novel has now come to stay\nand that one of the most brilliant pages m the national hterature has\nopened up to view. Charles G. D. Robert's Forge in the Forest\nwas an early filustration of this fact. J. Macdonald Oxley in recent\nyears won a high and deserved reputation as the \"Henty \" of Canada.\nMiss Joanna E. Wood in her Judith Moore and The Untempered Wind,\nwrote a pair of very creditable Canadian stories. Mrs. S. Frances\nHarrison in The Forest of Bourg Marie, produced a work wMch\nshowed dramatic power and much descriptive sMll, while W. D.\nLighthall in his novel The False Chevalier, WiMam McLennan in\nSpanish John, Edgar Maurice Smith in Aner&stes the Gaul, Blanche\nLucille Macdonell in Diane of Ville Marie, and Ralph Conner (Rev.\nCharles W. Gordon, of Winnipeg) in Black Rock, and others wrote\nstories wMch were a credit to the literature of the country. Mrs.\nHenshaw (\"Julia Durham\"), of Victoria, B. C, and Miss Marshall\nSaunders, of Halifax, N. S., have also, from the ends of the Dominion\nand tixree thousand miles apart, produced novels of considerable\nmerit.\nIn poetry Canada has always deserved, though it has not always\nreceived, a Mgh place. I must pass over the brilliant French school\nwMch in a fragmentary and somewhat journalistic way has conferred\nhonor upon Canadian hterature. The best early representatives of\nthis school, in 1832-37, were F. X. Garneau, J. G. Barthe, G. Lav-\niolette and J. E. Turcotte. These were followed by a multitude of\nclever young writers in romance and poetry and politics, most of\ntheir productions appearing in pamphlets or brilliant but ephemeral\njournals. A special word must, however, be said regarding Loms\nHonore\" Frechette, who received the laureated approval of the French\nAcademy; who was honored by the late Queen with a C.M.G., and\nwho was described by Professor Leigh Gregor, of McGill Umversity,\nMontreal, as the acknowledged cMef of French-Canadian litterateurs. Charles Heavysege, Charles Sangster, Alexander McLachlan,\nWilliam Kirby, John Reade and Isabella Valancey Crawford, hold\nthe highest place amongst the earlier poets of English-speaking\nCanada. Others of the middle of the century who must be mentioned\nwere J. J. Proctor, Isidore; G. Ascher, Helen M. Johnson, Jennie E.\nHaight, Harriet Annie WilMns, Pamela S. Vming, William Wye Smith,\nAnme L. Walker, Rev. Edward Hartley Dewart, Professor E. J.\nChapman, Evan McColl, George Martin, Mrs. Susanna Moodie, Canadian Literature 205\nJohn F. McDonnell, Rhoda Ann Page (Mrs. Faulkner), WiMam\nPittman Lett.\nNew Brunswick poets of an earlier day were the Hon. Jonathan\nO'Dell and WiMam Murdoch. Magnus Sabiston, of St. John, also\nwrote some clever verse and James De Mille found time amidst his\nnovel writing for the publishing of some excellent poetry. So in\nNova Scotia, with Oliver Goldsmith, James Hogg, John McPherson,\nThomas Knight and C. M. DesBrisay. Of Heavyege's Saul the\n\"North British Review\" of August, 1858, declared that it was\n\"Undoubtedly one of the most remarkable English poems ever written outside of Great Britam.\" Among English-speaking poets of a\nlater day in Canada, Roberts, Campbell and Lampman were easily\nfirst m popular esteem. It would be a difficult task to anywhere find\nmore eloquently patriotic verse than some of Roberts' productions;\nmore beautiful descriptive poetry than m Campbell's Lake Lyrics;\nor a more delicate witchery than in many of Lampman's fugitive\npieces.\nApart from these poets, m the sense of popularity, but ranking\nwith them m the power of Ms verse was Charles Mair. The day will\nsurely come when Ms drama of Tecumseh will rank among the great\nliterary productions of the country, not only m the library of the\nstudent or isolated critic, but in the minds of the people as well. Other\nCanadian poets of the past thirty years were very numerous, but their\npoetry of most unequal merit. John Reade, of Montreal, must be\nplaced among the Mghest and best. The special quahties of Ms verse\nhave been described as sweetness and culture. For popularity and\ngrasp of poetic dialect Dr. W. H. Drummond held a very Mgh place.\nDr. Theodore H. Rand, W. D. Lighthall, A. H. Chandler and the\nRev. C P. Mulvaney, Kate Seymour Maclean, Arthur G. Doughty,\nThomas O'Hagan, Rev. A. W. H. Eaton, John Henry Brown, J. A.\nLogan, Mrs. Blewett, Bernard McEvoy, Hereward K. CockM\nand Mrs. S. A. Curzon published volumes of verse which deserved\nMgh commendation. Bliss Carman, a most charming and briMant\npoet, has long since made Ms home m the Umted States and Ms verse\nhas lost the Canadian color wMch it once possessed as in Low Tide\non Grand Pre (1893).\nAmong the pohticians the late Hon. Joseph Howe, Sir J. D.\nEdgar, the Hon. David Mills, Nicholas Flood Davin and, especially,\nthe late T. D'Arcy McGee have written some excellent poetry. 206\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nFacts of this nature afforded a pleasant indication of growing national\nculture. R. F. Kemighan is well known by his nom de plume of\n\"The Khan,\" and some of his poems are so redolent of the farm and\ncountry life of the people and so instinct with the spirit of the soil as\nto have not oMy met wide popularity but merited a permanent place\nin Canadian hterature. Arthur J. Stringer is another Canadian who,\nin isolated poems of great merit as well as in stories and novels, has\nshown the possession of distinct power. Others who must be mentioned are T. Arnold Haultain, J. W. Bengough, Walter Ratchffe,\nJohn Stuart Thomson, Helen M. Merrill, Arthur Weir, PMMps\nStewart, J. A. Richey, J. E. G. Roberts, Mary Barry Smith, H. L.\nSpencer, Robert Reed, John Inirie, T. G. MarqMs, A. M. Taylor,\nFrancis Rye, John Lowry Stuart, H. R. A. Pocock, Mary Morgan\n(Gowan Lea), Anme Campbell Huestis, A. R. Garvie, George T.\nLamgan, Barry Stratton, W. A. Sherwood, C L. Barnes, C. D.\nShanly, C E. Jukeway, K. L. Jones, T. R. Ramsay, J. R. Newell,\nGeorge Gerrard, E. W. Thomson, Mrs. J. C Yule, Mrs. W. H. Clarke,\nJ. E. Pollock, Stuart Livingston and Clara Mountcastle.\nIt is a far call from poetry to science and kindred subjects,\nbut m the latter department of hterature Canada has excelled even\nmany older countries. Sir WiMarn Dawson, Sir Darnel Wilson,\nDr. A. R. C. Selwyn, Dr. George M. Dawson, Sir WiMam Logan,\nDr. H. Youle Hind and Dr. T. Sterry Hunt have ranked Mgh in the\nscientific world. Elkanah Billings, Prof. Henry How, Henry Poole,\nProf. J. B. Cherriman, WiMam Cowper, Prof. Henry H. Croft,\nGeorge and James Barnston, the Rev. WiMam Hincks and Prof.\nCharles Smallwood, were voluminous writers in their day on subjects\nranging from geology to meteorology. Profs. John Watson and J.\nClark Murray in philosophy; Mrs. Catherine Parr Traill, Prof.\nJohn Macoun, and Dr. Alexander Milton Ross in natural history;\nProfessors George Lawson, James Fletcher and George U. Hay in\nbotany, etc., won a distinct place. Horatio Hale, Dr. G. F. Mathew,\nDr. R. M. Bucke, Prof. E. J. Chapman, Prof. B. J. Harrington, Prof.\nR. W. Ellis, Prof. R. Ramsay Wright, Dr. Robert Bell, G. C. Hoffman,\nDr. WiMam Saunders, F. D. Adams, Prof. D. B. Penhallow, Dr. E.\nGilpin, Jr., Prof. W. H. Pike, Rev. Dr. C J. S. Bethune, R. G. Mc-\nConnell, Principal Loudon of Toronto University, Prof. H. T. Bovey,\nProf. W. L. Bailey, H. M. Ami, Robert Grant Haliburton, Edward\nE. Prince, Dr. Neil MacNish and Prof. John Campbell all earned Canadian Literature 207\nMgh reputations for scholarsMp or original research and for publications connected with some branch or other of the field of science.\nA most important subject in Canada wMch may be referred to here\nis Forestry and the general question of preserving the forests of the\ncountry. It has been dealt with most fully and authoritatively\nover a long term of years and in many publications by the late R. W.\nPMpps, and by A. T. Drummond, Edward Jack, J. C Chapais, H. B.\nSmall and Sir Henri Joly de Lotbimere. In the interesting subject\nof Numismatics Stanley Clark Bagg and R. W. McLachlan have\nwritten much.\nIn legal hterature some good work has been done m Canada.\nThe late Sir J. J. C Abbott on Insolvency and Railway Law, Sir\nJ. D. Edgar and F. H. Crysler on Insolvency Law, C O. Ermatinger\nand Thomas Hodgins on Franchise Law, J. A. Barron on Conditional\nSales, E. Douglas Armor on Titles, Hon D. Girouard and Dr. J. J.\nMaclaren on Bills and Notes, W. D. McPherson and J. M. Clark on\nMining Laws, Hon. R. A. Harrison on Municipal Law, C M. Holt\non Insurance Law, Henry Abbott on Railway Law and the Hon.\nH. E. Taschereau on Criminal Law have written authoritatively.\nFrancois Joseph Cignet, P. G. Mighault, J. R. Cartwright, John\nCrankshaw, L. A. Audette, E. Lareau, G. S. Holmstead, C H.\nStephens, S. Pagnuelo, S. R. Clarke, Alfred Howell, A. T. Hunter,\nW. Howard Hunter, G. W. Wickstead, Sir J. R. Gowan, R. E.\nKingsford, A. H. Marsh, Hon. Archer Martin, Hon. Michel MatMeu,\nCMef Justice Sir T. W. Taylor, Alexander Leith, Joseph Doutre,\nJudge Maclennan, Christopher RobMson, J. F. Joseph, R. Vashon\nRogers, Henry O'Brien, Hon. T. K. Ramsay, Sir James Lukin Robinson, J. P. Foran, County Judges J. S. Smclair and J. G. Stevens\nhave all published volumes upon special branches of Canadian law\nor practice. Others who have written much, though in a less defhiite\nform, were Edward Carter and Dr. James Kirby, of Montreal;\nJohn King, C R. W. Biggar and D. E. Thompson, of Toronto; Benjamin Russell, of Halifax, and R. Stanley Weir, of Montreal.\nTo ecclesiastical Mstory and hterature much has been contributed by Canadians, but only a few volumes of really first rank.\nPrincipal Grant in Ms Religions of the World, L'Abbe\" Auguste\nGossehn in Ms L'Eglise Du Canada, Professor WMiam Clark in Ms\nLife of Savonarola, Dr. WiMam Gregg in a History of the Presbyterian\nChurch in Canada, M. Faillon in Ms great work upon the annals of 208\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nCanadian Roman Catholicism, L'Histoire de la Colonie Francaise,\nhave occupied Mgh ground in a distinctly able manner. The foremost Methodist writer of the past has been Dr. Egerton Ryerson,\nand perhaps the best known one of the present is the Rev. Dr. Albert\nCarman. The most valuable Mstorical work done in that denomination has been by the Rev. Dr. George H. Cornish, the Rev. George\nPlayter, the Rev. Dr. John Carroll and the Rev. Dr. T. Watson\nSmith. The latter's History of the Church in the Maritime Provinces\nis of much value. The Rev. Dr. Mathew Richey wrote volummously.\nThe Church of England, in Canada, has produced many able writers,\nbut few great hterary works. Bishop Strachan and Bishop Bethune,\nof Toronto, Bishop G. J. Mountain, of Quebec, Bishop Hehmuth, of\nLondon, Bishop Oxendon and Bishop Fulford, of Montreal, Bishop\nMedley and Bishop KMgdon, of Fredericton, and Bishop Charles\nInglis, of HaMax, have, in their time, written upon various ecclesiastical topics, the first named bemg one of the strongest controversialists m Canadian annals. Volumes of some value upon church\nMstory have appeared from time to time by the Rev. H. C Stuart,\nDr. T. B. Aikm, the Rev. A. Wentworth Eaton, F. C Wurtele,\nArchdeacon Roe, Rev. Dr. John Langtry, and S. Herbert Lee. The\nRev. Dr. John McCaul wrote upon religious as well as classical subjects. Presbyterianism has not been very productive in a hterary\nsense, and its best known names are those of the Rev. Dr. James\nMcGregor, Dr. Robert Burns, Dr. R. F. Burns, Dr. Alexander Mathie-\nson, Dr. John JenMns, Principal Grant and Dr. Gregg. Dr. WiMam\nCocMane wrote some interesting religious works as did Dr. William\nOrmiston. Dr. George Patterson and Prof. John Campbell were\nknown in connection with various Mstorical subjects, wMle Dr. J0M1\nLaing wrote much on controversial topics of current importance.\nThe Rev. Dr. Robert Campbell wrote a useful History of St. Gabriel\nStreet Church in Montreal.\nThe literary productions of Roman Catholicism mclude the\nworks of M. Faillon and l'Abbe\" Gosselin in particular and much of\nthe historical and poetic literature of French Canada in general. Its\ninfluence upon the development of Canadian culture has been upon\nthe whole distinctly beneficial. Bishop Jean Langevin, Archbishop\nO'Brien, Mgr. C Tanguay, Mgr. Tetu, Dean Harris, Mrs. Mary A.\nSadlier, Rev. J. M. Coffee, J. K. Foran, Rev. iEneas McDonell\nDawson,Rev.Dr. J.R. Teefy, Rev. J.B. Dollard and Thomas O'Hagan Canadian Literature 209\nhave largely contributed to the pages of Canadian Catholic literature.\nMiscellaneous writers who may be mentioned in connection with\nreligious Hterature in Canada were the Rev. Dr. Joseph Wild, the\nRev. Dr. Chiniquy, the Rev. Dr. John Carry, the Rev. Dr. T. E. Bill,\nthe Rev. Dr. J. M. Cramp, Dr. R. A. Fyfe, Dr. Henry Wfikes, Dr.\nAbraham de Sola, the Rev. Dr. J. M. King. Professor William Clark,\nalready mentioned, in many pubhshed lectures and essays proved\nhimself one of the most cultured and scholarly of Canadian authors.\nCharles Lindsay in Ms Rome in Canada (1878) and in an earlier work\nupon the Clergy Reserves, assumed a strongly controversial position,\nbut admitting this, the volumes were still of distinct interest\nand value.\nIn bibliography G. B. Faribault, Phileas Gagnon, William\nKingsford, H. J. Morgan, W. R. Haight and C. C. James have done\ngood work. In 1864 Dr. E. H. Dewart published a volume entitled\nSelections from Canadian Poetry. TMs was supplemented in Quebec\nm 1874 by Edmund Lareau with Ms Histoire de la Litterature Cana-\ndienne, in 1881 by Dr. L. P. Bender's Literary Leaves, and in 1889\nby W. D. Lighthall's Songs of the Great Dominion. In tMs connection Sir J. G. Bourinot's work upon Canadian Intellectual Development, Miss J. E. Wetherell's Later Canadian Poets, Mrs. Frances\nHarrison's Birthday Book, L. H. Tach^'s La Poesie Francaise, William\nMcLennan's volume of translations entitled Songs of Old Canada,\nProfessor George M. Wrong's annual volumes reviewing Canadian\nhistorical publications and Patriotic Selections by the Hon. G. W.\nRoss were of value and interest. Turning to another fine of Hterary\nwork, reference must be made to a volume of great value written by\nJames H. Bartlett deafing with the coal, iron and steel development\nof Canada. George E. Drummond and B. T. A. BeU have written\nlargely on the same subject, while Prof. A. B. Wihnott has pubhshed\na useful work on the Mineral Wealth of Canada. The late Charles\nF. Smithers, the late James Stevenson, George Hague, Sir Edmund\nWalker and Professor Adam Shortt, of Kingston, have written\nlargely upon either the practice or Mstory of banking in Canada.\nIn controversial Hterature the names of Bishop Strachan and Dr.\nRyerson stand pre-eminent. Associated with them in the old days\nof pamphleteering activity were WiMam Lyon Mackenzie, the late\nChief Justice W. H. Draper, C.B., Sir JoMi Beverley Robinson, Dr.\nWilliam Dunlop, the Hon. R. B. SuMvan and the Hon. WiMam 210\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nMorris. A httle later came Sir Francis Hincks, the Hon. Isaac\nBuchanan, Ogle R. Gowan, T. D'Arcy McGee, the Hon. WiMam\nMcDougall, the Hon. W. H. Merritt, Sir A. T. Gait, John Sheridan\nHogan and the Hon. Alexander Morris. In Lower Canada were L.\nJ. Papineau, H. S. Chapman, D. B. Viger, Andrew Stuart, and, later\non, Joseph Royal. In the maritime provinces the Hon. John G.\nMarshaU, George R. Young and Pierce Stevens Hamilton wrote\nlargely. In more recent years the late Sir John Christian Schultz, the\nHon. Thomas White, the Hon. C H. Mackintosh, L. G. Desjardin,\nthe late John Maclean, the Hon. C C Colby, Sir David Macpherson,\nW. A. Foster, Q.C, the Hon. James Young and J. S. Ewart, Q.C,\nhave written largely upon political subjects. In medicine Dr. Henry\nHoward, Dr. A. T. Hoknes, Sir James Grant, M.D., Sir W. H.\nHmgston, M.D., Dr. James BoveU and Dr. Anthony Von Iffland have\nwritten much, while Dr. WiHiam Canniff's History of the Medical\nProfession in Upper Canada is of importance for reference.\nThere is a very large and increasing mass of general Hterature\nin Canada of books wMch can hardly be placed under distinct\nheads and yet ought to be mentioned in such a review as tMs. E. T.\nD. Chambers, by his descriptive works upon the sports and scenery\nof Quebec, F. Barlow Cumberland by Ms History of the Union Jack\nand J. W. Tyrrell in Ms popular Across the Sub-Arctics of Canada\nhave earned a place m Canadian Hterature. J. Hampden Burnham\nhas pubhshed a useful book entitled Canadians in the Imperial Service. The Hon. J. H. Gray wrote one interesting volume of a proposed\nHistory of Confederation, but never completed the work. The Hon.\nT. D'Arcy McGee wrote upon Federal Governments and, Hke everything wMch he treated, the result was attractive and most valuable.\nIn 1898 there appeared a most useful work upon Steam Navigation in\nCanada by James Croil. Jehu Matthews in Ms Colonist and the\nColonial Question (1872), pubhshed one of the earhest works of importance upon Imperial Federation. Oliver A. Howland, in Ms New\nEmpire, afforded a most interesting review of the growth of existing\nImperial conditions. Sir Sandford Fleming and Thomas C Keefer,\nC.M.G., have written much upon questions connected with the\nmaterial development of the country. Dr. George R. Parkin, C.M.G.,\nwrote an eloquent volume upon Imperial Federation. His Life\nand Letters of Edward Thring, published m 1988, is, however, the\nmost important of Ms literary works. Canadian Literature 211\nAmong miscellaneous Canadian authors dealing with subjects\nnot exclusively or maiMy Canadian, perhaps the Mghest place should\nbe given to Lieutenant-Colonel George T. Demson, whose History\nof Cavalry (1877), m competition with the works of officers from many\ncountries, won a prize offered by the Emperor of Russia for the best\nwork upon the subject. His Modern Cavalry (1868) had previously\nearned for him a distinct reputation. Upon general nufitary matters\nin Canada Lieutenant-Colonel L. T. Suzor wrote much in the early\nsixties. A word must be said for the work of Hon. J. W. Longley,\nof Halifax, m the region of beUes lettres. His Httle volume of essays\nentitled Love, published in 1898, reached a notable level of cultured\nexpression. The various educational works of Sir G. W. Ross, of\nToronto, were also of a Mgh order, wMle Ms lectures on pubhc topics\nhave done much to promote a Mgh view of the Imperial question.\nOutside of Canada many Canadians have of late years distinguished themselves. Sir George Duncan Gibb, Bart., M.D., was a\ngreat medical writer; Sir WiMam Osier is to-day one of the cMef\nmedical authorities of the Umted States and Great Britain; Dr.\nBeattie Crozier in London has won a Mgh place in EngHsh science and\nHterature; Montague Chamberlain is an American authority in the\nrealm of natural history; the late Bishop GiMs of Edinburgh, was a\nvolurnmous writer on Roman CathoHc polemics; Robert Barr, Grant\nAHen, EHnor Glyn, May Agnes Fleming and Stinson Jarvis have been,\nor are, weU known in the world of novels; Ernest Thompson-Seton\nhas become widely popular in the Umted States by Ms works dealing\nwith wild animal life; the Hon. Charles Wentworth Upham has\nwritten standard works on local American' Mstory; John Foster\nKirk has won eminence in the Umted States as an Mstorian; Dr.\nGeorge McCaH Theal's is the most eminent name in the Mstorical\nHterature of Cape Colony. So with the names of BHss Carman,\nCharles G. D. Roberts, Norman Duncan and A. J. Stringer, New\nYork; E. W. Thomson, Boston, and StaMey Waterloo, CMcago.\nThese latter appear to have mamtained their Canadian affiliations\nand mterests while rismg in the field of mternational fiction or\nHterature.\nDuring the decade or so ending with 1912, a new and fraitful\nHst of writers has arisen m Canada. In novels and romances AHce\nM. Jones, Jean N. Mcllwraith, WMrid CampbeU, Theodore Roberts,\nMargaret A. Brown, Vallance Patriarche, A. E. McFarlane, A. P. 212\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nMcKishnie, Adelaide M. Teskey, Virna Sheard, Agnes C Laut,\nR. L. Richardson, Dr. W. F. Grenfell, Kate Westlake Yeigh, Hampden\nBurnham, Prof. E. P. Leacock, R. W. Service, Rev. H. A. Cody,\nMarian Keith, A. R. Carman, NeMe L. McClung and Harvey J.\nO'Higgms have pubhshed volumes of merit. Certam authors sprang\nmto wide popularity and recognition and their cMef works may be\ntabulated m a few cases as follows:\nW. A. Fraser\nThoroughbreds (1902).\nThe Blood of Lilies (1903).\nZa-Zada Tale (1905).\nBrave Hearts (1904).\nThirteen Men (1906).\nThe Lone Furrow (1907).\nMrs. Everard Cotes\nThe Delightful Americans (1902).\nThe Pool in the Desert (1903).\nThe Imperialist (1904).\nSet in Authority (1906).\nCousin Cinderella (1908).\nThe Burnt Offering (1911).\nRev. R. E. Knowles\nSt. Cuthbert's (1905).\nThe Undertow (1906).\nThe Dawn of Shanty Bay (1907).\nThe Web of Time (1908).\nThe Attic Guest (1909).\nThe Handicap (1910).\nThe Singer of the Kootenay (1911).\nArthur J. Stringer\nThe Silver Poppy (1903).\nLonely O'Malley (1905).\nThe Wire Tappers (1906).\nThe Woman in the Rain and Other\nPoems (1907).\nThe Under Groove (1908).\nIrish Songs (1911).\nL. M. Montgomery\nAnne of Green Gables (1908).\nAnne of Avonlea (1909).\nKilmeny of the Orchard (1910).\nThe Story Girl (1911).\nChronicles of Avonlea (1912).\nRev.C.W. Gordon\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Ralph Connor)\nGlengarry School Days (1902).\nThe Prospector (1904).\nThe Doctor (1906).\nThe Foreigner (1909).\nRecall of Love (1910).\nC. G. D. Roberts\nThe Kindred of the Wild (1902).\nBarbara Ladd (1902).\nPoems (1912).\nRed Fox (1905).\nThe Heart that Knows (1906).\nThe Hunters of the Silence (1907).\nThe Watchers of the Trails (1904).\nCameron of Lochiel (1905).\nIn the Depth of the Snow (1907).\nThe House in the Water (1908).\nThe Backwoodsman (1909).\nNeighbours Unknown (1911).\nIn poetry there has of late been an abundance of material.\nRobert W. Service in his Songs of a Sourdough (1907) struck a new and\npopular chord of thought which was followed up with The Ballads of a Canadian Literature\n213\nCheechako (1909) and Rhymes of a Rolling Stone (1912), while Ms novel\nentitled The Trail of '98 was pubhshed in 1910. R. J. C Stead, of\nMamtoba, in Empire Builders (1908); Prairie Born and Other Poems\n(1911) and Songs of the Prairies (1911), produced verse of a ringmg\nand rythmical nature wMch won prompt patriotic appreciation.\nIsabel E. MacKay, J. A. Tucker, CarroH Ryan, E. PauHne Johnson,\nCHve PhilHpps-WoUey, A J. Stringer, A. J. Lockhart, Duncan\nCampbell Scott, Dr. W. H. Drummond, Rev. Dr. F. G. Scott, Jean\nBlewett, J. D. Logan, Helena Coleman, Peter McArthur, T. R. E.\nMclnnes, Rev. J. B. DoHard and W. M. McKeracher all produced\npoetry of a more or less Mgh order. In Mstory, the writer of tMs\narticle pubhshed (1899) the pioneer Encyclopaedia of Canada, a record\nin six volumes of Canadian conditions and history written by tMee\nhundred of the most emment men in the country. Since 1900, also,\nhe has published annually The Canadian Annual Review of Public\nAffairs, a study of events and conditions in Canada from ocean to\nocean and in relation to other countries. In biography the most\nimportant publication has been the Makers of Canada series issued m\n1903-8 as foUows:\nEgerton Ryerson\nRev Dr. N. Burwash.\nLord Elgin\nSir J. G. Bourinot.\nJoseph Howe\nHon J. W. Longley.\nPapineau and Cartier\nA. D. De Celles.\nSir F. Haldimand\nJ. N. Mcllwraith.\nMackenzie, Selkirk and Simpson\nGeorge Bryce.\nWolfe and Montcalm\nAbbe H. R. Casgrain.\nSamuel de Champlain\nN. E. Dionne.\nJohn Graves Simcoe\nDuncan C. Scott.\nSir Isaac Brock\nLady Edgar.\nWilmot and Tilley\nJames Hannay.\nLord Dorchester\nA. G. Bradley.\nGeorge Brown\nJohn Lewis.\nBishop Laval\nA. L. de Brumath\nCount Frontenac\nW. D. Le Sueur\nSir John Macdonald\nGeorge R. Parkin.\nSir James Douglas\nE. R. Gosnell, R. H. Coats.\nLord Sydenham\nAdam Shortt.\nW. L. Mackenzie\nG. G. S. Lindsey.\nRobert Baldwin\nRev. Dr. N. Burwash.\nSir L. H. Lafontaine\nE. P. Leacock.\nSir Francis Hincks\nSir J. G. Bourinot. 214\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nOther Historical Works 1902-12\nTitle and\nThe Fight for Canada\nWilliam Wood\nThe Talbot Regime\nC. 0. Ermatinger\nThe Story of the Canadian People\nD. M. Duncan.\nThe Royal Tour in Canada\nJoseph Pope.\nOld Quebec\nSir G. Parker, Claude Bryan.\nThe War of 1812\nJ. Hannay.\nThe Tragedy of Quebec\nRobert Sellar.\nCanadian Life in Town and Country\nH. J. Morgan, L. J. Burpee.\nThe Story of the Dominion\nJ. Castell Hopkins.\nAuthor\nThe Progress of Canada in the 19th\nCentury\nJ. Castell Hopkins.\nHistory of Manitoba\nD. M. Duncan.\nThe Siege of Quebec (6 vols.)\nA. G. Doughty, T. Chapais, E. T.\nD. Chambers, G. W. Parmalee.\nThree Premiers of Nova Scotia\nRev. E. M. Saunders.\nHistory of the Catholic Church in\nWestern Canada\nRev. A. G. Morice.\nThe Cradle of New France\nA. G. Doughty.\nBiographical Works, 1902\u00E2\u0080\u009412\nTitle an\nLord Strathcona\nBeckles Willson.\nLife of King Edward VII\nJ. Castell Hopkins.\nSir Wilfrid Laurier and the Liberal\nParty\nJ. S. Willison.\nLaurier et Son Temps\nHon. L. 0. David.\nSir Oliver Mowat: A Biography\nC. R. W. Biggar, K.C.\nLife of Archbishop Machray\nR. Machray.\nReminiscences of Goldwin Smith\n(edited)\nT. Arnold Haultain.\nReminiscenses of Sir R. J. Cartwright\nLife of James Robertson\nRev. C. W. Gordon.\nDiary of Mrs. John Graves Simcoe\n(edited)\nJ. Ross Robertson.\nd Author\nFather Lacombe: The Black-robed\nVoyageur\nKatharine Hughes.\nLife of Sir J. B, Robinson\nMaj.-Gen. C. W. Robinson.\nLife of Archbishop O'Brien\nKatharine Hughes.\nPrincipal Grant\nF. Hamilton, W. L. Grant.\nSpeeches and Addresses\nJohn Charlton.\nThe Struggle for Imperial Unity\nColonel G. T. Denison.\nLife and Letters of James Wolfe\nBeckles Willson.\nSpeeches and Published Letters of\nJoseph Howe\nJ. A. Chisholm. Canadian Literature 215\nIn conclusion let me say that national Hterature is not the\nproduct of an hour nor does its existence depend upon popularity.\nThe personahty of Homer is hard to trace yet he lives forever m\nMs writings. So in the case of many Canadian authors, unknown by\nname to the masses of our people, who whl yet hve m Mstory as part\nand parcel of the development of pubhc thought tMough the influence\nwMch their, works have had upon other minds better able to express\ntheir sentiments or Mstorical views. Canadian hterature is, and must\nbe, a fact to all who look back of Hie ever-mcreasing volume of Eng-\nHsh-speakmg books and ephemeral journals to the substantial sum\ntotal of Canadian works wrought out of the pioneer thoughts and\nHves and manners of our people\u00E2\u0080\u0094the natural products m their defects,\nand in their virtues, of the environment of the time. The Hterature\nof a country comes from within itself and must partake of the characteristics of the period. To meet tMs condition a writer does not\nrequire to have Hved continuously m Canada, but he must embody\nCanadian ideas or accurately describe Canadian mterests or affairs.\nAnd whether we look at Canada from the days of Charlevoix to those\nof Garneau and Kirby or of Frechette and Parker, we cannot but see\nthat there was always a growmg Hterature, evolving gradually from\nan ahnost unnoticed condition into the final and full sun-Hght of\nnational recognition. To-day the note of nationality\u00E2\u0080\u0094whether it\nbe English-Canadian or French-Canadian in its local application and\nlanguage does not matter so long as it rings true to the soil of our\ncommon country\u00E2\u0080\u0094is bemg struck, and with it comes a Hterature\nadequate to the whole range of Canadian progress and aspirations. CANADIAN STATISTICS\nTMs collection of statistics has been culled from the \"Canada\nYear-Book,\" 1911, second series, and the \"Census of Canada,\" 1911.\nA selection has been made of some of the most important tables, \u00E2\u0096\u00A0\nadapted to the purpose of making a comparison of conditions in Canada and other countries.\nChinese Immigration\nFollowing a report made by Mr. Justice Murphy, Royal Commissioner\nappointed to investigate certain alleged Chinese frauds and opium smuggling\non the Pacific coast, an Order in Council of May 31st referred from the Department of Trade and Commerce to the Department of the Interior all matters\npertaining to Chinese immigration, the order taking effect from October 2d.\nBy a further Order in Council of August 4th immigration officers of the Department of the Interior were made controllers of Chinese immigration under authority of R. S. 1906, c. 95, s. 6, ss. \"B\". The number of Chinese immigrants during\nthe fiscal year ended March 31, 1912, was 6,584, compared with 5,320 in 1910-11,\n2,302 in 1909-10, and 2,106 in 1908-9.\u00E2\u0080\u0094{Canada Year-Book, 1911, second\nseries, p. xxx.)\nAreas and Population\nThe number of occupied dwellings in the sub-districts of the Dominion\nin 1911 was 1,413,913, and the number of families 1,488,353, compared with\n1,028,892 dwellings and 1,070,747 families in 1901. The average number of\npersons per dwelling in 1911 was 5.096 and per family 4.841, compared with\naverages of 5.220 per dwelling and 5.016 per family in 1901.\nThe area of Canada is given in the census tables of 1911 as 3,729,665 square\nmiles of land and water, which is 15,909 square miles less than ten years ago.\nThis is due in part to a reduction following the Alaska Boundary treaty and also\nto new map measurements. The population per square mile was 1.93 in 1911,\nand in 1901 computed on the same area it was 1.44. In Alberta the population\nwas 1.47 per square mile in 1911 and in 1901 it was .28. British Columbia in 1911\nhad 1.09 per square mile and in 1901 only .50. Manitoba in 1901 had 3.46\nper square mile and in 1911 it reached 6.18. New Brunswick increased during\nthe same period from 11.83 to 12.61 per square mile and Nova Scotia from 21.45\nto 22.98. Ontario's increase was nearly 1.30 per square mile, or from 8.37 in\n1901 to 9.67 in 1911. Prince Edward Island in 1901 had a population of 47.27\nand in 1911 it fell to 42.91. Quebec in the ten years has grown from 4.69 per\nsquare mile to 5.69, which is an increase of one per square mile as compared with\n1.30 in Ontario. In Saskatchewan the increase has been from .36 to 1.95, and\nin Yukon and the Northwest Territories there have been large decreases.\u00E2\u0080\u0094\n(Census of Canada, 1911, vol. I, p. vii.)\n(216) Canadian Statistics 217\nPopulation of Canada, ign\nDuring the year the fifth census of Canada was taken as for June 1st. As\nthe result the population was ascertained to be 7,204,838, an increase of\n1,833,523, or 34.13 per cent, since the previous census of March 31, 1901. Tables\nI and II on page 2 of this volume of the Year Book give the distribution of the\npopulation by provinces and territories according to sex, with the totals of the\nprevious census for comparison.\u00E2\u0080\u0094{Canada Year Book, 1911, second series,p.xxiv.)\nYields and Values of Field Crops, ion\nThis table shows that a total area in Canada of 32,404,110 acres yielded in\n1911 a harvest which, computed at local market prices, had a value of $558,099,-\n600. For wheat, Canada's principal cereal crop,the total production was estimated\nat 215,851,300 bushels, with a value of $138,567,000, from an area of 10,373,958\nacres. This is the largest wheat crop in the history of the Dominion both as regards\narea and total production. Except as regards flaxseed the areas in the table\nrepresent the totals of the schedules obtained from every agricultural occupier\nby the census of 1911, and the total yields are calculated therefrom according\nto the estimated yields per acre as returned by the crop-reporting correspondents\nof the Census and Statistics Office. The figures of 1911 possess therefore a greater\ndegree of statistical accuracy than can be attributed to the estimates of 1908,\n1909 and 1910, published on page xxiii of the Year Book of 1910, the latter being\ncalculated from the areas as estimated by correspondents. It may, however,\nbe mentioned that the area and yield of wheat in 1911 exceed by over 1,000,000\nacres and by 65,861,000 bushels the estimate of 1910\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Ibid., p. xxvi.)\nRailway Statistics of Canada\nAccording to the report of the comptroller of railway statistics the increase\nin the railway mileage of Canada for the year ended June 30, 1911, was 669, as\ncompared with 627 in 1910 and 1,138 in 1909. Seventy per cent of the increase\nin 1910-11 was in the western provinces. The total railway mileage in actual\noperation on June 30th was 25,400, as against 24,731 in 1910 and 24,104 in 1909.\nThere were in addition 1,577^ miles of railway in actual operation but officially\nregarded as still under construction.\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Ibid., p. xxviii.)\nTelephones\nThe report on telephones relates to 537 organizations with a total capitalization of $40,043,982, of which $21,527,374 are in stocks and $18,516,608 are in\nfunded debt. The gross earnings amounted to $10,068,220 and the operating\nexpenses to $6,979,045. Equipment was represented by 302,759 telephones\nand 687,729 miles of wire, of which 576,713 miles are urban and 111,016 are rural.\nThe total number of telephone employees was reported as 10,425 with a wage list\nof $915,636. (Ibid., p. xxix.)\nCanadian Trade with Other Countries\nThe total foreign trade of Canada for the calendar year 1911 amounted\nto $799,212,342, exclusive of coin and bullion, as compared with $740,024,880\nin 1910. Imports in 1911 amounted to $502,641,115, as compared with\n$444,610,449 in 1910, and exports to $296,571,227, as compared with $295,414,431 218\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nin 1910. Trade with Great Britain reached a total of $260,717,743, as compared\nwith $248,768,284 in 1910. Imports from Great Britain in 1911 were $113,299,-\n422, as compared with $108,272,427, and exports to Great Britain in 1911 were\n$147,418,321, as compared with $140,495,857 in 1910. Trade with the United\nStates reached the total of $456,396,070, as compared with $383,173,805 in 1910.\nImports from the United States were $341,192,612, as compared with $269,-\n464,731, and exports to the United States were $115,203,458, as compared with\n$113,709,074 in 1910.\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. xxix.)\nIncrease in Prices of Commodities\nSince the beginning of the present century a marked increase has occurred\nin the prices of commodities, an increase which is not confined to one country,\nbut which is felt with more or less intensity throughout the civilized world.\nIn 1910 the Labor Department published a special report by Mr. R. H. Coats\non Wholesale Prices in Canada during the twenty years 1890 to 1909, and this\nhas been since followed by similar reports on the prices of 1910 and 1911. In\nthese reports prices are measured by means of index numbers based upon the\naverage prices of from2~30 to 261 selected commodities in the period 1890-1899.\nIn 1890 the index number for 235 commodities was 110.3. From this date the\ncourse was downward until 1897, when the percentage figure was 92.2. Then\noccurred a sharp upward rise which continued with a slight fall in 1901 until\n1907, when the figure reached was 126.2. Falling to 120.8 in 1908, a further\nrise occurred until last year, when the highest point yet reached was recorded,\nviz., 127.3. Thus wholesale prices in Canada during 1911 were 27.3 per cent\nhigher than the prices of the closing decade of the nineteenth century.\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada\nYear Book, 1911, second series, p. xxxiii.)\nPopulation.\nTable I.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Population of Canada by Provinces According to the Censuses of 1911 and 1901\nProvinces\n1911\n1901\nIncrease\nIncrease,\nper cent\nAlberta\t\n374,663\n392,480\n455,614\n351,889\n492,338\n2,523,208\n93,728\n2,002,712\n492,432\n8,512\n17,196\n73,022\n178,657\n255,211\n331,120\n459,574\n2,182,947\n103,259\n1,648,898\n91,279\n27,219\n20,129\n301,641\n213,823\n200,403\n20,769\n32,764\n340,261\n-9,53h\n353,814\n401,153\n-18.7071\n-2.9331\n413.08\n119.68\n78.52\n6.27\n7.13\n15.58\n-9.23\n21.46\n439.48\n-68.73\n-14.57\nBritish Columbia\nNew Brunswick\t\nNova Scotia\t\nPrince Edward Island\t\nSaskatchewan\t\nNorthwest Territories..\nTotals for Canada\t\n7,204,772\n5,371,315\n1,833,457\n34.13\nThe rural population in 1911 was 3,924,328 and the urban population\n3,280,444. In 1901 the rural population was 3,349,516 and the urban population\n2,021,799. The increase of rural population in the ten years is therefore 574,-\n812 and of the urban 1,258,645, which is 17.16 per cent for the former and 62.25\nper cent for the latter.\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 2.)\n1 Decrease. Canadian Statistics\n219\nTable II.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Area and Population of Canada by Provinces in 1911 and\nPopulation of 1901\nArea\nin acres\nPopulation in 1911\nDistricts\nMale\nFemale\nTotal\nPer\nsquare\nmile\ntion in\n1901\n3,821,030\n251,619\n250,056\n179,867\n251,019\n1,299,253\n47,069\n1,011,247\n291,730\n6,508\n8,673\n3,383,742\n140,861\n205,558\n172,022\n241,319\n1,223,955\n46,659\n991,465\n200,702\n2,004\n8,523\n7,204,772\n392,480\n455,614\n351,889\n492,338\n2,523,208\n93,728\n2,002,712\n492,432\n8,512\n17,196\n1.93\n1.09\n6.18\n12.61\n22.98\n9.67\n42.91\n5.69\n1.95\n5,371,315\n178,657\n255,211\n331,120\n459,574\n2,182,947\n103,259\n1,648,898\n91,279\n97 910\nBritish Columbia.\nManitoba\t\nNew Brunswick..\nNova Scotia\t\nOntario\t\nPrince Edward\nIsland\t\nSaskatchewan\t\nYukon.,,\n227,747,200*\n47,188,2982\n17,910,400=\n13,713,9202\n166,951,636*\n1,397,9912\n225,198,561s\n161,088,000\n132,528,640*\n1,229,878,400*\nNorthwest Territories \t\n\t\non i?o\n*\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, pp. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.)\nNote.\u00E2\u0080\u0094The totals of areas for Canada and the Provinces and Territories are as measured by\na planimeter on the map, and embrace land and water; while those for districts are the totals of\ntheir respective subdistricts, excepting as may be indicated by footnotes where large areas are\nunsurveyed and unoccupied, and are land areas only.\nTable III.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Population of Cities and Towns Having Over 5,000 Inhabitants in 1911, Compared with 1871, 1881, 1891, 1901\nCities and Towns\nMontreal8...\nToronto3. . ..\nWinnipeg3...\nVancouver3..\nOttawa3\t\nHamilton3...\nQuebec\t\nHalifax\t\nLondon\t\nCalgary\t\nSt. John\t\nVictoria\t\nRegina\t\nEdmonton...\nBrantford...\nKingston....\nMaisonneuve\nProvinces\nQuebec\t\nOntario\t\nManitoba\t\nBritish Columbia.\nOntario\t\nPopulation\n1911\nQuebec\t\nNova Scotia\t\nOntario\t\nAlberta \t\nNew Brunswick..\nBritish Columbia\nSaskatchewan. ..\nAlberta\t\nOntario\t\n| Quebec.\n470,480\n376,538\n136,035\n100,401\n87,062\n81,969!\n78,190\n46,619\n46,300\n43,704\n42,511\n31,660\n30,213\n24,900\n23,132\n18,874\n18,684\n* By map measurement.\n* Population of the city municipality.\n1901\n267,730\n208,040\n42,340\n27,010\n59,928\n52,634\n68,840\n40,832\n37,976\n4,392\n40,711\n20,919\n2,249\n2,626\n16,619\n17,961\n3,958\n1891 1881\n219,616\n181,215\n25,639\n13,709\n44,154\n48,959\n63,090\n38,437\n31,977\n3,876\n39,179\n16,841\n155,238 115,000\n96,196 59,000\n7,985 241\n12,753\n19,263\n31,307\n36,661\n62,446\n36,100;\n26,266\n41,353\n5,925\n9,616\n14,091\n24,141\n26,880\n59,699\n29,582\n18,000\n41,325\n3,270\n8,107\n12,407 220\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nTable III.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Population of Cities and Towns Having Over 5,000 Inhabitants in 1911, Compared with 1871, 1881, 1891, 1901\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Continued)\nCities and Towns\nPeterborough\t\nHull\t\nWindsor\t\nSydney\t\nGlace Bay\t\nFort William\t\nSherbrooke\t\nBerlin\t\nGuelph\t\nWestmount\t\nSt. Thomas\t\nBrandon\t\nMoosejaw\t\nTrois-Rivieres\t\nNew Westminster.\nStratford\t\nOwen Sound\t\nSt. Catharines. . . .\nSaskatoon\t\nVerdun\t\nMoncton\t\nPort Arthur\t\nCharlottetown....\nSault Ste. Marie...\nChatham\t\nLachine\t\nGalt;\t\nSarnia\t\nBelleville\t\nSt. Hyacinthe\t\nValleyfield\t\nBrockville\t\nWoodstock\t\nNiagara Falls\t\nAmherst\t\nSorel\t\nNanaimo\t\nNorth Vancouver..\nLethbridge\t\nNorth Bay\t\nSt. Boniface\t\nSydney Mines\t\nLevis\t\nOshawa\t\nThedford Mines...\nFredericton\t\nCollingwood\t\nLindsay\t\nOrillia\t\nOntario\t\nQuebec\t\nOntario\t\nNova Scotia.\nOntario.\nQuebec.\nOntario.\nQuebec\t\nOntario\t\nManitoba\t\nSaskatchewan...\nQuebec\t\nBritish Columbia.\nOntario\t\nProvinces\nSaskatchewan...\nQuebec\t\nNew Brunswick.\nOntario\t\nP. E. Island....\nOntario\t\nQuebec.\nOntario.\nQuebec.\nOntario.\nNova Scotia\t\nQuebec\t\nBritish Columbia\na ii\nAlberta\t\nOntario\t\nManitoba\t\nNova Scotia\t\nQuebec\t\nOntario\t\nQuebec\t\nNew Brunswick.\nOntario\t\n1911\n18,360\n18,222\n17,829\n17,723\n16,562\n16,499\n16,405\n15,196\n15,175\n14,579\n14,054\n13,839\n13,823\n13,691\n13,199\n12,946\n12,558\n12,484\n12,004\n11,629\n11,345\n11,220\n11,198\n10,984\n10,770\n10,699\n10,299\n9,947\n9,876\n9,797\n9,449\n9,374\n9,320\n9,248\n8,973\n8,420\n8,306\n8,196\n8,050\n7,737\n7,483\n7,470\n7,452\n7,436\n7,261\n7,208\n7,090\n6,964\n6,828\nPopulation\n1901\n11,239\n13,993\n12,153\n9,909\n6,945\n3,633\n11,765\n9,747\n11,496\n8,856\n11,485\n5,620\n1,558\n9,981\n6,499\n9,959\n8,776\n9,946\n113\n1,898\n9,026\n3,214\n12,080\n7,169\n9,068\n5,561\n7,866\n8,176\n9,117\n9,210\n11,055\n8,940\n8,833\n5,702\n4,964\n7,057\n6,130\n2,072\n2,530\n2,019\n3,191\n7,783\n4,394\n3,256\n7,117\n5,755\n7,003\n4,907\n1891\n9,717\n11,264\n10,322\n2,427\n2,459\n10,110\n7,425\n10,537\n3,076\n10,366\n3,778\n8,334\n6,678\n9,500\n7,497\n9,170\n296\n5,762\n11,373\n2,414\n9,052\n3,761\n7,535\n6,692\n9,916\n7,016\n5,515\n8,791\n8,612\n3,349\n3,781\n6,669\n4,595\n1,553\n2,442\n7,301\n4,066\n6,502\n4,939\n6,0\n4,752\n1881\n6,812\n6,890\n6,561\n1,480\n7,227\n4,054\n9,890\n884\n8,367\n8,670\n1,500\n8,239\n4,426\n9,631\n5,032\n11,485\n780\n7,873\n2,406\n5,187\n3,874\n9,516\n5,321\n3,906\n7,609\n5,373\n2,347\n2,274\n5,791\n1,645\n1,283\n2,340\n7,597\n3,992\n1871\n4,611\n3,800\n4,253\n4,432\n2,743\n6,878\n200\n2,197\n7,570\n4,313\n3,369\n7,864\n8,807\n879\n5,873\n1,696\n3,827\n2,929\n7,305\n3,746\n1,800\n5,102\n3,982\n5,636\n6,691\n3,185\n6,218\n6,006\n4,445\n2,829\n5,080\n4,049\n2,911\n1,322 Canadian Statistics\n221\nTable III.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Population of Cities and Towns Having Over 5,000 Inhabitants in 1911, Compared with 1871, 1881, 1891, 1901\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Continued)\nProvinces\nPopulation\n1911\n1901\n1891\n1881\n1871\nFraserville\t\nYarmouth\t\nCornwall\t\nBarrie\t\nQuebec\t\nNova Scotia\t\nOntario\t\n6,774\n6,600\n6,598\n6,420\n6,383\n6,370\n6,346\n6,254\n6,158\n6,107\n5,903\n5,892\n5,880\n5,713\n5,638\n5,626\n5,608\n5,579\n5,418\n5,362\n5,318\n5,092\n4,569\n6,430\n6,704\n5,949\n4,447\n5,155\n4,220\n1,785\n5,202\n5,993\n4,030\n3,901\n3,826\n5,178\n4,175\n6,089\n6,805\n5,550\n3,776\n3,864\n3,347\n2,291\n3,485\n4,468\n4,854\n2,595\n2,087\n3,268\n1,541\n2,500\n2,033\n3,398\n1,150\n3,047\nNew Glasgow\t\nSmiths Falls\t\nJoliette\t\nPrince Albert\t\nNova Scotia\t\nOntario\t\nQuebec\t\nSaskatchewan. . .\nOntario\t\nKenora\t\n1,806\n5,102\n4,722\n3,363\n2,277\n4,813\nTruro\t\nSt. Jean\t\nPortage la Prairie..\nNova Scotia\t\nQuebec\t\nManitoba\t\nQuebec\t\n3,461\n4,314\n3,022\nChicoutimi\t\n1,935\n900\n1,393\nSpring Hill\t\nCobalt\t\nNova Scotia\t\nOntario\t\n5,156\n1,570\n1,550\n4,646\n1,852\n1,863\n4,188\n4,239\n4,806\n4,401\n2,820\n1,508\nit\nNorth Sydney\t\nNorth Toronto....\nNova Scotia\t\nOntario\t\n2,513\n1,520\nWelland\n2,035\n5,042\n4,829\n6,252\n1,870\n5,581\n4,957\n3,786\n1,110\nPort Hope\t\nit\n5,114\nti\n5,074\n5,058\n4,442\nDartmouth\t\nNova Scotia\t\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, pp. 7, 8, 9.)\nTable VII.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Sex, Conjugal State, Birthplace, Race and Religion\nClasses\n1871\n1881\n1891\n|\n1901\n3,485,761\n1,764,311\n1,721,450\n2,283,003\n1,085,376\n117,382\n4,324,810\n2,188,854\n2,135,956\n2,784,396\n1,380,084\n160,330\n4,833,239\n2,460,471\n2,372,768\n3,053,392\n1,588,055\n191,792\n5,371,315\nBy sex\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nMale\t\n2,751,708\n2,619,607\nBy conjugal state\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nSingle\t\n3,312,593\n1,833,043\n225,018\n661\nBy birthplace\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nBritish Columbia\t\n2,892,763\n3,715,492\n32,275\n19,590\n4,185,877\n37,153\n56,430\n4,671,815\n60,776\n110,742 222\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nIf\nTable VII.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Sex, Conjugal State, Birthplace, Race and Religion-\n(Continued)\nClasses\nBy birthplace (continued)\nCanada\nNew Brunswick\t\nNova Scotia\t\nOntario\t\nPrince Edward Island...\nQuebec\t\nThe Territories\t\nUnorganized Territories.\nNot given\t\nBritish Islands\t\nEngland\t\nIreland\t\nScotland\t\nWales\t\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Lesser isles\t\nBritish possessions\t\nAustralasia\t\nIndia\t\nNewfoundland\t\nOther possessions\t\nAustria-Hungary\t\nBelgium and Holland\t\nChina\t\nDenmark\t\nFrance\t\nGermany\t\nIceland\t\nItaly\t\nJapan\t\nNorway and Sweden\t\nRumania\t\nRussia\t\nSwitzerland\t\nTurkey and Syria\t\nUnited States\t\nOther countries\t\nAt sea\t\nNot given\t\nBy race or origin6\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nBritish\t\nEnglish\t\nIrish\t\nScotch\t\nOthers\t\nAustro-Hungarian. . . .\nChinese and Japanese.\nDutch\t\nFrench\t\nGerman\t\n1871\n245,068\n360,832\n1,138,794\n1,147,664\n405\n486,376\n144,999\n219,451\n121,074\n4\n852\n9,696\n7,768\n1,928\n102\n2,899\n24,162\n218\n588\n416\n64,447\n1,836\n430\n1,828\n2,110,502\n706,369\n846,414\n549,946\n7,773\n29,662\n1,082,940\n202,991\n1881\n288,265\n420,088\n1,467,988\n101,047\n1,327,809\n58,430\n470,906\n169,504\n185,526\n115,062\ni\n814\n7,329\n4,596\n2,733\n4,389\n25,328\n777\n2,076\n6,376\n77,753\n7,670\n380\n6,334\n2,548,514\n881,301\n957,403\n699,863\n9,947\n4,383\n30,412\n1,298,929\n254,319\n1891\n300,621\n433,696\n1,728,731\n106,103\n1,462,293\n60,850\n477,735\n219,688\n149,184\n107,594\n4\n1,269\n12,517\n9,336\n3,181\n9,129\n5,381\n27,752\n2,795\n7,827\n9,917\n80,915\n9,582\n321\n3,491\n1901\n317,062\n442,898\n1,928,099\n105,629\n1,620,482\n65,784\n6,969\n13,374\n390,019\n201,285\n101,629\n83,631\n2,518\n956\n15,864\n991\n1,076\n12,432\n1,365\n28,407\n2,665\n17,043\n2,075\n7,944\n27,300\n6,057\n6,854\n4,674\n10,256\n1,066\n31,231\n1,211\n1,579\n127,899\n2,188\n339\n14,829\n3,063,195\n1,260,899\n988,721\n800,154\n13,421\n18,178\n22,050\n33,845\n1,649,371\n310,501\n4 Not given.\n\u00C2\u00BB Not taken in 1891. Canadian Statistics\n223\nTable VII.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Sex, Conjugal State, Birthplace, Race and Religion-\n(Continued)\nClasses\nBy race or origin\u00E2\u0080\u0094(continued)\nIndians and half-breeds\t\nItalian\t\nJewish\t\nNegro\t\nScandinavian\t\nRussian\t\nOther races\t\nNot specified\t\nBy religion\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nAdventist\t\nAnglican\t\nAgnostic\t\nBaptist\t\nBrethren6\t\nBuddhists\t\nCatholic, Greek\t\nCatholic, Roman\t\nChristian Scientist\t\nConfucian\t\nCongregationalist\t\nDisciple\t\nDoukhobor\t\nEvangelical\t\nFriends (Quaker)\t\nHoliness (Hornerite)\t\nJewish\t\nLatter Day Saints (Mormon)\nLutheran\t\nMennonite\t\nMethodist\t\nPagan\t\nPresbyterian\t\nSalvation Army\t\nUnitarian\t\nUnited Brethren (Moravian).\nUniversalist\t\nOther sects\t\nNot given\t\n1871\n23,037\n1,035\n125\n21,496\n1,623\n607\n4,182\n7,561\n6,179\n494,049\n227,898\n15,375\n18\n1,492,029\n21,829\n4,701\n7,345\n1,115\n534\n37,935\n567,091\n1,886\n544,998\n2,275\n604\n4,896\n37,949\n17,055\n1891\n1901\n108,547\n1,849\n667\n21,394\n5,223\n1,227\n8,540\n40,806\n7,211\n574,818\n275,291\n8,831\n1,791,982\n26,900\n20,193\n6,553\n2,393\n46,350\n21,234\n742,981\n4,478\n676,165\n2,126\n4,517\n26,018\n86,769\n6,354\n646,059\n302,565\n12,911\n1,992,017\n28,157\n12,763\n4,650\n6,414\n63,982\n847,765\n755,326\n13,949\n1,777\n3,186\n46,009\n89,355\n127,932\n10,834\n16,131\n17,437\n31,042\n28,621\n10,639\n31,539\n8,058\n680,620\n3,613\n316,477\n12,316\n10,407\n15,630\n2,229,600\n2,619\n5,115\n28,293\n14,900\n8,775\n10,193\n4,100\n2,775\n16,401\n6,891\n92,524\n31,797\n916,886\n15,107\n842,442\n10,308\n1,934\n4,701\n2,589\n33,023\n43,221\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, pp. 14, 15.)\n6 Including Plymouth Brethren and Tunkers. r\n224\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nManufactures\nTable X.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Statistics of Industries of Canada, 1906\nKinds of Industries\nNo. of\nestablishments\nCapital\nNo. of\nwage\nearners\nWages\nfor labor\nValue\nof products\n15,796\n$846,585,023\n356,034\n$134,375,925\n$718,352,603\n1. Food products....\n5,012\n89,880,145\n45,520\n12,025,927\n173,359,431\n2. Textiles\t\n2,073\n75,089,936\n57,421\n17,632,985\n85,982,979\n3. Iron and steel\nproducts\t\n707\n61,204,638\n30,480\n13,894,518\n53,125,265\n4. Timber and lum\nber and their re-\nmanufactures. ..\n3,099\n151,773,435\n80,252\n29,483,625\n112,494,072\n5. Leather and its\nfinished products\n533\n28,667,125\n17,991\n6,399,330\n42,132,007\n6. Paper and printing\n907\n49,138,352\n19,960\n8,654,294\n33,738,772\n7. Liquors and bev-\n262\n26,639,815\n3,833\n1,795,765\n14,394,319\n8. Chemicals and al\nlied products....\n188\n16,385,396\n3,373\n1,282,822\n15,703,306\n9. Clay, glass and\nstone products..\n749\n25,282,960\n13,526\n5,042,700\n13,986,000\n10. Metals and metal\nproducts other\nthan steel\t\n577\n104,852,998\n20,490\n10,873,161\n50,828,968\n11. Tobacco and its\nmanufactures...\n155\n10,628,691\n7,114\n2,349,598\n15,274,923\n12. Vehicles for land\ntransportation. .\n446\n31,850,465\n22,508\n10,879,841\n37,396,302\n13. Vessels for water\ntransportation. .\n78\n3,496,009\n1,839\n783,995\n1,943,195\n14. Miscellaneous in\n>\ndustries \t\n825\n169,897,164\n30,389\n12,713,976\n66,294,869\n15. Hand trades\t\n185\n1,797,894\n1,338\n563,388\n1,698,195\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 29.)\nNorthwest Provinces\nTable XL\u00E2\u0080\u0094Horses, Horned Cattle, Sheep and Swine in the Provinces\nin 1906 and 1901\nProvinces and Districts\n1906.\nNorthwest Provinces\nManitoba\t\nSaskatchewan. . . .\nAlberta\t\n1901.\nNorthwest Provinces\nManitoba\t\nSaskatchewan..\nAlberta\t\nHorses\n682,919\n215,819\n240,566\n226,534\n340,329\n163,867\n83,461\n93,001\nMilch cows Other horned\nCelt tic\n384,006\n170,543\n112,618\n101,245\n244,216\n141,481\n56,440\n46,295\n1,560,592\n350,969\n360,236\n849,387\n698,409\n208,405\n160,613\n329,391\nSheep and\nlambs\n304,531\n28,975\n121,290\n154,266\n182,616\n29,464\n73,097\n80,055\nSwine\n439,048\n200,509\n123,916\n114,623\n200,375\n126,459\n27,753\n46,163\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 34.)\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0H Canadian Statistics\n225\nTable XII.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Field Crops of 1900, 1905 and 1906\nKinds of Crops\nFall wheat\t\nSpring wheat....\nOats\t\nBarley\t\nRye\t\nFlax\t\nPotatoes\t\nOther field roots.\nSugar beets\t\nForage crops\t\nSown or cultivated\nhay\t\nNative or prairie\nhay\t\n1900\nAcres\nBushels\n947 20,505\n2,494,519 23,436,354\n833,390 16,653,68l|\n162,557 3,141,121\n3,276\n14,731\n25,611\n2,164\n60,496\n37,217\n85,011\n,155,391\n462,042\nTons\n90,852\n904.481\n1905\nAcres\n52,669\n3,888,700\n1,697,170\n370,850\n7,708\n45,812\n34,139\n4,410\n2,792\n64,680\n129,358\nBushels\n1906\nAcres\nBushels\n1,110,067\n1,351,560\n68,810,855\n10,971,755\n163,599\n608,242\n5,569,613\n710,356\nTons i\n19,907\n105,828|\n174,689\n2,630,313\n85,199 2,225,281\n4,977,294 108,361,543\n2,309,439| 110,569,628\n18,684,609\n522,734\n14,496\n131,819\n50,720\n8,028\n4,369\n49,656\n174,216\n323,904\n1,818,780\n9,489,081\n2,081,932\nTons\n32,075\n123,022\n359,701\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 35.)\nTrade and Commerce\nTable XIV.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Aggregate Trade of Canada by Countries During the\nFiscal Year Ended March 31, 1911. Includes Coin and Bullion\nCountries\nTotal exports\nTotal imports\nTotal trade\nBritish Empire\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nGreat Britain\t\n$136,965,111\n3,925,592\n477,466\n2,354,869\n6,761\n4,113,270\n622,735\n67,955\n521,890\n59,808\n3,874,775\n1,004,370\n150,435\n$110,586,801\n512,918\n9,025\n232,628\n1,368,008\n6,469,382\n3,793,201\n229,145\n599,448\n2,777,334\n1,819,082\n913,608\n227,347\n$247,551,912\nAustralia\t\n4,438,510\nBermuda\t\n486,491\nBritish Africa\t\n2,587,497\nBritish East Indies, all other....\nBritish West Indies\t\n1,374,769\n10,582,652\nBritish Guiana\t\n4,415,936\nStraits Settlement\t\n297,100\nHong Kong\t\n1,121,338\nIndia\t\n2,837,142\nNewfoundland and Labrador...\nNew Zealand\t\n5,693,857\n1,917,978\nOther British Possessions\t\n377,782\nTotal British Empire\t\n$154,145,037\n$129,537,927\n$283,682,964\nForeign countries\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nAlaska\t\n$471,990\n3,021,708\n156,931\n2,773,444\n1,032,829\n102,765\n232,502\n$238,304\n2,304,957\n1,347,565\n3,630,340\n924,047\n105,011\n419,063\n$710,294\nArgentina\t\nAustria-Hungary\t\nRplgium, \t\n5,326,665\n1,504,496\n6,403,784\nBrazil\t\n1,956,876\nCentral American States\t\nChile\t\n207,776\n651,565 r\n226\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nTable XIV.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Aggregrate Trade of Canada by Countries During the\nFiscal Year Ended March 31, 1911. Includes Coin and Boullion.\u00E2\u0080\u0094\n(Continued)\nCountries\nChina\t\nCuba\t\nDenmark\t\nDanish West Indies\t\nDutch East Indies\t\nEgypt and Soudan\t\nFrance\t\nGermany\t\nGreece\t\nHawaii\t\nHolland\t\nItaly\t\nJapan\t\nMexico\t\nNorway\t\nPanama\t\nPeru\t\nPhilippines\t\nPorto Rico\t\nPortugal\t\nRussia\t\nSanto Domingo\t\nSt. Pierre and Miquelon..\nSpain\t\nSweden\t\nSwitzerland\t\nTurkey in Europe\t\nUruguay\t\nUnited States\t\nVenezuela\t\nOther foreign countries...\nTotal foreign countries.\nTotal imports and exports.\nTotal exports\nTotal imports\n$529,821\n1,845,169\n443,035\n16,966\n2,551\n14,044\n2,782,092\n2,663,017\n135,347\n142,767\n1,397,019\n379,270\n619,989\n1,268,150\n412,935\n321,440\n34,466\n58,305\n506,764\n1,175,444\n31,335\n146,454\n27,943\n108,983\n22,673\n10,242\n77,010\n119,396,801\n32,995\n568,044\n$143,051,328\n$297,196,365\n$685,912\n1,055,654\n88,251\n149,932\n1,818,083\n34,931\n11,755,403\n10,087,199\n453,647\n25,809\n1,840,915\n1,021,805\n2,425,638\n494,968\n426,163\n165,916\n38,301\n188\n187,006\n266,280\n843,831\n1,127,534\n281,857\n3,149,787\n9,218\n6,300\n294,415,202\n90,839\n793,757\n$342,709,613\n$472,247,540\nTotal trade\n$1,215,733\n2,900,823\n531,286\n166,898\n1,820,634\n48,975\n14,537,495\n12,750,216\n588,994\n168,576\n3,237,934\n1,401,075\n3,045,627\n1,763,118\n839,098\n321,440\n200,382\n96,606\n506,952\n275,094\n1,441,724\n875,166\n146,454\n1,155,477\n390,840\n3,172,460\n19,460\n83,310\n413,812,003\n123,834\n1,361,801\n$485,760,941\n$769,443,905\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 38.) Canadian Statistics\n227\nTable XV.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Aggregate Trade of Canada, 1868-1911\nFiscal Year\nTotal exports\n\u00E2\u0080\u009E , . Aggregate trade\nTotal imports of Canada\n1868\t\n1869\t\n1870\t\n1871\t\n1872\t\n1873\t\n1874\t\n1875\t\n1876\t\n1877 :.\n1878\t\n1879\t\n1880\t\n1881\t\n1882\t\n1883\t\n1884\t\n1885\t\n1886\t\n1887\t\n1888\t\n1889\t\n1890\t\n1891\t\n1892\t\n1893\t\n1894\t\n1895\t\n1896\t\n1897\t\n1898\t\n1899\t\n1900\t\n1901\t\n1902\t\n1903\t\n1904\t\n1905\t\n1906\t\n1907 (9 months)\n1908\t\n1909\t\n1910\t\n1911\t\n$57,567,888\n60,474,781\n73,573,490\n74,173,618\n82,639,663\n89,789,922\n89,351,928\n77,886,979\n80,966,435\n75,875,393\n79,323,667\n71,451,225\n87,911,458\n98,290,823\n102,137,203\n98,085,804\n91,406,496\n89,238,361\n85,251,314\n89,515,811\n90,203,000\n89,189,167\n96,749,149\n98,417,296\n113,963,375\n118,564,352\n117,524,949\n113,638,803\n121,013,852\n137,950,253\n164,152,683\n158,896,905\n191,894,723\n196,487,632\n211,640,286\n225,849,724\n213,521,235\n203,316,872\n256,586,630\n205,277,197\n280,006,606\n261,512,159\n301,358,529\n297,196,365\n$73,459,644\n70,415,165\n74,814,339\n96,092,971\n111,430,527\n128,011,281\n128,213,582\n123,070,283\n93,210,346\n99,327,962\n93,081,787\n81,964,427\n86,489,747\n105,380,840\n119,419,500\n132,254,022\n116,397,043\n108,941,486\n104,424,561\n112,892,236\n110,894,630\n115,224,931\n121,858,241\n119,967,638\n127,406,068\n129,074,268\n123,474,940\n110,781,682\n118,011,508\n119,218,609\n140,323,053\n162,764,308\n189,622,513\n190,415,525\n212,270,158\n241,214,961\n259,211,803\n266,834,417\n294,286,015\n259,786,007\n370,786,525\n309,756,608\n391,852,692\n472,247,540\n$131,027,532\n130,889,946\n148,387,829\n170,266,589\n194,070,190\n217,801,203\n217,565 510\n200,957,262\n174,176,781\n175,203,355\n172,405,454\n153,455,682\n174,401,205\n203,621,663\n221,556,703\n230,339,826\n207,803,539\n198,179,847\n189,675,875\n202,408,047\n201,097,630\n204,414,098\n218,607,390\n218,384,934\n241,369,443\n247,638,620\n240,999,889\n224,420,485\nI 239,025,360\n257,168,862\n304,475,736\n321,661,213\n381,517,236\n386,903,157\n423,910,444\n467,064,685\n| 472,733,038\n470,151,289\n550,872,645\n465,063,204\n650,793,131\n571,268,767\n693,211,221\n769,443,905\n-(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 39.) 228\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nTable XVIIL\u00E2\u0080\u0094Exports of Canada to Britain, United States and\nOther Countries of Merchandise the Produce of Canada\nby Total Values in the 44 Fiscal Years 1868-1911\nFiscal Year\n1868\t\n1869\t\n1870\t\n1871\t\n1872\t\n1873\t\n1874\t\n1875\t\n1876\t\n1877\t\n1878\t\n1879\t\n1880\t\n1881\t\n1882\t\n1883\t\n1884\t\n1885\t\n1886\t\n1887\t\n1888\t\n1889\t\n1890\t\n1891\t\n1892\t\n1893\t\n1894\t\n1895\t\n1896\t\n1897.. M\t\n1898\t\n1899\t\n1900\t\n1901\t\n1902\t\n1903\t\n1904\t\n1905\t\n1906\t\n1907 (9 months).\n1908\t\n1909\t\n1910\t\n1911\t\nExports of Total Merchandise the Produce of Canada to\nBritain\nUnited States\nOther countries\nTotals\nTotals for 44 years $2,731,699,113\n$17,905,808\n20,486,389\n22,512,991\n21,733,556\n25,223,785\n31,402,234\n35,769,190.\n34,199,134\n34,379,005'\n35,491,671\n35,861,110\n29,393,424\n35,208,031\n42,637,219,\n39,816,813\n39,538,067\n37,410,870'\n36,479,051\n36,694,263\n38,714,3311\n33,648,284\n33,504,281\n41,499,149\n43,243,784!\n54,949,0551\n58,409,606!\n60,878,056!\n57,903,564\n62,717,941\n69,533,852\n93,065,019\n85,113,6811\n96,562,875\n92,857,525\n109,347,345\n125,199,980\n110,120,892\n97,114,867\n127,456,465\n98,691,186\n126,194,124\n126,384,724|\n139,482,945\n136,962,971\n$22,387,846\n23,640,188\n27,398,930\n26,715,690\n29,984,440\n33,421,725\n30,380,556\n25,683,818\n27,451,150\n22,160,666\n22,131,343\n23,149,909\n26,762,705\n31,015,109\n41,687,638\n36,096,501\n31,631,622\n32,618,593\n31,503,292\n32,273,033\n37,323,161\n36,449,288\n33,291,207\n34,829,436\n31,317,857\n33,813,802\n29,297,598\n32,303,773\n34,460,428\n39,717,057|\n34,361,795\n34,766,955\n52,534,977\n67,983,673\n66,567,784\n67,766,367\n66,856,885\n70,426,765\n83,546,306\n62,257,2991\n90,814,871\n85,334,806\n104,199,675\n142,208,6761\n$5,249,523\n5,196,727\n6,169,271\n6,732,110\n7,735,802\n8,421,647\n7,777,002\n7,607,941|\n8,031,694\n8,212,543\n7,747,681\n7,546,245\n8,125,455\n7,269,051\n8,538,260\n8,651,139\n8,089,587\n7,085,874\n6,777,951\n6,976,656\n7,326,305\n7,248,235\n7,545,158\n7,684,524\n9,417,341\n9,783,082\n10,411,199\n9,321,014\n9,200,383]\n10,434,501\n12,494,118\n12,920,626\n14,412,938\n16,590,188i\n20,104,634'\n21,435,327\n21,436,662\n23,313,314'\n24,481,185\n19,596,821\n29,951,973\n30,884,054\n35,564,931\n40,828,563\n$1,920,525,195 $560,329,235\n$45,543,177\n49,323,304\n56,081,192\n55,181,356\n62,944,027\n73,245,606\n73,926,748\n67,490,893\n69,861,849\n65,864,880\n65,740,134\n60,089,578\n70,096,191\n80,921,379\n90,042,711\n84,285,707\n77,132,079\n76,183,518\n74,975,506\n77,964,020\n78,297,750\n77,201,804\n82,335,514\n85,757,744\n95,684,253\n102,006,490\n100,586,853\n99,528,351\n106,378,752\n119,685,410\n139,920,932\n132,801,262\n163,510,790\n177,431,386\n196,019,763\n214,401,674\n198,414,439\n190,854,946\n235,483,956\n180,545,306\n246,960,968\n242,603,584\n279,247,551\n290,000,210\n$5,212,553,543\n-(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 49.) Canadian Statistics\n229\nTable XIX.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Imports of Canada by Values Entered for Consumption\nfrom Britain and United States in the 44 Fiscal Years 1868-1911.\nExclusive of Coin and Bullion\nFrom Britain\nFrom United Stai\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2ES\nFiscal Year\nDutiable\nFree\nDuties\ncollected\nDutiable\nFree\nDuties\ncollected\n1868\t\n$28,284,194\n28,483,645\n$9,333,131\n7,013,119\n$10,014,304\n7,793,748\n$12,645,828\n13,703,632\n1869\t\n$4,799,758\n$1,565,566\n1870\t\n30,022,948\n7,514,147\n5,037,440\n8,698,845\n12,998,392\n1,700,252\n1871\t\n39,815,550\n8,682,652\n6,544,088\n14,085,383\n13,100,203\n2,290,881\n1872\t\n48,197,337\n14,011,917\n7,908,152\n13,271,042\n20,470,953\n2,385,592\n1873\t\n47,443,203\n20,553,742\n7,392,957\n16,678,805\n28,510,305\n2,945,966\n1874\t\n47,794,745\n13,629,662\n7,867,481\n21,097,531\n30,609,375\n3,681,014\n1875\t\n48,949,803\n11,059,281\n8,881,998\n22,312,546\n26,617,812\n3,853,634\n1876\t\n32,385,482\n8,093,771\n6,075,756\n21,334,613\n22,765,267\n4,104,484\n1877\t\n32,916,776\n6,414,845\n6,377,596\n23,510,846\n25,865,162\n4,393,511\n1878\t\n32,139,783\n5,112,986\n6,445,985\n23,464,504\n24,538,371\n4,790,427\n1879\t\n27,075,555\n3,892,223\n5,561,933\n23,803,457\n18,366,849\n5,524,879\n1880\t\n28,038,118\n5,726,321\n6,737,997\n19,566,567\n8,627,216\n4,512,415\n1881\t\n35,860,461\n7,024,681\n8,772,950\n25,632,313\n10,706,388\n5,649,152\n1882\t\n41,459,730\n8,896,538\n10,011,811\n32,941,061\n14,111,874\n7,073,912\n1883\t\n40,732,476\n10,947,286\n9,897,785\n38,652,045\n16,495,198\n8,148,268\n1884\t\n32,828,307\n9,096,814\n8,001,371\n35,796,697\n13,989,191\n7,411,946\n1885\t\n30,702,359\n9,329,089\n7,617,249\n31,231,947\n14,344,563\n6,624,100\n1886\t\n30,385,797\n8,647,209\n7,817,357\n29,659,876\n13,158,775\n6,769,365\n1887\t\n35,766,273\n8,975,077\n9,318,920\n30,570,609\n14,225,299\n7,268,195\n1888\t\n30,848,116\n8,319,528\n8,972,740\n27,097,680\n19,342,616\n7,109,234\n1889\t\n32,219,807\n10,031,382\n9,450,243\n28,982,283\n21,047,136\n7,371,148\n1890\t\n33,267,721\n10,009,288\n9,576,966\n30,575,397\n20,790,264\n8,126,625\n1891\t\n31,447,660\n10,571,283\n9,114,272\n29,790,402\n22,243,075\n7,734,515\n1892\t\n30,831,809\n10,231,902\n9,074,201\n29,505,550\n22,236,582\n7,814,559\n1893\t\n31,869,267\n10,660,073\n9,498,747\n28,562,050\n23,777,746\n7,636,076\n1894\t\n27,493,160\n9,542,803\n8,245,846\n25,823,636\n24,922,455\n6,960,951\n1895\t\n23,311,911\n7,747,421\n7,006,677\n25,795,538\n24,383,466\n6,897,395\n1896\t\n24,366,179\n8,458.326\n7,358,514\n29,101,646\n24,427,744\n7,767,993\n1897\t\n20,217,422\n9,183,766\n6,205,367\n30,482,509\n26,540,833\n8,147,075\n1898\t\n22,556,479\n9,486,982\n6,649,429\n38,063,960\n36,760,963\n9,941,624\n1899\t\n27,521,508\n9,409,815\n7,328,192\n44,471,824\n43,995,349\n11,713,859\n1900\t\n31,561,756\n12,718,227\n8,074,541\n53,897,561\n48,182.616\n13,491,873\n1901\t\n31,701,654\n11,118,341\n7,845,406\n53,600,278\n53,549,047\n13,311,750\n1902\t\n35,062,564\n13,960,162\n8,424,693\n60,181,808\n54,562,888\n15,155,136\n1903\t\n42,210,165\n16,582,873\n9,841,627\n68,538,323\n60,251,914\n17,069,881\n1904\t\n44,939,829\n16,784,787\n10,838,017\n77,543,780\n65,466,798\n19,554,586\n1905\t\n45,099,527\n15,243,177\n11,171,010\n78,797,440\n73,634,186\n20,580,302\n1906\t\n52,615,725\n16,568,190\n12,944,249\n89,540,776\n79,257,600\n22,187,103\n1907 (9mos).\n48,750,741\n15,664,674\n11,823,197\n78,969,028\n69,629,033\n19,084,738\n1908\t\n71,212,207\n23,205,107\n17,265,293\n110,361,367\n94,287,518\n27,132,543\n1909\t\n52,219,881\n18,462,220\n13,449,342\n90,584,507\n79,471,671\n22,526,807\n1910\t\n71,822,941\n23,513,486\n18,032,629\n118,834,173\n98,668,242\n29,515,836\n1911\t\n84,511,835\n25,422,830\n20,756,811\n153,067,232\n121,777,626\n37,854,728\nTotals....\n$1,666,942,406\n$506,851,134\n$390,016,593\n$1,852,285,487\n$1,565,058,021\n$445,379,896\n-(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 50.) 230\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nTable XXXV.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Percentage of Imports from Great Britain and United\nStates Respectively to Totals of Dutiable and Free in\nthe 44 Fiscal Years 1868-1911\nFiscal Year\nGreat Britain\n1868\t\n1869\t\n1870\t\n1871\t\n1872\t\n1873\t\n1874\t\n1875\t\n1876\t\n1877\t\n1878\t\n1879\t\n1880\t\n1881\t\n1882\t\n1883\t\n1884\t\n1885\t\n1886\t\n1887\t\n1888 :m\t\n1889\t\n1890\t\n1891\t\n1892 J\u00C2\u00A7\u00C2\u00A7\n1893\t\n1894\t\n1895\t\n1896\t\n1897\t\n1898\t\n1899\t\n1900\t\n1901\t\n1902\t\n1903\t\n1904\t\n1905\t\n1906\t\n1907 (9months)...\n1908\t\n1909\t\n1910\t\n1911\t\nAverage for 44 yrs\nDutiable\nto total\ndutiable\n64.78\n69.35\n66.52\n66.25\n70.59\n66.63\n62.69\n62.64\n53.76\n54.03\n53.76\n48.84\n51.74\n50.06\n48.34\n44.47\n41\n41\n02\n90\n43.00\n45.78\n44.29\n43.26\n43.15\n42.19\n44.58\n45.61\n43.79\n39.81\n36.24\n30.53\n30.23\n30.77\n30.25\n29.92\n29.54\n30.85\n30.18\n29.88\n30.40\n32.05\n32.64\n29.84\n31.60\n29.89\n39.95\nFree\nto total\nfree\nDutiable\nand free\nto all\nimports\n39.82\n31.75\n34.50\n35.99\n38.20\n38.55\n29.03\n28.16\n25.08\n19.31\n16.69\n16.72\n36.43\n37.23\n35.04\n36.16\n35.03\n35.22\n34.13\n33.25\n26.81\n28.97\n28.95\n28.57\n22.24\n23.53\n20.61\n18.39\n22.19\n22.73\n18.35\n15.70\n18.66\n15.50\n17.94\n18.84\n17.73\n15.14\n15.03\n16.04\n17.35\n16.31\n16.49\n15.04\n21.51\n56.06\n56.20\n56.10\n57.58\n59.27\n54.61\n49.87\n51.11\n43.75\n41.78\n41.21\n39.34\n48.30\n47.39\n45.30\n42.40\n39.56\n40.12\n40.66\n42.56\n38.90\n38.73\n38.75\n37.67\n35.66\n36.92\n33.96\n30.85\n31.15\n27.58\n25.36\n24.72\n25.66\n24.10\n24.95\n26.15\n25.34\n23.98\n24.42\n25.79\n26.83\n24.52\n25.78\n24.34\n33.29\nUnited States\nDutiable\nto total\ndutiable\n22.93\n18.97\n19.27\n23.43\n19.43\n23.42\n27.67\n28.55\n35.41\n38.59\n39.25\n42.95\n36.11\n35.78\n38.41\n42.20\n44.74\n42.62\n41.97\n39.13\n38.90\n38.91\n39.65\n39.97\n42.66\n40.88\n41.13\n44.05\n43.28\n46.03\n51.00\n49.73\n51.65\n50.58\n50.72\n50.10\n52.07\n52.21\n51.74\n51.93\n50.59\n51.76\n52.29\n54.14\n44.39\nFree\nto total\nfree\n53.96\n62.04\n59.69\n54.31\n55.81\n53.47\n65.19\n67.78\n70.53\n77.88\n80.13\n78.91\n54.88\n56.74\n55.58\n54.48\n53.88\n54.12\n51.94\n52.71\n62.34\n60.79\n60.13\n60.12\n48.34\n52.49\n53.84\n57.79\n64.07\n65.69\n71.13\n73.43\n70.69\n74.66\n70.11\n68.46\n69.14\n73.13\n71.90\n71.28\n70.51\n70.20\n69.22\n72.05\nDutiable\nand free\nto all\nimports\n66.41\n33.77\n34.03\n32.43\n32.28\n32.14\n36.29\n41.97\n41.66\n47.67\n52.45\n53.10\n53.57\n40.33\n40.15\n42.33\n45.25\n46.97\n45.68\n44.60\n42.61\n46.13\n45.86\n45.99\n46.65\n44.90\n45.44\n46.52\n49.84\n50.80\n53.48\n59.24\n59.24\n59.17\n60.30\n58.40\n57.29\n58.71\n60.58\n59.59\n59.50\n58.16\n59.00\n58.81\n60.84\n52.34\n-(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 230.) Canadian Statistics\n231\nTable XXXIX.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Value of Goods Entered for Consumption at Certain\nPorts During the Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 1911\nPorts\nDutiable goods\nFree goods\nTotals\n$2,252,690\n$1,473,671\n$3,726,361\n4,224,723\n1,205,541\n5,430,264\n568,903\n313,100\n1 882,003\n6,705,880\n3,184,921\n9,890,801\n9,164,851\n7,159,026\n16,323,877\n3,987,167\n3,665,547\n7,652,714\n70,788,508\n40,636,297\n111,424,805\n4,508,457\n3,206,040\n7,714,497\n4,691,265\n6,579,565\n11,270,860\n4,170,780\n2,759,342\n6,930,122\n3,901,500\n3,830,744\n7,732,244\n736,747\n2,131,962\n2,868,709\n1,051,418\n1,119,695\n2,171,113\n54,501,222\n29,266.073\n83,767,295\n19,969,836\n5,280,627\n25,250,463\n4,739,397\n1,320,027\n6,059,424\n5,560,375\n3,098,210\n8,658,585\n24,647,623\n4,892,938\n29,540,561\n$226,171,372\n$121,123,326\n$347,294,698\nBrantf ord\t\nCalgary\t\nDawson\t\nHalifax\t\nHamilton\t\nLondon\t\nMontreal\t\nOttawa\t\nQuebec\t\nSault Ste. Marie\nSt. John, N. B. .\nSt. Johns, Que. .\nSydney\t\nToronto\t\nVancouver\t\nVictoria, B. C..\nWindsor, Ont. .\nWinnipeg\t\nTotals\t\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 235.)\nTable XL.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Value of Exports of Canadian Produce by Principal Ports\nDuring the Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 1911\nPorts\nValue\nPorts\nValue\n$5,099,972\n11,549,360\n10,366,842\n12,275,017\n12,156,019\n3,427,681\n64,388,515\n3,809,311\n4,415,284\n21,817,175\n8,292,400\nQuebec\t\n$6,936,439\nBridgeburg\t\nCoaticook\t\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0Pnrf. William\nRossland\t\n123,480\nSt. Armand\t\nSt. Johns, Que\t\nSt. John, N. B\t\nSault Ste. Marie\t\nSydney\t\n3,461,562\n10,703,898\nHalifax\t\nAthelstan\t\nMontreal\t\n21,248,951\n7,583,714\n1,157,831\nNaniamo\t\nVancouver\t\n7,007,884\nNew Westminster\t\nWinnipeg\t\n497,164\nTotal\t\nPrescott\t\n$216,368,498\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 235.)\nNote.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Under regulations which went into effect July 1, 1900, all export entries are delivered\nat the frontier port of exit, and the totals are credited to the respective ports where the goods pass\noutwards from Canada. 232\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nTable XLI.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Value of Merchandise Imported into and Exported from\nCanada Through the United States from and to Foreign Coun-\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 tries Distinguishing the Countries whence Imported and to\nwhich Exported During the Fiscal Years Ended\nMarch 31, 1910,1911.\nCountries whence imported\nand to which exported\nMerchandise imported\nthrough United States\n1910\n1911\nMerchandise exported\nthrough United States\n1910\n1911\nGreat Britain\t\nAustralia\t\nBritish Africa\t\nBritish India\t\nBritish East Indies\t\nBritish Guiana\t\nBritish West Indies\t\nNew Zealand\t\nOther British Possessions\n$10,047,989\n20,460\n1,427,282\n429,878\n783,867\n35,476\nTotal British Empire $12,744,952\nArgentine\t\nAustria-Hungary\t\nBelgium\t\nBrazil\t\nCentral American States.\nChile\t\nChina\t\nCuba\t\nDenmark\t\nDanish West Indies\t\nDutch West Indies\t\nDutch Guiana\t\nFrench West Indies\t\nEgypt and Soudan\t\nFrance\t\nFrench Africa\t\nGermany\t\nGreece\t\nHawaii\t\nHayti\t\nHolland\t\nItaly\t\nJapan\t\nMexico\t\nNorway\t\nPeru\t\nPhilippines\t\nPorto Rico\t\nPortugal\t\nRumania\t\nRussia in Europe\t\nSan Domingo\t\nSpain\t\nSweden\t\n$1,077,489\n244,345\n583,791\n347,672\n65,998\n103,168\n302,569\n31,212\n$8,379,152\n14,749\n30,007\n770,922\n632,432\n873,382\n330,185\n7,713\n100,660\n$11,139,202\n12,550\n2,027,160\n2,606\n2,032,644\n96,220\n97\n207,595\n346,724\n176,512\n106,650\n20,113\n719\n10,137\n140,737\n627,812\n126,264\n65,757\n$643,368\n135,190\n263,633\n304,267\n22,063\n45,039\n322,251\n48,574\n92,400\n833\n6,431\n13,522\n802,794\n166\n2,521,342\n101,795\n108\n116,031\n382,981\n111,966\n46,555\n29.987\n495\n10,077\n3,697\n16,085\n683,491\n102,781\n77,671\n$39,986,459\n2,009,137\n67,598\n39,893\n52,885\n705,897\n601,863\n189,800\nt0,447,265\n1,697,978\n196,225\n49,728\n3,977\n38,372\n1,378,808\n303,755\n245,212\n$43,653,532 $44,361,320\n1,255,538\n$1,895,136\n55,724\n163,579\n259,019\n208,444\n415,816\n587,369\n158,299\n312,066\n46,718\n100,095\n16,976\n10,160\n268,601\n493,541\n373,487\n277,919\n14,408\n13,704\n1,151\n1,102\n36,799\n43,048\n18,165\n6,436\n20,605\n11,554\n260,386\n616,764\n16,305\n27,697\n1,532,226\n1,219,503\n224\n3,591\n1,197\n2,144\n7,924\n29,382\n821,445\n469,255\n320,247\n358,938\n6,835\n9,354\n58,166\n182,695\n416,754\n296,433\n8,948\n11,114\n4,663\n2,479\n189,716\n185,197\n26,205\n19,118\n68,779\n140,146\n579,673\n1,150,187\n1,056\n5,958\n19,680\n26,736\n53,978\n61,984 ^\nCanadian Statistics\n233\nTable XLI.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Value of Merchandise Imported into and Exported from\nCanada Through the United States from and to Foreign Countries\nDistinguishing the Countries whence Imported and to which\nExported During the Fiscal Years Ended March 31,\n1910, 1911\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Continued)\nCountries whence imported\nMerchandise imported\nthrough United States\nMerchandise exported\nthrough United States\nand to which imported\n1910\n1911\n1910\n1911\nSwitzerland\t\nTurkey\t\nU. S. of Colombia\t\n$569,131\n162,874\n4,993\n$97,294\n100,675\n76,048\n43,611\n47,195\n31,452\n$6,321\n1,614\n35,406\n23,201\n9,729\n13,254\n$9,171\n17,272\n32,018\n29 930\nVenezuela\t\n27,632\n233,293\n27,840\n17,198\nTotal foreign countries\n$9,754,464\n$7,301,749\n$7,425,238\n$ 9,076,257\nGrand total\t\n$22,499,416\n$18,440,951\n$51,078,770\n$53,437,577\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 236.)\nInland Revenue\nTable LXHI.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Annual Consumption per Head of Spirits, Wine, Beer\nand Tobacco and Amount of Excise and Customs\nDuties per Head, 1869-1911\nConsumption of\nDuty Paid on\nFiscal Year\nSpirits\ngals.\nWine\ngals.\nBeer\ngals.\nTobacco\nlbso\nSpirits\nWine\nBeer\nTobacco\n1869\t\n1.124\n1.434\n1.578\n1.723\n1.682\n1.994\n1.394\n1.204\n0.975\n0.960\n1.131\n0.715\n0.922\n1.009\n1.090\n0.998\n1.126\n0.711\n0.746\n0.645\n0.776\n0.883\n0.115\n0.195\n0.259\n0.257\n0.238\n0.288\n0.149\n0.177\n0.096\n0.096\n0. 104\n0.077\n0.099\n0.120\n0. 135\n0.117\n0.109\n0.110\n0.095\n0.094\n0.097\n0.104\n2.290\n2.163\n2.490;\n2.774\n3.188\n3.012\n3.091\n2.454\n2.322\n2.169\n2.209!\n2.248\n2.293\n2.747\n2.882\n2.924\n2.639,\n2.839\n3.084\n3.247\n3.263\n3.3601\n1.755\n2.190\n2.052\n2.481\n1.999\n2.566\n1.995\n2.316\n2.051\n1.976\n1.954\n1.936\n2.035\n2.150\n2.280\n2.476\n2.623\n2.052\n2.062\n2.093\n2.153\n2.143\n$0,761\n0.962\n1.059\n1.160\n1.335\n1.363\n1.127\n1.182\n0.949\n0.927\n1.005\n0.772\n0.990\n1.084\n1.186\n1.074\n1.198\n1.007\n1.045\n0.944\n1.107\n1.257\n| 1\n$0,037 $0,092\n$0,193\n1870\t\n1871\t\n0.049\n0.056\n0.070\n0.066\n0.086\n0.069\n0.075\n0.057\n0.052\n0.057\n0.055\n0.073\n0.092\n0.097\n0.082\n0.074\n0.074\n0.066\n0.066\n0.068\n0.072\n0.085\n0.095\n0.108\n0.120\n0.119\n0.114\n0.098\n0.109'\n0.147\n0.125\n0.081\n0.081\n0.098\n0.103\n0.104\n0.111\n0.091\n0. 100\n0.110\n0.114\n0.121\n0.259\n0.336\n1872\t\n1873\t\n1874\t\n0.422\n0.350\n0.442\n1875 \t\n0.428\n1876\t\n0.513\n1877\t\n1878 \t\n0.446\n0.439\n1879 \t\n0.449\n1880\t\n1881\t\n1882\t\n1883\t\n1884\t\n1885\t\n1886\t\n1887\t\n1888\t\n1889\t\n1890\t\n0.428\n0.443\n0.485\n0.473\n0.365\n0.393\n0.502\n0.514\n0.509\n0.529\n0.539 234\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nTable LXIII.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Annual Comsumption per Head of Spirits, Wine, Beer\nand Tobacco and Amount of Excise and Customs Duties,\nper Head, 1869-1911\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Continued.)\nConsumption of\nDuty Paid on\nFiscal Year]\nSpirits\ngals.\nWine\ngals.\nBeer\ngals.\nTobacco\nlbs.\nSpirits\nWine\nBeer\nTobacco\n1891\t\n0.745\n0.701\n0.740\n0.742\n0.666\n0.623\n0.723\n0.536\n0.661\n0.701\n0.765\n0.796\n0.870\n0.952\n0.869\n0.861\n0.947\n0.889\n0.806\n0.815\n0.859\n0.111\n0.101\n0.094\n0.089\n0.090\n0.070\n0.084\n0.082\n0.086\n0.085\n0.100\n0.090\n0.096\n0.096\n0.090\n0.091\n0.092\n0.096\n0.085\n0.097\n0.104\n3.790\n3.516\n3.485\n3.722\n3.471\n3.528\n3.469\n3.808\n3.995\n4.364\n4.737\n5.102\n4.712\n4.918\n4.972\n5.255\n5.585\n5.812\n5.348\n5.276\n5.434\n2. 292 $1,094\n2.291 1.156\n2.314 1.235\n2.264 1.235\n$0,080 $0,137\n0.075 0.211\n0.070 0.218\n0.060 0.205\n0.056 0.161\n$0,590\n1892\t\n0.680\n1893\t\n0.691\n1894\t\n0.683\n1895\t\n2.163\n2.120\n1.124\n1.159\n0.645\n1896\t\n0.047\n0.041\n0.164\n0.213\n0.639\n1897\t\n2.243 1.341\n2.358 1.306\n2.174 1.337\n2.300 1.455\n2.404 1.593\n2.404 1.653\n2.548 1.812\n2.765 1.985\n2.686 1.842\n2.777 1.800\n2.953 1.972\n2.898 1.858\n2.910 1.681\n2.940 1.702\n3.011 1.801\n0.671\n1898\t\n0.041 0.126\n0.045 0.174\n0.044 0.185\n0.048 0.198\n0.048 0.214\n0.051 0.205\n0.051 0.225\n0.040 0.207\n0.050 0.228\n0.053 0.249\n0.054 0.253\n0.047 0.225\n0.053 0.223\n0.053| 0.233\n0.615\n1899\t\n0.841\n1900\t\n1901\t\n1902\t\n1903\t\n1904\t\n1905\t\n1906\t\n1907 (9months)\t\n1908\t\n1909\t\n0.853\n0.875\n0.915\n0.992\n1.042\n1.005\n1.053\n1.276\n1.129\n1.032\n1910\t\n1911\t\n0.979\n1 048\nAverage of 43 years....\n0.955\n0.118\n3.581\n2.306$1.290\n$0,060 $0,153 $0,644\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 273.)\nBanks and Banking\nTable LXXI.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Deposits of Chartered Banks in Canada and Elsewhere,\n1901-1911\nDeposits by :\nrHE Public in\nCanada\nDeposits\nBalances due\nto Dominion\nCalendar Year\nTotal\nPayable after\nin Canada\nand provincial\ndeposits\nPayable on\nnotice or on a\ngovernments\ndemand\nfixed day\n1901\t\n$95,169,631\n$221,624,664\n$26,560,444\n$6,218,588\n$349,573,327\n1902\t\n104,424,203\n244,062,545\n34,529,739\n7,354,006\n390,370,493\n1903\t\n112,461,757\n269,911,501\n34,931,701\n6,862,181\n424,167,140\n1904\t\n117,962,023\n307,007,192\n36,388,330\n8,908,199\n470,265,744\n1905\t\n138,116,550\n338,411,275\n44,325,531\n10,390,120\n531,243,476\n1906\t\n165,144,569\n381,778,705\n46,030,241\n13,014,998\n605,968,513\n1907\t\n166,342,144\n413,014,657\n58,828,181\n16,654,729\n654,839,711\n1908\t\n169,721,755\n406,103,063\n65,793,319\n16,748,878\n658,367,015\n1909\t\n225,414,828\n464,635,263\n70,788,822\n22,459,967\n783,298,880\n1910\t\n260,232,399\n532,087,627\n78,445,210\n39,199,603\n909,964,839\n1911\t\n304,801,755\n568,976,209\n72,823,733\n33,832,091\n980,433,788\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 277.) Canadian Statistics\n235\nPost Office\nTable XCI.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Number of Post Offices in Canada and Estimated Number\nof Letters and Post Cards Sent 1868 to 1911\nFiscal Year\nNumber\nof\npost offices\nEstimated Number sent of\nRegistered _ , ,,\nletters Free letters\nTotal letters\nposted\nPost cards\n1868\t\n1869 |\n1870\t\n1871\t\n1872\t\n1873\t\n1874\t\n1875\t\n1876\t\n1877\t\n1878\t\n1879\t\n1880\t\n1881\t\n1882\t\n1883\t\n1884\t\n1885\t\n1886\t\n1887\t\n1888\t\n1889\t\n1890\t\n1891\t\n1892\t\n1893\t\n1894\t\n1895\t\n1896\t\n1897\t\n1898\t\n1899\t\n1900\t\n1901\t\n1902\t\n1903\t\n1904\t\n1905\t\n1906\t\n1907 (9 months)\n1908\t\n1909\t\n1910\t\n1911\t\n9\n9\n9\n9\n9\n9\n9\n10\n10\n10\n11\n11\n11\n12\n12\n13\n638\n756\n820\n943\n135\n518\n706\n892\n015\n161\n378\n606\n773\n935\n171\n395\n887\n084\n295\n534\n671\n838\n913\n061\n288\n477\n664\n832\n103\n191\n282\n420\n627\n834\n958\n150\n460\n879\n141\n377\n823\n479\n887\n324\n704\n850\n1,000\n1,100\n1,280\n1,377\n1,562\n1,750\n1,774,\n1,842\n1,980\n1,940\n2,040\n2,253\n2,450\n2,650\n3,000\n3,060\n3,400\n3,560\n3,580\n3,649\n3,280\n3,292\n3,286\n3,254\n3,237\n3,183\n3,505\n3,509\n3,534\n3,675\n4,312\n4,528\n4,973\n5,470\n5,986\n6,594\n7,475\n6,254\n9,078\n9,504\n10,465\n11,584\n750\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n900\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n700\n000\n200\n200\n500\n500\n500\n400\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n500\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n000\n733,000\n874,000\n1,034,000\n1,218,000\n1,125,000\n1,091,000\n1,432,200\n1,290,000\n1,059,292\n1,096,000\n1,250,000\n1,384,000\n1,464,000\n1,838,000\n2,390,000\n2,600,000\n2,824,000\n2,960,000\n3,310,000\n3,160,000\n3,500,000\n3,872,000\n3,870,000\n4,078,000\n4,606,000\n4,723,000\n4,925,500\n4,441,000\n4.808,800\n5,501,000\n5,673,250\n5,400,500\n6,318,000\n6,839,000\n7,411,000\n8,152,000\n8,819,000\n9,716,000\n10,922,0001\n9,176,000;\n13,207,0001\n13,686,000'\n14,975,500\n16,382,000\n18\n100,000\n21\n920,000\n24\n500,000\n27\n050.0007\n30\n600,0007\n34\n579,000'\n39\n358,5007\n42\n000,0007\n41\n800,000\n41\n510,000\n44\n000,000\n43\n900,000\n45\n800,000\n48\n170,000\n56\n200,000\n62\n800,000\n66\n100,000\n68\n400,000\n71\n000,000\n74\n300,000\n80\n200,000\n92\n668,000\n94\n100,000\n97\n975,000\n102\n850,000\n106\n290,000\n107\n145,000\n107\n565,000\n116\n028,000\n123\n830,000\n134\n975,000\n150\n375,000\n178\n292,500\n191\n650,000\n213\n628,000\n335\n791,000\n259\n190,000\n285\n541,000\n323\n644,000\n273\n071,000\n396\n011,000\n414\n301,000\n456\n085,000\n504\n233,000\n4,646,000\n5,450,000\n6,455,000\n6,940,000\n7,800,000\n9,640,000\n11,300,000\n12,940,000\n13,580,000\n13,800,000\n15,109,000\n16,356,000\n16,586,000\n19,355,000\n19,480,000\n20,300,000\n20,815,000\n22,790,000\n23,695,000\n24,025,000\n24,794,800\n26,140,000\n28,153,000\n27,450,000\n27,130,000\n26,842,000\n26,343,000\n26,646,000\n27,178,000\n29,941,000\n33,674,000\n28,270,000\n40,664,000\n42,179,000\n45,105,000\n49,313,000\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 292.)\n' Including post cards. 236 The Annals of the American Academy\nTelegraphs\nTable CXXXIV\u00E2\u0080\u0094 Statistics of Chartered Companies, 1900-1911\nMiles\nMiles\nNumber\nNumber\nCompanies\nYear\nof\nof\nof\nof\nline\nwire\nmessages\noffices\n1900\n18,290\n34,810\n2,623,257\n1,466\n1905\n11,775\n44,573\n2,755,543\n1,360\n1906\n11,920\n45,031\n2,739,612\n1,335\nGreat Northwestern Telegraph\n1907\n11,720\n46,937\n2,904,221\n1,303\nCo |\n1908\n11,505\n47,054\n2,810,458\n1,228\n1909\n11,386\n47,483\n2,749,378\n1,227\n1910\n11,134\n50,092\n2,907,494\n1,183\n1911\n10,726\n50,568\n3,812,159\n1,194\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\n1900\n9,505\n37,112\n1,900,0008\n996\n1905\n10,669\n52,096\n2,262,158s\n1,343\n1906\n10,892\n57,651\n2,735,960s\n1,182\nCanadian Pacific Railway Co.... <\n1907\n1908\n11,208\n11,856\n62,458\n65,508\n2,897,299s\n2,802,216s\n1,235\n1,310\n1909\n12,108\n69,398\n3,004,943s\n1,340\n1910\n12,257\n76,758\n3,431,493s\n1,372\n_\n1911\n13,386\n87,703;i\n3,921,477s\n1,424\n1900\n2,922\n8,682\n437,157\n218\n1905\n2,620\n10,106\n542,155\n217\n1906\n2,578\n10,347\n548,299\n219\nWestern Union \u00E2\u0080\u00A2\n1907\n2,589\n10,518\n537,981\n220\n1908\n2,591\n10,518\n520,092\n221\n1909\n2,638\n10,605\n534,210\n222\n1910\n2,639\n11,244\n551,764\n217\n;\n1911\n2,598\n11,599\n572,081\n219\n'\n1907\n138\n883\n100,149\n15\nTimiskaming and Northern On\n1908\n205\n1,221\n95,191\n18\ntario Railway\t\n1909\n265\n1,641\n142,985\n22\n1910\n265\n1,865\n131,106\n22\n1911\n294\n3,299\n211,920\n25\n(\n1908\n130\n174\n8,648\n:ir'4\nAlgoma Central Railway <\n1909\n1910\n130\n130\n174\n174\n3,148\n3,639\n4\n4\n[\n1911\n214\n517\n4,497\n6\nHi\n1909\n1,122\n3,754\n49,618\n58\nGrand Trunk Pacific Railway.. ft\n1910\n1,699\n5,081\n71,154\n73\nI\n1911\n1,963\n6,004\n101,048\n92\n1907\n44\n886\n51,475\n80\nThe North American Telegraph\nCo., Ltd\t\n1908\n1909\n44\n44\n886\n763\n49,314\n49,127\n80\n61\n1910\n44\n783\n38,015\n63\n1911\n44\n783\n40,508\n62\nCanadian Northern Railway Co. \\n1909\n1910\n1911\n3,512\n3,685\n4,367\n7,568\n7,841\n13,073\n169\n191\n227\nTranscontinental Railway\t\n1911\n313\n...\nJ\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 337.)\n8 Not including press messages.\n9 Including 962 miles of cables. Canadian Statistics\n237\nTable CXXXVI.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Mileage of Wire and Earnings and Operating\nExpenses of Telephone Companies in Canada by Provinces,\nJune 30, 1911\nProvinces\nMileage of Wire\nUrban Rural Total\nEarnings\nOperating\nexpenses\nAlberta\t\nBritish Columbia\t\nManitoba\t\nNew Brunswick\t\nNova Scotia\t\nOntario\t\nPrince Edward Island.\n20,166\n54,793\n22\n13,725\n1,156\n9,563\n1,000\nQuebec 458,166\nSaskatchewan.\nTotals.\n18,122\n576,713\n151\n5,064\n18,593\n7,107\n22,718\n29,098\n1,250\n17,781\n9,253\n111,015\n20,317\n59,857\n18,615\n20,832\n23,874\n38,661\n2,250\n475,947\n27,375\n$439,846\n856,571\n1,123,447\n318,992\n415,154\n473,993\n33,602\n6,127,056\n279,559\n687,728\n$10,068,220\n$250,708\n643,438\n1,032,035\n195,156\n313,854\n219,102\n26,321\n4,136,083\n162,348\n$6,979,045\nThe number of telephones in use was 302,759.\nThe capital liability was $40,043,982, divided as follows:\nStocks $21,527,374\nFunded debt 18,516,608\nTotal $40,043,982\nNote\u00E2\u0080\u0094The wire mileage credited to Quebec is the mileage of the Bell Telephone system,\nwhich extends to all the leading centers of Ontario. The return of the Manitoba Government\ndid not make any distinction between urban and rural mileage, and the total was classified as\nrural.\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 338.)\nTable CXXXIX,\nRailways\n-Railways in Operation 1835-1911\nYear\nClass of\nrailway\nMiles in\noperation\nMiles\nincrease\nYear\nClass of\nrailway\nMiles in\noperation\nMiles\nincrease\n1835..\n1836..\n1837..\n1838. .\n1839. .\n1840. .\n1841..\n1842. .\n1843. .\n1844. .\n1845. .\n1846. .\n1847. .\n1848. .\nSteam.\n16\n16\n16\n16\n16\n16\n16\n16\n16\n16\n16\n54\n54\n38\n1849.\n1850.\n1851.\n1852.\n1853.\n1854.\n1855.\n1856.\n1857.\n1858.\n1859.\n1860.\n1861.\n1862.\nSteam.\n54\n66\n159\n205\n506\n764\n877\n1,414\n1,444\n1,863\n1,994\n2,065\n2,146\n2,189\n12\n93\n. 46\n301\n258\n113\n537\n30\n419\n131\n71\n81\n43 238\nThe Annals op the American Academy\nTable CXXXIX.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Railways in Operation 1835-1911\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Continued.)\nYear\nClass of\nrailway\nMiles in\noperation\n1863. . .\nSteam\n1864. ..\n1865 . . .\n1866. . .\ntl\n1867 . . .\n11\n1868 . ..\n11\n1869 . . .\n\"\n1870. ..\n1871. ..\n\"\n1872. ..\ni<\n1873. . .\ny\n1874. ..\n11\n1875 . . .\n\"\n1876. . .\nu\n1877 . . .\nii\n1878 . . .\n11\n1879 . . .\nu\n1880... .\nu\n1881....\n11\n1882....\nn\n1883... .\nii\n1884....\n\"\n1885... .\nu\n1886....\nu\n1887...\n11\n1888... .\n11\n1889...\n\"\n1890... .\n\"\n1891...\nn\n1892...\n\"\n1893...\nn\n2,189\n2,189\n2,240\n2,278\n2,278\n2,278\n2,524\n2,617\n2,695\n2,899\n3,832\n4,331\n4,804\n5,218\n5,782\n6,226\n6,858\n7,194\n7,331\n8,697\n9,577\n10,273\n10,773\n11,793\n12,184\n12,585\n12,585\n13,151\n13,838\n14,564\n15,005\nMiles\nincrease\n51\n38\nYea\n246\n93\n78\n204\n933\n499\n473\n414\n564\n444\n632\n336\n137\n1,366\n880\n696\n500\n1,020\n391\n401\n566\n687\n726\n441\n1894..\n1895..\n1896..\n1897..\n1898..\n1899..\n1900..\n1901..\n1902..\n1903..\n1904..\n1905..\n1906..\n1907..\n1908..\n1909..\n1910..\n1911..\n1901..\n1902..\n1903..\n1904..\n1905..\n1906..\n1907.\n1908.\n1909.\n1910.\n1911.\nSteam,\nClass of\nrailway\nMiles in\noperation\nMiles\nincrease\nElectric10\n15,627\n15,977\n16,270\n16,550\n16,870\n17,250\n17,657\n18,140\n18,714\n18,988\n19,431\n20,487\n21,429\n22,446\n22,966\n24,104\n24,731\n25,400\n553\n558\n759\n767\n793\n814\n815\n992\n989\n1,049\n1,224\n622\n350\n293\n280\n320\n380\n407\n483\n574\n274\n443\n1,056\n942\n1,017\n520\n1,138\n627\n669\n5\n201\n8\n26\n21\n1\n177\n-3\n60\n175\nNote\u00E2\u0080\u0094The statistics of railways are for the years ended June 30.\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 340.)\nMarine\nTable CLXXX.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Sea-going Vessels Entered Inwards and Outwards by\nCountries, 1911\nvessels entered inwards\nBritish\nCanadian\nForeign\nCountries whence\narrived\nNo.\nof\nvessels\nTons\nregister\nCrew\nNo.\nNo.\nof\nvessels\nTons\nregister\nCrew\nNo.\nNo.\nof\nvessels\nTons\nregister\nCrew\nNo.\n1,250\n27\n1\n3\n118\n659\n4,843,277\n101,946\n2,795\n5,338\n179,292\n212,676\n123,784\n4,054\n41\n86\n4,026\n11,762\n66\n76,579\n4,484\n61\n71,936\n1,136\n6\n1\n42\n171\n8,212\n1,899\n35,558\n272,190\n105\n23\n885\n3,994\nBritish West Indies....\nNewfoundland\t\n86\n281\n13,350\n89,478\n639\n3,255\n10 Not including double track and sidings. Canadian Statistics\n239\nTable CLXXX.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Sea-going Vessels Entered Inwards and Outwards\nby Countries, 1911\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Continued)\nVESSELS ENTERED INWARDS\nBritish\nCanadian\nForeign\nCountries to which\narrived\nNo.\nof\nvessels\nTons\nregister\nCrew\nNo.\nNo.\nof\nvessels\nTons\nregister\nCrew\nNo.\nNo.\nof\nvessels\nTons\nregister\nCrew\nNo.\nBelgium\t\n22\n8\n56\n13\n4\n36\n8\n15\n1\n1\n10\n17\n1.209\n94,806\n11,214\n185,126\n49,239\n9,303\n142,310\n18,247\n50,573\n2,701\n330\n984\n20,685\n1.121.294\n1,518\n155\n10,070\n1,252\n132\n3,456\n321\n907\n42\n8\n53\n359\n60,555\n4,822\n1,440\n1,932\n2\n16\n3,757\n19,701\n45\n297\n4\n6,981\n136\nFrance\t\n17\n43\n9\n2\n40\n23\n1\n64\n8\n4,397\n1,411\n11\n48\n12,896\n134,348\n20,357\n2,605\n144,366\n21,758\n850\n19,959\n2,335\n2,110,429\n113,376\n29,891\n60,011\n376\nGermany\t\n2,836\n318\nHolland\t\nItaly\t\n2\n4,520\n79\n3 500\n390\nPortugal\t\n17\nSt. Pierre\t\nSpain\t\n42\n9\n3,046\n1,507\n3,651\n9,147\n1,339,371\n77,276\n220\n148\n65,488\n17,207\n1,437\n64\n84,453\n27,037\n253 20,220\n37 77,338\n38 57,877\n532\nOther countries\t\n33\n4,981\n222\n1,510\nTotals\t\n3,786 7,207,571\n1\n230,775\n5,076\n1,625,334\n91,878\n6,373\n3,086,434\n128,991\nCountries to which\ndeparted\nVESSE\nLS EI\nWERED\nOUTW\nARDS\nGreat Britain\t\n833\n52\n20\n49\n569\n7\n23\n9\n42\n27\n20\n3,184,404\n179,519\n55,466\n58,615\n206,878\n15,885\n118,605\n1,991\n135,327\n34,024\n53,918\n93,174\n4,867\n782!\n1,571\n9,145\n183\n2,335\n66\n8,618\n685\n1,384\n11\n48,139\n2,294\n125\n4\n4\n29\n186\n47\n3\n7\n2\n17\n7\n16\n2\n2\n37\n45\n158,237\n8,416\n7,815\n21,801\n279,837\n62,944\n2,617\n8,437\n5,322\n7,724\n3,876\n55,527\n5,231\n2,261\n147,923\n16,759\n2,410\n95\n1\n65\n356\n6\n1,862\n10,065\n126,547\n7,331\n22\n403\n4,530\n83\n70\nBritish West Indies....\nNewfoundland\t\nArgentine Republic....\n580\n4,093\n811\n52\n1\n249\n7\n116\n52\nCuba and Porto Rico..\n65\n20,294\n501\n174\n167\n1,177\nHolland\n1\n1,462\n21\n69\n44\n6\n24\n5\n1,026\n283\n50\n38\n21,369\n1,843\n16,649\n1,230,901\n22,407\n104,186\n61,317\n345\n126\n298\n50,413\n5,752\n1,988\n2,019\n3,516\n: -53\n4,533\n262\n979\nUnited States\t\nSea fisheries\t\nOther countries\t\n3,171\n1,787\n3\n12\n1,388,783\n96,070\n5,505\n7,286\n70,122\n20,759\n102\n103\n3,783\n1,731\n5\n42\n2,158,190\n139,722\n13,084\n50,194\n82,588\n32,649\n146\n1,241\nTotals\t\n3,084\n5,504,766\n183,772\n5,531\n1,716,664\n99,188\n6,094\n3,156,417\n131,029\n(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 376.) 240\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nTable CLXXXL\u00E2\u0080\u0094British and Foreign Vessels Employed in the Coasting Trade of Canada, 1907-1911\nVessels Arrived\n1907\"\n1908\nBritish\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nSteam No.\nTons register\t\nNumber of crew..\nSail No.\nTons register\t\nNumber of crew. .\nForeign\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nSteam No.\nTons register\t\nNumber of crew..\nSail No.\nTons register\t\nNumber of crew..\nDescription of vessels\u00E2\u0080\u0094\t\nSteam, screw.. No.\nSteam, paddle. \"\nSteam, stern-\nwheel \"\nSail, ships. ... \"\nSail, barks.... \"\nSail, barken-\ntines \"\nSail, brigs. ... \"\nSail, brigan-\ntines \"\nSail, schooners \"\nSail, barges, canal boats, etc.\"\nVessels Departed\nBritish\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nSteam No.\nTons register\t\nNumber of crew. .\nSail _ No.\nTons register\t\nNumber of crew..\nForeign\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nSteam No.\nTons register\t\nNumber of crew. .\nSail No.\nTons register\t\nNumber of crew..\n11 Nine months.\n35,690\n13,212,481\n700,787\n17,342\n1,977,120\n68,976\n822\n1,112,684\n17,982\n603\n113,546\n2,105\n28,909\n6,521\n1,082\n14\n53\n13\n25\n13,917\n3,923\n37,000\n12,116,733\n610,690\n16,943\n1,908,926\n69,007\n898\n,156,070\n19,728\n397\n93,860\n1,812\n54,368\n21,314,515\n1,046,660\n24,845\n3,781,927\n102,009\n1,198\n1,535,801\n26,333\n601\n102,503\n1,964\n42,674\n9,286\n3,606\n9\n43\n24\n1\n11\n18,417\n6,941\n47,846\n18,549,764\n918,250\n24,814\n3,710,207\n99,003\n1,115\n1,456,650\n24,957\n450\n78,468\n1,529\n1909\n1910\n1911\n55,984\n22,295,771\n1,055,353\n24,347\n3,742,621\n98,786\n1,217\n1,564,662\n28,084\n157\n41,968\n802\n46,604\n6,978\n3,619\n6\n20\n18\n14\n18,183\n6,262\n48,970\n19,294,280\n921,000\n24,219\n3,709,755\n92,627\n1,912\n1,965,839\n42,746\n299\n55,302\n1,477\n62,753\n23,816,666\n1,171,385\n24,837\n4,725,048\n97,957\n941\n1,313,807\n21,082\n175\n56,733\n1,085\n53,455\n7,894\n2,345\n8\n25\n19\n2\n23\n17,142\n7,793\n56,533\n20,791,115\n1,018,985\n25,051\n4,693,996\n98,154\n804\n1,300,465\n20,284\n219\n53,098\n1,296\n68,236\n28,205,713\n1,333,888\n24,447\n4,889,332\n96,129\n673\n1,170,018\n17,185\n46\n15,606\n474\n58,666\n7,478\n2,765\n1\n9\n9\n2\n23\n16,846\n7,603\n63,330\n26,250,090\n1,246,632\n24,245\n4,858,664\n92,060\n670\n1,208,372\n17,577\n79\n30,139\n658 Canadian Statistics\n241\nTable CLXXXI.\u00E2\u0080\u0094British and Foreign Vessels Employed in the Coasting\nTrade of Canada, 1907-1911\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Continued)\nVessels Departed\nDescription of vessels\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nSteam, screw. .No.\nSteam, paddle. \"\nSteam, stern-\nwheel \t\nSail, ships....\nSail, barks....\nSail, barken-\ntines\t\nSail, brigs\t\nSail, brigan-\ntines\t\nSail, schooners\nSail, barges, canal boats, etc\n190712\n32,338\n4,786\n1,074\n9\n47\n14\n17\n13,460\n3,793\n1908\n38,857\n6,500\n3,604\n8\n39\n21\n12\n18,433\n6,751\n41,278\n5,274\n4,330\n8\n16\n22\n1\n13\n18,144\n6,314\n1910\n49,043\n5,948\n2,346\n10\n24\n24\n1\n23\n17,088\n8,100\n1911\n55,112\n6,115\n2,773\n4\n19\n12\n1\n19\n16,621\n7,648\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 377.)\nTable CLXXXIII. Sea-Going Shipping Entered and Cleared at Canadian Ports, 1868-1911, with Cargo and in Ballast\nFiscal Year\nBritish\nNo.\nTons\nregister\nCanadian\nTons\nregister\nForeign\nNo.\nTons\nregister\nTotal\ntonnage\n1868.\n1869.\n1870.\n1871.\n1872.\n1873.\n1874.\n1875.\n13,911 3,457,113 2,105 862,208\n1876..\n1877..\n1878..\n1879..\n1880,,\n16,31 lj\n15,863\n16,562\n16,151\n16,870\n12,191\n11,075\n2,595\n2,963\n2,9541\n2.6181\n2,990\n3,811,405\n3,942,392\n3,916,322;\n4,356,661\n4,323,003\n3,945,822'\n3,571,8031\n1,896,6031\n2,216,516\n2,294,688\n2,155,444\n2,642,935\n2,940 1,185,160\n2,652 1,142,481\n8,554\n8,955\n8,847\n9,296\n10,219\n1,634,333 i\n1,897,094'\n1,928,531\n1,736,310;\n1,794,210\n3,366 1,199.\n3,614 1,381.\n4,727 1,762.\n5,562 2,105.\n4,530 1,757.\n5,6141 2,379.\n5,842 2,531,\n5,715 2,461,\n5,087' 2,196.\n5,161: 2,349.\n771\n564\n532\n539\n405\n828\n212\n165 I\n796\n569 I\n4,319,321\n4,996,565\n5,084,873\n5,116,093\n5,685,144\n6,085,535\n6,051,361\n5,329,208\n5,910,764\n6,644,822\n6,684,384\n6,088,550\n6,786,714\n1881 3,707\n1882 3,335\n1883 3,403\n1884 3,327\n1885 1 3,219|\n12 Nine \"months.\n3,526,005\n11,103\n1,865,612|\n5,952\n2,712,720 i\n8,104,337\n3,164,839\n11,355\n1,892,290\n6,448\n2,879,433\n7,936,562\n3,001,071\n11,291\n1,886,166\n6,814\n3,085,540\n7,972,777\n3,257,219\n11,796\n1,880,993\n7,220\n3,346,089\n8,484,301\n3,007,314|\n10,512\n1,588,894 1\n7,461|\n3,048,407 1\n7,644,615 r\n242\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nTable CLXXXIIL\u00E2\u0080\u0094Sea-going Shipping Entered and Cleared at Canadian Ports, 1868-1911, with Cargo and in Ballast\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Continued)\nFiscal Year\nBritish\nNo.\n1886\t\n1887\t\n1888\t\n1889\t\n1890\t\n1891\t\n1892\t\n1893\t\n1894\t\n1895\t\n1896\t\n1897\t\n1898\t\n1899\t\n1900\t\n1901\t\n1902\t\n1903\t\n1904\t\n1905\t\n1906\t\n1907 (9 mos.)\n1908\t\n1909\t\n1910\t\n1911\t\nTons\nregister\n2,960\n2,679\n3,316\n3,305!\n3,67l'\n3,483'\n3,402\n3,271\n3,381\n3,206\n3,226\n3,835\n4,121\n4,855\n4,707\n4,319\n4,363\n4,647\n4,997\n4,614\n5,104\n4,488\n6,356\n5,795 10,405,3701\n5,780 11,038,709\n6,870 12,712,337\n3,101,285\n2,657,619\n3,326,417\n3,333,079\n3,617,013\n3,523,238\n3,586,335\n3,780,915\n4,146,645\n3,994,224\n4,385,055\n5,393,435\n5,777,068\n6,625,698\n6,728,799\n6,694,133\n6,865,924\n7,753,788\n8,045,817!\n8,034,652|\n9,059,453\n7,576,721\n10,329,515\nCanadian\nNo.\nTons\nregister\n11,405\n12,901\n13,828\n13,021\n13,695\n13,6651\n13,720\n13,422\n13,780!\n12,918\n1,783,623\n2,314,109\n1,862,295\n1,599,594\n1,708,939\n1,791,306\n2,085,187\n2,189,925 |\n2,334,081\n2,054,024 1\nForeign\nNo.\nTons\nregister\n7,006\n10,570\n13,663\n12,218\n13,758\n3,159,663\n3,390,708\n4,009,091\n4,363,928\n5,002,333\n13,462 2,141,272\n11,123 1,888,172\n12,142 2,029,745\n10,918 1,892,215\n11,427| 1,918,320\n9,910j\n11,413\n11,282\n11,045\n11,279\n1,677,138\n1,937,227\n2,085,568\n1,979,803\n2,269,834\n12,201 2,304,942\n7,880 1,899,141\n10,562 2,606,660\n10,946 2,806,278\n10,857 3,498,361\n10,607 3,341,998\n14,173 5,380,652\n13,839 5,081,452\n10,854 4,637,771\n11,179 4,799,810\n11,752 4,928,581\n13,114 4,932,497\n12,136 4,729,373\n11,524 4,778,672\n11,348'4,719,141\n12,412 5,528,002\n12,476 6,171,791\n14,530 5,928,337\n12,403 6,001,819\n14,002 5,801,085\n11,904 5,283,969\n12,511 5,479,034\n8,107 4,429,012\n12,886 6,555,096\n13,441 6,554,228\n13,147 6,267,243\n12,467 6,242,851\nTotal\ntonnage\n8,044,571\n8,362,436\n9,197,803\n9,296,601\n10,328,285\n10,695,196\n10,752,974\n10,608,611\n11,280,536\n10,976,829\n11,458,824\n12,010,980\n12,585,485\n13,237,054\n14,175,121\n14,543,062\n14,731,488\n15,841,175\n15,826,705\n15,588,455\n16,843,429\n13,904,874\n19,491,271\n19,765,876\n20,804,313\n22,297,186\nNote.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Canadian vessels were not separated from British in the years 1868-1875.\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 379.)\nImmigration\nTable CC.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Arrivals at Inland and Ocean Ports in Canada in Fiscal\nYears 1907-1911\nNationalities\nEnglish.\nIrish\nScotch.\nWelsh..\nTotal from U. K 55,791 120,182\n1907\n(9 mos.)\n1908\n41,156 90,380\n3,404 6,547\n10,729 22,223\n502 1,032\n1909\n37,019\n3,609\n11,810\n463\n52,901\n1910\n40,416\n3,940\n14,706\n728\n1911\n84,707\n6,877\n29,924\n1,505\n59,790 123,013 120,137\nFor 9 mos.\nended\nDecember\n1911\n81,750\n7,313\n29,694\n1,380\nm Canadian Statistics\n243\nTable CC.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Arrivals at Inland and Ocean Ports in Canada in Fiscal\nYears 1907-1911\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Continued.)\nNationalities\n1907\n(9 mos.)\n1908\n1909\n1910\n1911\nFor 9 mos.\nended\nDecember\n1911\nArmenian\t\nAustralian\t\nAustrian\t\nBelgian\t\nBukowinian\t\nBulgarian\t\nChinese\t\nDanish\t\nDutch\t\nFinnish\t\nFrench\t\nGalician\t\nGerman\"\t\nGreek\t\nHebrew, Austrian\t\nHebrew, German\t\nHebrew, Polish\t\nHebrew, Russian\t\nHebrew,13\t\nHindoo\t\nHungarian\t\nIcelandic\t\nItalian\t\nJapanese\t\nNewfoundland\t\nNew Zealand\t\nNorwegian\t\nPolish, Austrian\t\nPolish, German\t\nPolish, Russian\t\nPolish,13\t\nRoumanian\t\nRussian, \u00E2\u0080\u00A2\u00C2\u00BB\t\nRuthenian\t\nServian\t\nSwedish\t\nSwiss\t\nSyrian\t\nTurkish\t\nU. S. (via ocean ports)\nUnited States\t\nWest Indian\t\nOther nationalities\nTotal\t\nGrand total\t\n208\n185\n562\n650\n229\n179\n92\n297\n394\n1,049\n1,314\n1,652\n1,889\n545\n146\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 43\n49\n5,802\n544\n2,124\n499\n46\n5,114\n2,042\n1,029\n30\n876\n375\n22\n492\n144\n' 431\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0 1,927\n303\n4\n1,077\n112\n277\n232\n89\n34,659\n64\n1,07-9\n563\n180\n1,899\n1,214\n2,145\n2,529\n1,884\n290\n1,212\n1,212\n2,671\n14,268\n2,363\n1,053\n195\n54\n46\n5,738\n1,679\n2,623\n1,307\n97\n11,212\n7,601\n3,374\n70\n1,554-j\n586\n16\n736\n255\n949\n6,281\n912\n48\n2,132\n195\n732\n489\n133\n58,312\n134\n1,344\n68,876 142,287\n79\n171\n1,830\n828\n1,546\n56\n1,887\n160\n495\n669\n1,830\n6,644\n1,257\n192\n24\n15\n2\n1,444\n151\n6\n595\n35\n4,228\n495\n2,108\n65\n752\n42\n3\n255\n76\n278\n3,547\n149\n31\n1,135\n129\n189\n236\n94\n59,832\n113\n334\n75\n203\n4,195\n910\n725\n557\n2V156\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2 300\n741\n1,457\n1,727\n3,368\n1,516\n452\n56\n10\n28\n2,745\n343\n10\n621\n95\n7,118\n271\n3,372\n82\n1,370\n483\n12\n738\n174\n293\n4,564\n568\n76\n2,017\n211\n195\n517\n186\n103,798\n146\n523\n20\n266\n7,891\n1,563\n700\n1,068\n5,278\n535\n931\n2,132\n2,041\n3,553\n2,530\n777\n248\n19\n85\n4,188\n606\n5\n756\n250\n8,359\n437\n2,229\n116\n2,169\n1,065\n43\n800\n269\n511\n6,621\n2,869\n50\n3,213\n270\n124\n469\n203\n121,451\n398\n963\n43\n158\n4,483\n1,238\n241\n1,516\n5,633\n458\n891\n1,391\n1,794\n1,541\n3,866\n544\n228\n3\n40\n3,581\n453\n14\n313\n201\n5,720\n650\n2,502\n54\n1,472\n1,853\n20\n847\n548\n663\n7,013\n10,342\n161\n2,109\n194\n128\n389\n127\n107,365\n298\n1,294\n94,007 149,004 188,071 172,379\n124,667 262,469 146,908 208,794 311,084 292,516\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\u00E2\u0080\u0094(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 396.\na Not elsewhere specified. 244\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nTable CCII.\u00E2\u0080\u0094Immigration from United States to Canada and Estimated Value of Effects and Cash, from January 1, 1906, to\nJanuary 1, 1912\nYears\nNo. of\nImmigrants\nWealth\nper capita\nTotal value\nof effects\nand cash\nCalendar year 1906\t\n63,782\n56,687\n57,124\n90,996\n124,602\n131,114\n$809\n885\n1,152\n811\n1,061\n1,539\n$51,599,638\n\" \" 1907\t\n50,167,995\n\" \" 1908\t\n65,806,848\n\" \" 1909\t\n73,797,756\n\" \" 1910\t\n132,202,722\n\" \" 1911\t\n201,784,446\nTotal for six years\t\n524,305\n$1,097 ($575,359,405\n-(Canada Year Book, 1911, second series, p. 398.) COMMUNICATION\nFUNCTIONS AND NEEDS OF OUR GREAT MARKETS\nBy Willet M. Hays,\nAssistant Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.\nThe trading pit organizations of boards of trade and chambers\nof commerce have come to function as crop-reporting boards as\nwell as marts of trade. Unlike state and national crop-reporting\nboards, they are not local to their own country, but are also international in scope, taking account of acreages, crop conditions and\nharvested products of the entire world. And, unlike publicly-supported crop-reporting boards, they take into account demand as\nwell as supply. They have more final functions than have public\ncrop-reporting boards, because they crystallize the whole knowledge\nof conditions of supply and demand into actual daily prices.\nThese boards in the great commercial centers are, however,\nvery inefficient reporters of crop conditions, in that they do not act\nas unbiased boards. The price figure which they decide upon is\nbased only in part upon conditions relating to the supply and demand\nof the actual product and in part upon thoughts which grow out\nof the self-interest of the dealers in the ownership of margins on\noptions and futures. The ownership of these margins, especially\nin case of exaggerated corners, gives such a bias to a portion of the\nmembers of these commercial price-making boards that their composite judgment is much warped.\nThese margins, risked on options and futures, sometimes\naggregate many times more than the sum of the margins risked in\nthe fluctuations on the price of the actual products bought and sold\nin the same market.. In determining prices, the money at stake on\n\"wind sales\" takes a most prominent place by the side of actual\nchanged conditions of acreage or of the development of the crop.\nIn other words, mischievous factors arise to prevent the free action\nof the law of supply and demand, and the trading pit becomes an\nagency interfering with what would be the natural course of events\nin the commercial world. Associated with this fundamentally false\nelement in these market organizations, numerous abuses arise.\n(245) 246\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nSometimes the trading pit, Hke a mob, is affected with collective\nhysteria, which then acts regardless of public interest, is demoral-\n. izing and even disgraceful in the eyes of the world.\nMarket trading in futures and in options is discussed .by two\nschools of philosophy; one asserts that dealing in futures and options\ngives fluidity and acceleration to commerce and provides for hedging;\nthat it enables producers, and especially manufacturers, to use all\ntheir capital in their immediate business; that it equalizes prices\nthroughout the year to the manufacturers' advantage, by leaving\nthe work of looking after fluctuations of price to financiers trained\nin speculative risks, thus placing the business of manufacture on a\nmore conservative basis. They even claim that the machinery of\nthe pit adds values to the actual product and thus creates new values;\nalso that there are dangers in restricting this class of business by\nlegislation, which claim, they assert, is proven by Germany's experience.\nThe other school asserts that too much fluidity and acceleration\nto business leads to frenzied finance, monetary panics, and business\ndepression; that it destroys business confidence; and that it tends\nto center wealth in the hands of the few. This school calls attention\nto the fact that markets for sugar and some other products get on\nwithout dealings in options and futures, and that the efficiency of\nrestrictive legislation has been demonstrated in southern states.\nThey urge that bucket-shop dealing and the other forms of dealing\nin options and futures on a small scale are made possible by the\nlarge exchanges, where different classes of trade center. They assert\nalso that those manufacturers, as a class, who do not hedge are more\nsuccessful than those who do. And they give emphasis to the fact\nthat these market organizations serve much the same purpose as\ndid the Louisiana lottery, tempting weak, men to their own ruin.\nIt may be safely asserted that this subject in its relation both\nto modern business and to the public welfare has not been comprehensively grasped by any one man or group of men. The intricacies of dealing in futures and in options are comprehended only\nby the few who are directly interested, and it is clear that they have\nnot given due regard to the relations of these dealings to the general\npublic nor to the many who, by speculation, lose their own financial\nstatus and while trying to get rich quick really plunge their families\ninto the no-capital class. Functions and Needs.of Our Great Markets 247\nIt is clear that so many vital interests have come to depend\nupon markets for future delivery of commodities that a change\nto something better must be constructive rather than destructive.\nTherefore, to secure the greatest good for all concerned, reformative\nmeasures, it would seem, should preserve the best features in present\nmethods of dealing while abolishing their excesses and glaring wrongs.\nMen trained to philosophic and dispassionate methods of scientific\nresearch and generalization, assisted by men of experience in our\nmarket practices, are needed to look broadly at the problem in all\nits essential details and to suggest constructive practices and devise\nrestrictive and constructive laws which shall remedy existing evils.\nPlans for national and international commissions are none too broad\nfor problems as comprehensive and as important as this.\nAlthough dealing in futures does help oil the wheels of exchange\nand adds elements of conservatism, our speculative markets are\ngreat irritants and the ever-present menace of manipulation produces\nworld market conditions at once nervous and unstable. The general\nfeeling that there is a large element of the unreal, the selfish, the\nfalse, the wrong, the actually vicious in our general commercial\nmarkets prevents confidence and, broadly speaking, is very repressive\nto commerce. Correctives are needed to preserve the good and\neliminate the bad from the whole situation.\nIt must be admitted that in making prices daily the great market\nperforms a most comprehensive, highly important and necessary\nfeat which no other known agency can perform. Crop-reporting\nagencies greatly assist, but only the trading mart can serve as the\ncrucible in which prices current are evolved out of the conditions of\nsupply and demand. In relation to the entire world product of any\ncommodity, as of wheat or cotton, the markets assemble as much\nas they can of the facts available concerning the supply afforded\nby the previous crop, also conrerning the raw and finished products\nin store and in transit; concerning the acreage and condition of growing crops and also concerning the present and prospective demand.\nThus, in case of wheat on May first, account is taken of the\ngrain in the hands of the farmers, in country elevators and in terminal warehouses and mills. The acreage and condition of winter\nwheat and the acreage of spring wheat in the wheat-producing countries of the northern hemisphere are taken into account, as is also\nthe amount of flour in store. The facts as to stores of wheat and 248\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nflour in stock, acreages of winter wheat planted in Argentina, Australasia and other southern hemisphere countries are sought. The\nprospective purchasing power of those who buy wheat, flour and\nbread is roughly determined from the industrial activities of the\ngreat wheat-buying nations.\nAnd in deternxining the prospective demand for wheat, facts\nconcerningthe prospective demand for other commodities are secured.\nEven the relative supplies and. prices of meats are taken into consideration in securing data to help determine the prospective supplies\nof wheat, because, with high prices for meats, the crops used to feed\nlive stock compete with wheat for increased acreages and thus lower\nthe wheat acreage and raise the price of wheat. To coordinate and\naverage all these factors into one single price figure is an important\nand comprehensive task. Under present conditions this work is\nnot accomplished in a manner to give occasion for pride. Our\nprices fluctuate unduly and there is more restlessness than is well\nfor the producer, the manufacturer, the dealer or the consumer.\nThose fluctuations which arise from changes in natural conditions\nshould be and can be smoothed down instead of being exaggerated.\nThe parties in the aggregate most fundamentally interested\nin our markets and market prices are the primary producers and\nthe consumers. Manufacturers, transporters and dealers, including\nspeculators, are likewise deeply concerned; also all other lines of business, including that of banking. Every one of these classes, excepting the speculators, is interested in stability, in the absence of wide\nfluctuation in prices.\nThe manufacturer and the dealer, in order to avoid the consequences of risking wide fluctuations, often use the market for futures\nto hedge, i. e., to sell against their own purchases. In other words,\nthey use the machinery of speculation to make their own business\nless speculative. The manufacturer sells for future delivery to\nresponsible parties the same amount of raw product as he purchases\nfor his factory or mill, thus pitting a speculative sale against the\nspeculative risk in his, purchase. In form this is speculation, but\npractically it is not gambling, so far as he is concerned. He often\nthen at once sells his finished product for future actual delivery\nat a price which will cover cost of raw product, cost of manufacture\nand profit. He thus, by a double speculative deal, insures the cost\nof his raw material at a certain figure, and thus insures his net profits. Functions and Needs of Our Great Markets 249\nThe other items of fixed cost of producing manufactured products\nbeing known, he can thus affix his prices to be charged and proceed\nwith nearly perfect assurance of modest profits. With less of risk,\nas he thus stands between the producer of the raw product and the\nconsumer of the finished product, his charge for manufacture is\nreduced, presumably (if it stood by itself) to the advantage both\nof the producer and the consumer.\nEach class above named, excepting the successful speculator,\nis a contributor to the expenses of speculating estabhshments. The\nmain loss, probably, falls not on the producer or the consumer,\nbut on the very many small speculators who on the average lose,\nand on the occasional large speculator who loses. And these losers\nnot only pay for a large part of the cost of office maintenance, telegraph and other expenses attached to the speculative business, but\nthey contribute large sums to the coffers of the successful speculators.\nWealth is constantly going from these losing classes,. which need\ntheir money for the building up of small family estates to endow\nthe mother of the nation's children. Part of this lost money goes\nto build up the swollen estates of those few who especially succeed\nat speculation or, as it may properly be called, speculative gambling. There is enough of the odor of wrongdoing to produce a\nbad moral effect, not alone on the participants, but on the community at large.\nThere are no adequate statistics as to the ultimate sources from\nwhich is drawn the money won by those speculators who are successful. The commission fees paid to commission merchants who negotiate margin sales and purchase for individuals, mainly outside the\nmembership of the exchanges, are paid by the multitude of speculators who thus risk their money on margins. The same outside\nspeculators also, on the average, lose in their wagers with the trained-\ndealers who are on the ground and who often combine to carry\nthrough deals in which a \"community of interests\" helps them to\nassure to themselves winnings. As suggested above, these outside\ndealers may even lose so much that they help pay producers enlarged\nprices in time of corners that \"bull\" prices upwards. The fact\nthat corners are not always premeditated, but naturally grow out\nof the system of option sales, does not make their evil effects less.\nNo one has the data to determine whether, on the average,\ntrading in options and futures decreases the price received by pro- 250 The Annals of the American Academy\nducers and increases the price paid by consumers or the converse.\nIt is perfectly clear, however, that in the large the outside speculators and the producers and consumers among them lose money to\na class of men who do not really pretend either to produce, to transport or to manufacture; and they also pay the expenses of running\nan expensive speculative machine.\nA very rough estimate places the money received from the\npeople by exchanges and their bucket-shop appendages in America\nalone at upwards of $200,000,000 annually. On the face of it this\nseems a high price to pay for fluidity and acceleration to the market\nand for the opportunity of hedging. It would seem that these\nadvantages cost the American people more money than they are\nworth, besides being obtained at the price of a business plan which\nseems to degrade our morals, as evidenced by reckless speculation\nand by the practices of many bucket shops. Or, to put it another\nway, it would seem that some plan could be devised which would\ngive equal or better service at a fraction of the cost.\nThe report of Governor Hughes' Committee on Speculation\n. in Securities and Commodities, made public in June, 1909, is a very\nuseful contribution to this subject in that it gives numerous facts\nnot hitherto available. The local character of this commission\nmade it natural that the discussion would be somewhat provincial,\nnot looking at the subject from a national standpoint, let alone\nfrom an international standpoint; nor from the point of view of\nthe unity of interests of the brotherhood of all men. It vigorously\npoints out abuses and evils, it rather weakly advises exchanges to\n\"be good\" and to advise their members who speculate to do so temperately. Its addition to the detailed facts as to the volume of\nspeculative trading in commodities and as to the associated advantages and evils of dealing in options and futures makes of it a distinct\nmark for progression in the discussion of the subject. And no doubt\nit will contribute to the solution of this vexed question.\nBefore the Committee on Agriculture of the United States House\nof Representatives at the hearing on option dealing in cotton in 1910\nit was estimated by a number of cotton dealers that on the New\nYork Cotton Exchange 105,000,000 bales are sold annually. Since\na bale, 500 pounds, averaging twelve cents per pound, is worth $60,\nthis gives an aggregate of $6,300,000,000 represented in option\nsales of cotton. Sales of futures in wheat on the Produce Exchange Functions and Needs of Our Great Markets 251\nwere shown of over 600,000,000 bushels, or stated in its equivalent\nat one dollar per bushel, $600,000,000. The record of the Coffee\nExchange shows a sale of 16,000,000 bags of 250 pounds each. This\nrepresents, at seven cents per pound, nearly $300,000,000. Thus\nin these three commodities, the sales amount to over $7,000,000,000.\nFigures secured by the present writer several years ago indicated\nthat about one-third of the cotton sales were then between member\nand member of the exchange; one-third between members of the\nexchange and outsiders, and one-third between one outsider and\nanother outsider, the members in this last case acting as commission\nmen only. The members charge outsiders 1\ cents per bale commission, or, where the sellers and the buyers are both outsiders, the\nmember receives a commission of fifteen cents per bale. Where\nthe member buys of or sells to an outsider he literally charges the\noutsider 7J cents per bale for the opportunity to bet with himself,\nthe trained dealer, on the future price of cotton, the dealer graciously\nusing a portion of this fee to pay the expenses of the exchange. Now,\nfor purposes of illustration, assuming that of the 105,000,000 bales\n35,000,000 are transactions between outsiders, the members at fifteen\ncents will receive in commissions $5,250,000. For the 35,000,000\nof sales between members and outsiders, the members receive, at\n7\u00C2\u00A7 cents per bale, $2,625,000, making in all commission fees amounting to $7,875,000. Since the membership is limited to say 500,\nthis provides, on the average, $15,750 per member, surely quite\nsufficient to pay expenses with $5,000 to $10,000 profit each.\nIt is probable that in the sales of 35,000,000 bales between\nmembers of the Cotton Exchange there is some eating of little fish\nby the big fish and allowing other little fish to enter the pond to\ntake the place of those which were swallowed and to serve annually\nas food for the big fish who it is believed know how to consume the\nlesser fish. But the public has no feverish concern with the differences which exist among these costly appendages of trade.\nAs long as the irritation remains within the walls of the exchange,\nno systematic danger threatens the body politic; but in their buying and selling with outsiders arises inflammation which spreads\noutward and affects our most vital business ^stitutions, and the\nhomes which depend upon business for accumulative expenses and\nfor the insurance against the rainy day. The 35,000,000 bales\nwhich members sell to or buy from outsiders at $60 per bale represent 252\nThe Annals of the American Academy\na value of $2,100,000,000. Figures secured by the writer indicate\nthat on settlement an average of about $2.50 per bale, or one-half\ncent per pound, passes from the unsuccessful bettor to the successful bettor. On 35,000,000 bales the margins thus placed at risk\nwould amount to $87,500,000. Only estimates can be secured as\nto the proportions of the bets on futures on these commodities which\nare won by the members and by outsiders. Since estimates have\nrun all the way from 60 per cent up to 85 and even 90 per cent, a\nvery conservative estimate would seem to be 65 per cent. If the\nexperienced members secure 65 per cent of the $87,500,000, risked\nin the bets, or $56,875,000, they receive back $13,125,000 more than\nhalf of the $87,500,000, or of the $43,750,000 which they risked;\nand the outsiders lost this amount. Thus, at least for the purpose\nof illustration, it seems fair to roughly estimate that the outsiders\npay to the members in fees $7,875,000, and in winnings $13,125,000,\nor a total of $21,000,000.\nThen the people at large are concerned also with the transactions\namong non-members. A goodly proportion of these trades are\nbetween speculators who are not members of the exchange and outsiders who bet in a small way. Some of these speculators operate\nin such an illegitimate manner that they could not secure election\nto membership, others are barred by the low limit to the number\nof members. Many of these speculators are. far removed from the\nseats of the exchanges and are often organized for business in the\nform of what are commonly called bucket shops. This class of dealing is worst of all because so little under law or restraint. Estimates\nare well nigh useless here, because so little is known \"outside the\ntrade\" on which to base estimates.\nBut, taking the estimate of $21,000,000 above, for which the\nwriter believes there is a fair basis, and to be more than conservative,\nassume that the smaller people lose another $9,000,000 through\ndealing with speculators withbusiness connections with the exchanges,\nor who assume to have such connection, arid we have a total of\n$30,000,000 lost, for the most part by the middle and poorer classes\nof people, on cotton dealing. Of the 12,000,000 bales of cotton\nproduced in this country, we manufacture more than 4,000,000\nbales, worth say $240,000,000. In case of not more than $100,000,-\n000 of this we may estimate that there may be hedging. The wrong\ntransference of $30,000,000 in order that a group of manufacturers Functions and Needs of Our Great Markets 253\nmay have the privilege of hedging, with their fellows doing nearly\nor quite as well without, is very costly.\nThere is evidence that the really large speculative dealing is\nin wheat on the Chicago market. Estimates made some years ago\nindicatethat 90,000,000,000 bushelsof grain sales were made annually\nin Chicago. Applying the same method of calculation to this as\nthat used for cotton, and the figures lost by the small speculators\non all commodities run into a few hundred million. Viewed as a\nmatter of wealth distribution, produce and stock exchanges evidently\nchange vast sums from the middle classes to certain rich speculators.\nThey cause distrust and sometimes lead to industrial panics; but\ntheir worst feature is their inculcation of a lack of steady business\nhonesty among people who yield to temptation to get something for\nnothing.\nThere is a growing demand that the methods of our markets\nwhich deal in futures and options should be investigated with that\nthoroughness which will provide a basis for corrective action. Of\nthe fact that restrictive laws have the effect of stopping the excesses\nin sales of futures there is abundant evidence in results from the\nlegislation of various south Atlantic states. Federal laws making\nillegal the dealing in options and futures have been proposed which\nhave resulted in a beginning of a study of the intricacies of the problem/] Those directly interested in dealing in options and futures\nhave abundantly demonstrated that they have the advantage of\nhaving technical knowledge of the subject and of being able easily\nto center their arguments. Those not interested specifically, but\nconcerned on principle, have not been so organized as to represent\nthe public interest before legislative bodies either with an adequate\ngrasp of the subject or with an aroused public will. Men who\nhave proposed regulation cannot claim to have presented\ntheir side of the case as ably as the opposition to regulation\nhas stated theirs. No doubt some of our universities have economists with abilities suited to attacking this problem. Some of\nthe professors of commercial geography have collected many data\nas to the flow of commodities along the great highways of commerce\nwhich connect international markets, which would be useful to\nstudents of this subject. Minds able to investigate deeply, to\nmaster details, to appreciate great economic and moral interests, to\ngive practical generalization and to coordinate constructively the 254\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nfunctions of public crop-reporting agencies and price-making\nmarkets are needed to evolve a general informational and marketing scheme for farm products.\nIf markets which provide for dealing in options and futures\ncould confine these formsof tradingto narrow limits, the manufacturer\ncould hedge against his purchases, allowing some one else to carry\npart of this speculative risk; and others could take advantage of\nthis amount of trading in futures and options as a sort of clearing\nhouse to facilitate trade. Simply to illustrate, if a law could be so\nframed as to confine speculative trading in a given market to quadruple the actual transference of product in that market, it might\nconserve a useful function by eliminating the great evil of unrestricted\nspeculative movements and thus avoid the state of uncertainty\nwhich results from not knowing when speculative excesses will occur.\nIf all deals in options and futures were required to be made public\nin order to be legal, this for all practical purposes might restrict\nspeculative sales without aboHshing these features which are useful\nin actual business.\nIt may be that the market organization, possibly under a state\nor national law, could place a prohibitive tax on all sales of options\nand futures beyond a limit which would be sufficient to permit all\nneeded speculative sales, but would prevent gambling excesses.\nThis would enable one set of men trained in financing the carrying\nof raw products to take care of much of the risk, thus reHeving the\nmanufacturer who, by hedging, could make his business less speculative. Possibly laws would be effective which would define the amount\nof trade in futures and options which would be considered speculation and the additional amount which would be considered gambling,\nwith penalties on any market organization for allowing its members to exceed the legal limit. If the excess of sales of options and\nfutures above a given number on a given market were declared by\nlaw to be gambling, market organizations permitting more than\nthe limited amount of sales could be denied the use of the mails,\ntelegraph, telephone, express companies and other common carriers.\nThese specific suggestions are not given here so much with a view\nto offering a solution of this knotty problem as to illustrate the\nproposal that this subject is open to possible and practical suggestion, and that there is reason for the hope that some solution for the\nproblem of our market excesses may be found. Functions and Needs of Our Great Markets 255\nThat public crop-reporting agencies should be greatly amplified,\nespecially in their world area aspects, so as more adequately to perform some of the functions now performed by the large markets\nseems clear. Publicity, at more frequent intervals, of acreages,\nconditions, yields, stocks in store and prospective demand might\nprove the safest and most efficient cure for fluctuations which come\nfrom speculation based on private crop reports.\nPublic estabhshments for providing statistics useful to trade\nare gradually coming into existence. In the United States basic\nwork is done every fifth year by the United States Census Office,\nwhen the acreage, the total amount of farm crop products grown\nand the numbers of five stock are secured by an actual census count.\nThus, in 1910, when census taking was under way, every farm in\nthe entire country was visited, and acreages, quantities and other\nfacts were secured concerning each farm crop of the previous year,\n1909, and the number of each class of five stock was ascertained.\nThe Bureau of Statistics of the United States Department of\nAgriculture, during each succeeding year of the next five years, uses\nthe census figures as a basis upon which to estimate changes in\nacreages and in numbers of five stock. These acreages, as ascertained by the census and the Bureau of Statistics, are used as bases\nupon which to estimate the conditions of the respective crops throughout the season, also the yield per acre, and to determine approximately the production per state and for the entire country. Thus,\nthroughout the year the markets are kept informed as to acreage,\nprogressive conditions of growth and quantities harvested. It must\nbe admitted that the public generally makes little direct use of these\nreports, but relies almost wholly upon the interpretations of them\nput out by the great market centers in the form of current price\nfigures.\nThe method of securing the information, of reducing it to figures representing averages and totals and of publishing the figures\nmay be of interest. The Bureau of Statistics of the United States\nDepartment of Agriculture is the largest and most highly-organized\ndepartment devoted to reports of current crop conditions supported\nby any country in the world. With a current expense fund of approximately $150,000 annually for that purpose, it employs about fifty\nstatisticians and clerks in the City of Washington and a third as\nmany special traveling reporting agents outside of Washington. 256 The Annals of the American Academy\nA state agent in each state is also paid for part of his time; While\nnearly three thousand county correspondents and thirty thousand\ntownship and individual correspondents give voluntary service as\ncrop reporters. There are thus received in the Washington office\nfour classes of reports on each crop. The reports by states, from\nspecial traveling agents, each of whom has from one to four states,\nand those from the state agents are sent directly to the Secretary\nof Agriculture and are deposited in a safe until the crop-reporting\nboard meets on crop-reporting day. The reports from the county\ncorrespondents and also those from the township correspondents\nare sent to the clerical force at Washington, where they are assembled\nand averaged by states and the summarized results, in fractional\nparts, are also placed in the Secretary's safe till the crop-reporting\nboard is in session and ready to use them.\nOn report day the crop-reporting board, consisting of the statistician and four assistant statisticians and agents, receives the four\nclasses of reports in a meeting behind closed doors. With the aid\nof clerks, the estimates from the different classes of correspondents\nare entered on sheets in four columns. Each boardmember is supplied\nwith a copy and, working independently at a separate table, he'resolves the four figures for the given crop for each state into a common\nfigure and thus constructs a fifth column. The five columns of\nfigures, one representing averages from each of the several members,\nare then all copied side by side on a single sheet and the board in\nsession merges the judgment of its five members into single figures\nfor each state. This is something more than averaging, because\nthe board often has reasons for giving more weight to the judgment\nof one class of reporters than to that of the others; and there are\nat times other\" legitimate sources of information than that which\ncomes from the four classes of reporting agencies.\nWhen the hour set for announcing the figures arrives the board\nhas its report worked out with national as well as state averages\nand totals, and manifold copies are made of a table of these figures\ntogether with a few brief paragraphs stating the leading facts as to\nthe acreage and condition of each crop. A few minutes before the\nclock strikes the hour the board and the Secretary of Agriculture\nsign the report and take it to the corridor near the telegraph room.\nSeveral copies of the report sheets are laid, face down, on a table.\nEight or ten telegraph operators and news reporters are ready for Functions and Needs of Our Great Markets 257\nthe stroke of the clock, and with the word they seize the papers and\nrush to the telegraph and telephone instruments. In a single minute\nthe wires have flashed the leading figures to New York, Chicago,\nNew Orleans and other great markets.\nNow contrast this procedure with what takes place at the market\nend of the wire. There, in the trading pit, hundreds of men watch\nthe clock, and when the telegraphic figures giving the estimates of\nthe acreage, or yield, or total product, of a given crop are shouted\nout, or are placed on the blackboard, each dealer forms a judgment\nas to whether to bid higher or lower on the products affected by the\nreports. The conclusion of the crop-reporting board, taken in the\nmost serene calmness of a quiet room in a building surrounded by\na beautiful park in the National Capital, suddenly, on the wings of\nHghtning, flashes into the bedlam-like mart where fortunes are made\nor lost in a moment. The selling pit has a spasm and in a few moments the price of the commodity has risen or fallen to a fairly stable\nequilibrium at a point warranted by the newly-reported facts as to\ncrop conditions.\nWorld Acreages\nIf the reports thus sent to the great market included the entire\nworld acreage the effect would be still more interesting. At present\nindividuals and firms, and groups of operators cooperating privately,\nsecure reports of crops from other countries and also reports of\nproducts from previous crops in store together with the prospective\ndemand. There is thus much private information utilized at the\ngreat market centers in arriving at the daily price current. And\ntoo often the speculating public is led to believe, or allowed to believe,\nthat the partial facts which are made public from these private\nsources tell the whole truth when they may not. And it is at least\nwidely believed that those dealers who have the more complete and\naccurate information sometimes proceed first to buy many margins\nin option and future deals and follow this movement by publishing\ntheir privately secured facts which will turn the margins in their\nfavor.\nThe public has no special concern as to which of two groups\nof trained speculators beats the other by securing first and taking\nadvantage of the facts of changed conditions. The public is, however, deeply concerned with the practices of these boards when,\nthey entice men of small means who are without knowledge of the mm\n258\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nchanged conditions of crops to take risks in a nearly \"sure thing\"\ngame with speculation in wheat or cotton, just as it was concerned\nwith the Louisiana lottery. The public is also concerned to avoid\nunnecessary fluctuation in prices, which greatly hampers manufacture and often seriously affects the interests of producers and\nconsumers and also of dealers in actual products. There exists a\nstrong consensus of opinion against market organizations for excessive\ndealing in options and futures, and if a plan were devised which\nwould furnish an efficient substitute for the marketing machinery\nwhich has there grown up entwined with the' option and future\nfeatures, such new organization would be generally demanded.\nWere a really efficient scheme devised for giving great fluidity to\nthe markets and to the transfer of credits, the people would demand\nof Congress that it be installed by a restrictive and constructive\nfederal law. There are many intelligent men who believe that if\nall markets for dealing in options and futures were placed under\nrestrictions so stringent as to prohibit the gambling as now carried\nout, business would adjust itself to the change very readily.\nOne of the constructive needs is world area statistics. The\nnew International Institute of Agriculture at Rome, recently organized, has, as one of its three departments, a bureau of agricultural\nstatistics, which collects world area data and supplies these facts\nto the forty-nine adhering countries. It thus gives basic statistics\nof acreages, conditions and total products as assembled at Rome,\nItaly. This information is assembled in a rather open way and is\npublished as soon as it is tabulated and made available. At present\nits information is rather old when received by the markets, but it\nis possible that eventually not only monthly reports will be issued\nduring the season of growth of a given crop, but that throughout\nthe month facts of special changes arising from storms, droughts\nor other quickly operating causes may be assembled and reported\nat once when they have occurred. That Institute collects available\nfacts through agencies already organized in the different countries;\nand it is successfully encouraging the equipment of statistical crop-\nreporting bureaus in all countries.\nTwo methods of procedure have been suggested for assembling and giving out information from Rome. Under the first method\nno especial effort will be made at keeping the facts in confidence\nwhile assembling them. Each country will compile its own statistics, Functions and Needs of Our Great Markets 259\npubHshing them when it pleases and sending the general results to\nRome. The Institute will compile these facts for the. world areas\nof each crop and publish them. Under this plan it will be able\ngradually to improve the statistical organizations throughout the\nworld. Better basic census statistics of actual acreages and quantities grown in census years, preferably once in five years, will\nbe made by the adhering nations, and more accurate compilations\nof current prices will be made. Annual estimates of acreages and\nseasonal time of planting, growth and conditions for harvesting will\nbe based on better and more numerous data. Markets'will have\nbetter annual data and better ten-year averages as bases for comparison to determine the probable prices the estimated crops of a\ngiven year should and will command in the markets. Gradually\nthe Institute can extend its records, in many cases based on actual\ncensus-like counts, to amounts of each product consumed in the\nrespective countries, the amounts in transit and in store, and may\nalso estimate the probable demand or consumption in each country.\nThus the figures of the Institute may more generally supplant the\nfigures of non-public agencies and thus come to be the recognized\nbases for nearly all comparisons and estimates of acreages, yields\nper acre, quantities and quality of products, also of demand and of\nprospective demand, and thus serve in a more potent way in providing stability of average daily current prices. Even under this plan\nthere will be some holding of final figures in \"confidence until they\nare simultaneously pubhshed to all agencies desiring them.\nThe second method contemplates the assembling of data in\nconfidence, not with great secrecy, but without allowing publicity\nof data until they can be open to the use simultaneously of all parties\nwho desire them as is now done by the United States Department\nof Agriculture. Under this plan an organization somewhat more\nformal than that now in use by the United States Department of\nAgriculture has been suggested. Using the political divisions of\nthis country to serve in stating the scheme, the plan suggested is\nsomething as follows: Have in each township a man who will spend\na day once a month, and an additional day on occasion of special\nchanges of crops due to storm, drought, etc., in gaining knowledge\nof acreages, conditions of growth, yield and quality of crops, and\nnumber of five stock and their condition. Have him report in\nwriting to a district agent at a central mailing point where are received 260\nThe Annals of the American Academy\ntownship reports from a few score of townships. Let this district\nagent compile the reports and wire totals to the state agent, who\nwould compile the district reports into state averages to be wired\nto Washington. The national crop-reporting board can then compile\nthe state reports into national averages and cable the totals to Rome.\nPossibly machines could be devised for use by the district and\nstate agents, and by the national bureau in compiling weighted\naverages. If the closing compilations at least could thus be done\nby calculating machines, it might give even greater assurance both\nof accuracy and that all the figures be kept in confidence. Or experience may prove that the present crop-reporting board plan is not\nonly safe but better adapted to giving accuracy to the estimates\nwhich are sent by a nation to the board at Rome. At least, experiments should be undertaken to find that method which would be\nboth efficient in getting accurate and frequent reports and economical for each country.\nThere seems to be no difficulty in keeping telegrams in confidence under telegraphic keys such as the one devised for use by the\nUnited States Crop-Reporting Board; and the amount of telegraphing suggested is not so large as to be a serious item of expense. The\ncost of the time of the local estimating agents is the most serious\nfinancial matter. The lack of organization in some countries and\n. the difficulty at first of securing dependablelocal reporters are thought\nto be the large difficulties. Traveling agents to check up reports\nso as to prevent biased statements, and to educate district and\nstate agents, as proven by the experience of the United States Department of Agriculture, do much to give accuracy to the primary estimates. The quinquennial census, compiled for township units,\nchecks up township reporters, serving both to give them bases for\ntheir estimates and also to put the accuracy of their work to the\ntest, that they may feel the responsibility of giving correct statements of actual fact.\nWith really comprehensive and efficient crop reports of the\nworld areas of a given crop, the great markets should be able to\nmaintain fairly steady prices, fluctuating only as the facts of production and consumption warrant. Such reports, issued by an\nagency which all parties trust as to its fairness and efficiency, would\nbe the main factors in determining prices. These reports, together\nwith a simple law, probably restricting rather than abolishing the\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0J^gSSSggj Functions and Needs of Our Great Markets 261\namount of dealing in options and futures to adequately meet all\nrequirements of hedging, might give nearly ideal market conditions.\nOn the other hand, aboHshing deals in options and futures might\nprove the better, but either alternative would seem preferable to\nthe overwrought system in which gambling is mixed with business\nin a most unbusinesslike manner. If laws prohibiting dealing in\nmargins are not practical in a single country, world government\nin market matters may create conditions under which world law\nalong this line may be effective. Our markets are world wide and\nour statistical service is rapidly becoming world wide.\nA weak investigation which does not enter into the problem\nin the most virile and comprehensive way, by failing of results, might\nhelp to entrench the dominating philosophy of the nearly unrestricted gaming pit. Possibly some plan of a national or international commission may be devised which will spend time enough,\nenergy enough, scientific research enough and business sense enough\nto comprehend the essential factors and to advise either that we\ncontinue the present system; that some modified form of \"future\"\nprice making be adopted, or that dealing in options and futures\nbe abolished. In any event the next step needed would seem to be\na most efficient investigation.\nIt is possible, and even probable, that a broader public scheme\nfor quickly gathering and dispatching crop statistics and facts concerning market needs would serve producers, dealers in and consumers of fruits and vegetables as well as those interested in the\n\u00E2\u0080\u00A2non-perishable products. In case of these latter products, no very comprehensive system of statistics has been devised; but even here the\npublic gathering of statistics might prove to be very useful to supplement the very awkward and inefficient system of information now\nserved by private agencies to the growers on the one hand and to\nthe markets on the other.\nUnder the second plan, outlined above, of assembling crop\nreports, the township agents could easily include reports on such perishable crops as strawberries, peaches and canteloupes. The telephone and telegraph could be used to assemble at once the estimates\nof amounts of ripening crops, and to give the information to distant\nmarkets. This information could also go at once to the railways\nto guide them in supplying a sufficient number of refrigerator cars.\nAssociations of producers could also be supplied with information 262\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nas to the markets most needing shipments, as gathered by paid\nagents in those markets, that they might bill their car lots to the\nmost favorable markets or might deflect cars already part way on\ntheir journey, thus avoiding glutted markets and supplying all consumers in the most equitable manner.\nThings world wide in their needs are not easily organized in the\npublic interest. World peace is more needed on account of markets\nthan most people imagine. World government has already been inaugurated. The International Institute of Agriculture at Rome is\nthe first beginnings of an economic department. Even if its protocol or constitution need to be enlarged for that purpose, would\nnot that Institute be the best auspices under which a commission\ncould study world trade? In the meantime, would not national\ncommissions to study international trade practices be a good preliminary step ?\n1\n\u00E2\u0080\u0094'-T-T- r'^-M' IT I '\n_ -\u00E2\u0096\u00A0 . . \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 yS . -.. \u00E2\u0096\u00A0 . BOOK DEPARTMENT\nNOTES.\nd'Anethan, Baroness Albert. Fourteen Years of Diplomatic Life in Japan.\nPp. 471. Price, $4.25. New York: McBride, Nast & Co., 1912.\nBacon, E. M., and Wyman, M. Direct Elections and Law Making by Popular\nVote. Pp. iv, 167. Price, $1.00. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Company,\n1912.\nShort manuals of this sort reach a number of people who would not read a larger\nbook. Fifty pages are devoted to discussing the contrast in theory and working\nbetween the Swiss, the early American, and the later American forms of the\ninitiative and referendum. Unfortunately almost one-half of this space is\ndevoted to general discussion of development which is out of place in a book of\nsuch summary character. The rest of this chapter is almost entirely drawn from\nOberholtzer's volume on \"The Initiative and Referendum in America.\" The\noutline of the spread of direct legislation is clearly drawn.\nThe second and third chapters covering half the book are devoted to the\nrecall and commission government for cities, material not indicated by the\ntitle. The chapter on the recall is summarized from Oberholtzer and Beard and\nShultz's \"Documents on the State-Wide Initiative, Referendum and Recall.\"\nThe discussion of commission government is too brief to leave even an outline\nin the reader's mind. The last chapter and the only one which has claim to\noriginality discusses the degree to which preferential voting has been adopted in\nAmerica and the changes now urged by advanced reformers. In the appendix\nare given some fac-similes of referendum ballots.\nThose who wish a brief review of the field covered will find this book useful.\nFor the student who wishes a thorough account, the volume offers little that is\nnot easily available in standard authorities.\nBalch, William M. Christianity and the Labor Movement. Pp. 108. Price,\n$1.00. Boston: Sherman, French & Co., 1912.\nWe are fond of saying\u00E2\u0080\u0094we of the Church\u00E2\u0080\u0094that labor does not understand the\nChurch, but we are not quite so ready to admit, as certainly we should, that the\nChurch does not understand labor; that there is, in short, mutual misunderstanding.\nIt may be seriously questioned whether labor's unfamiUarity with the Church\nis as great as is the ignorance of the Church regarding labor. The pronouncement\nfour years ago of the Federal Council of Churches of Christ on the Church and\nmodern industry was perhaps the very first notable attempt, by the Church, to\nset forth the common ground and interdependence of organized religion and\norganized labor, and to suggest, rather vaguely, a joint program for advance.\nBut catholic as was that pronouncement and sweeping as were its terms as to the\nbreadth of the Church's sympathy, yet it presented little, if any, of the viewpoint\nof organized labor; in fact, it was not purposed so to do.\n(263) 264\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nDr. Balch in his volume renders a distinct service. Comprehensively, yet\nconcisely; truthfully, yet sympathetically; with adequacy of statement, yet\nwith economy of language, he introduces labor to the Church\u00E2\u0080\u0094and he grounds\nthe roots of labor in the fundamentals of religion. Conversely, the Church is\nmade known to labor.\nThe book is in the best sense practical. The realm of the stars is not invaded\nto garment thought, yet there is felicity of expression throughout. It is a working\nman's book, whether the workman be of the stud}', the shop or the office; and\nit has a direct appeal to all men who are really interested in the vital problems of\nthese days of social and religious readjustment.\nBateson, W. Biological Fact and the Structure of Society. Pp. 34. Price,\n35 cents. New York: Oxford University Press, 1912.\nThis booklet is the Herbert Spencer lecture delivered at The Examination Schools\nat Oxford February 28, 1912, and is an attempt to evaluate the biological aspects\n. of civilization. The argument is the enlargement of the general proposition that\nenvironmental selection of adaptable variations of physiological and psychological\ntypes is that upon which all permanent and stable institutions are founded. It\nis therefore inevitable that the right and safe direction of social progress must be\nbased upon biological observation and experiment. Students of eugenics will\nfind the article stimulating and suggestive.\nBerolzheimer, Fritz. The World's Legal Philosophies. Pp. liv, 490. Boston:\nBoston Book Company, 1912.\nThis volume is the second in the Modern Legal Philosophy Series edited by a\ncommittee of the Association of American Law Schools. The series was instituted\nin response to the seeming need of the legal profession, for instruction in \"the\ntechnic of legal analysis and legal science in general.\" A year was spent in collecting material by the committee of five. Suggestion and advice were given by many\nmasters in leading foreign universities. The result is unquestionably a collection\nof unique character and value. The present volume is a comprehensive, historical\nreview of world philosophies, treated from the special viewpoint of juristic\nthought. No significant theoretical tendency is neglected from that revealed\nin the earliest civilization of the Orient to the generalizations of recent economic,\nsociological and general evolutionary philosophers and schools. The treatment\nis somewhat insular in its emphasis on German thought; but this is so catholic\nand so representative of varying tendencies that one would have great difficulty\nin finding a better outline history of thought than is to be found here. There is\nlittle effort at interpretation; and the almost endless array of topics treated gives\nrise to a tantalizing brevity of treatment in individual instances. But, after all,\nthese are only defects of a comprehensiveness that will stimulate readers to deeper\nresearch.\nBlount, J. H. The American Occupation of the Philippines. Pp. xix, 664.\nPrice, $4.00. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1912.\nBowman, I. Forest Physiography. Pp. xxii, 759. Price, $5.00. New York:\nJohn Wiley & Sons.\njgmsgssl:?-s\u00C2\u00A3 Book^ Department 265\nButler, Nicholas Murray. The International Mind. Pp. 121. Price, 75\ncents. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1912.\nThe five addresses comprised within this book are devoted to the task of teaching\nour American people to \"think internationally,\" even as Washington, Hamilton\nand their colleagues taught their contemporaries to \"think continentally;\" and\nas continental thinking was a prerequisite to the formation of the American\nUnion, so international thinking is a prerequisite to the development of a family\nof nations in which an international judiciary shall take the place of warfare and\nnational armaments in the settlement of disputes between nations.\nThis international thinking is looked to as the basis of an international\npublic opinion which will act as the chief power, moral or physical, in the enforcement of international justice; and it is looked to, also, as the basis of a rational\nframe of mind which will put an end to the hysterical, emotional insanity which\nhas been causing national armaments to increase by leaps and bounds.\nThe need for this international mind is illustrated in these lectures by references to the Anglo-German panic of recent months, and to sundry other ludicrous,\nor tragic international phenomena; the chief burden of teaching it to the world,\nby precept and example, is laid upon the shoulders of the United States of America:\nnoblesse oblige; and its potency in putting an end to the world-old scourge of\nwarfare is argued with all the luminous cogency for which the eloquent author\nof the addresses is so justly famous.\nClark, J. B., and John M. The Control of Trusts. Pp. ix, 202. Price, $1.00.\nNew York: Macmillan Company, 1912.\nThe revised edition of Professor Clark's \"Control of Trusts\" is in the estimation\nof the reviewer a very considerable improvement over the earlier volume.\nBarring chapter iii, which deals principally with tariff revision, and chapter iv,\ndevoted in large measure to railway regulation, the volume contains much that\ndeserves careful consideration by those studying trust regulation. The greater\nportions of the two chapters just mentioned are unnecessary and add little or\nnothing to the really valuable suggestions that are contained in other parts of\nthe book.\nProfessor Clark desires to prevent the crushing of efficient competitors by\nthe trusts (chap. v). He has specified only two of the methods used, i. e., local\nprice cutting and factors' agreements. The fact that these are only two devices\nout of many and that the author has taken no cognizance of the effect of the\nMiles Medical Company decision upon the factor's agreement, does not detract\nfrom the soundness of the general conclusion that if we are to have any competition these methods must be eliminated.\nThe most important chapter is the seventh on Constructive Competition.\nHere the argument is against the legalizing of pools and agreements, price fixing\nand other steps involving a recognition of monopoly as the guiding business\nprinciple. Several constructive suggestions are also offered, among which the\nreviewer found most interesting that permitting the holding company to hold\nstocks for investment only (pp. 150-51). It is felt that Professor Clark's condemnation of the oil, tobacco and powder dissolutions is premature, while the\nnecessity of his proposed commission (p. 175) is seriously questioned. The\nvolume is a strong brief for competition. 266\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nClopper, Edward N. Child Labor in City Streets. Pp. ix, 280. Price, $1.25.\nNew York: Macmillan Company, 1912.\nThe author feels after an earnest and sufficient study of the question, that\nchild labor in the city streets should not only be regulated but should be absolutely\nforbidden. After a discussion of the general problem, and investigation of the\nvarious types of street traders, the effect of street work on the children engaged\nin it and the failure of the attempts to regulate the evil, he reaches the conclusion\nthat absolute prohibition is necessary. The author feels that no real good can\nresult from the continuation of this form of child labor as great harm results to\nthe child. The practicability of having older persons sell newspapers and deliver\nmessages is carefully considered and this solution of the question appears advisable. \"Social workers have returned a true bill against street work by children.\nWhat will the verdict of the people be?\" (p. 158). The material of the subject\nof street trading has been covered and the book contains copious extracts from\nthe reports of investigations and from the opinions of child labor experts. The\nbibliography is complete. The appendices contain copies of the best laws that\nhave been enacted and copies of badges and forms that are being used. The book\nshould become a valuable handbook for all who are interested in the question of\nchild labor and should help remedy the unsatisfactory conditions with which it\ndeals.\nCommission of Conservation, Canada. Sea Fisheries of Eastern Canada.\nPp. 212. Ottawa: Mortimer Company, 1912.\nThe Committee on Fisheries, Game and Fur-Bearing Animals of the Canadian Commission on Conservation has.published this very valuable and interesting volume of papers and discussions, treating of Canada's fisheries, as the\nproceedings of a meeting in Ottawa, June 4 and 5, 1912. Maps and charts of\nthe areas of location and the annual productions are distributed throughout\nthe'volume. While it seems that the fisheries show a marked decline during\nthe last twenty years, the work of the conservation commission will, it is hoped,\nfind the means not only to arrest this decline, but to assure a rapid and continued development from year to year.\nCommittee of the City Clus of Chicago. A Report on Vocational Training in Chicago and in Other Cities. Pp. xiii, 315. Price, $1.50. Chicago:\nCity Club, 1912.\nThe City Club of Chicago has rendered a signal service in this excellent compilation of material on \"applied education.\" The tendency toward vocational\ntraining should receive a great impetus from the sane constructive recommendations which the committee of the City Club has outlined in such great detail.\nAlthough extremely complex, these recommendations may be summarized as\n(1) the establishment of a differentiated curriculum in the seventh and eighth\nyears; (2) a vocational school replacing the present seventh and eighth years\nwhich children may enter at the age of thirteen; (3) an industrial school which\nover-age children may enter at twelve; (4) a highly differentiated high school\nsystem consisting of general technical, commercial, industrial and trade courses\u00E2\u0080\u0094\nthe trade courses open to those who have selected the vocational school instead\nof the seventh and eighth years of the regular course; (s) day continuation classes\nwhich children may enter at fourteen; (6) apprenticeship schools which children\n- -.t~.^^~^r^L^\nHM Book Department 267\nmay enter at sixteen. All of these suggestions are intended to supplement the\nregular course of study at present existing in the schools. The committee has\nprepared a careful diagram, showing the method by which these various departments will be articulated. The report also includes a careful analysis of industrial\nand trade education under both public and private auspices in other cities. The\nwhole work is worthy of the careful perusal of all persons intimately connected\nwith the public educational system.\nDavis, B. M. Agricultural Education in the Public Schools. Pp. vii, 163.\nPrice, $1.00. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1912.\nDealey, J. Q. The Family in its Sociological Aspects. Pp. iv, 137. Price,\n75 cents. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 1912.\nThis little volume is a sane and scientific treatment of the family. Its wide\nreading would serve admirably to counteract the alarmist views so prevalent\nin our day regarding the subject. It is neither comprehensive nor adequate as\na treatment of the subject for the student who desires to obtain a thoroughgoing knowledge, but for the laymen, for whom essentially it is written, it\nis sufficient to demonstrate that the family is a fundamental social institution,\nand while subject to certain changes in ideals because of modern conditions, is\nin no danger whatever of being seriously affected. One finishes the reading of\nthese pages with a wholesome optimism in regard to the future of the family.\nDeploige, S. Le Conftit de la Morale et de la Sociologie (2d ed.). Pp. xvi, 424.\nPrice, 7.50 fr. Paris: F. Alcan, 1912.\nDewey, D. R. Financial History of the United States. Pp. xxxvii, 544. Price,\n$2.00. New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1912.\nThe cordial reception with which earlier editions of this standard work were\nreceived is in itself sufficient evidence of its value. This edition is the fourth\nrevision the third one having appeared in 1907. A chapter entitled \"Financiering under Expansion\" has been added to bring the narrative down to date.\nOne of the most valuable features of the volume is \"Suggestions for Students,\nTeachers and Readers\" and this has been made even more helpful by the addition of new titles and references.\nDilla, Harriette M. The Politics of Michigan. Pp.258. New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1912.\nThe work traces faithfully national political issues within the state in so far as\ntheir fortunes can be arrived at from a study of the Congressional Globe, party conventions and platforms, election statistics, news items and editorial opinions.\nParty leaders stand out clearly in their relation to these issues. State issues are\ncarefully, though briefly, treated. The student of state politics will not find an\nadequate or unified treatment of state history, but he will find much helpful\nwork critically done, an advantage not afforded by most other histories of the\nstate. For the most part citations to sources are adequate. Occasionally,\nstatements are found without indication of sources. Three or four newspapers\nare sometimes regarded as representative of the Democratic party, and the\nDetroit Free Press is cited to prove a statement made of the entire party. The\nbibliography seems to have stated the available sources and to have indicated\ntheir value for the matter in hand. 268\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nDoty, Alvah H. The Mosquito, Its Relation to Disease and Its Extermination.\nPp. 79. New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1912.\nThe author has rendered a real service to the public health movement by the\npopularizing of the scientific knowledge of the means of transmitting malaria\nand yellow fever through the bite of the mosquito. As long as these little pests\nwere regarded merely as sources of discomfort and annoyance they could be\nendured but now that they are known to be disease carriers, they must be\ndestroyed. This little volume by its identification of the dangerous varieties\nand its explanation of the means of their extermination has revealed clearly our\nsocial responsibility. The elimination of these infectious diseases is now a public duty.\nFagan, James 0. The Autobiography of an Individualist. Pp. 290. Price,\n$1.25. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 1912.\nDespite the title, this book is in large part a discussion of railroad problems.\nStarting with his autobiography, the author devotes three chapters to his exciting experiences in Scotland, South America and Africa. He then leaves his\nplot and devotes the rest of the book to criticism of present tendencies in industrial management. Much of the material used has been drawn from previous\nwritings of the author.\nAfter severely criticising present conditions, the conclusion is reached that\nonly through individualism and the removal of all artificial restraint will improvement be secured. The labor unions in particular are sharply criticised.\nThey are accused of forcing the woriringman to sink his industrial personality\nand become a mere automaton. The union is the main opponent of efficiency,\nsays the author. Regulation of labor organizations is ardently advocated.\nDemocracy must \"quietly but firmly place a restraining hand on all organized\nlabor, and in so doing it will give millions of other toilers a greater measure of\nsocial and industrial justice.\"\nThough no attempt at scientific treatment is made, the book is readable\nand throws an interesting light on many present-day problems.\nFloy, Henry. Valuation of Public Utility Properties. Pp. viii, 390. Price,\n$5.00. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1912.\nFoelske, H. E. The Practice of Democracy\u00E2\u0080\u0094Socialism vs. Individualism. Pp.\n73. Milwaukee: C. N. Caspar Company, 1912.\nHigby, C. D. The Government of Pennsylvania and the Nation. Pp. vi, 266.\nPrice, 70 cents. Boston: D. C. Heath & Co., 1912.\nThe author's aim, as set forth in the preface, to place before the students in\nour schools a description of the whole of our government\u00E2\u0080\u0094the part conducted\nby the state, and the part administered by the nation\u00E2\u0080\u0094has been realized in the\ncompletion of this little book on \"The Government of Pennsylvania and the\nNation.\" The first part of the book takes up the local districts, counties and\ncities of Pennsylvania, the powers and duties of each officer thereunder being\nclearly defined. The next few chapters deal primarily with the state, and its\nlegislative, executive and judicial departments. The remainder of\" the work\nis devoted to the national government, and this part lacks none of the illuminat- A\nBook Department 269\ning information characteristic of the preceding portions. In the appendix are\nthe constitutions of Pennsylvania and the United States.\nKeith, A. B. Responsible Government in the Dominions. Pp. lxxiv, 1670.\nPrice, $12.75. New York: Oxford University Press, 1912.\nLowry, E. B., and Lambert, R. J. Himself. Pp. 216. Price, $1.00. Chicago:\nForbes & Co., 1912.\nThis is an admirable presentation. The advocate or teacher of sex hygiene\ncould find no more serviceable summary of vital facts. The reading of such a\nbook could not but lead to a higher practical morality.\nMartin, G. W. (Ed.). Collections of Kansas State Historical Society, 1911-12.\n12th vol. Pp. xxxii, 569. Topeka: State Printing Office, 1912.\nMorse, Edwin W. Causes and Effects in American History. Pp. xxvi, 302.\nPrice, $1.25. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons,' 1912.\nTo tell \"the story of the origin and development of the nation\" in two hundred\nand ninety small octavo pages is Mr. Morse's task. He believes that details\nhave obscured our history and that the important thing is to bring \"economic\nand intellectual influences\" into sharp relief. Emphasis is placed not on political\nevolution, but upon the important parts which intellectual and religious freedom,\nindustrial and commercial activity and even literature and the fine arts have\nplayed in shaping the life of the people. For a book which is evidently intended\nfor readers interested primarily in problems of .the present day the devotion of\none-half the space to the period before 1812 seems unfortunate. The chapters\nare interestingly written but of necessity are little more than snap-shots of phases\nof our national life.\nMyers, A. C. (Ed.). Narratives of Early Pennsylvania, West New Jersey and\nDelaware, 1680-1707. Pp. xiv, 476. Price, $3.00. New York: Chas.\nScribner's Sons, 1912.\nOgburn, Wm. F. Progress and Uniformity in Child Labor Legislation. Pp. 215.\nNew York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1912.\nThis is an interesting attempt to apply statistical methods to the field of comparative legislation. The author states that \"the results of this inquiry are of importance to sociology in showing the possibilities of measuring social pressure\nby standard deviations and of interpretating their significance\" (p. 23). \"It is\nhoped that this subject will be of practical value, especially to legislators, who it\nis believed, can better frame their laws on child labor after a thorough knowledge\nof the status of child labor laws in the various states\" (p. 18). The child labor\nlaws from 1879-1909 are studied. Occupations, exemptions, age limits, hours\nof labor, educational requirements, working papers, and penalties and inspection\nare the headings under which the subject is treated. The ninety tables add much\n. to the value of the text. The author decides from his historical study that there\nhas been great- progress in the past thirty years, especially in the raising of the\nage limit at which children may start work and the notable decrease in the number\nof hours that they are permitted to work. As a study in a new method of presenting social material, the work is of real value. It is almost impossible to keep the 270\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nmaterial sufficiently up-to-date, to make it of use to legislators. Tnis study does\nnot attempt to analyze the laws passed during the last three years.\nPartridge, G. E. The Genetic Philosophy of Education. Pp. xv, 401. Price,\n$1.50. New York: Sturgis and Walton Company, 1912.\nThis book is a restatement of the views of President G. Stanley Hall, whose\nwritings are in too scattered a form to be available to the general reader. It\nis a valuable addition to the Hterature of social psychology and education, written\nso clearly and simply that anyone can understand it. A real want is thus supplied\nin a way that can be heartily recommended. Dr. Hall is too important a man to\nbe overlooked by workers in social science or education. Genetic education and\ndynamic economics are after all but two views of the same current changes.\nPratt, Sereno S. The Work of Wall Street. Pp. xxi, 440. Price, $1.75. New\nYork: D. Appleton & Co., 1912.\nThis is a revision of the work pubhshed in 1903. Much old matter has been\nomitted and a considerable amount of new material inserted which considerably\nincreases the size of the volume. Several entirely new chapters have been added\nand the report of the Hughes Commission has been added as an appendix. In\nall particulars the book has been thoroughly revised and brought down to date.\nThe- Princess. Traveller's Tales. Pp. xii, 296. Price, $2.00. New York:\nG. P. Putnam's Sons, 1912.\nThese \"Traveller's Tales \" are given in a series of letters by an American woman,\ntelling of her joumeyings in Belgium, Germany, England, Scotland and Wales.\nThey are charmingly written with a noticeable lack of the mere long descriptions\nthat usually characterize books of travel. Besides having a cultured mind well\nversed in the art, Hterature and history of the countries, she had, perhaps because\nof this, a deep appreciation of the meaning of what she saw and an understanding\nof the people. The book abounds in many stories and legends that make history\nHve again. .\nAlthough the letters are in a way deHghtfuUy personal, they are hardly\nintimate enough to be addressed to a \"Dearest Beloved\" nor do \"Your Most\nDevoted Princess\" and other fanciful terms quite agree with the idea of the\nwriter we get from the letters. The' tales would have been better simply as\naccounts of her travels rather than as letters which too evidently were never\nwritten as such but are only a form of Hterary expression.\nRollins, Montgomery. Tables of Bond Values (19th ed.). Boston: The\nAuthor, 1912.\nRosenau, M. J. The Milk Question. Pp. xiv, 309. Price, $2.00. Boston:\nHoughton, Mifflin Company, 1912.\nAmong aH modern problems few possess more various relations than the milk\nquestion. Dr. Rosenau has compiled the eight Harris Lectures deHvered at\nNorthwestern University so as. to make a most satisfactory discussion of the\nmilk question in its sanitary, chemical, dietetic, legal, hygienic, economic and\nsocial aspects. He has maintained an attitude of utmost fairness toward the\nfarmer, the middleman, and the consumer. With broad vision he has presented\na masterly, sane, constructive program for the solution of the various' questions Book Department 271\nconnected with the main theme. The book is rich in facts, strong in demonstrations, and able in rational discussion. The final solution of the milk problem\nrequires in his estimation the mutual cooperation of the farmer, the consumer,\nthe middleman, the health officer, the transportation agent and the legislator.\nHis views regarding pasteurization deserve particular attention at this time when\npasteurized milk is receiving constant discussion. Inasmuch as the definition of\npasteurization lacks completeness and misconceptions and confusion are rife,\nhe advocates that aU pasteurised milk should be properly labeled with a degree\nof heat, a period of time, and the date on which it was subjected to the process.\nHe is an advocate of pasteurization and regards this as one part of the solution\nof the problem. In his estimation pasteurization makes no change in either the\nnourishment or the digestibiHty of the milk, but he does not beHeve that the\nprocess should be utilized for the purpose of milk preservation or for the purpose\nof redeeming dirty milk.\nFor the purpose of securing clean milk, inspection of the farm, the dairy, the\ntransportation and places of retail sale are essential. To render milk safe from\ndiseases, as tuberculosis, typhoid fever, diphtheria and the like, pasteurization is\nessential. The fuU solution of the milk question, therefore, requires inspection,\nsupervision and pasteurization.\nRoss, E. A. Changing America. Pp. 236. Price, $1.20. New York: Century Company, 1912.\nThis volume is made up of a series of addresses and articles interpretative of\nvarious phases of contemporary life. The last four chapters, on The Middle\nWest, appeared in the Century. These afford a telHng picture of the race stuff\nof which the middle west is made, of its democratic tendencies, its educational\ngrowth, its social and its cultural quaHties. The earHer chapters are misceUa-\nneous, ranging from such general themes as The Outlook for Plain Folk and The\nWorld-Wide Advance of Democracy to such specific topics as Women in Industry\nand The Increase of Divorce. AH show the keenness of observation, the f aciHty\nof expression and the aphoristic quaHty characteristic of Professor Ross's style and\nmethod.\nShelton, W. A. The Lakes-to-the-Gulf Deep Waterway. Pp. x, 133. Chicago:\nUniversity of Chicago Press, 1912.\nThe promoters of a new railroad, in order to secure capital from judicious investors,\nare compeUed to furnish evidence of a prospective traffic sufficient to make the\n. proposed enterprise a paying investment. Mr. Shelton's monograph is a chaUenge\nto the \"promoters\" of the Lakes-to-the-Gulf Deep Waterway to give similar\nproof that the investment of a large amount of pubHc funds in their transportation scheme would be justified. A study of the statistics of the present traffic\non the Mississippi River, of existing rail and water rates, and of the difficulties\nof navigation that would be encountered in the proposed waterway, lead him to\nthe conclusion that from the standpoint of traffic at least, the enterprise would\nbe a colossal failure.\nSpeer, Robert E. South American Problems. Pp. xi, 270. Price, 75 cents.\n' New York: Student Volunteer Movement, 1912.\nMr. Speer deals not with the poHtical and economic problems of the southern 272\nThe Annals of the American Academy\ncontinent but, except in two brief introductory chapters, with problems of education and reHgion; in fact afl but three chapters are devoted to a criticism of the\npoHcies of the Roman CathoHc Church. The author holds the Church responsible\nfor aU South American shortcomings \"by virtue of its claim of South America\nas a Roman CathoHc continent\" (p. 169). Protestant and CathoHc churches\nin Nortff America would not welcome the application of a similar-test.\nPp.\n518. Price,\nStoddart, W. H. B. The Mind and Its Disorders (2d Ed.).\n$4.00. Phfladelphia: P. Blakiston's Sons, 1912.\nA neurological work weU adapted to inform social workers interested in the care\nand treatment of the insane.\nTodd, Mabel L. Tripoli, the Mysterious. Pp. xv, 214. Price, $2.00. Boston:\nSmaH, Maynard & Co., 1912.\nBecause of the Turko-ItaHan war the subject Tripoli is timely. The'conflict\nplays no important part in the book though the introduction gives a description\nof the first clash of arms. Mrs. Todd's object is rather to let us see how TripoU\nfives and how it impresses the chance visitor. A touch of history is given in the\nchapter discussing our conflict with the Barbary powers in the' early nineteenth\ncentury, but the chief attention is given to affairs of the present day. The\ncountry's inhabitants of many colors, the primitive occupations and more primitive schools, the consulates of the foreign powers, the ruins of the Roman occupation, the recent solar ecHpses, the Hves of the TripoHtan women, are aH passed'\nin review. The most interesting chapters of the book describe two Mohammedan\nweddings and a Jewish-Arab wedding,aU marked by curious formaHst ceremonies.\nNo attempt is made to write a scientific treatise, but one who reads this book\nwiH find it an engaging account of the obvious features of north African Ufe.\nVerhoeff, Mary. The Kentucky Mountains\u00E2\u0080\u0094Transportation and Commerce,\n1760-1911. Pp. xifi, 208. Price, $5.00. Louisville: John P. Morton &\nCo., Ltd.\nWhetham, W. C. D., and CD. An Introduction to Eugenics. Pp. vfii, 66.\nPrice, 35 cents. New York: MacmiUan Company, 1912.\nThis Httle volume is calculated better to create popular interest in the subject\nof Eugenics than to serve as a scientific introduction. The first chapter is devoted\nto a brief history of the Eugenics movement with particular reference to the work\nof Galton and Mendel. Chapter two is devoted to a discussion of Racial QuaHties\nwhich are most easfly susceptible of examination in the Hght of modern theories\nof heredity, such as susceptibiHty to disease, the inheritance of mental defects\nand of ability. Methods and materials of research are treated in the third\nchapter with a brief discussion of results obtained. Chapter four, on The Construction of Society, lays special emphasis upon the biological element in the history of mankind and upon the effects of, environment as a selective agency.\nFor readers unfamiHar with the material of the science there is much to\nstimulate interest and to create a desire for further inquiry. For those already\ninterested the treatment wiH seem fragmentary and disconnected. The bibHog-\nraphy contained in the appendix is utterly insufficient to give any adequate\nknowledge of sources. Book Department 273\nWhitin, E. Stagg. Penal Servitude. Pp. xi, 162. Price, $1.50. New York:\nNational Committee on Prison Labor, 1912.\nIn this book the author has popularized the findings of the National Committee\non Prison Labor. A report which would otherwise be read only by a narrow\ncircle of speciahsts is thus made interesting and accessible to a wide group of\nreaders. It is illustrated with photographs of prisons and of prison labor under\na variety of conditions.\nThe material is organized in seven parts or general divisions as foUows: I.\nThe Economic Problem; II. The PoHtical Problem; III. The Institution; IV.\nEmployment; V. The Market; VI. The Educational Problems; VII. Methods\nof Reform.\nThe justification of the resolution of the committee \"declaring itseh opposed\nto the contract system of prison labor and to every other system which exploits\nhis labor to the detriment of the prisoner \" is shown by vivid pictures of conditions\nwherever exploiting systems exist. The reader is not wearied by citations of\nfigures but is permitted to hear conversations and look into the institutions.\nIt is an intensely human presentation. One is impressed as he reads with the lack\nof foresight and of genuine concern in the welfare of the prisoners. Even former\nprison reforms were directed chiefly toward the improvement of physical conditions. It is to the problems involved in '' Penal Servitude,\" \" the last surviving\nvestige of the old slave system\" and its dehumanizing effects upon these unfortunate wards of the state, that the contents of the book is devoted and its message\nis indeed a valuable one.\nWihl, Oscar M. Electoral Reform. Pp. 32. Price, 6d. London: P. S. King\n& Son, 1912.\nWilcox, D. F. Government by All the People. Pp. xi, 324. Price, $1.50. New\nYork: MacmiHan Company, 1912.\nREVIEWS\nBraithwaite, William C. The Beginnings of Quakerism. Pp. xUv, 542.\nPrice, $4.00. New York: MacmiHan Company, 1912.\nThis volume is one of a comprehensive series on the origin and growth of Quakerism, under the general editorship of Dr. Rufus M. Jones. After a penetrating\nintroduction on the Quaker type of mystical rehgion, contributed by the general\neditor, the author opens his work with chapters on the Puritan Revolution and\nthe early Hfe of George Fox. The body of the book carries the history from the\npioneer work of 1649 to the close of the Restoration year, 1660. Other volumes\nare announced to continue the relation.\nThere have been some good brief sketches of early Quakerism written\nrecently, but the only work comparable to the present volume both in quaHty\nand comprehensiveness is that by WilHam SeweU, pubhshed in Dutch in 1717\nand in EngUsh five years later. SeweU's history was carefuUy compiled and is\nstiU useful. The advantages of Braithwaite's volume over it are the foUowing:\nSomewhat more space than SeweU gave to the same period; a nearer freedom 274\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nfrom sectarian bias; a better perspective of Quaker and other history and hence a\nbetter background and truer proportions; a much fuller coUection of source\nmaterials as a basis; the modern mechanical make-up of reference notes,\nbibhography, a fuH index, and helpful maps.\nThe bibUography should be fuUer than it is. It contains a good description\nof manuscript materials but no description or classification of the vast amount\nof printed matter.\nFor the most part the author seems to have maintained a good degree of\ncritical impartiafity. If, however, his judgments of the fanatical outbreaks\namong early Friends seem almost too charitable at times, he at least gives frankly\nthe necessary facts for the formation by the reader of an independent judgment.\nThe wonder wiH grow upon most readers that this zealous movement, constantly\nbordering at the first on hysteria, should yet have developed the bafiast needful\nto steady it at length and bring it to a great mission.\nAnother interesting fact is that George Fox, the founder, discovered great\nrehgious groups already prepared for his message and that many of them came\nbodily into the new Quaker movement. It is weU known that the Commonwealth\nperiod in England was a swarming time for mystical sects, yet few have reahzed\nthe wholesale way in which the early Quaker leaders gathered in these swarms.\nAs a somewhat simUar process took place in the American colonies it would seem\nthat Friends have been successful largely as a \"convincing\" rather than as an\n\" evangehzing \" body. In the early days they reached people who were already\nintensely reUgious and merely won them to a certain type of rehgious thought.\nPerhaps this accounts partiaHy for their decline in numbers when sectarian lines\nbecame more stable.\nThis volume is a real addition to the Hterature of rehgious history. It would\nseem to justify George Fox's prediction in his testamentary papers that \"all\nthe passages and travels and sufferings of Friends in the beginning of the spreading of Truth, which I have kept together, wiH make a fine history.\"\nR. W. Kelsey.\nHaverford, Pa.,\nBryce, James. South America, Observations and Impressions. Pp. 611. Price,\n$2.50. New York: MacmiHan Company, 1912.\nThe announcement that Mr. Bryce was writing a book on South America aroused\nthe keenest interest amongst students of Latin-American affairs. The breadth\nof view and depth of insight with which he has treated questions of poHtical and\nhistorical interest gave assurance that this would be a notable work. This\nexpectation has been in large measure justified, although one cannot but feel\nsome disappointment that the author has devoted so much of the volume to\ndescriptive matter such as is to be found in so many books of travel deahng with\nSouth America. The first eleven chapters are of this nature. The concluding\nchapters deaUng with The Rise of New Nations, The Relations of Races in South\nAmerica, The Two Americas, and the Relation of South America to Europe,\nThe Conditions of Political Life in Spanish-American Republics and Some Reflections and Forecasts are the reaUy notable chapters of the work. The fact that in Book Department 275\na trip of four months the author was able to secure so thorough a grasp of Latin-\nAmerican conditions is a tribute to his remarkable powers of observation.\nThroughout the work the author takes a healthily optimistic view of the\nfuture of these republics. He does not close his eyes to the serious racial problems\nthat confront them, and has no hesitancy in emphasizing their lack of preparation for democratic government. Mr. Bryce is one of the few writers on Latin-\nAmerican affairs who has emphasized the influence of environmental conditions\nas distinct from racial antecedents. He shows that the distinction between\nTeutonic and Latin, which is usuaUy used as a means of explaining the lack of\ncapacity of the people of the Latin-American countries for seff-government, has\nHttle or no meaning, and in reahty furnishes no explanation of their present\ncondition. No opportunity is lost to impress upon the reader the necessity of\nstudying the colonial development of the Latin-American peoples and their history since emancipation to understand their present condition rather than to\ndepend upon generahzations as to racial traits. Only through such a study can\nwe hope to secure any real comprehension of the present conditions and possi-\nbiHties of the people of these countries.\n.The author also points out the danger of attempting generalizations appH-\ncable to Latin-America as a whole. He shows clearly how diverse the national\ntypes are, and that these diversities are likely to increase rather than diminish.\nEach country demands separate treatment in much the same way as we would\ngive separate treatment to Spain, Italy and France in deahng with any of the\nLatin peoples of Europe.\nL. S. Rowe.\nUniversity of Pennsylvania.\nCarola Woerishoffer, Her Life and Work. Bryn Mawr, Pa.: By the Class of 1907,\nBryn Mawr CoUege, 1912.\nThis Httle volume is a document of extraordinary human interest. It is the\nstory, briefly told, of a young woman, rich, able, vigorous, a Bryn Mawr graduate,\nwho, without the sUghtest consciousness of heroism1, much less of martyrdom,\nHteraUy gave her Ufe for the cause of social justice. Brought up in an environment that was charged with the spirit of service and under the speU of family\ntraditions of courageous achievement and fearless independence, Carola Woerishoffer was doubtless prepared in an unusual manner for the life she Hved, but\nthose who knew her weU could never think of her merely as the product of outside\nforces. One of her distinguishing characteristics was her independence of conyen-\ntionahty. She abhorred sham. In everything she sought reahty and she claimed\nthe right to form her own opinions. In an unpretentious way and yet with firm\nresolution, she seems early to have formed the purpose of taking a share in the\nwork of advancing the cause of the wage-workers. In coUege her courses were\nchosen with this purpose in view. Gifted with a keen mind, abounding health,\nand a zest for living, she threw herself with eagerness into whatever she undertook,\nwhether it was study, athletics (in which she exceUed), or later, social investigation. '\n276\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nGraduating from Bryn Mawr in 1907, Miss Woerishoffer offered herself\nto Greenwich House, a social settlement on the lower west side of New York.\nShe came, she said, \"to learn and to help.\" Rich as she was, she would have\nscorned the thought of obtaining recognition because of her wealth. She did not\nseek a prominent place in social work. She wanted to know conditions at first\nhand and then to find the place where she could make her life teU for the largest\nusefulness. It was this spirit that led her to work for thirteen weeks during a\nhot summer as an unskilled hand in pubhc laundries. When it came to practical\nmeasures for the improvement of social conditions, her interest lay with those\nefforts that were aimed at causes, or that prepared the way for dealing radicaHy\nwith conditions. It was this that influenced her to come to the rescue of the\nCongestion Exhibit, when its success was imperiUed by lack of funds. Her\nfaith in trade unionism and her passion for justice were manifested when, during\nthe shirtwaist makers' strike in New York she met the need of adequate real\nestate security for bail bonds, in order to prevent the commitment of hundreds\nof young girls to jafl for indefinite periods. But she valued wealth only as a means\nof service. We are told that her joy was great when she was appointed to a position as investigator in the State Bureau of Industries and Immigration, at a\nsalary of $1,200. At last \"she was worth something in her own right!\"\nIt was whHe investigating labor camps in her official capacity that Miss\nWoerishoffer lost her life. Fatigued by days of strenuous work, she was driving\nher car along a sHppery road, when the wheels skidded and the car went over an\nembankment. The next morning she died from the injuries she had received.\nThe chief of the bureau, referring in her annual report to the work of this heroic\nyoung woman, says: \"The state has had no enroUed soldier who has given his\nlife more utterly in the field of battle than she in the cause in which she beHeved.\"\nThe Httle book under review is a coUection of articles, including editorials\nfrom prominent journals and an account of Miss Woerishoffer's Ufe pubHshed\nin the American Magazine by Ida TarbeH, together with addresses delivered at\na memorial meeting at Greenwich House. It is pubHshed by the members of\nMiss Woerishoffer's class at Bryn Mawr. It would be weU if this book could have\na wider reading than is likely to be the case because of the manner of its publi-\ncation. It is the story of a life which expressed what Miss TarbeH caHs the Revolt\nof the Young Rich\u00E2\u0080\u0094\"a questioning of the fortunes laid in their hands, a resentment at the chance for a life-fight of their own taken away, rising passion of pain\nand indignation at meaningless inequaHties and sufferings.\" If it could be read\nby many young persons looking out upon life at the threshold of their careers it\nwould help to give meaning and direction to the part they are to play.\nGaylord S. White.\nNew York.\nRailroad Finance. Pp. xv, 463. New\nCleveland, F. A., and Powell, F. W.\nYork: D. Appleton & Co., 1912.\nThis book describes the method of financing railroads in the United States.\nThe historic side of railway promotion and capitaHzation is ably and interestingly\nevolved in the first two chapters. The various aspects of financing are then Book Department 277\ntreated: finances of construction, equipment, maintenance and additions and\nbetterments, operation, and management. Two chapters are devoted to the\nmanagement and distribution of the surplus, and accounts and statistics. The\nremaining chapters deal with insolvency, receivership, reorganization, consoHda-\ntion and over-capitahzation.\nThe book is replete with Hlustrations of actual transactions. The chapter\ndevoted to the accounting aspect of railroad finance contains the recent rulings\nof the Interstate Commerce Commission regarding the handling of the various\naccounts. This chapter would be more nearly complete and of more value to the\ninvestor and student, if it were explained how to read the balance sheet and the\nincome accounts, and if iHustrations of its appHcation were inserted. The narration of abuses and extreme variations in the accounting systems and methods of\nthe railroads in their earher history is particularly interesting compared with\nthe uniformity now practiced as required by law.\nA splendid treatment of over-capitahzation is given in the last chapter.\nConsiderable has been written of the gross over-capitaHzation of the railroads,\nparticularly in the early stages of raflway development, but the authors probably\nstate it correctly when they say: \"The common experience has been to have\ninadequate capital for conducting and developing the business of transportation.\"\nThere is undoubtedly but Httle, if any, stockwatering in the issue of new capital\nby the railroads at the present time, but in the past there was much. The authors\nexplain the many ways by which it was accompHshed. So many schemes were\ndevised to meet varying conditions and circumstances that one cannot but admire\nthe ingenuity of the early railroad financiers. At the close of the book an exceHent\nbibhography of the subject is given.\nNo original theories or new ideas are promulgated in this book. It is rather\na compHation of material with the non-essentials and the superfluous omitted.\nAs a text book for coUege use it is exceHent and those interested in corporation\nand railroad finance wiU find it profitable reading.\nFrank Henry Schrenk.\nUniversity of Pennsylvania.\nCutting, R. Fulton. The Church and Society. Pp. ix, 225. Price, $1.25.\nNew York: MacmiUan Company, 1912,\nThere is an exceUent quotation in this book, which it is worth everyone's while\nto ponder on. \"We hear much said,\" it goes, \"about consistency of thought.\nIn my opinion it is a monstrous humbug to caU it a moral virtue, because all\nsocial progress is the result of changes of opinion.\" It seems to me the quotation\ncorrectly delineates two classes of people who are found to-day in our churches.\nThe one class, to maintain consistency, are gripping on to old and worn-out doctrines and ideas the propagation of which in present society has no place. Then\nthere is a class who are dropping the old ideas as useless or not adapted to the\npresent and are trying to find in what way they can most fuUy embody the\nspiritual and ethical ideals of Christianity in present-day civiHzation. One of the\nmost significant movements among our churches is the awakening of interest in\nsocial affairs. Many churches are beginning to grope around for a means to help 278\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nsolve the problems of vice, corruption, chUd welfare, and the like. The present\nbook, which embodies the Kennedy Lectures for 1912 in the New York School\nof Philanthrophy, is an attempt to show how the Church can be, and is being,\na force in social upHft. Mr. Cutting, after outUning Christianity's contributions\nto civifization, takes up in turn its relation to the pubHc school, the poHce, the\npubHc health, the chUdren and its possible influence in the formulation of pubhc\nopinion. The book shows what has been done by churches in helping to solve\nthese problems in some locahties, and points the way in which other churches can\naccomphsh the same results. He shows with great force that the situation is\npregnant with possibifities for our churches. Their methods must be that of active\nand sympathetic cooperation with present agencies after a careful and dispassionate study of the facts. Put in Mr. Cutting's own words: \"The Church with\nher vast opportunities for education has a major duty to fulfil. When she comes\nto appreciate that there are seasons when it is more Christian to use mothers'\nmeetings for instruction in the care of infants than for expounding justification\nby faith, that Big Brothers may often be better church builders than 'chUd\nevangehsts' and that 'pleasant Sunday evenings' for chUdren may make more\nChristians than the study of catechisms, she wiH interpret 'suffer Httle chUdren\nto come unto me' in 'our own tongue wherein we were born.'\" The latter part\nof the book is devoted to a Hst of cases in which churches have actuaUy contributed to the solution of social problems /The book as a whole, and this latter\npart in particular, will be an invaluable aid to any church organization or church\nworker who is interested in taking part in social welfare work.\nBruce D. Mudgett.\nUniversity of Pennsylvania.\nEllis, Havelock. The Task of Social Hygiene. Pp. xv, 414. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 1912.\nThis latest book by Havelock EUis adds another volume to the interesting Hterature that is to-day appearing on the subject of eugenics. To no smaU degree\nthe importance of the book Hes in the bringing into strong relief of the contrast\nbetween two distinct points of views,\u00E2\u0080\u0094that of eugenics with that of euthenics,\nor the relative importance of heredity and environment. If for no other reason\nthe book is valuable for sanely recognizing a distinct and legitimate field of study\nfor each of these sciences. Although temperate in his attitude toward each science,\nEUis takes the position that in the evolution of a method in social hygiene,\nemphasis has been laid in turn upon sanitation, upon factory legislation and upon\neducation, all of which in themselves have been incomplete; and that we are\nnow forced to take up the final link in the series, puericulture, or, as it has lately\nbeen caUed, eugenics.\nThe first and last chapters in the book are among the very best, for they\nbring out this contrast exceUently. Social hygiene is here held to include the\nstudy of both environment and heredity. The two chapters dealing with The\nWar against War and The Problem of an International Language have, at\nbest, only a very indirect connection with the subject of social hygiene, and it\nmay weU be wondered why they were included in the present book. Even less Book Department 279\nconnection does there seem to be between chapter vu on ReHgion and the ChUd\nand the new science of heredity which he wants to emphasize. Taken by itself\nthe chapter is one of the most scathing and fundamental criticisms yet written on\nthe education of the chUd before the age of puberty. The chapter on The\nSignificance of a Falling Birth Rate is thoroughly representative of the modern\nviewpoint that quahty is of more importance than quantity, and contains within\nthe smaU space of sixty pages one of the best'discussions that have appeared on\nthe subject. It is one of the best things in the book.\nThe book should be in the Hbrary of anyone who wants to know the latest\nword in the great controversy of modern times concerning the relative influence\nof heredity and environment.\nBruce D. Mudgett.\nUniversity of Pennsylvania.\nFleming, W. L. General W. T. Sherman as College President. Pp. 399. Price,\n$5.00. Cleveland: Arthur H. Clark Company, 1912.\nThe reputation of General WiUiam Tecumseh Sherman cannot but be enhanced by\nthe intimate revelation of himself contained in these letters, for, although written\nat a time when even prophecy of his future greatness was impossible, they stiU\nshow the same character and convictions which appear to the present generation\nthrough his official reports and personal correspondence as general. He is the\nideal superintendent of the new Louisiana State MUitary School, a tremendously\nhard worker, cooUy inteUectual, calm and dignified, stern in disciphne, ever ready\nto repress insurrection among the cadets in any form, but a fair friend to aU.\nWhen he leaves his post to side with the North in the great sectional struggle,\nthe state officials of Louisiana treat him with every courtesy and pay him the\nhighest compliments for the efficiency of his services to the state. In politics\nhe is neutral, perhaps even slightly favoring the South on the slavery issue, so\nlong as the overt act of secession has not been committed. He is sorry that his\nbrother, John Sherman, as a member of Congress, had signed his name in approval\nof the famous \"Helper\" book, he begs him to renounce the irrepressible conflict\nideas, and recommends concessions to the border states; although mUdly suggesting some amehoration of the conditions of slavery in Louisiana, he stiU in\ngeneral openly sympathizes with the southern position on this question. But\nsecession introduces into the problem the new elements of lawlessness and anarchy,\nwhich to Sherman constitute a chaUenge to organized government to defend\nitself, and in the face of such a chaUenge he instinctively chooses the side of\ngovernment. The spirit of disorder in 1860 was to Sherman the most portentous\nsign on the pohtical horizon.\nThis reflects the attitude of the strictly mUitary man, unbiased by pohtics.\nAlthough he visited Ohio during the exciting poHtical contest of 1860, Sherman\ntook no part in poHtics, refused to vote, and in general often expressed his distrust\nof the poHtical leaders of the land.\nStudents of economic conditions will be interested in a statement of Braxton\nBragg, in a letter to Sherman (p. 80), that the net profits of the former's plantation\nfor 1859 were $30,000 on a total investment of $145,000.\nYale University. Emerson D. Fite. 280\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nGerson, V., and Deardorff, Neva R. Studies in the History of English Commerce\nin the Tudor Period. Pp. xi, 344. New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1912.\nThe three studies in this volume are doctoral dissertations by students in the\nUniversity of Pennsylvania. Two essays are concerned with the Muscovy Company: \"The Organization and Early History of the Muscovy Company,\" by\nDr. Gerson; \"English Trading Expeditions into Asia under the Authority of\nthe Muscovy Company (1557-1581),\" by Dr. Vaughn. The third study is devoted\nto the Eastland Company; \"EngHsh Trade in the Baltic during the Reign of\nElizabeth,\" by Dr. Neva Ruth Deardorff. Research extended in each case to\nthe EngHsh archives, but the records of the Muscovy Company were destroyed\nby the great fire of London and there are apparently few Mss. of substantial\nvalue that have not been printed. Miss Deardorff brings to her study new material from th* Record Office which furnishes a complete account of negotiations\nby agents of the Eastland Company for trading rights at Elbing.\nDr. Gerson's study of the Muscovy Company is necessarily based on documents that have been in print for some years, so that there is Httle that is new in\nhis narrative. In discussion, he raises the question of the proper classification\nof the company, and here further qualification is necessary. Evidence is adduced\nto support the contention that the company was reaUy a joint-stock and not a\nregulated company. But Dr. Gerson considers only the organization of trade,\nand fails to recognize that conditions of admission to membership were equaUy,\nif not more, important. The organization of the company clearly involved some\nanomaHes, and, in practice, it presented some features of each type so that no\nclassification can be entirely satisfactory.\nDr. Vaughn has furnished an interesting and thoughtful account of the vain\nattempts to estabhsh trade with Persia by way of Russia.\nThe study of the Eastland trade by Miss Deardorff is perhaps the most\nsignificant, as it deals with the reorganization of the Baltic trade. The character\nof the Baltic trade, the formation of the Eastland Company, and the establishment at Elbing are her topics. The treatment is suggestive throughout and adds\nan interesting chapter to the general history of the Baltic trade.\n. Abbott Payson Usher.\nCornell University.\nGrice. J. Watson. National and Local Finance. Pp. xxiv, 404. Price, 10s.\n6d. London: P. S. King & Son.\nStruggles over financial control have always been the center of the long-continued\ncontests for popular government, but the control over the details of expenditure\nis a problem the importance of which is often overlooked. Even if the general\nmachinery of appropriations is controHed by the people, true popular government\nis not attained if the representatives are not able to exercise an effective check\non extravagance and a rational direction of the fines in which the money appropriated shaU be expended. Increasingly important too are the problems of\nfinancial control in their relation to local government. The growth of social\nexperiments in the smaUer units has given local finance an importance far beyond\nwhat it has ever had before. How to insure that the proper balance shaU be\n\"^ Book Department 281\nfound between central and local governmental activities and how to exercise\nsupervision of local finances without Hmiting too greatly local independence and\ninitiative are capital though often unappreciated problems of modern nations.\nMr. Grice gives us a review of the expedients adopted in England, France, Belgium and Prussia with the object of placing at our command the lessons of the\nexperience through which these countries have passed.\n. France, Germany and Belgium have adopted what the author describes as\nthe bureaucratic system by which local administration is chiefly in the hands of\nspeciaUsts responsible to the various executive departments of the central government. The local representative councUs have narrowly limited functions and their\ninterference with administration is exceptional. At the other extreme stands the\nUnited States where cities are, broadly speaking, autonomous in financial matters\nexcept as bound by constitutional limitations on debt. There is here no administrative hierarchy, no national or even state system in control of education, sanitation and communication. The result the author beheves is \"the anarchy of\nlocal autonomy,\"\nEngland, since 1833, has foUowed a compromise poficy. This has developed\nthrough the \"grant in aid\" which introduced the principle of supervision from\nabove by inducement rather than by mandatory law. The author is apparently\nnot aware that the use of this legislative expedient has already made marked\nprogress in the United States under the various forms of \"state aid\" famUiar\nto Americans. EngHsh experience, he maintains, shows this pohcy only partiaUy\nsuccessful and demonstrates the advantage of further extension of administrative supervision to insure that the amount of aid given shaU be proportioned\nto the degree of efficiency obtained.\nThe author gives in the latter part of the book a discussion of the practice\nof dividing governmental services into two classes \"beneficial\" and \"onerous.\"\nHe shows how this theoreticaUy perfect adjustment is confronted by great practical difficulties since almost no service faUs exclusively within one class and therefore the degree of central supervision justified becomes a matter of degree only,\ndepending upon the peculiar circumstances of the individual case.\nThe complex nature of Mr. Grice's subject matter makes his book hard\nreading. In addition there are occasional digressions into detaUs and comparisons which destroy clearness of perspective but an understanding of the material\ndiscussed is so essential to good government that students of economics and\npofitics wiH find this important book an unusual mine of needed information.\nChester Lloyd Jones.\nUniversity of Wisconsin.\nHyde, Grant M. Newspaper Reporting and Correspondence. Pp. xi, 338. Price,\n$1.50. New York: D. Appleton & Co., 1912.\nThe author devotes his 338 pages almost exclusively to what is known in the\nnewspaper world as \"the story\"\u00E2\u0080\u0094more particularly, to the \"writing-up\" of\nthe material gathered by the reporter on his \"beat\" or \"assignment.\" Only\none short chapter is given to Gathering the News, the author evidently being of\nthe beHef that \"a nose for news\" is either present as a natural endowment or 282 The Annals of the American Academy\naffliction'' or can best be acquired by exercise. This gives his book at once a\nclass-room air and something of the appearance of a considerable to-do about a\nsmaU matter. One might think with some reason that a sharp young person\nwith the disposition to do newspaper work might be reHed upon to pick up the\ntechnique of writing out his material just as the author thinks he may be reHed\nupon to learn the technique of news-gathering. But Mr. Hyde is evidently of\nanother opinion, and as a result he has written in aU, seventeen chapters, with\ntwo appendices, mainly concerning themselves with \"stories,\" reports of speeches,\ncourt news, interviews, etc. He carries out his plan with great particularity and\npresents his studies and suggestions with force and clarity. The great shortcoming of the book, however, is that, while it proceeds from a seat of learning\nand authority of the highest rank, it scarcely says ten words either to offset\nwhat is deplorable (if not worse) in our newspaper methods, or, at least, to bring\nthem under criticism. It contains next to nothing to promote in the student\nintelligent seh-assertion; its standards of fitness are the standards of fitness in\nnewspaper practice at the moment, both ethical and theoretical. This is scarcely\nteaching; it is mere marking time.\nAnd throughout the 338 pages, not a single helpful word about first principles!\nIn newspaperdom first principles (and last principles) are circulation, because\nwithout the honey of circulation the advertising fly is not to be caught. In that,\nand back of it, Hes nine-tenths of the technique of newspaper-work. Mr. Hyde\ndoes not bring it out; and leaving it hidden, he leaves real help out of his book.\nStiU it is only fair to re-affirm that what he does do by way of academicaUy discussing the practice of the moment, he does weU and painstakingly.\nT. D. O'Bolger.\nUniversity of Pennsylvania.\nLeuba, James H. A Psychological Study of Religion. Pp. xiv, 371. Price,\n$2.00. New York: MacmiUan Company, 1912.\nThis psychology of rehgious life strives to reach \"what is fundamental and\nessential in human nature\" (p. ix). Refigion is defined in the foUowing way:\n\"What belong exclusively to reHgion are not the impulses, the desires, and\nyearnings . . . but merely the conceptions themselves\" (p. 8). \"If the\nterms 'superhuman' and 'supernatural' have any relevancy in reHgion, it is\nmerely with reference to the gods and their action on man, should they have an\nexistence outside the mind of the beHever\" (p. 9). \"ReHgion begins when the\nmystery has been given some solution, naive or critical, making possible practical\nrelations with the 'ultimate.' ... If men have 'fived by reHgion,' it is not\nbecause they have recognized the mystery, but rather because they have, in their\nuncritical purposive way, transcended the mystery, and have posited a solution\nof which they were able to make practical use\" (p. 28). Thus, the author seems\nto find the value of reHgion to humanity not in its emotional inspirations, nor\nyet in its influence upon behavior, but in what is reaUy a philosophy of the mysterious, though recognizing that, \"the reason for the existence of reHgion is not\nthe objective truth of its conceptions, but its biological value\" (p. 53). No Book Department 283\ndoubt it has a biological value, if we admit with him, that the \"reUgious Ufe\n. . . includes the whole man\" (p. 52); that \"in its objective aspects, active\nreHgion consists ... of attitudes, practices, rites, ceremonies, institutions;\nin its subjective aspect, it consists of desires, emotions, and ideas, instigating and\naccompanying these objective manifestations.\" If this is not the whole man,\nthe remainder is a negfigible quantity.\nThere is an attempt to show that magic and reHgion are entirely separate,\nneither developing out of the other; \"reHgion is social and beneficial; magic is\ndominantly individual and often evU\" (p. 176). Of course if the definitions are\nclearly drawn to start with, the phenomena wUl fit them; but the more important\nquestion which he treats too tersely, is whether this may not merely express two\naspects of fundamentaUy Hke phenomena. He differs from Frazer, however, in\nholding magic to be something different from primitive science and not even\nclosely related to it. The chapter on Morahty and ReHgion touches a very rich\nethnological field but it can scarcely be said that the author has made the. most\nof it. He denies the right of theology to isolate itself from psychology and\nphUosophy on the ground of its being immediate knowledge whose very presence\nin consciousness carries its own conviction of truth and thinks it as amenable\nto critical psychological analyses and estimates, as is any other phase of con-\nsciousnes.\nW. P. Wallis.\nUniversity of Pennsylvania.\nMunroe, James P. New Demands in Education. Pp. vfii, 312. Price, $1.25.\nNew York: Doubleday, Page & Co., 1912.\nThis is an inteUigent discussion of many of the current problems of American\neducation. It regards boys and girls under an inteUigent scheme of education as\nthe nation's greatest resource. To reaHze such an Utopian condition, the author\nmakes eight demands: smaU classes with more or less individual teaching, physical development and care for health, interesting and stimulating studies and teaching, the training of the senses, the development of strong character, social training, vocational guidance, and wide opportunities in the school for individual\neffort. He makes a plea for the development of individuaHty and initiative on\nthe part of both teacher and pupU, and is espedaUy bitter in his condemnation\nof the despotism of ignorant school boards. American education is aimless.\nIt has lost its one-time definite aim, and the present broad, general, cultural idea\nlacks a real understanding of what education should be.\nThe pubHc school exists to develop social and personal power. It is just as\nimportant for it to train boys and girls to play an important part in community\nHfe as it is to develop individual skiU and intellectual acumen. Society demands\nof pubHc school product, \"health, character, honesty, truth telling, willingness\nto work, readiness to comprehend, quickness of adaptation, fertility of resource\nand vision. These results come not from set lessons, but from self-discipline, self-\nrehance and seH-knowledge. These quaHties the pubHc school must develop.\"\nThe discussion of discipline is admirable. The day of the rod has passed and 284\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nin too many cases has left a coaxing, pampering, disgusting way of dealing with\nchUdren. The profession of teaching has found it difficult to create a self-discipline \"which wiH whip him soundly every time he disobeys wise laws which he\nis capable of understanding.\"\nThe author joins in the weU-nigh universal criticism of the American high\nschool. The blame, so the author thinks, rests upon the university which has\ncommandeered it as a feeder and upon the pubhc which has faUed to grapple with\nthe situation. The high school apes the university and fails to serve the evident\nneeds of the community. It wiU faU until it becomes independent and is a powerful social force.\nA. H. Yoder.\nWhitewater, Wis.\nNitobe, Inazo. The Japanese Nation: Its Land, Its People and Its Life, With\nSpecial Consideration of Its Relations with the United States. Pp. xiv, 334.\nPrice, $1.50. New York: G- p- Putnam's Sons, 1912.\nThese eleven chapters based on lectures delivered during the past academic\nyear at various American universities, from the Atlantic to the Pacific, aim to\npromote a just understanding of the attitude of Japan toward the United States.\nThis laudable undertaking in behalf of international peace has now passed from\nthe charge of the universities to that of the Carnegie Peace Endowment.\nWith discrimination coupled with wise and hopeful suggestion, are treated\nthe character of the land and of the people, their history, reHgion and morals,\nthe present economic and educational conditions of the country, and particularly\nits past and present relations with the United States. The chapters on Economic\nConditions and on Japan as a Colonizer, appeal especiaUy to readers of The\nAnnals.\nThe 4,223 islands which, according to the Tribune Almanac, compose the\nempire, are reduced by official statistics to 518, those only being counted whose\ncircumference equals one ri, or two and a half mUes. Their whole extent is less\nby some 10,000 square mUes than that of the State of Cahfornia, and only about\nfifteen per cent is arable, the country being so largely mountainous. \"Yet from\nthis fimited area our peasants produce enough to feed and clothe themselves and\nthenation and to furnish more than o'ne-half of the silk worn by American ladies\"\n(p. 210). Agriculture engages 60 per cent of the people, and 70 per cent of this\nclass own and work farms of less than two and a half acres. Twelve is \"a very\nrespectable holding,\" and twenty-five acres make the owner \"a local.magnate\"\n(p. 212). \"As for manufacturing and other industrial enterprises, I am glad to\nsay these are growing steadily and on the whole sanely\" (p. 222). As yet there\nis \"an unfortunate absence of iron,\" \"lack of skiUed labor,\" and a \"predominance\nof female labor;\" \"chUd labor is disproportionately large\" (pp. 234-5). \"Careful-experiments in cotton miUs have shown that 300 Japanese operatives-are\nrequired where 200 English are sufficient and where 100 Americans do the same\nwork. As yet, there seems to be no immediate fear of an industrial Yellow\nPeril!\" (p\u00E2\u0080\u009E 224). \"Though as many as 98 per cent of the children of school age\n(6 to 14 years), are actuaUy attending schools, a considerable portion of these Book Department 285\ndo so just long enough to foUow the letter of the compulsory education law\"\n(pp. 224-5).\n\"The conditions of labor in the factories are far from satisfactory\u00E2\u0080\u0094in many\nof them they are positively disgraceful.'' Yet,'' as the new law forbids the employment of chUdren under nine in factories, and the working of women at nights, a\nstarting point is provided for a better condition of things \" (p. 224).\nFor a population half as large as that of the United States, yet penned up\nin limits no greater than those of the State of Colorado, colonization is a necessity.\nEmigration to Formosa, Yezo, Korea and Manchuria is encouraged by the\ngovernment that restricts voluntarily emigration to the United States. The\ninteresting account of Japanese success in controlling and improving refractory\nFormosa contrasts with the meagre notice of Japanese action in Korea and Manchuria. In regard to these latter, the author aUeges foreign misrepresentation\nand deprecates premature criticism. -\nWhile the author of \"Bushido,\" cannot be charged with any lack of admiration for what is distinctively Japanese, he shows himself in the book before us\nas indeed \"shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace.\" In temperament,\nabUity and education, and in intimate knowledge of western thought and of America in particular, no Japanese is better fitted to appeal to the judgment and good\nfeeling of thinking Americans. If the Chauvinists of neither country can be\nexpected to think and Hsten, the great majority of weU-meaning people on both\nsides of the Pacific may find in this book ample ground for maintaining inviolate\nthe cordial relations that have existed between the two countries ever since our\nCommodore Perry saUed up Yedo Bay.\nWm. A. Houghton.\nYonkers, N. Y.\nParkhurst, F. A. Applied Methods of Scientific Management. Pp. xfi, 325.\nPrice, $2.00. New York: John WUey & Sons, 1912; Addresses and Discussions at the Conference on Scientific Management, held October 12, 13 and\n14,1911. Pp. xi, 388. Price, $2.50. Hanover.'N. H.: Tuck School, Dartmouth College, 1912.\nSince Frederick W. Taylor began his workin scientific management and efficiency,\nthe output of Hterature upon these subjects has steadUy increased. Two of the\nlatest pubhcations are Parkhurst's \" AppHed Methods of Scientific Management\"\nand the Proceedings of the first conference of the Amos Tuck School of Administration and Finance of Dartmouth CoUege.\nThe first of these volumes treats of the appHcation of scientific methods\nin the case of the Ferracute Machine Company of Bridgeton, New Jersey. These\nmethods are particularly adapted to a business employing one hundred people\nor more. In a general way the work resembles Arnold's \"Factory Manager.\"\nBut where Arnold in the space of his work examined in some detaU the organization of several plants, Mr. Parkhurst has devoted an entire volume to the organization of one. As might therefore be anticipated, the work gives an exceedingly\nminute and thorough treatment of the methods of the company in question. The 286\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nportions, of the volume that are devoted to \"routing work through the shops,\npayment of labor,\" and \"time studies\" are especiaUy interesting.\nThe book contains a lengthy appendix \"Organization Record of the Ferra-\ncute Machine Company.\" This lays down exactly what the duties and respon-\nsibiUties of each member of the organization are. It goes, therefore, without\nsaying, that that company employs the Taylor and not the Emerson system.\nThe Tuck School Conference was divided into six sessions; the first devoted\nto Principles of Scientific Management; the second, to Scientific Management\nand the Laborer; the third, to Scientific Management and the Manager; the\nfourth, to the AppHcabiHty of Scientific Management in Certain Industries;\nthe fifth, to Scientific Management and Government, and the sixth, to Phases\nof Scientific Management. Some of the leading speciahsts of the country in this\nfield attended the conference, among them F. W. Taylor, Harrington Emerson\nand H. L. Gantt.\nAs in nearly aU conferences, much was said that was elementary in character\nor that had Httle bearing upon the subject in hand. But it is fair to say that\nless of this was in evidence at the Tuck Conference than is usuaUy the case.\nSeveral of the speeches were unusuaHy interesting and informative, whUe some\nof the discussion developed many points that are not commonplaces to the students\nof the subject.\nBoth volumes it may be said, in conclusion, are interesting and valuable\ncontributions to the extant literature on \"Scientific Management.\"\nWtlliam S. Stevens.\nColumbia University.\nRees, J. D. Current Political Problems. Pp. xi, 423. Price, $1.40. New York:\nLongmans, Green_& Co, 1912.\nThe \"Current PoHtical Problems\" are those before the British pubHc at the present time, but the real subject of the work is the attitude of the poHtical parties\ntowards these problems. The book is written primarily for the British voter,\nand assumes, with regard to most of the topics treated, a knowledge on the part\nof the reader, such as might be gained from the casual perusal of newspapers.\nThe provisions of the Lloyd George budget and of the Declaration of London,\nfor example, receive Httle explanation, whUe other topics less weU-known or less\nrecently the subject of general discussion, such as foreign affairs and education,\nare given more exposition. On the whole, however, the tone is distinctly argumentative, and, since the author frankly acknowledges inclinations \"in the Unionist direction\" (p. v), the book becomes mainly a justification for the attitude of\nthe Unionist party. The author endeavors to remedy this one-sidedness by a\nsummary statement at the end of each chapter of arguments both for and against\nthe poHcies considered. These fairly deserve the author's claim of impartiafity,\nthough they can scarcely be regarded as systematic or thorough.\nThe contents cover so wide a range that it is impossible to give them an\nadequate survey here, but some of the more significant views may be noted.\nThe keynote of the treatment of the army and navy is their inadequacy to protect the empire and also defend England from German attack. The chapters\n\u00E2\u0096\u00A0\u00E2\u0096\u00A0 Book Department 287\non India, the colonies and foreign affairs .are largely expository, but through them\nruns the note of opposition to the anti-imperial attitude of the Radical-SociaHst-\nLabour group. This party is, in fact, the red rag throughout the book, and later\nsociafism comes in for a chapter of condemnation to itseh. On the constitutional\nquestion, the franchise, apportionment of representation, Irish home rule, education, disestabHshment and taxation, the weU-known Unionist views are fortified\nby argument, and an earnest plea for tariff reform is not omitted. With regard to\nsocial reform the author insists that the Unionist party should take a positive\nattitude, but discreetly leaves the reader to guess what the concrete poHcies should\nbe. The book is of value, therefore, chiefly for its statement of the principles\nof the Unionist party as a member of the party sees them and for the summaries\nof certain contemporary poHtical issues.\nW. E. Lunt.\nCornell University.\nVineberg, S. Provincial and Local Taxation in Canada* Pp. 171. New York:\nLongmans, Green & Co ., 1912.\nThis contribution to our somewhat undeveloped stock of Hterature on fiscal affairs\nis not only timely but extremely valuable. In this epoch of increasing interest\nin taxation, especially in our American states and local governmental areas, it\nis necessary, at aU times, to keep in touch with the practical experiences of other\nlocafities, especiaUy when such locafities have been more progressive and more\nindependent than is the case in this country. ' Canadian experiences, of whatever\nnature, Ulustrate valuable lessons in statesmanship and local administration.\nThe author of this contribution on the revenue problems of Canada has combined\nthree very essential factors of analysis in his review. The historical background\nis clearly presented; the practical results of definite experiences are specificaUy\nshown; and in addition the author has given us the benefit of his own personal\ncriticisms and suggestions. Though the latter factor may be subject to some\ndisagreement in particular cases, its existence in this volume helps rather than\nhinders, for the reader is forced to give a more critical attention to the concrete\nsubject matter. Another point of value is his very clear and lucid division of\ntopics, thereby making it possible for the work to be used as a handbook of\nreference. In particular, his analysis of the faUure of the personal property tax,\nthe business assessment, and taxes on real estate are to be strongly commended.\nThe absence of vague technicafities is a virtue in itself. The copious citations and\nthe supplementary appendix help to emphasize the soHd and scientific character\nof the investigation. GeneraUy speaking, its chief merit would seem to He in\nthe fact that the author has apparently had few preconceived ideas in regard to\nthe merits or demerits of any system or method, as theoreticaUy apphed. Each\ntopic is analyzed on a basis of the natural and necessary relation between the\nsocial and economic conditions of the locality and the actual administration of\nthe method cited. It would be weU if more of the many monographs on taxation\nand kindred subjects could be as clearly and efficiently presented.\nC. Linn Seiler.\nUniversity of Pennsylvania. 288\nThe Annals of the American Academy\nWinter, Nevin 0. Chile and Her People of To-day. Pp. xii, 411. Price, $3.00.\nBoston: L. C. Page & Co., 1912.\nThis book aims to give a comprehensive survey of what constitutes modern Chile.\nA great many topics, more or less diverse, demand attention, and the author\napparently has found some trouble in weaving them together. There are many\nplaces where the discussion is decidedly choppy reading.\nAfter an introductory chapter on the country as a whole, the author wedges\nin a chapter on the west coast of South America. The application of this matter\nto Chile and her people is not always obvious. Valparaiso, Santiago, the southern\nagricultural zone, Tierra del Fuego, the Andine CordUlera, the mineral zone of\nnorthern Chile, the people, the Araucanians, education and arts, transportation,\nreHgious influences, three chapters on history, and a summary of present conditions and future possibifities, are the heads under which the narrative is subdivided.\nMistakes and misleading statements occur everywhere. Examples may\nbe cited. \"Fine bays and harbors\" (p. vi, preface) are certainly not conspicuous\nalong the coast for 1,500 mUes south of Arica. The rest of the coast is of Httle\nor no consequence anyway. \" It is said that the foreign population (of Valparaiso)\nalmost equals the natives in numbers\" (p. 50). The latest census (1907) gives\nValparaiso, natives 146,000; foreigners, 13,000. \"Talca has plenty of rainfaU\"\n(p. 94). The irrigation ditches about Talca, and the meteorological records giving\na mean annual rainfaU of seventeen inches with an average of forty rainy days\nper year, do not support this statement. Constitucion is at the mouth of the\nRio Maule, not the \"River Talcahuano\" (p. 103). It is very doubtful whether\nthe primeval forest \"extended along the coast as far as Valparaiso\" (p. 115).\nA rainfaU of sixteen inches yearly, and limited largely to the winter, wUl not\nsupport a forest in the latitude of Valparaiso. A glimpse of the lumber yards at\nthe railroad stations from PUlanlelbun southward creates the impression that\nthe important lumber industry\" is not \"stiU awaiting development\" (p. 116).\nThe province of Cautin alone has two score sawmiUs. ChUean Patagonia can\nnever \"exceed in fertility and wealth the broad leagues of rich plain between the\nAndes and the Atlantic\" (p. 119). The approximate southern limit of known\nnitrate lands is south of Taltal and not \"near Antofagasta\" (p. 181). The nitrate\noficinas refine only a part of their iodine not \"to keep up the price\" (p. 184),\nbut because the so-caUed iodine trust aUots each oficina its annual share, and\nno more than this can be disposed of. The British is not the \"most numerous\nnationafity other than Spanish\" (p. 208) that has entered Chile. The census of\n1907 gives: ItaHans, 13,000; Germans, 10,700; British, 9,800. The gold peso\nhas a fixed value of thirty-six cents United Sates currency (18 "Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. XLV [whole no. 134]

The papers in this publication were collected and edited by Ellery C. Stowell.

Catalogue record includes contents."@en . "Books"@en . "F5011_A51"@en . "10.14288/1.0056209"@en . "English"@en . "Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library"@en . "Philadelphia : American Academy of Political and Social Science"@en . "Rare Books and Special Collections"@en . "These images are provided for research and reference use only. Written permission to publish, copy or otherwise use these images must be obtained from Rare Books & Special Collections http://www.library.ubc.ca/spcoll/"@en . "University of British Columbia. Library. Rare Books and Special Collections. F5011 .A51"@en . "Canada"@en . "Canada--Economic conditions"@en . "Canadian national problems"@en . "Text"@en . ""@en .