Mr. F. D. MONK.

Before the Orders of the Day are called, I would ask my hon.

friend the Minister of the Interior if he would lay on the table of the House the ten years' contract of the 28th November, 1904, between the Crown and the North Atlantic Trading Company of Amsterdam, Holland, with reference to immigration, and to which my hon. friend alluded the other day when the estimates of his department were under discussion.

Mr. OLIVER.

I would prefer to let my hon. friend examine the papers himself, and then I will be willing to abide by his judgment as to whether they should be laid on the table.

Mr. URIAH WILSON.

I have read this contract and made some extracts from it, and I do not think there is anything in it which the general public ought not to be made aware of. I think the contract ought to be made public. It is a contract that I think the government ought not have made. I understood the minister the other night to say that if any member of the House desired to have it laid on the table he would bring It down. I desire to have it laid on the table.

Mr. A. K. MACLEAN.

Before the Orders of the Day are called, I desire to bring to the attention of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries a matter which is a subject of complaint among the fishermen of Nova Scotia, particularly those dwelling in the county which I represent. The matter I refer to is well expressed in the issue of the Halifax ' Chronicle ' of the 19th instant, by a correspondent resident in Lunenburg.

Mr. SPEAKER.

I assume the hon. member (Mr. A. K. Maclean) intends to conclude with a motion.

Mr. A. K. MACLEAN.

This correspondence, after referring to the success of the fishermen in that constituency, concludes as follows :

The most of these fish have been caught off Cape North, and the fishermen are complaining bitterly that there are no cutters in that section to protect them. In many cases Americans were fishing within two miles of the shore, and also getting bait privileges not allowed them by treaty. They also say that American vessels .threw great quantities of small fish away, which are ruinous to the fishing grounds, besides being wanton waste.

This expresses the complaint of many of the fishermen of my county ; and I feel sure, from the correspondence which I have received from many persons able to speak upon this matter, that the statements made by this correspondent are practically correct, namely, that on portions of the' Nova Scotia coast, near Cape North, it has been the practice, during the past month or so, for American fishermen to prosecute their business within territorial waters. I merely Mr. MONK.

wish to mention this to tlie minister so that in future some measures may be taken to protect our interests by the presence there of some of the cutters. I also wish to say that it is the practice of American fishermen to purchase bait supplies on the Magdalen Islands. I know that under the treaty of 1818 the Americans were permitted to take fish, but whether that gave them the liberty of going ashore and purchasing bait supplies from the residents of the islands is, I think, an open question. However, I am not prepared to express an opinion upon it one way or the other ; I would simply ask the Minister of Marine and Fisheries to be good enough to look into this matter and ascertain whether the treaty of 1818 does give the American fishermen a right to laud upon the shores of the Magdalen Islands and purchase supplies. It is a matter of great importance to my own constituency at least, and I think to Nova Scotia generally. The protection of bait supplies is as important as the protection of the fisheries. I desire that the American fishermen should have no furtner privileges allowed them to purchase bait supplies than the treaty absolutely gives them. I move the adjournment -of the House.

Hon. H. R. PREFONTAINE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries).

I thank the bon. gentleman (Mr. A. K. Maclean) for having brought this matter to the attention of the department. I may say that, with the few cruisers under the control of the Department of Marine and Fisheries, it is impossible to cover this large territory and make the protection as effective as we would like. The work is very extensive, and from the reports that I have received in the department it has been done pretty effectively. Up to the 1st of June I think that over 600 nets have been confiscated from Americans fishing and poaching in Canadian waters. The work is done as effectively as it can be done under the circumstances, but if there is some neglect I will certainly look into it and see that a remedy is provided. As regards the Americans getting their supplies from the Magdalen Islands, this is a new question that I am not ready to answer at the present moment, but I will look into it and try to satisfy the hon. gentleman on that point.

Hon. GEORGE E. FOSTER.

Has the hon. Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Fisher) anything to present to the House in reference to the Japan treaty?

Hon. SYDNEY FISHER (Minister of Agriculture).

Mr. Speaker, iii reply to the question raised by the hon. member for North Toronto (Mr. Foster) I have been asked to make a statement in regard to the trade relations between this country and Japan and in regard to certain differences in the tariff of that country towards Canada

and other countries. I must premise with an explanation saying that in the year 1891 Great Britain made a commercial treaty with Japan to which treaty the self-governing colonies were privileged to adhere if they saw fit and these colonies were given two' years in which to adhere to the treaty. The expiry of the two years occurred on the 10th July, 1890, three days after the present Prime Minister was sworn into office. When this government came into office we found a recommunication from the imperial authorities asking whether Canada would like to adhere to the Japanese treaty. It was some little time before we could take the matter up for discussion or investigation. The time had really expired, but we did consider the matter and in view of the difficulties which we were then foreseeing in regard to commercial treaties between the mother country and foreign countries which contained favoured nation clauses, clauses which might hamper Canada in her commercial dealings, and also in view of the fact that at that time our people generally classed the Japanese and Chinese together in regard to their entering into Canada and their relationships with us as a labouring class in our country, the government thought it was better for us not to adhere to the treaty. Some little time afterwards, and especially at the time that I was delegated to go to Japan in connection with the exhibition there, i made a careful study of the commercial relations between Canada and Japan, and I found what had not been, I think, thoroughly understood in this country before even by those In office, and yet Is not understood by the people of the country at large. The Japanese govermeut have treaties with four commercial nations, Great Britain. Germany, Austro-Hungary and France. By these treaties Japan accords to each of these countries special reduced duties on special specified articles, not a general reduction, but special specified duties on special articles. Each of these treaties contains a most favoured nation clause.

Is that the treaty of 1894?

Mr. FISHER.

Yes. Each of these treaties contains most favoured nation clauses. These other treaties were negotiated within a short time of the ratification of the treaty with Great Britain. They were all concluded within a very short time of each other and we may group them so far as time and their characteristics are concerned. The consequence of the most favoured nation clause is that each of these countries obtains the greatest advantage which is given to any one of them by the specific section of each treaty. In addition to that Japan has commercial treaties of a general character with, I think, seventeen other countries, including practically all the commercial nations of the world, and in each of

these treaties, while there is no specified reduction of the duty on any specified article, there is a most favoured nation clause with the result that practically Japan is giving to nearly all the commercial nations of the world, either under these special conventions or under their general treaties, the lowest duty which she gives to any country on certain specified articles and only on these certain specified articles. The list of these articles is not a very large one, and it includes chiefly manufactured articles having been made out at the instance of those great manufacturing countries, Great Britain, Germany, Austro-Hungary and France. It does, however, include some articles besides manufactured goods In which we in Canada might enjoy a trade with Japan if we had the same advantages.

I may say here in a general way that the difference between the reduced duty and the general duty is as two to three ; that is the reduced duties in a general way are about two-thirds of the general duties and in many instances they are 10 per cent or thereabouts ad valorem in comparison with about 15 per cent ad valorem of a general duty.

Mr. SAM. HUGHES.

Is there not something in connection with the patent laws of the two countries? For instance, a person from the United States gets more favoured treatment for his patent and the manufacturer of his patent gets more favoured treatment for the articles which he manufactures than if they came from Canada. Is there not something of that kind?

Mr. FISHER.

There is also a clause in the treaty to which I will allude later on after having dealt with the customs matter. I am speaking of the customs part of the treaty alone. As Canada has not adhered to this treaty and as the United States especially has one of the commercial treaties with Japan our goods in a general way

Mr. FOSTER.

Not one of the special

treaties?

Mr. FISHER.

No, but one of the general treaties containing the most favoured nation clause and consequently the United States has all the advantages for her goods going into Japan that any of the special treaties give and the best advantages which any of them give. The result is, that, comparing the treatment of our goods with American goods in the Japanese market on this particular list of articles and only on this particular list of articles, Canadian goods have to pay, roughly speaking, an average of 15 per cent while American goods only pay, roughly speaking, an average of 10 per cent, which is the duty collected on German and other goods.