"They and their attorneys claim that in carrying freights between American points 'the Canadian Railroads have conformed to the letter and spirit of the Inter-State Act as rigidly as have their American competitors.' But inasmuch as that act requires no duty whatever from the roads wholly in Canada, and no duty from their American connections, except to publish their through rates, the absurdity of this claim is at once apparent. No one in his right mind can successfully contend for a moment that the Great Trunk or the Canadian Pacific pays any more attention to the Inter-State Commerce Act in Canada, than if it were so much waste paper. They are perfectly free to violate every one of its provisions, from the first paragraph to the last, and, as a matter of fact, its only effect, so far as they are concerned, is to make it all the easier for them to cheat and deceive, if not to actually pick the pockets of their American rivals, who are bound by the law and subject to the surveillance of the Commissioners and the punishment of the courts.
"It the Canadian railways were not subsidized and supported by the Dominion Government, if they were not an essential part of the machinery used for binding the British empire together, and in case of need to transport armies and military munitions against our frontier; if they were not free from our local and general laws, and also free to do all the things which have been pointed out, and, in short, were not daily doing them to our detriment and injury, we should have no cause of complaint against them. But so long as the facts remain as they are, so long as those railroads run through a foreign country and are controlled by aliens, under foreign laws, and for purposes which, to say the least, are foreign to us and hostile to our permanent national interests, it can be regarded as no more than prudent if we shut them out of our transit traffic along our northern border, just as we shut foreign ships out of our coasting trade.
"The great republic, in the words of Prince Bismarck, 'fears nothing but God.' It has no apprehension for its safety, and but little for its peace from its neighbors of the Dominion; but it should not forget that the Dominion has an area of 3,500,000 square miles and a population of about 5,000,000 souls, and is backed up by the whole British empire, upon whose possessions it is the Englishman's boast that 'the sun never sets,' that 'her drum beat encircles the world,' that 'her ships fill every sea,' and that her population is not less than 300,000,000 souls. It should not forget that it has had difficulties before with that universal bully, and will probably have them again; it should not forget that it has, out of its abundance and good-nature, nurtured and fostered the British bantling on our borders, enriched its railroads, patronized its canals, granted it the right of free transit through our territories, enriched its shopkeepers, and generally treated it with amiable liberality and indifference. Now that the subject has become of enough importance to be considered, Congress should not forget to act in accordance with its own ideas of interest and duty, even if Canada should 'retaliate.' We have had reciprocity enough, such as it has been; now let us try what virtue there is in insisting upon our right to manage our own affairs in our own way, while leaving the Dominion and the other dependencies of the British crown (if there are any others) in North America to manage their own in a similar way. We have played second fiddle long enough. Let the British Government spend just as much money as it pleases for fortifications; let it subsidize and support as many railroads as it thinks necessary to tie the British empire together; let it open and improve one or more of its (Canadian) seaports, and let it retaliate just as and when it pleases. But let it do all these things without our help or connivance; and then, if in God's Providence the Canadian Dominions do not come otherwise under the sway and the uses of the Union, when a great emergency arises which seems to demand it, we shall go and take them."
CHAPTER IV.
RETALIATION.
During the period from 1885 to 1888 the ill feeling growing out of Canada's treatment of the fisheries question increased; and began to assume proportions which indicated a possible outbreak of hostilities between the two countries.
A temporary arrangement was entered into between the then American Secretary of State, Mr. Bayard, of Delaware, and the British Minister; and President Cleveland recommended the appointment of a commission to negotiate a new treaty. Congress, however, refused to authorize such a commission, but in March, 1887, passed a joint resolution authorizing the President in case vessels of the United States were, or then lately had been denied or abridged in the rights secured to them by treaty or law; or any rights secured by Canada to the most favored nations, whether vessels licensed for trading or other vessels, or have been unjustly vexed, to close our ports to vessels of the British Dominion of North America, "and also to deny entry into any port or place of the United States of fresh fish or salt fish, or any other product of said Dominion, or other goods coming from said Dominion to the United States."
President Cleveland, however, did not avail himself of the powers granted by this resolution; but being apparently desirous of securing a permanent settlement of the question by a new treaty, he appointed three commissioners to meet an equal number appointed on behalf of Great Britain, notwithstanding the fact that Congress had expressly disapproved of such a settlement. The commissioners, thus appointed, recommended a treaty, which was in August, 1888, rejected by the United States Senate, by a strict party vote—the Republicans still having control of that body.
Probably, the Republican Senators were largely influenced in their action, by the fact that a Presidential election was then pending; and Mr. Cleveland being a candidate for re-election, they were unwilling that his administration should have the prestige which might accompany the successful settlement of this great controversy.
Whatever their motives may have been, the ultimate results of their narrow-minded partisanship—as will be seen in the sequel—were most disastrous to the country. For the first time in its history, the Senate had discussed this treaty in open session. Diplomatic discussions of this kind had previously always taken place in executive session, with closed doors. But a movement had been made to supercede what some demagogues of that day called the "Star Chamber" system of executive sessions, and this treaty happening to come up for discussion at the time when this agitation was at its height, the Senate, by a close vote, decided that the discussion of it should be held with open doors. Much partisan feeling was exhibited on both sides during the debates. The Republicans took very strong ground against the treaty; claiming that it surrendered valuable rights which had always been conceded to the United States; and gravely charged the President and Secretary Bayard with being desirous of fostering British interests, at the expense of their own countrymen. The Republican press throughout the country took up this cry; the President was roundly denounced as an English sympathizer; and the rejection of the treaty by the Senate was hailed by these party organs as a well-deserved rebuke to a President and a Secretary of State who were willing to make such disgraceful concessions to England.