Washington on the 24th
January, 1866, and that they remain there till the 24th February, on
which day they report that after many days' discussion they have failed
to do anything, and that the Reciprocity Treaty is finally at an end.
"Our Government having done nothing, the Provinces, it would appear,
had, at the last moment, to send 'delegates' themselves to negociate; a
mode of procedure altogether very unlike the action of 1854.
"The following papers give a resume of the discussion : -
"WASHINGTON,
"February 7th, 1866.
"'SIR,
"'We have the honour to inform Your Excellency that our negociations
for the renewal of Reciprocal Trade with the United States have
terminated unsuccessfully. You have been informed from time to time of
our proceedings, but we propose briefly to recapitulate them.
"'On our arrival here, after consultation with Your Excellency, we
addressed ourselves with your sanction to the Secretary of the
Treasury, and we were by him put in communication with the Committee of
Ways and Means of the House of Representatives. After repeated
interviews with them, and on ascertaining that no renewal or extension
of the existing treaty would be made by the American authorities, but
that whatever was done must be by legislation, we submitted as the
basis upon which we desired arrangements to be made the enclosed paper
(marked A).
"'In reply we received the Memorandum from the Committee, of which a
copy is enclosed (B). And finding after discussion that no important
modifications in their views could be obtained, and that we were
required to consider their proposition as a whole, we felt ourselves
under the necessity of declining it, which was done by the Memorandum
also enclosed (C).
"'It is proper to explain the grounds of our final action.
"'It will be observed that the most important provisions of the
expiring treaty, relating to the free interchange of the products of
the two countries, were entirely set aside, and that the duties
proposed to be levied were almost prohibitory in their character. The
principal object for our entering into negociations was therefore
unattainable, and we had only to consider whether the minor points were
such as to make it desirable for us to enter into specific engagements.
"'These points are three in number.
"'With regard to the first - the proposed mutual use of the waters of
Lake Michigan and the St. Lawrence - we considered that the present
arrangements were sufficient, and that the common interests of both
countries would prevent their disturbance. We were not prepared to
yield the right of interference in the imposition of tolls upon our
canals. We believed, moreover, that the privilege allowed the United
States of navigating the waters of the St. Lawrence was very much more
than an equivalent for our use of Lake Michigan.
