Mr. PIKE. I have another letter from several gentlemen, known to me as gentlemen of high character and intelligence, who are engaged in this business. They say: “The duty on dry fish is entirely too low and il passedwillthrow the wholccod lisheryiuto the hauds of onrlprovincial ncighhors. “his 1can becaught in the Provinces 2 dollars perquintal cheaperthan we can catch them, and we want about that amouut of protectioninsome shape." I have other letters of the same purport. They all show that it is an absolute necessity to receive some protection in order to carry on their business, otherwise they say they cannot comete with a people living in proximity to the fis ieries and running the race of competition wi a light weight of taxation. We do not wish to see these people driven across the line for the purpose of escaping taxation. No doubt they can go, but they willgo with the greatest reluctance. They are not a character of men who can readily change their ur suits. They have education in this as oters in mechanical and professional pursuits. They were born in this kind of pursuit, and they have followeditfor alivelihoo and must continueto follow it or suffer from want. Under these circumstances, the question whether we should look to our own interests or the interests of these Provinces should be readily decided. Why should congress endeavor to protect the interests of the provinces instead of the interests of these men? In there anything in their history for the past half a dozen years which should induce us to l do it? I do not desire to excite any prejudioe I in this House; but the matter would, be only i half presented did we not take into consideration the character of these 2 parties, did we I not remember that on the one side we have I. 1population loyal to the Government. If that means anything in those days, if it be creditableto have stood by the Government when it needed assistance, if there be anything in that fact. let me say these men have contributed of their substance freely, and furnished their full quota to the war. I ask the House, while I taking this into consideration, also to bear in. mind the additional fact that the war was prolonged and the services of more men were remdered necessary by the conduct of the people I you propose to take care of. Some of) their ports were the rendezvous of blockade runners and iratical cruisers upon our commerce. Halifax, the headquarters of provincial fish ermen, was also headquarters for depredatorl upon our interests. It is too soon yet to forget l the Chesapeake or the Howqua. I am amicably disposed toward the people. I wish them no harm; but I cannot res and to the desire to protect their interests at t leexpense of our own. By the bill the Provinces are to give us free fishing along their coast. They are not to in sist upon the 3mile restriction to which we foolishly agreed in the convention of 1818. But my constituents assure me they do not place great value upon the boon. They are Willing to take their chances of catching fish where they can, and allow the provincials to do the same. They write me not to be influenced by this consideration. Mr. Cartier, in the Canadian Parliament, said 3 years ago that the cod fish was a val uable fish and was strong enough to carry the treaty of 1854, and tlrht it would carry a renewal of the treaty in 1865. But the fisher men that I represent assure me that the codfish does not swim within 3 miles of Nova Scotia, and for that reason there is no need of asking provincial permission to catch him. Mr. Cartier should rely upon some more stable assistance in carrying a measure of this mag nitude. Sir, I have already spoken longer than I intended. I have this to say, in conclusion: that while we yield the bounty, while we yield the reciprocal part of this bill, we do ask to be treated fairly. While we are advocates of the great protective interests of this country, while my constituents year after year send men here to vote a protective tariff on all the great industries of the country, thus benefitingothers and endearing the prices of the articles they consume, while we willingly and cheer fully pay our additional assessments in consequence of the tax upon the various articles of consumption, we in turn askto be treated simply with average fairness. We ask barely the average of the protection we cheerfully accord to others. I trust to the sense of justice of the House to accord it to us.