Mr. MORRILL. Without thinking of the tariff. )Iorrill and tariff are synonymous, just like Lincoln and liberty. If we are not to have a reciprocity trea, I have nothing to say about the details of it. Every gentlemen upon this floor understands the interests of his constituents, and each one will come to conclusions for himself. I will pass by, then, all that appertains to the tariff proper, only making this suggestion, if we should conclflde not to have a reciprocity treaty, to refer this bill back to the ComWays&Meanswith instructions to report abill conforming this tariff to the one now in existence. In looking over the House, I find a great many gentlemen who would much rather have that tariff. We would then have a uniformity of tariff. There is a great deal of reason in what the Gentfrom Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLEY] has said as to singling out the British Provinces for our favor. I think we should treat all nations alike, and have but one tariff for all nations. If we are to have a tariff, I will leave the present bill in the hands of men who are able to defend it. Now, the next reciprocity treaty you find in section 9. It reads thus: SEC. 9 and be is further marred. That the President is hereby authorised to terminate or suspend the provisions of this act, or any section or sections thereof, and as to the wholco rpart of the British North American colonies, by giving public noticeof such termination orsnspension, wheneverin hisopinion it may appear just and proml; or whencver the followrnir privileges, or any of t icmI shall not be no cordod and secured to the citizens and inhabitant: of the U.S. namely, lie. I do not know what treaty there is behind this. I do not know but the SecyTreasury, the SecyState, and the British ambassador here may have a treaty which will come down fiat upon us as soon as this is passed. It may be a good one, and it may be a bad one; but as a Representative from one congressional district here I should like to see it. If there is to be a treaty the 2 Senators from my State can take their proper share of responsibility. We are contending about these small provisions of the bill when they may amount to nothing 2 hours after the bill is passed. Who knows how soon the POTUS will suspend it? As to the advantages of a reciprocity treaty, I find that depends upon the 1locality from which aman comes. Men from one loculitysay thatitis advantageous, and others from another localitysay that it is disadvantageous. I think if we do without a treaty for 60 or 90 days it would speak for itself. The treaty expires on the 17th of March. There is no reason why we should hurry in this matter. take it for granted Congress is not going to adjourn very soon. I have heard, however, of a recess being taken; but there is no roba bility this Congress will adjourn unti after we shall have seen the practical operations of doing without a treaty. The Constitution says that the President shall make treaties by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Now, if I had my way, I would refer this bill hack to the ComWays&Means, to strike out all that relates to a reciprocity treaty; and after 60 or 90 days we can judge for ourselves. As a Representative from the West, I have sought information of what Canada could do for us; I have asked men confidentially what we could demand, and they have told me she had nothing to give us. Now, then, to come to the Welland canal. I would like in self to have the Welland canal enlarged, so that vessels loaded at Chicago mightnot break bulk until they reach the ocean. They cannot do it now and when we ask the Canadians why they do not enlarge their canal as some compensation for this favor, what is the answer? They say they are not able to do it. I do not feel at liberty to reeat private conversations which I had with istinguished Ca nadian gentlemen on this subject, but the near est proposition that I could get from any of them was that they would be willing to nego tiate with us and see if we would not enlarge the canal together, we to own half of it. Now, I do not suppose that any individual in this House believes that we are ever to own half of anything that is in Canada.