Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
While the net effects of the Reciprocity Treaty, 1855-1866, are difficult to estimate, it has been generally held that the Maritime Provinces gained more than did the province of Canada. The rapid development of central Canada and the painful readjustments of the Maritime Provinces since the abrogation of the treaty and the consummation of Confederation may seem to justify this conclusion, but the following analysis of the trade statistics of the period suggests grave doubts as to the validity of this interpretation. It appears that it was the province of Canada that had most to gain from free access to the American market.
The simplest and most general test of the efficacy of any trade policy is the measure of increase or decrease in those branches of commerce that it was designed to influence. In order to apply this test, a table has been prepared (table I) showing for the province of Canada and the Maritime Provinces the percentage changes in exports to, and imports from, the United States. In each case the imports and exports for the years 1854 to 1866 are shown as percentages of those for the year 1853. Had 1854 been chosen as the base year a slight advantage would have been gained for the thesis of this paper, but the results would not have been materially different.
1 E.g., Adam Shortt wrote: “At first the Maritime Provinces were either indifferent or opposed to the treaty, but it turned out in the end that they had most to gain from it” ( Cambridge History of the British Empire, vol. VI, Cambridge, 1930, p. 389).Google Scholar
2 Province of Canada throughout means Ontario and Quebec.
3 Robinson, Chalfant, Two Reciprocity Treaties (New Haven, 1903)Google Scholar; Haynes, Frederick E., The Reciprocity Treaty with Canada of 1854 (Publications of the American Economic Association, vol. VII, no. 6, 1892)Google Scholar; United States Tariff Commission, Reciprocity and Commercial Treaties (Washington, 1919)Google Scholar; Ganong, C. K., “The Canadian Reaction to the American Tariff Policy” (unpublished thesis, University of Wisconsin, 1931).Google Scholar
4 United States Tariff Commission, Reciprocity and Commercial Treaties, p. 88.Google Scholar
5 Saunders, S. A., “The Maritime Provinces and the Reciprocity Treaty” (Dalhousie Review, vol. XIV, no. 3, 1934).Google Scholar
6 Grant, Ruth Fulton, The Canadian Atlantic Fishery (Toronto, 1934), ch. 2, passim.Google Scholar
7 Robinson, Chalfant, Two Reciprocity Treaties, p. 36.Google Scholar
8 This conclusion appears to have been a result of placing too much emphasis upon the large amount of lumber reported to be reaching the Chicago market from the province of Canada (see Donald C. C. Masters, “Canada and the Reciprocity Treaty of 1854”, unpublished thesis in University of Toronto library, and Harvey, Arthur, The Reciprocity Treaty, Quebec, 1865).Google Scholar
9 Statistics of the Foreign and Domestic Commerce of the United States (Washington, 1864), p. 163.Google Scholar
10 Johnson, Emory et al, History of the Domestic and Foreign Commerce of the United States (Washington, 1915), vol. I, p. 288.Google Scholar
11 Although Prince Edward Island showed a larger percentage of her total exports made up of agricultural products and foodstuffs, nevertheless the smaller proportion of these products going to the United States leaves that province relatively less dependent upon the American market even for agricultural products than was the province of Canada. In 1865, slightly over 28 per cent. of the total exports from Prince Edward Island was made up of commodities under this category going to the United States, as compared with nearly 43 per cent. for the province of Canada.
