The Canadian Minister, in reply, observed that the treaty made no mention whatever of the matters complained of, and, in a very lucid argument, charges against the Legislature of the United States the very same grounds of complaint as the Committee alleged against Canada. No accusation of an infraction of the treaty is made, and therefore the subjects treated of in the Report affect the commercial relations and not the good faith of the contracting parties. The Committee accuse Canada of violating the spirit and intent of the treaty, by an increase of duties on manufactured articles, by a change in the mode of levying duties, and by abolishing tolls on the St. Lawrence canals and river; but Mr. Galt contends that the treaty had nothing to do with manufactures, but was expressly limited to the growth and produce of the two countries mentioned in the schedule. Those articles not enumerated in it are necessarily excluded from its operations, and must be made the subject of special legislation between the two States before any act of either respecting the mode of their admission can be made ground of remonstrance. As a proof of the narrow spirit in which these fine declaimers about “liberty of commerce and reciprocity of trading advantages” have dealt with the treaty, it may be mentioned that they imposed duties on planks in part planed, tongued, or grooved, and on flour ground in Canada from American wheat, and on lumber made in Canada out of American logs. The Canadian Government, however, have maintained, both against the Americans and the mother country, their right to decide for themselves both as to the mode and the extent to which taxation should be imposed. Declamations against a policy of Protection come indeed with a bad grace from the United States; and Mr. Galt, in suppressed sarcasm and irony, shows that their doctrine of Free Trade with Canada really means an exclusive protection for themselves against the manufactures of Great Britain.