1
THE LEADER.
REGINA, N.W.T., THURSDAY MORNING, APRIL 3, 1902.
ADDRESS ADOPTED
After a Short But Interesting Debate in the Assembly.
PROVINCIAL AUTONOMY
The Subject Which Received Most
Attention — Speeches By Dr. Elliott
and Mr. Fisher — Mr. Haultain Outlines Government's Position — Mr.
McDonald Speaks of Delays — Dr.
Patrick Wants Two Provinces.
MONDAY, March 24.
The debate in the Legislative Assembly
on the Address in reply to the Speech
was a short one this year and the
great question of provincial autonomy
was the subject which naturally received the most attention. Mr. Speaker took the
chair at 2.30 p.m. Mr. D.
H. McDonald moved: "That an order
of this House do issue for a return
showing what action has been taken
by this Government on the resolution
passed by this House at the last session
regarding the liquor traffic."
Mr. Haultain said he thought the
hon, gentleman would attain his object as easily and more reasonably if
he put it in the form of a question
rather than a motion for a return.
The action taken by the Government
in this question was necessarily in the
form of correspondence with publishers, government officials, and others,
among them being the authorities in
South Carolina, Sweden, and other
places where a system similar to these
exists. The replies were in the form of
letters, pamphlets, blue books and
other works on the subject which the
hon. gentleman would understand could
hardly be copied within reasonable
time. Mir. Haultain did not think the
information obtained by the Government was for the information of the
House. Their instructions were to
enquire into the matter. It would be
quite impossible within the limits of
a year probably to bring down any
such return as this because it
would involve writing out a number of
long reports in technical language. He
thought the hon. gentleman should be
satisfied to accept the statement that
the Government had been getting all
the information, literature and documents possible on the subject in accordance with
the resolution of the House.
Mr. McDonald said he could quite
understand that it would be impossible
to get the return in time in view of
their experience of the difficulty of
getting much shorter papers in previous sessions.
Mr. Haultain—I do not propose to
bring these papers down because they
are not matters in which the House is
particularly interested at the present
time.
Mr. McDonald—I must say this is
very unsatisfactory: it will not be
satisfactory unless the papers are laid
before the House.
Mr. Hauitain –Does the hon. gentleman wish to press the matter?
A vote was then taken, two members
supporting Mr. McDonald and the remainder of the House voting with Mr.
Haultain. The Speaker declared the
motion lost.
MORE RETURNS WANTED.
Mr. McDonald then moved for a return of all correspondence between
this Government and the Federal Governnment in connection with the resolution passed
by this Assembly at the
last session urging the advisability of
making grants of land to volunteers
from the Territories engaged in the
war in South Africa. This was agreed
to.
Mr. McDonald presented a third motion for a return showing the names, if
any, of residents in the Territories in
any of the Large Local improvement
Districts. who have been allowd to pay
taxes assessed against their land
at less than the amount charged againist these lands: and also
a fourth motion for a return showing
(1) the total amount charged against
the Canadian Pacific Railway Co. and
the Hudson Bay Co. for taxes on lands
in the Large Local Improvement Districts in the Territories for the years
1899, 1900 and 1901; and (2) the amount
accepted by the Government in settlement of the taxes referred to, and the
date of settlement.
In regard to these Mr. Sifton said
there was no objection to them The
staff of the local improvement branch
was very busy, but the returns would
be brought down hefore the end of the
session.
Mr. McDonald — Will the hon. gentleman say these returns will be brought
down as soon as possible?
Mr. Sifton — They will be just as soon
as the notices of this year's assessment
are issued, which the hon. gentleman
will realise is also an important matter
as we need the money.
Dr. Patrick (Yorkton) –Perhaps the
hon. gentlenian will be a little more
definite and say if they could be brought
down before the budget debate?
Mr. Sifton –Yes, they will be brought
down before the budget debate. The
motions were then agreed to.
A QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE.
Upon the Orders of the Day being
called Mr. McDonald rose to a question
of privilege. He said a matter had
been brought up in the Senate of Canada, within the last few days. He
would call the attention of the Government to a question asked in the Senate
on the 21st of March by Senator Perley, Mr. McDonald then read from a
newspaper report as follows:
Senator Perley enquired if the Government of
the North-West Territories made application to
enter confederation under full provinclal autonomy, and if so, what were the terms
and conditions proposed by them.
Mr. Scott said an application had been made
for the admission of a portion of the Territories.
but nothing had been done or was likely
to be at present. The papers were confidential
and could not be brought down without the
leave of the North-West Government.
In answer to Mr. Lougheed, he said the matter could not be dealt with at the present
session. It was under consideration.
Hon. Mr. Lougheed of the North-West
Government had been in Ottawa. The feeling
in the Territories was strongly in favor of provincial autonomy, and the present government
were understood to be not adverse to giving
the Territories autonomy. He was sure there
would be great disappointment if some measure
along these lines was not brought down at
once.
Hon. Mr. Scott said there were several questions to be settled, such as whether there
should
be one province or several: and where the
capital should be.
Mr. McDonald continuing said: This
came I am sure as a surprise to a large
number of people in the North-West.
After years of delay on this question
and after the leader of the Governnment—
Mr. Haultain here raised a point of
order and Mr. Speaker ruled Mr. McDonald out of order saying: "This is
referred to in the Speech."
Mr. Haultain—The hon. gentleman
might call the attention of the Government to certain statements. I
would not object to that.
Mr. McDonald—Our desire was to
find out if the papers were held secret
at the instance of this Government and
for what reason.
Mr. Haultain—No, the papers were
not held secret at the instance of this
Government.
Mr. McDonald –It's a question then
between you and Hon. Mr. Scott.
Mr. Haultain —The hon. gentleman
is attributing statements to Mr.
Scott which are not in the report he
read. Mr. Scott said the papers could
not be brought down without the leave
of the North-West Government. Anyone would understand that negotiations pending between
two governments are confidential. The matter
then dropped.
THE ADDRESS IN REPLY.
Dr. Elliott (Wolseley) then rose
amid cheers to move that a humble
address be presented to His Honor.
He made an eloquent reference to the
visit of the Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and York, to the great object
lesson their world-wide tour was to the
un-British world, and to the interest
the Duke and Duchess took in Canada
as was made manifest by the address
of His Royal Highness in London where
he spoke of Canada's need of population and made an appeal to send of
their best. Referring to the inrush of
immigrants Dr. Elliott noted the fact
that every man in the West, seemed to
think his district the best and the new
settlers seemed imbued with the same
idea for they think they can pick out a
better one and the vast majority of
them go out to new portions of the
country. This large immigration
would entail a very great expenditure
on the part of this Government in
building roads and bridges and opening
up schools. He considered the federal
government would only be doing its
duty if it dealt very liberally with the
people of the Territories.
Speaking of the big crop of last year,
Dr. Elliott said the crop bulletin issued
by the Territorial Department of Agriculture was probably more reliable
than any issued by any department in
Canada. That document was an
interesting one and showed that the
wheat area of the Territories was not
confined to East Assiniboia, but West
Assiniboia, Saskatchewan and Alberta
were also included. There was a crop
of 13,000,000 bushels of wheat, and
11,000,000 bushels of oats and yet only
a very small portion of the best of the
land had seen the plow. At Rosthern
500, 000 bushels of wheat would this
year he exported and the district of
Saskatchewan would in a very short
time produce a million bushels, And
wheat was not the only grain grown
in the Territories. Of the 11,000,000
bushels of oats the vast bulk of it was
grown west of the 3rd meridian and
one-third of the total crop of the Territories, was grown west of the 3rd
meridian.
THE GRAIN BLOCKADE.
We have, continued Dr. Elliott, not
only grown a vast amount of grain but
we have experienced a great deal of
trouble in exporting it, and I must
congratulate the Minister of Agriculture on the efforts put forth in an
endeavor to bring public opinion to
bear on the C.P.R. to get them to move
the grain. It is all very well for people
1,500 miles to the east to talk of there
being no blockade in this country, but
there is no use telling men who have
stood in their offices and seen hundreds of loads of grain standing on the
streets and the elevators closed because
they could not get cars and were taking
much less for their grain. There was a
standing offer by some people of
five cents over and above the
market price, provided the grain
was loaded on cars, but the C. P.
R. in its wisdom did not see fit to
supply farmers with cars. They had
loading platforms and other facilities
but the cars did not come. After
public sentiment had been worked up
to its highest pitch and the Minister of
Agriculture, boards of trade and others
had brought pressure to bear, the
C..P.R. at last made a move and decided to allow some of the grain to be
shipped via North Portal and other
roads to the American side where there
was room to store it, but I am sorry to
say that their efforts have not continued as long as they should have done.
And when we consider the expense the
farmers of this country have gone to in
building warehouses— in 14 towns at
least 400 buildings costing at least
$20,000–to store wheat and with hunds of thousands of bushels lying today in great
danger of having a considerable portion destroyed if stormy
weather comes, — I say when we consider these things and all that the
farmers have done for the C.P.R., they
should in all fairness and honesty have
done everything possible to prevent
the danger of having the crop damaged
by having it put on the market before
spring opened.
PROVINCIAL AUTONOMY
I am pleased to notice in His Honor's
speech that the Government has been
in communication with the federal
government, but that no answer has
been received. This certainly is a disappointment to the people of this
House and country. (Hear, hear.) It
is time the people of the country were
prepared to give to their representatives full powers of provincial manhood, and the
representatives have done
their duty when the House passed the
mermorial and sent it to Ottawa and
since then the Government have been
in communication with the federal
authorities and they have simply been
marking time and putting the matter
off. The delay has been caused by the
action of the Dominion Government.
Representations have been made to
them. Every member of this House
who takes an intelligent interest in
what has been said in and out of the
House knows what those representations have been or almost. They knew
them from the speeches delivered in
1900, from the speech at Indian Head,
and by the budgets of the last three or
four years. Everyone knows the conditions that the people and Government of this country
are asking for.
Mr. Elliott —it is only a part of it,
The conditions the people are asking
are only, the ordinary conditions of
British subjects, the same as the other
provinces. We are not paupers and
are not asking for special favors or
special rights. They are not fancy
terms: we ask for our rights, nothing
nore and expect to receive nothing
less from the hands of the Dominion
Government. (Hear, hear.) The terms
upon which the North-West wishes to
enter confederation are practically
public property but up to the present Â
hour we have not the slightest indication bow our terms are going to be received by
the Ottawa government.
Referring to the increased representation in the House Dr. Elliott said
they were pleased to think that the
people thought so much of the members of the House that they wanted
more of them (Laughter). When they
talked of increased representation, he
wondered where they were going to
put them. Unless they had provincial
autonomy and power to put up buildings it would be an impossibility to accommodate
the new members.
Dr. Elliott in speaking of the receipts
and expenditures said it had always
been the policy of this Government to
deal fairly with the people of the country in always giving them all the
information they desired in regard to
the expenditures. With the growing
population, the vast, increase in the
number of school children and the
number of schools, the Government
would have a hard task to manage the
country unless the Dominion Government gave a largely increased grant.
He hoped they would do so. Dr.
Elliott concluded by moving that the
following address he presented to His
Honor: We. His Majesty's dutiful and
loyal subjects, the Legislative Assembly of the North-West Territories in
session assembled, thank Your Honor
for the gracious speech which Your
Honor has been pleased to address to
us at the opening of this present session.
MR. FISHER SECONDS THE MOTION.
Mr. Fisher (Batoche) seconded the
motion. After congratulating Dr.
Elliott on his speech, he referred to the
great prosperity and happiness now
general not only in the Territories but
throughout Canada. Mr. Fisher confined his remarks largely to Saskatchewan which he
said had in former
years been more or less neglected,
immigrants being encouraged to take
some other direction. Conditions had
now taken a radical change and Saskatchewau was getting a great share
of the immigrants.
Mr. Fisher — Possibly that has a great
deal to do with it. (Cheers. ) Mr.
Fisher then devoted considerable time
to a comparison of the yields of grains
in Saskatchewan and other portions of
the Territories showing that in West
Saskatchewan the yield had run nearly five bushels more to the acre than
elsewhere. The new settlers had great
confidence in the Saskatchewan district and while the census showed a
population of 25,579 he would venture
to say it had now increased to 30,000
and before the end of the present year
would be 35,000, and before four years
elapsed Saskatchewan would contain
75,000 souls.
The speaker then made a most eloquent reference to the visit of the
Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and
York. Referring to the recent census,
which was somewhat disappointing,
Mr. Fisher said he believed the next
one would show an increase to double
the present figures. The coronation of
King Edward VII would be an event
such as had never occurred before and he
was glad the premiers of the different
provinces had been invited. (Hear,
hear.) Let me say in particular, continued Mr, Fisher, that it must be a
matter of great pride to the gentleman who occupies that position in this
House to take part in that great ceremony. (Cheers.) All should entertain
very bright hopes of the future of the
North-West Territories. We have
citizens of different nationalities, different religions, but we must all remember
that we are all lhere with the
same view, to build up the country
(Loud cheers) founded on principles of
liberty and equal lights to all. (Cheers.)
LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION.
Mr. McDonald on rising to reply was
greeted with cheers. He said: Mr.
Speaker, if there was no other reason
why l should get up on this occasion,
if nothing else would bring me to my
feet, I should take the opportunity to
congratulate the hon. member who has
just taken his seat, upon his fervent
and loyal speech and the eloquent
tribute he his paid to the representatives of the British Empire, who have
passed through this country during the
past year. We have had the pleasure
of hearing the hon. member before.
He speaks in a language which is not
the language of his youth, but we can
safely say that during the term of
this legislature he need not apologise
to anybody of take a back seat for any
speech he has made. I congratulate
him on that account.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure with the rest
of the members of this assembly, possibly not those entirely in the confidence of
the Government, we were surprised at the opening of this House to
to find the bill of fare presented to us
in the condition it is. We have had
during the past years, questions of importance that have been before the
Territories for some time, brought before this House and discussed by the
principal members of this House, and
for which the unanimous approval of
this House was asked. We had hoped
that these would have been dealt with
more fully at the opening of the House.
We have been advised that the time
is one characterised by great prosperity
in all sections of the country. This is
evident not only to the people of this
country, but it is evident also to the
people of Eastern Canada. There has
never been any time in the history of
North-West Canada or even of the
whole Dominion, when, I suppose,
there has been such a prosperous year
as the year 1901. The fame of Canada
has gone abroad to all parts of the British Empire that this year has been one
of great prosperity. It is indisputable
even in the old land and one of the
most important papers in the world
had special reference to Canada in its
first issue of the year. I quote from
the London Times: "During the year
just closed Canada has reached a higher imark in her progress, than she has
hitherto attained." There is not a
question of a doubt, that from the
eastern part of Canada to the borders
of Manitoba they look to the west as a
support to the east. Eastern manufacturers look to the west and all the
traffic that comes from the east is paid
for by the people of the west. It is regretable, Mr. Speaker, that the conditions
of prosperity which we here speak
of, cannot be taken full advantage of
by the people of this country. This
has been a great year for the people of
this country in a general way, but individually it has come very hard upon
some of the settlers of this country.
During the past year we had the
pleasure of the visit of the Duke and
Duchess of Cornwall and York. The
eloquent tributes that have already
been paid to then by preceding speakers were sufficient to allow me to pass
them over, further than to say that we
join with them in their loyal remarks
and the pleasure it gave this country
to welcome the representatives of the
British Crown. Nothing could have
been better than the reception in Regina and Calgary,—the wheat arches
and cattle.
CREDIT DUE THE G.G.A.
The third subject dealt with in the
Speech says the unprecedented crop of
last season brought the transportation
question before the public. Now, Mr.
Speaker, this is a question that has
been discussed in all parts of the Territories, and has been before the people
from the early part of the shipping
season of 1901-1902. We had expected
from such a large crop in this country
that the people would have been able to
reap the advantage from it, they deserved, but unfortunately the circumstances that
prevailed have severely
handicapped the farmers in marketing
their crops. I quote from the Speech
that the Government claims the farmers in this country are now in receipt
of perhaps 10 per cent. advance in
prices owing to their efforts with the
C. P. R. in endeavoring to relieve the
blockade, but when the Department of
Agriculture takes to itself credit for
relieving the block of a few weeks ago,
they are stretching the point. This
evil existed several months before
three weeks ago. What happened
then? Where was the Department of
Agriculture? The Department of
Agriculture should give credit
where credit is due. Who brought
this matter before the people
of the country but the farmers of this
country. What about the Grain Growers' Association? They are the ones
who deserve the credit.
It is true one of the preceding speakers said the Grain Growers Association
backed up the Department of Agriculture. I think the Grain Growers'
Association were in this before the
Department of Agriculture. There
has been no victory gained for the
farmers of this country but what they
have worked for themselves.
This difficulty existed in December,
1901. In that month the Grain Growers' Association was organised, and
ever since they have been actively
endeavoring to get the C.P.R. to help
them. The Winnipeg board of trade
and grain exchange took the matter up.
If the Department of Agriculture have
taken such an interest in the matter
why is it not done more actively today. At Qu'Appelle Station in the
constituency which the honorable gentleman represents, and at Indian Head
there is still a grain blockade, and
further than that, Mr. Speaker,
this is not the only product produced
by the people of this country in which
there has been a blockage. What
about the shipments of cattle last season: Where was the department when
the farmers and ranchers were bringing in cattle and keeping them for
days? The cattlemen looked to the
Winnipeg board of trade for relief and
it was them who assisted. If possible
this was a more vital question than
even the wheat blockade. (A voice,
No.) We know that wheat call be
stored in a building or taken back
home and does not suffer as do cattle
in being driven to the station. The
cattlemen also have their space secured at Montreal. I think the Department of Agriculture
is stretching this
a little too far in taking credit for this
much. But let them persevere in their
efforts. There was raised north of the
Qu'Appelle Valley last season at least
from one million to a million and a
half bushels, most of it is still there.
The farmers are unable to get it out
and are getting discouraged about
growing wheat. What has the Department of Agriculture done to relieve the people north
of the Qu'Appelle Valley? Their influence with the
C. P. R. is so great now, they have got
to be so friendly with them, since they
remitted their taxes, (Laughter), that
they can do anything, they can fully
persuade them to build railways in all
parts of the country, One of our representatives from the North-West, in the
House of Commons last week estimated that the farmers of Manitoba, and
the North-West had lost seven million
dollars on the price of wheat owing to
the grain blockade. It would seem a
pity if this Government had any influence with the C. P. R. that they did
not save to this country some portion
of these seven million dollars.
A REGRETTABLE DELAY.
Now, Mr. Speaker, we come to the
paragraph of the Speech, which
says: During the recess my Government has been in communication with
the Federal Governument" and goes on
further. This is a paragraph which I
believe we are most interested in. We
had thought that before this we would
have had some definite reply to that
memorial of 1900, but year after year
we have been put off with the statement that it is the Government at
Ottawa that is at fault. (Hear, hear.)
And further we have been told from
Ottawa in reply to a question by the
Hon. Senator Perley in the Senate on
the 21st of March, that nothing had
been done or was likely to be done at
present with regard to the admission
of a portion of the Territories as
province. I think, Mr. Speaker, that
we all agree on this point that we are
disappointed. (Hear, hear.) We had
anticipated after passing that memorial in 1900 that our Government would
ere this have been able to get something for the people of this country.
We are anxious to be unanimous on
this question and give them all the
support they deserve and it was that
motive that prompted the members of
this side of the House to be unanimous
in passing that resolution. We are
not anxious to make this a party question if we can believe that this Government is
sincere in their demand. We
have taken the statement of the Government for years that they are urging
these matters. We had a statement
from Ottawa last year that only then
had they been asked to put their representations in writing: up to that
time they had been verbal. They have
put in their written demand, and judging by a remark made by the
hon. leader of this Government,
at Indian Head these demands
in some particular, were considered absurd. A very rash statement, I think, for any
member of a
government of this country to make,
that after this House had been session
after session passing resolutions and the
Government making their annual trips
to Ottawa, that now some of these
demands were considered absurd. It
was a very weak point, I think, Mr.
Speaker, for our representative to
admit of the case he was pleading.
Now, Mr. Speaker, there is one thing
with regard to the demands that have
been made, — the people of this country
do not know what they are. Some
will tell you to look at the Indian Head
speech, some to the memorial, some to
the Yorkton speech, some to the Carnduff speech, but never yet has this
Government laid before this House the
demands the Government has made.
It is time we had them. If they are
sincere and their demands are just, we
ought to know them so we can back
them up as unanimously as we did
the memorial passed in 1900.
RETURNS DELAYED.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I just want to
deal with a few remarks nade by some
of the previous speakers. One hon.
gentleman said that we had been
accustomed to get fair statements of
receipts, expenditure and returns from
this Government. I wish to question
that statement. We have had occasion
to know that, in one year in this
country;we did not get a fair statement. We had occasion to know that,
in one year a sum of $20,000 was added
to the receipts of this country, (Laughter) and if the hon. gentleman calls
that a fair statement he must be drawing on his imagination. And also with
regard to the returns. We have sometimes been criticised for asking for
returns which occupied too much time
of the civil servants in preparing them
for the House, but I wish to draw the
attention of the Government to the
return asked for last session of $92,000
which was voted by the Dominion
Government to the North-West Territories, for a special purpose. That
return was not brought down at the
session at which it was asked for, and
we were not able to see whether that
sum, was spent for the purpose, for
which it was voted. Now if the Government were as fair as the hon. member says they
are we should have had
that return in time.
CORPORATIONS' TAXES.
I wish to take up another matter
just now, as I fear owing to dilatoriness
in bringing down returns we may not
have an opportunity of discussing it
very early this session. I refer to
the taxes in the large local improvement districts on the C. P. R. and Hudson's Bay
Co. lands. We know, Mr.
Speaker, that this has been a matter of
litigation and dispute. We had expected last year that after the leader of
the Government had passed his retroactive legislation, which we objected
to, not because it affected these corporations but on principle. We were
accused of corporation leanings and as
being on the side of the corporations
as against the country, but I do not
think they had a good right to charge
us with that statement. The hon.
member for West Calgary (Mr. Bennett) made the stateanent that, the
Hudson's Bay Co. and other corporations
should pay their taxes, and we believed
that then and we believe it now.
It has been stated openly that the
Government has allowed these corporations to pay their taxes for less
than one hundred cents on the dollar
and they have never contradicted it.
We may be able to account for one
reason for the influence of this Government, with the C. P.R. when we see
what they related to the company on
their taxes. I do not see any reason
why the Government should put their
hands in their pocket to pay the C. P.
R.'s taxes. If they can successfully
deny this, we will withdraw it, but I
have it on the best authority from one
of the large corporations that they did
make a settlement at less than one
hundred cents on the dollar. We claim
for the rest of the ratepayers in these
local improvement districts the same
treatment. If they have settled with
the corporations for less than one
hundred cents on the dollar, then they
5
ADDRESS ADOPTED
(Continued from page 1.)
should make an equal allowance to
other ratepayers in those districts. It
is not fair that one corporation should
receive a benefit that is withheld from
other settlers. During the time
that I have represented the electoral district of North Qu'Appelle I have almost every
year
brought before them the lack of water
in that district especially north of the
Qu'Appelle Valley. This Government
has not yet successfully coped with
that question, in fact they have mae
a complete failure of it. Had they
been a business-like Government they
would have ere this, secured for these
settlers a bountiful supply of water.
They have even discouraged the people
in that district as they have gone in
and made unsuccessful attempts to get
water.
I would refer also to the dilatoriness
in doing road work. There was a vote
in 1900 re-voted in 1901 for roads that
to this day are not done. If the hon.
gentleman would call that a businesslike government he had a poor idea of
business.
I would call attention to the excessive cost of selling lands for arrears of
taxes. If we have not the expensive
numerical system of Manitoba and the
other provinces, there is to my mind
nothing more expensive than the
system of confiscating lands in the
local improvement districts. My attention was called to one case where
the arrears were $5.00 and the land
was redeemed within three or four
months and the costs were $14.00, making a total of $19.00. I do not think
the Commissioner of Public Works or
any member of the Government can
bring to the attention of the House a
case in any province where such an excessive cost is charged up. I had a case
from Manitoba brought to my attention where the costs were not one- third as much
proportionately as in
this case.
We are told that there has been a
great increase in the population and
that we would have additional representation. I think as members of the
Opposition we will see that as far as
the Government are concerned they
would like to legislate us out of the
House (Cries of 110, 110). I only hope
the will show that fairness which the
settlement in this country demands.
They should take into consideration
what will happen in the next few
years. There are some of us who cannot credit that they will give all the
people of the Territories that justice
which we think they should have. We
are probably judging them a little too
harshly (Hear, hear), by time will tell.
We will be willing to give them the
benefit of our judgment in the matter
but I am doubtful if they will accept
it.
I would like to see the papers between the Ottawa Government and
this Government over provincial
autonomy. This Government is likely
pressing for it but have they pressed
strongly enough? What the people
require is to have it now. (Cheers.)
THE PREMIER REPLIES.
Premier Haultain replied to Mr.
McDonald. He said: Mr. Speaker, I
am very glad to be able once
in a while to join with my hon. friend
opposite, and on this occasion do so in
the matter of congratulating the hon.
gentleman who moved and seconded
the Address in reply to the Speech.
Mr. Haultain — I, then, on behalf of
myself and the members of this House
congratulate the hon. member who
moved the Address. It is not the first
time we have had the pleasure of hearing him and he had already established
his reputation and nothing he might
say would add to it. The hon. gentlemen opposite has made criticisms on the
sins of omission and commission of
this Government, and over the actions
of the Dominion Government, the C. P.
R—and as such large lines, and also in
regard to well boring in his own
particular district. The hon. gentleman has to a certain extent anticipation
what he has not called but insinuated he might have called the gerrymander bill. He
can be perfectly certain that the Government and the
House may be safely left to deal with
it fairly and justly as we are accustomed to deal with matters that come
before this House. We do not propose to deal with this question on prophetic lines
at all. We do not propose
to ask for representation for a population which may be here in the hereafter. We
propose to deal with it as a
business question. Sufficient unto the
population of to-day is the representation thereof, and sufficient unto the
population of to-morrow will be the
representation of that day.
COST OF TAX SALES.
The hon. gentleman complained of
the meagreness of the bill of fare outlined in the Speech, which was the
stereotyped criticism of leaders of
oppositions. The Speech was fair as it
deals with the business of the country.
It was enough to call forth two good
speeches from the mover andseconder
and a long one from the leader of the
Opposition. The hon. gentleman carrying out the suggestion I made last
year that he brings in the confidence of
the corporations is able to get information not otherwise obtainable, —
Mr. McDonald — I did not say that
information was confidential.
Mr. Haultain — I said the hon. gentleman being in the confidence of these
corporations could get the information.
He has referred to the excessive cost
of tax sales under the Local Improvement Districts Ordinance. he mentioned a case
where the costs amounted
to $14.00 and says this was caused
to some taxpay who did not know of
the arrears. One of the fundamental
principles of our local improvement
tax system is that gentelmen who own
land are supposed to take sufficient
interest in the country to know there
are local improvement taxes; otherwise they are running a risk. The
hon. gentleman had also referred to a
case in Manitoba. If the taxpayers
who are living in Manitoba can redeem
their land more cheaply, so far as
expenses are concerned they will more
than make up for it in the amount of
taxes they will have to pay. For my
part I would rather have the burden
on the occasional man who does not
pay his taxes than on the people as a
whole.
Referring to the large immigration
movement at present in progress, the
premier said: I believe it is only the
forerunner of one of the largest movements of population this continent has
ever seen.
The royal visit, said
Mr. Haultain,
has brought us very much nearer home
to the old country and the governing
family of the Empire. I will not say
it has caused greater loyalty on our
part for it is not necessary to have
royal visits to increase our loyalty.
(Cheers.)
DEPARTMENT DESERVES CREDIT.
The question of the crop and railway
transportation is not one that is
necessary for me to take up now.
What the Grain Growers' Association
is entitled to, or what portion it is
entitled to, of the credit for relieving
the blockade I do not know; it is a
question of arithmetic for the hon.
gentleman to settle himself. All I
know is that the question was taken
up by the Department backed by the
Association. I do not care so much
about the praise but believe in giving
praise where it is due. If the relief
brought about by the action of the
Department was only temporary, as
my hon. friend says, we do not take
credit for the removal of the whole of
the evil, nor do we propose to take
blame for the evil.
THE ALL IMPORTANT QUESTION.
Now with regard to the negotations
with the Federal Government over the
question of provincial autonomy. We
are not to blame if those negotiations
are stretched out. Hon. gentlemen on
the opposite side of the House think all
they have to do is write a letter to Ottawa to get your demands granted. They
will realise if ever they attain their
ambition to sit on this side of the House
that it requires a great deal more. The
Government here and the legislature
has, I believe, been pressing as strongly as they possibly could. The delay in
1900 was caused by an exceptionally
late session at Ottawa followed almost
immediately by the campaign for the
election of that same year. Last year
when we went to Ottawa in January
1901 we made our representations verbally and followed them up with a
written statement. Later on we asked
to be allowed to go down and continue
them but were told a special committee of the Council would have to be
appointed and could not be appointed
until after the federal session. When
the session was over we renewed our
request and in reply were told that the
minister of finance, who was a member
of the special committee, had gone to
England and would not be back till
August. As soon as August came we
again asked by telegraph for an appointment. One was made for October and kept. We
had our interview
with the special committee of the
Council and at their request put in a
more elaborate statement than at first.
And although we have been in Ottawa
since pressing for settlement we have
up to the present received no answer.
I believe this is largely due to the illness of the Minister of the Interior,
who has been absent from Ottawa
almost since the session opened. I
have an assurance from Sir Wilfrid
Laurier that as soon as Mr. Sifton gets
back an answer will be sent.
The Government at Ottawa has,
however, anticipated that answer
somewhat by Hon. Mr. Scott's answer
in the Senate. I can hardly credit the
report published of that answer as it
showed a little more ignorance on the
part of that gentleman than he usually
displays in North-West affairs. In his
reply to Senator Perley he is reported to
have said that the cause of delay arose
on account of the difficulty to decide
whether there should be one province
or several and the location of the
capital. Everybody knows, or ought
to, that the location of the capital will
not be dealt with at Ottawa but by
the first provincial legislature after a
province is created and cannot, therefore, be one of the questions to be decided.
We have negotiated in person, by
letter and by telegraph. If the answer
has not come it is not our fault. We
cannot take the Dominion Government by the throat and carry out
highway robbery methods. These
might suggest themselves to members
of the Opposition but are not the way
the business of the Government is
carried on.
THE GOVERNMENT'S POSITION.
The Government has no desire
whatever to withhold the fullest statement of its position from the members
of this House or the people of the
country. So far as could be done
without divulging the negotiations
while they were pending this has been
done. And while there has probably
been no formal statement by myself or
anyone else on behalf of the Government, everyone in this House and country knows
what the principal points are.
It is not at all likely that the members
of the Government in this House and
on the platform should be speaking
along certain lines, making certain
points, advancing certain arguments,
and then go down to Ottawa and give
them up. The members of this
House have a pretty clear idea of what
the Government thinks should be done.
The papers will be brought down at
the first possible opportunity. We
regret the delay. We have put it in
the mouth of the lieutenant governor,
the strongest possible way under our
system of government, that we regret
the delay.
WHAT IS THE OPPOSITION POLICY?
Now, Mr. Speaker, as the hon. gentleman says we have trifled with this
matter, that we have done nothing. I
will ask what have the hon. gentlemen
on the other side of the House been
doing to develop public opinion on this
question? What have they been doing
towards educating the people on this
question? The hon. gentleman has for
the first time broken silence on this
question and has had the hardihood to
say that the people demand this provincial autonomy at once.
Mr. McDonald — I beg your pardon, it
is not the first time.
Mr. Haultain — On what other occasion did you express an opinion on the
question?
Mr. McDonald — I said it was time we
had provincial autonomy.
Mr. Haultain — I accept the hon.
gentleman's statement but I have no
recollection of it. I am glad, however,
to know that at intervals of two years
he has been able to express an opinion
on this important question. What
have he and his colleagues been doing
to develop that public sentiment, to
educate the people of this country on
this important question? What did
the hon. gentleman say when it was
up? Was it that silence, I suppose
indicating the unanimous approval of
which they have spoken several times?
On this side of the House we are not
accustomed to draw from silence unanimous approval. When hon. gentlemen opposite have
nothin to find
fault with and criticise, it is that later
on they ay have something to criticise,
and for one I am not disposed to
accept the silence of the hon. gentlemen as a sign of unanimous approval.
Other questions have been up of
indefinitely less importance, except
possibly of some personal interst to
hon. gentlemen attached to them, and
there heavy been memorials and resolutions by the hon. gentleman as leader
of the Opposition on matters not half
so important. He has devoted himself
to questions of half breed scrip and to
asking questions with regard to the
education of deaf and dumb children,
and then when the question of scrip is
settled he discovers a new one for the
volunteers, a very laudable thing in
itself. But when a large question, the
absorbing question the most important question the House will every have
to deal with has been up the hon.
gentleman has sate mute and never had
an opinion except once, he says, two
years ago and once to-day.
WHERE DOES THE OPPOSITION STAND?
Not only the hon. gentleman, but
where does his following stand on this
important question? I suppose it
would be somewhat indelicate for me
to intrude into their little differences.
I would ask where does the hon. gentlemen stand with his following?
Where are other hon. gentelmen on
this important question? What unanimity do they show, what common
opinion do they hold on this question?
Take the hon. gentleman from Calgary
West and see what he has to say
about it. He said the time had
come to consider all the phases of the
question so that public opinion
might be developed and educated. What has he been doing? The
nearest he got to it last session was to
say that it is a very large question.
And the hon. gentleman himself after
two years has just come to realise that
we really have a very important question to deal with. This helps about as
much as the unanimous and silent consent he accords.
Now, I am glad to see the hon. gentleman has broken that silence and is
able to express an opinion, because I
think it is important that the members
of the Opposition when they have
grouped themselves under the leadership of the hon. gentleman should
know exactly where he stands on this
most important question. The member for Calgary West is holding meetings now and it
seems to me it would
be an appropriate time for him to express and opinion. I find in the Olds
Oracle, a paper very friendly to him
and published in a part of the constituency where he is strongest, that in
the course of an addresswhich is
described as "a clear, concise and
masterly statement of a man who has
strong convictions" the hon. gentleman for West Calgary devoted his
entire speech to petty questions of
expropriation for taxes, steam boiler
inspection, hail insurance and school
taxes, while at the same time his
leader is regretting that the Government has done nothing to secure provincial autonomy
and practically
charging us with retarding the movement.
Another hon. gentleman, the member for Prince Albert West, what is his
opinion? He goes in for a northern
province, that wonderful and fearful
division of two strips making a north
ern and southern province that each
might have a line of railway.
A DIRECT QUESTION.
And what does the hon. leader of
the Opposition favor, asked Mr. Haultain, and he waited for a reply.
Mr. McDonald — I did not express
myself as to one or two provinces.
(Laughter). What are you in favor
of?
Mr. Haultain — I am in favor of one
province. (Hear, hear) I have said so on
the platform and we stated so in our
memorial to Ottawa. The hon. gentleman is afraid to express his opinion
and so I think we must attribute his
silence, not as the silence of the
Sphinx, but because he has taken the
attitude of waiting to see what one his
followers take and that popular opinion will take.
The member for Prince Albert East
says he has had to go to Ottawa to
present our plan being adopted there.
His attitude is a little more definite, is
more clearly defined and clear cut
than this leader.
I have pointed out these differences
to allow the hon. gentlemen and the
country to see what a united and
happy family they are on the one, the
most important question which the
House has to deal with to-day. The
hon gentleman from South Regina
belives in creating one province immediately. On that question he goes
a little further than his leader. I am
not aware of the opinions of the hon.
gentlemen from Victoria and St. Albert may be, but I am perfectly certain they may
be or may not be in
accord with the opinion which is going
to be pronounced sometime in the
hereafter by the hon. gentleman for
North Qu'Appelle. It is no wonder
that they sit down and wait for public
opinion and for things to happen.
They have several sets of opinion and
everyone who goes off is practically a
party, so that besides a small and decreasing party we have a multiplicity
of leaders. It is not at all wonderful
that they find themselves in difficulty.
They are trying to do the impossible.
Their leader is trying to decide which
horse he will ride of two or three and
he will probably be put in the position
of trying to ride two or three at the
same time. In the meantime what do
we find them doing? They have no
opinion, they simply sit down and wait
until popular opinion shall have disclosed itself and then, I suppose, they
will be ready to jump. I am perfectly
sure of this, that when the member for
West Calgary does come out and state
his opinion it will be one his leader
cannot accept. He would be perfectly
willing that a portion be handed over
to Manitoba that a western province
could be formed.
The hon. gentlemen refers to the
fact that there is a growing opposition
to the Government of the Qu'Appelle valley. I certainly congratulate the hon. gentleman
on his new
ally. I congratulate him that he
stands on the same platform, or so
nearly, that he can claim the support
of the most active annexationist in the
whole of Eastern Assiniboia. I must
console myself with this fact, that if
there is a growing opposition headed
by Mr. Motehrwell north of the
Qu-Appelle valley, the Opposition in
this House is rapidly decreasing.
(Laughter.)
THE GOVERNMENTS POLICY.
On the one hand we have a clear cut
opinion on the part of the Government:
on the other side we have a number of
opinions differing in every detail,
differing in every important question. As a
consequence its leaders are placed in
the position of not being able to say or
do anything but simply maintain the
hopeless and helpless attitude of do- nothings. They say nothing, do nothing,
and so far as we can gather they know
nothing. We have a clear and definite policy and we are united on it.
We believe in once province with all
rights of other provinces: we believe
in the full control of the lands, the
mines, the minerals and all the royalties
of this country: we believe in adequate
compensation for all the public lands
that have been used for Federal purposes: we believe in getting a fair
adjustment of any outstanding debt
there may be against the Territories;
we believe in the subsidy being given,
not on a population of 400,000 people,
but that it should be as large as that
received by any other province; in fact,
we believe in being treated the same
as the other provinces, and that is the
proposition we made to the Federal
Government, with the provision that we
be made into one province and not
into a number of small ones. I believe
that in this we are backed up by a
loyal following in this House and
knowing the justness of our claim we
rest assured of the outcome. (Cheers.)
WANTS TWO PROVINCES.
Dr. Patrick (Yorkton) followed the
premier and made a vigorous attack
on the one province idea. He proposed to take advantage of the latitude
which the debate offered to say many
things which he regretted to have to
say. Referring to the speech made by
the Duke of York in London after the
royal tour in which His Royal Highness spoke of the liberal laws of the
colonies. Dr. Patrick said he surely
had no reference to some legislation
passed by this House last session
which proposed to expropriate the
property of free men and give them
what compensation a commissioner
might see fit.
Dr. Patrick then devoted himself to
the provincial autonomy question.
He said: I think I may safely claim not
to be open to the indictment made
against others. It is nearly 12 years
since I first had something to do with
local politics. I was so taken with
the attitude of the premier that I followed him and have done so faithfully
to this day. I was a strong believer in
the one province idea and held these
views up to 1897 because I believed
that the assumption was correct that
larger arrears were more cheaply
governed. I followed with a good
deal of interest the debate on the
autonomy motion of the number for
Banff, but in 1897 the position was
taken by Manitoba that it should include a part. I believe that position
was taken by Manitoba as the direct
result of the debate here in 1806 when
the unanimous resolution was passed
in favor of one province. This led me
to see that the position of Manitoba
was such that they had a fair right to
have some say in this matter.
I felt then that the matter must
be dealt with from a Dominion
rather than a local point of view.
In the session of 1809 I expressed the opinion that we should have two
territories united under one local
government. I made the suggestion
in the hope that the leader of the
Government would see his way clear
to recede from a position I held to be
dangerous to the people of this country
and their local interests. I sought reelection not as such a declared follower
of the hon. gentleman. I have continued to hope that he would not bind
himself to the once province idea but
make an alternative proposition, but I
gather that he has nailed his banner
to the one province. (Hear, hear.(
And I as firmly nail my banner to two,
I think the one province idea highly
prejudical to the interests of the people
of this country, and I would rather
stay at home and advocate two provinces than come here to advocate
one. I can understand and appreciate
the position of Manitoba but I am opposed to the annexation of any portion
of the Territories to that province, except the portion lying to the north of
that province: that I think they are
entitled to. If the Territories are
organised into one large province it
will certainly dwarf Manitoba in the
estimation of the people of Canda
and on the map of Canada, and I say
here today the settlement will be
either two provinces or annexation
and that two provinces is the proper
solution.
COST OF GOVERNMENT.
It is said that the two provinces
would be more expensive than one.
It is not an axiom; it is not a self-evident truth. The hon. gentleman
should go further than he does and tell
the people that we have large and
small provinces and show that they
large provinces and show that the
large provinces are the cheaper. I say
that the records show that it will be
cheaper and more economical to have
two provinces than one. I do
not intend to prove it at this time.
The reverse is the assumption on which
the hon. gentleman's case for one province rests. He should take the records
of the small provinces and by a comparison with the large provinces show
that he is correct. It is the only position on which he can stand. No man
can stand on the position that we
should wish one province to be so predominant as to cause strife. The hon.
gentlemn should by a comparison
between large provinces and stuall
provinces, by a comparison between
large States and small States, by a
comparison between the 5,000,000 of
Canada and the 75,000,000 of the United
States, by a comparison between New
Brunswick with its 330,000 of a population and Ontario with its 2,000,000 show
that in any case or a majority of cases
the larger are cheaper than the smaller.
For the purpose of putting him to this
proof I deny it. Let him take the
people into his confidence and prove
that his contention is a correct one.
The motion adopting the Address in
reply to the Speech was then put and
carried, Dr. Patrick alone protesting.
The House then adjourned.
Fisher,
Charles
Wellington