1
THE LEADER.
REGINA, N.W.T., THURSDAY MORNING, MAY 8, 1902.
MORE ON AUTONOMY.
Many Members Speak on the All
Important Subject.
AMENDENT DEFEATED
By a vote of 22 to 7 the Assembly
Rejected Dr. Patrick's Amendment
in Favor of Two Provinces—The
Members for North and South
Regina Express Their Views
Other Speeches.
WEDNESDAY, April 9th.
Speaker Eakin took the chair at half
past two. Mr. A. B. Gillis, chairman
of the committee on standing orders
reported in favor of a petition for
incorporating the Red Deer Memorial
hospital.
Premier Haultain in reply to Mr.
Villeneuve said that the permits for
the sale of liquor in the organized
Territories and the amounts received
were as follows: 1899 (84) $253; 1900
(72) $179; 1901 (142) $325; 1902 to April
8 (54) $143.
Premier Haultain in answer to Mr.
Villeneuve said no members of the educational council had been appointed
since the last meeting of the assembly.
The government did intend to make
such appointments but he could not
exactly say when.
Hon. A. L. Sifton in reply to Mr. C.
Fisher said that 2,740 quarter sections
in Batoche electoral district had been
included in Prince Albert's local im
provement district but neither the hon.
member nor any one else was consulted
in the matter.
MR. A. E. CROSS.
Mr. A. E. Cross (East Calgary) resumed the debate on provincial autonomy. He was thoroughly in accord
with Mr. Haultain's motion expressing
regret that the Dominion Government
had not agreed to pass legislation giving the Territories provincial establishment.
The amendment was a sort of
snap-shot, want of confidence in the
Government. It was not his intention
to vote for two provinces till he knew
where they were to be, and he would
rather vote for one province than for
two if they were to be divided up into
northern and southern provinces. If,
as stated, they were to be divided more
or less equally in area it would place
the northern province in a most ridiculous light. He did not think anybody
would vote for it. If they threw off
the northern part which was not populated and then divided the remainder
there would be a province consisting
of a long thin line along the international boundary largely populated with
people from the United States and
coming in with agressive ideas and
looking down more or less on our
country. He had lived in the United
States and knew something of their
ideas and if the House invited that condition of affairs they were not only doing
a wrong to the country but a great
injustice to every man in it. By introducing that long thin province they
would create a wedge of discord right
in the heart of Western Canada, and
in the future these people might make
a demand on Ottawa which was unreasonable and could not be granted.
There would follow an agitation and
an appeal to Washington and the first
thing they knew they would have an
international question on their hands.
Mr. Cross said he was in favor of two
provinces and would go further and
state where they should be, which was
more than members of the Opposition
had courage to do. He believed in
an eastern and western province.
Mr. Cross —They should be divided
almost equally in area and I do not
think any controversial, questions
should arise if they are so divided.
Mr. Cross said the western province
would find its best market in the west,
while the eastern province would be
contributary to the east, as the chief
product, wheat went to the seaboard.
As far as the area of two provinces
was concerned Mr. Cross claimed it
was not fair to make comparisons
with other provinces where, much of
the land would support neither man
nor animal, whereas the Territories
was composed of arable land capable
of producing all kinds of agricultural
products and live stock. Consequently
they would be in a position to support
a very much larger population than
the other provinces, and if they were
divided into two provinces they would
eventually be larger provinces, than
any in the Douminion. (Hear, hear.)
He had that much confidence in the
west. (Hear, hear.) The outcome
would be the formation of the greatest
and most powerful provinces with the
people in the front rank. (Hear, hear.)
He, therefore, regretted that the
amendment had not come before the
people in a reasonable and fair way so
that honest and intelligent people
could judge for themselves and say
they either had confidence in the Opposition or they had not. The amendment was really
no amendment at all,
but in fact a motion. He was perfectly in accord with Mr. Haultain's
motion and could not vote for the
amendment even if it came up as a
motion.
MR. ANNABLE'S POLICY.
Mr. G. M. Annable (MooseJaw)
claimed that a majority of Government supporters were in favor of two
provinces. He had taken an independent stand in the House voting with
one side as much as the other. He
congratulated the Opposition on getting out a platform on one plank of
which he could stand. He was in favor
of two provinces, and when they were
formed he thought the boundary lines
would be in sympathy with the ideas
of the member from East Calgary.
Dealing with the negotiations carried on by the local Government, Mr.
Annable said: "If I was a member of
that Government I would give the
Dominion Government 30 days to grant
our demands. I would say I
want this subsidy or I will resign and
you can run the show." (Hear, hear,
and cheers.) Continuing he said nobody knew better than the Dominion
Government, the extent of the influx of
immigration into this country and yet
the local Government was expected to
build roads, bridges, schools, etc., and
make these people happy on $300,000 a
year. If the local Government would
give the Dominion Government 30 days
notice and then resign if their request
was not acceded to they need not be
afraid that the lieutenant governor
would call on any three other men to
form a Government because they could
not be elected. (Laughter). These
were not hard times and the Dominion
Government did not know what to do
with their money. (Laughter.)
was the next speaker. The question
of one or two provinces had found
their fullest expression. The hon.
member for Yorkton had not quite
proved his case as to the cost of adiministering large and small provinces.
He (Rosenroll) had had a little experience himself last summer. For a few
months he had to keep up two households as his wife and faimily were in
one province, while he had to keep up
his house at his place of business at
Wetaskiwin. Two governments, he
declared, were twice as expensive as
one. That was as clear as that twice
two makes four. The world was getting smaller and distances shorter all
the time, and government of a large
area was much easier and more economical in Canada, now than twenty
years ago. The tendency all over the
world was for combination in the political as well as the commercial world.
The smaller nations of Europe had
been wielded together into large and
powerful nations such as Germany and
taly. In all branches of human activity instead of dividing forces people
were uniting them. The people of the
Territories should conform to the spirit
of the times and unite and have one
great, prosperous province.
Another objection to two provinces
would be the obstacles thus placed in
the way of professional men. Why
build a Chinese wall between two sections of the country. So far they
had grown up together under the same
institutions and they formed a national
character peculiar to the North-West.
Still another reason was that as one
province they would assimilate
foreign races such as the Galicians and
Doukhobors more easily. These people
were enjoying privileges unknown to
them before they came to Canada;
they were poor in there own land as
our grandparents were here; they were
becoming prosperous and would make
good patriotic citizens but the process
of assimilation would be more rapid
in one province.
The Minister of the Interior had
stated at a public meeting in Winnipeg that it was not desirable to increase
the present number of provinces. The
hon. member for Yorkton only as late
as last year was in favor of the extension of Manitoba's boundaries and
justified his contention by a lengthy
speech. It had been said that one great
overshadowing province would be a
future danger to confederation. What
did that mean? It meant that if there
existed no danger of annexation that
danger had since been created by the
arguments of the gentlemen on the opposite side of the house.
Dr. Patrick explained that he did not
advocate the extension of Manitoba
westward.
Mr. Rosenroll—I did not say northward or westward. The facts are that
he practically said that Manitoba, was
too small a province. He admitted
that it should be made larger.
Mr. Haultain—But he was willing to
state the boundaries. (Laughter)
MR. J. B. SHERA.
Mr. J. B. Shera (Victoria) contented
that the motion did not mean that they
should have been made into, one province, but that they regretted that the
Dominion Government had not granted provincial institutions. He regretted that and
he thought the people did,
and taking that ground he was willing
to support the resolution. He believed
it was nothing more than right and he
did so conscientiously. He might
suffer for it as the people in the northern country were in favor of two provinces.
SOUTH REGINA'S REPRESENTATIVE.
Mr. J. B. Hawkes (South Regina)
said he was in favor of one province.
Some people said the time had not
yet arrived when the Territories should
come into provincial rights but he
claimed the time had fully arrived and
the sooner they were formed into a
province the better it would be for all
parties concerned. They had also
heard that the Government had no
mandate to go to Ottawa and treat
to form a province. He did not look
at it in that way. The Government
had started to bring the matter as
near it as possible before consulting
the House so that if the Dominion
Government was willing to grant their
request the House would be in a position to close the bargain. He could
see no reason why they could not get
along as one province quite as well as
two and it could be managed just as
economically.
Mr. Hawkes referred to Mr. McLeod's Prince Albert speech in which
that gentleman claimed the Opposition
were working together to hold this
matter in abeyance. The speaker said
that while he had belonged to that
Opposition no man could say that he
ever, endeavored to hold the question
in abeyance. The sooner they got
provincial autonomy the better. Quoting further from Mr. McLeod's speech
in which that gentleman was reported
to have said he was satisfied the
Dominion Government would not
grant autonomy for some years and
that they were better as they were,
Mr Hawkes said he thought the hon.
gentleman did not know what he was
talking about. With the very worst
terms they could possibly get they would
be better than they were today. If they
were made into a province today they
would have a better chance to develop
the resources of the country. Pioneers
were now paying for all the improvements while in a province the payments would be
extended over many
years; they could fix the country up
and newcomers would pay their share
of the burden. It was a well known
fact that the Government had not the
money to do necessary work. He had
asked for work to be done which he felt
sure would have been done if the Commissioner of Publie Works had had the
money at his disposal.
A contented settler, Mr. Hawkes
claimed, was the best possible immigration agent. It was therefore of the
utmost importance that the Terriories should be formed into a province
and thus be able to build roads and
bridges, carrying on tests for water,
and develop the resources of the
country.
PROUD OF THE GOVERNMENT .
He believed the Government were
working not for the interests of
Regina, Calgary, Macleod, but for the
Territories as a whole. Did the proposition it sent Ottawa sound as if it
had no interest in the country or its
development? It did not. Every
member supporting the Government
should be proud of the position it had
taken and he was very proud of it, and
he felt sure every member would regret
the way in which the Government had
been treated. The Opposition had
formulated their policy and he could
follow them no longer. (Cheers.) He
would give the Government all the
support he could give them until their
policy of one province was carried out.
(Cheers)
Dr. De Veber (Lethbridge) supported
the resolution. Although it did not
declare for one province he was in
favor of one province. Some of the
arguments advanced against one province were very poor, and the argument that the
larger the province the
more it cost per capita would not appeal to anyone of sense.
MR. R. S. LAKE.
Mr. R. S. Lake (Grenfell) expressed
his approval of the proposal of the executive. The opposition were unanimous in favor
of the recital of the
motion, but they were nearly all at
variance as to the motion itself. For
his own part, however, the motion
was very simple. It was merely a matter of regret that legislation of some
kind was not introduced into the
Dominion parliament and he could not
see why the opposition even holding
the views they did, could not vote for
the motion. Coming to the reasons
given by the Minister of the Interior
for postponing the question, he said
that if the population was too sparse
for one province, surely it was too
sparse for two provinces. (Hear, hear.)
It was evident when the conference
was arranged, that the Dominion
government meant business, but something had evidently happened, he did
not know what, which had changed
that intention. He concluded by expressing his approval of the actions and
methods of the executive and said it
would be inconsistent with the federal
principle if the new province was not
treated on an equal plane with the
older provinces. Otherwise confederation would totter and fall to the
ground. He was a one province man
on the principle that union is strength,
and as one province they could work
out the solution of the transportation
problem so much more easily. The
varied climate and resources of the
several districts might be an argument
against, but there were many good reasons favoring one large province. He
was opposed to annexation with Manitoba.
CAPTAIN MEYERS.
Capt. Meyers (Kinistino) opposed the
amendment. Some of the people to
the north wanted two provinces with
the dividing line between Assiniboia
and Saskatchewan from Manitoba to
British Columbia. He ridiculed the
idea of carrying the boundary line so
far north as the northern boundary of
British Columbia, which would further
carry the dividing line some hundreds
of miles north. If the proposed boundaries were clearly defined he might
have seen his way clear to support the
amendment, but as it was he must say
he had greater faith in one province
although it might be large than in two
provinces with uncertain boundaries.
Mr. M'CAULEY.
Mr. M. McCauley thought the question was not so much one of one province or two provinces, as a question
of
terms, Edmonton and Prince Albert
Boards of Trade had passed resolutions
in favor of a northern and southern
province, but obviously they had been
influenced by the question of capital.
Such resolutions were a little previous,
and he thought the real question was
one of terms. Personally he was in
favor of one province, on the score of
economy.
MR. FISHER.
Mr. C. Fisher said that he had always been a one-province man, but
seeing that the Dominion Government
had refused, and had postponed the
question for two years, he should,
when that time elapsed, be prepared to
vote for two provinces. If, however,
there were to be a northern and a
southern province, he would like to
know how they were to be divided.
He joined, however, in the expression
of regret in the resolution, and, therefore, he should support it.
MR.M'DIARMID.
Mr. McDiarmid believed that the
time was not ripe for provincial autonnomy, but when it did come, he was a
one-province man.
MR. CONNELL.
Mr. J. W. Connell considered that
the publicity of the executive's proposal implied a sufficient mandate to it to
deal with the question. His constituents were in favor of one province,
and he was there to support the motion
of the government.
THE DIVISION.
The vote on the amendment proposed
by Dr. Patrick was then taken and it
was lost by 22 to 7, follows: For,
McDonald, Bennett, Patrick, Villeneuve, McLeod, McKay, Annable- 7.
Against, Haultain, Sifton, Bulyea,
DeVeber, Brown, Fisher, McIntyre,
Meyers, Elliott, Cross, Rosenroll,
Lake, Smith, Shera, Prince, Connell,
McCauley, Simpson, Wallace, Gillis,
Hawkes, McDiarmid–22. Mr. Greeley
was absent.
Premier Haultain itimated he would
reply to the debate when the original
motion was put.
BILLS READ.
Mr. Thos. McKay moved for a return
of correspondence in connection with
the construction of drain No. 54 on T.
33, R. 4 west of the third meridian.
Motion was agreed to.
Mr. McDonald introduced a bill to
amend The Hail Insurance Ordinance.
It was read a first time.
Mr. Bennett introduced a bill to
amend The Local Improvement Ordinance, which also received a first reading.
Mr. McCauley got a first reading of
a bill respecting municipal public
works at Edmonton and also one to
amend the Ordinance incorporating
the town of Edmonton.
Mr. G. W. Brown moved the second
reading of a bill to amend the Ordinance respecting chemists and druggests. The bill
which dealt with the
fees passed its second reading and the
House adjourned.
This individual participated in:
