THURSDAY, 10TH MARCH, 1870.
The debate was resumed by the
Hon. Mr. TRUTCH, Chief
Commissioner of Lands and Works, who said:—Mr. President, in rising to renew
the debate on the question which has been brought before the House by the
Honourable the Attorney―General. I desire to express my regret that I was
prevented yesterday, by indisposition, from speaking in support of the
motion which I had the honour to second, because I fear that by the delay I may
have laid myself open to the charge of waiting to reply to objections that
might be urged against this motion, instead of at once supporting it upon
positive and substantial grounds, as I hold it to be incumbent on those to
do who advocate so important a measure. I must also ask the indulgence of
the House if I find it necessary to follow the Honourable the Attorney-General
over ground already so fully and ably occupied by him, as, rather than leave
out anything in the history of this question which is pertinent to my
argument, I will run the risk of laying myself open to the charge of
plagiarism. In the first place, then, I must ask you, Sir, to allow me to
trace the history of Confederation in this Council, as shown in the debates which
have taken place on the subject. You will find, Sir, that this subject was
first introduced into this'Council on the 29th of March, 1867, when a
Resolution in favour of the abstract principle of the Confederation of the British
Provinces in North America, and expressing the desire
that this Colony should be allowed the opportunity of entering the Dominion
upon fair and equitable terms, at some future time, was unanimously agreed
to. I do not quite take the view of the Honourable the Attorney-General with
respect to the discussions that have taken place on this question; for, Sir,
I think that the question is now for the first time brought before this House and
the country in a practical shape, for a full and deliberate expression of
opinion. The vote which was taken in 1867, according to my understanding of
it at that time, went no further than to express a desire on the part of the
Colony to be confederated with Canada, when a favourable occasion should
arrive, and the result of that vote was, I believe, the insertion of the clause in
the "British North America Act," on which the measure we are now discussing
is based. Again, in 1868, when the Honourable Member for District No. 2
introduced a series of Resolutions setting forth terms on which this Colony
should be united with Canada, the sense of the House, as then expressed, was
that we were not possessed of sufficient information to enable us to come to
any practical resolution on the subject; and, Sir, when the terms and conditions
then proposed for the consideration of the House are compared with those now
submitted for your adoption, no words are needed to show that the conclusion
then arrived at was judicious.
Last year, again, the subject was introduced by the Hon. Dr. Davie, to a reluctant
House.
We all felt that there were circumstances which rendered its discussion then in this
Council
inexpedient, although the question of Confederation was even then occupying public
attention
to an absorbing extent, and had in fact been the test question at the elections a
short time
previously in the Districts in this part of the Colony. But certain remarks of the
Honourable
Member for Cariboo, in reference to the position of Government Members on this question,
compelled the expression of the views of the Council on the subject at that time,
in a Resolution
pointing out the practical impossibility of the union of this Colony with Canada,
until the North-
West Territory was amalgamated with the Dominion.
But now circumstances are entirely changed. The Hudson Bay Company's rights in that
region, known as the North-West Territory, are determined by purchase, and that country
is
practically part of the Dominion of Canada; for the temporary opposition from a certain
class
of the population of the Red River Settlement, to the assumption of the Government
by the
Canadian authorities, is passing away, if not by the present moment virtually at an
end. And
treating that ebullition of feeling resulting from misapprehension of the real intention
of the
Dominion Government as passed away, I regard it as an established fact that, as stated
in Lord
Granville's despatch, our boundaries are now conterminous with those of Canada.
But not only is Union with Canada now practicable, but, Sir, I regard the present
as a most
opportune moment for its consummation. I entirely agree with Honourable Members who
say
that this Colony requires a change. In its present depressed state, the Colony needs
assistance
and fresh impetus. There are many causes which combine to contribute to the depression
now
observable in the country. It has been attributed to the present form of Government.
Take
that as one cause, if you please; but, Sir, I believe it has had very little effect,
if any, in pro
20
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.ducing this result, and you will find many other and mightier reasons to account for
it. Chiefiy,
I believe, with the Honourable Attorney-General, that this depression is attributable
to the
isolated position of the Colony, and to the cold shade thrown over us by the neighbourhood
of
the Territories of the United States, from whom we can never hope for aid in advancing
the
interests of this Colony whilst under the British Flag. The desire for some change
is urgent,
and if we wait for more prosperous times, under which to claim better financial terms,
we may
realize the old proverb of the "Horse starving whilst the grass is growing." Besides,
Sir, on
reference to the terms now proposed for the consideration of this House by the Government,
it will be found that they are based not altogether on the present condition of the
Colony, but
somewhat on an anticipated increase of population and prosperity; and I suppose we
might
wait many years before such a measure of prosperity would accrue to us, as to entitle
us to
ask better financial terms than are included in these Resolutions.
I believe the time, then, to be opportune, and I think that there is every reason
to suppose
that the present Government of the Dominion is now desirous and ready to grant us
fair and
liberal terms.
I believe, Sir, the Canadian Government are favourably disposed towards us, and prepared
to go to the utmost of their ability in all reasonable matters to enable us to joint
the Confederation. The policy and wishes of the Imperial Government, too, in the same
direction
are clearly
enunciated in Earl Granville's despatch; and we are fortunate in having now at the
head of
the Executive a Governor admirably adapted by his ability and experience to take charge,
on
our behalf, of negotiations for our union with the Dominion, and to whom the interests
of the
community may confidently be entrusted.
And that brings me, Sir, to this point: That in its first introduction into this Council,
this
measure must necessarily be a Government measure. The constitution of this House renders
it imperative that the initiatory steps should he taken by the Government, although
the final
acceptance of the terms will properly rest with the people. The policy of the Imperial
Government has been clearly stated: It encourages us to amalgamate our interests with
Canada,
and
points out the advantages to be thus obtained, and nothing that I could add would
enunciate
more clearly than that document the grounds on which Her Majesty's Government, on
behalf
of this Colony, favour Confederation.
This leads me to remark on the part that has been taken in reference to this question
by
the Official Members of this House, especially by the Executive Officers. Our position
has been
misapprehended—or it not misapprehended, it has been misrepresented—and I feel it
my duty to
allude to the false impressions which have been spread abroad on this subject. It
has been
stated that the Official Members have been obstructive to Confederation, with regard
to their
own official positions and interests. But this is not the fact. On a matter so clearly
involving
a question of Imperial policy, we were not at liberty to anticipate the views of the
Home
Government, which have now for the first time been distinctly made public. The Hon.
Attorney-
General and myself have consistently affirmed the principle of Confederation; and
we have
always felt that we could safely confide our personal interests to the care of the
Imperial
Government, whose servants we are. To Her Majesty's Government those interests are
entrusted
by the Resolutions proposed for your adoption; and, Sir, we are well satisfied that
this question
as it affects us personally should so depend. We have been right, Sir, I believe,
in not anticipating the views of the Imperial Government, for the terms of union now
submitted
for your
adoption prove the wisdom of the course which we have pursued; and in the exercise
of caution
we have shewn ourselves the truest friends of the Colony, even though we have not
appeared
to be the most enthusiastic advocates of Confederation.
This, then, is a Government measure, as the Honourable the senior Member for Victoria
has told you; and as I hold it is of necessity a Government measure. This scheme is
propounded
by the Government, as the guardians of the interests of this infant Colony; and I
stand here
as a member of the Government to support the Resolutions which are now before you,
and I
sincerely trust that they will be adopted by this Council. But His Excellency has
told us that
the ultimate acceptance or rejection of the terms of union with Canada, after they
have been
submitted to the Dominion Government, shall be left to the popular voice of this country.
I will now. Sir, come to the consideration of what Confederation is in the abstract,
as I
understand it. It is the union and consolidation of British interests in British Territory
on
this continent, for the security and advancement of each Province individually, and
of the
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 21
whole collectively, under the continued support of the British Flag. A great idea
of great
minds, which have thus given a practical refutation to that doctrine of "America for
the
United States," known as the "Munro doctrine," held by leading politicians of the
States
south of us; and on this account, if on no other grounds, the principle of Confederation
deserves
the support of every British heart in the Colony.
I am now brought to a subject which I should not have known how to approach, but for
the
bridge thrown over for me by the Honourable Member for Victoria yesterday. By that
Honourable Member the suggestion of a closer union with another country—with the United
States, in
fact—and the possibility that at the next General Election such an union might be
presented as
an alternative to Confederation with Canada, was introduced in so palpable a manner,
that I
should feel myself derelict to my duty as a Member of the Executive and as a Member
of this
Council if I did not refer to it.
Mr. President, I should do violence to my best feelings were I to refrain from availing
myself of this opportunity of paying my humble tribute of respect and esteem for the
people
of that great Republic. ["Hear, hear," from
all sides]
Hon. Mr. TRUTCH No one can better appreciate than I
do the high and eminent qualities which characterise that great Nation, and especially
that
national feeling—that love of country, so worthy of our imitation―for which they have
made
such sacrifices. It has been my fortune to pass several years in the United States,
and to have
formed there some of the most valued friendships of my life, so that my acquaintance
with
Americans has led me to form a most appreciative estimate of their social and domestic
relations, of which I can not speak in terms of too much praise. But my experience
of the
political institutions of that country only led me to prize our own more highly, and
made me
more than ever an Englishman; and I rejoice at the opportunity now afforded me of
raising my
voice against any movement tending in the direction of incorporating this country
with the
United States.
I must now make passing allusion to a petition gotten up in some mysterious way, looked
upon here at first as a mere joke; so insignificant that it would not be worthy of
notice but
for the use made of it elsewhere. It has been represented in other quarters as expressing
the
views of a great portion of this community. It has been so represented in very high
quarters,
and I therefore notice it; and in doing so I feel compelled to state that, so far
as I could learn,
it was signed by a very small number of people―forty-two, I believe, in all—many of
whom were
aliens, and most of whom were foreign-born subjects, and who appear to have been generally
actuated by prejudice, based upon a lack of information respecting Canada and the
Canadians,
and not by any regard for the permanent benefit of the community. But as this petition
has
been followed up by the publication of letters and by a discussion in the newspapers,
which we
cannot blink, as to what has been termed the Annexation of this Colony to the United
States;
and as allusion was made to it, by an innuendo at all events, in this Council yesterday,
I feel
bound to express my opinion of what our position would be under any such union as
has been
hinted at.
If British Columbia were placed in the same position as Washington Territory, we should
be absolutely without representation―for that Territory has one representative in
Congress, it
is true, but he has no vote—and all our officials would come from Washington. Annexation
to
the United States would also entail on us largely increased taxation, and would most
materially
affect an interest which the Honourable Member for Victoria told you would suffer
most
from Confederation. Why, Sir, under the union suggested, our farmers would be brought
into
direct competition with the farmers of Washington Territory and Oregon, and then our
agricultural interests would be indeed annihilated. Again, it this country were American
Territory
you would have the whole influence of San Francisco brought to bear against the mercantile
interests of Victoria; no hope could we have of building up a port here to rival San
Francisco;
no, Sir, you would never see a foreign vessel in these waters. I see no advantages
in the
suggestion; I have heard none pointed out, unless it be the questionable expectation
that
American capital might buy up the real estate in and around Victoria, and so give
the present
holders the opportunity of realizing their property into money and then leave the
country to
its fate. But in this hope, Sir, I believe they would be egregiously disappointed.
I will not
pursue the subject any further. Annexation is entirely out of the question, and I
should not
have dared to allude to it, but for the introduction of the subject by another Honourable
Member
yesterday. What do these foreign petitioners propose to transfer? Themselves? Their
own
22
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
property? No; not themselves, nor that which belongs to them, but the whole Colony,
the soil
of this vast domain which belongs to the Crown and the people of England. This I regard
as
treasonable. In supporting Confederation I support the flag I serve. I say that loyalty
is no
exploded idea; call it a sentiment if you will; life is nothing without sentiment.
Every one whose
soul is not dead must cling to love of country and attachment to her flag, as one
of the most cherished sentiments of the heart, and I regard loyalty as one of the
most deep-rooted
and
highly prized treasures of the human breast. [" Hear, hear," from
all sides]
Hon. Mr. TRUTCH Bear with me, Sir, while I tell you now what I think Confederation is not. I don't
think
it necessarily means Responsible Government, or, as an Honourable Member at the other
end
of the House has put it, that it means getting rid of Government Officials. If that
Honourable
Member's desire is to be rid of the present incumbents of office so that others may
take their
place, I think it probable that his wishes in this respect may be gratified through
Confederation;
and in that case I could only hope that the change would be beneficial to the Colony,
But I
doubt much if this measure would receive support from this Council on these grounds;
and at
all events the Honourable Gentleman cannot expect much sympathy on that score from
this side
of the House.
Again, Confederation does not, to my mind, mean Responsible Government, as some Honourable
Members hold. British Columbia will assuredly get Responsible Government as soon
as
the proper time arrives, as soon, that is to say, as the community is sufficiently
advanced in
population, and in other respects, to render such a form of Government practically
workable;
sooner, probably, through Confederation than by any other means, and the sooner the
better, I
say. But I do not think it desirable to fetter or cumber the proposed terms of union
with
anything about Responsible Government, and specially for the reason that we should
find it
very difficult to arrive at any conclusion in favour of it. Great difference of opinion
exists
upon the subject even around this Council Board, and I am by no means sure that the
strongest
opposition to Responsible Government would come from the Government side of the House.
It
is easier to change the constitution after Confederation than before. ["No, no."]
Under the
Organic Act, this Colony could get Responsible Government. In fact, it is the special
prerogative
under this Act of each Province to regulate the constitution of its own Executive
Government
and Legislature; and whence this desire to act so prematurely now in this respect?
Another Honourable Member has told you that in his opinion Confederation means the
terms―means a Railway; but I take it, Sir, that the terms proposed result from Confederation,
and that the Railway is a means to the end, for we cannot have real Confederation
without a
Railway, But, Sir, I advocate Confederation on principle; and I believe the terms
to be the
natural result of Confederation. They flow from it as a natural consequence, as the
effect
proceeds from the cause. I believe that by Confederation we are to gain those advantages
which are set forth in the terms.
If it could be shown that by acceptance of these terms we should in any way sacrifice
our
honour―lose any political status that: we now enjoy—I would not support Confederation
it it
brought a dozen railroads. But I believe that each member of this community will be
raised
by the change. We shall have a distinct and very respectable representation in the
House of
Commons and Senate. We shall have as representatives there men whose voice will be
heard,
men whose duty it will be to speak for us Far from entertaining the views expressed
by the
two Honourable Members for Victoria, I am inclined to think with the Honourable Member
for
New Westminster, that this Colony will have its due weight and influence in the Dominion,
that
its representatives will be heard and listened to in the Canadian Parliament, and
that this will
be a favoured portion of the Confederation, when admitted, on account of its position
as the
outlet of Canada on the Pacific. I do not, then, advocate Confederation specially
on account
of the terms I find in its general merits ample grounds for support, and I consider,
as I have
said, that the terms follow as a matter of course.
The Honourable Member for Victoria has said that we are bound to prove the benefits.
It
is difficult to prove anything to some minds. The benefits of Confederation are among
those
things which, being in futurity, we cannot prove. I cannot prove that which has not
happened.
We can only rely on human judgment and experience, and argue that such and such things
will
occur, as certain causes will produce certain effects. I, and other Official Members
of this
Colony, have a considerable interest in this Colony; I have, to a certain extent,
identified myself
with it and its concerns for some years past, and speaking as an individual Member
of this
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 23
Council, if I did not believe that Confederation would prove advantageous to this
Colony, and
redound to the benefit of our local interests, I should not support it by my voice.
I might as
a Government servant vote for it as a Government measure, but I should not be standing
here
to speak for it and to advocate it as heartily as I do. It is hardly possible to show
where the
colony will be benefited by Confederation, without discussing the terms, which is
not my present
intention to do; but I promise Honourable Members that if these Resolutions get into
Committee,
I will fully satisfy them of the local advantages that must accrue to the Colony from
union with
Canada, on the terms proposed in these Resolutions.
I believe, Sir, that many of the objections which have been raised to Confederation
have
arisen from prejudiced feelings. I have no reason to be prejudiced against or partial
to Canada.
I believe that Canadians as a people are no better than others, and no worse. I have
no ties
in Canada, no particular reason for entertaining any feeling of affection for Canada;
and if I did not believe that the advance which we make will be met in a becoming
spirit,
["Hear,
hear,"] then I should be of opinion that Confederation would be nothing more than
on union
on paper, one not beneficial to this Colony or to Canada. There are statesmen there,
Sir,
who know that it would be useless to try to beat us down on terms; for what would
be the
use of Confederation if it afterwards turned out that this Colony was injured, rather
than
benefited, by it.
The Honourable Junior Member for Victoria asks what guarantee have we that the terms
will be carried out. I say at once, Sir, that if the terms are not carried out, if
the Canadian
Government repudiate their part of the agreement, we shall be equally at liberty to
repudiate
ours. [
Dr. Helmcken—"How?"]
Hon. Mr. TRUTCH We should, I maintain, be at liberty to change; but I, for
one, do not approach this subject with any such feeling. [" Hear, hear," from
Mr. DeCosmos.]
Hon. Mr. TRUTCH There are always two sides to a bargain, and if the terms which are frankly and honestly
proposed are not fairly and honourably dealt with, we should, in my opinion, be at
perfect liberty
to draw back.
There is, however, one real and practical objection which has always suggested itself
to
my mind from the first, and that is, that the same measures that apply to the circumstances
of Canada, such as tariff, will not apply equally in all respects to this Colony.
It will be asked,
then, why is there no suggestion as to some alteration or modification of the tariff
in the terms.
The reason is somewhat similar to the reason for the omission of all mention of Responsible
Government. You would find it very difficult to come to any conclusions on this subject
in
this Council. It is impracticable to define now positively what precise tariff would
best suit
this country. Some favour a free port. I should be inclined to favour it myself if
I believed
it, practicable. Some, on the other hand, say that we must have protection to agriculture,
and
that without it we cannot compete with the farmers of Oregon. This point was fully
discussed
in the Executive Council, but it was decided to omit any conditions for the regulation
of Customs
dues from these terms; and I do not think that this measure ought to be complicated
with the
tariff question. I believe that we may safely trust this people with whom we are about
to
negotiate, to do as much for us in this direction as we could do for ourselves; it
will be to
their interest to do so. It requires no argument to show that it will be to the interest
of
Canada, after Confederation, to advance the prosperity of this country. If it be possible
to
adopt a special tariff to this part of the Colony, and I see no reason why it should
not be
adopted, I confidently hope to see such a special tariff arranged under Confederation.
[" Hear,
hear," from
Mr. DeCosmos]
Hon. Mr. TRUTCH Rely upon it, Sir, that there are statesmen in Canada who have
a far wider and longer political experience than Members of this House, and who would
be
able to point out many means of prosperity, for which we are looking with so much
anxiety,powerful minds, before which I feel humbled,―men who I cannot for a moment
suppose
would
fail to see as plainly as we do that Confederation would be of no benefit to Canada
unless it
redound to the advantage of British Columbia. This requires no argument; it is perfectly
plain common sense.
If we are not to have Confederation, what are we to have? What is the proposition
of
those who oppose Confederation? The people of this Colony have been, for a long time
past,
asking for a change, and it has been the policy of those who ask for change to throw
the blame
of everything upon the Government. The policy of the Imperial Government on this matter
is clearly expressed in Earl Granville's despatch. He does not say you must confederate,
whether you will or not; it is left to the people to decide this question for themselves;
but he
24 CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
says, virtually, " You have for years been asking for a change, you complain that
your present
form of Government does not suit you; we point out for your consideration Confederation,
which, if it suits you, we favour; the Government of Canada is ready to step in and
assist you to carry out your views for the advancement of your local interests."
Now, Sir,
I say to
this Council,—If you don't want Confederation, what do you want? To remain as you
are?
This I know you are not satisfied to do. What then? Establish a sort of Independent
Government of about 6,000 people, connected with nobody, owing allegiance to nobody?
The
idea isÂ
absurd. There appears, then, to be no alternative to Confederation, but that suggestion
which
has been shadowed forth during this debate, and which I, for one, decline to consider
as a
possibility. And so we come to Confederation as our manifest destiny.
To sum up my argument in support of the motion of the Honourable the Attorney-General-
I advocate Confederation because it will secure the continuance of this Colony under
the
British Flag, and strengthen British interests on this Continent; and because it will
benefit
this community, by lessening taxation and giving increased revenue for local expenditure;
by advancing the political status of the Colony; by securing the practical aid of
the Dominion
Government, who are, I believe, able to—and whose special care it would be to devise
and- carry into effect measures tending to develop the natural resources, and to
promote
the prosperity of this Colony; and by affording, through a railway, the only means
of acquiring
a
permanent population, which must come from the east of the Rocky Mountains.
The Hon. Mr. HOLBROOK said:—Sir, In rising to continue this
debate, after the able speech of the Hon. Chief Commissioner of Lands and
Works, I feel that there is little left for me to say, as when we go into
Committee I shall have an opportunity of expressing my opinion upon the
terms; and it would be factions to oppose a measure which has to come before the
people for their decision. The way, Sir, that I understand the question of
Confederation to stand at present, is that it is not a mere abstract
question of Confederation with Canada, but a question of certain terms which
have to be laid before the people; therefore, I say that any opposition
against this being done would be factious. As regards myself, I shall abide by
such decision, whatever it may be, as I consider the people themselves are
the best judges as to whether they will "benefit, or otherwise, by becoming
part and parcel of the Dominion of Canada. This matter has evidently been
well considered by the Executive Council, most of whom are largely interested
in the welfare of the Colony, and several of them have been as much opposed
to immediate Confederation, when the question has been before this Council
on other occasions, as I have been. But having had an opportunity of seeing
the documents which have come from the Imperial Government on the subject,
the Executive have arrived at the decision that it is best for this question
to go to the country, upon the assumption that the people will ask for Confederation
to be carried out on certain terms; therefore, I say, Sir,
let it go to the people and settlers of the Colony, and by their verdict let
it be decided. Earl Granville has sent out a despatch which states, in
pretty plain terms, that we were not able to govern ourselves; and there
was, perhaps, more truth than poetry in this; for we have had the greatest liberty
granted to us, and yet we have not been content. Our Gold Mining Laws have
been made by the Mining Board; we have had the most liberal Land Laws; and
if we have had a want that the law could satisify it has been immediately
granted.
Our Officials are an honour to the country. As an Englishman, I am proud of them.
Justice has been properly administered in the country; there has been absolutely security
to
life and property so much so that a man can travel in perfect safety from Cariboo
to Victoria,
and capital can be safely invested in any part of the Colony.
We have excellent roads, and one of the richest spots on the whole earth for our Colony,
whether as regards mining wealth or agricultural resources; and yet a petition has
emanated
from a small body of foreign residents in the City of Victoria, asking to be annexed
to the
great Republic adjoining. I am well aware, Sir, that, as has been well said by the
Hon. Chief
Commoner, the petition was paltry and unworthy of notice, and that those who signed
it
were insignificant; and I may be allowed to say that we of the Mainland had no feelings
in
common with them. If it were within reason to contemplate the possibility of the occurrence
of such an alternative. it might be worth while to point out its disadvantages, and
to show
that under it we should not even have representation, as without a certain population,
which
we have not, we could not elect a member, and we should fall back to what Washington
Territory
and Oregon were in the days before this City of Victoria was brought forward by the
Fleet,
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 25
to the encouragement and development of the neighbouring States, equally, or perhaps
in excess
of the interests of our own Colony. We may say that liberty had run wild; people have
actually
become dissatisfied because they have had too much of it. I remember a similar discontent
with excess of liberty in Paris, after the Revolution of 1848; the people revelled
in excess of
freedom, and from so much liberty they fell into another Revolution. It is only in
a country
with such free institutions as England, that such a petition could have been signed
with
impunity; for if it means anything at all, it did not stop short of treason. In most
other
countries the signers would have forfeited their liberty; in some that I have lived
in, the
penalty would have been death. Speaking for the Mainland, Sir, and coming from the
Royal
Town of New Westminster, I have a right to speak in the name of its loyal inhabitants.
I say
that, although Confederation with Canada meets with favour in some quarters, the feelings
of the inhabitants are, and ever will be, thoroughly loyal to the glorious flag of
Great Britain,
and feel proud of belonging to that flag which represents honour, power, justice,
and wealth,
and which is stainless and untarnished, whether unfurled in the face of an enemy and
defended
by its sons, or floating in peace over such a Colony as this. We have had our complaints
on
the Mainland, and we considered the removal of the Capital and centralization of business
at
Victoria an injustice to the rest of the Colony, for the reason, principally, that
Victoria, from
its proximity to the United States, draws its supplies thence, instead of from the
Mainland,
to the gain of the neighbouring States, and consequent loss to the agricultural districts
of the
Mainland of some $10,000 annually, in the article of beef alone; and for the reason
that, by
the Fleet being placed at Esquimalt, we of the Mainland were not only left without
protection,
but that the agricultural interests of Washington Territory and Oregon were being
built up
with the money expended by the Fleet in the purchase of supplies, which if spent in
the
Valley of the Fraser would, by this time, have given us there a population of some
thousands.
The people of my part of the Colony have favoured Confederation, in the belief that
the resources
of the Colony would receive some consideration from the Dominion Government.
We all acknowledge that population is required, and I think there is no reason to
doubt
that it will come. I do not attribute the depression, as some Hon. Members have done,
to
bad Government. We merely followed the course of other gold countries in over trading,
and
placed all our dependence upon a single mining district, and when we did not find
another
Williams Creek so rapidly as we expected, we became disheartened.
But, Sir, I mean to state, and I do so without fear of contradiction, that our natural
resources are more prosperous to-day than they have ever been before, and I need only
point
to the 8,000 acres of land taken up last year as an example of real and solid prosperity.
We
shall acquire population from Canada by means of the railroad, and the large amount
of money
required for its construction will tend to our prosperity. Our merchants also want
something
fixed, that they may not be threatened with constant change, which renders commerce
fluctuating
and uncertain.
I consider, Sir, that the time is opportune for Confederation for many reasons, amongst
others, that there is a favourable opportunity for us, with the aid of Canada, to
make arrangements for the reception of some of the emigrant poor, who are now being
assisted by
the Societies in England to go out to the Colonies. Work could be found for them
on the
railway,
and by this means much of our valuable agricultural land might be settled up.
I shall reserve to myself the right of opposing some of the terms when they come under
discussion, and of asking that others may be inserted. I should be glad to see inserted
in
the terms a clause empowering our Local Government to make her own tariff, so as to
protect
our farming interests, in a similar manner under the Imperial Government, the Isle
of Man
and the Channel Islands have rights reserved; but I am of opinion that the full tariff
of the
Dominion should in all cases be charged, and that the Local Government of British
Columbia
should have the exclusive benefit of any extra tariff.
The Indians, also, should be secured the same protection that they have under our
own
Government. They are now content with us, and with the way in which the laws are administered,
and it is quite possible that they may hereafter be a source of great trouble,
if they are
not considered as well as white men.
I shall hail with pleasure the salmon laws of Canada, spoken of by one Honourable
Member,
which will prevent the placing of salmon traps at the mouth of the Fraser, stopping
thereby
the fish from ascending the river, and by that means cutting off the food of the Indians,
and
26
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
taking from them the means of support; but I should much regret to see any laws brought
into
operation which would grant monopolies, such, for instance, as in the case of cranberries,
which
are at present a source of living to many hundreds of Indians.
As regards our defences: we should have the right to have our own forces, as every
one
would have to serve in the Militia; but so long as English troops are stationed in
Canada, we
ought, when we become an integral part of the Dominion, to have our share of them.
And at
no very distant future I trust that the great scheme of Confederation may be carried
out,
and that the Dominion may have a Royal Prince at its head, and then may the views
of the
great Anglo―Saxon race as regards commerce and trade become enlightened so that English
goods may come into the Dominion duty free.
As we shall, from our position on the Pacific Coast, be the keystone of Confederation,
I hope we may become the most glorious in the whole structure, and tend to our own
and
England's future greatness.
I shall support the motion of the Honourable the Attorney-General.
The Hon. Mr. WOOD said :—Sir, I rise to support the amendment
of the Honourable Junior Member for Victoria, to postpone the consideration
of these Resolutions for six months. I desire, Sir, to express my
unqualified opposition to what is termed the Confederation of this Colony
with the Dominion of Canada on the basis of the Organic Act; and in dealing with
the subject I shall address myself to three several heads of objection:
Firstly, to the principle of the Organic Act of 1867, as applied to the British North
American
Provinces;
Secondly, to the special application of the principle to this Colony;
Thirdly, to the mode in which the consent of its adoption is now attempted to be obtained.
Referring for a moment to my own personal position in this Council, I should wish
to say
that I feel bound as a non―representative and non―official member to present my own
views.
My mouth is not closed by official reticence, nor do I represent any constituency.
I am here,
bound by my duty as a Member of this Council, to express my own conscientious views
in
respect of the measure in explicit terms, in the interests no less of this Colony
than of Great
Britain, which in this, as in every Colonial question, I cannot but hold to be identical.
With respect to the general principle of Confederation of the British North American
Provinces, it will be remembered that, in 1867, I was one of those Members who did
vote
that Confederation, on fair and equitable terms, was desirable I am of that opinion
still;
but my objection is that no terms based on the Organic Act of 1867 can be fair or
equitable.
It cannot be denied that the idea of a confederation and general alliance between
the
British Colonies in North America is a very captivating idea. The existence of a homogeneous
nation tending to act as a counterpoise to the great Republic to the south of us,
is a grand
political idea, but it is an idea most dangerous and difficult to carry out. When
I voted in
1867 for Confederation on fair and equitable terms, I had in my mind Confederation
in the
general acceptance of the word as understood by all political writers and by the world
in
general— a union of free and self-governed States, united by a federal compact for
purposes
of offence and defence, of peace and war, and for the purposes of maintaining and
preserving
uniformity in laws and institutions which affect the social and commercial relation
of life;
such laws and institutions as criminal law and practice, the general administration
of justice,
and the laws regulating commerce and navigation. Such a Confederation I then believed
to be
possible, I am foolish enough to believe it to be possible still; but Confederation
as understood
by Canadian and Imperial statesmen—Confederation as effected by the Organic Act of
1867- is not Confederation at all. I would, indeed, throw the word Confederation
to the
winds, since
by Confederation is obviously meant union, incorporation, and absorption. The Organic
Act
of 1867, provides for the entire transfer of all effective legislative power and control
to Ottawa,
as the seat of the Dominion Government, where, owing to the much greater wealth and
population
of Canada, the influence and authority of Canada bear all before it. It is a principle
too obvious
for proof or dissertation, that Confederation in its proper sense can only thrive
where the States
bound together by the federal compact are not only free, but where they are nearly
equal.
Excess of power in any one State is fatal to the interests of the rest. No, Sir, the
word Confederation has no application to the intended movement. Lord Granville. in
his despatch,
no
longer calls it by such a term. Union and Incorporation are spoken of, not Confederation,
and
the movement really is one of incorporation, absorption, and annihilation.
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 27
Now, Sir, the objections that I raise are objections to the provisions of the Organic
Act,
and I find it necessary, for the purposes of my argument, to turn to those provisions.
I do not
mean to detain the Council at unnecessary length, but as the question before us is
one which
concerns the future of this Colony for all time, I trust that I shall be excused if
I dwell for a
few moments upon these points.
If we come into Confederation, we come in, as I understand it, under this Organic
Act; and
it is on account of the overwhelming influence of Canada in the joint Legislature
of the Dominion,
as given by that Act, that I object to the general principle of the Confederation
of the North
American Provinces of Great Britain. I am told I am in error, that profound statesmen
in
Great Britain and in Canada have determined otherwise, and that Confederation, on
the basis
of the Organic Act of 1867, is the policy of Great Britain
I regret, Sir, that I cannot be silenced by the weight of such authority. No statesmanship,
no conclusion, is of any value except for the reasoning on which it is founded; and
I am ready
to rest the whole matter on simple argument and reason. All States large enough and
populous
enough to warrant such privileges, eagerly and passionately desire the power of self-government.
It is the common passion of our race. Formerly, even now, in other places, it is British
policy
to give these powers; and as New South Wales has thrown off Victoria and Queensland,
so
would it appear to be reasonable to extend the principle to the British Provinces
in North
America, rather than to adopt a different policy, for the simple reason that it is
in accordance
with the instincts of the Anglo-Saxon race, and the just rights of man.
We want self-government, which means the protection of our own interests, and the
establishment of our own welfare in our own way; the passing of our own Estimates
in our
own way;
the selection of those who rule, and the subsequent meeting of our rulers, face to
face, in open
Council, that they may show us the results of their ruling. It means the imposition
and collec―
tion of our own taxes, fostering our own industries, and the power of the purse. These
are the
elements of self-government, and they are reserved to the Dominion Government, and
taken from
the Provinces; hence my objections to the Organic Act. For these reasons I say that
Confedera―
tion—or rather union—with Canada cannot be fair and equal, on account of the overwhelming
influence of Canada in the Dominion Parliament, now and in the future; for it always
must be
so. Canada can extend, and will extend, and even of herself would be able to sway
the destinies
of the Dominion. And are we to accept this position because we are told that British
statesmanship wills it? Statesmanship, Sir, is nothing more than very sound common
sense put
into
practice—sound common sense, backed by a knowledge of mankind and of the subject matter
to
which that statesmanship is applied. And, although it is not for me to depreciate
the renown
of my countrymen, it cannot be disguised that they have not unfrequently gone astray,
and been
forced to submit to the control of national interests and national will. It is not
difficult to find
instances of error in British statesmanship, as applied to Colonial affairs. The errors
of British
statesmen, with a majority of the House of Commons-and the British Nation to back
them, cost
Great Britain the thirteen United States. The errors of British Statesman, with a
majority of
the House of Commons and the British Nation to back them, have inflicted wrongs upon
Ireland,
which are only now in process of removal; and the policy of British statesmen, with
the British
Nation to back it, has created a difference which has gone far to alienate tile affections
of the
Colonists of New Zealand.
In this question of Confederation it is impossible not to see the self―intorest of
Great Britain
underlying the whole matter. England is alarmed at the extent of her Colonial possessions,
and
her obligations to protect them by sea and land. Of all her possessions, the Dominion
of Canada
is the most assailabie; and, doubtless, Great Britain stands alarmed at the responsibility
and
cost of protecting so enormous a frontier. The question of Confederation is the question
of
every tax-paying Englishman, and whatever may be the reasoning put forth, the motive is
economy and security to the tax―paying public of Great Britain. Confederation is,
doubtless,
of value to Great Britain, as establishing a counterpoise to the United States of
America, and
probably inducing the Dominion of Canada to ask for and obtain independence, and so
relieve
the Mother Country from the cost and duty of defending it. This is, I believe, the
entire
statesmanship of the measure—a statesmanship meritorious in English eyes—but, as I believe,
fraught with extreme danger to British interests in this quarter of the globe.
Turning now to what may be called the argument in favour of Confederation, we have
Lord Granville's despatch. Lord Granville, it must be admitted, has ably, gracefully,
and
28
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
plausibly put before us the supposed advantages of Confederation :―" Her Majesty's
Govern"ment believe that a Legislature selected from an extended area, and representing
a diversity
"of interests, was more likely to deal more comprehensively with large questions,
and more
"impartially with small questions, and more conclusively with both, than is possible
when
"controversies are carried on and decided upon in the comparatively narrow circle
in which
"they arise. Questions of purely local interest would be more carefully and dispassionately
"considered when disengaged from the larger politics of the country, and at the same
time
" would be more sagaciously considered by persons who have had this larger political
education.
"Finally, they anticipate that the interests of every Province of British North America
" would be more advanced by enabling the wealth, credit, and intelligence of the whole
to be
" brought to bear on every part, than by encouraging each in the contracted policy
of taking
"care of itself, possibly at the expense of its neighbour."
This I understand to be the argument of the Colonial Office in favour of Confederation;
and
although I fully admit that it is well put, I believe that no argument is more fallacious.
It is
delicate ground for me to touch when I presume to differ from what comes from so able
a man.
On this point I wish to make myself distinctly understood. I do not profess to be
a statesman
or a politician, but as a lawyer of mature age, pretending to a fair share of common
sense and
a knowledge of human nature, I will venture to say, that if there is one passion more
powerful in
the minds of Colonists of Anglo-Saxon origin than another, it is the passion for self―government;
in all English communities there is an ardent passion for self-government. Colonists
here, as
everywhere else, are animated by an intense desire to govern themselves in the way
they think
best; and to delegate that power to others is destructive of every feeling of self-respect
and of
social and political liberty. '
It is not necessary for me to prove that this is the case, it is too notorious for
comment;
and as long as the spirit of liberty exists in the British Nation, we shall find that
no one Province
will submit to legislation at the hands of a Legislature in which its interests and
welfare are
overwhelmed and overborne. To secure submission to a Legislature such as that of the
Dominion
of Canada, where the majority of the Canadian Members make the law, uniformity of
interest
and feeling is necessary; and not only will the feeling of any separate Province be
wounded by
the consciousness that self-government is withheld from it, but on finding that its
interests, or
its feelings, are overwhelmed and subjected to the interests and feelings of a dominant
portion,
the sense of discontent and dissatisfaction will become universal and national, hence
will ensue
a condition of things most perilous 'to British interests generally.
The bond of union between Canada and the other Provinces bears no resemblance to the
union between England and her Colonial Possessions. There is no natural love and original
feeling of loyalty. The feeling of loyalty towards England is a feeling blind, instinctive,
strong,
born with us and impossible to be shaken off; and I believe it is impossible to transfer
a feeling
of loyalty and fealty at will. The connection between the Mother Country and a Colony—even
a
Crown Colony―is well understood in principle and in practice. The Mother Country guarantees
the Colony from enemies abroad and the entire work of inter-colonial management is,
except in
matters of prerogative, left to the Colonists themselves. The Crown pretends to no
dictation,
nor has it any interest at variance with the interests of the Colonists, Although
in a Crown
Colony the official element is supreme, it is well understood that it is to govern—and
public
opinion forces it to govern—according to the well-understood and well-established
wishes of
the Colony at large. The Government can not and dare not interfere except to prevent
crude,
irrational, or vicious legislation. There is no direct conflict between the Mother
Country and
a Colony in these days; but it cannot be supposed that any British Province will submit
patiently
to injustice at the hands of a Canadian Ministry or a Canadian House of Commons. If
any
scheme has been devised more likely than another to raise and keep alive local irritation
it is,
in my judgment, the scheme of Confederation on the basis of the Organic Act of 1867.
What is said by Lord Granville is true in theory, but practically it is opposed to
human
nature; and in endeavouring to carry out elaborate and elevated views Great Britain
stands a
fair chance of losing the whole of British North America,
Thus far I have treated of the general policy of the Organic Act.
With respect to the applicability of the scheme of Confederation to this Colony I
have more
special and particular grounds of objection, I consider such an union inexpedient
on several
grounds.
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 29
First, the remoteness of the Colony from Canada;
Secondly, the comparative insignificance of British Columbia;
And, thirdly, the diversity of its interests from those of Canada.
That these objections specially apply to the extension of the principle to this Colony
no
one can doubt. Lord Granville admits that the distance is an objection, but thinks
that a
Railway will annihilate time and space. He thinks that the Government can be carried
on at
a distance of 3,000 miles without difficulty. This Railway is to bridge over the vast
desert that
intervenes between this Colony and Ottawa. The notion that we can with any effect
represent
the interests of this Colony in the Parliament at Ottawa at a distance of 3,000 miles
is to me
absurd. With a population such as ours, even if we have the representation suggested
by the
terms, with eight Members of Parliament against one hundred and eighty-two, and four
Senators
against seventy―two, how can it be supposed to be possible that our voices could he
heard?
When Lord Granville spoke of "comprehensiveness" am "impartiality" in a Legislature,
surely
he must have lost sight of the constituent elements of a House of Commons. For let
us consider,
without any reflection upon the House of Commons at Ottawa, what is the nature of
the House
of Commons of England, or of any other assembly of the same nature? Every House of
Commons
is but an assemblage of the Members of Parliament pledged to support the material
interests of
their constituents, whenever those interests are affected. I never can anticipate
anything but
the representation of the views and the material interests of constituents in any
House of
Commons. I believe that members would always vote according to the interests of men
whose
votes they would have again to solicit, and of whose interests public opinion holds
them to he
the acknowledged advocates.
How can we find eight men in a place like this, where at all events; the most valuable
members of society are professional and business men, without selecting them from
a class who
are politicians by profession? Most men here are workers of some sort, and actively
employed
in their several professions and businesses, and we should have extreme difficulty
in finding eight
good men who wou|d spare the time and expense to go to Ottawa. What we should want
would
be such men as are now at Ottawa, the principal business men, bankers, merchants,
and professional men; but time and space will prevent this most valuable class of
men from leaving
British
Columbia and representing our interests at Ottawa, and we shall be compelled either
to retain
the services of Canadian gentlemen, who, living in Canada, would be the British Columbian
repre―
sentatives only in name, or we should have to take eight representatives who will
be content to
make politics a profession, and we shall have to pay them for their services. To the
insignificance of British Columbia as a Province of the Dominion the same remarks
apply.
Difference of interests is a still more material point. Upon this point direct conflict
is sure
to arise. Canada belongs to the Atlantic, and looks to the Old World for her markets.
We are
a new country, our staples are totally different. Questions cannot but arise between
British
Columbia and Canada—between the East and the West—in which Canadian interests will
prevail over those of British Columbia; and aggravated by the feeling of wounded pride
and
forced insignificance, the Colonists of British Columbia will feel naturally aggrieved.
The Colonial feeling is well known—pride and attachment to the Mother Country and
intense sensitiveness and tenacity where injustice or wrong is done. Once let this
feeling he
roused amongst us and it will not be long before British Columbia is clamorous for
repeal;
and not obtaining it, the country will be ripe for any other change, however violent.
Now, Sir, with respect to the third head of my objections. With respect to the mode
in
which the consent of this Colony is attempted to be obtained, I am sorry to notice
what I cannot
but call a spirit of diplomacy and a spirit of management characterizing the whole
movement
in favour of Confederation on the part of the Imperial Government, it is obvious throughout
that the Imperial Government desires to obtain their end and aim of Confederation
in a mer―
cantile spirit of bargain and sale, which jars upon my feelings of right and wrong.
If this Council is properly the Legislature of British Columbia; if we reflect the
intelligence,
the substance, and the interests of the Colony, we ought to have originated these
Resolutions
ourselves. The matter should have arisen spontaneously amongst us, without any attempt
at
leading or forcing. What may be His Excellency's own views upon the subject of Confederation
we cannot tell. I look upon Lord Granville's despatch as a diplomatic order, couched
in polite
language, but nevertheless a requirement to the Governor to carry out the will of
the Colonial
Office, without reference to his own convictions. All that we are told by His Excellency
upon
30
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
this subject is that the Colony will derive "material benefit" from Confederation,
and the Colony
has been offered by the Executive certain material benefits in the shape of a Railway,
a Dock,
cash in hand, and freedom from debt, in return for the transfer of all legislation
to the Dominion
of Canada. These "material benefits " being paraded before the eyes of the colonists,
the
bargain is afterwards to be accepted or refused by a Council composed mainly of Representative
Members. This mode of operation, no less than the bargain itself, is equally objectionable
in
my eyes. The material benefits—the Dock, the Railway, the money payments—are in effect
nothing more than bribes to the present generation to forego the rights of self-government.
I have no doubt that the Colony will accept the bargain. The Colony is a small one,
the
population not exceeding 6,500 adult white men, and of these many are gentlemen of
Canadian
proclivities, Canadians by birth, who are naturally, and I may say patriotically,
in favour of a
union with their native country.
There are many, also, who, in the present adverse condition of things in this Colony,
are
desirous of change of any kind, and eager for any opportunity of benefiting by operations
which
promise to throw population, capital, and enterprise into the Colony. We have suffered
much
from pecuniary depression, and when we have an offer from a great country to come
and spend
money among us, can you doubt that any one will fail to feel these advantages; while
many
more hope for political power and eminence in a system which they expect will carry
with it
Representative Institutions, if not Responsible Government. Can we doubt that the
vote will
be in favour of Confederation? The people of this country will sell themselves for
the consideration of the present, and posterity will hereafter ask indignantly what
right
had we to
shackle them, and to deprive them of rights which cannot be sold.
We shall reap the benefit, and those that come after us will reap the disadvantage
and
humiliation. It is not in the power of the present generation to dispose of the birthright
of
its descendants. Liberty and self-government are inalienable rights. The original
vice of the
matter still remains, and when once the material benefits are enjoyed or forgotten,
and the
consciousness of disadvantage is apparent, reaction will set in; a party of repudiators
and
repealers will arise, who with great show of justice will clamorously demand the reversal
of
an organic change, founded on political error and wrong. Although our masters at Ottawa
may
be ever so amiable and ever so pure, the moment we feel the yoke we shall repent;
it is not in
the nature of Englishmen to submit to tyranny of any description; and dissent such
as our
posterity will express, will be on only too sound grounds. I say, Sir, that this matter
ought not
to be brought forward now, when the country is in a state of depression, ready to
catch at
anything. Recourse should not be now had to Representative Institutions for the first
time,
when the obvious effect is the acceptance by this Colony of a confederation which
carries with
it direct, immediate, pecuniary gain. Few have the self-denial to reject a bait so
invitingly
dangled before their eyes. If the Colonists are to be trusted with Representative
Institutions,
for the purpose of effecting so important and radical a constitutional change, why
are they not
to be trusted with Representative institutions altogether? It is notorious that the
Colony is,
probably with justice, considered by the Imperial Authorities unfit for full Representative
Institutions, and that a Council, with a predominant official element within it, is
the
only fit body
to deal with important questions. Yet this Council is to be differently constituted,
and the
ultimate terms to be accepted by the people alone, for the sole purpose of forwarding
the
cause of Confederation. The whole scheme for effecting Confederation is but a scheme
of
temptation very difficult to forego, though it must be admitted recourse is not had
to actual
or practical force and obligation.
I have delivered my honest opinion on this matter, liberavi animam mcam, I fear at great
length. But I have spoken according to my conscientious convictions and a spirit of
the truest
loyalty. I am desirous to promote the interests of the British Nation; and I believe
the present
movement puts them in great peril. I have given you the best proof of my sincerity.
I have
spoken against my own interests. I have material interests in this Colony which will
greatly
benefit by the movement which will ensue from the building of a Railroad and a Dock.
The
interests of friends and connections who are dear to me will be much benefited; and
those who
know the world tell me that it would have been much better for me if I had bent before
the storm which I cannot avoid; that the honours and rewards of my profession are
not likely
to be bestowed upon one who is no friend to a popular, an Imperial, and a Canadian
movement;
but I cannot act against political conviction. I am here to give honest counsel, and
I have done
it, come what may.
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 31
The question has always appeared to me to be this :—Confederation with England, which
we have; Confederation in its truest sense; Confederation with all the security of
protection,
and all the pride of self-government, now or hereafter to be, when the Colony shall
have
population and wealth sufficient: or Confederation—or, as it should be termed, " Incorporation
"- with Canada. Incorporation with a country to which we are bound by no natural
tie
of affection
or duty, and remote in geographical position, and opposed to us in material interests
Incorporation with all the humiliation of dependence, and to my mind the certainty
of reaction,
agitation, and discontent. Canada can never become the assignee, the official assignee, the
Downing Street official assignee of the affection and loyalty which exists between this dependency and the Mother
Country. I am opposed to the political extinction of this Colony,
and
its subservience to the will of a majority of the House of Commons at Ottawa, and
the administration of its affairs by the political adherents of Canadian statesmen.
And all
this for
what? For "material benefits," for a money consideration, in which the ring of the
dollar
only faintly conceals the clink of the fetter. I am grieved at the mode in which the
change
is sought to be effected, and view the bargain and sale of political independence
for ourselves
and our descendants for a few dollars in hand, and a few dollars in the future, as
equally
shameful and void.
Railway or no railway—consent or no consent—the transfer of Legislative power to
Ottawa, to a place so remote in distance and in interest, is an injustice and a political
extravagance which time will most surely establish.
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS, Member for Victoria District, then
rose and said :—Mr. President, I congratulate you, Sir, and this House upon
the noble work on which we are engaged. We are engaged, I believe, in
Nation-making. For my part I have been engaged in Nation-making for the last
twelve years—ever since I have been engaged in politics in the Colony. [
Hon
Registrar- General—"You have not made a Nation yet"]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS The Hon.
Registrar-General says that I have not made a Nation yet. I need only, in
reply, quote for his enlightenment the old adage " Rome was not built in a
day." [Laughter.] In the humble part that I have taken in politics, I have
ever had one end in view. I have seen three Colonies united on the Pacific Coast.
[
Hon. Mr. Helmcken ― "Three?"]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS Yes, three: Stekin, British Columbia, and
Vancouver Island; and if I had had my way, instead of the United States
owning Alaska, it would have been British today. I have advocated the union
of those three Colonies, and in the union of two of them particularly I have
taken a prominent part. For many years I have regarded the union of the
British Pacific Territories, and of their consolidation under one Government, as
one of the steps preliminary to the grand consolidation of the British
Empire in North America. I still look upon it in this light with the pride
and feeling of a native―born British American. From the time when I first
mastered the institutes of physical and political geography I could see
Vancouver Island on the Pacific, from my home on the Atlantic; and I could see a
time when the British Possessions, from the United States boundary to the
Arctic Ocean, and extending from the Atlantic to the Pacific, would be
consolidated into one great Nation.
Sir, my political course has been unlike that of most others in this Colony. Allow
me to
illustrate my meaning by the use of another old adage. My course has been that of
" beating
the bush whilst others caught the bird." My allegiance has been to principle, and
the only
reward I have asked or sought has been to see sound political principles in operation.
Therefore, Sir, I say again that I congratulate you and this Honourable House on the
noble
work
on which we are all engaged.
We are here, Sir, laying the corner stone of a great Nation on the Pacific Coast.
When
we look at past history, we find some nations that date their origin in the age of
fable; some
have been produced by violence, and extended their empire by conquest. But we are
engaged
in building up a great Nation in the noon-day light of the nineteenth century, not
by violence,
not by wrong, but I hope, Sir, by the exercise of that common sense which the Honourable
gentleman who preceded me called statesmanship.
It was not my intention yesterday to have taken up the attention of this House with
any
remarks until we were in Committee of the Whole, although I have taken, for historical
purposes, ample notes of the debate. Allusions have, however, been made during the
course of
this debate, amongst others to myself. I am, therefore, compelled to crave the indulgence
of
the House for a time to set myself right before this Council and the country, and
to add my
32
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
humble opinion to those around me in favour of the consideration of this question
in Committee of the Whole. I shall support the general principle of Confederation
[Hear,
hear], as I
have always done, if we get to the discussion of the terms proposed.
First, Sir, let me allude to some of the statements of the Honourable the Attorney-General
(Mr. Crease) and the Chief Commissioner of Lands and Works (Mr. Trutch), and to the
Honourable Executive Member for Victoria City (Mr. Helmcken). Sir, I know something
about
the history of Confederation. Up to the opening of this Session Confederation has
been
a subject of agitation. It may properly be divided into several heads: Firstly, agitation;
secondly, negotiation; thirdly, inauguration; and fourthly, I hope, successful
operation. Now, Sir, it is apparent that every act of mine in reference to Confederation,
up
to the time it was announced in Earl Granville's despatch, up to the time His Excellency
the
Governor sent down his Message—every act of mine was in the line of agitation. It
was with
the view to bring about the consideration of terms with the Dominion Government; to
hear
what they would do; to bring the question before the people, and to canvass its defects
and
advantages, that I for one have agitated the question. In doing so I have come in
for blows
from open enemies and treason from false political friends. Sir, the era of agitation
has now
passed, and we advance to the era of negotiation.
When I heard the Hon. Attorney―General, yesterday, invoking High Heaven; and when
I
heard him explaining the position of Official Members upon this question; when I heard
him
state that he was always in favour of Confederation, there flashed across my mind
one of the
proverbs of Solomon, which I cannot refrain from repeating: " Such is the way of an
adulterous
woman; she eateth and wipeth her mouth and saith I have done no wickedness" [Laughter]
Sir, I respect any Honourable Member who will, if he sees reason to change his opinion,
come
down and frankly tell the honest truth; but when an Honourable Member tries to make
political
capital out of other men's labour, I confess I do not respect him. On the contrary,
such men as
the latter, when officers of a Government, remind me of the remark of a celebrated
French
philosopher, who said: "That in all the mysterious ways of Providence there is nothing
so
inscrutable as his purpose in committing the destiny of nations to such creatures
as these."
[Laughter]
There are men in this Colony entitled to some honour; some men who are entitled to
praise
for having brought Confederation to its; present stage; but they are not the Honourable
gentleman, the Minister of Justice, nor the Honourable the Chief Commissioner. [Hear,
hear.]
Is Earl Granville entitled to the credit of bringing this matter forward? Is Governor
Musgrave, or his Cabinet, or the Officials? No, Sir, I should be doing wrong if I
permitted it
to be supposed that the credit was due to any one of them. I have assisted to make
history,
and this is a page of it. Let it go forth to the world that the people of this country
have
made Confederation the important question that it is to-day.
The Hon. Chief Commissioner, whom we have heard with so much pleasure today, made
an
allusion to me. He said that when I brought this matter before the Council in 1868,
that the
Executive Council opposed Confederation then, and the present terms proved their wisdom
in
delaying the question at that time. On that occasion my object was only agitation
to open
negotiations. But, Sir, what did I hear at that time? "You pension the officials and
we
will all vote for Confederation." and I think I could mention another Executive Councillor
who
said: " Do you think we are such fools as to vote for Confederation without being
provided for? "
That was the kind of wisdom in vogue, in 1868. Sir, I again object to Hon. Members
taking credit
where no credit is due. [Hear, hear.]
Let us turn now to the Honourable Member for Victoria City (Dr. Helmcken), once a
warm
and generous friend to Confederation; and what has been the result of his opposition?
Impotence. He was impotent to retard the question. He was impotent to advance it.
By impotent,
I mean powerless. He was impotent to stem the course of events. He hung out the banner
of
Anti―Confederation in Victoria. and won his seat by crying: "down with Confederation."
Before
he contested the seat with me, I told him that the Canadian Government would not negotiate
until the North―West Territory question was settled. Yet the Hon. Member for Victoria
City
charged me with backing down from Confederation.
The Hon. Member for New Westminster, also, denounced me in his elegant English in
the
 Columbian as giving up the cause of Confederation. But, Sir, why did I say that the
Canadian Government would not enter into negotiations with us? It was because I had
in
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 33
my pocket, at the time, a despatch from a Canadian Cabinet Minister, which said that
the
Dominion Government would not negotiate until the questions then pending with respect
to the
North-West Territory were settled. The Hon. Member for Victoria City held up, however,
his
puny arm against Confederation. But has he stopped it? No! Not a day, not an hour;
for as
soon as the North―West Territory question was settled, then came a despatch to the
Governor
to push on Confederation. I think I have said enough, Sir, to show that it was the
people
who took this matter in hand, and it is the people who will carry it through. [Hear,
hear.]
Although I have risen unprepared to make a set speech, there are still some points
raised
in debate which, in my opinion, require attention.
The Hon. Attorney-General, after opening, his budget upon Confederation, has referred
to
the three courses which those terms had to take:—First, they are to be arranged by
this House;
next, to go to the Canadian Government; and, thirdly, to be ratified by the people
of this
Colony.
I hope, Sir, that this House will deal with these terms in the interests of British
Columbia.
I stand here not as a Canadian, but as a British Colombian; my allegiance is due first
to British
Columbia. I sincerely hope that these terms will be dealt with from a British Colombian
point of view [Hear. hear, hear, hear], and first as to the money value of Confederation.
[Hear, hear, from
Dr. Helmcken]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS It may grate on the ear of the once Solicitor-General (Mr.
Wood) to mention money: but, Sir, I believe in the old adage that: "Money makes the
mare
to go." I do not intend to allude to the terms in the Resolutions at present, any
further than
to say, that I do not believe in going into Confederation without good terms. I believe
that it
would be traitorous to British Columbia to consent to Confederation without good terms;
and
that we would not do our duty if we did not insist upon getting them.
The Hon. Attorney―General asks why we are not prosperous? In my opinion, Sir, the
causes of our want of prosperity are various. They first arose under the administration
of
Sir James Douglas in 1858, and have been perpetuated down to the present day. The
people
were then almost driven away, and down to the present time the Government have done
nothing comparatively to induce population to settle in the Colony. Another reason
is, that
the country is somewhat rugged, and not so attractive for settlement as some others.
The
Hon. Member for Victoria City says that it is our proximity to the United States.
I most
respectfully deny it. Population would have come if greater efforts had been made
to get it.
The Attorney―General is consistent in one thing. He said in 1867, and he says in his
speech now, that British Columbia is of vital importance to Canada. I cannot see it.
I
cannot see why the Canadian Railway, if this was a foreign country and our boundary
coterminous with that of Canada, might not have run through to connect with our railway
system, as the French railways connect with those of Belgium.
When sitting in the Vancouver Island House of Assembly, in the place now occupied
by
the Hon. Chief Commissioner, I defined British Colonists to be politically, nothing
but subordinate Englishmen; and I contend, Sir, that Confederation will give us equal
political
rights
with the people of Great Britain. In labouring for this cause, Sir, my idea has been
and is
to assist in creating a nationality—a sovereign and independent nationality.
Now, I come to the Hon. Member for Victoria City again. I really confess, Mr. President,
that I expected more sterling opposition from that Hon. gentleman, I thought we had
here
the modern Charles Martel, the celebrated armed warrior who had gone out to drive
the
Saracens—the Canadians—back across the Rocky Mountains. I thought that he would have
protested like Paul the Protestant. [Dr. Helmcken—" What became of St. Paul?"]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS Paul was
converted, and I hope the Hon. Member may share the same fate. [Laughter.] I expected
the
Hon. Member to have deliverd a philippic, that would have done honour to Demosthenes
when
declaiming against Philip of Macedon. But, I really don't know but what he has been
set up
as a target by the Government—a man of straw—to draw the shot of all the Confederate
party.
I don't know why he was taken into the Executive Council. I thought that this Council
was
an united and impenetrable phalanx, but it seems that it is otherwise. What a happy
family
that Executive Council must be! The Member for Caribou and the Member for the City
differ
in their views, and both differ in this House from the Honourable Executive Councillors
at
the other end of the table. It is like Barnum's happy family. But the Honourable gentleman
has told us some things which are good, and besides that he is going to raise other
issues.
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS Yes, the Honourable gentleman said that the issue would be raised at the next election,
between going to Canada and going somewhere else.
[
Dr. Helmcken ―"I said that I thought it very probable if mean terms were proposed by
Canada, the people would raise other issues."]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS O! "the people," those much abused words. I believe in the people when they are right.
But the Honourable gentleman did threaten to raise the issue of going somewhere else.
Now,
Sir, where else except to Canada could we go? The Honourable Member talks of the agricultural
interests. Why, Sir, by going somewhere else, these interests from Comox
to Sooke,
and from Soda Creek and Kamloops to the Lower Fraser would be destroyed. The country
would be flooded by produce from the United States. From Comox to Sooke, from the
delta of
the Fraser to Cariboo, the farming interests would be destroyed by going somewhere
else. If
that question came up, Sir, the farmers would quickly put it down. The Honourable
Member
for Victoria City says that the question comes here by desire of Her Majesty's Government.
Sir, I say again, that it comes here by desire of the people, a large proportion of
whom have
asked Her Majesty's Government and the Government at Ottawa to bring it here. I am
thankful that the question of Confederation is here. The Honourable gentleman says
it is
a
Government measure, and that the terms must he passed. I say, again, that I hope terms
will
be passed of such a character as will contribute to the prosperity and happiness of
this Colony.
The Honourable Executive Councillor that this is a Government measure, and that
it
ought to be an open question. Why does he not retire from his seat then? I would not
be
a candidate for his place. '
[
Dr Helmcken ―" There are no candidates. The Executive Council are appointed."]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS Then I am sorry for the choice that has been made. Why, Sir, the programme settled
by
Government would leave it virtually an open question by referring the terms to a popular
vote.
I may have something to say upon that hereafter. How patriotic will the Honourable
gentleman
be when he goes outside, and says that this nominative Council, pre ded over by a
paid Colonial
Secretary, have done this! How very easy it is for an Honourable gentleman to talk
about the
autocracy of Government, when it suits him to do so. Look at his conduct in voting
supplies.
When my Honourable friend on my left (the Member for Lillooet) tried to bring in a
Bill to
repeal the Crown Salaries Acts, was he not choked off by the Honourable Member for
Victoria.
City objecting first? But I am only delaying the House. [Hear, hear.] The Honourable
Magisterial Member for Victoria City says " hear, hear." Now, Sir, as far as I am
concerned,
the Honourable Member has my full permission to withdraw. [Laughter.] I have always
been
ready to take a British subject vote on this question; but the Honourable Member for
Victoria
has always dissented from that proposal.
The Honourable Member for Victoria City has a remarkable way of putting things. But
a
few days ago he stated in this House, that if the people will only support the Government
in
getting the terms proposed, all will be right. I quote from the Colonist newspaper
of 20th
February, 1870, in which the Honourable gentleman is made to say, "I hope the people
will
support the Government in trying to get terms." He now comes down here and opposes
them.
[
Dr. Helmcken —"I don't oppose the terms. I oppose Confederation."]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS A distinction without
a difference. The Honourable Executive Councillor says the time is inopportune. I
say, Sir.
that now is the time. If the new gold discoveries, which have been mentioned in the
course of
this debate, really exist, now is the time to confederate, and to take means to attract
and retain
population. I have spent five years of my life in the mining districts of California,
and
have helped to build up town after town; but how are they now? Many of these towns
which
had their 5,000 inhabitants have almost none now. It will be the same with our gold-mining
towns. I fear the Honourable gentleman will always say the time is inopportune, not
only
before the population arrives, but when it is here, and after it goes. If we can make
a good
bargain with Canada, by all means let us make it, and make it now. I like the word
bargain,
it sounds like business. What did the Honourable Member for Victoria say at the last
election?- " Don't let us have Confederation, for we shall have a surplus revenue
of $100,000
in 1869, and
we will do better without Confederation." Confederation was inopportune then. There
was a
large deficit or falling off in the revenue for 1869, and yet he says it is inopportune
now. He
said yesterday, we shall have a reduction of the public debt in 1873 of about $36,000,
and by
funding the floating debt make another saving of $15,000 per year. So that for a paltry
saving
of $50,000 three years hence, the Confederation question is now inopportune, I am
surprised at
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 35
the Honourable gentleman. First, it is inopportune, because of the present depression;
second,
inopportune at the last election, because things looked so bright; thirdly, inopportune
now,
because we can save $50,000. Your predecessor as Minister of Finance, Mr. President,
promised
great things, but the Governor's Message with the Estimates shows how they have turned
out.
I do not deal in prophesy, but in facts. Let any one look at Cariboo. Look at Victoria.
If we
wait for the time to be opportune, we may wait until it is too late. Suppose any unforeseen
accident were to happen to our gold mines. If the golden spring is dried up, the golden
stream
that now flows from Cariboo to Victoria will be dried up also. We are asked by the
Honourable
Member for Victoria to wait for the Census of 1871. What has the census of Canada
to do with
the question? The basis of population as set forth in these terms is all fiction.
It does not come
up to my idea of nation-making. Why not deal with facts? Why set up some legal fiction
of
John Doe and Richard Roe? I want facts, not fiction. Let us base our financial calculations
upon facts, and the rest will work itself out satisfactorily. Much has been said,
during the
debate, about the Red River Territory and its settlement. For my part I don't care
if the Red
River difficulty is never settled, so far as it bears on the question before the Council.
I believe
that the Red River country and the valley of the two Saskatchewans are not so favourable
for
settlement as some amongst us are accustomed to assert. But whether the North―West
Territory
is confederated or not, I go in for Confederation, because I believe we can make terms,
and
good terms, with Canada. The Honourable Member for Victoria City talks of the drawbacks
to Confederation arising out of the vast extent of country, and our great distance
from the seat
of the Federal Government. That will hardly scare anybody, with the example of the
United
States before us. Next he says that the Dominion is only an experiment, and that it
may break
up. How often have I heard people predict that the United States, as a nation, must
break up,
as it was only an experiment. Why, Sir, they forget that the States had existed as
separate
Government's for one hundred and fifty years before their union. So with the Provinces
of the
Dominion of Canada; they existed as separate Governments for the last hundred to two
hundred
years, and Confederation is but the application of long-tried principles to a larger
territory.
Why did not the Honourable Member for Victoria City, when he said there were defects
in the
Confederation machine, tell us what the great defects in the machine were? He has
merely
raised up a scarecrow. Then he says it is absurd to ally ourselves to people who were
3,000
miles away; but nothing in his argument showed me that the absurdity was proven. I
remember, Sir, when the communication between California and Washington was by Panama
and
Nicaragua. Was California then less to the United States than now? We now can hold
communication with Ottawa by San Francisco and the Pacific Railroad, and will be as
near
to our
Central Government as Washington Territory. The Honourable Member speaks of people
3,000
miles away being unable to do as well for us as we could do for ourselves. I believe
they could
do just as well, so far as some general principles are concerned, if we only settled
the conditions
properly. With regard to the States of the neighbouring Republic getting on better
than the
Provinces or ourselves, I would ask, where is the progress of Washington Territory,
as compared with our own country? [
Dr Helmcken ―" It contains a much larger population"]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS The
population is only five thousand voters!
The Honourable gentleman is pursuing the same devious course as he did in past years,
when he opposed reform, when our Government might have been beneficial to the Colony,
had
it been based on the popular will. He says that the deposition of the Free Port drove
people
out of the Colony. I take this occasion to state that, in my belief, the deposition
of the Free
Port was the commencement: of the permanent prosperity of this city, and brought in
its train
the dawning of prosperity throughout the whole district, from Comox to Sooke. which
includes
the district which I have the honour to represent, and which now numbers six hundred
voters,
all of whom are prosperous. There, Sir, lies the key-stone of Confederation! If the
terms
between British Columbia and Canada do not protect the farming interests, the largest
and the
only permanent interest in this Colony, Confederation will do no good. If it does
not protect
the farming interest, I vote against Confederation, first, last, and all the time.
It would be most unwise to join Canada without protection. We must have a control
over
certain imports in the terms, for a protective tariff is the only inducement to farmers
to remain
upon the soil. We depend upon them to build up a permanent interest in the country,
that will
last for ever.
We most certainly do want extension of commerce but the true mode to obtain extension
is to add to its volume internally. First, I believe in developing internal trade
and industry;
36
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
next, I believe in external trade. Allow these terms as brought down by the Government
to
pass, and in a few years you will reduce Victoria to the position of a mere smuggling
village.
Protection is a necessity. So long as there are nations and national interests, so
long will it be
necessary to have laws to protect those interests. Allow me, Sir, on this point to
say that there
is a great revolution in the value of realty, capital, and labour commencing on the
Pacific Coast.
The equalization of the value of realty, capital, and labour has commenced. The whole
tendency
of events in the countries to the south of us is to equalize the value of labour,
of real estate, of
capital, of manufactures, and of produce on this coast with their value on the Atlantic
side.
No such revolution in values has over occurred on the Pacific Coast, except that produced
by
the discovery of gold, as has been produced since the opening of the Pacific Railroad.
Take off
protection, then, from our farmers, and they are reduced to the condition of agriculturists
to the
south of us, who will be reduced to the condition of those in the east. No doubt the
prices of
our farmers will be reduced by the revolution that is going on; but give them protection
against
foreign competition, and there will still be inducement for them to remain. The Honourable
Chief Commissioner referred to this in a very proper spirit; and the Honourable Member
for
New Westminster says that it is one of the most important questions. I hope, therefore,
that
the subject will have due weight with them.
The Government of Canada, according to the proposed terms, would give us a surplus
revenue
of $200,000. [
Dr. Helmcken —" No."]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS The Honourable Member says no. He may be right. But
upon the calculation that we shall have $200,000 surplus revenue, I say that this
subsidy will be
equivalent to four hundred farmers who earn in the Colony $500 each, annually. By
taking
off protection from our farmers. to get the $200,000, we would injure the country
instead of
benefiting it. But get the surplus of $200,000, and at the same time protection for
our farmers,
and we will do a prosperous business under Confederation. This is what we have to
arrange,
what we have to get into the terms, [
Dr. Helmcken ―" All right! I will help you"]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS I would
say that " extremes meet," for I now meet in Honourable friend (I mean political enemy)
[" No,
no,"] to secure protection. I do not see, with the Honourable Member for Victoria
City, that we
can get all we want without Confederation by a judicious arrangement of tour own tariff.
I can
show that what we want most in this Colony population, and that population employed
in a
remunerative manner. Isolation will not secure population. Confederation on proper
terms will
give us population; will give us means to employ labour remuneratively; will enlarge
our commerce, and build up our industry. If it give us public works,—if it give us
a railroad
from a
point on the Fraser, below Yale, to Savona's Ferry on Lake Kamloops,—and if we connect
Lake
Okanagan with the Spel-mah-cheen River, by railway, which is only about thirteen miles—not
only will the whole country from Osoyoos Lake, on the boundary, behind the Cascades,
be
opened up and connected with our chief commercial city, with a cheap and speedy means
of
transportation, but all this tract of country traversed by the railways and lake communication
will be utilized in producing wheat and wool, and other articles for exportation.
Victoria, then,
will be built up, and will be the chief commercial city of British Columbia, with
all other parts
of the Colony tribute to her. This is what Confederation on proper terms will do for
us. The
Honourable Member tor Victoria said that no lasting union could be maintained, unless
the
interests of British Columbia are preserved, if I look (for argument sake) at these
things from
a Canadian point of view, I find that by serving the interests of Brilish Columbia,
the interests
of Canada will be served. Canada, as well as British Columbia, will benefit by a protective
duty
here. Canada will get the revenue under protection, and British Columbia will have
its industry
protected from foreign competition. And there is no reason that we should not have
our
interests protected, [
Dr. Helmcken —"The Organic Act says no."]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS The Organic Act says no
such thing. Confederation is diversity in unity: really and essentially a general
unity, and an
application of law to diverse interests. First, we find that New Brunswick, under
the Organic
Act, gets a temporary subsidy of $63,000 per anuum. None of the other Provinces receive
any
temporary subsidy under that Act. New Brunswick is allowed to collect export dues
on lumber.
All the other Provinces are prohibited from levying dues on lumber. Now, if New Brunswick
gets an additional subsidy, and levies a lumber tax prohibited to the other Provinces,
why cannot
British Columbia get exemption from uniformity in her favour? Nova Scotia gets two
subsidies,
equal to $160,000, which are not in the Organic Act. The Crown lawyers say that the
grant, is
not unconstitutional. This is a noted exception, made to satisfy the Nova Scotia repeal
party.
Another exception is found in the compulsory provision that appointments to the Judiciary
shall
be made from the Bar of the Provinces for which the appointment is made, till the
laws and
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 37
practice are assimilated. If the Organic Act is wrong, I say change the Act. But I
believe
that I have successfully shown that exceptions have been and can be made under the
Organic
Act.
Now, let us see what this horrible Canadian tariff is. It is too high on cattle for
us; not
high enough on bacon, butter, cheese, and lard by a few cents; and imposes nothing
on hay,
hops, and grain of all kinds. I explained the whole to my constituents, at eleven
meetings, and
they said, get these few alterations made to suit us, and we will support Confederation.
So we
must have an alteration. Why, Sir, under the English Constitution different tariffs
can be
imposed. Look at the difference in the excise spirit duties that were levied formerly
in Scotland
and England, for instance. As a lawyer, not as a judge, I give my opinion that we
can have one
tariff in British Columbia, and another in the Atlantic Provinces, under the Organic
Act; and if
the Act does not allow it, then we must alter it.
I have already given notice of motion respecting protection for our farmers and manufacturers.
I desire to add a resolution to the proposed terms, keeping the power in the
hands of
the Local Legislature to impose a tax on certain imports, in case the tariff be too
low. With
respect to brewers, the tariff can easily be arranged so as to protect them; and the
Honourable
Member for New Westminster has answered the objection to the Dominion fishery laws.
As for
commerce, that common sense that the Hon. Mr. Woods calls statesmanship, will settle
that;
for if Confederation would injure the commercial interests of British Columbia, it
would also
injure the interests of the Dominion.
The Honourable Member for Victoria City has said a great deal about centralization.
But
I say, Sir, that there must be a centre somewhere. We cannot have it in British Columbia,
and
a centre would be no worse in Ottawa than in Washington. The Pacific Coast, so far
as the
United States are concerned, is represented at Washington, which is not so large a
city as
New York.
Representation is one of the most important elements in free Governments; and as it
has
been urged by the Hon. Mr. Wood and others, that British Columbia would not he heard
in the
Canadian Senate or Commons, and that our small delegation would be crushed and out-voted,
I will briefly examine the subject. Now, Sir, the whole of the Pacific States of the
United
States have only twelve Representatives in Congress―six in the Senate and six in the
House of
Representatives. California has two Senators and three Representatives; Oregon, two
Senators
and one Representative; Washington Territory, one Delegate; and Nevada, two Senators
and
one Representative. Now, it is proposed in the Resolutions to grant to British Columbia
twelve
Members—four in the Senate and eight in the Commons―a number equal to the whole representation
of the Pacific States, with 1,000,000 people, in the United States Congress.
Again, there
are only five States that have more than twelve Members in Congress. They are New
York,
Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. Take another glance at the representation
of the
States most remote from Washington. Texas has five Members; Florida, three; Maine,
seven;
and California, five. Remoteness and small numbers have never caused any of those
States to
be treated unfairly. Under the popular system of government there, the small States
do not go
to the wall. Has little Delaware gone to the wall? Has Rhode Island gone to the wall?
No;
neither would British Columbia go to the wall in the Parliament of Canada. The Government
of Canada is based on the popular will; and that is the highest of guarantee that
we shall be
treated fairly by the Dominion.
I have never heard of Scotland being injured because she had a smaller representation
in
Parliament than England.
[
Hon. Mr. Wood—"Yes, yes. Two revolutions followed immediately upon union"]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS Yes; but that don't affect my proposition. A little blood-letting, however, does
no harm
occasionally. I would not object to a little revolution now and again in British Columbia
after
Confederation, if we were treated unfairly; for I am one of those who believe that
political
hatreds attest the vitality of a State. [Hear, hear.]
The Honourable and learned Member for Victoria says that all power will be taken away
by Confederation. Why, Sir, the Honourable gentleman cannot have read the Organic
Act.
For he will find the exclusive powers of the Dominion and the Provinces clearly set
forth in it.
Then, Sir, on the question of guarantee for the fulfilment of the conditions by Canada,
there
appears to be some misapprehension in the Honourable gentleman's mind. In point of
fact, we
have a guarantee from the Imperial Government. If the Dominion refuse to keep the
terms
and repudiate their part of the bargain, we can appeal to the Imperial Government
to release us.
38
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS Why, let the Act be repealed and down go the terms. The sovereign power is in the
Parliament of England. It made the Act, and if it is violated without redress, it
can repeal
it, and the power of Canada ceases.
The Honourable and learned Member for Victoria City has referred to the possibility
of
a Fenian invasion, and said what will become of the Railway in such an event. I believe,
Sir,
on such an extraordinary occasion, such as invasion, each one in the Colony would
be patriotic
enough to do without a few miles of Railway, until the invasion may be put down.
It has been asked what is the gain under Confederation.
At present we have no surplus revenue. But with Confederation on equitable terms,
there
will be a clear gain of $384,000 annually from subsidies and reduction of tariff;
therefore, as
$384,000 is to nothing, so is Confederation to Isolation. There are a great many points
to
which I could allude were I disposed to trespass longer on the time of the Council;
but I reserve
them until we go into Committee.
There are, however, some few things to which I will passingly allude. It is important
to
British Columbia to know what will be the qualification of Members to the Dominion
Parliament
[Hear, hear, from
Dr Helmcken]
The Hon. Mr. DeCOSMOS and the qualification of electors. And with reference to
the Local Constitution, it may be necessary for us to know whether our Governors cannot
be
elected as in the United States. instead of being appointed on the English principle;
and
whether we may not acquire the right to pass local laws over the veto of the Governor,
by a
two-third vote of the Legislature. The usury laws, imprisonment for debt, and many
other
matters will require careful consideration and attention.
With respect to the main principle, I am in favour of Confederation, provided the
financial
terms are right in amount, and if the other terms will contribute to the advancement
and
protection of our industry. If we cannot get favourable terms, which I believe we
can, it will
then be for the people of this country to say whether we shall remain in isolation
or seek some
other more favourable union.
The debate was here adjourned until Friday, at 1 o'clock.
This individual participated in:
