FRIDAY, MARCH 18TH, 1870.
"14. The Union shall take efffect on such day as Her Majesty by Order in Council (on
"an Address to that effect, in terms of the 146th Section of 'The British North America
" Act, 1867,') may direct: and British Columbia may, in such Address, specify the
Districts,
"Counties, or Divisions, if any, for which any of the four Senators to whom the Colony
shall
"be entitled shall be named, the Electoral Districts for which—and the time within
which- "the first Election of Members to serve in the House of Commons shall take
place."
These terms, or rather the terms which come back from Canada, will of necessity come
before the new electoral body, whose existence His Excellency has shadowed forth,
and the
particulars as to the division into districts must be left for the decision of that
House. It is
impossible at present to specify the time.
Hon. Mr. DECOSMOS—Cannot an approximate time be named?
Besides there are other things upon which the country will want information;
such, for instance, as whether the voting for members will be by ballot, and
what is to be the qualification of voters. I think it ought to be fixed. The
Dominion law is more liberal than that to which the people of this country
have been accustomed. I believe in the ballot, but it will be better to leave it
to the constituencies.
Hon. CHIEF COMMISSIONER—This clause has been left general,
that it may be settled by the newly-constituted Council.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN—If there is a qualification for the House
of Commons it must be general for the whole Dominion. At present I believe
the qualification is that existing in the Provinces before union. Ultimately
there must be a qualification for the whole Dominion.
Hon. Mr. HUMPHREYS—The clause is indefinite and dangerous.
The Dominion qualification will virtually disfranchise half the
British settlers in British Columbia. We are legislating in the interests of
the people; this ought to be determined at once.
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS—I believe in British subjects, having a
fixed residence, and of a certain age, voting in British Columbia. It should
be a residential manhood suffrage.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN—We cannot deal with the subject now. It is
impossible to divide the Colony into districts until we know how many
Senators we are to have.
Hon. Mr. HOLBROOK—Mr. Chairman, I move a recommendation to
strike out the words "if any."
Hon. Mr. WOOD—I think the words ought to stand. The Organic
Act says that Senators shall be selected for districts; but it may be
desirable that Senators should be appointed for the whole Colony. They are
nominated, and nominated because they are the best men that the Governor can
obtain. [No no, no—
Hon. DeCosmos]
Hon. Mr. WOOD I believe the Executive are in the best
position to know whether the principle of appointing Senators is best or whether
they should go for the whole Colony.
Hon. MR. HUMPHREYS—As this stands it throws the whole power
into the hands of the Canadians. The Lieutenant-Governor will be a Canadian
and will name Canadians. We ought to know by whom these appointments are to
be made.
96
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
Hon. Mr. ROBSON—It is a great pity that these sectional
differences should be allowed to prevail. We ought to consider ourselves
British Colombians. The Governor-General, with the consent of 'his Council,
appoints the Lieutenant-Governor, and the Lieutenant-Governor, with the
advice of his Cabinet, recommends the Senators. [No, no—
Hon. Dr. Helmcken.]
Hon. Mr. ROBSON Yes, it is so. He recommends to the Governor-General, who appoints. It is a great
pity to raise these disputes about Englishmen and Canadians.
Hon. Mr. HUMPHREYS—It is all very well to talk that way. I
maintain that the Englishmen sitting at this table have said less
as to nationality than the Canadians. We want to be governed by British
Columbians.
Hon. Mr. WOOD—The Hon. Member for New Westminster should not
be angry because we want to provide against the possibility of ill-feeling
by timely precaution. " Safe bind, safe find." When the Governor-General
appoints Senators, it i understand it right, he appoints the political
friends of his Cabinet. If we are to have Responsible Government there will
always be some check; if not we may be in the position of having members selected
by the Lieutenant-Governor without the assistance of any responsible
Cabinet. [Hear, hear—Hon.
DeCosmos.]
Hon. Mr. WOOD A Canadian Lieutenant-Governor will act
with the same sort of feeling that the English Government will. Senators
will be selected by favouritism, and supporters of Confederation
will doubtless be selected in this Colony, unless we have Responsible Government
and Representative Institutions in full vigor. Canadian interests will
doubtless be very prominent in this Colony, and power acts injuriously on
the human mind—it is one of the corruptors of the mind.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I should be very sorry to see the words
" if any " struck out ; their retention leaves the matter open. Hon. Members
seem to have forgotten that Senators must be residents of British Columbia.
Probably they may be selected on the ground of their having an appreciation
of the whole country, instead of a section only. It may be that Senators
will be appointed for the whole Colony.
Hon. Mr. HOLBROOK—After hearing the explanations of the Hon.
Attorney-General, I feel more desirous to press my recommendations, to show
that we from the Mainland desire to have our fair share of representation. I
think the words most objectionable.
Hon. Mr. DECOSMOS—I find by the Resolutions passed at the
Conference of Delegates. in London, that Senators were to be taken from the
Legislative Council. We are told by the Government that we are to go into
Confederation without Responsible Government; then we ought to have a
guarantee that the first Senators shall be representative men, and that they
shall not be chosen by the Governor and put into office for life without reference
to the people.
Hon. Mr. HUMPHREYS—I shall move a recommendation that the
first Senators shall be nominated by the Legislature. Â
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN—The position will be worth $600. The
difficulty will be to get anyone to go there. People are chary of going into
the Legislative Council now, and they will not be very anxious to go to
Canada. As to choosing Senators from one place, it is out of the question.
And it is equally out of the question to appoint them by the Legislative Council.
Hon. Mr. HUMPHREYS—We are here as the agents of the people,
delegates in point of fact, and we are bound to legislate in accordance with
the well understood wishes of the people. In reference to having these
Senators appointed, we are bound to see what they are and whether the people
are likely to approve of our acts.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Hon. Members must remember that these
Resolutions will be submitted to the people, a much-abused term, as the Hon.
Member for Victoria District has truly said, and our common object must be
to make the terms acceptable to the people. They will have to pass upon them
in the last resort, and to say we will or we will not have them.
Hon. Mr. PEMBERTON—The objection seems to me to be to
dividing British Columbia into districts. It is a qualification for Senators
that they must reside in their districts; therefore, I think it
will not be desirable to divide the Colony into districts. 1 think the clause
should stand as it is.
Hon. MR. ROBSON—One matter deserves attention in connection
with this item. I believe that the indemnity to Senators is $600 in a lump
sum, without travelling expenses. I think it is now commuted, and this would
place British Columbia Senators at a disadvantage with other It is no
hardship to other Provinces, but would be most unfair to British Columbia.
Travelling expenses both ways should be allowed.
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 97
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—My conviction is that mileage is now
allowed. If I am right, ten cents a mile both ways is allowed.
Hon. MR. BARNARD—It is the prerogative of the Governor; we
had better vote for the repeal of the Organic Act,
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS—Under the proposed constitution Senators
would be chosen by an irresponsible Governor, on the advice of an
irresponsible Minister. Those who own this country do not want such a state
of things to be. Â
Hon. MR. WOOD—It is better to bear in mind that the Organic
Act applies to three, or at the most four, Provinces: Canada East, Canada
West, and the Maritime Provinces. Here we want exceptional terms.
Hon. MR. ROBSON—Hon. Members seem to assume that we are going
to enter Confederation without Responsible Government. This I
repudiate. I say we shall enter with privileges equal to other Provinces I
decline to assume anything else, With regard to the appointment of Senators
by the Legislative Council, I would ask by what Council? By this or by the new
House? It would not satisfy the people that a Council nominated by the
Governor should appoint; and it is yet to be seen that the new House, as
shadowed forth by the Governor, would be less objectionable than this one.
We are entirely in the dark.
Hon. MR. HUMPHREYS—As I understand it, these Senators are to
be appointed after Confederation, and consequently the recommendation refers
to the new Council. His Excellency that he will give a majority to
the popular members, and I have no doubt he means what he says. I believe
him to be a most estimable gentleman; but I have a feeling that he has been
misled. It is not likely that in a few weeks' travel he could understand the wants
and feelings of the people. You must eat, drink, and sleep among them to
understand a people. If I were a great Government contractor I would support
the Government. I ask some reason of rank. It would be very easy to give us
a majority of two or three popular members; but unless we have a large
majority of representative members the Government might still get their own
way.
Hon. MR. ROBSON-I desire, Mr. Chairman, to answer two points.
I believe we shall fight for and have Responsible Government. In referring
to the Governor's speech, the Hon. Member for Lillooet says the new Council
will be just similar to this; that it will still be unrepresentative. I
cannot see why there should be this doubt about the constitution of the new
Council. If there were to be only a majority of two or three the Council would
still be unrepresentative; and the people will not be contented with such a
form of Government. The argument of the Hon. Member for Lillooet refutes
itself in the most conclusive way. The people do not want an
unrepresentative House not having their confidence to elect their Senators.
Hon. MR. RING—What have we to do with the Organic Act? Why
should we put ourselves under the iron points of the Organic Act, and be
dragged under a barrow all the days of our lives? If the Act is wrong it
must be repealed. Now is the time to express our opinion.
The Chairman put the recommendation of Mr. Humphreys, which on division was lost,
and
of Mr. Robson, which on division was lost.
Clause 14 passed as read.
"15. The constitution of the Executive authority and of the Legislature of British
Columbia,
"shall, subject to 'The British North America Act, 1867,' continue as existing at
the time of
"union, until altered under the authority of the Act."
And before touching upon the merits of the Resolution itself. I wish to explain that
the
time which must necessarily elapse before Confederation will allow ample opportunity
to
procure a change in the Constitution and I desire to impress upon Hon. Members that
this
question of alteration in the form of Government is not necessarily connected with
the Resolution now before the House. I make these observations in consequence of observing
a
notice of
the Hon. Member for Lillooet, on the subject of Responsible Government, on the Orders
of the
Day. On behalf of the Government, I desire to say that there is no desire whatever
to shirk
the full discussion of the question of Responsible Government. I throw the door open
and
invite the fullest discussion; but, as the question of the change of the Constitution
of this
Colony is one that lies between this Colony and the imperial Government, it does not
form an
item in these Resolutions. Therefore, I would ask Hon. Members to postpone the consideration
98
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
of Responsible Government and pass these Resolutions. On a question of such importance,
a special day, irrespective of these Resolutions, should be set apart for discussion.
There is
no desire whatever on the part of the Government to shirk the question. The matter
of
the Constitution is under negotiation between this Colony and the Imperial Government
at
this moment. Supposing these Resolutions are passed, other negotiations must take
place.
First, Canada has to accept them; then there is reference back to British Columbia
to submit
to the popular vote, so that there will be full time allowed for the new institutions
to be
inaugurated. If the people say that they do not want the terms, but that they want
Responsible
Government, they will undoubtedly get it. I cannot conceive our going into Confederation
with a Crown Council; we must expect to go in with fuller Representative Institutions.
If
we do not have Confederation under these terms, we shall, nevertheless, have Representative
Institutions; and a majority, under the Imperial Act, will have the power to change
and get
Responsible Government,— that is, party government. My point is, that it is unnecessary
to
drag in Responsible Government now; it is not necessary to mix it up with these Resolutions.
Our vote on this Resolution need not be decided on Responsible Government, or party
government. We shall still be open to send any other Resolution on the subject of
party
government
to the Governor. I, therefore, throw out the invitation to discuss it more fully on
a future
day. I feel sure that it this course is adopted the discussion will be more free.
Hon. MR. RING—I think, Sir, that His Excellency's message, it
I may so call these Resolutions, invites us to discuss Responsible
Government. Sir, we have been in former days favoured with Representative
Institutions, and have been defrauded by them. I desire to know what we have
gained by the Irresponsible Government that has for some years past
oppressed us. What, I ask, has been done about the various questions that have
come up- the Sisters' Rocks, the Court of Appeal? The answer has been no
funds. Where do the funds come from? From the people. If the Governor heard
the views of the people, he might, perhaps, change his views. I ask Hon.
Members here, who have lived under Responsible Government in Great Britain,
[Hear, hear, from
Mr. DeCosmos]
Hon. MR. RING not to be recreant to their country. Hon.
Members on the other side may say they are against Responsible Government
and refer to a former House of Assembly of Vancouver Island. This is no argument.
I trust that Hon. Members loving British institutions will be true to their
country. Because there are defects in some Assemblies, do not let us run
into the abject error of saying we are not fit for self-government. We have
borne this too long. Do not let us hand over to Canada our consent to submit
to this degradation. Let us not say that we are not fit; that we surrender the
question of self-government. Who, I ask, has examined the people? Who has
tried them and discovered whether or not they are competent to exercise the
privileges of Responsible Govern ment? There are many points in this clause
which demand discussion, but I am not going to exhaust myself. I say,
however, that the question of Responsible Government must be considered. I throw the
gauntlet down.
Hon. MR. HUMPHREYS—Mr. Chairman, as mover of the Resolution
on Responsible Government, I do not think it necessary to take up the time
of the House. I am perfectly satisfied in my own mind that the official
members are convinced that the people are in favour of Responsible
Government. As a student of history, young as I am, I begin to realize this
truth: that all liberty and improvement has been infused into communities by the
shock of revolution. or violent agitation. There is no hope of political
improvement in time of tranquillity and without agitation. The
official members of this Council are remarkable for their profound
indifference to right and wrong. It is in their interest to postpone the
settlement of this question of Responsible Government. I hold that there is
a great necessity for this Resolution. The question ought to be settled now
and for ever. Why should we be compelled, year after year, to
fight those battles for reform over and over again? Let this question be
settled so that we may have leisure for other things. Hon. gentlemen say the
people are not in favour of Responsible Government. Time will show. I say
that they will almost as a unit insist upon it, and I lay down this
proposition—no Responsible Government, no Confederation; no Confederation,
no pensions. Instead of t liteniug the Governmental reins they should be
slackened. If Responsible Government is not granted these officials will still
lose their power; for then, in all probability, a mightier nation than
Canada will take charge of us. I am in favour of Confederation if it gives
us permanent advantages, not otherwise. We must have a free constitution. My
conscience tells me that my votes on these Resolutions are not prompted
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
99 by selfish motives. If the people get Responsible
Government I am satisfied. His Excellency admits that he would not like to
extend the liberal form of Government to this Colony. My opinion is that
there is no community unfit to govern themselves. Government is not a complicated
machine, There is very little difference between carrying
on a Government and carrying on a business. One-half of the depression in
this Colony is, in my opinion, attributable to the despotic form of
government. Just fancy the head of a mercantile house allowing his clerks to
carry on the whole business of the firm as they pleased. [Hear, hear, from
Mr.
DeCosmos.]
Hon. MR. HUMPHREYS without Responsible Government you will lose Confederation. It is
not necessary to say any more. Let us have something like the Government of
Ontario. Those whom I have the honour to represent sent me here to advocate
Responsible Government. I will read from a petition now in my hands.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—This is out of order. I rise to call
the Hon. Member to order. This is not the time to present a petition.
CHAIRMAN—The Hon. Member cannot read from a petition which
has not been presented to and received by this House.
Hon. MR. ROBSON—Mr. Chairman, I request that you will be
careful in ruling on this matter. Hon. Members have the right to read from
documents to show the views of their constituents. It is alluded to as the
best means of acquainting the House with the views of the constituency which
the Hon. Member represents.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—On the other hand, I would say that the
right of petitioners must be respected; and if Hon. Members are allowed to
read petitions, then petitions can be got in by a side wind.
Hon. MR. ROBSON—In my opinion the Hon. Member has a right to
read from a document of this kind. Â
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN—Having looked at this document I see it is
not a petition to this House, and may therefore be quoted.
The CHAIRMAN, having looked at the document, decided that it
might be quoted.
Hon. MR. HUMPHREYS then read a portion of the prayer of the
petition, which purported to be to Her Majesty the Queen.
Hon. MR. ROBSON—The Honourable and learned Attorney-General
has appealed to those Honourable Members who are in favour of Responsible
Government to postpone the question for the present. I should be glad to
accede to the request it the Honourable and learned gentleman will meet the
objections that present themselves to my mind as to that course. In my opinion,
to vote for this section now will preclude the possibility of our bringing
on the subject of Responsible Government in the House this Session. We shall
be met with the assertion that it has been already discussed and decided for
this Session. I am quite sure the Honourable and learned Attorney-General
does not wish to catch us in a trap.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Certainly not. As Honourable Members
have insisted upon opening the question, I now propose to go on with the
discussion.
Hon. Mr. ROBSON—I am most anxious to meet the views of the
Government in this matter, it possible; but, we are asked to vote aye or no
upon this clause, I say that in voting for it we shall be casting our votes
in direct opposition to Responsible Government.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—The discussion must go on now. You have
begun; it is too late to withdraw. The lists are closed, and the gang of
battle down.
Hon. MR. ROBSON—Mr. Chairman, I will address myself to the
question before the House, which I feel to be the most important clause in
these terms; a question, in fact, which underlies the peace. prosperity, and
happiness of British Columbia; a question which, if carelessly or improperly
treated now, may eventuate in the most serious consequences to the Colony; for I
believe the people are as ready now as in earlier days to fight for freedom,
and to shed their blood in defence of their political rights. It becomes us,
then, to be candid with ourselves and with each other—very serious, firm,
and dispassionate in discussing this clause, as it might result in most
disastrous consequences. As I read the clause, it places it beyond the power
of the colonists to obtain the form of Government which they, I believe, really
want; and it we pass it we shall obtain no more than that slightly more
liberal form which is foreshadowed in His Excellency's Speech,
under the cover of Representative Government. Profoundly impressed
as I am with the gravity of the subject we are now called upon to consider,
100
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. any remarks I may be enabled to
offer will proceed rather from a sense of duty to my constituents
and to my country than from any hope of changing the views or influencing the vote
of any Honourable Member. What is Responsible Government? I have been led to
believe that considerable confusion of ideas exists upon this point; and I
was the more impressed with this upon listening to the remarks ot the
Honourable Member for Cariboo, a few days ago. That Honourable gentleman
compared the introduction of Responsible Government into this Colony to
applying the machinery of the Great Eastern to a dairy churn. Now, Sir,
Responsible Government is not a quantity; it is a principle; and as such it
is applicable to the Great Eastern  or to a dairy churn,—capable of being
applied to a tiny lady's watch. It is a principle admirably adapted to the
largest communities in the Old World. It is a principle admirably adapted to
the smallest communities in the New World. It is a principle that may be worked
out in a cabinet of a hundred. It is a principle which may be successfully
worked out in a cabinet of three. Without it no Government can, in the true
sense, be called a people's Government. All true Governments derive their
power from the people. All true Governments must be responsible to
the people. Responsible Government is, then, a principle which may be
adapted to, and successfully worked out in, this community. If this proposition is
incontrovertible, which I maintain it is. who can say that British Columbia
is not large enough for Responsible Government? There are men here of
ability to form a Cabinet. The Cabinet of the day is, under the responsible
system, the Government, just so long as it has the confidence of a majority
of the representatives of the people in the House. In the event of that
confidence being lost. one of two courses is open: The Ministers place their
resignation in the hands of the Governor who commonly calls upon a prominent
member of the opposition to form a Ministry; or, it they believe that the
House does not truly represent the people upon the question at issue, they
advise a dissolution and an appeal to the country. What would Responsible
Government have to do here? In dealing with this question I, of course,
assume British Columbia to be a Province of the Dominion; and, I confess, that
were it otherwise, were it proposed to remain a separate Colony, the case
would be different. I do not say that even then I would not advocate the
introduction of Responsible Government, but that advocacy might be less
hearty and less firm. Regarding British Columbia as a Province of the
Dominion, the chief objections are removed by the removal to Ottawa of all
those larger and more complex questions of legislation which might threaten to
crack the brain of our embryo statesmen. The Local Government would alone
have to deal with local questions, and thus it would have very simple duties
to discharge—scarcely more difficult, in fact, than those falling within the
functions of a large municipality in Canada. Are the people in British
Columbia fit for it? And here I would express my sincere regret that the
representative of Her Majesty in this Colony has felt it to be his duty to
pronounce an adverse opinion. I will yield to no one, either in this House
or out of it, in entertaining a high respect for His Excellency, for his
talent, experience, and honesty of purpose; but I do say,—and I say it with
respect, more in sorrow than in anger—that I cannot think his knowledge of
the people of this Colony was such as to justify him in so early pronouncing
upon their fitness for self-government.
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL — The Honourable Member for New
Westminster will, I am sure. pardon the interruption but I feel it to be my
duty to deny that the Governor ever said, or that any member of the
Government has said or thought. that the people of British Columbia are
unfit for self-government.
Hon. MR. ROBSON—I thank the honourable and learned
Attorney-General, and I appreciate his motives. There is no one less
disposed than myself to speak or write one word calculated to weaken the
hands of the Government, or cause the well-deserved popularity of His Excellency
to wane; but yet I cannot conceal from myself the fact that a mere play upon
words will not mend matters. Whether it is the Colony or its inhabitants
that has been pronounced unfit for self-government, the practical results
remain the same: and it is with these we alone are concerned. From
my own knowledge of the people. and it is the result of eleven years' contact
with them, I have no hesitation in saying they are pre-eminently fitted for
self-government. There are scores of men in this country with calloused
palms and patched garments, well fitted by natural endowments, education,
and practical experience in the working of Responsible Government in other
Colonies, to occupy seats either in the Legislative Assmbly or in the
Cabinet of British Columbia. He who would judge of the intelligence and mental
acquirements of men in this Colony by outward appearance and by present
occupation, certainly would not  judge righteous judgment. The opinion of
His Excellency the Governor to the contrary not
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
101withstanding, I boldly assert that the people of British
Columbia are fit for Responsible Government. Do they want it? Doubtless
there are those in this House, possibly even in the unofficial ranks, who
will deny that the people of British Columbia really desire to have
Responsible Government under Confederation. It is sometimes difficult to account
for divergence of opinion; but I venture to think that I have the
weight of both argument and evidence on my side when I assert, as I do, that
the great body of the people—certainly an overwhelming majority—do earnestly
and intelligently desire that form of government. It is difficult to believe
that any man who has given due thought to the subject can possibly hesitate. Look
at the position this Colony would occupy under Confederation, without the
full control of its own affairs—a condition alone attainable by means of
Responsible Government While the other Provinces only surrender Federal
questions to the Central Government, we would surrender
all. While the other Provinces with which
it is proposed to confederate upon equal and equitable terms retain the
fullest power to manage all Provincial matters, British Columbia would
surrender that power. Her local as well as her national affairs would virtually be
managed at Ottawa. Could a union so unequal be a happy and enduring one? The
compact we are about to form is for
life.
Shall we take into it the germ of discord and disruption? The people desire
change; but they have no desire to exchange the Imperial heel for the Canadian
heel. They desire political manumission. I stand here, and, in the name of
my ancestors, protest before Heaven against the surrender of constitutional
rights purchased by the best blood of our race—a priceless legacy we have no
right to barter away, even if we would. We owe it to our ancestors to
preserve entire those rights which they have delivered to our care. We owe
it to posterity not to suffer their dearest inheritance to be destroyed But, if it
were possible for us to be insensible of these sacred claims, there is yet
an obligation binding upon ourselves, from which nothing can acquit us; a
personal interest which we cannot surrender. To alienate even our own rights
would he a crime as much more enormous than suicide, as a life of civil
security and political freedom is superior to a condition of serfdom; and if life
be the bounty of Heaven, we scornfully reject the noblest part of the gift
if we consent to surrender that certain rule of living, and those
constitutional rights, without which the condition of human nature is not
only miserable but contemptible. I know but too well that the people of this
Colony have, during these years past, been unjustly and unconstitutionally
deprived of their rights; but the perpetration of a wrong in the past can
constitute no argument for perpetrating that wrong in the future; and it
would appear a most fitting moment, when a new constitution is about to be
offered, to demand the full restoration of political rights of which we have been
for some time so unjustly deprived. A word about the constitution which the
Governor proposes to confer upon this Colony. Regarding it in the dim light
shed upon it by the Executive, it is not unfair to assume that there will be
one more popular Member taken into the Executive, and that the people will
have a majority of two in the Legislature. Let us suppose that the
Legislative Council has 20 Members, 11 elected by the people and 9 appointed by
the Governor. Three are taken from the 11 into the mysterious chamber of the
Executive, where they become —I will not say corrupted—manipulated; educated
to see things somewhat differently from what they saw them before. In a
House so constituted, is it unfair, is it uncharitable to conclude  that,
on all Government measures at least, the Government would command a majority? Take
3 from 11, and 8 remain. Take 8 from 20, and how many remain to the
Government? Is it not 12? Where, then, is the people's majority under the
proposed constitution? And yet I am constantly told that this is not the
proper time to ask for Responsible Govermnent—that if the people want it
they will possess, under the new constitution, the ready means of obtaining
it. Sir. I do not see the matter in that light. I see in the proposed constitution
a condition of things which promises a five years', possibly a ten years',
agitation for what the people are prepared for now, desire now, are entitled
to now. All Governments are naturally conservative. All persons holding
positions of honour, power. or emolument, are conservative. Think you those
holding office by appointment will favour or promote a change which would make
them responsible to the people—exchange their commission from the Crown for
the more brittle tenure of "public opinion "? On the contrary, we should
find those in power opposed to the people in their struggle for Responsible
Government; and how long the struggle might last, it would be idle to
predict. Besides, the people of Canada do not desire to see British Columbia
occupying any such false position. They know too well the value of free
institutions, and their adaptation to new countries, to think of withholding
them from us. These institutions were not won without a long and bloody
struggle, even in Canada; and the prosperity and content
102
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.ment of that people date from the
inauguration of Responsible Government. The failure of representative
institutions, formerly enjoyed upon this Island, is frequently cited as an
argument against Responsible Government being introduced here. I admit the
partial failure of these institutions. That failure was not, however, on
account of the institutions being " representative," but because
they were not "responsible" The essential principle was wanting. There was
no constitutional connecting link—no bond of sympathy between those who sat by the
will of the people and those who sat contrary to, and in defiance of, that
will. The system, painted, though it was, in popular dress, was rotten at
the core—proved a delusion and a sham. The people, sometimes in indifference
and contempt, permitted unsuitable men to be elected, and the whole thing,
came to rack and ruin. It is to avoid a repetition of that unseemly farce that the
people demand that any new constitution which may be conferred upon this
Colony shall be based upon the only true principle of responsibility. This
question should be finally settled. The Colony desires political rest. To
inaugurate a fresh political agitation with Union is most undesirable, and
might lead to disastrous results. The possible consequences of a refusal to
grant Responsible Government coincident with Confederation, is a part of the
subject I almost hesitate to touch. I would neither prophecy, predict, nor
threaten; but I would ask the Government to read well and
carefully the lessons written in blood in other countries Human nature is
much the same on both sides of this great continent. Has the Anglo-Saxon race
become so utterly degenerate here that it is prepared to barter away for
mere money subsidies those rights which were purchased with so much blood
elsewhere? I utterly refuse to think so meanly of this people. We have seen
that even the half-breeds at Red River have too much of the old blood in
their veins to permit a fancied political wrong. I am not going to predict a
rebellion here. Heaven grant there may be none. But I do feel it my duty to
warn the Government against unnecessarily provoking such a possible
contingency. Why should there be such an unaccountable antipathy to
investing the people of British Columbia with those political powers enjoyed
under the British Constitution? Why is the present form of Government so unpopular
with the people? I will tell you why. It is just because it is not a
people's Government. They had no hand in making it. They had none in working
it. They can have none in unmaking it. Only let the people have a hand in
forming the Government, in selecting men of their own choice to rule over
them, and we would find a popular Government, a strong Government, strong in
the heart and confidence of the people. The very same gentlemen who are unpopular
now, because ruling without the consent of the people, would be popular
then, because ruling by the act and with the consent of the people. The
people of British Columbia are naturally a conservative people. Restore to
them their political rights, and no Government would need to fear an undue
desire for change. The people know best how to manage their own local affairs.
Depend upon it, Sir, the people are seldom wrong in their opinions; in their
sentiments they are never mistaken. Those now in power have a great
responsibility resting upon them. Upon the manner in which they acquit
themselves in regard to this very question may hang the most momentous
consequences. Will they promote everlasting wellbeing, or precipitate untold evil?
Heaven grant that they may do the right! I stand here today to advise and
warn, not to threaten and predict. The Government has a very grave
responsibility in this matter, and may well take a lesson from other
countries. The possible consequence of a refusal to grant a  reasonable
request may be a repetition of the Red River trouble. Let not the Government
make a fatal mistake, or they may find themselves in a state of political
agitation that may lead to the most serious consequences. I believe that,
under circumstances analogous to what occurred in the Red River Territory,
the Imperial Government would treat the inhabitants of this Colony with even
more consideration. It would not be a question of bayonets and fleets to
coerce this Colony, but it would be a question of what concessions ought to be
made. I say that the Government have an opportunity now not only of shunning
evil, but of doing a great work. Oh! let not the Government make the fatal
mistake of saying the people shall not manage their own affairs Do not let
them make the fatal mistake of compelling the people to reject these
conditions at the polls. Now I have discharged a duty; I have said all I feel
called upon to say at this stage. I have stated my own views and, I venture
to think, those of an overwhelming majority of the people of British
Columbia, as well as of my own constituents. I trust the
Government will take care how they force a vote on this question, which
affects this whole community , [" Hear, hear."] This is, in a sense, distinct from
the conditions, and it is probable that the Governor must obtain what we are
now asking from a different quarter. But, obtain it from where he will, it
must, I say, be obtained.
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 103
I beg to move the following amendment, as meeting the case more fully than the resolution
offered by the Hon. Member for Lillooet :-
"Whereas no union can be either acceptable or satisfactory which does not confer upon
the
people of British Columbia as full control over their own local affairs as is enjoyed
in the other
Provinces with which it is proposed to confederate; therefore, be it
"Resolved, That an humble address be presented to His Excellency the Governor, earnestly
recommending that a Constitution based upon the principle of Responsible Government,
as
existing in the Province of Ontario, may be conferred upon this Colony, coincident
with its
admission into the Dominion of Canada."
Hon. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Allow me to observe on this, that the
Hon. Member is asking the Government to grant what it has no power to give.
Hon. MR. ROBSON—The Governor has promised to seek the power
to grant us a new Constitution. We only ask that in that new Constitution we
may have Responsible Government.
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS—Mr. Chairman I do not intend to occupy the
House for many minutes. I agree with the Hon. Member for Lillooet, and I
disagree with the Hon. Member for New Westminster. I think, Sir, that we
ought to have representative institutions and Responsible Government,
irrespective of Confederation. The Hon. Member for New Westminster's proposition unites
it with Confederation. I think this is a mistake;
but it is of no matter, so long as we get it. I look upon British Columbia
as a municipality under the British Crown. Under Canada it will be a
municipality with less power. Anyone who knows anything of municipal law
knows that it is based upon three principles: territory, authority, and responsibility.
This Colony has the first two, and we are now asking for
the third. and the terms sent down to the Council do not contain the
elements of responsibility of the Executive to the people. Everything is
tending to this point. Without responsibility, no matter how elective the
new Council is, it will be a failure. The people want Responsible Government and
representative institutions under 'any circumstances. I think
the people would be traitors to themselves if they accepted any form of
Government which had not the element of responsibility. I would
rebel if there were enough like me in the Colony, and arrest every member of
the Government that I thought was robbing me of my rights. I would go to a further
extreme. However, I shall not trouble the House with a long speech on this
matter, as I consider it of little use. This question ended, I am contented
to leave this Council and go to my constituents,
Hon. DR. CARRALL—Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask what all
this breeze is about? It is perfectly clear to all that as soon as we enter
the Confederacy the people of this country can have any form of Government
they desire. I refuse to take up the issue without Confederation,
in a state of isolation. We are dealing with Confederation. I am, equally with
the Hon. Member for New Westminster, aware of the priceless boon of
responsibility which exists in England, which may fairly be called the
standard-bearer of nations, and I am equally aware that the same
responsibility does not exist in the Unitcd States. During the late war I
was in the United States army. Stanton, the then Secretary of War, was a most
unpopular man. They wanted to get rid of him, but he could not be removed.
When I took the ground that Responsible Government was not expedient. it was
not because I did not approve of the system. It is I say, the wisest and
best form of Government, but it is too cumbrous for this Colony. I will
repeat my objections: The Council contains no men of influence, the constituencies
are too remote, and the inhabitants are all engaged in
bread-seeking; there are few men of independent means who would take part in
Responsible Government, and, consequently, the direction of public affairs
would fall into the hands of men who are not fitted, or qualified to govern
the country, or otherwise into the hands of Victorians; neither of which I, for
one, wish to see. How unfortunate it would be for Caribooites if the Hon.
senior Member for Victoria (Dr. Helmcken) were elected for Cariboo. I say,
then. that it must fall into bad hands. or into the hands of Victorians. I
offer that argument as a British Columbian. The Executive Council do not
care one fig what sort of Government the people take. The Executive say the
question is one for the people to decide. We have a measure of responsib y now.
The Hon. Member for New Westminster says that His Excellency will do certain
things. I take his speech as it reads, and I have no doubt that a majority
of the people's representatives will sit round the board; none know how
great the majority will be. [
Attorney-General—"Hear,
104
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. hear."]
Hon. DR. CARRALL Responsible Government has
never been made a distinct issue throughout the Colony. [" It has "—
Mr.
DeCosmos.]
Hon. DR. CARRALL The Hon. Member says that it has; I say it has not. It has been
named with Confederation, but not by itself; and until it is made a separate
question, my advice to the Governor will be not to grant it. The Governor
has left you to choose any Government you deem best. Do you think it would
be better to have as permanent heads of departments two or three gentlemen
who are familiar with the wants of the Colony, or a moveable Ministry going
out on a question of repairs to Cowichan Road, or something of that. kind?
These are amongst the things that you have to consider, and if, after due
consideration, the people desire Responsible Government, they will have it.
I am here to state that His Excellency the Governor has no wish or desire to
keep back Responsible Government; if he had any such desire, is it likely
that he would have reconstituted his Executive Council so as to make it
elective? I apprehend that people do not consider what they are talking about when
they'ask for Responsible Government; they have not probably considered the
failures that have been made in respect of Responsible Government There have
been some failures, as, for instance, in Jamaica and in Victoria. A class of
people get into power under Responsible Government whom no person would like
to have as rulers. There are petty interests mixed up with politics in small
communities, which prevent the system working so well in them as in large
countries like Great Britain, where there is a healthy tone and a vast population,
and, consequently, great questions of national importance. I maintain that
after Confederation the questions connected with local affairs will be so
small, and so entirely connected with particular localities, that a staff of
permanent heads of departments will be far better for the Colony than
Responsible Government. I make this statement from conviction. I am perfectly
free to take any course I like, notwithstanding I am an Executive Councillor.
My position has not in any way curtailed my views. I could have advised
Responsible Government if I had thought proper, and would have done so if I
had thought it desirable for this Colony. If anyone believes that the Organic
Act does not allow Responsible Government to be obtained at any time, let him
move to make clause 19 specially applicable to this Colony.
Hon. DR. CARRALL—Well, name it specially and put it in; I
will support it if anyone proposes it. We know what His Excellency's
intention is with regard to giving representation in the new Council, but we
do not know the measure of it. If there is an overwhelming majority for
Responsible Government in all districts, electors will take care to send
Responsible Government Members to the next Council. If the people are
determined to have this " priceless boon," let them send men who will say
they will have it. I feel impelled to administer a soft and gentle rebuke to
the Hon. Member for New Westminster, who has, I must confess, won my esteem
by his manly, straightforward support of these Resolutions; but I must take
exception to his language: it has been too emphatic—unintentionally, of
course—because led away by the subject. He has used inflammatory language
which he had better not have uttered, language which was not exactly in
accordance with what I conceive to be correct. That clause in the Governor's
speech which speaks of our not being fit to govern ourselves: Governor
Musgrave has never said so; if he had, I should have taken it as a personal
insult. I say, as a British Columbian, I am capable of governing myself ;
and if we can, individually, govern ourselves, it is fair to suppose that
the Colony, as a whole, can govern itself. It you had the whole population
comeatable altogether, so that they could be parallel like an army, and you
could make them give expression to their views, and out of that get a Government,
it might be practicable; but instead of that, here we are with a scattered
population, isolated centres separatcd from each other. The majority are
here for the sole purpose of making money, and they don't feel that anxiety
that has been represented about Responsible Government; they want
to be governed as cheaply as possible. If I am wrong, if it turns out at the
polls that even a trifling majority are in favour of Responsible Government, they
can have it. The iron heel of Canada is all nonsense. Governor Musgrave is
the man we have to deal with, and I say that Responsible Government is a
relief to any Governor, for it comes between him and the people. Governor
Musgrave says that it is (I paraphrase) " my duty, with my "experience, to
give fair and frank advice to the people; to tell them what I think is for their
"good. If they determine differently to my advice, the fault is with them."
Supposing that Governor Musgrave had put Responsible Government in as a
condition, and had thrust it upon the people, would not the respectable
minority who are against it have said—or possibly, and
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â
105
as I think, probably, have said—His Excellency had acted unwisely?
This question has been before the people; they would have been justified in
jumping at the gilded bait of Responsible Government if the Government had
not proposed a new system; but as he has done so, the people will do well to
consider before they swallowed the barbed hook that lies under the bait. I
desire to disclaim speaking in the interest of oflicials; their position would, so
far as I believe, not be injured in any way by the introduction of
Responsible Government. Those among them who were commissioned in England (I
mean the heads of departments) will be rendered so independent that they
will be above fighting after their own interests. I think it unlikely that
they will remain here. As to the balance of officials, if Canada is as liberal
now as of old, or as liberal as Australia, they will be well provided for,
whether we have Responsible Government or not. Probably they will be
"utilized," since that is the term we are to use. I claim for the system
which His Excellency has foreshadowed, that it is more suitable to the
present circumstances of this Colony than any other system which can be given
us. Responsible Government has acted well in large communities, but in small
ones I doubt its efficiency. It is like a painted ship on a painted ocean.
If it were obtained in a small Colony like this, there would be a constant
game of battledore and shuttlecock going on—in to-day and out to-morrow.
Fancy the Honourable Member for Victoria City presiding at the Lands and
Works Department one day, and I, having paid him all the compliments I could,
come over another day to have an interview with the Chief, and find that
there has been a change of Ministry, there is another man in. My ideas may
be wrong; if so, they can be corrected at the polls. If I were a man of
property, with a large stake in the Colony, I should decidedly object to
Responsible Government. I have given my opinion candidly and honestly. I may
never sit at this Council Board again. I have given my advice to His Excellency,
to this Board, and to my constituents. conscientiously. If I am wrong, the
people will correct me. I speak from conviction. No doubt there is talent in
British Columbia; no doubt there is plenty of administrative ability; there
are many better men than myself, I am very sure, and that is one reason that
I oppose Responsible Government. [Laughter.] But the main difficulty is that
the best men won't come here; the chaff is blown here, the wheat remains behind.
  On motion of Hon. Mr. Drake, the debate was adjourned to Monday.
This individual participated in:
