TUESDAY, MARCH 22ND, 1870.
Hon. MR. HOLBROOK—Mr. Chairman, I rise with some diffidence
to give my opinion as to whether we are fitted for Responsible Government or
not, after the able speeches that have been delivered by Hon. Members on the
subject. The Hon. and learned Member for Victoria City (Mr. Drake) has
affirmed that Responsible Government would give the real government of the
Colony to Victoria. This I believe is true, and if such were the case what
injury it would inflict on New Westminster and the Mainland generally. I feel that
we are not yet fit for Responsible Government; but nevertheless, I think
that the extent of the population is very much under-estimated. It
has been stated that after the most careful calculation that can be made the
white population cannot be calculated at over 5,000 adults; but I think this
is wrong, and no doubt it has been taken from the Government Accounts, which do
not include Kootenay, Big Bend, or the settlements around New Westminster;
and I would make the adult white population to be 10,000, besides 40,000
Indians; and these Indians ought not to be ignored. If they are not
represented will it not be difficult to make them contented with the change
from the Imperial Government to Canada? And it is for this reason that I have
given a notice of motion in this House to show them that they are not
forgotten, and that they may go on with their settlements and improvements
in safety. But if we are to have Responsible Government I will not
be answerable for the consequences. We are told the question is to be
submitted to the people. I say let us wait for their decision. I have confidence
in Canada, and am content to take my chance of being well governed by the
Dominion Government, rather than try something of the working of
which we know nothing. I have no doubt that great agitation on the subject
of Responsible Government will be got up by the press, and that many members
will gain their elections by confusing the questions of Confederation and
CONDEDERATION DEBATE.
121 Responsible Government. I entirely concur with the lion.
Mr. Wood in believing that more liberal representation will do much more for
the good of the Colony than Responsible Government. I believe in a
good franchise being given, as foreshadowed by the Governor's Speech ; and I
think twelve elected and eight nominated members would give satisfaction and work
well, although report makes the change more liberal than this. We are now on
the eve of prosperity. Our quartz mining is still to be commenced, and we
only want good roads to Kootenay, by way of Eagle Pass, to open our
resources in this respect. I do not intend to enter upon the question of
Responsible Government. I believe it would be bad for us and is not required
by the people. I shall support the Government in the clause now under discussion.
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS—Mr. Chairman, I had not expected to say
anything more on this subject ; but, on more mature reflection, I am
satisfied that it is my duty to do so. The more the matter is argued, and
the more the remarks of Government members are heard, the more I believe we
are being asked to take a leap in the dark ; for all I can learn is that the new
House is to be partly nominative and partly elective—and not responsible.
The proportions are not stated. It has also cropped out that there will be a
qualification for members. and also for electors. If the Government refer
this matter to the people to know whether such a Constitution will suit
them, I believe the people, to almost a unit, will reject it. The mass are
opposed to Confederation altogether unless they can get a more liberal
representation than that proposed by the Government. At the outset I
proposed a Committee of all parties to consider and report upon the whole
matter; but the hasty judgment of the House, as I think, deferred the
question. Now, Sir, I think if the Committee had met and suggested, for the
protection of the property element, that one-third of the Members of the Council
should be elected for a longer period and hold property qualifications, the
country would have been satisfied. I can conceive on some such proposition
as that being laid before the House, it would have been eminently
successful; as it nor stands it is matter of opinion. I think the Governor
has been led into error if the utterances that occasionally drop from members of
this House mean anything. I cannot conceive that the people will accept such
a Constitution. I should prefer that we should go into Confederation as a
unit. I have made these few remarks to set my mind at rest, and to save
myself trouble with my constituents if I should offer myself as a candidate
again. I state that I believe the Government will jeopardise Confederation on
this point.
Hon. MR. DEWDNEY—Sir, the question now under consideration
has been so fully gone into by Hon, Members of the Council, that I feel it
will be useless for me to take up the time of this House to any great
length. At the commencement of this debate I had several arguments
which I proposed to bring before your notice against Responsible Government, but I
find that these have been ably handled by other Hon. gentlemen far more ably
than I could have hoped to do ; and should I not have been convinced at the
earlier stages of this debate, other arguments have been adduced which now
completely set my mind at rest on the subject. I am opposed to the
recommendations of both the Hon. Members for New Westminster and Lillooet,
particularly the latter, and in opposing them I do not feel I am injuring the
cause of Confederation. But while I feel, Mr. Chairman, that it is
unnecessary for me to enter into the question of Responsible Government, I
think I should not be doing my duty were I to remain silent upon one matter
connected with this debate—one upon which I consider I am as capable of
giving an opinion as any Hon. Member of this Council—namely, the feelings of
the inhabitants of the Mainland generally with regard to Responsible Government. I
have travelled through this country as much as any Hon. Member of this
Council, and I have been brought in contact with all classes, and have mixed
with all classes. and I have yet to meet the first individual who has
expressed to me his desire for Responsible Government. Now. Mr. Chairman, do
you believe, does this Council believe, that the cry throughout this Colony is—
down with the present form of Government, let us have Responsible
Government? Hon. Members of this House are aware, I presume, that my
avocations for some years past, in fact as long as I have been in the
Colony, have necessarily brought me in contact with all classes, and should
this have been the cry, do you think I should not have heard it? I say distinctly
again, I have yet to meet the first individual who has expressed to me his
desire for Responsible Government, The feeling of my constituents
is not in favour of Responsible Government; on the contrary, it was
distinctly expressed to me that they do not desire any change in the present
form of Government. All they want is money to keep their trails in order and a
122
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. resident Magistrate to administer
and carry out the laws I believe that some Hon. Members of this House have
mistaken the feelings of the country on this matter. Any dissatisfaction
that exists is not with the present system of government but with the expense of
carrying, the system out. We all feel that, and we all know that. it cannot
be avoided, for reasons which have been given over and over again in this
House, namely, the smallness of population; scattered as it is over so vast
an area. I have not heard during the debate any arguments that will prove to
me or to this House that under Responsible Government we could have a cheaper
form of government. I for one could not be convinced that we should. I
believe that the public moneys would be wasted. peculation and dishonesty
would be the order of the day. We are told by the Hon. Member for Yale we
must have a beginning. I am aware of that fact. and for one shall assist to
put off the evil day. I prefer for a time—until our population increases—to
live under the present form of Government, one under which, I am proud to say,
I have lived for eleven years without seeing the faults of maladministration
and other evil accusations that have been hurled at it by the Hon. Member
for Lillooet. I am aware that that Hon. gentleman was himself in some
subordinate position under the Government; he may of his own personal
knowledge, while in that capacity, be aware of some malpractice, but I defy
him to point out a single instance brought before the notice of the Government
that did not receive the strictest investigation and in which the individual
complained of, if the charges were proved, was not discharged. In
conclusion, Mr. Chairman. I shall take this opportunity of expressing my
appreciation of the officers generally that have carried on the Government of
this Colony during the eleven years that I have lived here; and I challenge
any Hon. gentleman to prove by the records of Her Majesty's
Colonies, that in any Colony or Dependency of the British Crown laws have
been more justly administered, life and property better protected, or the
affairs of the. Colony carried on with greater rectitude than in the one in which
we are now living. Holding these views, I must decline to support either of
the recommendations before the Committee.
Hon. Mr. ALSTON—Sir. I am in favour of Responsible
Government, but not the form that has been discussed in this House at so
great a length I believe all representative Governments are
responsible. The Hon. and learned Member for Victoria District has quoted John
Stuart Mill I believe. Sir, that the words Responsible Government do not
occur in his book; he shows that the form applicable to one country will not
do for another. We have heard enough in this Council to make me believe that
'the people do not want Responsible Government; I believe that a
representative form of Government is the only form that will suit this
Colony It has been well shown by the Hon. Mix Wood, that from the difficulty of
getting districts represented, this Colony is not adapted for purely
representative institutions. I think it most desirable that Executive
Members should have seats in this Council, and I think that a partially
elective House would best represent the interests of the entire community. The
American form of Government is in a certain sense responsible, executive
officers being elected for a term of four years. England possesses a
different form, and Canada diifers again from England. The Colony from
which Governor Musgrave came is the last that has received Responsible
Government; thus we may fairly trust to His Excellency to judge for us as to the
probability of its working well here. The smallest Colony po 'ing
Responsible Government is Prime Edward's Island: and we who do not possess a
popula on one-twelfth the size of that of Newfoundland. are a use for
Responsible Govermnent. The lion. and learned Member for Victoria City (Mr.
Drake). who seems to uphold Responsible Government against his own
convictions. admits that all power would be held in Victoria; and he says that
there would be no harm in such centralisation. I think, Sir, that he has
read John Stuart Mill to little purpose if such be his conviction.
Hon. Mr. Humphreys —Sir. I am more impressed than ever with
the absolute need of Responsible Government. I think the Hon. Chief
Commissioner particularly, and the Hon. Member for Victoria Citv, have
proved conclusively that two-thirds of the people representing property are
determined to have Responsible Government. The Hon. Member for the City told
us the people were not in favour of Responsible Government. and in the same
sentence he tells us that if Confederation were set before the people with
Responsible Government mixed up with it, the people would take Responsible
Government to the exclusion of material interests. I have said, and say
again, I am in favour of Confederation, and I earnestly hope that it will be
for the benefit of the Colony. I sometimes think that some Hon. Members at the
other end
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
123 of the House intend to defeat Confederation. I may he
called an extremist—an agitator; I admit I am. I desire to see the people
having a share in the Government, instead of being under a despotism, or
what is equivalent to it. I have been in this Colony nearly eleven years; I
am satisfied that the people want Responsible Government. Hon. Members say there
are different forms of Responsible Government; admitted. I am not sure that
it would be advisable to introduce any one system in its entirety here. Hon.
Members have been quoting writers upon this subject; I will quote Lord
Macaulay, he says: "Government, like a good coat, is fit for the body for
which it is made." I say if we cannot live on Responsible Goverinnont, we
cannot live on irresponsible Government. I do not know what is shadowed forth in
His Excellency's speech; I confess I cannot understand it. If the Governor
had promised a two thirds elective House, with heads of department sitting
to give information without voting, then I think the question of Responsible
Government would never have been considered. I ask Hon. Members to endeavour
to approximate, and if they cannot agree to full Responsible Government,
then to give us as liberal a form as they can. If you withhold Responsible
Government you lose Confederation.
Hon. MR. ROBSON—Mr. Chairman, in rising to reply to what has
fallen from Hon. gentlemen in opposition to Responsible Government, I crave
the kind indulgence of this House; and should I, in the course of my
remarks, appear unduly harsh or unkind, I beg Hon. gentlemen to
attribute it to earnestness in advocating a great cause, rather than to a desire
to wound the feelings of any. The Hon. Member for Cariboo, who is also a
Member of the Executive, made a very convenient, yet, to my mind, singularly
ineffective, reply to one point in my speech of Friday. I had, or fancied I
had, with considerable force and elaborateness, pointed out the difficulties
that might naturally be presumed to lie in the way of obtaining Responsible
Government under the new constitution proposed to be conferred upon this Colony;
and the only answer is that the Organic Act makes the necessary provision. 1
was as well aware of the provision made in that Act before the Hon gentleman
spoke as after; but no attempt has been made to meet the difficulties I
suggested. The Hon. gentleman, with that facetiousness, poetry and ready wit
for which he is so justly celebrated, proceeded to point out the undesirableness of
Responsible Government in this Colony. Under it, he
told us, Cabinets would be too versatile. In fact, he described the working
of such institutions as a sort of dissolving views, a thimble-rigging
operation, "now you see it, now you don't," in such quick succession would
the changes be rung. The Chief Commissioner would, it appeared from his
description, be much like Lincoln's celebrated flea. Now, Sir, where did the
Hon. gentleman acquire his experience of the working of Responsible
Government? Was it not in Canada? What do we find to be the experience of
that country? Certainly it does not in any way warrant the conclusions
arrived at by my Hon. friend. On the contrary, we find a change of Ministry to
be of very rare occurrence. The present Premier of Canada has, with one.
unimportant intermission, been at the head of the Government for
some twelve or fourteen years! As I stated on a former occasion, the people
of British Columbia are not politicians, nor are they fond of change. They
are naturally conservative. Give them a people's Government, and in no part
of her Majesty's Colonial Empire will a less versatile, a more conservative and
loyal people be found. The Honourable gentleman said Responsible Government
would blow the chaff into this House. Now, although I listened with
pleasure, as I always do, to that gentleman's oratory and humour. I could
not but experience a feeling of regret to find him on the wrong side of a great
question, taking a false step. It is sad to witness the early mistakes of a
young man of such talents, ambition, and promise; and when I hear such words
coming from my Hon. friend, I begin to fear that the bright future, the
brilliant political career I had marked out for him may never be realized.
Sir, a certain proportion of chaff may be blown into this House, under Responsible
Government, as is the case now; but, depend upon it, under
the form of government we seek, the chaff would quickly be blown out at the
back door, before the breath of public opinion. The people can always
discriminate between wheat and chaff, and Responsible Government supplies
the most effective winnowing-fan with which to separate the two. We were reminded
by that Hon. gentleman that Responsible Govarmncnt had its failures as well
as its successes; and he referred to Victoria, Australia, and to Jamaica, as
instances of failure. Now, I cannot but think the Hon. gentleman has been
singularly unfortunate in going to these Colonies to prove his proposition.
The former ranks amongst the most flourishing, progressive, and wealthy of
all Her Majesty's Colonial possessions. Doubtless very grave political
difficulties
124
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
were encountered, and many mistakes characterized
the earlier working of Responsible Government in that fine Colony
; but it would be most unfair to charge all these to the possession of such
institutions. Nay, most of them had their origin in a different political system.
As for Jamaica, Hon. gentlemen must be aware that it never possessed
Responsible Government. A mixed representative system it had ; and the chief
cause of failure was the absence of responsibility. It was just
because those who administered the affairs of that unfortunate Colony were
not responsible to the people that the opposition, led by the ill-fated Gordon—a
man of unquestionable ability, although, perhaps, somewhat deficient in
judgment—was induced finally to assume the extreme attitude which resulted
so fatally. The Hon. and learned Attorney- General made an
effort, not altogether warranted by facts, to force the advocates of Responsible
Government into a false and disadvantageous position, in relation to the
Government programme ; but Hon. gentlemen will recollect how
anxious I was, at the beginning of this debate, to meet the views and adopt
the suggestions of that Hon. and learned gentleman, in respect to the
particular time and mode of approaching this question. My desire to give the
Government a general and strong support upon the great question of
Confederation is no secret in this House; and I think I can speak with equal
confidence in regard to the views and intentions of my Hon. friend on my
left (the Member for Yale). But enough has already been said upon this point
; and I have only to add that I utterly refuse to occupy the position in which the
Hon. and learned Attorney-General appears desirous of placing me. That Hon,
gentleman was content to give the same answer to the main objection as that
given all round the Government end of the table, viz. that the
Organic Act provides the necessary and ready means of obtaining what we
seek; and he further tells us that, inasmuch as Responsible Government
relieves Governors of responsibility, a Governor would naturally be ready to make
the concession. Such, however, is not the accustomed working of
human nature. Such is not the lesson of history. The ruler hugs power as the
miser does his gold, nor parts with it only as it is extorted piecemeal by
the people. I am charged with having used threats—threats of blood! Now,
Sir, I must plead " not guilty" to this charge, While carefully avoiding
everything in the nature of threat and prediction, I asked the Government to
read carefully those lessons written in blood around us, and implored them
to take warning from the errors and profit by the successes of others. We
were told by the Hon. and learned Attorney-General that the Governor is
powerless to grant what the Resolution asks; but might not the same objection be
raised to almost every recommendation passed in connection with
Confederation? His Excellency in asking Her Majesty's Government
for power to give us a new Constitution. The Resolution merely suggests a
more liberal Constitution than His Excellency proposes. There is therefore,
no weight in this objection. The Honourable gentleman next tells us that the
Resolution implies want of confidence in the Canadian Government ; that they will
not listen to the cry ot the people for Responsible Government. Now, the
Hon. gentleman must be aware that Canada can only listen to our cry when it
is heard in the particular form prescribed by the Constitution. The people
can only cry through the Government it is proposed to give them under the
Constitution foreshadowed in His Excellency's opening message ; and I have
already endeavoured to point out the probability that the new Government might
refuse to utter a cry in that direction at the desire of the people. There
is no such expression of want of confidence in the resolution. The Canadian
Government could not interfere—would have no power to give us Responsible
Government—until asked by our Local Government to do so. Such objections I
must, therefore, regard as frivolous, and utterly unworthy of the Hon. and
learned Attorney-General. The Hon. Chief Commisioner followed with his accustomed
ability, but, I venture to think, without his usual discretion, That Hon.
gentleman set out by telling us that he quite understood it to be necessary
for certain members, in order to be consistent with pen and speech outside
of this House, to bring forward this subject; that it was a logical
necessity, inexorable fate. Now, Sir, I cannot see into that Hon, gentleman's
heart, any more than I can into the mysterious Executive Chamber. l will
not, therefore, permit myself to impute motives to that Hon. gentleman in
his opposition to Responsible Government; but he must permit me to be the
best judge of those motives which have impelled me, with some degree of
reluctance, to take a stand in opposition to the Government upon this question. lt
may appear necessary, in order to be consistent with word and pen, that I
should advocate in this House great principles which I have advocated
elsewhere; but it may be permitted me to say that, whether here or
elsewhere, I advocate Responsible Government under Confederation,
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
125 because I conceive it not only to be the right of the
people. but their interest also. We are constantly told that we should not
have mixed this question up with the terms. We have not mixed it up with the
terms; but the Government has mixed the terms up with it; and if there is
any blame, any responsibility in this connection. it mus rest with the Government,
and not with the Opposition The Hon. gentleman tells us that it is
impossible to work Responsible Government with a population so scattered;
and in the same breath he tells us that we have Responsible Government
now,—that the officials are responsible to the Governor, and he to the
Queen. Well, certainly. this is a sort of responsibility; but it is not precisely
the kind we want. The responsibility now existing takes the wrong direction.
It is not responsibility to the people, but to the supreme power. In this
sense the most despotic form of government in the world may be termed
Responsible Government. The members of the Government of the Czar of Russia
are responsible to him, and he is responsible to the Great Ruler of all; ergo,
Russia has Responsible Government! The Hon. gentleman must see the absurdity
of his startling proposition. Ile next tells us that if the people
desire Responsible Government it is because they have been educated up to it
by the press. There is more truth than argument in this. Doubtless
the press is in this, as in other civilized countries. the great educator of the
people, especially in matters political. Have not the people of England been
similarly educated up to every great political reform? Such constitutes a
legitimate and important function of the press. But the honourable gentleman
goes further and tells us that if the present Government is unpopular with
the people the responsibility resls with the press. which has by misrepresentation
created prejudice in the public mind. This proposition I beg most.
unqualifiedly to deny. The honourable gentleman has confounded
cause and effect. The press has opposed the Government because it is
unpopular; and the Government is unpopular because it is not. a people's
Government— because it does not possess the principle of responsibility to
the people. it must be remembered that the press subsists on popular favour;
and in order lo subsist it must oppose an unpopular form of Government. The
press of this Colony has acted rather as the exponent than the moulder and
leader of public opinion in its opposition to the present form of Government. As
I have repeatedly said, it is not the officials that are unpopular. so much
as the system under which th administer. No officials can be popular under
such a system. it places them in a false position. The press is, therefore,
not to blame; it is the faithful exponent of public opinion. The honourable
gentleman on my left [
MR. Holbrook]
Hon. MR. ROBSON dissents from this view. It is the habit
of some honourable gentlemen to affect to sneer at the press 0t this Colony. They
admit that the pre s of England is all I claim for it; but they allude
sneeringly to the press of this Colony. Now, I am free to admit that the
leading journal of this Colony would lose by a comparison with the leading
journal of England. It is smaller, and, perhaps, less ability is displayed
in its editorial columns. But would not such a comparison be unfair? Apply this
rule to other institutions of the Colony and what would be the result?
Taking the press of this Colony with all its imperfections, and l boldly
assert that it will compare favourably with that of any other country of
like age and population. That is the way to institute the comparison; and it is the
only true way. When I hear honourable gentlemen indulging
in sneers at the press invariably all ye at one conclusion: and I will not
tell you what that conclusion is. It will not be necessary for me to again
allude to the improper use made of what I said about the hornv-hunded class,
especially as the Hon. Mr. Walkem fully vindicated me. One more point and I
have done with the honourable the Chief Commissioner. That gentleman repeated
the now stereotyped argument that the Dominion Govormnent. being based on
liberal institutions. would not withhold Responsible Government if
desired by the people of: British Columbia. That argument has been so often
met that I was surprised to hear it repeated by that honourable
gentleman. Need I say. for the twentieth time, that it is not the prerogative of
the Canadian Government to give, unless asked by our local Government. and
that our local Government will, from its organic nature, be averse
to ask anything of the hind? Surely I am entitled to regard the constant
iteration of those exploded arguments as evidence of the weakness of the
Government cause. Passing to the specch of the Honourable Mr. Walkem, my task is
an easy one; for although that honourable gentleman spoke. with his
accustomed eloquence and agreeable in of word and manner. all must have felt
lhat his effort had about it an air of special pleading in a bad can. The
principal objection that gentleman brought against the position 1 took on
Friday was, that Responsible Government is not a principle, but a form. Now,
I think it may be regarded as either or both, and I am not disposed to quarrel
about mere
126
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. words. What I contend for is
Responsible Government. That honourable gentleman tells us that Canada did
not get Responsible Government till her population reached about two millions.
Now, while that gentleman is greatly astray in his figures, I cannot
discover in his facts any evidence in support of the proposition he wishes
to establish They may prove that Responsible Government was long wrongfully
withheld from Canada. I now come to my honourable friend the senior member
for Victoria City. That honourable gentleman started out by telling us that
he intended to support the Government scheme, and to support it strongly; but he
added that he would not say much about Responsible Govermnent. Would that he
had adhered to the latter resolution. It was but natural that, feeling
himself on the wrong side of a great principle, he should be disposed to say
little. But, unfortunately for himself, he has said much, a great deal too
much. He said some things which it would have been much better to have left
unsaid. He told us that Government for, by, and from the people means Government
for, by, and with the politicians. But he does not stop there. He tells this
House that the advocates of Responsible Government will he willing to
surrender all the other conditions in order to obtain that form of
Government as a means of securing office, power, pickings! Now, Sir, let us
look at the political history, and position of the honourable gentleman who
presumes, with so much boldness, to judge of other people's motives I
recollect when, some two years ago, that honourable gentleman was the most
ardent of all Confederationists; when he desired to rush into an
unconditional and blind union; when he urged the then Governor to negotiate union
by telegraph, At that time I was doubtful about the policy of
immediate union, regarding such a step
as somewhat premature and unreal, so long as the immense intervening territory
remained an unorganized and unopen waste. Holding these views I proposed to
strike the word 'immediate' out of the resolution which had been
moved by the Honourable Mr. DeCosmos; but so enthusiastic, so fanatical. was
the honourable the senior member for Victoria City that he longed for' a
stronger word than 'immediate.' Subsequently we saw that honourable gentleman
the most ultra, the most rabid Anti-Confederate. We saw him opposing it in
every way, both in the House and out of it, denouncing Canada as a most
undesirable connection. Now, what do we see? We see the Anti-Confederate
Lion rampant suddenly metamorphosed into the Canadian Lamb passant. with his
longing eyes fixed on Ottawa! Such has been the magic influence of the
mysterious Executive Chamber. I do not, for one, regret the transformation;
but I do object to that gentleman turning round so suddenly and denouncing the
motives by which others are actuated. Does not that honourable gentleman
live in a 'glass house' in that sense which peculiarly disentitles him to
throw stones? Is not he guilty of measuring other people's corn in his own
bushel? Did not be cast all his political principles to the winds and bolt
in at the very first opening to place and power that presented itself? And who
knows but there may be at this moment a mission to Ottawa dangling
temptingly before his eager eyes? ls this the man who is entitled to turn
round and, looking down from his pinnacle of temporary power, judge others?
strutting his hour of brief authority, he taunts us with seeking
Responsible Government as a stepping-stone to power and pickings. I hurl back,
with scorn and contempt, the accusation in his teeth! To pass, however, to
the so-called arguments put forward by that honourable gentleman. he tells
us that the resolution asks for a Government like that of Ontario,—that we
should require 40 or 30 members. Now. Sir, it is difficult to give him
credit (or sincerity, as ever honourable member must see that the resolution asks
nothing of the kind. It asks fo' a constitution based upon the principle of
Responsible Government as existing in Ontario. That honourable gentleman has
attempted to make me inconsistent with myself in saying that we shall be
under the heel of Canada without Responsible Government, and that Canada
desires that we should have such institutions. Now, I see nothing inconsistent
in this. Canada does desire that the people of British Columbia should
possess as full powers of managing their own local affairs as the people of
the other Provinces possess; but Canada will have no power to grant these
institutions until asked to do so in a constitutional way through and by our
Local Govermnent; and the weight of my objection lies in the reasonable
belief that, however desirous the people may be, the Local Government will be
naturally averse to a change calculated to lessen its power, and weaken the
tenure by which its members hold office. Again, we are told that the
Governor would not be disposed to withhold institutions which would relieve
him of responsibility. However plausible this proposition may appear in
theory, it is scarcely borne out by experience. As I have already stated, in reply
to the honourable and learned Attorney-General, history presents
rulers in a different light. We are asked
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
127
what measures of importance have been introduced that have not been
introduced by the Government? By this the honourable gentleman wishes, I
presume, to convey the idea that the Government so fully meets the wants of
the people as to leave nothing for representative members to do. In what
singular contrast is this with his utterances during past sessions. Here,
again, we have the kindly bleating of the docile Confederation Lamb, instead of
the terrific roar of the Anti-Confederate Lion of the past. Verily, the
mysterious influences of the Executive Chamber must be potent. The
honourable gentleman tells us that if we couple the question of Responsible
Government with the conditions of union, the people will be willing to
accept poorer terms in their eagerness to obtain it. Surely, if language means
anything, this is an inadvertent admission of what the honourable gentleman
has been so stoutly denying, viz. : that the people desire Responsible
Govermnent. Leaving the honourable gentleman to the lashings of his own
conscience, and to the seductive influences of the mysterious Executive
Chamber, we next come to deal with the Honourable the Registrar of Titles. The
Honourable Mr. Alston announces himself in favour of Responsible Government,
but not the kind that would make the heads of Departments go in and out. He
holds all Representative Government to be Responsible Government. The
honourable gentleman may be entitled to hold a theory peculiarly
his own ; but it is scarcely the fitting time to announce personal theories. We
are now dealing with the question of Responsible Government, as understood
by political economists, not as understood by the honourable gentleman who
has just propounded a political paradox. He has been reading John Stuart
Mill, and he tells us that writer never mentions Responsible Government. I
have not read Mill's theory, but I have read enough to know that he goes even
further than I am prepared to go in the direction of responsibility. We have
next the honourable gentleman for Kootenay telling this House that
with all his experience in the Colony he never heard a man express a desire
for Responsible Government, and that his own constituents were distinctly
opposed to it. Now, so far as that honourable gentleman's constituents are concerned,
I am prepared to think that his opportunities of learning
their views upon that or any other subject have scarcely been such as to
entitle him to express a very positive opinion; but when he tells this House
that in all his experience in this Colony he has never heard a desire for
Responsible Government expressed, I can only say that I am surprised. The
honourable gentleman cannot but know, if he has not turned a deaf ear to
politics altogether, that the question of Responsible Government has been a
prominent issue at more than one election, and that it has been used as one
of the chief reasons for Confederation from one end of the Colony to the
other. But, Sir, I fear I have already wearied the House. Permit me to say,
however, that throughout this protracted debate the efforts on the Government side
of the House have been characterized by a want of argument, and by a sort of
special pleading, a begging of the question almost painful to listen to.
Every effort has been made to raise false issues and to misconstrue remarks
coming from this side of the House, and a most unfair attempt has been made
to, place the whole question in a false and disadvantageous position; yet
this is scarcely surprising. It was not to be expected that the unrepresentative
members would approve the measure I feel, however, quite inditterent about
their votes. We have a large majority of the representative members with us,
and their vote must virtually carry the measure. The great proposition I
desire to impress upon honourable members is this: The Colony is about to
become a Province of the Dominion of Canada. No union can be equitable and
just which does not give this Colony equal political power—equal control over
their own local affairs with that possessed by the people at the Provinces
with which it is proposed to unite. I care not how good the other conditions
may be: it the people of British Columbia are placed in a false political
position they will not be content. and the inauguration of such a union will
only prove the beginning of new political discontent and agitation. Mistakes will
doubtless result from the first workings of Responsible Government, but
these mistakes were better made now than years hence, when the consequences
might be more serious The period of lisping, stammering infancy must, be
passed. Surely it is better to pass it now. while the political questions
are few and simple, and the interests comparatively small, than to wait for
great development. Almost every speaker on the Government side has accused me of
want of confidence in the Dominion Government. 1 have no want of confidence
in that Government. I know the men who compose it too well for that. I know
them as honourable, liberal, large- minded statesmen. But it is
our Local Govermnent under the new Constitution. proposed in terms so vague
in His Excellency's opening message, that I doubt. The Canadian Government
128
CONFEDERATION
DEBATE. will possess no constitutional power to grant us political relief
until asked to do so by our Local Government ; and it is the hesitation, the
disinclination of the Local Government to move in that direction which I
dread. I would again warn the Government against endangering the
whole scheme by having it submitted to the people unaccompanied by "Responsible
Government."
Hon. DR. CARRALL—Sir, on Friday last the honourable member
for New Westminster spoke at some length upon this subject, and I replied as
best I could, and it is in accordance with the eternal fitness of things
that I should make a very few remarks. It is one of those happy things in
nature that where the poison is there is the antidote always near. (Laughter.)
I propose to give the antidote. I laid down two principles: First, that the
Government did not believe that Responsible Government, as it is maintained
in England, was applicable to this Colony. I hold to that. I maintain that
no one has controverted this proposition ; no one has proved that it could
be adapted to the requirements of this Colony; there has been burning
eloquence and all that sort of thing, but no proof. But I say, Sir, that even now
there is a measure of responsibility in this Government. I am responsible to
my constituents, and if there is such an overwhelming force in favour of
Responsible Government can I ever return here The utmost that the honourable
member for New Westminster has proved is, that under Confederation
it would take a great deal of time and much agitation to get Responsible
Government, a minimum of five years and a maximum of ten years, and that as
it would take that time it was better that we should have it at once. I say
if one proposition is correct the other must be incorrect. If there is such
an overwhelming desire on the part of the people for it, they will get it.
If the majority even are in favour of Responsible Government there is no constitutional
power to prevent their getting it. There is' no desire
on the part of the Government to withhold it. I say it is a want of
responsibility of the Executive that has rendered them unpopular ; but the
people have never been asked to contrast the present form of Government with
that shadowed out by His Excellency ; and I say that heads of Departments under
that system will be, to a certain extent, responsible. The present system is
bad, but the officers are good I say that the requirements of the Colony
will be met by the system proposed by His Excellency. If it is not, then let
the people say so, and get Responsible Government. The honourable member for
New Westminster allows that it is only a question of time under the Organic
Act. If it should take five years, then my point that there is not such a strong
desire for it is proved. I said, and I say again, that in Jamaica they could
not work Responsible Government, or even representative institutions, and in
Victoria it remains to this day a monument of stupidity and mismanagement.
With regard to the assertion of the honourable member for New Westminster, I
say that if speaking and voting from conviction are false steps, and a bar
to advancement in political life, then I don't want to advance a step-further in
that direction. I say that Responsible Government has not been made a
distinct issue in elections. The Government of the people was to be one of
the consequences of Confederation ; I hope we shall get a people's
Government before it. The present Executive Council is one-third unofficial ;
the work; they have done has brought a shapeless, formless phantom into one
harmonious whole, and they propose to precede Confederation with a form of
Government which will enable the people to decide what form of Government
they will have. I coincide with the Honourable Chief Commissioner of Lands
and Works, that it was not necessary to introduce this subject into the
Confederation Resolution. I am sorry that it was brought up at all in connection
with our scheme.
Hon. Dr. HELMCKEN—Sir, I wish to say in reply to the remarks
of the honourable member for New Westminster, that I support the Government
from conviction. I do not shirk my responsibility. I said that the
one great thing the supporters of Responsible Government are afraid of is,
that it shall he set alongside of Representative Government. Honourable members
may find when the resolutions return from Canada that I have still something
to say upon them.
The recommendation of the Honourable Mr. Humphreys was put by the Chair, and on
division was lost.
The recommendation of Honourable Mr. Robson was put by the Chair, and on division
was lost.
Clause fifteen then passed read.
"16. The provisions in 'The British North America Act, 1867,' shall (except those
parts
"thereof which are in terms made, or by reasonable intendment may be held to be specially
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. 129
"applicable to and only affect one, and not the whole, of the Provinces now comprising
the
"Dominion, and except so far as the same may be varied by this resolution) be applicable
to
"British Columbia in the same way, and to the like extent, as they apply to the other
Provinces
"of the Dominion, and as if the Colony of British Columbia had been one of the Provinces
"originally united by the said Act."
The Honourable ATTORNEY-GENERAL gave an assurance that the resolutions of which
notice had been given should be discharged, and the opposition was withdrawn.
Clause sixteen passed as read.
"With reference to defences:-
"A. That it shall be an understanding with the Dominion that their influence will be
used
"to the fullest extent to procure the continued maintenance of the Naval Station at
Esquimalt.
"B. Encouragement to be given to develop the efficiency and organization of the Volunteer
"force in British Columbia."
On clause A being read by the Chairman, Honourable Mr. Holbrook objected to Esquimalt
being named, on the ground that it was only fair to New Westminster that one gunboat
should
be stationed there.
Honourable ATTORNEY-GENERAL—I should have been very sorry to
have this clause inserted if I thought it would give us only two or three
gunboats.
Honourable COLONIAL SECRETARY (Mr. Hankin) —Because the Naval Station is
at Esquimalt it does not follow that every ship will remain there. The
commanding officer can send ships where he pleases.
Clause A passed as read.
Hon ATTORNEY-GENERAL—At present there is no means of
ascertaining What encouragement can be given; I suppose arms and
money.
Clause B passed as read.
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS—Mr. Chairman, I gave notice of my intention
to bring up a clause with regard to provision being made to protect the
agricultural produce of this Colony. It has been said by the honourable
Executive Member for Victoria City that this differential tariff is quite a
new thing to me. If he will take the trouble to refer to the
Colonist of the 15th May, 1868, he will
find that in an article written by myself I touched on this matter; it is not new
to me. I am thoroughly persuaded that the disti ct which I represent will be
a unit against Confederation without a provision to keep up
protection. From Comox to Sooke the opinion on this point is as that of one
man, and I believe I maysay that it is the same thing as regards the whole
of the agricultural districts on the Mainland, from Soda Creek to Kamloops. I
hold, with respect to protection, that when farmers shall be able to produce
farm produce in sufficient quantity to enable them to reduce their prices as
low as the prices obtained by the farmers of Oregon and Washington
Territory; then protection is not essential, for this great and sufficient reason
that if we can produce as good an article at home as we can get abroad,
which we can put down at the same price, the cost of transport will be a
sufficient protection. Our farmers will have a natural protection. With
regard to manufactures, I am one of those who believe that our manufactures
ought to be protected. If we go into public works we must have waggons and
machinery, and the waggon-builders should have protection; then, again,
farming implements should be made in the Colony, and encouragement should be
given to the manufacturer of these things. Again, there are the bootmaker
and tailor, and the soapmaker and others, even the brewer, for whom we require
protection. I ask from the Executive the insertion of this principle: "That
British Columbia shall be entitled to levy and collect any tax, or taxes, on
the sales of foreign produce and manufactures entered for home consumption
equal in amount to the duties of Customs now levied and collected on the
same under the 'Customs Ordinance, 1867,' provided, always, that British
Columbia shall not be entitled to levy and collect any such tax, or taxes, as
aforesaid, if the duties of Customs of Canada extended and applied to
British Columbia at the time of and after Union on such foreign produce and
manufactures shall be as high as the duties of Customs now levied and
collected on the same under the 'Customs Ordinance, 1867,' and provided
always, that such foreign produce and manufactures shall be construed to mean no
more and none other than such foreign produce and manufactures as may enter
into competition
130
CONFEDERATION DEBATE. with the produce and manufactures of
British Columbia." I don't care how it is put in, our manufactures would
come into competition with goods from Canada. That is a natural evil which
we cannot avoid. There will be other advantages arising out of Confederation which
will counterbalance this.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN —I have nothing to do with the honourable
gentleman's newspaper articles. I can only say that differential duties are
contrary to the views of Her Majesty's Government.
Hon. MR. DRAKE — The honourable member's explanation is
different from the clause itself. I suppose from the explanation that it is
intended to apply to all foreign produce and manufactures tin-es imported. I
think it will be better that I should move my motion as an amendment to his,
so as to confine the protection to agricultural produce.
Hon. MR. DECOSMOS — I don't expect any resolution of mine to
pass. If it should pass I shall be quite surprised ; but as I hold this to
be the very keystone, and of more consequence than Responsible Government, I
deem it my duty to bring it forward. But to confine the protection to
agricultural produce will not reach the issue. it would not touch our rude
manufactures.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN —This is left an open question by the
Government. I wish it to be distinctly understood that this question of the
agriculture of the country is an open question. I think I shall be found on
the side of these honourable gentlemen. I think with the honourable member
for Victoria District that this is the most important question comprised in these
resolutions. If the terms do not contain a clause giving
protection to agricultural interests, I will answer for it there will he no
Confederation.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN —I mean that every member of the Government
is free to vote as he pleases upon this question of encouragement to the
agricultural interests of the Colony.
Hon. MR. WOOD —Then it is free for official members to vote
these recommendations?
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN —Certainly it is, and it is right that it
should be so ; for I consider, Sir, that we have come to a most important
question, one that concerns our own country. Confederation must
not come like an eclipse, it must not produce a darkness and then leave us to
recover. I say that if these terms are left to pass as they are, and return
from Canada, and are passed by the people, they will produce great ills. I
say that the agricultural interests are most important ; when we come to
manufacturing interests it is different, they have made but little progress.
Manufacturers will meet with competition from Canada, and the Dominion would not
stand it ; we cannot have protection for manufactures but with regard to
farm produce it is different. I say that the farmers could not exist without
protection ; you will depopulate the country by bringing Confederation
without protection. I have stated that this Colony affords more inducement
to people to settle than any other Colony I know of ; yet we do not raise
sufficient stock for ourselves. Look at the statistics: $111,447 is the value of
agricultural produce—barley. flour, malt, wheat, and
oats—imported. Of barley. there is nearly one million pounds imported, and
this would take about 450 acres to grow in ; of malt about 4,500 bushels, which
would require ninety acres to grow in ; of flour and wheat about 87.000
bushels. which would require about 2,500 acres to grow in ; of oats, about
2.364 bushels, which would require about sixty acres to grow in ; altogether
about 3.080 acres. More land must be in cultivation to produce the quantity
of cereals which I have enumerated as being imported annually. and this number of
acres, supposing a man to cultivate fifty acres, would give employment to
123 men ; so that 123 men will save the Colony $111,447, or $900 each,
besides growing what they want for their own consumption. In relation to
this it must be recollected that mills would be at work to grind, machinery
would be required, and labour of other kinds would he required. such, for
instance, as brewers. In addition to this comes in pigs. There were 508 of
these animals imported last year ; less by 28 than in the preceding year.
This is on improvement, when we consider that the amount of bacon and hams
imported is 61.740 pounds less than last year. To make this bacon about 500
hogs are required ; so you will see that nearly the whole amount of bacon is made
by and from foreign hogs. Take butter—82.000 pounds, or forty tons, were
imported last year. It will take 400 more cows, yielding 200 pounds each per
annum, to produce this amount, and it would save the Colony $31.588 per
annum. One thousand seven hundred head of beef cattle would save annually
$96,949 but it repurposes 6,800 more cows at least. Now, then. to supply ourselves
with beef and mutton, and cheese, 8,000 more cows are required ; but it
takes four years to produce beef. We import 7,000 sheep. Surely no one will
tell us that we have no room for 7,000 sheep or
CONFEDERATION DEBATE.
131 3,000 cows. Why, it only means 20,000 acres, or thirty-six
miles of land; six miles will supply the cereals—thirty-six miles in all.
Why, the flats at the Fraser would yield it all. The cattle business
certainly requires capital, but the capital will produce great results, and
recollect the good it would do the country, the amount of labour employed
and land cultn ted for the purpose; wool, hides, and bones for house use or
export. What I wish to impress upon you, Sir, is the profit that might be
derived from the introduction of a couple of hundred families. What an immense
loss the Colony would sustain if this were thrown open to the Americans.
What a magnificent field for immigration, particularly when we consider how
much more of agricultural produce will he required when public works are
carried on. The market is good now; how much better it would he then. I
think it would be doing those farmers who had commenced farming under a
protective tariff a great injustice to withdraw protection from them now. We must
have an agricultural population. It Confederation comes, and brings the
Canadian tariff, we destroy the agricultural interests altogether, and the
country will become a wilderness. Confederation without those
terms will not, in my opinion, be accepted. Leave them out and Confederation will
most assuredly fail . Farmers in the Upper Country have a natural protection
from the difficulty of transport. The day will come, and pretty quickly,
when they will raise more there than they have a market for. They must find
an outlet, which must be where the consumers are. If the duty is not
maintained, how can they send their produce down? If the railway should be built,
the cost of transporting goods from the interior will be diminished. and
farms of the Upper Country will then find the tariff of more consequence to
them than to the people of the Lower Country. I say Confederation will not
go down without protection. The agricultural interest will prefer living in
comfort with protection. and without Confederation, than in a perpetual struggle
for livelihood under Confederation. I am in favour of protecting our farming
interests; but if we had a lower scale upon some other goods I should think
it an advantage. I support protection to the agricultural interest, and the
throwing open of our ports to other things. The latter part is, I fear, not
an open question.
COMMISSIONER OF Customes—(Mr. Hamley) —It is difficult to
tell which resolution the Hon. Member is speaking in favour of. It
is quite true that protection may he too little on some things and too much
on others; for instance. I consider the duty on horses too high. I will tell
Hon. gentlemen that a revision of the tariff was considered last year by a
Committee appointed by the late Governor, and a majority of that Committee, who
were all business men. reported in favour of lowering the duties on
agricultural produce, and there was a special report in favour of making
Victoria almost a free port.
Hon. MR. HAMLEY —They were a Committee of gentlemen whom the
late Governor thought fit to appoint. I think the tariff must be altered to
suit this Colony but I believe it must he left to the Canadian Parliament to
alter. What will our representat members do sitting in the Canadian
Parliament, except they look after our interests? There is no obstacle that I know
of to there being a diiferont tariff to suit the interests of this or any
particular Province of the Dominion.
Hon. Mr. HOLBROOK is no reason that there should he a similar
tariff all over, but I think it must be altered by the Canadian Parliament.
Hon. Dr. HELMCKEN—I do not think that it is necessary that
one tariff should prevail all over the Dominion over the Dominion.
Hon. Dr. HELMCKEN —But there can be no differential duties;
that is forbidden by English statutes.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN— So far from leaving it to the Canadian
Parliament, I say we must go in with it altered. How absurd for eight
members to attempt to revise the tariff of British Columbia in the Dominion
Parliament.
Hon. DR. HELMCKEN —Why. look how ridiculous it is to come to
this House to propose any alteration in the tariff. How much more so in the
Dominion Parliament. where so many would be on the other side? If at all, it
must he done. by ourselves. The Canadian Government must agree to it before
we go into Confederation. The other interests are subsidiary to it.
On motion of
Hon. Mr. Ring, the debate was adjourned to Wednesday, the 23rd.
This individual participated in:
