NORTH-WEST TERRITORIES ACT.
Mr. DEWDNEY moved second reading of Bill
(No. 146) to amend the Acts respecting the North- West Territories. He said: The principal
provisions
in this Act are the following:—It is deemed advisable to define the Territories more
particularly
than they are at present defined and to change
their name to the Western Territories of Canada.
This is proposed to be done by section 3 of the
Bill. Sections 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 contain the provisions which are to govern the composition
of the
Legislative Assembly, the periods at which sittings
thereof are to be held, and the mode of proceedings
for electing a new Assembly, or for filling a vacancy.
Section 10 defines the classes of subjects respecting
which the Legislative Assembly may make ordinances. By section 13 of the Bill the
powers of a
single judge are to be extended and defined. By
the same section the confirmation reversal, or
modification by the Court of Appeal, of the
decision of a single judge is to be provided for. By
section 14 provision is to be made for the perform
ance of the duties of a sheriff or a clerk in
the event of a vacancy throu h death or otherwise.
By section 18 provision is to be made to empower
each judge of the Supreme Court of the Territories
to be
ex-ofiicio a district magistrate for the Territories, and also to sit as a criminal court to
try and
determine charges preferred against any persons
for the offences which are specified in that section. By section 22 of the Bill provision
is to be
made as to the manner of indicting persons so
charged. By section 23 provision is to be made
for the transmission, by a justice of the peace or
magistrate holding a preliminary investigation
into any criminal offence, which may not be tried
under "The Summary Convictions Act," of the
records of such investigation; and for the notification of a judge, with the object
of affording the
person charged with the crime, a speedy trial.
By section 24 those persons convicted of a breach
of a municipal by-law and sentenced to imprisonment on account of such breach, are
to be excepted
from the provisions of section 79 of chapter 50 of
the Revised Statutes, unless the municipality shall
arrange with the Commissioner of the North- West Mounted Police for the maintenance
of
the person so convicted during the period of his
sentence. By section 30 the wording of section
108 of the said chapter 50 is to be slightly changed,
and two sub-sections are to be added thereto.
The first of these sub-sections fixes the width of
public highways, roads or trails which existed in
the Territories prior to survey, and also provides
for the improvement of the location thereof by the
surveyor, if necessary. The second retains the
title to the highways in the town for the public
uses of the Territories, and provides that such
roads cannot be altered and that the land cannot
be sold except by consent of the Governor in
Council. The amendment proposed by section 31
to section 110 of the said chapter 50 will give the
Legislative Assembly which will be elected to
succeed the present one the right to regulate and
to decide the manner of recording and publishing
its proceedings. By section 32 of the Bill it
is to be provided that no change shall be made in
the existing law of the Territories concerning
intoxicating liquor until the dissolution of the
present Assembly has afforded the inhabitants an
opportunity of expressing their opinion with
regard to the nature of such change. The other
sections of the Bill contain no material alterations
of the present law.
Mr. LAURIER. The hon. gentleman has only
given us a synopsis of what the Bill contains, but
no explanations as to the reasons of the alterations
made in the Act. I think no more important subject could be brought before this House
at the
present time than a Bill legislating in regard to the
North-West Territories, and the House, I am
sure, will be disappointed at the more than dry
manner in which the hon. gentleman has introduced
this subject, but I cannot blame him very much
for that, because the Bill itself is a very dry one,
and the changes made in the present law are mostly
technical, with the exception of section 13, which
is clothing the Legislature of the North-West
Territories With powers similar to those now enjoyed by the Provinces. In fact, section
13, as
amended by this Bill, is largely borrowed from
section 92 of the Confederation Act, which gives
the powers now enjoyed by the Provinces. I do
not find fault with the Administration for enlarging, to that extent, the powers now
enjoyed by the
Legislature, but it seems to me that while the
Government was making that concession, it would
have been opportune to supplement it with another
concession by giving responsible government to the
Territories. The Territories are not progressing
very fast, but still the population which goes
there is an advanced population, well educated,
and already showing great powers of self-government. There are some subjects of a
nature which
had better be entrusted to them than kept in this
House. They are the best judges of what is best
4451
[COMMONS] 4452
for them in their present condition. It is felt that
the powers which they have already received are
inadequate, and I question very much whether
this small measure of reform, though it may be
accepted for what it is worth, will meet the condition of the people of the Territories.
If the Government had seen fit to give them a responsible
government, or at least a larger measure of self- government, than they have at the
present time,
many of the difficulties which may come before
this House at some time or another, and many of
the difficulties which may arise in the Territories
themselves, under the present system, would in all
probability be avoided. All the difficulties that
have arisen between the Lieutenant Governor and
the Legislature—and they have had some difficulties during the last Session—arose
from the fact
that the Governor had not a responsible body of
advisers who were answerable to the House, and
this fact shows the necessity for some larger measure of responsible government. Under
the circumstances, I do not venture at this moment any
further criticism of this Bill than to say that, in
my judgment, it falls short of what should be the
proper remedy for the difficulties which may arise,
not only in this House but in the Territories
themselves.
Mr. DAVIN. I sympathise, to some extent,
with the remarks that have fallen from the leader
of the Opposition. Those remarks are not couched
in a spirit of hostility to the Government or to
this Act. In fact, this Act is travelling along the
road that the hon. and learned gentleman wishes
it to go, but he would have it go further. I think
that so long as the Act remained as it was there
was a very large section of the people in the North- West who were well content. I
may tell the hon.
gentleman that though there was some difficulty in
the Assembly last year, I believe as a fact that the
weight of opinion in the North-West was with the
minority of that Assembly. By the 11th sub-clause
of section 10, that is to say, section 13 of the
Revised Statutes, which has been put in by the
Senate, all the powers that call for responsibility
are given, as we find by these words:
"The expenditure of such portion of any moneys appropriated by Parliament for the
Territories as the Governor
in Council may instruct the Lieutenant Governor to
expend by and with the advice of the Legislative Assembly."
I am afraid that unless some form of responsible
government is given, that money will be worse
than wasted; that money will be expended—
how? It will be expended by the Lieutenant
Governor by and with the advice of the Legislative Assembly. Why, Sir, What will happen?
You will have that money log-rolled, as we know
has often happened in the history of such Governments. Suppose moneys were voted here
in
Committee of Supply; if you allowed those
moneys to be expended by the advice of this
Parliament without any Government to be responsible therefor to the people, the result
would be
that vast sums that are now carefully expended,
would be worse than wasted. With regard to the
local fund which they raise now, amounting, I
think, to some $16,000 or $17,000, that sum is log- rolled. The manner in which that
sum is expended is
this: It is divided by 22, and the quotient given
to each member, and whether he needs it or not, he
naturally takes it, although sometimes he may have
to fall back upon his inventive faculties for ways
of expending it. Yet, of course, he does expend it.
One case happened where an hon. gentleman spent
the money on purposes that never could have been
contemplated when it was voted; and, therefore
I think, as we have gone thus far, probably it
would be as well to go still further and to give
them a little government. I think there are some
parts of the Bill that will be found an improvement; but, when we come to the clause
dealing
with the appointment of deputy sheriffs, I will ask
the Committee to accept an amendment. It seems
to me that is indefensible; it is vicious in principle.
to have the Assembly provide for the appointment
of deputy sheriffs; it would be much better to
have the judges provide for the necessity of the
appointment of deputy sheriffs, because if you have
this work devolving on the Assembly, every member of the Assembly will be troubled
with requests
from every little town in his district to have a
deputy sheriff appointed, because every little place
would think it would obtain a certain importance
if it had a deputy sheriff. The subject was discussed elsewhere, if I may refer to
it in passing,
and all the North-West opinion was in the direction which I now express myself. I
will ask the
Government to consider that point, because, as I
say, you will have such a large number of deputy
sherrifs that the receipts will not be enough to give
them bread and salt. I think, on the whole, there
are very good reforms in the Bill, and the North- West will welcome it.
Mr. BLAKE. I think it impossible to attach
too much importance to the point on which the
hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Davin) has
just enlarged. We are proposing to make a
departure from the principles of responsible
government, as we understand them, in a most
important particular. I admit that it is difficulty
to deal with the exigency otherwise than it is
dealt with by this Bill, without responsible govern
ment. The principle, as I understand it, is that,
with respect to the expenditure of public moneys,
it is the Crown that initiates, not the Assembly.
The Assembly is supposed to be a check, a guard,
to keep the drag on; that is the function of the
popular body. I quite agree that eminent statesmen, not theorising, but dealing with
actual
results in late years in the mother country, have
pointed out how far the English House of Commons has departed from the ancient traditions;
how far it has ceased to be a bulwark and support
to the Administration in matters of prudence and
economy in public expenditure. But, none the less,
I hold it to be the most important ingredient in securing economy, and also good direction,
in public
expenditure, that there shall be an initiative somewhere else than in the popular
assembly, and, deeply
as I differ from the hon. member for West Assiniboia
(Mr. Davin) as to his characterisation of the expenditures that have taken place in
this House, or
rather with the sanction of this House, I say they
are, beyond all comparison, better, more prudent,
and wiser than they would have been if such a
system as we are proposing to give the North- West Territories had existed here. We
have had
a few instances, I am glad to say only a few, of
attempted departure from that system. There have
been perhaps three cases, three only occur to my
mind at this moment, in which select committees
4453 [May 6, 1890.] 4454
have substantially, though not nominally, been
allowed to deal with old claims in order, I am
afraid, that the Executive might escape the responsibility, with the inevitable result
that the
claims were allowed; but, subject to those trifling
exceptions, which only mark the rule, we have
observed the rule. We are not without experience
in this matter in the old Province. In the early
days of the old Legislature of Canada, prior to
1840, when, as you know, we had a system which
was not a system of responslble government,
although there were Ministers representing the
Crown, at that time, as Mr. Bourinot says:
"All applications for pecuniary assistance were addressed directly to the House of
Assembly, and every
Governor, especially Lord Sydenham, has given his testimony as to the injurious effect
of the system. The Union
Act of 1540 laced the initiation of many votes in the
Crown, and this wise practice was always strictly followed
up to 1867, when the new Constitution came into force."
And we know the language of the present Constitution provides expressly:
"It shall not be lawful for the House of Commons to
adopt or pass any vote, resolution, address or Bill for the
appropriation of any part of the public revenue, or of any
tax or impost, to any purpose that has not been first recommended by a Message of
the Governor General, in the
the Session in which such vote, resolution, address, or
Bill is proposed."
A similar provision is inserted in the Constitution
of each Provincial Legislature. Now, as I have
said, I see the difficulty in which hon. gentlemen
opposite were plunged when they came to deal
with this question, because they have got one or
two alternatives to adopt. They have to adopt
the language we find here, which says:
"The expenditure of such portion of any moneys appropriated by Parliament for the
Territories, as the Governor
in Council may instruct the Lieutenant Governor to expend, by and with the advice
of the Leglslative Assembly."
That is to say, the advice of the Assembly is to rule.
They had that course open to them. Or the course
was open to them of providing that the Lieutenant
Governor should send down his Message, and without that Message it should not be competent
for the
Legislative Assembly to deal with the question at all.
There you would at once be face to face with irresponsible rule. The Legislative Assembly
cannot
condemn the Lieutenant Governor, or dismiss
him, or alter his position in any way, his advisory
council is not responsible; and you are brought face
to face with a difficulty which must subsist for the
want of responsible government. But, on the other
hand, what are we doing by the proposed plan? We
are deliberately initiating that system which was
deliberately abandoned in the early history of the
old Province, where it was tried with injurious
results, which has been deliberately rendered
impossible by the constitutional Act, as to this
Assembly and as to the Provincial Legislatures, and which is decidedly opposed to
the
spirit of the British Constitution. The hon. gentleman from Assiniboia has told us
of the method
of the expenditure of the scanty funds, which
up to this time the Legislative Assembly has
been allowed to expend. It is not an entirely
new method of expenditure, because, I happen
to know, that in the Province of Nova Scotia there
are certain moneys called "road moneys," the
disposal of which has been placed under the
control of members; but, even there, the question of deciding as to how much shall
go to each
county is decided according to constitutional principle, while the detailed application
has been left, with
very injurious results, to the local members. But
the hon. gentleman tells us, that in this case the
total fund to be disposed of is divided by the number of constituencies, and each
member is given his
equal share. Of course, it is impossible to suppose, that in a territory like the
North-West, in
which, with the best possible desire, you cannot
have equal areas with equal wants all over, that
an equal division of money all over is a just
division. Why, it is beyond all possibility that
such an arrangement can be just, and it is important that what scanty funds are available
should
be expended for such objects as may on the advice
of responsible Ministers, be submitted to the Assembly and as shall by the Assembly
be deemed to
be for the general good. It might be that a particular district might be infinitely
more benefited
in reality by the whole fund being expended outside of it, in an adjoining district;
its own immediate local interests might be better served
by a large expenditure on a ridge or other means
of public communication, than by being frittered
away in the district itself. Such a system as
this is one which certainly does not encourage
us in the scheme of placing more funds in
this present fashion under the control of the
Assembly. I think, therefore, we are face to
face with a very serious question when we are engaged in the work commenced in 1875,
that high
and noble work for any Legislative Assembly, the
task of improving, as we were engaged then in the
task of inaugurating, the institutions under which
a large territory, to be inhabited at some future
day, we hope, by millions, may grow up and
prosper.
Mr. LARIVIERE. In the early part of this
Session, a question closely connected with the present legislation which we are now
called upon to
examine was raised in this House, and it was then
stated although the population of the North-West
Territories was largely composed of a class of
people using the French language, it was astonishing that in the North-West Council,
composed of
22 members, not one had been returned who
belonged to the French Canadian nationality. This
was due to the fact that the electoral divisions
were so arranged, that the French population could
not muster a sufficient number of electors to elect
one of themselves to represent their interests in
that Council. I expected that the present Bill
would contain such provisions, as would alter the
electoral divisions so as to give the French population of the North-West Territories
a chance of
having representatives upon the floor of their
Council. The hon. member for Saskatchewan (Mr.
Macdowall) made at the time a suggestion, that
when amendments should be framed to the North- West Territories Act, they should contain
such
changes as would help the French population
to be properly represented; an if my
memory serves me right, the promise was
given to him, that when such legislation would be
brought before this House, it would contain a provision whereby the desired change
would be effected, and whereby the interests of those which are
to-day unrepresented in that body, would be protected. I am sorry to see, that when
a suggestion
was made to the Senate to that effect, it was not
4455
[COMMONS] 4456
accepted by those who had the Bill in charge;
and the Bill which now comes before this House
is, consequently, without such provision. Out of
22 members composing the North-West Council,
as I have said, not one belonged either to the
French nationality, or even to the Catholic religion,
although one-fifth of the North-West is French.
The population of the North-West Territories, according to the last census, was 22,000
or 27,000
inhabitants, out of which 4,800 were of French
origin, and these people, as I repeat, are without
representation in the North-West Assembly.
Before this Bill is adopted by the House, I hope
that such an amendment as will rectify this state
of affairs will be incorporated. When a Constitution was given to the Province of
Quebec, at Confederation, the framers were very careful to set apart
a certain number of counties which were called the
English counties; and by the Constitution, the
Legislature of the Province of Quebec could not
interfere with the limits of these counties, so that
the Protestant minority of the Province would
have their representatives, and would thus be protected against the majority. I say
that this was well
done. Although there was no danger, still it was
right, I believe, that the minority should be protected against the majority. If we
had this protection in the Province of Manitoba, we would not
have had to regret the legislation recently adopted
in that Province. I maintain that it is within
our duty, as representatives of the people here, to
see that the minority is protected in the North- West Territories, as it is in the
Province of Manitoba by the Constitution, and as the Protestant and
English minority of the Province of Quebec is also
protected by the Constitution. I repeat expressing
the hope that, before this Bill is put through all its
stages in this House, such provision will be incorporated as shall protect the minority
of the North- West Territories, as far as their right to fair representation at least,
is concerned.
Mr. MCCARTHY. I agree with a great deal
which has been said by my hon. friend from West
Durham (Mr. Blake), but I do not think he has
quite stated the law; he has not stated it, at all
events, as I understand it. The difficulty with the
North-West Territories is, that the Advisory Council is not responsible as a Government
would be;
although it is stated that the Lieutenant Governor
has to consult the Advisory Council with regard to
the expenditure of moneys. It is a hybrid system.
It is neither a system of responsible government,
such as we are accustomed to understand it, nor is
it a system by which the Executive—that is, the
Lieutenant Governor of the North-West Territories
—is responsible, and, I suppose, solely responsible to
his official head. But I think the hon. member for
West Durham (Mr. Blake) was wrong in this respect.
As I understand the effect of the amendment now
proposed, it is this: that in addition to the moneys
which the people of the North-West vote themselves, and which, according to the present
practice,
they are supposed to have control over; they are
to have control over such further sums of money,
under the 11th sub-section:
"As the Governor in Council may instruct the Lieutenant Governor to expend, by and
with the advice of the
Legislative Assembly."
My hon. friend will see that under another clause
of the North-West Territories Amending Act of
1888, these moneys so expended will have to be
recommended by the Lieutenant Governor; so, in
point of fact, one of the mischiefs he pointed
out, that that would be an expenditure without
any responsibility, is, as I conceive, the result of
the present scheme; the Lieutenant Governor is
not responsible, as the hon. gentleman pointed
out, but no money can be expended by the Council
without his recommendation. To my mind, that
is a most unfortunate condition of things, and I
join with the hon. gentlemen of the Opposition in
thinking that, if the day has not come, it is fast
approaching, when responsible government might
well be given to the North-West Territories, in some
degree at all events. I do not mean to say that
we should give them control of the public lands,
but I believe that responsible government might
well be given in a very large degree to the people of
the North-West Territories. A Bill of a similar
nature to this is now before the British Parliament
with regard to West Australia, and although the
population there is 65,000 only—not so much at
the population of the North-West Territories,
if my memory serves me right—the Imperial
Government have introduced a Bill proposing
to confer on West Australia responsible government, though not giving them absolute
control
over the great public lands of that country. With
that exception, I do not know why our North- West Territories, with 100,000 inhabitants,
as,
I think, they claim themselves to he, should not
be entrusted with responsible government, instead
of the extraordinary system which is perpetuated
to some extent by this measure. Any one who
reads the difficulties of the last session of the
North-West Assembly will see how important it
is in the interests of that country that this question should be settled, and settled
promptly. We
find that in the early days of the last meeting of
the Legislative Assembly, Mr. Haultain's Administration resigned, because the Lieutenant
Governor declined to account for the expenditure which
had been voted by the Assembly the preceding
session. Then we find that a new Advisory Board
having been selected, the Council promptly voted
want of confidence in them, and the Advisory Board
having refused to resign on account of that, the
Legislative Assembly refused to vote money which
had been recommended by the Lieutenant Governor.
There is a deadlock; it is a deadlock that this
measure is certainly not going to get rid of in any
way; the same difficulty will arise next session;
and I really think that when the Bill is before us,
some more adequate provision should be made for
getting rid of a difficulty which is calculated to
create uneasiness and disturbance in the North- West, the result of which we must
all deplore- I notice, too—though it is perhaps not intentional—
that the effect of the Bill is rather to limit the
authority of the Legislative Assembly of the
North-West. The 9th sub-section of section 13
simply gives power to the North-West Assembly
to constitute courts of civil jurisdiction; but that
Assembly has up to this time had power, which it
will cease to have if this Bill becomes law, to constitute courts of criminal jurisdiction
as well. I do not
know the reason for that change. However, these
are provisions which will, perhaps, undergo discussion in committee, and I merely
refer to them
now, Without in any sense opposing the second
reading. I regret that this Bill has not been
4457 [MAY 6, 1890.] 4458
brought down earlier in the Session. Dealing as it
does with a territory of such vast extent and with
such a large population, I think it is not too much
to say, that it is one of the most important,
if not the most important measure of the whole
Session, and I think it is a pity that it has been
left to be considered in the dying hours of the
Session. But, when the proper time comes, I will
move with regard to one or two clauses—one
clause which I see in the Bill, and another which
I object to not seeing there, if that is not a Hibernianism. I propose to ask the
Committee to reconsider the resolution which is now to be found
embodied in the 31st clause of the Bill:
"Either the English or the French language may be
used by any person in the debates of the Legislative
ASSembly of the Territories and in the roceediugs before
the courts; and both those languages shall be used in the
records and Journals of such Assembly: and all ordinances made under this Act shall
be printed in both those
languages: Provided however. that after the next
general election of the Legislative Assembly, such
Assembly may, by ordinance or otherwise, regulate its
proceedings, and the manner of recordingand publishing
the same: and the regulations so made shall be embodied
in a proclamation which shall be forthwith made and
published by the Lieutenant Governor in conformity with
the law, and thereafter shall have full force and effect."
Now, I submit that this clause does not at all
dispose of the question of the dual language. I
notice that the hon. gentleman who represents the
Government in the other House calls it a compromise. If it is a compromise, I do not
know who
were the parties to that compromise. I do not
know why the Upper House should have felt bound
or precluded by some arrangement or compromise
made with regard to this question. Who were the
parties to the compromise? Were the people of the
North-West consulted? Had they any notice of it,
or did they assent to it?
NORTH-WEST TERRITORIES ACT.
Mr. MCCARTHY. I was pointing out that it
had been urged in the other branch of the Legislature that this compromise had been
agreed to, and
that by reason of the compromise it was not in the
public interest that this agitation, as it was termed,
should be prolonged or renewed. What I want to
know is, who were the parties to the compromise,
and why should we be bound or precluded by an
arrangement when we cannot even tell who were
the parties to it. It was not stated on the floor of
this House that there had been any arrangement;
certainly no arrangement was agreed to on the
floor of the House other than that found in the
vote that was cast. Then, was the arrangement
made outside of the House? If so, who were the
parties to it? It was stated, I see, by the hon.
gentleman who represents the Government in the
fairly. What I feel, and what I think most people feel on this subject, is the mischief
resulting
other Chamber:
"The reason is precisely the one which my hon. friend
from Ottawa stated, and it is the one which actuates
probably nearly every man in this Chamber who votes
or the proviso, namely, that by the introduction of the
proviso it is intended not to prolong or increase or renew the agitation on this subject,
but, by accepting it, to
seek to put an end to the agitation on this subject, because
it represents something. in the nature of a compromise
which has been impliedly entered into and agreed upon
by the leaders of all parties in politics in this country—
with the exception of this new and small party which has
lately sprung lip—as a solution of the difficulty which can
reasonsably be accepted."
Well, I do not understand, and on endeavoring to
recall the discussion, I cannot now derive from it,
although I paid pretty close attention to it, how
this compromise was agreed to. I do remember, that
my hon. friend from West Assiniboia (Mr. Davin)
moved a resolution proposing that the whole subject
should be left to the people of the North-West after
the general elections; I understood that a large proportion of the House were in favor
of that; I heard
the right hon. gentleman who leads the House
applaud the sentiment, and I think, if I am not
mistaken, that he spoke in favor of it. Shortly
afterwards, the hon. member for West Durham
(Mr. Blake) made a proposition, he not being
satisfied either with the Bill or the amendment of
the hon. member for West Assiniboia. Within
twenty-four hours afterwards, this other amendment was suggested, but it was not suggested
as
the result of a compromise or anything of the
kind. Perhaps the leader of the other House
knows more about it than I do; all I know of it was
what took place on the floor of this House. But
what I protest against, is that Parliament should
be supposed to be bound by any arrangement come
to on that occasion. I ventured to say then, and I
repeat now, that that is not going to settle the
difficulty. If this dual language discussion is
calculated to arouse passions and feelings which
had better not be aroused, then the proper thing
for Parliament to do is to settle the question once
and for all. This is no settlement of it. What
does it do? It merely leaves to the Assembly of
the Territories the power to say that the Journals
shall be printed in the way they think fit; in
other words, they shall not be printed in both
languages; and further, that but one language.
if they please, shall be spoken in the Assembly.
have not the slightest doubt that, without any law
at all, any reasonable body of men—and I take it
that the members of the North-West Assembly
are reasonable men—would permit one of its
members to speak in any language which suited
him, in which they could follow him. I
do not think they require any law for that.
I do not think that is the grievance which was
complained of. What the people of the North- West complained of, and what they still,
if I read
their press aright, complain of, is that this is a
perpetuation of the system of dual languages, and,
therefore, calculated to do a great deal of mischief, unless put an end to at an early
day.
That system is still maintained in the courts.
I do not object, nor need anybody object,
to the printing of the laws in as many languages as the Assembly thinks necessary;
it is
not necessary to impose by this Act imperatively
upon the Assembly that the laws shall be printed
in French and English, as that is a matter which
reasonable men would deal with properly and
from the policy of perpetuating the dual system of
language. I do not propose to renew the discussion at any length upon that subject;
but ask the attention of the House to an omission which is perhaps still more serious
in this Bill, and that is with
reference to the question of education. By the
law, as it now stands, separate schools have
4459
[COMMONS] 4460
been, since 1875, absolutely imposed upon the
people of the North-West Territories. The
majority constitutes its school and then the
minority, whether Protestant or Catholic, has a
separate school. This system differs from the
system prevailing in Ontario in this way, that in
Ontario we have the public schools, which are the
general schools, and then we have the separate
schools which are the schools of the Roman Catholic
minority. But in the North-West Territories the
law is the same as in the Province of Quebec, I
believe; at all events, it is that the majority
having formed their school, the minority, whether
Protestant or Catholic, are then entitled to form
theirs. So that there are in most of the districts
two schools—the school of the majority, whether
Roman Catholic or Protestant, and that of the
minority. The intention of our Constitution is to
give the Local Assemblies absolute and complete control over education. That is the
scheme
of our Constitution. In the cases of Quebec
and Ontario, special restrictions were imposed
on both these Provinces; but in all the other
Provinces of the Dominion there is no restriction
whatever, and the question is left to be settled by
the local authorities, who are the most competent
to deal with it. I propose to ask the Committee,
when this Bill is in committee, to place the
law in the North-West Territories exactly in that
position. When this law was passed, it was said
there were only five hundred people in the North- West Territories. It was passed,
so far as the
Senate was concerned, in opposition to a very
large number of Senators. I have here the debate
on the subject, and I find that this clause of the
Bill was only carried by a majority of two, it having been opposed on a motion made
by Senator
Aikins and strongly supported by the Hon.
George Brown. The late Mr. Brown opposed it
on the ground that it was contrary to the spirit of
the Constitution, as the British North America
Act gave the matter of education absolutely to the
Provinces, and that, as at that time, the North- West Territories were being endowed
with certain
powers, the power should be given to them of
dealing with this question. Mr. Brown spoke,
according to the official reports of the Senate, as
follows:—
"He held this provision was quite contrary to the
British North America Act. Nothing was more clear
that each Province should have absolute control over
education. He held that was the only principle on which
the Union Act could be continued. If the Dominion
Government interfered in local matters we would get
into inextricable confusion with the Provinces. The
safe way for us was to let each Province suit itself in this
matter. The country was filled with people of all classes
and creeds, and there would be no end to confusion if each
class had to have its own peculiar school system. It had
been said this clause was ut in for the protection of the
Protestants against the Catholics, the latter being the
most numerous. But he, speaking for the Protestants,
was in a position to say that we did not want that protection. In this case, it was
proposed that the national
machinery should be used for the imposition and collection of taxes upon persons of
peculiar denominations
for the support of schools of their kind. It was an
attempt to enforce upon that country peculiar views with
regar to education."
Now, what was the argument against this contention? It was that the system of separate
schools
and public schools was prevailing in Ontario and
Quebec, and that it was the subject of very great
regret that there was not in New Brunswick—because at that time the New Brunswick
question
was up—a similar law. Well, I have learned from
members coming from New Brunswick that the
school system there has acted satisfactorily, and
that there is no substantial grievance complained
of by the minority, who do not find that, in attending the ordinary public schools,
they are suffering
any great wrong. We know that in the Province
of Ontario, in many places, all classes of religion
attend the public schools. I know of one place in
my own riding where the Roman Catholics have
always refused to have separate schools, although
they are a very large body in that particular township. They are quite content, rather
more
than content, to send their children to the
public schools, confident that by joining
with the others they would get a much better
education than by dividing the schools into two
smaller bodies. The suggestions, therefore, which
were made in the Senate in support of this clause
of the Bill, experience has shown to be not warranted by the results. It is urged
that this
and kindred questions should not be dealt with
until after the next elections, and I propose to
move an amendment in that sense. The Legislative
Assembly has unanimously petitioned that the
clause to which I refer should be amended in the
direction I speak of. I find upon the 29th of
October, on motion of Mr. Richardson, seconded
by Mr. Brett, it was resolved:
"That an humble Address be presented to His Excellency, the Governor General in Council,
the Senate and the
House of Commons, praying that an Act he passed to
amend the North-West Territories Act by repealing subsection 1, of section 14, after
the word 'education' in
the second line."
In other words, simply giving the North-West
Assembly power to deal with the subject of education. A special committee was thereupon
appointed to draft a petition, and both these motions
were carried unanimously; and I find on page 65
of the Journals of the North-West Assembly, that a
petition to the same effect was presented and
again unanimously adopted. However, if there is
any doubt about the propriety of asking the
North-West Assembly to deal with this questlon at
present, I am quite willing to yield to that doubt,
because a year or two cannot make any great
difference. Therefore, I propose to move in Committee that after the next election
they shall have
power to deal with this subject of education in an
unrestricted manner.
Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD. I regret I was
not able to be present during the previous part of
this debate, and that I had not the advantage of
hearing all the argument of the hon. member for
North Simcoe. This Bill, however, does not pretend
in any way to be either a consolidation of the laws
respecting the North-West Territories or to make
any substantial amendments, except to remove the
clause dealing with education and leaving to a
future Parliament the discussion of the whole
system of governing the North-West. I presume
that, in a very few years, the population there
will be such as to call for the division of the
Territories into Provinces. Then I have no doubt
a constitution will be adopted similar in substance
to the constitutions that prevail in the the various
existing Provinces of the Dominion. The Legislature of Canada has proceeded, with
reference to
the organisation of the North-West, With great
care and caution. It will be remembered that at
4461 [MAY 6, 1890.] 4462
first that country was governed by a Lieutenant
Governor with a council appointed, I think, altogether by the Crown, and afterwards
with a council
composed of a certain number of Crown nominees
and a certain number of elected councillors. The
governor was practically without responsibility to
the Legislature, and I have no doubt that was
designedly so, the Governor being responsible to the
central Government, and that central Government
or Cabinet being responsible to the Dominion
Parliament. The amended measure which was
introduced, I think, by my hon. friend from
Bothwell (Mr. Mills) made a further advance and
provided that when the population amounted to a
certain number
Mr. BLAKE. That was introduced by the hon.
member for East York (Mr. Mackenzie).
Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD I beg the hon.
gentleman's pardon for the error. That provided
that, when the number of the elected members
amounted to 21, the nominated council should
disappear, and it should be changed from a council
to an assembly, and the Governor would then sever
himself—if I recollect aright—from the council of
which before he was merely a member, and would
assume a more distinct political existence, in fact,
would assume by degrees the position of the
representative of the Crown in a Province. Still,
there was no responsible government provided for
in so many words in that Act. In 1888, the last
Act was passed, by which without the Lieutenant
Governor having a responsible government as we
understand it, without having advisers selected
from the assembly and obliged to go back to their
constituents for re-election upon being appointed
advisers of the Crown, it was provided that
further steps should be taken towards the assimilation of the system there to that
which prevails in
the Provinces, so that the Lieutenant Governor
should have an advisory board taken from the
Assembly, and so on. The difficulty—if difficulty
it may be called—the difference of opinion in the
North-West arose from the fact that the Assembly at
once assumed that they had a constitution similar
to a Provincial constitution. As to the danger
that was alluded to by the hon. member for
West Durham (Mr. Blake), or rather the practice
in the olden days—I am old enough to remember
them—the Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada
did not look after the finances at all except those
which were derived from Imperial revenues, such
as Customs, for instance.
Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD. Also the post
office and the Indian revenue quoad the Indians.
The Lieutenant Governor managed those revenues
autpcratieally, but, I believe, with a praiseworthy
desire to meet the views of the people, though he
was not obliged to do so. As to the revenues
which came within the governance of the Legislature, I am afraid there was a great
deal of what
the hon. member for Western Assiniboia (Mr.
Davin) calls log-rolling. At all events, there were
Acts passed appropriating the revenue at the instance of any member who moved a Bill—something
like the system which now prevails in the
American Congress. There were ludicrous instances
of Bills being passed for certain purposes when
there was no money in the treasury to carry out
the purposes for which they were adopted. Year
after year statutes were adopted enabling the
Province to borrow money when there was really
no power to borrow, and when, if there had been
the power, they had not sufficient credit to raise
the money required by the Bill. You will find a
semi-indignant, but somewhat cynical account of
these proceedings in the report of Lord Sydenham.
This state of affairs was cured in 1863. In this
case no such action can be taken except on the
initiative of the Governor, who is responsible to
the Parliament of Canada as a Dominion ofiicer,
but he had always the power in that country to
act at first on his own discretion. In
1878, there was an attempt made to provide
an embryotic Ministry or Council, to allow the
Lieutenant Governor to select four advisers, from
those he thought, from their commercial and
financial experience, were best fitted to discharge
that duty. That was all that was then done in
the direction of establishing responsible government. Whether the time has come, or
not, when
responsible government in its fullest extent should
be established in those Territories, I am unable to
say, but I can say this, that almost every gentleman from the North-West with whom
I have
communicated, either personally or by letter, on
the subject, has objected very much to the premature introduction of the system which
now
prevails in the Province of Manitoba. They say
that they are warned by the results of Provincial
Government in Manitoba; that, there not being
included in the population of that Province men
of political experience, men acquainted with constitutional principles; they say—I
am not expressing my opinion on the subject—that the
experience of Manitoba, and the enormous expenditure in that Province, has warned
them
against having that system prematurely extended
to the North-West. I shall not enter into the
discussion as to the dual language or the separate
schools. The hon. member for North Simcoe
(Mr. McCarthy) has promised to express his views
by resolution when we are going into Committee
of the Whole I hope, therefore, that the Bill
will pass the second reading, and will be set down
for an early day, when we can discuss those questions. I regret that my absence from
the House
at the time prevented my hearing the speech of
the hon. gentleman, and, therefore, no doubt, my
remarks are very much short of being an answer
to that speech.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). I agree with the hon.
member for North Simcoe (Mr. McCarthy), in
saying that the measure now under our consideration is one of the most important,
perhaps the
most important, that has been before the House
this Session, and I feel in my own mind that it is
quite impossible at this period of the Session to
give to a measure of this importance that full and
exhaustive consideration which it ought to receive
from this House. The principles involved in the
measure are of very great importance, and ought
to receive very full consideration, and ought to be
discussed from every possible standpoint by the
members of this House, before any final action is
taken. Now, the hon. gentleman has stated that
it is not proper at the present time that responsible
overnment should be introduced in the North- West Territories. Well, it does seem
to me an
extremely unsatisfactmy condition of things that
4463
[COMMONS] 4464
you have given to the people of that country a
representative Assembly, but that you should
withhold from them executive responsibility. The
hon. the First Minister has referred to the Lieutenant Governor as a party who is
responsible for
the executive government in those Territories.
Well, he is only responsible in the same way that
the Governor appointed by the Imperial Ministry
for this country was responsible to Downing
Street before responsible government was conceded. The Lieutenant Governor of the
North- West Territories is responsible to the Administration here; he is not responsible
at all in the
sense in which we understand the expression. It is
an Administration, or an Executive, that is responsible to the representatives of
the people within
the Territories for the purposes for which that representative Assembly is constituted.
Now, there has
been a good deal of discussion in the House, not on
this question but on another question that preceded it this Session, which shows that
to some
extent there is confusion in the minds, I think, of
the members of this House, and also perhaps, in
public estimation, with regard to the differences
that exist between a Territorial Government and a
Provincial Government. We recognise this difference in every Bill that we introduce
to this House,
and we have recognised it in the measure that is
now before us. But whether we give to the Territorial Legislature large power, or
whether we give
to it little power, whatever power is conferred
upon it should be exercised, it seems to me, under
the control of a responsible Administration. I do
not see how it is possible that you can have anything like permanency in public policy
in regard to
measures which may be brought before that Legislature for consideration, unless you
have an Administration controlling the legislation and responsible for its due execution.
You may have measures
carried through the Territorial Legislature to-day,
which will be repealed next Session, because there
is no Administration existing which will, in any
proper sense, be responsible for the conduct of
public affairs. Now, I admit that in a new country
people must be content with narrower powers than
we have in an older country, which is more densely
settled, where the population has grown more
wealthy, where their wants are more varied. We
recognise this difference in the growth of Provincial
establishments under responsible governments.
We are not content to-day with the amount of
power that was possessed by the old Legislature of
the Provinces after responsible government was
first introduced. Our population has become more
dense, their interests have become more varied,
they have external as well as domestic relations,
and so they require and ask for a voice in controlling their external as well as their
domestic
affairs. This may make a difference between the
extent of power which we confer upon a Local
Legislature under a territorial system, and upon a
Local Legislature that is constituted under a Provincial organisation. But all these
matters are matters
that require very careful consideration. I was
astonished at the change of sentiment indicated by
the speech of the hon. member for North Simcoe
here to-day, in discussing the subject of the dual
language. The hon. gentleman expressed sentiments
to-day with which I, in a great measure, cordially
agree; they were those which I enunciated in discussing this Bill at an earlier period
of the Session.
The hon. gentleman has had new light, and I am
glad to see that the views which he expressed today are more nearly in consonance
with those
entertained by the majority of this House. Now,
I am sure that some of the parties outside of the
House will be disappointed. Let me tell the hon,
gentleman this: A Frenchman and a countryman
of his, in this city, were discussing this question of
the dual language yesterday, and his countryman
said to his French friend: "Ah, ye may use your
French lingo to-day, but wait till the Great
McCarthy has done wid ye, and ye will only be
able to make signs then." I am sure if the hon.
gentleman's countryman had heard his speech here
to-day, he would be satisfied that the Frenchman,
after all, might be able to do something more than
make signs after the hon. gentleman had done with
him. The hon. gentleman has recognised to-day
the principle that language used for public purposes,
like language used for private purposes, is a
matter of convenience. The hon. gentleman said
that we ought not to force two languages upon a
population. Well, I do not think we are doing
that. I was opposed to that in the first instance,
but I never supposed for one moment that if
the members of the Council were Frenchmen and
could not speak English, they would be debarred
from speaking French. That was their privilege.
When that Council was first created the Crown
appointed to the Council, upon our advice, a
half-breed who could not speak a word of English,
and we appointed him because he was a man of
immense influence over the hall-breed population
and one in whom they had the utmost confidence;
and I am perfectly sure that we carried on the
government of that country during the remaining
period of our administration, with very much
smaller police force to maintain peace in that
country, than if we had appointed a member to
the Council in whom the people of the Territories
had not the utmost confidence I observe that
the hon. gentleman has by this Bill, in section 3,
provided that the "territories formerly known as
Rupert's Land and the North-West Territories
shall be" so and so. Well, the hon. gentleman
will see, from looking at any old work on the subject of Hudson's Bay, or any old
map representing
that territory, that Rupert's Land embraced the
territory east of Hudson's Bay as well as the
territories on the west, and that the designation
of the North-West Territories applied rather to the
territories extending eastward from the Bay, and
that Rupert's Land was, on most old maps, marked
as the territory laying on the east and south-east
of that Bay. The hon. gentleman will remember
that the territory is not embraced in any Province
at the present time; it is not embraced in the
Territory of Keewatin, and so there ought to be
some phraseology used to show what precise territories are intended to be embraced
under the
provisions of this Bill. I notice there are some
provisions providing for the appointment of
legal experts, for the appointment of a fixed
number of members of the Territories, which is,
no doubt, right and proper in the first instance;
but the limits of the territorial districts and
the number of members to be elected, ought to
be left to the people of the Territories through the
Legislature which they have constituted. I would
just say one thing more with regard to the general
principles embodied in this Bill, and that is with
4465 [MAY 6, 1890.] 4466
reference to any appropriation that may be made
by this Parliament and placed at the disposal of
the Legislature of that Territory. I think that an
amount of money ought to be appropriated upon
some principle such as was recognised in making
an appropriation out of the revenue for the use of
a Province, and it ought to be as absolutely under
the control of the Legislature and its responsible
executive as an appropriation that is made by this
Parliament under the constitution is under the
control of the Legislature of the Province to which
it is made. It is impossible that the government
of that country can be fairly carried on with the
very small appropriation that is made, nor is it at
all adequate when we compare the number of the
population with the number of the people in any
one of the Provinces. It does seem to me, when
we look at the fact that the Territories have no
resources whatever except those received by direct
taxation or those derived from grants made by this
House, that an appropriation ought to be placed at
the disposal of the Legislature of the Territories
for territorial purposes, and it should be as completely under their control and as
free from interference as if it were made to a Province regularly
constituted.
Motion agreed to, and House resolved itself into
Committee.
(In the Committee.)
On section 3,
Mr. DAWSON. Perhaps the hon. Minister will
allow me to direct his attention to a technical
matter; it is that, I think, the description might
be somewhat improved. It at present reads:
"All that portion of the Dominion of Canada which is
bounded as follows that is to say: Beginning at the point
of intersection of the western boundary of the Province
of Manitoba and the international boundary line dividing
Canada from the United States; thence westerly along
the said international boundary line to the line of the
watershed dividing the waters flowing into the Pacific
Ocean from those flowing into the Arctic Sea or Hudson's
Bay."
The international boundary line does not touch
the watershed of the Arctic Sea at all, but it
crosses the watershed separating the waters flowing into Hudson's Bay from the waters
running to
the Pacific Ocean. The description would be better in this way:
"Dividing the waters flowing into the Pacific Ocean
from those flowing into the Gulf of Mexico and Hudson's
Bay."
I believe that in the Rocky Mountains the international boundary line actually touches
on the
sources of the Mississippi, but certainly it does
not touch on any river flowing into the Arctic
Ocean. It also touches the head waters of the
south branch of the Saskatchewan. The hon.
Mister has officers in his Department who could
draw up a very good description. As it stands
now, it is not a great deal better than the description drawn by the Imperial Privy
Council of the
boundaries between Manitoba and Ontario, where
a very large portion of the United States is given
to one of the Provinces. I merely throw out the
suggestion.
Mr. DEWDNEY. The officers of the Department have taken much trouble in preparing this
description; but if the hon. gentleman will send to
me in writing any suggestion he has to officer, it
will be considered.
Mr. CHARLTON. I doubt very much whether
it is advisable to change the name of the country
from the North-West Territories to the Western
Territories of Canada. The new name is not as
convenient as the old one, because there are more
words in it. The country has been for many
years known as the North-West Territories, and it
will very likely continue to be so known despite
this legislation changing its name. I question very
much the propriety of making any change, and I
move that we retain the old name, North-West
Territories.
Mr. BLAKE. It occurred to me that it is a
very awkward name that is proposed. If you do
not use a name that is easily spoken, it will not be
used at all. I felt some difficulty about making a
change, but it occurs to me that if a change is to
be made it would be a much easier mouthful to say,
Western Canadian Territories.
Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD. The name might
be changed to Western Territories. Objection has
been taken to the word "North" as conveying to
the general public the idea of an arctic condition,
that the country was not very like the American
North-West, but was further north, and possessed
a more severe climate, a shorter summer and a
longer winter, and for these reasons it was suggested
to drop the word "North."
Mr. BLAKE. It seems to me that the old name,
after all, was not devoid of truth, and the change
proposed will not alter the thermometer in winter
or in summer in any way whatever. My impression is that any announcement made to the
world
at large, and particularly to the immigrating public,
with the view of persuading them that they are
not going to cold winters in the North-West, will
not have any effect on any sensible man.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). These Territories have
been designated by the present name for half a century, and are known to the geographical
world by
that name, which we should retain. The name
merely expresses its relation to the other portions
of Canada. In 1787, the territories between the
Ohio, Lake Erie and Mississippi, were called the
North-West Territories of the United States, and
they were so-called because of the geographical position of the territory to that
embraced within the
thirteen States of the Union. So I think those
territories may very well retain the name of
North-West Territories, considering their relation
to the rest of Canada. This section would require to be somewhat altered so as to
describe
the Territory of Keewatin, and the north and west
of the Province of Manitoba; otherwise you have
not a proper description.
Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD. As to the name,
I do not suppose there will be any serious quarrel
about it. My hon. friend from Bothwell (Mr.
Mills), as did my hon. friend from Algoma (Mr.
Dawson), suggested that the description was inaccurate. My hon. friend said that Rupert's
Land was understood to be the land that lay to
the south and south-east of Hudson Bay. If that
is the case, the North-West Territories, which
was one time held under license, would be supposed to lie to the south-west of Rupert's
Land. I
would suggest that the clause should be allowed to
4467
[COMMONS] 4468
stand until the Minister of the Interior has time
to consider the matter.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). Rupert's Land lies east
of the Territory of Keewatin. The hon. gentleman does not propose to embrace all that
territory
under this jurisdiction. All the territories this
Bill deals with lie west of the Territory of Keewatin, and, therefore, it should not
refer to Rupert's
Land at all.
Mr. DEWDNEY. The simplest way would
be to leave out "Rupert's Land" altogether.
Mr. O'BRIEN. I think it is a great mistake to
change the name. There is a sort of historical
interest attached to the name of the "North- West," and when you speak of the North-West
in
Dakota or the Western States, the people know at
once that you refer to the North-West Territories
of Canada. It is a more euphonious name than
the one you now propose, and in all respects a
better one in my opinion.
Mr. DAVIS (Alberta). I think we should
call it the South-West Territories instead of the
North-West, for there are plenty of lands which
remain there which you can call the North-West
if you so wish.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). In that case the hon.
gentleman ought to propose to exclude from this Bill
all the territories lying north of the Saskatchewan,
but this Bill embraces all the territories to the
mouth of the Mackenzie River, and the hon. gentleman will hardly call the territories
lying around
the Mackenzie and Copper Mine Rivers the "South- West."
Mr. CHARLTON. The change proposed by the
hon. gentleman would lead to the supposition that
we had been acquiring territories in Central America.
Mr. DEWDNEY There are a number of people throughout Canada who have a very strong
feeling on this matter. The name of the North- West often leads to a confusion between
our country and the United States. I saw, no later than
a few days ago, in our local paper here, a statement
as to a snowstorm in the North-West Territory,
and people looking at the item though it referred
to the North-West of Canada, and congratulated
themselves that the snow would do good to the
fields. I have frequently had letters from the old
country, sympathising with us on account of storms
and cyclones, which were experienced in the Western States of the Union, but the people
thought
they had occurred in our North-West. That is one
of the principal reasons that we proposed to change
the name. I do not think the name should be
struck out of the Bill without consideration, and
I think it is better to allow the clause to stand for
the present.
Mr. AMYOT. I did not raise an objection that
this Bill was not translated into French as I did
not wish to delay the House at this late period of
the Session, but I should like to know from the
Minister of the Interior before I vote for this, what
is the translation into French of the name he has
suggested. If the hon. Minister cannot answer me,
perhaps the hon. member for North Simcoe (Mr.
McCarthy) can.
Mr. CHAPLEAU. Nobody knows that better
than my hon. friend from Bellechasse (Mr. Amyot).
Mr. DEWDNEY. I am sorry I cannot give
the hon. gentleman the name in French.
Sir HECTOR LANGEVIN. The hon. member
for Bellechasse (Mr. Amyot) is too good a French
scholar not to be able to translate that himself,
but no doubt he wanted to have a little joke on
my hon. friend the Minister of the Interior, who is
not, perhaps, so fluent in French as he is in English.
I suppose the translation Would be: "Territoires
Occidentaux du Canada." That will be rather a
long name, but I believe it will be a good translation.
Mr. AMYOT. I am glad this has drawn
some compliments to my humble self from the
Minister of Public Works. I am not used to them.
On section 5,
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). I think this section is
objectionable in this, that it ought to provide for
a fixed number of members until the Legislature
otherwise determines. The Legislature ought to
have an opportunity of altering the boundaries of
constituencies, or increasing the number of members. It may be convenient, on account
of settlement going on more rapidly in one division than in
another, to divide it and give it two representatives. Then, I can see no object in
having three
legal experts.
Mr. DEWDNEY. With regard to the twenty- two electoral districts, I may state, that that
number was agreed to during my term as Lieutenant Governor, and a great deal of trouble
was
taken in the division of the electoral districts. The
members were naturally jealous for their districts,
desiring to get as many members for them as
possible; but after a good deal of negotiation, the
number of twenty-two was agreed to as a compromise. I am not aware whether there will
be
any objection to giving to the Legislative Assembly
power to increase their number; I think they
would probably know the position of affairs better
than any one else. With regard to the legal
experts, during my time they were of very great
service in the Council, and I believe they are still
felt to be of great service, and I think it would be
a pity at present to make any change with regard
to them.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). If it is found necessary
that parties with legal knowledge should be in the
Assembly to advise, the constituencies ought to do
just as is done in regard to this House—they ought
to return a certain number of legal gentlemen to
the Legislature, who would give them the legal
advice they require.
Mr. DAVIN. I do not think there is any substantial reason for changing this clause. It is
only a temporary arrangement, and at present it
works very well. I may say that the members of
the North-West Council pretty well fixed on the
number of the constituencies before we fixed on it
here. I do not think there is any sense of grievance with regard to this clause at
all.
Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD. The Bill of my
hon. friend opposite (Mr. Mills, Bothwell) made
4469 [MAY 6, 1890.] 4470
provision for twenty-one elected members whenever the population arrived at a certain
point;
and there was frequent request from the North- West to alter the constitution to allow
of twenty- one elected members. When the Council met together, they found that it
would be more convenient, that it would make a better readjustment—a
better gerrymander, as the hon. gentleman would
call it—if there were twenty-two elected members
instead of twenty-one. That was their own deliberate recommendation, and I think we
ought to
leave the provision as it is until they ask for an
alteration; because the House must remember
that the expenses of the Legislature are defrayed
out of the Dominion treasury. By-and-bye, when
the North-West Territories become Provinces, they
will, of course, have all the powers which Provinces
have.
Mr. LAURIER. There are at present nineteen
territorial divisions, two of which, Edmonton and
Calgary, I think, elect two members each. I think
it would be wise to adopt the suggestion made by
my hon. friend from Bothwell (Mr. Mills), that as
the population increases in any division, the Legislature should have power to increase
the number
of representatives for that division. Not later
than yesterday, the hon. gentleman introduced a
Bill which he hoped would very much increase the
population in a certain section of the country, that
is to say, the section which already returns two
members, Calgary and Edmonton. Under such
circumstances, it seems to me that the suggestion
made by the hon. member for Bothwell has a good
deal to commend it.
Mr. DEWDNEY. The difficulty I see about it
would be this: that if one district proposed to
increase its number, every other district would
also insist on an increase.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). Why should you undertake, once you have created a representative
body, to tie it up in this way. There is none of
the Provinces tied up by the Constitution in that
way. The hon. gentleman is just creating a difficulty similar to the one which was
raised here
during this Session over the clause relating to the
dual language, a clause which was wholly unnecessary to secure the use of both languages.
Now,
you propose by this restriction to force these people to come here and occupy the
time of this
House in making a change which they could, if
you gave them the power, better make for themselves, as they are better judges in
that matter
than we can be. Suppose one of these districts in
the next few years increases in population while
the others scarcely increase at all, that district
will require additional representation; and that is
a point which the Legislative Assembly is best
fitted to pronounce upon. All that it is necessary
is to say that the Legislative Assembly shall be
composed, until the Assembly otherwise determines, of twenty-two members. There is
no danger of the Assembly wasting its resources lightly
by undertaking to increase the number of representatives beyond the actual requirements.
If
any such a thing were attempted, the people would
send other men to represent them.
Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD. The money does
not come out of the local revenues, but out of the
Dominion treasury.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). These people are contributors to the Dominion treasury. You give to
every Province a certain revenue per head
according to the population. Are you prepared to
give them the same revenue to be at their own disposal? I think we should. I think,
that as soon
as they increase in numbers sufficiently to be entitled to have a competent representative
Assembly,
they ought to have control of the revenues required
to carry on the Government, and those revenues
should be voted by this Legislature on some intelligible principles recognised by
the British North
America Act as applicable to the Provinces.
Mr. DAVIN. I have always contended that we
should have a revenue granted on the same principles as those on which revenues are
given to the
Provinces. But the reason I do not think it necessary that this clause should be changed,
is that I
have heard no desire expressed on the part of the
members for a change, and have seen no evidence of
grievance whatever in that connection. The only
thing I have noticed in connection with this clause,
is that there is a kind of defiance on the part of the
members of three judges who are there. I do not
know why they should dislike to have them there,
since they cannot vote, and only one of them
speaks.
Mr. DAVIN. No; he does not. He has only
spoken once or twice. The experience, patience
and labor of Judge Richardson, as the hon. the
Minister of the Interior well knows, are invaluable
to that Assembly; and Judge McLeod is a man
of considerable experience and ability; and I
cannot understand why there should be, among
quite a number of the members, a certain impatience at havihg these gentlemen there.
So far
as I can see, they do nothing but good. They do not
vote, and take no part in the discussions. There is
only one subject on which the learned judge ever
took a prominent part, and that is the subject of
the dual language clause. I do not see much necessity of changing this clause; but
if, later on,
when you come to the clause giving the Assembly
power in great part over the revenue, you should
make a change so as to give it a little executive,
then, on the third reading, you could recommit this Bill, and alter, as you logically
should,
this clause. The hon. member for Bothwell (Mr.
Mills) says that three or four years hence it may
be found necessary to add to the number of the
Assembly. Why, Sir, before three or four years
pass, we shall require to have another North-West
Territories Bill in this House. We shall have a
census taken; and I venture to say that we shall
find a far larger number in the North-West Territories than hon. gentlemen, who always
speak disparagingly of that country, give it credit for; and
that being the case, something will have to be done
then in order to readjust the representation. If
the hon. gentleman had proposed a practical plan,
I should see no insuperablc difficulty in altering
this clause; but, as a matter of fact, there is no
grievance. I have never heard a single complaint
about the number; I have never heard any of the
members declare that they ought to be able to control it; and the only murmur I have
heard—
in fact they have petitioned was that they
objected, for some inscrutable reason, to having
the three legal experts, there. At present I think
4471
[COMMONS] 4472
it is an advantage to have them there. Our experience has shown that the members of
the
Assembly found it convenient to make use of these
gentlemen's experience and legal knowledge.
Mr. BLAKE. As long as we have not decided
to alter fundamentally the system which exists, and
which it is proposed by this Bill to continue, I do
not see, in the absence of any complaint from the
Assembly, why we should interfere with the three
legal experts who do not vote. The only complaint that can be made is that which the
hon.
member for North Simcoe (Mr. McCarthy) suggested, that their speeches are rather long.
Mr. BLAKE. I was not aware of that; I did not
find, on looking at the petitions, that there was
any complaint against them. My own impression
strongly is, that if a small executive council were
granted to the Territories, which, I think, ought
to be granted, the experts should disappear; and
my opinion is that the people of the country themselves would find it necessary to
elect to the Assembly a certain limited number of gentlemen experienced in the law,
so that their Assembly might not
be a
parliamentum indoctum, as a well-known Parliament was, from which, I believe, the lawyers were
altogether excluded. They would thus obtain as
much trained assistance as they thought necessary;
and if they chose to do without it, nobody but
themselves would be the sufferers. With reference to the number of members, I was
not in a
position, of course, to hear the whispers of the
North-West; but I heard what were not whispers
here. I heard the hon. member for Saskatchewan,
at an early period of the Session, declare that
complaints were made with reference to the distribution of districts in the North—West,
and
particularly with reference to those in the region he
represents; and, if necessary, some remedy ought to
be applied to that. If there be a subject with which
the Territorial Assembly might be supposed to be
better competent to deal than any other, it is in
what way the country should be divided for local
representation. How is it possible for us to form
an intelligent appreciation of that subject? We
have to take upon trust the statement of the
Minister who studies the subject, with his knowledge of the country from the maps,
and the statements of the four members from the North-West
Territories. We cannot judge how things are.
We cannot give an intelligent vote upon the question of the arrangement of districts.
They are,
in a country of that description, arrangements
which require an intelligent acquaintance, not
merely with the census, but with the prospects of
growth and with the particular regions in which
those prospects are brightest. It is an evil to
change frequently, and in this country we know
that, in older days, when changes were made, we
recognised the view that newer sections—as, for
example, the County of Bruce and the County of
Renfrew—should be, as regarded population, overrepresented for a while, because we
expected that an
influx of population would redress the difference.
That is all a matter to be best considered by the
Assembly itself, and, therefore, I think that the
readjustment of the electoral districts might be
well left to the Assembly. The only question is
whether we should give them the power to increase
the number of districts, and the only difficulty in
regard to that is what the First Minister has suggested, that they may unduly increase
the number
of districts because it is a popular thing to do, because there are many who in small
districts might
thus obtain positions of prominence, and possibly of
emolument, which they otherwise could not. If
we think it necessary so far to hamper and restrain
the action of the Assembly, that difficulty might
be remedied by providing a maximum number which
would cover all demands for increased representation for the next few years. We might
say the
number should be thirty. We might give the new
Assembly, elected after the people have had that
question before them, the power to readjust the
districts, while not giving them the power to
increase the number of districts beyond a certain
maximum.
Mr. MILLS (Bothwell). The advantage of not
confining the number of the Assembly to twenty- two is that, if you have a large increase
in population you have it met by a division of the districts,
but, if you fix the number at twenty-two, it may
entail a readjustment of the entire territory.
Mr. McCARTHY. I am entirely in favor of
the view expressed by the hon. member for
Bothwell (Mr. Mills). It seems to me that we
are treating the people of the North-West as if
they were unfitted for responsible institutions.
Most of these people come from the older Provinces, and they are generally well trained
in
regard to political institutions. From the short
visit which I paid to the North—West, it appeared
to me that they were particularly well fitted in
that respect, though the hon. member for West
Assiniboia (Mr. Davin) seems to think that they
do not occupy the same plane as members of this
House.
Mr. McCARTHY. That seemed to be the tone
of the hon. gentleman's remarks. We ought not
always to be tinkering with this question of the
North-West. We cannot here be competent to
reassign and readjust the boundaries of the districts in the North-West. If the Legislative
Assembly there are to have the power to readjust
the boundaries, we should give them the power to
increase the districts when, in their judgment, it is
necessary. It may be said that these 22 men have
not the ability to do anything until after the next
election. That, at all events, is the theory which
has been already adopted by this Parliament. At
all events, they might be given the power to do it
after the next election. I dare say that, if you take
many of the districts since the Act was passed
two years ago, you will find the changes in population so great that the present representation
is not
a fair one. I press upon the Committee that a
change should be made in the direction suggested
by the hon. member for Bothwell (Mr. Mills).
Mr. DAVIN. I wish to repudiate in the strongest manner the language of the hon. member for
North Simcoe (Mr. McCarthy). He said that I
put the representatives in the Assembly on a lower
plane than the members composing this Parliament.
On the contrary, I have again and again asserted
in this House that we have a representation in that
Assembly which would do credit to any Assembly
in the world. I congratulate the North-West on
4473 [MAY 6, 1890.] 4474
the sudden accession of popularity which it has
obtained, because in 1887, 1888 and 1889, when I
brought forward the question and moved for a representative government there, I found
there was
very little interest taken in the subject either by
hon. gentlemen on the Reform side, or by hon.
gentlemen on the Ministerial side of the House.
My hon. friend from Simcoe (Mr. McCarthy) must
remember that he should not taunt me, who have
been a veteran in the service of the North-West,
because he is now animated by the warm zeal of a
convert. I am glad to welcome him as a
convert, but confessedly it is a recent interest on
his part, confessedly it is a new love, and it has all
the warmth and perhaps some of the imprudence
of a new attachment. So he must not taunt me,
who have been fighting the battles of this people,
and have contended in this House for responsible government for them. If you give
them
representative government now, I want to be
logical, and I think that clause should be changed.
I think now, when you are going to give them control over the funds, you should do
what the hon.
member for Bothwell (Mr. Mills) contends,
namely, strike an average as to the population—
you can easily find out what the population is, you
can go far below what the actual population is, and
still give us far more than we get now; you can
give us an adequate income, loose our hands and
set us free; give us our majority and let us do the
best we can for our country; give us our executive,
and then we can go back to this clause and change
it, if necessary. But the reason why I desire not
to change the clause now is that, after the census
which is close at hand, is taken, you cannot deny
us responsible government. My hon. friend (Mr.
McCarthy) says he has been in that country, and
he must know that the people of the North-West
are, in intelligence, above the population of any
other part of Canada. I mean that there is a
greater average intelligence amongst them than
there is amongst the people in any other part of
the country. In fact we have had an
immigration
d'Ă©lite.
Mr. DAVIN. I do not feel anxious about this
clause, but I congratulate the North-West, and I
may say, I congratulate myself, on the deep
interest which is shown in the North-West this
year, because, when I came first in 1887 and in
subsequent years to advocate their cause, my
words fell on languid ears; but each year this
House has taken more interest in the North-West,
and I think nothing could be of more happy omen
than this fact.
Mr. BLAKE. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Davin)
seems to think that until he came here no one took
any interest in the North-West, but the fact is
that the North-West owes whatever it possesses
of responsible government to the wisdom and
prescience of my hon. friend from East York (Mr.
Mackenzie), who, in 1875, proposed a measure
which contained the germ of all the representative
institutions the North-West has to-day. The hon.
gentleman may learn, what he evidently does not
know, that for many ears gentlemen on this side
of the House pressed upon the Government, by
speech and by vote, the necessity of extending the
representative principle here to the North-West
of responsible government: and I am sure that,
whatever doubts and fears we may have had before,
we may now congratulate ourselves upon the
inestimable blessings conferred upon the whole of
Canada, upon the North-West, and upon ourselves,
in having introduced my hon. friend to this House.
He says in the North-West there has been an
immigration d'Ă©lite, and we here have the
Ă©lite
of the
Ă©lite, and we may judge what is
left there by the sample which they send us.
But the hon. gentleman is quite right. So far as
the emigration from Ontario is concerned, and I
presume it is the same from the other Provinces,
there can be no doubt that by a process of natural
selection they have got amongst the best and most
energetic men that were to be found among us; and
I have no doubt whatever that that immigration,
taken on the whole, is of a very superior character
just as, upon the same principles, the upper Province was originally settled. I am
old enough to remember the character of those settlers, at least of
some of them, living at an extreme old age, and I
can bear testimony that a great many of the earlier
settlers who came to this country at a period when
it was very different from what it is to-day, when
there was no assisted emigration, no steamships,
no cleared lands, when bears and Indians were
supposed to be the attractions of that country,
were men of the first rank. Those circumstances
indicate of themselves that the early settlers were
men of superior force of character, men, I am afraid,
we must confess with humility, better, upon the average, than many of their sons and
grandsons are. So,
in degree, though not to the same extent, is the character of the immigration to the
North-West; and
we must not, of course, keep such people as that in
leading strings; we must deal with them as men of
capacity, as men of will, as men of resolution and
ability; and we must trust them with their own
fortunes, confident that if they make mistakes, as
it is they who will suffer the consequences, so they
will be able to repair their errors. Such is the general principle upon which we ought
to deal with
them, and in that view I am disposed—not forgets
ting that we have certain responsibilities towards
them and towards Canada until such period as we
give them full Provincial rights—I am disposed
largely to listen with great respect and attention
and deference to the decided and clearly expressed
voice of the Territories themselves as to what is
for their advantage.
Mr. MCCARTHY. Perhaps an apology is due
by me to the hon. member for West Assiniboia
(Mr. Davin) for the insinuation I ventured to make,
but really, if I misunderstood him, he is himself
to blame. In the observations he made on the
second reading of the Bill, he rather intimated that
the representatives in the North-West Assembly
were in the habit of disposing of public moneys
by lot, by some system of log-rolling, to use his
own expression, dividing it amongst them and
expending the money in some way, being even
driven to imagine how they could expend it. Well, I
should have not imagined that was the way in which
the North-West Legislative Assembly were in the
habit of discharging their duties. But if that was
a true and correct statement, as no doubt it was
according to the hon. gentleman's light, he does
not represent them to be a very high class of legislators. That is what I referred
to; therefore, I
think the hon. gentleman should see that I was
4475
[COMMONS] 4476
not altogether to blame for the statement I made.
Now, Sir, as to the new zeal that I am displaying
in regard to the North-West. In admitting it is
new, I hope it will be permanent, and I hope it
will not be imprudent either, as the hon. gentleman seems to imagine. But I was astonished
at
the proposition that the people of the North-West
were not able to govern themselves; perhaps I
had judged the North-West too much by the
Ă©lite
of the
Ă©lite they had sent to this House, and not
enough by what was left behind. When I visited
the North-West, from what I saw of the people up
there, I am satisfied that this House would be
making a very great mistake indeed if they do not
realise that they are quite competent to manage
their own affairs, and that we ought to give them
the power to do it, instead of keeping them in
leading strings, and dealing out authority piece by
piece, as if they were children.
Mr. DAVIN. My hon. friend refers to the remarks I made on the second reading. Now, Sir,
permit me to explain that what I meant by logrolling is a thing that any Assembly,
that this
Assembly, the hon. gentlemen around me, might
fall into it.
Mr. DAVIN. I do not condemn them for doing
so; but let me point out my meaning by facts.
What did one gentleman do?—and he is not the
least intelligent member of that Assembly, not the
least energetic, not the man with the least ambition. When he got his quotient of
the sum
divided by twenty-two, he had such difficulty in
knowing how to spend that money that he took a
legal opinion as to whether he could not spend it
on sidewalks for his own town, and he spent it on
sidewalks. Another gentleman, a member of that
Assembly, told me frankly that as the roads and
bridges had all been made in his district, he did not
know what to do with the money. As the hon.
member for West Durham (Mr. Blake) pointed out,
when you have money administered by an Assembly
like that, you will have it expended in one quarter
where it is not needed, whereas the money of another man will be expended in another
quarter
where it is direly needed. As the hon. member
pointed out, it would sometime be the proper way
to govern the country, and best for the whole of
it, that the great portion of the sum should be expended in one district. Suppose
in one district
there is absolute need of a first class bridge,
the road of which would serve not merely that district, but half a dozen districts;
is it not clear that
the half a dozen districts would be better served if
all the money that is given to the most of them, or
the greater portion of that money, were to be spent
in the one district where the work that related to
the whole of them belongs? Now, I was not
ignorant of the fact that the hon. member for
West Durham and his colleagues have taken in the
past an interest in the North-West. I have
listened, from that gallery, to some of his very
brief speeches on that subject; I have listened to
that compressed and caustic eloquence of which
he is master, when dealing with the North-West,
and, of course, I have been proportionately struck.
But I have noticed this in the speakers on the
Opposition side of the House—although the hon.
gentleman from North York (Mr. Mackenzie) did
inaugurate a certain policy that is even now
bearing fruit—I have noticed that there was not
the same evidence of insight as to the needs of
the North-West, and as to those things that
are necessary to give to the North-West progress, that I have seen on the side of
the House to
which I belong, since the right hon. gentleman and
his friends came into power. I do not forget those
long and interminable speeches of the hon. member
for West Durham, I do not forget all the eloquence
that has been lavished upon the North-West; but,
Sir, I say this, "nevertheless and notwithstanding," to use a locution of which the
hon.
gentleman is fond, that when I came forward in
1887 and proposed a motion to give the North- West responsible government, the Opposition
benches were dumb—I got no support from
them whatever. I got no support from the
hon. member for North Simcoe (Mr. McCarthy).
At that time he was not enlightened, at that time
his eyes were not open, at that time he was in the
gall of bitterness, in respect to true views regarding our great western country;
but now his eyes
are open, and he thoroughly understands the
wants of the North-West. I am very glad of
it; I do not care whether he assists me or I assist
him; I do not care who does the work provided the
work is done. For there is much work to be done
for the North-West. I am sure that I am expressing the belief of every hon. gentleman
who listens
to me when I say that there is, to-day, more interest in this House in the North-West
than there
was in 1887. I do not say it is due to the humble
voice—
Mr. DAVIN. I do not say it is due to what my
hon. friend from West Durham called the
Ă©lite of
the
Ă©lite, or the
creme de la créme—I do not suppose
that, Sir, as the hon. member for West Durham seems
to think. And let me congratulate the hon. member for West Durham, and congratulate
the North- West, on the genial manner in which he has dealt
with this question to-day. The North-West, that
vast country, with its great capacities, its inspiring
possibilities, has acted on his imagination and on
his heart, and I never heard him speak more genially; because, Sir, I sometimes think
that that hon.
gentleman, so superior, so learned, is not merely the
créme de la créme, but he is the cream of tartar as
well.
Mr. WATSON. We are all gratified to listen
to the hon. gentleman. He says the hon. member
for West Durham (Mr. Blake) is cream of tartar;
probably it is because he makes a fizz when united
with another mixture. The hon. member for West
Assiniboia (Mr. Davin) is a kind of mixture, and it
is very difficult for the House to understand what
he wants and what were the requirements of the
North-West from the hon. gentleman's speeches.
He delivers himself on every occasion on any
matter connected with the North-West that comes
up for discussion. Only a short time ago, he told
us that he had in 1887 and 1888, advocated a full
measure of responsible government for the North- West, but that, after going home
and visiting his
constituents, he found out he had made a mistake,
and he found only one man in his constituency in
favor of such a step.
Mr. WATSON. Still the hon. gentleman calls
for responsible government for the North-West,
4477 [MAY 6, 1890.] 4478
when, on his own admission, the people do not
want it. I would not have said anything on this
question except for a reflection passed on the
Province of Manitoba. The First Minister stated
that nearly all the representations he had received
from the North-West were to the effect that the
people would be in a very much worse position
than they occupied to-day if they were governed
by the sort of Government they had in Manitoba.
I consider that a reflection on the Government of
that Province, whoever may be the right hon.
gentleman's informants, whether members of this
House or persons outside the House; and as a
resident of Manitoba, and I know I am speaking
the opinion of the great majority of that Province,
I say the people are thankful we have a responsible Local Legislature there, and the
right hon.
gentleman no doubt would much prefer to have a
Council similar to that in the North-West, and one
subject to his dictation. But we have a Legislature which has protested against the
unjust acts
of the right hon. gentleman, and we are now
reaping the benefits of responsible government. I
do not think we should consider the individual
acts of any member of the North-West Council
to-day, as has been done by the hon. member
for West Assiniboia (Mr. Davin). It is sufficient
for us to know that the Council is Composed
of an able body of men, as has been admitted by
the hon. member for West Assiniboia (Mr. Davin),
and I am satisfied although I do not know the individual members of that body, that
the representations of the North-West Council should have
more weight in this House than the views of an
individual member from the North-West; and if
the North-West Council recommend to this House
the granting of responsible government to that
country, it is in the interest of this House to consider the advisability of granting
it, and if they
object to having legal advisers appointed, who
must have certain weight in the Assembly, the
gentlemen composing that Council are men who
are quite competent to elect men who are able to
fulfil the positions of the legal advisers. I have
no doubt that if the North-West Council and the
people, through their representatives in this
House, were listened to by this Parliament, and if
it would act on their advice, we would do very
nearly what is right for the North-West. They
are more interested in its welfare than are people
2,000 miles away. We should endeavor, as nearly
as possible, to carry out the wishes of the North- West Council, and I repeat, if
they wish to have
the legal experts abolished, this should be done.
In the North-West, as in Manitoba, we must have
minorities, and the hon. member for Provencher
(Mr. LaRivière) represents a class that think
they must have all the rights and privileges which
the majority possess in the Province and in the
Legislature. We must expect these things to occur, but the rights of the majority
under the
British North America Act must prevail, and
those constituting the minority must submit to
such legislation as is carried by the majority.
Sir JOHN A. MACDONALD. The hon. gentleman says that no doubt I would prefer to have
Manitoba governed as the North-West Territories
are governed, because it would bring the Province more under the power of the Government.
The hon. gentleman must have forgotten that the
Government of which I was a member gave the
constitution to the Province of Manitoba. The
hon. gentleman might, if he had looked back at
Hansard of that day, have found that when I proposed there should be two representatives
from
that Province in this House, the proposal was opposed by hon. gentlemen opposite,
on the ground
that the population of the Province did not authorise the returning of such a number,
and I was
laughed at when I said that I wanted more than
one to come, as one would be lonely coming such a
long distance. It is quite true, what the hon.
member for West Durham (Mr. Blake) has said,
that the credit of giving representative institutions to that Province is to a certain
extent due to
the Government of which the hon. member for
East York (Mr. Mackenzie) was the head. But
the hon. gentleman must not deprive me of my
four lambs from the North-West, the four representatives from the North-West, and
the fact that
representation was given to the North-West Territories by the Government of which
I was a member.
But, speaking in regard to this measure now under
consideration, the discussion has gone on as if we were
settling a new constitution for the North-West, as if
we were applying ourselves to the remodelling of
that whole system. If that were so, it would
require more consideration than can possibly be
given to the subject at this period of the Session,
and it must be remembered that this Bill was
introduced for the purpose of making such amendments as were wanted for the present,
and not for
the purpose of arranging a new constitution for the
North-Test, as when we were settling the Quebec
resolutions giving a constitution to the Dominion
of Canada. It is impossible that we can endeavor
in the discussion of this Bill, which is a practical
one, to discuss it with any such view. In order to
do justice to the measure, we would be kept here
for weeks and weeks. And, therefore, the Government must either ask the House to take
such provisions as are unobjectionable and adopt them for
the nonce, for this Session, or we must ask the
House to support the majority, or we must withdraw the Bill. We cannot set to work
and settle
now a new constitution for the North- West.
Mr. BLAKE. The right hon. gentleman is
quite correct in the two statements of fact he has
made. It is quite true that the right hon. gentleman gave to Manitoba its present
popular Constitution; it is also true that the right hon. gentleman
gave the North-West Territories their representation in the House of Commons, and
obtained his
four lambs, as he called them, but I prefer to call
them sheep, and I will not say of what color.
Revenons Ă nos moutons. I should like to tell
the reason why the right hon. gentleman gave
popular institutions to Manitoba, and gave representation in this House to the North-West
Territories. That supervened which generally does
supervene before a Tory reform. There was a
rebellion first. The right hon. gentleman gave the
people of Manitoba a paternal Constitution; he sent
up there a Lieutenant Governor, who never got into
the country; and an alien Council, which could not
get in either. The people rose in rebellion against
him; and then he came down here and gave them,
forsooth, provincial rights. And he now claims
credit for having given that which they obtained
at the point of the bayonet. So much for Manitoba.
4479
[COMMONS] 4480
Then as to the Territories. Year after year we
in this House, sitting on this side of the House,
inveighed against the absence of representation
from the Territories. We pointed out their distance,
their remoteness, the murmurs of complaint which
came from that country, and we said it was absolutely essential there should be a
safety-valve, at
all events, for them, and guidance for ourselves.
We did not indeed know then how extensive, or
expansive, or expensive,that safety-valve would be;
but we called for a safety-valve for them, for light
and information for ourselves. We asked for it,
we called for it, we pressed for it, we moved for it.
Deaf ears were presented to us on those benches.
Another rebellion came, and the year after his
second rebellion the hon. gentleman gave representation to the North-West Territories.
Mr. MULOCK. I understand the member for
North Simcoe (Mr. McCarthy) to say, that there
have been petitions presented from the North- West Territories asking for some changes
in the
system of Government. I think it is material
that the Committee should know what were the
views submitted to the Government by the representatives of the North-West Territories.
Mr. MCCARTHY. The papers were brought
down, and are now before the House.
Mr. MCCARTHY. They are printed in the
proceedings of the North-West Assembly.
Mr. BLAKE. Are they printed in both languages?
Mr. MCCARTHY. I am afraid not. The Bill
of the Minister of the Interior of last Session,
which was submitted to the Legislative Assembly,
was criticised by them, and they say that section
10 of the Bill should be amended, so as to dispense with the sitting of legal experts
in the
Assembly.
Mr. MULOCK. How does the Minister propose to get over that? I presume it is the expression of
opinion of the people of the North- West Territories. I am glad to have the question
introduced by my hon. friend from North Simcoe
(Mr. McCarthy). I can congratulate him on his
increasing light, for I think it is only a year ago
since he professed to be a Tory of the Tories.
Mr. MULOCK. At any rate, the hon. gentleman is repudiating some of the old Tory principles.
I think we ought give effect to this expression of
opinion of the people of the North-West.
Progress reported.
This individual participated in:
