Mr. McCARTHY moved for leave to introduce
Bill (No. 33) to amend the North-West Territories
Act. He said: The Bill needs but little explanation, at least one portion of it, when
one remembers the long discussion which took place with
reference to this subject at the last session of the
last Parliament. I would only say now, that the
object I have in view is to repeal the clause with
reference to the dual language in the North-West
Territories, and I do so because I am convinced
that the direction in the North-West Territories Act that there shall be two official
languages in the country is calculated to perpetuate
race distinctions which it ought to be, and which
I hope it is, the object of this House to do away
with. I believe I was able to show that, however
175 [COMMONS] 176
some hon. gentlemen thought the measure was
a harsh one, it was at all events in the right
direction so far was these North-West Territories
are concerned. It is, of course, well to remember
that this Bill merely deals with the North-West
Territories and that the right to the dual language
is one based upon the British North America Act,
and is to be found in that enactment alone. It is
not a right conferred upon our French Canadian
subjects at the time of the cession of the old Province of Quebec to the British Crown,
and is
not to be found earlier than the date of the
British North America Act, and in that it is
limited to the proceedings of this House, the
proceedings of the Senate, and the proceedings of the Assembly of the Province of
Quebec. No one who has given any attention to
this subject can be otherwise than convinced that
the perpetuation of these race distinctions is not
in the public interest, and that nothing is more
calculated to prevent the growth of the common
nationality of the people of the Dominion than the
encouragement of the additional language in the
French tongue. I do not desire to interfere with
the right which everyone has to speak in any
language which seems right to him, but I desire to
prevent anything which will foster race distinctions
in our North-West without warrant, and, as I
believe, without public object or public benefit.
This Bill, however, goes further than that of last
Session, in that it purports to deal with the school
question. According to the genius of our constitution, as destined in the British
North America
Act, the subject of education is one belonging
exclusively to the Provinces, is one of local concern
to be dealt with by the Provinces. It is truth that,
owing to difficulties which existed in the old
Province of Canada, there are certain limitations
and restrictions in regard to school matters
imposed upon the Provinces of Ontatio and
Quebec, but these restrictions end there, and
I know no good reason why the people in
the North-West Territories should be limited
or restricted in the matter of education. As
the law now stands, separate schools are made
imperative. Wherever there are two religious
communities, there is the right to have separate
schools. I propose not to interfere with that, but
simply to give to the people of the North-West the
right to deal with the question of education as to
them seems fit. My Bill is, perhaps, not so objectionable in another respect as the
one of last year,
because I omit the preamble, which to some of my
friends, was a stumbling block. I have found that
hon. gentlemen who were quite willing to adopt
the enacting part of the Bill, hesitated somewhat
at the wide terms of the preamble. That preamble,
of course, was unnecessary for the purposes of the
enacting cleanse, and as I have no desire to increase
the difficulties, already sufficiently great, that I
have before me in order to repead this particular
clause, I have left out the preamble in the short
Bill.
Motion agreed to, and Bill read the first time.
[...]Lawrence, in the County of Soulanges, Province
of Quebec: and if so, at what date has said Order
been passed? Has a survey been made? How
much has been already paid for survey and other
expenses connected therewith: the probable estimated cost of said canal: and whether
it is the
intention of the Government to proceed at an
early date with its construction?
Sir HECTOR LANGEVIN. An order in
Council was passed on the 7th February, 1891. A
survey has been made, and there has been paid for
the survey and other expenses connected with
it. $28,151. The probable cost of the canal is
$4,800,000. It is the intention of the Government to proceed at an early date with
its contruction.
This individual participated in:
