1374 COMMONS DEBATES May 5, 1870
NORTH-WEST EXPEDITION
On the item of $1,460,000 for opening communication with and establishing Government
in, and providing the settlement of such Territories, including the expedition to
Red River—
revote,
Hon. Mr. Holton said it would be remembered that in the Committee of Supply, in the
ordinary estimates, that amount was voted for
the purpose of opening, negotiating and establishing a settlement in the North-West;
but
when the question of concurrence came up, the
hon. member for Soulanges moved an amendment, declaring in effect that no part of
that
appropriation should be expended on a military expedition to that country, which was
said
at that time to be in contemplation. The House
was assured at that time by the Minister of
Justice that no part of that money would be
expended upon this proposed military expedition, and that if such an expedition was
contemplated, the sanction of that House would be
asked for it, and that the requisite money
would be asked in a straightforward proposal,
(hear). The motion of the member for Soulanges had been allowed to remain on the order
papers for more than a fortnight, and the Government had not called up the item. But
they
now proposed to drop the previous vote and
evade the motion of the hon. member for
Soulanges.
Hon. Mr. Holton—Yes; by introducing into
the Supplementary Estimates this item in
another form which would cover in point of
fact the expense of this proposed military
expedition, (hear). He did not think that this
was dealing fairly with the House, and was
grossly digressing from what he believed to be
the true Parliamentary practice by appropriating to meet those military expenses out
of the
money voted for different purposes two years
ago, (hear). He could not imagine anything
more repugnant to sound Parliamentary practice than that course of the hon. gentleman.
If a
military expedition were being equipped, why
did not the Government come down and frankly state the policy on which that expedition
was founded? (Hear.) Why not bring down
estimates showing the number of men that
were to be employed, and the amount expended, and other information to which, as a
free
Parliament they were entitled to from the Ministry, instead of seeking to accomplish
all their
purposes, by that indirect, irregular and uncon
1375
stitutional measure? (Hear.) He waited for an
explanation from the Ministers as to that point.
Hon. Sir Francis Hincks said he could not
conceive anything more distinct than the terms
of the resolution now before the chair. With
reference to the fact that it was proposed to
defray the cost of that expedition out of the
vote the House was then asked for, the hon.
gentleman had referred to a discussion on the
previous vote. It was perfectly true that the
original vote which was taken last year, and
for which a loan was authorized by Parliament
last year, was asked for when no military expedition was contemplated; and it was
moreover
perfectly true that when the Estimates were
last year brought down, and that when
estimated provided for the balance of the vote,
which had been previously taken, and to which
this loan had been granted; it was perfectly
true that it was not then contemplated to apply
any portion of it for that expedition, and that
was distinctly stated, as the hon. member well
knew. The hon. gentleman complained that the
resolution having been reported from Committee, the Government stated they were not
prepared to go into the discussion of the whole
question on the motion proposed by the hon.
member for Soulanges, which was calculated to
bring on discussion. The hon. gentleman
wished to know why the Government did not
come down with their policy? It was answered
at the time that whether the expedition was to
be what might be called a warlike expedition
or one of peace they could not state. He
believed, looking at the state of matters, that
he regarded it as one of peace, and consequently likely to incur less expense than
was once
anticipated. The hon. gentleman charged the
Government with endeavouring to evade a discussion on the subject. The Government
had
no such desire. It was perfectly well known
that it was their intention to send troops to the
North-West and a discussion would take place
on the subject; but they simply asked that vote,
intending to supply out of the fund already
voted and sanctioned by the House, a sum to go
to pay the costs of the expedition. If this
House, knowing that fact, was not prepared to
grant that sum then a straight vote would be
taken on the resolution.
Hon. Mr. Cameron believed not only the
House but the country at large would sustain
the course the Government had taken in that
matter, and they had no reason to be alarmed.
They had placed the matter in such a state that
must give satisfaction to the country at large.
If they were going to the North-West for the
purpose of protecting the people, the House
ought to understand what amount was intended for such a purpose. The Government need
1376 COMMONS DEBATES May 5, 1870
have no fear in stating that, and no better
opportunity for making explanations on the
subject could be given. They had placed everything on a satisfactory footing, and
their best
course was to state their policy and what they
intended to do and the people would sustain
them beyond doubt.
Hon. Mr. Dorion said that the vote was only
$160,000 more than the first estimate. He
wished to know if that sum was intended to
cover the military expedition to the North-
West. (No, no.) Well then they had either
estimated more than was necessary at first, or
had asked a vote of money for purposes which
they had not stated. They first asked for
$1,300,000, and now they asked for $1,460,000.
The first vote was not intended to cover the
military expedition, while this one was. Therefore, when the estimates were prepared,
all
that was required was the first mentioned sum,
for the purpose of opening up and providing
for the government of the Territory, and it
followed that only $160,000 was required to
cover the military expedition.
Hon. Mr. Dorion—Then he was to understand that when the Finance Minister brought
down the first Estimates they asked a much
larger amount for the purpose of opening up
the country than they intended to spend
during the year. If so, it was proper that the
Estimate should be about the amount intended
to be expended during the year for which the
vote was asked. The Finance Minister said now
that, when the House was asked to vote $1,300,000, he did not intend to expend during
the
year, for which the vote was asked, anything
like that amount. Well, it was an objectionable
course, and the House was entitled to know
what was the amount out of the vote of $1,460,000 that the Government intended to
expend in
opening up the country and for the Government of the North-West, and what was the
amount that they expected to expend in the
military expedition. And he thought it due to
the House that they should know, when voting
that large sum of money, what it was for, and
what portion was to be appropriated to each
particular service, and he did not know that he
should object to any of the items when he
should know for what purpose they were
required. Perhaps the hon. member did not
know what that expedition would cost. He
(Hon. Mr. Dorion) could understand that very
well, but the House should know what amount
was asked for that purpose, and it should be
separated from the sums intended for other
purposes. If they should vote several items in a
lump they might just as well vote everything
1377
in a lump. He thought that, not only should
they be told the amount required for the expedition, but that each item should be
voted for
separately.
Hon. Mr. Holton thought, as a preliminary
to further discussion, that the suggestion he
was about to make would be in order, and
would be acquiesced in by the Minister of
Finance. He thought the House could hardly be
asked to vote money already expended, and he
thought they might make the present resolution in perfect conformity with the resolution
already proposed. That resolution was for
$1,300,000, it being alleged in general terms
that $160,000 had been already expended. He
proposed to take the vote of $1,460,000, to cover
the amount already spent. It was now thought,
as a mere matter of convenience and regularity, it would be better not to go further
with the
resolution in its present shape.
Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald said the Government might have made a mistake, but at
any rate it was a mistake in the right direction.
It was arranged by statute that all appropriations unexpended in the course of the
year
should be submitted again to the House. The
vote of ÂŁ300,000 for the North-West Territory
was a case in point, there not being the slightest necessity to ask the House for
its renewed
sanction. He found from the 35th clause of 31
Vic., chap. 5, that the Government might have
effected a loan, and have fairly expended the
whole of that money in organizing, preparing,
and sending up an expedition for the purpose
stated. He considered the Government would
be fully warranted in expending the whole of
the vote in endeavouring to establish a Government in that country. In bringing down
the
original estimate, the Government merely
desired to repeat the original vote, and an
assurance was given that no portion of that
money should be applied to military purposes.
It was clear to the House, if the vote was now
passed for merely the purpose of opening communication, etc., it would leave the country
open to unknown expenses on account of the
expedition. There was no certainty in calculating the expenses of the expedition,
it could
only be guessed at; but he hoped, owing to
recent events, that the expenses would be
much less than once feared. He asked the
House not to press the Government to disclose
particulars as to the expedition. They did not
at present know whether the expedition was to
be a peaceable or hostile one. If it was to be a
peaceable one, there could be no objection to
giving the information, but if the intention was
hostile, to state the information, would be to
give information to the enemy. (Laughter). He
contended that it would be unwise and impru
1378 COMMONS DEBATES May 5, 1870
dent to give the information which might have
the effect of increasing the expense of the
present expedition, and might render subsequent additions to it if necessary. He was
happy to believe that in consequence of the
generous and liberal spirit which had been
shown by the people and Parliament of
Canada, the character of the hostile expedition
would be that of a friendly procession. (Hear,
hear.) He was almost certain that unless at the
very last moment, owing to personal or party
conflicts in that House, they marred what had
been hitherto so successfully begun, they
might look almost immediately for a pacific
solution of all the difficulties, and that the
expedition would be received by the people of
the Territory as the restorer of order rather
than as threatenings of war, (hear). He
thought the House would see that it was not
wise to enter into details in reference to this
expedition; but he might give the minimum of
force to be sent. It was to be composed of
one-fourth regulars and three-fourths Canadian volunteers, who were to be considered
as
regulars, and would be under the command of
regular officers commissioned by Her Majesty—the expedition having the prestige and
sanction of the Imperial Government, a fact to
which he attached much importance. The minimum strength of force would be about 1,000
men, and any addition to that number would
altogether depend on circumstances, over
which at present they had no control. He hoped
the House would be satisfied with the explanation that he had now given. He would
prefer,
under the circumstances, that the vote should
be adjourned until they made further progress
with the Bill he had introduced. He would
rather not have any expression of opinion on
that item than have the happy prospects
marred. He would ask the Finance Minister to
postpone the item until the principle of the bill
had been adopted, so that it might go to the
West that a measure which was liberal to
generosity in its terms had received the sanction of the majority of Parliament.
Hon. Mr. Holton contended that the argument of the Minister of Justice as to the power
with regard to the disposal of funds raised by
loans and appropriations was not correct.
Mr. Jones made a few remarks as to the
expedition.
Hon. Sir A. T. Galt: said the House had a
right to know some particulars of the expedition. The Minister of Justice said he
had taken
the House into his confidence, but it seemed to
him (Sir A. T. Galt) to have been but a very
little way. They ought to know more of details
as to the length of time it was supposed the
Imperial troops would be on that expedition;
1379
when the liability of the Imperial Government
was to cease; and when the ÂŁ300,000 was to be
paid to the Hudson's Bay Company. He had
understood that it was to be an Imperial expedition, and if that was so the whole
control and
responsibility of the expedition would be with
the Imperial authorities, although in the
matter of finance they were to pay three-
fourths, (hear, hear). He certainly considered
that it was of the highest importance that the
Imperial Government should be responsible for
that expedition, and he should have been glad
if their responsibility in a pecuniary sense had
been larger than it was, (hear, hear and laughter). He would like to know how the
proposition of one-fourth and three-fourths had been
arrived at. He did not think that they could
expect that the present vote would cover all
expenditure.
Hon. Mr. Cameron was obliged for the information they had obtained, but would have
liked it to have been fuller.
In reply to Hon. Mr. Dorion,
Hon. Mr. Langevin said that $200,000 was
the amount of the vote to be expended in opening up communication.
Mr. Mackenzie said, according to the information he had before him, the entire expenditure up to
the present time amounted to about
$137,000. Now the entire estimates of Mr.
Dawson for opening up the whole communication was $165,000 in round numbers. This
estimate had been frightfully exceeded. If $137,000
had been already expended, and if hon. gentlemen intended to add $200,000 more, there
was
something wrong. He called the attention of
the House at the commencement to what he
believed to be a very correct account of the
extravagance of that department of Public
Works, and he was afraid that the hon. gentleman had given good reason for the charges
brought against the mode of conducting works
which appeared in the newspapers, and which
he learned from other sources. He (Mr. Mackenzie) was afraid that the expedition going
westward would find a fearful difficulty in
getting over what was called a road, but what
was really not fit to be travelled over by regular vehicles, and more particularly
when heavily laden. He was afraid the road would be
1380 COMMONS DEBATES May 5, 1870
impassable for military expedition. It was
quite evident the expedition was to go there,
and the House must vote the means to pay for
that expedition, and he could only say that the
Government ought to give the House the fullest information as to what they intend
doing.
He would with great cheerfulness support and
vote for measures carrying out that intention.
The Government would lose nothing by being
entirely frank with the House, though the
course they had pursued during the session
had been entirely the opposite.
Mr. Mackenzie said the hon. member seemed
to be very much amused at the idea, but he
would not be so pleased if he (Mr. Mackenzie)
descended to particulars, as he certainly should
if the hon. member challenged him to do so, in
voting money, and in reference to startling
events occurring in their territory, and which
required the consideration of Parliament. It
was wrong on the part of the Government to
withhold information, and entirely wrong to do
so under the pretence that it was in the public
interest, as if the House should, in the interest
of the public, be kept in ignorance, as if they
should be kept in front of the scenes, while the
hon. gentleman opposite walked behind the
screens in perfect mastery. That was not the
way to treat a free Parliament, and he would
not consent to such treatment at their hands;
but especially in an emergency like the
present, he thought every member was bound
to give a fair support to Government provided
they trusted the House. When the item came up
again he would take the stand which he had
expressed.
Mr. Masson (Soulanges) said he would
move the amendment, which would have
almost the same effect as one moved on a
former occasion, because he still failed to see
the necessity of that North-West expedition.
After the introduction of a new measure for
the Government of the North-West Territory,
and which he desired to see carried, he did not
see the necessity for sending up troops, and
offering the olive branch with one hand while
they carried war with the other. It meant you
must either accept the measure or swallow it.
They heard from the papers that peace existed
in that part of the country since the arrival of
Bishop Taché. It was said that Riel was about
to run away with some money belonging to the
Hudson's Bay Company, and he hoped that
Riel would, for he did not deserve to live in the
country. The whole French population had
been treated as rebels, or sympathizers with
them. In his own name, and in the name of his
people, he denied such an assertion, because
1381
they could not assent to such proceedings.
They could not approve of the murder of Scott
in that part of the country; and he would say
for his fellow countrymen that no Frenchman
in the Dominion approved of it, (hear). It was
not because they sympathized with Riel that
they opposed the expedition to Red River.
When he moved the resolution against the expenditure of $1,300,000, it was in the
belief that
it was the intention of the Government to send
an expedition into that part of the country.
How was it that at that time preparations were
being made for it? Where were they going to
use that money if not for that purpose? To-day
in discussing that item it was avowed that it
was their intention yet to send a military expedition into the Red River country to
make the
people of that country swallow that measure
whether they liked it or not. For his part he
was a freeman, thank God, and believed while
under the British Crown, and while protected
by the British flag, he had a right to be heard,
and he asserted that before asking those people
to accept that measure they should be consulted. But no Government desired to frame
laws
and send troops to enforce them without
asking the opinions of the people on the subject. If the Confederation scheme had
been
submitted to the people it would hardly have
been accepted, and as the hon. member for
Cornwall said, they would not be in the condition in which they found themselves today.
When Confederation was carried they had a
national debt of some seventy-seven millions,
to—day it amounts to $100,000,000, and before
many years he ventured to say it would exceed
$150,000,000. The debt would be rolled up at the
rate of from two to three millions per year in
carrying on the Government of the North-West
alone. Under those circumstances he wondered
how any member of the House could wish to
have anything to do with the new Territory.
After a few remarks from
Mr. Ferguson, the
House rose for recess at six o'clock.
PROVINCE OF MANITOBA
The debate on the Bill intituled: "An Act to
amend and continue the Act 32 and 33 Victoria,
chapter 3; and to establish and provide for the
Government of the Province of Manitoba" was
then resumed.
Hon. Col. Gray was glad to hear that the
policy of the Bill was peace to all parties concerned in the insurrection. They ought
to look
at the Bill in the light of future and not in the
light of the present irritating circumstances,
and he should support it.
Mr. Young said the question should be considered with moderation, but the issues were
too important if the future of the Dominion
was so deeply involved, that it would be criminal to remain silent. He was not astonished
at
the feeling in Ontario, for the people not only
felt that the country had been humiliated by
the insurrection, and that a loyal Canadian had
been murdered, but that the future of the mag
1386 COMMONS DEBATES May 5, 1870
nificent North-West Territories was trembling
in the balance. The Government had blundered
in not consulting the Red River people, in
pushing through a Bill at the close of last
session to govern them by a Lieutenant Governor and Orders in Council. This provoked
an
odious comparison with the neighbouring
American territories, and the action of the officials sent there had increased the
jealousy and
alarm of the people. To cap the climax the
Secretary of State for the Provinces arrived on
the scene, and the Loyalists looked anxiously
to him to dispel their doubts by stating the real
intentions of the Canadian Government; but
that gentleman remained silent at a time when
silence was to betray his country's cause, and if
the hon. member for North Lanark was to be
believed, the hon. gentleman actually
encouraged the discontented to resist the
transfer to Canada, and to insist in obtaining
what he called their rights, (hear, hear). Those
were grave charges, and if true the hon. gentleman should not longer hold a position
in the
Councils of Her Majesty, (hear, hear). Since
the expulsion of Lieutenant Governor McDougall, the Government had neither acted with
wisdom nor patriotism.
Mr. Young—You could have paid over the
ÂŁ300,000, to the Hudson's Bay Company, (hear,
hear). They broke their agreement with the
Imperial Government on the point, and as an
excuse the House was told that if the Government had done so, the British Government
would have refused to take part in the expedition. After the transfer, the North-West
would
still have been British territory, and the
Imperial Government could hardly have done
less than what has been gained by delay, and
find one-fourth the men and pay one-fourth
the expense—not paying the £300,000 was
pretty much like a breach of faith, and at least
showed a Want of trust of faith in the future of
the country, and When it became known
encouraged Riel, and helped to prevent a settlement for months. Two great facts had
been
,before the country—armed insurrection
against the Queen's authority, and the murder
of a loyal British subject. Whatever, then, their
political differences were, every loyal man—
every true Canadian would agree that the
Queen's authority should have been re-established, and the majesty of the law upheld.
The
course of the Government, from the first, had
been clearly to take immediate steps to re
1387
assert the Queen's authority, and to see that
the crime committed at Red River was punished, as if committed on the banks of the
St.
Lawrence or Ottawa. But they had delayed and
delayed, and it was only now, when the
increased public opinion of the country goaded
them into action, that they took the first active
measures to preserve that fine territory, and to
uphold the laws of the land, (hear, hear). As
regarded the policy the Government now had
before the House, the speaker approved of
creating the Province of Manitoba and giving
the people representative institutions, but
many provisions of the Bill were objectionable.
The system of the Government proposed was
too cumbrous and costly. He was glad that the
boundaries had been extended to take in the
Portage la Prairie settlements, but the country
had not the Government to thank for that.
They had been forced to withdraw that proposition which was little more than an insult
to
the House and the majority of the people of the
Dominion, (hear, hear). He (Mr. Young)
strongly objected to locking up 1,400,000 acres
of land for the children of half-breeds in addition to lands they now held. This would
give
350 acres for each male half-breed in the country; as they would not work their farms
this
land would be lost to the settlement, and with
the lands now held under the Hudson's Bay
Company titles, and the one-twentieth to be
allotted to that Company would leave very
little land in the small Province to be taken up.
He hoped the House would amend that clause.
More information should be given by the Government before they legalized all grants
made
by the Hudson's Bay Company, and in no case
should any grant after the 12th of March, 1869,
when the territory was bargained for, be legalized. The House should limit the first
Parliament to two years, and allow every British
subject going to Manitoba, as soon as he
became a resident or householder, to exercise
all rights of British subjects. The whole Bill,
particularly as first brought in, bore traces of a
bargain, a compromise, and of being largely
dictated by the Red River delegates. He protested against these delegates being considered
the representatives of the Red River people, as
they had been elected under compulsion; and
he felt humiliated to think that whilst these
men had largely influenced the Government,
not a single representative of the loyal people
of Red River in the city knew a single provision of the Bill until it had been laid
before the
House, (hear). In regard to the Military Expedition he believed it necessary, but
was glad
the Government felt so sure it would be one of
peace. The Minister of Finance represented
that some members wanted the Government to
adopt a war policy, and wanted bloodshed. The
hon. gentleman was simply drawing upon his
1388 COMMONS DEBATES May 5, 1870
fertile imagination. The whole country wanted
peace. For his part he regretted that any expedition was necessary, and but for the
blundering of the Government none would have been
required, and they would not have had to bear
the vast expense it would cost, (hear). But
when it became necessary it should have been
despatched as soon as navigation opened. But,
as on other questions, the course of the Government was weak and vacillating; as on
the
Tariff, they were divided among themselves;
they had no policy, no guiding principle; only
one bond held them together, the cohesive
power of office and place, and it was only too
plain that on thisgreat question of the preservation of the North-West in which the
very
future of their nationality was involved, their
Bill had been cut and carved mainly with a
view to enable them to engineer it easily
through the House, and thus maintain themselves in place and dispense its patronage,
(cheers).
Mr. Colby dissented from the views
expressed by the preceding speaker. He
defended the conduct of the Government
throughout the entire North-West business,
and contended that not only was the country
satisfied with the course they had adopted, but
the House was also, for he had never seen the
benches so empty during an important discussion. He did not blame the Hon. Mr. McDougall,
for he considered a better appointment could
not have been made. He did not blame the hon.
Minister of Justice, for although it had been
asserted that the hon. gentleman had never
displayed astuteness except in keeping himself
into office, he (Mr. Colby) believed it was
through the astuteness of the Prime Minister
that the country had come so safely through
the difficulty. He believed it was better not to
make the new Province too large at first, but to
allow it to expand as the population spread
over the country; and he thought a better population than French Canadian Catholics
could
not occupy that key to the North-West. They
were
par excellence a loyal people, and they
were in the best position to render assistance
in protecting that valuable avenue. The hon.
member for Waterloo seemed wedded to a
single Legislative Chamber for a new Province, but he (Mr. Colby) did not approve
of
that exceptional form of legislation for the
people of Manitoba.
1389
Mr. Cartwright thought that the Government had failed to use discretion in the
appointment of subordinate officials employed
in the North-West. He had heard of no sufficient reasons for the large representation
in
the Dominion Parliament, which was given by
the Bill, but they had better err on the side of
generosity in thtter. The Government
were responsible for the early fruits of the
insurrection, but not for the murder of Scott
and later actions. One good result would follow
from their expedition to that Settlement, and
the progress of the country would be forwarded more by it than by years of ordinary
progress. He hoped the Government would be
willing to accept amendments in Committee.
Mr. McCallum criticised the action of the
Hon. Mr. Howe in the matter, especially as to
his notorious conduct on the prairie.
Hon. Mr. Morris read from a report of the
Hon. Mr. McDougall, published in the North-
West newspapers, stating that the Hon. Mr.
Howe at that interview warned the Hon. Mr.
McDougall that delicate handling was required
in the Territory, but did not state that there
would be an armed insurrection, because he
did not apparently expect it.
Mr. McCallum said it was impossible to
bring in a Bill to satisfy all parties, and the
question was whether the Government had
done all in their power to avoid the difficulty.
He thought they had not. The appointment and
acts of Colonel Dennis were also severely
criticised.
Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald said full opportunity would be allowed for the discussion
in Committee; and the Bill was then read a
second time, and was referred to the Committee of the Whole for to-morrow, when it
will be
the first measure for discussion.
This individual participated in:
