1414 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
PROVINCE OF MANITOBA
Hon. Sir George-È. Cartier in the absence of
Sir John A. Macdonald, moved that the House
should go into Committee 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".
Mr. Mackenzie said, before the Speaker left
the chair, he would like to make a few remarks.
For the manner in which some hon. gentlemen
had treated the subject it would seem to be
with them, as with the hon. member for St.
John, mere matter of indifference as to the
kind of work to be performed in that somewhat
remote dependency. He looked upon it in a
very different light. He looked upon it as an
undertaking of vast political importance to the
future of the country. He looked upon it as a
question essential to the continuance of their
existence as a British Independent power on
the continent. He considered that without that
Territory it would be impossible to maintain
their present political relations, and a change
in political relations, which that House and the
county would be adverse to, would be the
inevitable consequence of any departure from
the policy long held by Canada of acquiring
that Territory for the Dominion. He was aware
that that was not the opinion of some of the
hon. gentlemen who were now charged with
the administration of affairs. He was aware
that some of those gentlemen denounced the
acquisition of that country, and the colonization of that vast territory, as an outrage
to
other portions of the Dominion. There were not
wanting in the administration of the day, gentlemen who treated the whole question
with
ridicule when first brought up in the House. In
the discussion of this subject he entreated and
desired every hon. member of the House to
treat it in a truly national spirit. He had been
gratified in looking over the reports of the
former discussion on that important question
to find that it has been approached in that
spirit. In the report of the Hon. Mr. Cauchon's
Commissioner on Crown Lands in a former
Government (1857), he found remarks so
exceedingly apposite that he could not refrain
giving the House the benefit of them. Hon. Mr.
Cauchon said: "It would be very desirable
therefore, and quite practicable if the British
Government would consent to annex the
Indian Territories, extending to the Pacific and
Vancouver's Island, to Canada to establish
during summer a monthly communication
across the continent. It is of incalculable
importance that these measures should be most
forcibly pressed upon the Imperial Government at the present juncture; for on this
solution depends the question of whether this
1415
country shall ultimately become a petty State
or one of the Powers of the earth; and not only
that, but whether or not there shall be a counterpoise favourable to British interests,
and
modelled upon British institutions, to counteract the preponderancy, influence, if
not the
absolute dominion, to which our great neighbour, the United States, must otherwise
attain
upon this Continent." That embodies in a few
words his (Mr. Mackenzie's) opinion with reference to his anxiety for obtaining and
colonizing immediately that great country; and believing that could only be obtained
by the united
efforts of all parties in this House and country,
he had sought to discuss the measure in such a
spirit as would not compromise any individual,
however strongly sectional interests or personal prejudices might be felt to influence
opinions. In a recent debate, the hon. Minister of
Justice, on the subject of the murder of
Thomas Scott in the North-West, had asserted
that they had no jurisdiction. Now, he (Mr.
Mackenzie) had since examined authorities on
the subject and found they had always had, at
least since the passage of the Imperial Act
conferring a concurrent jurisdiction with the
Hudson's Bay Company in the North—West in
such matters. A former Government, in which
the Minister of Militia was a prominent
member, had asserted the possession of that
jurisdiction. The report already quoted contained the following passage:—"The time
has
passed when any consideration of expense or
temporary inconvenience even if proved to
exist, can be allowed to stand in the way of
opening up those territories, when indeed the
necessity for expansion compels the Provincial
Government to create further facilities; for it is
an additional reason why the Government
should no longer permit the present state of
things to continue. It must be added, the
rumours have been gaining ground of late
years, with a force and clearness which almost
compel conviction, that the jurisdiction actually exercised in those remote territories,
has
been contrary to the wishes of the people, as it
has been manifestly, without the sanction of
law." That clearly showed that they had the
power to bring offenders to justice for crimes
committed in that Territory. He spoke of the
great value of the Territory to the Dominion, as
containing the very best trans-continental railroad route to the Pacific. There were
in that
Territory valuable lands with rich deposits of
minerals, such as coal and iron, which were
essential to the progress of the country, a rich
soil and an inexhaustible supply of good water,
all essential to the permanent settlement and
the maintenance of a great Pacific railroad,
and which were wholly wanting on the United
States Pacific route, where 1,000 miles of arid
desert intervened between the Atlantic and
1416 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
Pacific available lands. Looking not merely at
the political and social aspects, but at the
physical aspects, it afforded the greatest
inducements to them to take possession of the
country, and to direct the stream of immigration now going to the Western States to
that
country. (Hear, hear.) They had then to look at
the position of the people. The late Parliament
of Canada showed a desire to meet their
wishes, but the political struggles before Confederation, made it apparently impossible
to
take notice of the petition presented at the
conferences of Quebec and London. The question was, however, taken up, but it was
not
pushed with that vigour which so many of
them thought requisite. After the measure
granting the Territory steps had to be taken for
the settlement of the country. Last session an
Act was introduced, but the greatest error in it
was, that provision was not made for representative institutions. He did not think
that
the people of the country would be so chagrined at that measure as to cause insurrection,
although it was undoubtedly calculated to give
dissatisfaction. The measure should have been
explained before the Lieutenant Governor was
sent there. The Secretary of State was sent on
some mission for what purpose he (Mr. Mackenzie), could not understand, though one
would naturally suppose his commission was
to explain the Act to the people, except it was,
as he said, to go and see the country with
which he was to hold communication as Secretary for the Provinces. He (Mr. Mackenzie)
thought that such a representative should not
have been one who had openly ridiculed the
intention of acquiring the Territory as being a
stupid policy. He thought at the time that the
appointment wasa very great mistake, and as
the inhabitants of Red River were a reading
people, they could not have failed to have seen
that he had designated the Territory as merely
the elongation of an India-rubber boot that he
had seen on some performer on the stage. If
that was the kind of a forerunner, what would
the inhabitants think of the coming Government. The Secretary of State acted in such
a
way that he was openly accused of having
encouraged rebellion by Mr. Kennedy. He had
no doubt that Mr. Kennedy had uttered that
statement, though he had afterwards written
that he had held no such conversation. Since
then he had written a letter showing his sympathy with the rebellion, which he (Mr.
Mackenzie) had in his hand. It was a very remarkable piece of corroborative evidence
as to what
had been said about the Secretary of State. The
Secretary had also engaged an apostate
Canadian as a correspondent at St. Paul, who
edited a rabid Anti-Canadian newspaper. Such
an act was a gross violation of duty, and
showed that there had been something in the
1417
charges brought against the hon. gentleman.
He also had communication with Mr. Sanford,
who was known to be an American by birth,
and an annexationist. It was very remarkable
that the hon. gentleman should on all occasions
choose such persons for his intimates in that
extraordinary journey which he undertook,
and which had proved so disastrous to the
country, and had in fact made the present
expedition a necessity, and had involved the
country in endless trouble and almost everlasting disgrace, (hear). It was not his
(Mr. Mackenzie's) duty to defend the hon. member for
North Lanark. That hon. gentleman's conduct
to his own political friends during the last six
years had been such as not to command any
sympathy on his part; but, for all that he was
willing to recognize his authority as Governor
in the Territory, but, as a matter of course,
reserving to himself as well, with regard to
that matter, as to the political conduct of the
hon. gentleman, the free right of criticism in
all his public acts. (Hear.) He would not say
that the hon. gentleman went up under the
impression that there was no disturbance; but
he had no doubt the Secretary of State might
have told him there was disturbance in the
Territory—that he actually expected it. But the
Secretary of State had chosen to attack the
hon. member, and said that he wrote a mean,
sneaking, cowardly, and infamous letter to
Riel. He (Mr. Mackenzie) had read that letter,
and certainly could not see anything in it that
was cowardly or sneaking, and certainly nothing that was infamous. (Hear.) He rather
thought the hon. gentleman must have been
thinking of some of his own proclivities when
he attached that description to the letter.
(Cheers.) [Mr. Mackenzie here read the letter.]
Mr. Mackenzie continued. He could see nothing
in the letter but which was certainly proper
under the circumstances. He had called meetings in his County as was customary with
him
before the session, and stated there that Mr.
McDougall ought to have endeavoured to have
obtained a meeting with those insurgents in
order to set himself and Canada in a right
position before them, and he was glad to find
in the North-West papers proof that the hon.
gentleman had endeavoured to do so. (Hear,
hear.)
Hon. Mr. McDougall—I remained eight days
after writing that letter, hoping to receive
some response to it. (Hear, hear.)
1418 COMMONS >DEBATES
May 7, 1870
Mr. Mackenzie said there was no doubt that
the hon. member was unauthorized to issue the
proclamation; but on the Other hand, it was
tolerably clear from his despatches that he had
no reasonable doubt of the Territory being
transferred on the day appointed, and the act
was quite reasonable, considering the difficult
circumstances in which he was placed. It was
significant that the people among whom he
was then situated, and even the rebels in the
Territory knew more of the events that were
transpiring than he did, and the fact that the
transfer had not taken place, than Hon. Mr.
McDougall himself, which might be accepted
as the natural result of the extraordinary conduct of persons holding official positions
at
Ottawa. (Hear.) He should not say who they
were; but every one knew that there were parties who were openly plotting against
the new
Governor of the country. With regard to the
proceedings of Col. Dennis leading to difficulty, they found, from the papers sent
down, that
he consulted the principal men of the Territory, including among others, Father Ritchot,
and proceeded with their consent, or at least
without any remonstrances on their part.
Under those circumstances he was of opinion
that the insurrection against the authority of
the Government was wholly unjustifiable; that
it could have been prevented, and should have
been prevented by the Secretary of State if he
had done his duty. He thought that honourable
gentleman's duty was that as difficulties were
being created, as trouble was ahead, he ought
not to have left the Territory until his colleague had arrived. He knew that there
was an
opposition being organized against the
entrance of Governor McDougall, and he must
have known if he made enquiries, and if he did
not make enquiry he was equally guilty; for he
should have done so till the cause of discontent
was settled; and it was his duty to have seen
every inhabitant of the country, to call public
meetings and to take every means to assure the
majority of the people that the Government of
Canada had no such intentions as those
ascribed and from which originated the insurrection. But they did not find that the
hon.
gentleman paid any visit to certain portions of
the Territory, and only returned home in order
to escape the result for which his untimely
remarks were wholly responsible for. With
regard to the insurrection itself there was no
doubt but that it arose partly from chagrin of
the Hudson's Bay Company officials, who
sought to instil discontent into the minds of
those whom they employed or with whom they
associated. It was evident that the seeds of
discontent were sown and that the Secretary of
State when he went there watered the growing
plant and the result was that they had the
present scheme of compromise submitted
1419
instead of a scheme of Government. (Cheers.)
In considering this measure they were bound
to consider whether it was a measure calculated to advance their interests in that
great Territory, and promote the happiness of the
people. With regard to what had taken place
after the disturbance, he found the Government had sent up as Commissioners, Father
Thibault and Col. De Salaberry. It was clear
that Father Thibault, although a very amiable
gentleman, was, altogether unsuited for the
commission on which he was sent; while as for
his comrade, he knew nothing of him, except as
an associate in some remarkable circumstances
which were more creditable to his egotism than
his political capacity, (hear, hear). Vicar-General Thibault visited the section,
except that in
insurrection, and never endeavoured to ascertain the feelings of the people generally,
and
the whole mission was a complete farce. Riel
was always spoken of in their reports as "President" Riel, who cordially received
them and
whispered a message in Col. De Salaberry's
ear. The inevitable consequence of these acts
was not to elevate the Government of Canada
in the estimation of any one. The next Commissioner, Mr. Smith, had always been
associated with the Hudson's Bay Company.
He visited the loyal settlements, but only to
induce them to give their allegiance to the
wretched renegade, who had insulted the Government of Canada, in order to save Mr.
Boulton. He admired the bravery of the unfortunate
man Scott. (Cheers.) He admired the British
pluck and spirit of Scott, who would not save
his life by taking the oath of allegiance to Riel,
but spurning it paid for his loyalty by his life,
(Cheers.) He also condemned the conduct of
Mr. Smith at the Convention, where there were
two to one loyalists, in not replying to their
demands that before proceedings commenced
the prisoners should be released, and he persuaded them to let them alone because
all
things would be settled in a regular way in a
few days. After referring to the appointment of
Ritchot, Scott and Black as delegates, he said
the Government had received them in that
character in defiance of the opinion of the
country. He did not object to their being heard,
but no more attention should be given to them
than the interests of justice required. With
regard to Dr. Schultz the Secretary of State
had called him a disreputable person; but Dr.
Schultz was a native Canadian, whom he (Mr.
Mackenzie) had known for a long number of
years, and who had always been above
reproach, both in his moral character and as a
loyal British subject, who had rendered great
service to Canada there. That gentleman, who
was loyal enough to hoist a flag with "Canada"
on it was designated by the Secretary of State
as a disreputable person. No greater insult had
1420 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
ever been offered to a loyal man than had been
offered by the hon. gentleman in the interests
of his associates and the rebels. (Hear.) With
respect to the Bill, he did not wish to discuss it
from a party point of view. He believed it to be
of great importance as constituting the initial
measure for the Government of the great
North-West country, and he hoped the hon.
gentleman opposite would give every attention
to the amendments that might be offered. For
his part he should afford all the assistance in
his power so as to give satisfaction to all
classes of Her Majesty's subjects. (Hear.) He
did not, however, consider it advisable to
establish a permanent Government in the Territory at present, and would prefer to
see a
Governor of the Territory for a year or two
who would be able to ascertain the desires and
wishes of the inhabitants of the Territory as to
the form of Government to be introduced. The
House could then endeavour to meet their
views; but in the present Bill they imposed
upon the people a Government which they
might not want. They had no reason to believe
that it met with their consent, for there were
others to be consulted besides Messrs. Ritchot,
Scott and Black, and it would be far better that
they should pass a Bill organizing a temporary
Government, with a Council of members to be
elected from regular electoral divisions, and
that they should in the meantime govern the
country, and should indicate to Parliament
what form of Government they desired.
(Hear.) There was one provision in the Bill
which he thought very disastrous. The Province, as now proposed, included an area
of a
little over 13,000 square miles, of which 500
were water, and a great portion of pasture
land, which was not fit for settlement, so that
by taking one-half, they had 6,500 square miles
left—taking the land held by the population, or
that claimed by the Hudson's Bay Company,
there would be left altogether 2,500,000 acres
for settlement, and of that the Bill proposed to
set apart 1,400,000 acres, leaving a million for
settlers who were to go into the country. He
was entirely opposed to the land policy of the
Bill. His impression was that they had committed a great mistake in the land policy
of the old
Provinces, and he did trust that, in securing
that new country, they would have been able
to lay out the whole land for settlement and
pour in it a tide of settlers who would open up
the whole country. If that policy was adopted,
there would be no need of a reservation at all,
(cheers), though it was a question whether in
the lands further west they should not put
some reservation on the coal and iron mines.
The agreement as to the confirmation of titles
was that titles granted up to the 4th of March,
1869, should be confirmed, but why they should
now, by the Bill, substitute for that date four
1421
teen months later was to his mind incomprehensible and unjustifiable. (Hear.) He found
in
the deeds of the Hudson's Bay Company the
clause that parties holding under such deeds
were to contribute in due proportion to the
expenses of all public establishments, whether
of ecclesiastical, civil, military or other nature,
including therein the maintenance of the
clergy. He was not prepared to confirm titles
there which would impose on the people the
duty of the maintenance of the clergy. (Hear.)
Canada had deliberately adopted a non-State
Church policy, and the proper course would be
to supersede those titles by the ordinary
Crown Land titles.
Hon. Mr. Morris said the titles of the Hudson's Bay Company were principally leases for
999 years, and the Bill proposed to convert
them into freeholds.
Hon. Sir A. T. Galt—The object of the Government is the same as that of the hon. gentleman, I suppose.
Mr. Mackenzie expressed his dissatisfaction
at the wording of the clause with regard to
political institutions. He thought the Bill was
defective in that it provided that no one could
vote at the coming election who had not been a
resident in the Territory one year. A large
number of Canadians had been ejected or
obliged to leave the Territory, and in all likelihood in addition to the return of
those persons,
a large number would go to the territory, and
he could see no reason why every person resident in the Territory at the time of the
election, being a British subject, should not have a
vote. (Hear.) That was so manifestly just, that
he hoped the Government would yield on the
point. (Hear.) With regard to the qualification,
he would prefer that it should be residental
suffrage and not household suffrage, as many
young men would reside there, and he also
objected to the first Parliament sitting four
years. If it did the consequence would be that a
small majority would have the power over all
newcomers who might be in a majority, and
representatives to that Parliament could only
be elected for two years, while Local House
would sit four. He objected to the small extent
of territory included in the new Territory, and
trusted the boundaries would be changed. The
1422 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
clauses referring to education, were of too general a character, and he would prefer
leaving
them to be decided by the people of the Territory. He proposed to discuss the details
of them
more fully in committee, and trusted the Government would give the utmost facility
in
making such amendments as the House might
feel led to believe would most minister to the
happiness, peace and prosperity of that country. (Cheers.)
Mr. Harrison agreed that the Bill should be
discussed in a national spirit from a no-party
point of view. He was of opinion that the Government should take steps to obtain possession
of the Territory. He referred to petitions presented in 1849 by the people of that
Territory
for the establishment of a Municipal Council,
and in 1853 another for the formation of a
railroad and settling the Territory. The meeting on that occasion was presided over
by Mr.
James Ross, who was now a Chief Justice. The
outrage or murder now perpetrated was a disgrace to humanity, and instead of building
up
the Government would be the means of shattering it into pieces. They found that the
Lieutenant Governor was instructed to take the
leading men of the Territory into his Council,
and that Mr. Provencher communicated that
intention. It was after that, that the insurrection broke out. The great difficulty
was the
ignorance of the people, and he ascribed the
difficulty in part to the articles published in
the leading newspapers in Ontario. The Roman
Catholic priests and Fenians were also parties
acting in that direction. Unfortunately at that
time the Hudson Bay Company, the Government of the Territory, was incapacitated from
governing the Territory; there was one bright
spot in the difficulty and that was the firm
loyalty of the Indians, who would repel anything like a Fenian invasion, and he did
not
consider the appointment of the Hon. Mr.
McDougall as Governor objectionable,
although the
Globe had ascribed the difficulty
chiefly to him. That gentleman was now in
Opposition, and for his part he (Mr. Harrison)
could not support the assertions of the
Globe.
With regard to the letter to Riel he thought
that the hon. member for North Lanark had
done quite right in sending it and would have
failed if that attempt at negotiation had not
been made. He objected to the criticisms of Mr.
Mackenzie, and the use of the word "President" by Father Thibault, and the rash actions
of Mr. McDougall. The appointment and commission of Col. Dennis was condemned, and
also the issue of the proclamation. Had the hon.
1423
gentleman, to escape the odium of his blunders,
thrown the whole blame on the Secretary of
State, and if there had been treason committed
by the Secretary of State, it ought to be proved
and punished; but it had not been proved,
whereas he (the Secretary of State) had proved
the blundering of the Lieutenant Governor
with regard to the payment of money. He (Mr.
Harrison) thought the difficulties did not arise
therefrom, and if the payment had been effected, the hon. gentlemen opposite would
have
condemned them even louder than they did
now for the non-payment. The effect of nonpayment, he thought, was good. If that money
had been paid, the Hudson's Bay Company
would not have any interest in putting down
the rebellion. He was glad to hear that the
Dominion Government had not undertaken the
suppression of that rebellion alone. The British
Government, he believed, should have undertaken the whole duty of putting it down
with
British troops. A large number of people there
had a prejudice against Canadians, and he considered it injudicious sending volunteers
to the
Territory; and he confessed he had misgivings
on the subject. He spoke as if he was a resident
in the Territory himself. People there would
hardly look upon Canadian volunteers as forming a part of the British army. He hoped
however, his doubts would be unfounded. With
respect to Father Thibault's mission he considered it better to send a man of peace
than a
man who would carry dissensions among the
people. Objections had been taken to the establishment of a second Chamber. To that
he
replied that it was a rule in the Canadian
Government that should be followed. There
were many reasons why a second Chamber was
necessary there. With respect to the number of
representatives there had been a point of law
raised. It was asserted that under the British
North America Act there could be but one
representative for every 17,000 inhabitants, but
that special representation had only been fixed
for the Provinces already in the Union, and did
not extent to the North-West. It therefore
seemed to him that Parliament could fix the
number of representatives at pleasure. They
had given the new Province two representatives to the Senate and four to the Commons.
In the first Bill of Rights the rebels asked
merely for full representation, and in the
second Bill of Rights for one representative to
the Senate. He would like to hear the Government explain why a larger representation
had
been given. He did not approve of the halfbreed reserves and he would like to see
following the measure a treaty with the Indian tribes
of the Territory, by which their loyalty to British authority would be guaranteed.
He thought
it indiscreet on the part of the Government to
send surveyors into the Territory, though not
1424 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
unnatural, considering the anxiety manifested
by the country at large for its early settlement.
As to the mounted police, it might be a question whether they would be acceptable
to the
people or not. They certainly would not under
the command of the man whose name had been
mentioned as commander of the forces. A much
better appointment would be that of Colonel
Denison, of Toronto, (hear, hear), who would
not fail to be acceptable to the people and
prove himself a most efficient officer.
Hon. Mr. Cameron would like to suggest
that important amendments should not be
made to the Bill till the motion for concurrence. They could be discussed infinitely
better
while the Speaker was in the chair.
Mr. Mackenzie had no objection to the adoption of his hon. friend's suggestion.
The House then rose for recess.
After recess,
Mr. Mills resumed the debate. He said there
could be no doubt the present was the most
important measure yet submitted to that Parliament. Many months ago the hon. member
for
Lanark was appointed Lieutenant Governor of
the North-West Territory, the purchase money
of which it was agreed should be paid before
the arrival of the hon. member in the North-
West. There had been a desire evinced by many
hon. gentlemen opposite to throw the whole
blame of failure, or to a large extent, on the
Lieutenant Governor, and to show that there
was no trouble there till Hon. Mr. McDougall
arrived on the frontier. So far from that being
the case, he (Mr. Mills) could not see how the
hon. member could in any way be held responsible for what had occurred except as a
member of the present Government. As a
member of the Administration he certainly
was responsible, but not to so great an extent
as other members of the Government. Now he
(Mr. Mills) supposed that every loyal man had
a right to resist treason; and in case of death
occurring through resistance to his acts, it was
at most least justifiable homicide. When Hon.
1425
Mr. McDougall, in the exercise of his undoubted right, arrived at the frontier, he
had a perfect right to use any means in his power to put
down rebellion if it existed there. If the right
of the hon. member were not properly protected, who were to blame but the Administration
of the day. The House was informed that it
would have been an act of folly to pay over the
money to the Hudson's Bay Company without
obtaining possession of the Territory. If that
view was correct, it was even greater folly to
attempt to legislate for a country which they
did not even own. They were depending now
on that purchase money to secure possession of
that Territory. Did the Government suppose
that if the £300,000 had been paid, the Imperial
Government would have been less willing to
aid in putting down the rebellion at Red River?
It was immaterial to the Home authorities
whether the Red River Territory was a portion
of the British Empire separate from Canada or
a portion of the Dominion. It was her interest
to preserve the dignity of the British flag there,
to perpetuate British institutions. Now, it
seemed to him that, under the circumstances, it
would have been a wise and honest policy to
pay over the purchase money. If the Territory
had been purchased by, and handed over to the
Dominion, then Canada would have had authority there, and Riel could have none. The
people, a majority of whom were friendly to
Canada, were undecided how to act. They did
not know whether Canada had a right to claim
the Territory or not, and that uncertainty was
Riel's strength. The House was informed by the
hon. member for Quebec the other day that if
troops were sent there, it would create a civil
war and dissension throughout the whole
Dominion, and Confederation itself might be
burst asunder. Now, that view was taken on
the ground that persons in arms against the
British authority at Red River Territory, were
of a different nationality and religion from the
great mass of the people in the Dominion. He
(Mr. Mills) could not believe in raising such a
question. It should be looked upon, not as a
question of nationality or religion, but one of
resistance to Dominion authority; and it was
for the House to restore law and order in the
Territory. They had failed to comply with the
terms of the Act, and it was throught that
omission difficulties had arisen in the North-
West. He contended that it would have been
better to pay over the money and establish a
permanent Government in the Territory, and
afterwards a Province might be marked out
and a regular system of Government established. Assuming that the money would soon
be paid over, he believed it would be better to
set forth the provisions of the British North
America Act in the Bill before the House. He
could not approve of that Bill. It was too cum
1426 COMMONS DEBATES May 7,1870
brous for the population of the proposed Province, considering their habits and numbers;
like a tailor who measured garments for Apollo
of Belvidere, the Bill had been made to suit
particular gentlemen, without enquiring
whether it suited the condition of the people in
the Territory. It was highly desirable that the
new Province should be larger on the ground of
the expense of the Government. It was almost
as expensive to govern a small country as a
large one. There was a strong relation too,
between the ideas of men who governed a
State, and its geographical position. Governments representing large countries were
less
likely to be troubled by petty local jealousies
than small ones. When they had 300,000 square
miles in Quebec, and the same extent in
Ontario, why should they have only 13,000
square miles in that new Province? In the
neighbouring Union some of her Western
States were small in extent owing to the
broken nature of the ground; but in the Western States from 60,000 to 80,000 square
miles
were included in one. There was, therefore, no
good reason for creating that small Province in
the Western prairies. If the proposed Government was to be a temporary one, it would
be
not so objectionable; but if it was intended to
be permanent it would be better to form it
after the same model as their own. Then with
respect to the representation of the Province, it
was unfair to give so many members for so
large a population. It was based, no doubt, on
the expectation of the rapid increase of the
inhabitants, but he contended it would be
better to give representation in proportion to
the number of the people, increasing the
number if it thought proper, every two years,
or leaving that to the Local Legislature if it
thought proper. He approved of two Chambers
for the new Province, on the ground that they
were likely to have for some time to come a
very incompetent Legislature. He did not
approve of the idea of calling Manitoba a Province while it had not the same constitution
as a
Province. It would have been better to have
called it the Territory of Manitoba. It had been
objected that the word Territory was unknown
in any of the British Colonies, but in this very
Bill before the House the Red River country,
not included in this Province, was termed Territory. The word had been used in the
British
Colonial Government before. He objected to
the half-breed reserves, as it would interfere
with the settlement of the country, and would
tend to promote jobbery in connection with
public lands.
1427
Hon. Sir A. G. Archibald—The hon. member
for Lambton in breaking ground this afternoon, has entered into a great variety of
details. He has criticized the conduct of the
Government and of individual members of the
Government at great length and with great
asperity. The observations he has made—the
line he has followed—would be proper enough
if we were discussing a question of want of
confidence, but does not seem to me at all
suitable to the subject now before the House.
The question we have to deal with is the kind
of constitution we are to give to the new Province, the kind of organization under
which the
people of Manitoba are to enter upon a new
phase of national existence. When my hon.
friend for Lambton tells this House that a
subject of such vast importance to the future
welfare of the Dominion, should be approached
in a spirit of gravity and decorum, he carries
with him the judgement and good sense of the
House, but I ask my hon. friend if he thinks the
style of address which he has adopted is in
conformity with his own views—whether it is
the kind of address, which is worthy of his
position—his high position—in this House, or
which is likely to promote the true interests of
this country. Sir, when my hon. friend for
Lambton undertakes to speak of my hon.
friend the Secretary of State for the Provinces,
as a traitor to his country, as a traitor to the
Government of which he is a member, when he
condescends to make himself the channel by
which all the idle tales of a country, which the
member for Lanark describes as a country of
semi-savages, shall find their way into this
House, I ask him whether he is keeping himself
within the bounds of decorum, which he has
described as suitable for the discussion of this
great subject. I will not humiliate my hon.
friend, the Secretary of State, by treating the
charges brought against him as requiring a
defence or a denial. I will not treat them as
requiring any other defence or denial than
their intrinsic improbability and absurdity.
But I will take the liberty of pointing my
honourable friend to one source of consolation
which he has under the circumstances. My
honourable friend the member for Lambton
sits alongside of the honourable member for
Lanark. They are engaged in a joint assault on
my honourable friend the Secretary of State.
1428 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
They have so far a common object, but it must
have been a source of amusement to my honourable friend, as it certainly was to the
House,
to see the hon. member for Lambton suddenly
pause in the course of his fierce invective and
turn to his friend at his side, to let him know
what he thought of him and his conduct, to his
political party and friends. It was quite clear
that the hon. member for Lanark was still
unforgiven, and my hon. friend the Secretary
of State has the consolation to know that there
is nothing which either of these gentlemen can
say of him, that they have not, during the last
three years over and over again said of each
other, and that if the hon. Member for Lambton has on this occasion allied himself
with the
hon. Member for Lanark, it is because he wants
his services as a kind of political Sioux in
hunting down and scalping my hon. friend the
Secretary of State. The hon. member for Lambton has said the delegates from the Territory
ought to be received.
Hon. Sir A. G. Archibald—Then I have mistaken the hon. gentleman, and I supposed him
to have said what I think he ought to have said.
These men are here by the invitation of the
Canadian Government. They were appointed
at a meeting of representatives from the various districts, convened at Fort Garry
for that
purpose. They are here, therefore, as the representatives of the people of that district,
or, at
all events, the representatives of that portion
of the people who have taken part in these
troubles. They may have sympathized with the
actors in the
emeute. Very likely they have—
and if they have not they would hardly have
been chosen as representatives and would have
been of little value if they had been chosen. If
they can be of any use, it will be because they
have the confidence and may be supposed to
understand the views of the people behind
them. These people are in armed insurrection.
We wish to know what the difficulties are, we
invite them to send delegates, and they send
them on our invitation. The question is not
whether the conduct of these people has been
right or wrong. We want to know what it is
they complain of, and they send these men to
tell us. They are, therefore, so far representatives, and any insults hurled against
them are
insults to the people who sent them here. I ask
my honourable friend for Lambton, if he
thinks any good is to come of his undertaking
to proclaim on the floor of this House that one
of these men is a drunkard and a loafer—and
that another, in reckless disregard of his sacred
character, has been complicated with rebellion,
and violence and outrages of the worst kind. A
1429
man holding the high position of the hon.
member for Lambton in this House and in this
country has a large amount of responsibility
thrown upon him. His words should be
weighed and measured. I fear such language is
not calculated to promote the settlement of
these unhappy troubles. Sir, I do not say that
we should not frame our measure agreeably to
the views of these or any other delegates. We
should get our information from every quarter,
and the measure should be the one which
recommends itself as best for the interests of
the Dominion, and for the prosperity of our
common country. My hon. friend from Lambton speaks of the value of the great domain
on
which we are about to enter in the most glowing terms. He dwells on its importance
as the
site of the only railway which can find its way
to the Pacific, over a fertile country. I entirely
agree with him in his judgement. I feel that the
value of this great Territory cannot be overestimated, and it is because I feel thus—and
because the Province we are now organizing is
the key of the whole—that I entertain so
strong a desire that we should get possession of
this, which assures us of the whole. I consider
it sound policy to deal in a liberal spirit with
the troubles we have, so as to efface them at
once and forever. If this Bill proposed to deal
with the whole North—West Territory, we
should feel much more difficulty in approaching the subject. If we were called upon
to give
form and shape to the political institutions
which were to regulate a whole continent, we
would do well to hesitate. To my mind the
smallness of the limits of the Province is no
objection. If it be one, it is one capable of an
easy remedy. All we require to know is that a
larger Territory ought to be included, and at
any time the limits can be extended. You may
enlarge, but you will find it difficult to contract. But after all, is it so very
small? It contains 14,000 square miles. That is not a very
large tract, perhaps, in the minds of the people
of the great Province of Ontario, but with us
by the seaboard, a Province five or six times as
large as Prince Edward Island, is no contemptible Territory.
Hon. Sir A. G. Archibald—It is not, but it
differs from Nova Scotia in this. A large portion of the interior of Nova Scotia is
barren,
much of it is rocky, a large tract is covered
with lakes. If 1/5th of our soil is capable of
cultivation, it is as much as we can count on,
but in Manitoba there is hardly an acre that is
not cultivable. It is capable of sustaining a
population of millions from the soil alone, and
1430 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
such a Province cannot be called mean or contemptible. It is true the present population
does not exceed fifteen to seventeen thousand,
but they will not remain long at that figure.
One of the first results which will follow the
organization of the country, will be a large
influx of Immigration. Quebec will contribute
its share, Ontario will do the same, many will
come from beyond the water, and in two years
we shall find there a population of double the
number; and in five years it will amount to a
very considerable population. Let them come
from where they may; let them be of any
origin, or race or creed; let them go in and
possess the country, working it under the
organization we are now framing, or under any
other organization which they may think fit to
adopt, all that we have to do is to see them
fairly started in the race. And it is because I
would like them started fairly that I objected
to a feature of the Bill as it originally stood,
that I approve of the alteration which extends
the boundaries to include all the people. I have
no doubt the Government have given a correct
account of their view they had in excluding a
portion of its people, but whether that account
be accepted or not, the Bill in its original shape
was liable to much misinterpretation, and the
Government have acted wisely in changing it.
In dealing with this question we are certainly
in a much better position than we were last
year. A flood of light has poured in upon us,
and yet it is impossible to deny that in many
points we are still in the dark. This little community which has grown up in the very
heart
of the continent is unique. Separated by
boundless prairies from intercourse with the
people of the South, barred out from Canada
by 800 miles of swamp and wilderness, and
mountain and lake, separated from the people
on the Pacific shores, by the almost impassable
chain of the Rocky Mountains, they have had
little intercourse with the outer world. And yet
they have among them men, who have had the
advantages of the best education which Europe
can afford—men who in intellectual culture, in
manners and in every social qualification are
not surpassed in any country. And yet. these
men are brought into immediate contact with
the most primitive people in the world, with
men in the primary stages of society, in the
lowest and rudest conditions of civilization. Is
it any wonder that a community so secluded
from all the rest of the world, uninformed of
all that is transpiring around them, should be
subject to great, to unreasonable aJarms, when
suddenly the barrier is burst, which separates
them from the rest of the world, and they see
their country about to be entered by strangers?
Is it any wonder that their fears should be
raised; should be traded upon by Demagogues
ambitious of power and place? I do not think it
1431
is. I deplore as much as any man in this House,
I can blame with as much severity as any man
in this House, the fatal results which have
followed, but I can not say I am astonished
that under the circumstances in which these
men were placed, and with the fears they
entertained, just such things should occur as
have occurred, and that they should have culminated in the sad event which we all
alike
deplore and condemn. The circumstances in
which these events place us impose on us a
stern duty. We must re-establish law and
order. We must vindicate the supremacy of the
national flag. But the readiest mode of doing so
is, at the same time, to show these people that
their fears are unfounded, that their rights
shall be guaranteed, their property held sacred,
and that they shall be secured in all the privileges and advantages which belong to
them, as
Britons and as freemen. This is why I rejoice
that the Government have proposed a most
liberal Bill, which gives the people every guarantee they have a right to ask. With
this Bill in
one hand, and the flag of our country in the
other, we can enter, not as conquerors, but as
pacificators, and we shall satisfy the people
there that we have no selfish object of our own
to accomplish, that we go there for their good
as well as for our good. Sir, I see provisions in
this Bill, which are creditable to the Government. It has hitherto been the pride
of Canada,
that in her dealings with the Indian tribes, she
has evinced a spirit of generosity. That in
making treaties she has dealt liberally, and
what she has promised solemnly, she has kept
faithfully. And at this moment she is reaping
the reward of her good faith. If there is any one
thing more than another that will assist us in
putting an end to these Western troubles, it is
the fact that the Indian tribes in every quarter
are grateful to their great mother the Queen,
for the way in which they have been dealt
with, and are loyal to a man. There is also one
other thing that very much helps us. In the
country at this moment there are no more loyal
subjects of the Crown than our fellow citizens
of French descent. There are no men more
truly British in their feelings, in their attachment to the Sovereign, in their love
of British
connection than are the French Canadians.
And in this respect the half-breeds of French
origin in the territory reflect the loyalty which
they inherit from both races. They have no
sympathy with republican institutions, and if
at this moment we have but little to fear from
Filibusters and Fenians in the West, it is due to
the fact that the men who are frightened,
unnecessarily frightened, into an aggressive
attitude, have no sympathy with the people
and no regard for the institutions of their
Southern neighbours. Sir, I think the main
features of the Bill which the Government
1432 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
have introduced are conceived in a spirit of fair
play to this people, and I shall have great
pleasure in giving it my support. And now, Mr.
Speaker, there is one matter which I feel bound
to allude to before I conclude. It really has
nothing to do with this discussion, but it has
been introduced into it by gentlemen on both
sides. The hon. member for Lambton, the hon.
member for Lanark, and the hon. member for
West Toronto have referred to a gentleman
who is not in this House, who is unable therefore to defend himself, in terms which
I think,
call upon some one to repel a gross injustice. A
British House of Commons will never refuse to
listen to the defence of any person, however
humble, when unjustly assailed, and it is
because Captain Cameron has been unjustly
and ungenerously dealt with, that I feel it my
duty to trespass for a little while on the indulgence of the House, in endeavouring
to do him
justice. I have no particular reason to be the
champion of Captain Cameron. I have not an
intimacy with him of sufficiently close a character to justify me in assuming that
function,
but I have the honor of some acquaintance
with him. I have sufficient acquaintance with
him to feel myself justified in saying to this
House, that as a man of cultivated intellect and
refined taste, as a scholar and a gentleman, he
is not second to the very best of his detractors.
The principal point which has been made
against this gentleman is that he is not a man
of gigantic stature. Now, I can understand the
Editor of the
Globe, whose fine proportions are
familiar to many members of this House—I can
even understand the member for Lanark—
being prejudiced in this way, but I have difficulty in conceiving why the hon. member
for
Lambton should consider qualification for
office to be dependent, either on height or on
girth. I have said that Captain Cameron is a
gentleman and a scholar. I have to say further
that as an officer in the branch of the service to
which he belongs, he has had a very extensive
and varied experience. He was appointed to the
artillery in 1856, and from that time to 1869, in
different parts of the world, he has been
engaged in continuous service of a kind which
demanded the highest order of qualification. I
hold in my hand a record of his services. It is
long, and I shall not detain the House to read
it, but after what has occurred I shall feel it my
duty to see that it finds its way to the press. I
would merely say in reference to this point and
as an illustration of the species of service
which Capt. Cameron has seen that, on one
occasion he conducted an artillery train from
one end of India to the other, from Peshawar in
the west to Dinapore in the East, that he did
this in the rainy season, crossing the unbridged
rivers of the Punjab, and performing the whole
march which occupied three months, without
1433
the aid of any European except a sergeant and
the officer in charge of the cavalry escort. This
is not a service that implies the absence of high
qualities. The men under whom Captain Cameron served were able to appreciate his qualities.
Their opinions might fairly outweigh
those of a Pembina postmaster, even if the
postmaster did pronounce on the subject. At all
events I shall take the liberty to read to the
House what General Tytler says of Captain
Cameron in a despatch to the Military Secretary of the Commander-in-chief dated in
1867.
"Capt. Cameron, R. A., served as Adjutant to
the Artillery attached to the Left Brigade
Dooar Field Force throughout the Bhutan campaign. He was also attached to the Armstrong
6th Pr. Batt., which he even commanded for a
limited period.
"Capt. Cameron's services in the field, where
he frequently commanded those Artillery
forces engaged, were most meritorious—nor
were his efforts for the advancement of the
public service confined to his own branch. On
two occasions, at least, he rendered important
services in the intelligence department.
"Out of the field he ably and zealously
seconded the efforts of his commanding officer,
Capt. Wilson, in the conversion of the 6th Pr.
Armstrong Battery into a mountain one, capable of being worked with efficiency in
the
very rugged and precipitous mountains of
Bhutan.
"I venture strongly to recommend Capt.
Cameron to the favorable notice of His Royal
Highness. He has, in my humble opinion, well
earned a step in army rank."
Perhaps the House will indulge me while I
read the certificate of another general officer,
Brigadier General Dunsford, dated the 6th
June, same year.
"Captain Donald Cameron served under my
command in the Dooars campaign, 1864, and
gave numerous proofs of energy, zeal and courage. Though not engaged with the column
under my immediate command, he was highly
1434 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
reported on by Colonel Watson and Major
Huxshaw, under whom he was actively
engaged against the enemy, and was brought
favorably to the notice of His Excellency the
Commander in Chief.
"I consider Captain Cameron an excellent
officer in every respect. He evinced skill, judgment, and energy wherever he was employed
throughout the campaign, and I would venture
to recommend his services to the favorable
notice of Government."
In 1868 or 1869 Captain Cameron was
appointed Adjutant to the first brigade of
Royal Artillery, stationed at Halifax. Captain
Cameron identified himself with many useful
and benevolent institutions in Halifax outside
the line of his military duties, and I am happy
to be able to say to this House that there, in
private society as well as in military circles, he
endeared himself to a large number of friends
and acquaintances. There too he formed a connection by marriage with the family of
a
member of this House, a circumstance to
which, perhaps, he has been indebted for some
of the asperities of the public press. When the
arrangements were being made for Red River, I
am not surprised that the Government, desirous to avail themselves of the services
of a
gentleman of such large and varied expression,
offered him an appointment in the West. He
proceeded there and with the rest of the party,
was barred out of the Territory. A great effort
has been made to cast ridicule upon Captain
Cameron for what took place at Pembina. The
Globe has been at great pains to retail some
sneering observation said to have been made
by the Postmaster of that place. Now I do not
know what may be the exact value of the
opinion of a petty official of the United States,
in a frontier hamlet, consisting of a few huts. I
would not have thought myself of quoting such
an opinion, but as the press which sympathizes
with the gentlemen in opposition have thought
fit to do so, he is their witness and not mine.
Now it just so happens that I hold in my hand
a letter from this same postmaster written on
the 18th February, and as the hon. member for
North Lanark seems to attach some importance
to this gentleman's saying he will have the
gratification to find that he does not confine
himself to Captain Cameron alone, but gives
some opinions about others of the same party. I
read from the letter:
"We were sorry to lose the Captain and his
lady as they were very much liked by all of us.
"I must admit that our first impressions of
the Captain were not very flattering. Probably
1435
from some of his eccentricities, but more from
the ignoring of him by all the party that he
came with, as they denied, in toto, that he was
one of them. That he was a hanger-on to their
party whom they picked up somewhere on the
road, or in the settlement that they had nothing to do with him, he not being a member
of
their Council, nor to their knowledge had he
any appointment or promise of appointment
from the Canadian Government. Even Governor McDougall, in the meeting held with the
Pembina officials, in the Customs Office, gave
him a sneering uncalled-for cut for which he
received no response whatever, as by that time
we learned to estimate the Captain as the best
man of the lot.
"I do not write this in a spirit of maliciousness, but simply to do justice to one
for whom
we all have the highest regard as a gentleman,
a good and kind neighbour, and laying aside
his eccentricites, as being superior to those
who caluminated him.
"You will please say to them for us that
should they ever come this way again they will
meet a cordial welcome from all here.
C. CAVILLER."
But, sir, I will call other evidence from the
Opposition quarter. The Reporter of the Globe
and the Reporter of the Telegraph were both
sent out of the territory, and on their return,
these gentlemen bore testimony to the high
character which Capt. Cameron bore while on
the confines of the Territory. And now, Mr.
Speaker, I have to thank the House for kind
indulgence with which they have listened to
observations which partake so much of a personal nature. I was quite sure that I was
not
counting too much upon their spirit of fair
play, when I asked the liberty of giving this
esplanation—and I thank them sincerely for
the opportunity they have given me of repelling, as I have endeavoured to do, some
unjust
aspersions on a meritorious officer, and I have
only to regret that his indication has not fallen
into abler hands.
Mr. Bodwell denied that any member of the
Opposition has spoken disparagingly of Captain Cameron during the debate on the measure.
The Captain might have done good service
in India, and might do very well in the back
woods of America if there were no rivers or
fences in the way. With reference to the Bill
before the House, it seemed as if the Government desired to place the new Province
under
the control of the French Canadians. If that
was not their object it looked like it, for it
granted special privileges to that race, such as
1436 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
setting aside 1,400,000 acres of land for the
half-breeds and their children. He denounced
such a policy as one calculated to create a
division among the people of the Dominion. He
had been pained during the discussion on that
Bill to hear members of the Government speak
in terms of contempt of those who had proved
themselves loyal to Canada in the Red River
country, while those who had rebelled against
them, and murdered and imprisoned their
countrymen, were treated with the utmost
respect and consideration. Such a course was
humiliating to the House, and discouraging to
those brave man who were ready to sacrifice
their property, and if necessary their lives, in
support of their connection with Canada. He
should make some further remarks on the various clauses of the Bill in Committee.
The House then went into Committee—
Mr.
McDonald (Middlesex) in the chair.
On the clause relating to the boundary,
Hon. Mr. McDougall said that, although it
had been arranged that important amendments
should be moved on concurrence, it yet was
well to indicate the amendment which should
be submitted to the House on this clause. He
proposed to extend the boundary to 102nd parallel of west longitude one side, and
the Lake
of the Woods and along the International
boundary until it reached the western boundary of the Province of Ontario; thence
due
north along the parallel until it intercepted the
56th parallel of north latitude; then due west to
the 102nd west parallel of longitude. There was
some doubt as to the western boundary of
Ontario, but it was generally placed at the
Lake of the Woods. He proposed to obviate any
doubt that the eastern boundary of Manitoba
should be the western boundary of Ontario,
thus leaving no doubtful land between the two
Provinces. The only objection to that was the
question of the Indians, but he apprehended no
difficulty from that source if proper
endeavours were made to let the Indians know
the changes, so as to prevent false impressions
from getting abroad. With regard to the size of
the Province only 900,000 acres would be open
for the settlement of new settlers. He denied
the right of the half-breeds to any reserve and
if the Province was made too large they could
diminish it.
1437
Hon. Mr. McDougall—As a matter of law, I
say it is within the legislative power of the
House. He objected to the Bill as premature,
and thought it should only be proposed at the
end of four or five years, when they had seen
whether the Government which they were
creating might find itself embroiled in any new
difficulty in consequence of the already existing difficulties of the different populations
and
recollections of former disputes. They might
find such a state of things that emigrants
would pass it by and not bring themselves to
submit to the difficulties existing there. If
their expectations of the Bill were disappointed, it would show that they had been
too hasty
and imposed a Provisional Government only
suited to a large population. The only proper
course was to get at the question tentatively.
They should provide such a Government as
was suited to the wants and number of the
population, and when it was found that they
had grown out of their district and municipal
system, and were ready to bear the expenses of
a Provincial system, let the House give it to
them. Having been in the Government he knew
its power, and he now found that members who
were elected on a pledge, and under arrangements which had been broken, still gave
their
support to the Government. He thought it
likely that unfortunately the Bill would pass,
and he should, therefore, endeavour to make it
as good as possible. In the first place they
would endeavour to extend the franchise so
that instead of restricting it to householders it
should extend to residents at the time of election or a short time previously. They
should
endeavour to reduce the time of the sitting of
the Legislature to two years instead of four, at
all events for the first Legislature. It was
advisable that uniformity in this respect
should prevail between the different Provinces, and he approved of fixing the ordinary
duration at four years after the first Parliament. He should also propose to strike
out the
20th clause relating to separate schools. They
had better see what provisions the Local Parliament might make with regard to this
question, after which the Governor General exercised the vote power. He opposed the
clause as
inapplicable to the country and as suggestive
of a state of things which it should be preferable not to suppose to exist. With regard
to the
clause confirming titles, he should move the
limit should be as agreed on the 9th of March
1869. He objected entirely to additional power
given under the Bill. These were the principal
amendments which he should propose if that
Bill was unfortunately enabled to pass.
1438 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
Mr. Ferguson said he was one of the first to
object to the western boundary of the proposed
Province, and to urge upon the Government to
change it so as to include Portage la Prairie. He
was an independent member of the House,
although he had given and was prepared still
to give fair support to the Government. As for
the hon. member for North Lanark, the whole
country knew his political reputation was irretrievably ruined, that while he was
in the Government he was willing to do anything that
might be necessary to keep him there, and had
become the biggest Tory of the whole of them.
(Laughter.) Why, the hon. gentleman spoke of
separate schools as if they were something horrible to contemplate; but if his memory
served
him right, the hon. gentleman while in the
Government had voted for separate schools in
this country. (Hear.) The truth was, the hon.
gentleman's opposition to the Bill arose mainly
from the fact that he was no longer in the
Government. If he were still on the Treasury
benches, he would not find much fault with it,
even if it were more open to objection. (Hear.)
He (Mr. Ferguson) could easily vindicate his
own consistency, but he thought the hon. gentleman would find it extremely difficult
to
vindicate his. (Hear.) With regard to the rebellion, he (Mr. Ferguson) charged that
the responsibility for it was mainly on the heads of
the Hudson's Bay Company's officials. This, he
maintained, was borne out by indisputable
facts; and yet the hon. gentleman's Bill, which
he offered as a substitute for the Government
Bill, proposed to keep these officials in power
for an indefinite period. As regards the educational clauses of the Government measure,
he
(Mr. Ferguson) was opposed to the establishing of any sectarian schools, and trusted
that
the Government would consent so to change
the Bill as to remove all doubt upon that point.
With respect to the reservation of 1,400,000
acres of land, he was informed that it would
leave only about 1,200,000 acres for settlers
going in. If that was the case he would regard
it as great injustice, which he trusted the Government would not press on the House.
The
resolution was much too large and he would
have an amendment to propose, when the
proper time arrived, if the Government would
consent to change in this respect, and if in
some other particulars the Bill was made more
satisfactory, the Government might rely upon
his support, but, if not, he must say they would
have to look elsewhere for support.
1439
Mr. Bowell said if the Government recognized the delegates from Red River, when they
had recognized the Provisional Government—
Mr. Bowell—Well if that was the case, the
clause of the member for North Lanark's Bill,
retaining in office the present officials, would
confirm in their places officials, whom he saw
by papers recently received, were being sworn
in. He must say that the remark of the member
for Colchester, about insulting the representatives of the people of the Territory,
grated on
his ears and also on those of the other members
of the House. He (Mr. Bowell) wanted to know
whether those gentlemen, who has been driven
out of the Territory, on account of their loyalty, had been consulted by the Government
prior to the introduction of this Bill. The general impression of the country was
that they
had not, and their opinions even had not been
asked, until after the Bill had been prepared;
and, if that was the case, he desired to have it
understood, with regard to Judge Black, that
he (Mr. Bowell) could not regard him in the
same favourable lights as the member for
Lambton, holding that he, perhaps more than
any other man in the Territory, was responsible for the outbreak.
Hon. Sir Francis Hincks said, in reference to
the enquiry that had been made by the hon.
member, that there was a point that had not
been brought in mind, and it was this, that
certain persons had been specially invited to
represent their grievances here; invited, he
might say, at the desire and certainly with the
concurrence of Her Majesty's Government,
because the words of the Governor General
inviting them were almost dictated by the
Secretary of State, for the colonies. Now he
(Sir Francis Hincks) did not think the persons
to whom the hon. member had referred were in
that position, the position of persons having
grievances to represent. They had no grievances, and had not therefore been asked
to
send persons to state them. As for himself, he
had no wish to take any prominent part in
these proceedings, but he might say he had had
several interviews, satisfactory interviews,
with the gentlemen to whom the hon. member
referred; but with regard to the delegates, he
had never seen one of them except Judge
Black. With Judge Black, however, he had
never spoken, he having been simply pointed
out to him, and with regard to Father Ritchot
and Scott, he had never seen them—(hear,
hear)—or exchanged a word of any kind with
them.
1440 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
Hon. Sir Francis Hincks—Yes. He had never
seen or spoken to them before the Bill was
introduced, while he had had interviews with
the gentlemen referred to by the member for
North Hastings, (hear). The Minister of Justice
and Minister of Militia had also seen them, and
every opportunity had been given to them to
express their views, (hear). But the parties
whom it was proper more particularly for the
Government to hear were those persons who
had grievances to make, and whose complaints
and opinions it was the special object of Her
Majesty's Imperial Government to ascertain.
He might add, however, that the Bill itself had
been framed entirely on the responsibility of
the Government, and not at the dictation or
according to the particular wishes of the delegates of one party or the other (cheers,)
and he
had yet to learn that the members of the Government were liable to any censure, if
they had
succeeded in receiving persons who had any
influence, even over any portion of the people
of the Territory, and had gained their assistance in establishing the authority of
the
Dominion in that country, if they had done this
he thought they had accomplished a great and
good work, (hear).
Mr. Bowell understood that so long as the
Government appeased the wrath of the malcontents, they care very little about the
rest.
Mr. Bowell said that that appeared to him to
be the principle laid down by the Minister of
Finance. He had acknowledged that so long as
the Government framed the Bill to meet the
wishes of malcontents, the others being loyal
they must put up with it whether they like it
or not. (Cries of no, no.)
Hon. Sir Francis Hincks—Not at all. The
whole course and policy of the Government
from first to last had been in the interests of
the very party to which the hon. gentleman
referred. The acquisition of the Territory by
Canada, and the establishment of a Government there by Canada, were in the interests
of
the very persons to whom he alluded, and those
persons themselves were satisfied with the
course of the Government from the outset,
(Hear.) They had made no complaint. He (Sir
Francis Hincks) repeated that other parties did
complain that they were going to be interfered
with. To listen to those complaints was the
duty of the Government, and they would have
been false to their trust if they had not heard
1441
what the delegates had to say, and as far as
possible to reconcile them to the establishment
of Canadian authority in the country. (Hear,
hear.) He repeated that it was a most desirable
thing to do.
Mr. Mackenzie said these men had been consulted about the Bill, while the loyal refugees
had not been consulted.
Mr. Mackenzie could only say that the Minister of Justice, in introducing the Bill, distinctly
stated that it was the result of an agreement with those parties.
Hon. Sir Francis Hincks—No, he stated it
was the result of the deliberations with various
parties, not of an agreement with any. (Hear,
hear.)
Mr. Mackenzie regarded it at any rate as a
matter of fact, that the representatives of loyal
parties in the Territory had not been consulted,
and the Finance Minister said they had not
been consulted because they had no grievances.
The position in which this declaration placed
the hon. gentleman, when contrasted with the
statement he had made in an earlier debate,
was that the disturbance in the Territory had
been fomented by the Toronto
Globe. If that
was the case, how was it that he now said the
English speaking people had no grievances?
Hon. Sir Francis Hincks—I never said anything of the kind—(hear, hear)—and I must
protest against the hon. gentleman misrepresenting what I did say. I never used the
words
English speaking people. With regard to them I
have always held that a very considerable portion, if not a majority, do not concur
in the
views of Dr. Schultz, Dr. Lynch and others, and
of that fact there is ample evidence in this
book, (the blue book of correspondence). When
I said that certain parties had no grievance, I
referred more particularly to what is known as
the Canadian party, to which a considerable
proportion of English speaking people have
had no connection, (hear, hear).
Mr. Mackenzie insisted that there was a
contradiction between the two statements of
the hon. gentleman, and that he had fallen into
a trap which he could not get out of.
1442 COMMONS DEBATES May 7, 1870
Hon. Mr. Morris could not allow the question to rest as it had been put. The Bill was
introduced on the responsibility of the Ministry. After they had taken pains to obtain
the
information from all parties, they had seen
Drs. Schultz and Lynch, and he himself had a
preparatory meeting with them, as had Sir
George-É. Cartier. All the object of the Government was to draw up such a Bill as
would
add the vast Territory to the Dominion.
Mr. Mackenzie asked were those gentlemen
consulted as to boundaries, as he understood
Scott, Ritchot and Judge Black had been?
Hon. Sir George—É. Cartier said Scott and
Ritchot came with an extraordinary proposal
to get the whole Territory, and it was the plan
of the Government itself to restrict the boundaries, as by the Bill it being doubtful
if the
Portage la Prairie people were willing to come
in, and on the suggestion of Drs. Schultz and
Lynch they had been included.
Mr. Bowell asked on whose suggestion they
were first excluded.
Mr. Bowell—Then because they refused to
be under the dictation of Riel, they were
turned out? Then the delegates were not
received, and the rebel delegates consulted? It
was strange that the question was asked of the
loyal delegates what line would include the
Portage people, and that the Bill then brought
in showed exactly such a boundary as would
exclude them.
Hon. Sir George-É. Cartier was prepared to
adopt the amendment restricting the quieting
of titles to those granted up to the 8th March,
1869. They knew the Hudson's Bay Company
had granted no titles subsequent, but to make
it explicit and beyond doubt, they would put in
the date. He hoped they would allow the Government to take this stage now. It was
perfectly understood the gentlemen opposite did not
approve the principle of the Bill.
Clauses one to fourteen passed.
After this clause it was proposed to add one
to make the majority of the Legislative
Assembly necessary to constitute a meeting.
The other clauses, with some verbal and unimportant amendments, were passed, and the
1443
Committee rose, reported, and asked leave to
sit again.
Hon. Sir George-É. Cartier moved the House
into Committee on resolution on the same subject, to be considered
pro forma, so as to
advance the measure a stage.
The resolutions were severally put and carried, with some unimportant amendments proposed
by Government, the only important one
being that restricting the provision of quieting
title to grants made prior to the 8th of March,
1869. The Committee rose, reported and asked
leave to sit again.
Hon. Mr. McDougall asked whether the
cable telegram that the Governor General had
intimated to the Imperial Government the settlement of the Red River disturbances
was
correct.
The House adjourned at midnight.
This individual participated in:
