AFTERNOON.
DEBATE ON THE AMENDMENT TO THE 4TH
PARAGRAPH OF THE ADDRESS
MR. FISHER,
on resuming, said, he
would refer to the principal points put
before the House yesterday, when
he
said, that the very fact that the Legislature had no been convened till one
month after the usual time, showed an
utter disregard of the wants and wishes of
the people, and was in itself sufficient to
condemn the Government before the
country. The absence of the
Attorney
General at Washington was no
sufficient
excuse. He had referred to the vacillation of the Government, and their failure
to fill up the public offices. as against
the
ends and spirit of the Constitution ; that
provided there should be a certain number of salaried and responsible officers
;
yet, during the time the Government had
held office, there was hardly one to be
found in his place—one officer was off to
one place and another to another place.
He had referred to the Government not
filling up the office of Solicitor
General.
The Constitution demanded that
the Governor should have the advice of hon.
gentlemen to conduct the business
of the
country ; while the Attorney
General was
off to England and to Washington the
country had been without the advice of a
Crown Officer. When he (Mr. F.) was
Attorney General he never had left home
for two days but he found that
letters and
documents had been flowing in
continuously demanding his attention. Things
must have marvellously changed since
he
was in power, if, with the advancing properity of the country, with the advancing
tide of civilization, there was not siill the
same flow of business—the name need
of
the constant advice of the officers of the
Crown. The Government had kept the
office of Solicitor General dangling before
the country because they could
not find
one man who was willing to take
it, and
run the risk of an election. That
fact
showed the Government was
sinking, and
since it had come into power, it
had
sunk lower and lower, till it was difficult
to imagine it would sink any
lower. And
the salary of the Solicitor
General had
not been saved to the country. He knew
enough
of the value of the services of
legal gentlemen retained to do
the business, to know that.
He had
referred to the fact that there
was not an efficient office of Audit. He
had gone into the Audit Office
and
found
that of all the entries, amounting
to
$700,000, not one account had been
legally audited. He knew that the
office
of Auditor General was one of the most
important in the country. Ha had shown
that it formed part of its Constitution ;
that among the arrangements
made, when
the Civil List was surrendered, was one
that there should be an efficient Office of
Audit ; that it was in fact, the crowning
consequence and result of that arrangement. Mr. Fisher quoted the dispatch of
Lord Glenelg, of September, 1836, in
proof.
" Among
the
objects," His Lordship observed, " to which it is my purpose to
devote a portion of this surplus, is the
institution of an efficient Office of Audit
within the Province for all the
Revenues
raised and expended in it. I am, of
course, aware that, at present, it is the
custom of the House of Assembly to
appoint, from time to time. Committees
of that Body to whom are
referred such
financial returns as are laid on the table,
and also, in fact, exercise the power of
auditing the accounts specified
in
such
returns. It is far from my
intention to
undervalue the labors of these Committees, or to question the advantage which
must accrue to the public
service from the
rigid supervision, by the Representatives
of the people, of the expenditure
of the
Executive Government ; but, at the same
time, Committees of a popular
Body are
but an inadequate substitute for a permanent and responsible officer
whose
duty it would be to inspect the accounts
of the public departments. The experience and practical skill, the
intimate
and continuous knowledge which
are necessarily acquired by such an
officer, give
him many advantages over any
fluctuating body. It is also to be
observed
that the appoinment of an
Auditor immediately, responsible to His Majesty,
is
more consistent with the Constitution and
practice of the Kingdom than the consigning of the duty of examining
the
PUBLIC ACCOUNTS ALTOGETHER TO THE
REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE.
I will lose no time in communicating
with the Lords of the Treasury to prepare
in concert with them the
necessary arrangement for the constitution of an
efficient Officer of Audit."
Mr. Fisher
then
went on to show what
were the powers and duties of Auditor
General. He was invested with judicial
powers ; he might require
accounts
on
oath and witnesses, and books or
papers
to he produced, and if not within six
months to disallow them. He had the
power of Justice of the Peace, and might
examine witnesses on oath ; he was reviewer by certeorare ; no proceedings
could be bad for the recovery of any sums
of money until the Auditor General had
made a report on them. He
might send
his clerk abroad to examine into the facts
of an account, and a certified
copy of audit and order of council was evidence in
all cases, and argued
that the Government had been guilty of a
violation of the
law and the Constitution of the country
in not appointing an Auditor General ;
they had been derelict in their
duty, and
did not deserve the confidence
of the
House. He had referred to the legislation of the Government ; the only thing
they had done was to pass a Treasury
Note Bill, which had not yet received the
approval of Her Majesty. He had never
thought much of paper money, and of assignats ; he preferred the good old gold,
or some solid equivalent, yet looking
abroad at the tendency of the
times, he
was afraid the Province would be
forced
to adopt them. He had referred to the
Post Office Bill, and must express his
surprise that after the Bill had been
thrown out in the Upper House,
a gentle
man of that body should have been elected to fill the office of Postmaster General.
He had referred to the Crown Land
Office, and maintained that when the Government wished to break down regulations,
in common justice to
the country
the repeal should have been notorious as
the framing
itself. He had referred to
the despatch of the l2th of April, 1865,
and he put it to the House if they would
countenance a Government in keeping
back despatches received from the Imperial Government. We had been talking very largely
of the greatness of the
Province, and of the humiliation of being
connected with Canada and Nova Scotia ;
but was it consistent with that greatness
that the Province should receive the first
news that such a dispatch had bean written through these sources ?
[
Mr. Fisher here quoted part of the saidÂ
dispatch, which expressed the approval
of Her Majesty's Government of the Quebec scheme, on the ground that it was
eminently calculated to promote effectual
provisions for general defence, directing
the Governor to bring the scheme before
his advisers ; showing that New Brunswick, as a separate Province, could make
no adequate provision for its
own defence,
and that the Government should
reasonably attach great weight to the views and
wishes of England.]
He maintained no one could justify
the Government in keeping back such a
dispatch ; it was an infraction of the Constitution. Why was the dispatch
so important ? Because, if laid before the
House when it should have been
last
Session, there would have been no need
to send a delegation home, which had, it
was said, cost the country ÂŁ800.
In private life, suppose a case where one of the
parties to a contract kept back on important paper, what would that be called ? (
Mr. Wetmore, -I might call it fraud.)
What he (Mr.
F.) complained of in the
Government was
if they erred in small
things, they would err, if occasion
offered, in great. He had referred to the
delegation, and be must say,
after the
glorifications of the press of the Government, he felt sorry, he felt humiliated,
at
the manner our delegates had
been received compared to those of Canada.
While
the Canadian Ministers had been presented to the Queen, and had every honor paid
them, our men had been snubbed. He
had referred to the other
dispatch of the
28th July, in the reply to the delegates.
published in Canada but never in New
Brunswick, in which Mr.
Cardwell said :
" I have answered them in entire ac" cordance with the dispatches I have
" addressed to you explaining the views
" of Her Majesty's Government on the
" subject of Confederation, and
that no
" countenance would be given to a
union
" of the
Maritime Provinces, unless it
" contributed to the other."
12 DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1866.
He had referred to the insulting minute
of the 12th July, in answer to a
dispatch
of Mr. Cardwell of the 24th
June, on the
subject of the conference between the
Imperial Government and the Canadian
Deputation, in which the
advantages of
union was discussed in its
various aspects,
and its absolute importance in a military
point of view pointed out, and
asserting
the authority of the Imperial Government
to urge upon the Province what they considered expedient for defence, and closing
with the hope that, after a careful consideration of the subject, they
would perceive
the advantage of union. What was
the
answer to that dispatch ? What
he condemned the Government for was
that they
did not clothe that answer to the communication to the Queen in gentlemanly,
at
least if not in elegant language. He
considered it also highly indecorous and
unprecedented that, in a grave
dispatch
reference should have been made
to a
newspaper article. He would read it,
and ask the House if it was not an insulting document. For himself, he
wished
to relieve himself of the odium
of it.
Nothing he had found, the Government
had done had roused such a feeling in his
own County. He had been met by people from all parts, who said to him during
the last election : You must, on
the hustings, refer to and denounce that minute
of council.
" From the language of this dispatch it
would be natural to infer that it related
to some scheme for effecting an entire
legislative and administrative
union of
the United North American Provinces,
which has not yet been made public ; but
words used in the concluding paragraph,
taken in connection with various other
circumstances, lead the Committee to
conclude that it was intended to
refer to
the resolution in favor of
a federation of
the various Provinces of British North
America, agreed to by the
Canadian Parliament at its last Session.
These resolutions have been submitted to
the people
of New Brunswick at the times and in the
manner which the advocates of the scheme
themselves selected."
Was there a boy in the Province, not a
man of intelligence, or grave
member of
the House of Assembly, but a boy,
who
doubted what the dispatch of Mr. Card-
well, of the 24th June, referred to ?
Any
person who wrote to him an answer to a
courteous communication in the spirit of
that Minute, he would put down as a low
fellow.
Mr. Fisher criticised
the Minute at
length, characterising it as the most
jesuitical dispatch ever penned in this
Province—one of the most
insulting
minutes that ever crossed the water.
[At this point.
Mr. Cudlip said.—Mr.
Cardwell had written an insulting and
dictatorial letter to the Government,
and
that he would return an insulting answer
to an insulting communication.]
Mr. Fisher defied
his hon. friend to
prove that ; he defied him to
point out
any expression in the dispatch of June
24th that did not show the utmost courtesy, that did not bear the
impress of the
parental and solicitous care of the Imperial
Government for the welfare and
advantage of the Province. It bore
out the
wise character of the Colonial Administration that had obtained under the rule
of
that Kings of England, and under the rule
of
the Queen, who, more than any other
monarch that had ever sat upon the throne,
won the love and admiration of all her
subjects. How could the House
countenance such an insulting document ? How
justify such an answer to the communication of refined and educated men as
were
Her Majesty's Ministers? It
would
not be consistent with the honor and dignity of the House to do it.
Mr. Fisher quoted from another
part of the Minute :-
" The Committee cannot suppose the
British Government shares the
ignorance
of the history and character of the Federal scheme which pervades the British
public, and which induces the Times
newspaper of 24th June to
observe that
the two Canadas have put aside their ancient jealousies, and agreed to unite in a
common Legislation, in apparent
forgetfulness of the fact that they have so met
for 20 or 25 years."
He (Mr
F) had never heard anything
like that before. He thought the
country
had occasion to know that the British
Government knew better what was going
on than we did ourselves. It was
the people who wrote that paper—referring to the statements of a newspaper
writer—that showed their ignorance.
Was that a fair statement ? Was the
writer of the despatch conscious
that the
scheme proposed to restore to the Canadas their local institutions, and that in
case of a failure to carry it out, its authors
were pledged to restore to Upper and
Lower Canada a great measure of
the local independence surrendered in 1840.
He had referred to the Judicial appointments, and the evidence of
an eminent legal gentleman on Judge Wilmot's
ability as a lawyer, and said that the Government had weakened the
administration of justice, and that a generation
would pass away before the
people would
have the same confidence in it they had
two months ago. He had referred
to
Judge Wilmot's two speeches on Confederation, and said that, surely, could not
have been the cause of his rejection. It
was nothing strange for a Judge to speak
on the topics of the day. He had himself
heard Judge Parker speak on a
new
School Law ; be had referred to what
Judge Coleridge had done in
England.He believed that the matter of the
appointment of Judge Ritchie to
the
Chief Justice
had been arranged a year
ago. He had heard so much to that
effect, that he believe it.
(
Mr. Anglin.—How
did the Government know that Judge Parker
would
die ?)
Mr. Fisher.—They
could not know
that ; but they knew that Sir
James Carter would resign. He (Mr. F.) had made
some observation with regard to the Militia, in answer to what
the Government
had said last year regarding
their irresponsibility in regard to Militia matters,
and showed four transactions, during the
administration of Lord Granville, that
had taken place in England 60
years ago,
that the control of all military
matters,
formerly in the hands of the King,
were
vested in those of the Executive
Council,
with the proviso that no change in the government of the army should be
carried into effect without the knowledge and approbation of the King. It was the
same in
this Province, where the
Constitution was a
copy in miniature of that of the Imperial
Constitution. The Governor acted with
and by
the advice of his Council—responsible to the Queen, but his every act
the act of his Government.
He would ask the House to condemn
the Government because they had made
no sufficient preparations for the defence
of the country. He knew that they had
a lot of men in camp during summer, but
that effected nothing. What he complained of in the Government was that
they had not spent the $30,000 voted for
militia purposes, and that had been wasted
with little purpose on the Camp of Instruction, in making arrangements tor
drilling men over the Province.
If they
had worked out such on arrangement
in
the month of March, some preparation
would have been made for the defence of
the country. If the present crisis passed
away without difficulty, they would at
least have a body of drilled men at an expense little above the sum that had been
thrown away, he must say, upon
the Camp
of Instruction. He never had thought there
was
much good in the militia heretofore,
but the times were changed, and
the people now demanded that there should be a
proper system of defence. Had the
country a Government according
to the
Constitution,—h:id there
been, as the Constitution demanded, gentlemen on
the
spot to give advice, the people would not
have been crying out. Proper provisions
would have been made for drilling
men all
along the frontier. and the people would
have had assurance that something was
being done. The feeling in the country
was the same as had animated the Province in 1812,
and the men of the Province this day were as willing
to make sacrifices and undergo hardships, if occasion demanded, as then. What the
country had reason to complain of,
what he
called on the House to condemn
the Go
vernment for was, they had failed in their
duty to the country at this time. But he
was not surprised that the
Government
had not done anything ; nor surprised
that they had been scattered to
the four
winds of Heaven. He was
not astonished
that they had not made an Auditor General ; he did not wonder they had
not created a Solicitor General, because he believed they did not know where they
were
themselves.
He would now speak on Confederation.
He would much like to know where the
Government were. He should soon
know, for he had written to a gentleman
in Canada who knew pretty much all that
was going on ; he should know before
this debate closed what the Government
were doing. This Government was
formed on an Anti-Confederate basisbut where were they
now ? We find that
there was put in the Speech a paragraph about Confederation, and that involved a
measure of Union to be submitted by
them. A year ago, they argued that the
country would be ruined by Confederation,
and now they were
ready to submit some
scheme themselves. When Confederation
was first mentioned in the Province, they
found
that opposition to it was a capital
piece
of political
clap trap to hoist themselves into office. But where
were they
now ? The Speech said that the
Government were going to put forth a measure
of Confederation. He would
like to
know some. of the foreshadowings
of that
measure. He would like to know at what
hour, what time or the day, in
what particular place, they changed their
minds, in
order that they might hold on to office ?
But he could tell them they would not be
allowed to hold on to office
much longer.
DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1866. 13
As for the Quebec Scheme, the most objectionable part of it was certainly
repre
sentation by population ; but he would
tell the Government that, as far as that
scheme was concerned, that principle
would never be changed. The leaders
of Canada had avowed that that never
can be receded from. He would
very
much like to know how his
honorable
friend (the Attorney General) had come
to change his mind. He .wuu uld quote
from hic (Attorney General's)
address to
his constituents :-
" This Union once accomplished and
you are bound for all coming time. You
cannot retrace your steps. There is no
dissolving the compact ; your
only relief
will be in rebellion after the example of
the United States.
" Further,
what will be our influence
in the new Parliament ? Fifteen
out of
one hundred and ninety-four members.
or voice will be feeble—Canada the
controlling element—practically in a state
of political vassalage for ever. We are
proud to be a Colony of Great Britain ;
but I think you are unwilling to become a
dependency of Canada."
The
Anti-Confederates, in their canvas, denounced the inquiry of Canadian
statesmen ; but the course the Government have pursued here. showed that our
tiously, manfully changed his opinion, but
he could not respect any man, or
any set
of men, who did so from merely selfish
motives. Such he believed was
the moral
government of the world—that the
honest
man would come up all right in the end.
You might cajol the people for a time,
but sooner or later, when they found that
they had been deceived, they would rise
in their might and hurl the men who had
gained power on false pretences from their
places.
Mr. Fisher went
on to show that the
Government, by their Minutes, had
ex-
Confederation, and that up to the 14th of
February they had evinced no symptoms
of a change of opinion. Why ? How
was it that they come to change
their
mind ? If they would not tell the
House, he thought he would be
able to
do so in three or four days. It was an
extraordinary circumstance that he should
read the statement made by the
Hon. J.
A. McDonald, at a public dinner
in Canada, that union would he effected in three
weeks. He believed there was some
connection between that statement
and the
avowed policy of the Government. If the
Attorney General had made an arrangement with the Canadian Minister,
he
would like to know what the principal
points of the arrangement were.
What
did they think of the statements
the
Government
had made of the Canadian
statesmen ? He would tell the House
that while these Canadian
Ministers would
be held in honor—would he famed
and
celebrated for all time to come—these
men would be forgotten forever, or if ever
remembered, it would be only to be mentioned with contempt, as men who, to
hold on to power,—(no, they had place
but not power)—forgot their principles
and their honesty ; if remembered, it would
be as the first of the Canadian statesmen
of New Brunswick who had forgotten her
interests and their own responsibility.
A great
flourish had been made about
a Railway contract. That was one of
the great
matters that took a delegation
of two our members of Government
to England. He was opposed to that
contract, though he was not opposed to
Railways. His objection was that the
contract with the Company would never
be carried out. His opinion was that
the object of the Company was to lock up
the road and make a handsome sum
by
selling out when the
Inter-colonial Railway came to be built. All that the Government had done in the matter
of this
contract could have been done for one
shilling. All they had to do was
to satisfy themselves as to the ability of the
Company to build the Railway, and that
they might have done by letter.
They
had agreed to give the Company a further facility by agreeing to pay land
damages. Who authorised
the Government to do that ? The Facility
Bill only
authorised the giving of a subsidy of
$10,000 a mile. He would like to know,
since the Government had opened the
door, could they refuse to give
further
aid to the St. Stephen,
Woodstock and
Fredericton branches, and to Western
Extension ? They transcended
their
power when they gave the
Company
that additional subsidy.
Then the
Government had made a
most extraordinary arrangement with
regard to the North Shore Steamer. It
went all the way to Boston. The
Government had not shown much
attention
to the interests of the Province by that
arrangement. (Hon. Mr. Hathewayit was made with the concurrence of
every representative of the North Shore.)
He had stated what was the fact.
Mr. Fisher
then proceeded to speak
of the reference made in the speech to
financial matters.
" An account of the Income and Expenditure of the past year will be laid
before you. Although the Revenue
was
considerably less than that
received in
1864,
it yet exceeded the estimate ; and
1 am happy to inform you that since the
close of the financial year, it has steadily
improved. The estimates, which will
be immediately submitted to you, have
been framed with as close an
attention
to economy as a due regard for
the exigencies of the public service and the
security of the Province would admit "
Was
that the whole truth ? People
might suppose, by this statement, that
the Revenue of the last year had exceeded the expenditure ; but he had taken
the trouble to inform himself on this
subject. He had found that the
receipts
for the fiscal
year, 1865, amounted to
$840,390.44, while
the expenditure had
been $930,000, leaving a
deficiency of
$90,000. Although the revenue
had exceeded the estimate—the whole trouble
had not been stated—the expenditure
had exceeded the total receipts. He
did not pretend to know much about
financial matters, but what I have stated
is the truth.
Yes, but not the whole truth.
Mr. Fisher
went on to speak of his
election, and the object he had been elected for, to oppose the present Government;
how he had to fight the
whole strength
and influence of that Governmentwhen he thought of all that the
great
constituency of York had done for
himhe had never been an ungrateful
man ;
he resolved in his mind what he would
do to show his gratitude. He
thought
of the country—what
hardships the people in the back settlements were
subjected to for want of roads--and he began to think it something could not be
done for them. He remembered that
the Province was full of new settlement ; and he thought he would
go to his friends in Sunbury and Queen's, and
other Counties, and see whether they
could not, by joining together, raise
more money for road appropriation.
That was his idea. He thought if he
could go to the Government with such
parties at his back he could break them
down if they refused to comply with their
request. He began to look through
the
public accounts to see where the money
could come from. He found in the
course of his researches that the Government had been collecting
export duty
to the amount of $60,000 ; and he found,
on turning to the Journals, that the Revenue Law expired on May 1st, 1865 ;
and from that time until now they
had
been collecting duties illegally. and
every dollar of that $60,000 would have
to be paid back. He fixed the blame of
this gross neglect upon the Provincial
Secretary and the Attorney General.
He asked the House if there had been
an
Auditor General and a Solicitor General, could that have happened? A ministry in England
that would be found
out in so great a neglect of
duty could
not last an hour. He did not think that
there could be found one representative
of my constituency in the Province
that would dare to go back and justify
so great a neglect of duty in a Government. Here were $60,000 of the
public
revenue lost to the country, not a dollar
of it had been legally
collected, and
every dollar would have to be paid back.
Mr. Fisher concluded by summing
up
his charges against the Government.
ATTORNEY GENERAL said,—From
the position be occupied as the leader of
the Government, he was called upon to
answer the speech of the mover of the
amendment. He had not been at all surprised at the course pursued by that gentleman,
because he had heard of the way
he had vilified and traduced the members
of the Government at the time
of the last
election in York. He had waited to hear
it the hon. member was prepared to make
the same statements on the floor of the
House as he had made on the hustings
He had waited to hear if he would dare
say now as he said then, that the Government was a disreputable and disloyal
Government, and that the traitor Anglin,
the Roman Catholic, was its dictator.
Would he dare make those statements
now ? He wondered how he (Mr. Fisher)
had dared to make them ; he
wondered
that he could reconcile
them with his conscience. What had been the course that
gentleman had pursued? It was said,
and he believed it, that he had his emissaries out, and that from hamlet to hamlet,
village to village, from school-house
to school house, they went, sowing
the
seeds of strife, awakening the elements of
religious discord in the breasts of the
people, stirring up sect
against sect. What had been the political canvas
throughout the country ? How had he
tried to frighten the people, excite hostility agninst him, (Attorney General)
and poison their minds against the Government ? What was the cry raised ?
Why, if the Government, if was said, was
allowed to stand, if the men who held the
reins were not ousted from power, the
seat of Government would be removed,
14 DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1866.
Fredericton and York would be ruined:
unless Smith was crushed, the seat of
Government would be lost. It might be
thought that from the position the hon
member had assumed it denouncing the
Government, that he was one of the most
extraordinary and immaculate men that
ever lived. When he spoke
of men holding on to office tor merely selfish motives.
he should have recollected that they had
been in Government together, and he (Attorney General) thought that the
course of
his political life would contrast
favorably
with that of the member for York. He
would ask him (Mr.F.) to point out one in
stance when he had left a
Government
voluntarily, for conscience sake.
He
could not. But he (Attorney General)
could remember a time when he was ousted out of a Government. The mover of
this amendment spoke of tha Government as condemned before the country,
and holding on to office against
the wishes
of the people. They could not if they
would ; they would not it they could.
They were in the hands of the
people ;
they must give a strict account
of their
administration. It was the privilege
of
the people to watch narrowly the acts of
those in power, for the tendency of power
was aggressive, and it was their
duty to
look closely that these men who
held high
positions fulfilled their trust.
If, when
they had given an account of their actions,
the peope should pronounce a
verdict
against the Government, they would
cheerfully resign office. But while it was
the duty of the people to watch closely
the acts of men in power, it was no
less
their duty, when it was sought
to oust
them out of office, to watch
narrowly the
motives
of those men who were endeavoring to accomplish that object. He
put it
to the hon. members, he put it
to the
country, if the mover of this amendment
was actuated by a spirit of patriotism,
whether this was the time for
him to take
the course he had. If it was true, as he
hoped to God it was not true,
that the
country was threatened with a hostile invasion, what would be the position
of this
House, what would be the
position of the
country, if this vote of want of confidence
was carried? There would be only two ways
to pursue ; one was to dissolve the House,
or a new Government would have to come
in, and the House would have to be prorogued to allow members of the new administration
to stand their elections.
Was this the time to plunge the country
into all the excitement of an election, or
to leave the country without a Government when, as it had been said, the country was
in a state of terror and suspense,
in danger of invasion from lawless conspirators?
He had asked the mover why he had
struck out that portion of the Amendment that referred to the lawless conspirators
from the neighboring Republic,
and he had given as a reason, because
some friend was afraid that the allusion
might give offence to the United
States !
Was
there any one so weak and childish
as to believe that ? Where were the
men who were afraid to give offence to
the United States ? No ; that
was not
the reason. He had seen, when the member of Carleton (Mr. Lindsay) made last
Saturday, that violent speech against
the
Government in which he pictured the
terror and alarm in the country, and demanded to know what the Government
were doing for its defence, what was the
game that they were going to play.
They had shown their hands, however,
and quickly. He (Attorney
General) was
satisfied that what he then stated the
Government had done to meet any danger that might be
threatened, had shown
that they were thoroughly awake
to the
emergency and were prepared to do
their duty.
The
Attorney General then proceeded
at length, to show that the authorities
had kept a most careful watch over
the safety of the Province ; that the
Governor had been in constant communication to the British Minister
at Washington—Sir Frederick Bruce ;—that
the
Government had signified their readiness
to put the whole resources of the Province, at the disposal of the
authorities,
to case of actual emergency. A war
steamer had been sent from Halifax, and
now lay at the harbor of St.
John ; steps
had been taken to distribute
arms through
out the Province ; that, in
Carleton— one
whose members had so fiercely
denounced
the Government— there were, at
this present time, five hundred rifles
and ten
thousand rounds of ball ammunition ;
and that the Governor, acting in conjunction with Col. Cole, and General
Doyle, were taking proper and efficient
measures for the protection of St. John.
He would ask the House, had the Government been recreant to their duty
? He
would ask any hon. member to point out
what more the Government could do than
they had already done.
The
Attorney General went on to say
that he did not intend, that afternoon,
to
occupy the attention of the House much
longer, but he intended, on another occasion, to take up the charges in
the long
bill of indictment preferred against the
Government by the member of York,
seriatim. After he had met and answered those charges, he would ask
the House
if the Government were not entitled to
their confidence ? He then proceeded
to
refer generally to some of the points he
intended to take up. and alluded particularly to the question of Union
and
the
Quebec Scheme.
[
Mr. Desbrisay said he would like to
know distinctly whether the
Government
had or had not a scheme which they intended to submit to the House
?]
Attorney General —If the hon. member
of Kent had only asked that question
before he had gone over to the other
side, he might have answered him. It
had been asked—he proceeded to
say—if
he was against a Union with Canada.
He did not know that he was against
Union, if an equitable arrangement
could
be made ; but this he did know, that he
was as strongly opposed to the Quebec
Scheme as ever. He was opposed to
building up Upper and Lower
Canada at
the expense of New Brunswick. He
did
not think it was right that they should
surrender up their independence, deluding them with the idea of a
grand
nationality. He charged it against
the
Delegates who had gone to
Quebec,
that they refused to see any objection to
the scheme, or to admit that it could be
altered for the better ; it was
with them
all "
coleur de rose."
The House
was then adjourned until
to-morrow at ten o'clock.
A. A.
This individual participated in:
