The House went into Committee of the Whole (Mr. Young in the Chair) on a Bill
" to make better provisions for the naval defence of the Province."
 Mr. WETMORE remarked, when the Provincial Secretary said the Bill explained itself,
he did not understand him, for the Bill did not explain itself at all. He was not
opposed to it, but he thought that the House had a right to expect some further information.
DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1866. 33
Let them consider how dangerous it
was to give up power without knowing
fully what was the necessity of granting
it, and for what purpose it would be
used! The House had a right to information, and, as a matter of common
decency, the Government ought to
give it.
He said he had read that sentiment
with an immence amount of pleasure.
Those words ought to be engraven in
gold, and hung up in the most conspicuous places in the halls of every Provincial
Legislature, and in the House of
Commons in England ; and they ought
to be engraven in the heart of every true
man. Here was a great nation that had
been deluged in blood, and been overwhelmed with taxation, and all this to
work out and prove to the world that
glorious principle of self-government ;
and in that mighty struggle to stay rebellion, he must say that they received
anything by sympathy from these Colonies. Here was that great nation proclaiming that,
though its "neutral
friends" would be the first to share the
benefit, it was determined to addert the
supremacy of its municipal law, and protect these Colonies from any raid from
American territory. He rejoiced that he
was here to pay to the men of that great
nation a just tribute to their noblemess.
This great Northern American Continent
had the salvation of many a crown head
in Europe. Many of them would have been
tottered to the centre long before this,
had not this great Continent received
their disaffected subjects as free men,
who otherwise would, by rebellion, have
obtained the glorious privilege of freedom.
These men looked across the broad Atlantic to this great, glorious and free
land, and when they landed on North
American soil they breathed the air of
pure and unalloyed freedom. It had been
said that the Antis were disloyal, but he
flung back the charge with contempt.
He was loyal to his Queen ; he was loyal
to his country ; he loved the British law
and he loved the British Constitution.
These were the honest sentiments of his
heart.
The Bill was then passed.
AFTERNOON.
ADJOURNED DEBATE ON THE AMENDMENT
TO THE ADDRESS.
MR. WILMOT said, he was now called
upon to explain the position in which he
stood with regard to the present. He had
received permission from His Excellency to
use anything where his colleagues and
himself had been in conflict. It appeared
that he had been charged as being entirely in error, when he had said he was
in favour of the abstract principle of union.
There was a distinct difference of opinion
between them with regard to the Minute
of Council ; and, when the gentlemen
who signed that memorandum, said, that
he never expressed an opinion in favor of
union, he had the authority of Judge
Allen to say, that he repeatedly heard
him state an opinion in favor of union ;
and he was allowed by His Excellency to
say, when
that celebrated Minute was
before the
Council, that His Excellency
referred to
him (Mr. W.) as not opposed
to the
abstract principle. When those
gentlemen
who signed the Minute said,
that he
expressed no such opinion, he
said, it
was not the fact. He saw Mr.
Fraser in
his place. He happened to be
in his (Mr.
W.'s) house when the question was
talked of, and he (Mr. R.) knew
whether he
was in favor of the abstract
principle
or not. (Mr. Fraser. There
was not the
slightest doubt about it.)
He had
expressed the same opinion to
hundreds of
persons. He had the satisfaction of
knowing that when he was
called a
traitor to the cause of anti-Confederation,
that the Governor had endorsed his
opinion. He would ask the
Government
if they were opposed to
union?
What did the paragraph in the
Speech mean? [The hon. member here
quoted from the Speech] If these gentlemen were still disposed to union, he
would ask again, how was it they agreed
to put that paragraph in His Excellency's
Speech? [The hon. member quoted the
paragraph relating to union in the Reply
to the Address.] He would like to know
if he was entirely wrong—if the Government were entirely right? When he
stated his opinion in Toronto, it was in
reply to a speech made by Mr. McDougall, who said, that not only the people of
Canada, but the people of the Lower
Provinces, were in favor of the Quebec
Scheme. In reply, he (Mr. W.) stated,
that, certainly, the Quebec Scheme had
been put before the people at the polls
and they had condemned it. But though
they had condemned that scheme, there
was a vast number in favor of the abstract
principle of union, and that it was only a
question of time when a union would be
carried—why, it was carried now. He
had, he supposed, had more foresight
than his former colleagues in this question.
Mr. Wilmot then went on to say, that
the paragraph in the Speech certain y
foreshadowed some Scheme of Union,
and he thought the Government ought to
come down with it. But he would tell
them that any Scheme of Confederation
they might submit must involve those
two principles :—one, the Federal principle, the other, Representation by Population.
Lower Canada would insist upon
the first, in order to protect her rights,
and
Upper Canada must have Represenation
by Population. [Attorney General. That
was unfair.] Fair, or unfair, no Scheme
could be carried that did not involve those
two abstract principles. He had strong
feelings against these two principles before he went to Canada. But when he
attended the Convention there, and heard
the whole question of trade opened up
and discussed, he came to the conclusion
that Union must take place. He foresaw
also, that the Reciprocity Treaty would
be repealed. There was one subject
brought forward at that Convention that
impressed his mind with the necessity of
Union—the Mother Country was prepared
to give those Colonies the right to make
Commercial Treaties. When he considered that there were six different Governments,
and six different tariffs, and
all the difficulties in the way, he concluded there must be one General Government
to carry them out.
It was stated in the papers, that it was
because he could not get the Audi or
Generalship, or some office, that he left
the Government. He would require to
DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1866. 35
enter into some details. After the late
election, when the late Government was
thrown out, he was called upon in conjunction with the Attorney General (hon.
A. J. Smith) to form an Administration.
He thought they were then in a position
to form a strong and stable Government.
When he met the Attorney General, he
(Attorney General) proposed that he
(Mr. W.) should be Provincial Secretary.
He had been Provincial Secretary before,
and he said that if they could not get a
better man, he was willing to take the
office. He asked if he could not have
had the office of he had chose? Differences of opinion arose betwixt them as to
the gentlemen who should hold the Departmental Offices. He thought that the
Government should have a Solicitor General, that there should be a responsible
law officer to whom questions of importance should be referred ; but the Attorney
General opposed any apointment.
(Attorney General here objected to Mr.
Wilmot entering into these detail.) He
was charged with falsehood, and further
charged with being bought in Canada
and he was bound to defend his own character. (Mr. Wilmot then quoted from
his tender of resignation, Jan. 4, in
which he expressed an opinion in favor
of the principle of Union, and the Government's reply thereto) When those gentlemen
that signed that memorandum
stated, "that they were not aware that he
was in favour of Union up to the time of
his mission to Canada," they stated what
was untrue. They knew the Government
referred to his opinion in Council when
they went on to state, "what induced a
change of his mind while there, the Council have no means of knowning." What
induced him? It was not office that induced him ; he could have taken the Secretaryship
if he had chose. That was
one of the best offices in the country.
The leader of the Government said, he
(Mr. W.) had no right to expose matters
in Council, but hoped, when he was
charged with falsehood and with being
bought, he had a right.
ATTORNEY GENERAL though that
he (Mr. W.) had a right to explain all
matters that touched on his resignation ;
but what took place in Council was as
binding upon him as himself (Att'y Gen.)
They were both called upon to form the
Government. They had worked together
for months, and he was now as much
bound to preserve silence as to what took
place in the Government as any member
of it.
MR. FISHER—If his conduct was impugned, had he not a right to explain?
Most certainly he had.
MR. WILMOT proceeded to quote
from his letter of resignation, February
21st, concerning the differences between
himself and the leader of the Government as to the composition of the COuncil
at its formation. He could have taken
the Provincial Secretaryship if he had
chosen.
MR. WILMOT.—Because he was not
disposed to be a more jack in the box, to
move as the strings were pulled. When
he saw the course the leader was pursuing, he came to the conclusion that the
Government would not last long, and he
would tell him (Att'y Gen.) to-day, if he
could not carry his man. Such was the
difference of opinion on the first formation, that he came to the conclusion not to
go into
the Government at all, and returned home, when a messenger came to
him in his house at Belmont, summoning him to Saint John. It was
then that he should return at the close of the
session, and take the Audit Office. After
having been so long in different Govern
ments as Provincial Secretary and Surveyor General, he thought, if a death
vacancy occurred in the Audit Office, he
had as much right to it as any other man.
After it was agreed that he should have
the Audit Office, a resolution was moved
in the House last Session to reduce the
salary, and it was agreed that the matter
should be referred to the Executive Council to deal with. After that, Mr. McClelan,
a member of the Opposition, moved
that the salary should be reduced from
ÂŁ500 toÂŁ100, and then the leader of the
Government got up and said the House
had a right to fix the salary. When he
saw the leader of the Government take
that course, and vote for the reduction of
the salary after the question had, by previous resolution, been referred to the Executive
Council, he was very much astonished.
ATTORNEY
GENERAL.—Did he
not, in conversation with him (Mr. W.)
about the Audit Office, say that he
thought the salary of ÂŁ300 was too high,
and the ÂŁ400 was sufficient, that it was
competent for the House to fix the
amount.
MR. WILMOT had no doubt about the
right of the House to fix the salary, but
what he objected to as that the leader
of the Government should, after the resolution was passed referring the matter
to the Executive Council, have taken the
course he did. If the leader of the Government chose to arrogate to himself the
whole Government, he was not disposed
to submit.
ATTORNEY GENERAL. He had
put a plain question to him (Mr. W.)—
did he not tell him that the salary was too
much.
MR. WILMOT. The question ought
to have been referred to the Executive
Council. That was not the only cause of
his dissatisfaction with the leader of the
Government. What had caused his friend
Mr. Anglin to resign but the fact that
the Attorney General took upon himself
the authority of the whole Government and the Lieutenant Governor when
he signed the agreement about Western
Extension. He (Mr. W.) did not, under
the circumstances, care to take office, as he
was no prepared to live under a despotism, and he certainly thought that an act
of despotism.
ATTORNEY GENERAL. He thought
the Government would see the unfairness
of the course the hon. member was taking. He (Mr. W.) was as much responsible for
the acts that took place in Council as he (Attorney General) was. He
would ask did Mr. Wilmot ever complain
in Council that he had noted despotically
in this matter.
MR. WILMOT. When the action that
led to the resignantion of Mr. Anglin took
place he was in Canada, but he reserved
his right to protest.
ATTORNEY GENERAL. Did he
(Mr. W.) protest when he explained the
transaction. Did he not approve of the
course he (Attorney General) had taken.
ATTORNEY GENERAL explained
that he had written the paper of agreement regarding Western Extension,
knowing
the minds of all his colleagues,
and it was necessary to do it immediately, as Mr. Parks and Mr. Skinner
were obliged to go to Boston.
MR. WILMOT.
He was in Canada
at the time. When he returned and
heard of the transaction, he expressed
his opinion to Mr. Anglin, and he then
reserved his right to protest against the
whole affair.
ATTORNEY
GENERAL. Answer
this
question. Did he (Mr. W.) express
to him
(Attorney General) when they
met, any
dissatisfaction?
MR. WILMOT.
He expressed his opinion of the matter in Mr. Troop's office, and
he certainly did not approve of the action of the leader of the Government.
MR. WILMOT.
He most unquestionably did not approve.
MR.
WETMORE. He recollected,
when the outrage committed by the Attorney General occurred, meeting Mr.
Wilmot, when he spoke in terms of entire disapprobation of the conduct of
the Attorney General in taking charge
of the country.
ATTORNEY GENERAL. He wanted
to know when he told Mr. Wilmot the circumstances under which he gave the
paper to Mr. Skinner if he did not approve of it.
MR. WILMOT was certainly not in the
habit of approving of what he did not
know. The leader of the Government
and himself, in fact, never could agree.
He never could even get a local matter
passed through Council without a fight,
and he now felt perfectly satisfied to be
out of the Government. Mr. Wilmot
proceeded to speak of the Union of the
Colonies. In Canada he had expressed
his opinion that some Union must take
place. He saw many reasons that made
him come to that conclusion. He saw
the United States were determined to
abolish the Reciprocity Treaty and that
there would be an opportunity of opening
up a large trade between the Provinces.
He also saw that in consequence of the
unsettled condition of the United States,
and the high taxation there, the Maritime
Provinces would be a better field for emigation, and they would have the advantage
in the shipping trade. His view at
first was that the Lower Provinces had
nothing to send to Canada ; but now,
that they had a right to make treaties
with other British Colonies and with foreign nations, a large and profitable trade
would spring up.
Mr. Wilmot proceeded to say that the
Government were now a Confederation
Government. Their conversation had been
very sudden. It had taken place between
the 19th of February, when his resignation was accepted, and the 8th of March,
when the House opened. In his last conversation with the leader of the Government,
that gentleman said ; rather than
consent to the Quebec Scheme, he was
determined to go down with the ship. He
could not understand what influences had
been at work to bring about so sudden a
change of opinion.
MR. WILMOT.—Yes. He would
[?]
the leader of the Government
[?]
prepared to go against representative
population?
36 DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1866.
ATTORNEY GENERAL—He would
never consent to representation by population under the Quebec scheme.
MR. WILMOT.—Canada would never
consent to forego that principle. Then
he understood the leader of the Government to say that he would never go for
any scheme with representation by population?
MR. FISHER thought the House ought
to know how the Government stood with
regard to the two principles—Federal
Union and Representation by Population.
The hon. member of St. John (Mr. Wilmot,) in arguing on the position of the
Government on the question of union, had
said that in any scheme that was submitted, these two principles must be included.
It was as well for the House to
understand where they were.
ATTORNEY GENERAL.—What he
had said was, he would never consent to
representation by population under the
Quebec Scheme. He would go down with
the ship before he would do so. In any
scheme he would support, there must be
something to neutralize the effect of that
principle.
MR. WILMOT.—These two principles
must be included in whatever scheme
was submitted. When he was in Canada
he was told that the Canadian Government were prepared to meet that Government of
New Brunswick on those two
points. He was informed by Mr. George
Brown that he was willing to do so.
When he returned to New Brunswick, he
told his late colleagues of the willingness
of the Canadian Government to confer
with them. He did not do it by writing,
but he did so in conversation.
ATTORNEY GENERAL.—The Government were willing to meet Mr. Brown
at any conference.
MR. WILMOT.—He understood the
Government had come to a very different
conclusion. He would now wish to read
the sixth and seventh resolutions passed
by the Confederate Council of Trade, held
in Quebec:—
6th. "That in the event of negotiations
for a new Treaty of Reciprocity with the
United States Government, but not concluded before the 17th March next, application
be made to Her Majesty's Government, suggesting that an arrangement
be entered into with the United States
Government for such a continuance of
the existing Treaty as may afford time for
concluding the pending negotiations."
7th. "That Her Majesty's Government
be requested to authorise the members of
this Council or a Committee to be appointed from amongst them to proceed to
Washington in the event of negotiations
being opened for the renewal of the Reciprocity Treaty, in order to confer with
the British Minister there, and afford him
information with respect to the interests
of the British North American Provinces."
These resolutions were passed at the
Confederate Council, sent off to Her Majesty's Government, sent back to the
Government in New Brunswick ; and his
report was read in Council, approved of
and adopted. What was done there was
approved here.
Mr. Wilmot proceeded to say that he
was in Frederiction, where he met the
Government after they received a telegram
from Sir N. Belleau, communicating the
fact that the Government of Canada proposed sending delegates to Washington,
but he was not told of the fact. he
would have been quite willing to forego
his right to proceed as a delegate to
Washington, but he was not willing to
be superceded without even bring referred
to. (Here followed some conversation
between Mr. Wilmot and the Attorney
General, Provincial Secretary, and Hon.
Mr. Hatheway, on the subject of the
meeting of Council in Saint John, at
which the Attorney General was appointed delegate to Washington.) Mr. Wilmot then
concluded by saying that he had
now explained the position in which he
stood with regard to the Government.
HON. MR. HATHEWAY said he would
in all probability address the House longer on the present occasion than he had
been in the habit of doing, and he would
ask the indulgence of the hon. members
for the remarks he would make. It might
be that his hon. friend, Mr. Wilmot, in
going out of the Government had taken a
leaf out of his (Mr. H.'s) book. It might
be that his hon. friend saw the clouds
gathering, and a storm coming, and made
haste to escape. It was said that he (Mr.
H.) saw last year which way the tide of
popular opinion was running, and that he
saw a crash was coming, and that he left
the Government just in time to save himself. It might be that his hon. friend saw
further into futurity than his late colleagues, and had resigned because he
thought another change in the variable
tide of popular opinion would turn the
Government out. His hon. friend said
he had not been anxious to get into the
Government, but he (Mr. H.) thought
that he (Mr. W.) had been dissatisfied to
remain in the Government because he
could not get his own way ; and he believed that it would have been much better for
his late colleagues if that hon
member had never entered it, if the Government had had him in the Opposition
from the very commencement. No member of the Executive Council could carry
every measure he desired. Difficulties
arose at the first formation of the Government, and he knew well that he and
the present Judge Allen differed in opinion upon a certain question. But were
the whole Council bound to take his
hon. friend's opinion. He had (Mr. H.)
permission, he would like very much to
tell the House the reason his hon. friend
would not take the office of Provincial
Secretary, but he could not, and he would
tell him (Mr. W.) that having from the
first formation worked with his late colleagues of the Government, their acts
were his, and the oath of secrecy was as
obligatory on him ; he was as much bound
to preserve silence as to what had transpired in Council as himself or any other
member of it. But what were his colleague's real reason for resigning? Because he
had been refused the trip to
Washington! Perhaps if he (Mr. W.)
had been present at the Council he would
have urged the appointment. If he had
been sent to Washington he was satisfied
they never would have heard of this question of his resignation Mr. H. proceeded
to say, that he had a great mind to
tell the House what had taken place in
Council when the Hon. George Brown
was present when the question of Confederation was discussed. His hon. friend
Mr. W. had said, that Mr. Brown, when
he saw him in Canada, expressed his
opinion that the Government of Canada
were prepared to meet the Government
of New Brunswick on the details of the
Scheme. But he (Mr. H.) would say
that Mr.
Howe in Canada and Mr. Brown
in New Brunswick, were two very different men. He (Mr. H.) had seen Mr.
Brown in Canada. He was then quite
willing and prepared to open up the question ; but how did the Government find
Mr. Brown in New Brunswick after he
had been subjected to two days influences
from certain quarters, and had been crammed with stories of the change of opinion
upon the Quebec Scheme—the country
then being excited about the York election—they found him holding off an
saying the Canadian Government cannot
consent to any change, "you must take
it as it is." His hon. friend said the
Governement agreed to give him the office
of Auditor General. No one disputed
his right to go into the office. But he was
offended because the salary had been reduced. It was considered that
ÂŁ500 was
too high a salary for the Auditor General
—and he thought
ÂŁ400 a year in that
office was a far better salary than ÂŁ600
a year in any of the Government Departments. [Mr. Wilmot—had he refused
ÂŁ400?] It was perfectly well known
that, if the hon. gentleman had chosen to
accept the office, the Government were
prepared to give it to him at the time.
He (Mr. Wilmot) had accused the Attorney General of assuming the whole Government
upon his shoulders, and said he
was not prepared to live under a despotism. [Here Mr. H. enetered into some
detail concerning the franchise of the
Government.] But it was entirely out
of his mouth to accuse the Leader of the
Government of having acted despotically.
The Government, he proceeded to say,
had been arraigned on four charged.
To one of the counts in the indictment
they had plead guilty. In trying them on
the other three the Government would
throw themselves on the justice of the
House. Thought the Government had arrayed against them a grwat deal of talent, and
though a great deal of recrimination had
taken a place he trusted that calm judgment would prevail, and he had no doubt
that the Government would satisfactorily
show that they were guiltless of the
charges preferred against them, and that
at the end of their trial they would come
off conquerors and more than conquerors.
The mover of the amendment (Mr. F.)
spoke of the wheels of popular opinion ;
that they were rumbling and rolling
through the country against the Government. Public opinion, they all knew,
was liable to very sudden changes, as no
one should know better than that hon.
member himself. He (Mr. H) could remember well when the wheels of public opinion
rolled him (Mr. F.) in 1851 out. He
could remember when they rolled him out
again in 1854. Mr. Fisher said that popular opinion had changed in the Province with
regard to the Quebec Scheme.
What was all this clamor raised about
this change of opinion. Was it not
raised and kept up by a few restless and
unscrupulous politicians, who made the
Quebec Scheme subserve their own ends
of personal aggrandizement? Rumblings
of popular opinion ! How were the wheels
that produced the rumblings set in motion at the time of the York election. He
challenged his colleague (Mr. F.) to show
one requisition from the electors of the
County that had not emanted from the
office of the Colonial Farmer, of the office of the Fredericton Reporter. How
was popular opinion influenced against
the Government. Bills an placards were
printed and thrown broad cast over the
DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1866. 37
Province, throwing out poisonous insinuations against the Government. It was
proclaimed all over the country that the
Government was under Roman Catholic
influencedthat Anglin, the traitor, was
its dictator. It was said that if the electors would save the country, and tear the
reins of power out of the hands of disloyal men, they must vote for Fisher, the
staunch loyalists, the old boy—vote for
Fisher and save the country—vote for
Fisher and the British Constitution, British Law, British Nationality, and British
Christianity! He would not tell how
many men during the excitement of the
election were fed in the back settlements,
or what other influences were brought to
bear. Every effort was made to prejudice him (Mr. H.) in the mind of the
country. . It was said that Smith ruled the
Government, and the Smith was hostile
to York, and Hatheway was powerless—
the interests of the Country was suffering
in his hands. He had not the ability el
his hon. and learned friend (Attorney
General), but he was quite able to face
him whenever the interests of his Country
were concerned. One of the canvasses
during the election was that the Government intended to remove the Post Office
Department from Fredericton, and that
was the first step towards the removal of
the seat of Government ; and the cry
was
raised, if the Country was to be saved,
and
the Seat of Government secured, they
must elect Fisher, for he was the only
man that could face Smith on the floors
of the House. He thought the hon.
member for Restigouche had handled the
sale of the Gibson lands very cautiously ;
he did not wonder that his colleague (Mr.
F.) had done so. But they did not dare
to condemn the Government for that
transaction : they knew the Government
were only carrying out the acts of their
predecessers. The member of Restigouche knew that, had the late Government remained
in power, they would have
rescinded the regulation. He thought
that was what the hon. member said.
(Mr. McMillan.—He said, if there was no
prospect of the Inter-Colonial Railway,
there would be no need of the regulation) Just so. Mr. Hatheway then
proceeded to speak of the influences that
had been brought to hear during the first
election in York? What were the arguments that his colleague, (Mr. F.) when
he went lecturing through the back settlements had put forth in his canvas?
First, if York would secure the seat of
Government, it must go for Confederation ;
and secondly, if York wanted to set the
Inter-Colonial Railway by the Valley of
the Keswick, it must go for the Quebec
Scheme At one of these meetings he
had met his hon. colleqgue, (Mr. F.) and
put to him the question, would he go for
Confederation if the Railway went
by the North Shore. well, he said he
would not. He (Mr. F) told the people that the Railway would go by the
Keswick Valley, and Mr. Fleming, the
Canadian Surveyor's Report would
soon be out, confirming his statement.
Let them refer to the law and the testimony, let them refer to Fleming's report [here
the hon. member referred at
great length to Fleming's report, reading several extracts concerning the various
routes to show that the Central
line fixed upon by the members of York
(Mr. F.) was the longest and would be
the most expensive in construction, and
would cost ÂŁ600,000 more than other
routes.] would the hon. member after
what Mr.
Fleming said about the Central line succeed in gulling the people
as he had done, that the Railway would
go by it. The hon. member (Mr. Fisher) had during the time of the election
the line absolutely staked out, and he
told the electors that he had induced
the Canadian Government to order that
the survey to be made along the Keswick Valley.
MR. FISHER said he had written to
the Canadian Government asking them
to order a survey of the Central route,
and he had no doubt that it was through
his urgent endeavours that the survey
came to be made.
HON. MR. HATHEWAY proceeded
to say that it was astonishing that with
all his knowledge, all his reputation as
a constitutional lawyer that the name
of Fisher was never mentioned in Canada, while the names of Smith, and Til-
ley and Gray were familiar was never
heard. He was astonished when he
looked over the map accompanying
Fleming's report to find that whilst there
was a line laid down that was denominated the Mitchell line, it showed no Fisher line.
The inter-colonial
railway had always been held forth as
the great boon New Brunswick would
get by Confederation, but he doubted if
it was looked upon with much favor in
Canada. Would any one tell him that
Galt the great finance minister of Canada who possessed immense property in
the City of Portland, and had held a
large amount of stock in the Railway,
was in favor of a Railway through New
Brunswick ! They might try to delude
the people that he was in favor of it,
but that would not go down with him.
In fact that there was little feeling in
Canada in favor of the Intercolonial,
and he was opinion that the feeling
on the whole was decidedly against it.
Hon. Mr. Hatheway proceeded to
speak to another charge against the Government with reference to the appointment of
Judge Ritchie over Judge Wilmot. He would say very little about it.
But he well remembered at the opening
of the Court in Fredericton, seeing
Judge Wilmot occupying the seat of his
honor his speaker. Never in his life had
ho seen the hall where the hon. members were now assembled so crowded
as on that occasion, for it was well
known in Fredericton, that the Judge
would deliver a harangue. He doubted
much the right of a Judge to deliver
from the bench at a time when polittcal
feeling was rising high, such an address
as Judge Wilmot did. It might be said
by some that he (Judge W.) had a right
to speak on a subject that was agitating
the minds of the people ; but when the
words caught his ears that if it was necessary to carry the scheme, he would
come down from the bench, he thought
that statement Judge Wilmot had no
right to make, and he justified the appointment of Judge Ritchie on the
ground of the same harangue. When
they heard the opinion of Chief Justice
Robert Parker, and knew that he advised the Government to appoint Judge
Ritchie, the mouths of those who had
murmured because they thought Judge
Wilmot had been superseded ought to be
closed.
MR. CONNELL he would like to hear
the letter of Chief Justice Parker read.
MR. FRASER—The hon. member of
Carleton had better apply to the hon.
member of
St. John, Mr. Wetmore.
He (Mr. F.)
gave him as an authority.
MR. WETMORE—What
did his hon.
friend (Mr. Fraser) say.
MR. FRASER—He said he gave the
hon. member of St. JOhn, (Mr. Wetmore) as his authority for the statement
that Judge Robery Parker would not
have accepted the office of Chief Justice,
if he had not known Judge Ritchie
would succeed him.
MR. WETMORE—What could his
hon. friend (Mr. F) mean? He most
positively and distinctly denied that he
ever made such statement.
HON. MR. HATHEWAY proceeded to
speak of the course his colleague, Mr.
Fisher,
had pursued against him during the election of York. He called to his recollection
the many occasions he had befriended
him in his political trouble ; he had always
been his friend ; he well knew his friend=
ship for him ; he knew the position he
(Mr. Hatheway) was placed in about the
time of the election—lying sick in bed attended to by two medical men, and he knew
that $300 were offered to one of these
medical men to keep him lying on the
broad of his back. (Mr. Fisher.—He
knew nothing of the kind.) One would
think he (Mr. Fisher) did know ; when he
was lying in this condition, he made a
public speech in the Temperance Hall, in
Frederiction, that was calculated to harrow
up the innermost feelings of those most
nearly related to him, and it was a
most remarkable fact that two copies of
the
Reporter, containing the report of the
speech, were directed to his wife. He
charged it home to him that he knew
that ; hon. members knew that Mr. Fisher
was in the habit of saying that after political discussion he went home to his family,
and forgot all the angry feelings that
had been engendered, and he prayed upon
his knees for forgeiveness to his enemies.
But when he though of that, the words
of his supplication ought to have been
in the words of the fine prayer in the
Litany : "From all blindness of heart,
from pride, vain glory and hypocrisy, from
envy, hatred, and malice, and all uncharitableness, deliver me." (Mr. Fisher.—
He denied that he knew the papers to
have been sent and said that the language he had used in his speech was
justified by the strong language uttered
by Mr. Hatheway against himself.)
The least Mr. Fisher ought to have
done was, after the excitement of the occasion, to have gone to the office of the
paper, and asked the editor not to put in
the report of the speech of the offensive
statements. To send the paper with that
speech into private family, was a low,
mean, cowardly act, unworthy of the character of a man. Every influence had
been brought to bear against him ; heedless expression in casual conversation
had been caught up and turned against
him. When in St. John he met that inflated little animal, Johnny Boyd, (he
knew he was not here to defend himself)
Boyd said to him, "You cannot resist
the British Government ; they will oblige
you to take the Quebec Scheme," (or
words to that effect) and he answered
hastily, "The British Government may
go to the devil, or some hotter place,"
and on the strength of that heedless expression, he had been accused of disloyalty.
He respected the British Government, but he though that on a question
that so nearly affected their own interests,
the people of the Provinces were the best
judges.
38 DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1866.
Hon.
Mr. Hatheway proceeded to make
some further personal remarks, and then
spoke against the Quebec Scheme, and
said that but for the influences brought to
bear upon the Hon. Mr. George Brown,
they would have had much better terms
of union offered them than those proposed by that scheme, and he did not think
the country was yet prepared to adopt it.
He then concluded by saying he had endeavored to justicy the course he had
taken.
MR. McCLELAN.—There was one
count, the hon. member said, the Government plead guilty to. What was that?
MR. MCMILLAN.—Should the Government agree to a scheme of union,
would they require the route of the Inter-
Colonial Railway to be defined?
HON. MR. HATHEWAY.—As a member of the Government, he would give him
the necessary information that day
week.
The Debate was then adjourned over
until to-morrow at eleven.
The motion being put the House was
then adjourned over until to-morrow at
ten o'clock.
A.A.
This individual participated in:
