The following Bills were read a second
time :
A Bill to authorise the Trustees of
Saint Andrews Church, Chatham, to sell or otherwise dispose of the old Church of Saint
Andrews, in Chatham.
A Bill to amend the Act to Incorporate
the People's Bank of New Brunswick,
A Bill to Incorporate the Governors of the Wiggins' Male Orphan Institution.
The following Bills were read a third
time :
A Bill relating to Public Burial Grounds
In the Town of Saint Andrews.
A Bill to amend the law relating to Municipalities.
A Bill to authorize the City Council of the City of Fredericton to raise monies, bu
way of loan, for the erection of a Market House in the said City.
PROCLAMATION OF UNION.
Hon. Mr. TILLEY.âMr. Speaker, I have just received a note and telegram containing the information
that the proclamation of Union has been issued, which, by permission of the House,
I will read.
THURSDAY MORNING
My Dear Sir :
The enclosed arrived last night, but I have only this moment received it.
You will see that the General received it in St. John.
I am, yours faithfully,
G.N. CAMPBELL.
The Honorable S.L. TILLEY.
BY CABLE.
MAJOR GENERAL DOYLE, Fredericton, New Brunswick,
A proclamation uniting, on the first of July next, the three Provinces, has this day
been approved by the Queen In Council.
DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM AND CHANDOS.
Colonial Office, London, May 22nd.
Mr. SMITH.âWe received that intelli, gence last night in the papers by the way of Canada. I
will now follow up this information by enquiring of the Secretary the names of the
persons composing the Senate.
Hon. Mr. TILLEY.âWhen we get the Proclamation the names will be made known.
Mr. SMITH.âThis is a clear evasion of the question. To any mind it is a most extraordinary
thing that the Proclamation of Union should be issued, twelve men appointed to represent
this Province in the Senate, and yet the Government refuse to let the House and the
country know who they are. If the information is not given I shall move a resolution
with regard to it.
Hon. Mr. TILLEY.â The question of the hon. member is entirely premature. No reliable information
has yet been received by the Government, but as soon as it arrives not an hour will
be delayed in laying it before the House,
Mr. SMITH.âI know the Secretary cannot say whether the list they have sent home has actually
been inserted in the proclamation, but he can say who the Government have recommended.
Various rumours are afloat as to the names of Senators, and yet although the proclamation
is now made known containing the list of Senators, the Secretary refuses to let the
House and country know who have been recommended to Her Majesty as fit men to represent
this Province in
the Upper House of the General Parliament. There is another question which the crown
officers should answer, and that is whether those who are appointed from the Legislative
Council and this House can retain their seats now the proclamation is issued. This
is a point of great importance. and should be well defined, so that we may know whether
they are still in a position to legislate for this country. I am aware that I have
no physical power to make the Government answer the questions I put, but the country
will now know why it is the information is not given, and with whom the responsibility
rests.
Hon. MR. TILLEY.â I am no lawyer,
and do not therefore pretend to give a legal opinion, but I can express my conviction
that nothing in the Imperial Act precludes those who are appointed to the Senate,
from holding their seats till the first of July. It is a subject for the Crown lawyers,
and when the proclamation is received it can be looked into and decided.
SUPPLY.
Hon. Mr. TILLEY moved that in accordance with a Resolution of the House,
making this the day for going into Suply, the House do now go into Committee
for the purpose of granting Supply to
Her Majesty.Â
Hon. Mr. TILLEY.âI do not intend to go into the whole question of Supply to-day, as I find that the
printed Financial Statement is not yet ready to lay before hon. members. I shall therefore
only now ask that the amount for bye road appropriations may be granted, as it is
necessary the various amounts should be distributed as speedily as possible. I therefore
move that a sum not exceeding $55,000 be granted for the Bye Roads and Bridges of
the Province.
Mr. SMITH.âI do not think it is
usual to put the Resolution for Supply in that form. By inserting the words "not exceeding"
we cannot tell how much of that amount will be appropriated. I think it should not
be left in this way, but that the exact sum should be stated.
Hon. Mr. TILLEY.âThe Resolution is in the usual form. The words "not exceeding" are always used.
I copied the form of the Resolution from the Journals, as my hon. friend may see by
reference.
Mr. SMITH.â It is usual to pass the Resolution in blank, but at any rate it is not right that
the Government should have the power to withold any porton of the amount granted.
I am sorry the Government have not seen fit to make a
larger appropriation, for the Roads and
Bridges in all parts of the country are in
a very bad condition, and the people at
some places really in a state of suffering.
I am aware that the amount is ten
thousand dollars more than was granted last
year, but when we take into consideration
the great damage done by the rains and
freshet, I think it will be found to be
not more, in proportion. to what was
then given. I really wish they could give
a few thousand more, for this will be
found to be one of the most useful grants
we make, espscially at the present time.
when flour and provisions are so high,
and report says still rising.
Bon. Mr. FISHERâBoth. my hon.
friend from Westmorland and myself
represent great rural constituencies, and
it is a matter of congratulation that we
can go to than: and say that although
flour and provisions are so clear and
business generally so dull. yet the Government are enabled to give $10,000
mors for the Bye Roads than was given
last year. There are also amounts expended on the Bye Roads and Bridges
I refer to the work performed under the
Labor Act for grants of Crown Lands,
which in itself would form a considerable
item if considered as money expended.
There are two things for which this country should receive all praise, and that is
that there is no Province of the British
Empire that does as much, in proportion
to tho population, for Bye Roads and
Schools as New Brunswick.
Mr. SMITH.âI suppose the Attorney
General wants to make it appear that the
present satisfactory state of the Finances
is due to Confederation. but I will remind him that the late Government had
something to do with the matter; for the
present Government did not come into
office until nearly half the fiscal year was
passed. Instead of our present condition
showing that we shall prosper under
Confederation. as the Secretary tried to
show the other day, it only proves how
well we could get along if we were only
left alone. With regard to our large appropriations for Bye Roads and Schools,
I think there are many countries that do
as much, if not more, than we do for
these objects. But as far as the increased amounts of our revenues are concerned the
Attorney General must remember that if any praise is due, it is not to his Government,
or to the effects of Confederations, but to the late Government.
Hon. Mr. FISHER.âI did not. say that
our present financial condition was due
to Confederation, but that in this time of
commercial depression it augufa well
that my hon. friend and I can go back to
our constituents and say, that the Gov
ernment has granted $10,000 more this
68 DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1867.
year than last for the Bye Roads of the country.
Hon. Mr. WILLISTON.â I quite agree
with my hon. friend from Westmorland
that the people in some parts of the
country are in great distress, and it will
be necessary to take part of the Bye
Road appropriations to assist them, they
making a return by performing labor on
the roads. It is therefore necessary the
monies should be distributed as soon as
possible, so that the people may get the
money for their use. The Secretary has
done all he could to meet the views expressed by the hon. member for Westmorland ;
he has done all he could to
meet the distress, arising from the high
prices of flour and provisions, in certain
parts of the Province. Not only has
the grant for Bye Roads been increased
$10,000 above last year, but $20,000
more than last year are to be put upon
the Great Roads. Already the Chief
Commissioner has sent funds to various
parts of the country to repair the damage which has been occasioned by the
heavy freshet, and very soon the Roads
will be in as good or better condition than
they have been for some years past.
Mr. WETMORE.âMy hon. friend
from Westmorland intimates that the
present satisfactory state of the finances
is not due to the present Government ;
well, I suppose Providence had something to do with it, but I should like to
know to what human agency it is due ?
and who we should thank for it ? Not
the late Government, I think, for I did
not know that we had to thank them particularly for anything but for getting the
country into a state of confusion and
turmoil. But I should like for my hon.
friend to say to whom the thanks of the
people are due.
Mr. SMITH.âThe hon. member has
only just got back from Saint John,
where hs has been during the greater
part of the Session, so far, and I suppose
he thinks he must do something to let
the people know he is here. He used to
put a great number of questions to the
late Government, and it seems he is disposed to do the same thing yet.
Mr. WETMORE.âI did ask questions, but could get no answer.
Mr. SMITH.âThe hon. member did
ask questions, day after day, and received answers, but they were not such
as he wanted. He surely knows that
now he has no right to interrogate me.
If he wants to know anything he should
direct his questions to the Government.
There is no doubt but he is very much interested in the state of the revenues, for
we have some papers before us that clearly show that ; but that I suppose is all
right. He has perforated labors on behalf of the Crown, and I hope the Government
will do something for him. With
regard to the Bye Road appropriation I wish the Government could give a few
thousand dollars more. It is said that
they have given some two thousand five
hundred or three thousand dollars to
wards a boat race that is to come off in
Paris. That I think is a misapplication
of the public money, which should have
been kept in the Province. (Hear.
hear.)
Mr. CAIE.âAs has been already stated, the Roads are in a very bad state, and
a large amount of money will have to be
expended upon them. The poor people
in some of the back settlements are almost in a state of starvation, arising from
losses they have sustained, and the high
price of provisions, and I should he very
glad if a larger sum could be granted for
the purpose of assisting them, but, of
course, if it cannot be done we must do
the very best we can with what is allowed.
Mr. WETMORE.âThe hon. member
for Westmorland refers to labors performed by me, and hopes I shall be compensated
by the Government. I am
happy to say for all services rendered by
me I have been pretty well satisfied already. I have done nothing for the present
Government ; what l did was on
behalf of the last, who were so weak that
they could not get through their work.
They had no Solicitor General, for they
were afraid to fill up the office, and the
Attorney General could not devote his
time to the legal business, they therefore
had to appoint Tom, Dick and Harry all
over the country to do it for them, and so
I happened to get some of the Crown
business to do for them among the rest,
the present Government paying the Bills.
My hon. friend says I used to ask him
questions, which is quite true, but the
trouble was I could not get a straightforward answer, although I kept it up for
about forty days, and that is just the case
now. I required information, and therefore asked my hon. friend to whom we
are indebted for the increase of the revenues. He has not answered that question,
although it is a very simple one, and
one he should answer in a straightforward manner.
Mr. SMITH.âIf the hon. member for
Saint John will put himself under my
direction I will show him, but unless he
does this he certainly has no tight to
question me. The late Government are
not now on their trial, and yet the hon.
member from Saint John sees fit to make
a vile attack upon it. The reason is
clear enough ; he only desires to give
vent to his revengeful feelings. He is
not satisfied that the late Government is
down. They know that their opinions
were not endorsed by the people, and
now they are willing to comply with
their wishes and give the measures which
are being introduced a fair trial, and yet
without the slightest provocation the hon.
member pours forth a torrent of abuse
against them, and makes an outrageous
personal attack on me. He says that the
late Government were so weak that we
could not appoint a Solicitor General,
and that I was so indifferent to the
duties of my office, that we had to give
the Crown business into the hands of
private legal gentlemen, and so we had
to employ him. But if he was employed he has been amply paid for his
services, and therefore it little becomes
him to speak as he has done. The hon.
member and I have always been on the
most friendly terms ; when he was employed on Crown business he was a
supporter of the late Government, and
it therefore seems most strange that he
should now impute weakness and indifference to us. He knows very well
why it was we did not appoint a Solicitor General, and he knows too that I
was in England and could not attend
to the duties of Attorney General here.
He would have been quite willing to
have got the Solicitor or Attorney Generalship, and would be willing, I dare
say, to accept it now, but at present all
the offices are filled up. I do not think
it at all generous in him to attack in
such a caustic and severe way a Government that has passed away. Why,
they are in a state of dead ducks, and
surely the hon. member does not want
to shoot a dead duck ! Our Government was killed by the action of the
Governor, who was urged on by the
party now in power, some of whom
were not on the floors of this House.
The people expressed their feelings
against us ; they went for the men who
were willing to carry them into a Union
which we considered fatal to the best
interests of the country, and we were
forced to comply. But as I said the
other day I am willing even now to go
back to the people and leave the verdict with them, feeling assurred that
they would now endorse the policy and
opinions of the late Government. As
to the hon. member from Saint John,
when I consider that for many years
we have been on terms of personal
friendship, and the position he occupied with regard to the late Government, I cannot
but look upon his present attack upon me as ungenerous and
uncalled for.
Mr. WETMORE.âI did not attack
him ; I merely spoke of the reasons why
my name appeared in the public accounts,
to which my hon. friend had referred, and
stated that there being no Solicitor General, and the Attorney General not
attending to the duty, the legal business
of the Crown had to be entrusted to the
hands of gentlemen outside of the Gov
DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1867. 69
ernment, and so I, among others, was
called in to do the work. This my hon.
friend construtes into a vile attack upon
the late Government and a personal outrage on him. Why, one would suppose
that he was the heart, soul, body and
bones of the late Government, a regular
one man Government, in fact. But this
is how he wanders off from the question
which I put to him. He said that the
Provincial Secretary had no right to arrogate to himself or the present Government
the praise for the present satisfactory state of the revenues. Now, I did not rise
to defend the Secretary, for I think he is quite able to take care of himself ; but
I simply asked for informationâWho, then, are entitled to the praise ? On this my
hon. friend gets up and makes a fierce attack on me, but all that is no answer to
my question, and I again ask him, Who are the men we should thank for a state of affairs
by which we are able to grant so much larger sums for public purposes than we were
able to do last year ? My hon. friend has insinuated that I changed my position ;
but, Mr. Chairman, it is well known that it was not I who changed but the late Government.
My views changed, it is true, but I was elected an Anti-Confederate and I stood to
the principle throughout. My personal views had changed, but so long as I represented
an Anti-Confederate constituency I was bound to go against anything like Union. Who,
I would ask, were the first to change ? Why the late Government came down with a speech
that was based upon Unionâthey, who had been elected in opposition to it were the
first to put it in the speech. I then opposed them, as I was bound to do. I asked
them over and over again what they meant by the reference to Union, but could get
no satisfactory answer. Here was reason enough why I should oppose them, but when
they allowed the Governor to dictate to them what course of action they should pursue,
the reasons strengthened and multiplied, and I did my best to deprive them of the
power they held. When I was first elected I did think that Union would be adverse
to the best interests of this people ; I had little time to examine into the subject,
and the ruin and danger to which we should be subject were continually dinned into
my ears, till I came to believe it. I did not, however, desire to become a politician.
It was pressed upon me most urgently to allow myself to be put in nomination. Thus
I was forced into the position, and having entered I would not draw back. I never
hesitated to express my opinions as adverse to Union ; but after a time as I had opportunity
to examine the subject, I saw that I was in error, and that the consolidation of these
Provinces would prove to be an immense benefit. When I was an Anti
Confederate I supported the measures of the Government on that principle. My hon.
friend says that I was willing to take office ; he knows that I could have been in
the Government, and with an office, too, if I had chosenâbut that is apart from the
question. As long as the Government stood to the principles, I was bound to support
them, and when my own views changed, if they had wished to have brought in a measure
of Union, I should have gone back to the people of Saint John and told them my views
on the subject had changed ; but I think my position was right, that I could not support
a measure of Union while I was an Anti- Confederate representative. When I went before
the people of Saint John at the first they thought with me that Union was bad, but
when I went back to them and told them my views had changed I found that their's had
too ; they believed in the sincerity of my convictions, and placed confidence enough
in me to return me to this House. My hon. friend hints that I was afraid to accept
the office of Solicitor General because I should have to run my election over again.
But I will ask him if he is aware that the fear lay not with me, but with the Government
? The office was needed, but they were afraid to fill it up. The office is still wanted,
for it is impossible for the Attorney General to attend to all the duties that would
otherwise be required of him. Now, I suppose my hon. friend will think that I want
the office of Solicitor General, because I have referred to it, or that I may have
some desire to become Attorney General, but I will tell him that I think I am quite
as capable as many others to fill either office. And I will tell him more, that if
the Attorney General gives up his office, and a good Government think it right and
proper to offer me the situation, I should be willing to accept it, and run my election
over, against the best man the late Government can bring in Saint John, and beat him,
too, by a majority of 500, and my hon. friend can just put that down on his memorandum.
I very much regret that my hon. friend gets so annoyed at the simple question I put,
and I really hope that his not answering will not have a tendency to mar that close
friendship which he has felt for me for so long a time.
Mr. SMITH.âI have always been very suspicious of these sudden conversions. He says he came
here an Anti and bound to support the Anti Government, but it was but a very short
time before he was right round and opposed the Government with all the power he could
command. The hon. member at the first Session said a good deal about Mr. Tilley, but
now he is found fighting his battles. When occupying the position of forty-second
member, he must have heard the language used
against him by the hon. member from St.
John (Mr. Wetmore), and I should now
like to ask the Secretary what his opinion
is of sudden conversions? When the
second Session arrived, however, the hon.
member came here disaffected, and I
might say why.
Mr. WETMORE.âWell, do. Don't
spare me at all ; let us know why it was
I became disaffected.
Mr. SMITH.âI remember his conversion to the idea of Union was very sudden indeed, and followed
immediately after he had strongly urged upon the Government his desire to become Solicitor
General.
Mr. WETMORE.âI did not ask for
the appointment, but said that I believed
I was as capable of filling it as any one.
Mr. SMITH.â If the hon. member did
not put himself boldly forward, still in
his mild way he let us know that he wanted it. He came out afterward and assailed
me with preventing his being
appointed, and he knows that when what
had transpired in the Government could
be disclosed it was found that I was the
only one who favored his being appointed.
The other members of the Government,
and his colleagues from Saint John
among them, were afraid to open the
constituency, and that was why he was
not provided for. He now says that he
would be willing to take the office of
Attorney General if it was offered to him,
and I have no doubt he would. He has
only been in this House about two years,
and yet has shown his desire twice to
take office. I have shown no such greed
for office as some have done. I have
been here about sixteen years, and have
held office but two years in all that time.
Why the Attorney General has expressed
his willingness to hold on to his seat in
this House and go to Ottawa, too, in the
interests of the people of his County. I
don't think my friend from Saint John
cares about going to Ottawa ; he would
rather stay here and be Attorney General.
He says he can run his election and beat
any one we can put forward, and wants
me to write down to my friends that he
challenges them to bring out their man.
I certainly don't know why I should take
so much trouble for him, but I have seen
so much of political life that I know how
to estimate such confidence, for l have
heard many declare that they could run,
who, when they tried it, found they could
not. Why, the Secretary thought he
could run on the Quebec Schemeâ
Mr. SMITHâYes, he did run, but the
trouble for him was that he ran out instead of inâ(laughter). Now here is the difference
between the Secretary and I : that whereas I have been in the House longer than he
has, I have only held office two years, he has held office every year
70 DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1867.
but one since he was elected and has received a salary of Ĺ600 a year. The hon. member
for Saint John (Mr. Wetore) thinks he could run his election again if he got the Attorney
Generalship, but he might be disappointedâindeed, he may not get the chance as soon
as he would like, but for the Attorney General, finding that the dual representation
idea won't work, will probably continue to hold on and not go to Ottawa at all, at
least not for some time to come. Then, again, even if he does decide to lay aside
his office, I doubt very much whether the Solicitor General would yield his rights
in favor of the member from Saint John. But I shall not protract this discussion,
I have already given an explanation of the action taken by the late Government, which
has gone to the country, and there is no need to go into it all again, especially
as it is entirely outside of the question now before us.
Mr. W. P. FLEWELLING.âI think the time of the House has been taken up quite long enough with this matter
; the business before us is the granting of Supply, and I trust, Mr. Chairman, you
will at once put the question on the Resolution without a further discussion on matters
so entirely outside of the subject before us.
The Resolution granting $55,000 for By Road purposes was then put and carried.
PETITIONSâORANGE LODGE.
Mr. BECKWITH presented a Petition
from Joseph Pickard and 120 others, inhabitants of the City of Fredericton,
praying that an Act may pass to incorporate the Grand Orange Lodge of New
Brunswick and subordinate Lodges in
connexion therewith.
The Petition was received and laid on
the table.
Mr. BECKWITH presented a Petition
from Samuel Fox and 68 others, inhabitants of the County of York, with a like
prayer.
A Petition from William Tomlinson
and 84 others, inhabitants of the County
of York, with a like prayer.
A Petition from Jeremiah Staples and
40 others, inhabitants of the County of
York, with a like prayer.
A Petition from Thomas Allan and 40
others, inhabitants of the County of York,
with a like prayer.
Dr. DOW presented the following Petitions:
A Petition from William Jamieson,
and 145 others, inhabitants of the County of York, with a like prayer.
A Petition from Ira Ingram, and 85
others, inhabitants of the County of York,
with a like prayer.
A Petition from Charles McCormack,
and 50 others, inhabitants of the County
of York, with a like prayer.
A Petition from W. P. Fraser, and 46
others, inhabitants of the County of York,
with a like prayer.
A Petition from James McNichol, and
110 others, with a like prayer.
A Petition from Jacob T. Pitt, and 112
others, with a like prayer.
Mr. SMITH.âI think, Mr. Speaker,
the Petitions introduced by the hon.
member from Saint John are informal,
inasmuch as they do not show on the
back the place of residence of the petitioners. This is a rule which has always
been complied with and should not be
dispensed with in this case.
Mr. WETMORE.âI do not see how the
want of residence being endorsed on the
Petition can affect its coming before this
House. A person has a right to petition
wherever he resides, but if there is a
rule I am quite willing to withdraw them
and insert the residence of the parties.
If, however. there is no rule the Petitions
are certainly in order.
Mr. SPEAKERâThere is no direct
rule that the residence should be endorsed, yet it has been practised, as a petition
unendorsed as to residence cannot have
that weight with the House which it
would otherwise have.
Mr. KERR.âEver since I have been
here, it has become rule to endorse the
residence upon the Petition, and it is so
entered upon the Journals. It is evident
that such a practice is necessary in order that we may know that the petitioners are
inhabitants of the Province, other
DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1867. 71
wise we might receive a petition from certain persons in Honolulu praying for a repeal
of our Election Law.
Mr. WETMORE.âEven though the parties may not be residents of this Province, I conceive they have
a perfect right to petition this House. Hon. members say there is a rule which requires
the residence to appear on the petition, Mr. Speaker says there is no rule, so the
petitions are in perfect order.
Mr. BOTSFORD.âThe hon. member must know that parliamentary law requires that the residence should
follow the name. This is laid down in May, and has always been practiced.
Hon. Mr. FISHER.âI take exception to the idea that custom makes law, or that the parliamentary rules
of the House of Commons are necessarily to be applied to the representatives of a
small country like this. It may be considered that the insertion of the residence
tends to give weight to the petiton, but if it is omitted the burden of that omission
must rest, not with the House, but with the petitioners. There certainly is no rule
to exclude a petition so presented.
Mr. SMITH.âThe practice of the House has always been to have the residence endorsed on the
petition, and you, Mr. Speaker, have frequently corrected hon. members who have introduced
petitions without the residence, and handed them back to be amended. It is certainly
important to know where petitioners live, so that they may be found if necessary.
Mr. SUTTON.âIf the petition does not show where the people belong, we have no opportunity of
finding out, and in justice to hon. members of this House I think the information
should be given. If it is not done I shall certainly take objection to the admission
of these petitions on that ground.
Mr. W. P. FLEWELLING.âAlthough I know from some of the namesâ names of very respectable personsâ where
one of the Petitions come from, yet other hon. members may not be so informed, and
I think courtesy demands that the residence should be endorsed upon them.
Mr. WETMORE.âThe objection raised then, is on the rule. Now, I say, show me that rule, and I
will at once withdraw the Petitions and endorse the residence. I will be the last
to infringe or break a rule of this House, but to my mind there is nothing to prevent
a Petition coming before this House without such an endorsation. I have no objection,
as I have said, to amend them if it is required by the rule, but I do not want to
be driven to it just because my hon. friend from Westmorland chooses to pick upon
the Petitions I introduce to raise an objection. It does seem somewhat strange that
he should have selected these, and his hon. colleague (Mr. Botsford) should
have been all ready with May on Parliaments with his finger open on the place, but
I am not to be so driven from my position, which is that there is no rule making it
imperative that the residence should be endorsed upon a Petition.
Mr. RYAN. âThere are certain cases in which it would be impossible to put the residence upon
the back of a Petition. Suppose some of the petitioners belong to every county of
the Province, how can the residence be designated ; and if one county is named, then
there would be a fallacy on the very face of the Petition. I don't think it is at
all necessary to say where the parties reside, the fact of the Petition being introduced
by a member of this House is certainly sufficient indication of the district from
whence they come.
Hon. Mr. CONNELL.âWhat is all the trouble Mr. Speaker ? What is the question at issue ?
Mr. SPEAKER.âThe hon. member from Saint John (Mr. Wetmore) has introduced two Petitions, but
there is nothing on the back to show where the petitioners reside. This is objected
to by the hon. members from Westmorland and Northumberland, on the ground that although
there is no specific rule laid down in the matter, yet that the unvarying practice
of the House has been that Petitions should be so endorsed, and this, in a manner,
has established a rule by which all Petitions should be regulated. This, I think,
is exactly how the question stands at present.
Hon. Mr. CONNELL.âWell, Mr. Speaker, perhaps I can assist in settling the matter. I hold in my hand
a number of Petitions which have been received during the past few days. Here is one
praying for a change in the manner of measuring cord wood ; another praying for a
change in the law relating to duties at the Port of Saint Stephen ; another praying
for the incorporation of the Saint John Trades Co-operative Society. There is nothing
on either of these to show where the petitioners reside, or indeed that they are inhabitants
of this country. This is quite sufficient to show what is constantly being done and
that there is no fixed rule or practice in the matter at all, for if there had been,
neither the hon. members nor you, Mr. Speaker, would have allowed these petitions
to lie on the table.
Mr. SMITH.âI am willing to leave it to the Clerk to say what has been the practice ; he has
been in the House longer than any of us, and therefore can speak impartially in the
matter.
Mr. WETMORE.âI don't see, Mr. Speaker, why my hon friend should want to apply to the Clerk. I
have heard him vaunt himself that for sixteen
years he had filled his place in this House, and had only been absent two days, and
it is something strange that the Petitions which have just been referred to by the
Surveyor General, should have slipped through without being challenged by my hon.
friend, as he is so well posted in the rules of the House. It is something strane,
too, that the objection should be raised on these Petitions instead of upon others.
Does my hon. friend intend to oppose the Bill, and refuse the prayer of the petitioners
? If so, let him come out like a man and tell them so openly and fairly. It does seem
more extraordinary that whenever I stand up to speak, my hon. friend should imagine
that I have reference to him, and that what I say is intended as an attack upon him.
He has such an exalted idea of his own importance, and of what is due to him for his
vast legislative attainments, that he seems to imagine there is no one else to whom
anything may apply but to him. Well, if the cap happens to fit let him wear it ; but
I most strongly object to his constructing every word I speak as an attack upon him
or intended for him alone. I think I have as much right to express my opinions in
my own humble way as my hon. friend, and I refuse to bow to his decision in every
case, for he has very frequently been found to have arrived at wrong conclusions.
This morning he singled me out because I asked a simple question, upon which I wished
information, and now again he takes exception to my actions, although it is quite
clear that I have a perfect right to introduce such Petitions, and in form as I have
done. I dare say now he will think that I am attacking him again by making the few
remarks I have.
Mr. SMITH.âThe fact is that the hon. member is so used to making attacks that he does not seem
to know when he does it. He is constantly making attacks on me, and I submit it to
the House, whether the sarcastic remarks which he has just made can be construed to
mean anything else. He did the same thing this morning, and I leave it to hon. members
whether he was not in that instance, as in this, the aggressor. And am I to sit still
and make no reply ? Am I to allow his violent assaults upon me to go to the country
and make no comment upon them ? I say that his remaks are most unwarrantable and ungenerous.
This morning two or three hours of the valuable time of this House were occupied in
a discussion which arose from the manner in which he assailed me and the late Government,
and he seems determined that two or three more should be occupied in like manner this
after
72 DEBATES OF THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR 1807.
noon. The hon. member has only been
a day or two in the House since it
opened ; he has only now just returned
after an absence of a week and from
the anxiety he displays in getting up
discussions, and the style in which he
conducts them, I think the country
would not have suffered if he had not
come here at all. We were getting
along with the business very well without him. Hon. members have expressed their desire
to get through as fast as
possible, but the hon. member appears
to be desirous to delay the business by
making unprovoked and uncalled for
attacks upon me. He has travelled out
of the record, and now l again say that
although there is no written rule, yet
the practice has been, and it is endorsed
by the Clerk, that whenever a Petition
is not properly endorsed with the residence of the petitioners, the attention
of hon, members is called to the fact by
the Speaker. The Petitions referred to
by the Surveyor General are exceptions, which it appears not only passed
the notice of hon. members but also of
the Speaker.
Mr. WETMOREâIt is just as I expected. My hon. friend has again
attacked me, because he says, although I
repudiated the idea, that I attacked him.
He has referred to this morning's discussion, and although I do not wish to take
up the time unnecessarily, yet it seems
important I should defend myself in my
humble way. The ideas held by my hon.
friend and the remarks he makes shows
him to be a bundle of inconsistencies.
This morning he said the Secretary
should not take the praise of the increase
in the revenues ; I then asked him to
whom the increase was due, and who we
should thank for it ? That he said was
making a vile attack upon him. He then
proceeded to charge me with inconsistency and sudden conversion ; but that
in his opinion, was not an attack upon
me. Now he says I am a sarcastic man,
which certainly is neither a very nice nor
agreeable name to be called ; but then
he does not regard that as an attack. I
said this morning that the late Government, though pledged against Union, put
it in their speech, and so I was forced to
oppose them ; but that he looked upon
as an outrageous attack upon him. You
see that whatever he says must not be
considered as assailling any one, no matter how personal his remarks may be ; but
if I attempt to speak, then what I say is
regarded as a torrent of abuse upon my
hon. friend. Now that's just how he looks
at the matter. He says we occupied two
or three hours in discussion this morning,
but as it was after 12 o'clock when we
went into Committee and we separated at
1 o'clock, that statement appears to be a
little exaggeration. The time that was
occupied arose entirely from his refusal
to answer my question as to who should
be thanked, and I think I stated, and if I did not I will now state that I do not
think we have to thank the late Government for anything but for getting the
country into a state of turmoil and confusion, My hon. friend has said that I wanted
to be Attorney General. Well,
suppose I did ; is that anything to bring
against me ? I think that my hon. friend
who says that he is so regardless of office wanted and got that office more than
once. If I remember rightly, when the
present Attorney General was (to use an expression which has been used before)
bowled out of the Govsrnment, my hon.
friend jumped into his shoes before they
were scarcely cool ; and when the present
Judge Allen was appointed to the Bench, although my hon. friend had publicly
stated that he would not accept office, unless a special emergency arose and the
interests of the country demanded it, yet
he jumped right into it. Now I never
said I wouldn't accept an office, for I tell
him that if I got the offer I should accept
it, and consider myself just as competent to fill it as my hon. friend.
Mr. SMITH.âI shall shall not take up
the time of the country any longer in such a useless discussion.
Mr. SUTTON then withdrew his objection, stating that as a fight would probably arise on the
Bill, it was useless to carry it any further now.
Mr. RYAN presented a Petition from Thomas Davis and 28 others, inhabitants of King's County,
praying that a Bill may pass to incorporate the Grand Orange Lodge of New Brunswick
and subordinate Lodges in connexion therewith.
The Petition was received and laid on
the table.
Hon. Mr. CONNELL presented a Petition from Rev. J. C. Bleakney and
65 others, inhabitants of Carleton County, with a like prayer.
The Petition was received and laid on
the table.
Hon. Mr. McADAM read a Petition
from James Dunn and 50 others, inhabitants of Charlotte County, praying for assistance
in erecting certain landings at Oak Bay ; but as it asked for a grant of money it
was not received.
Hon. Mr. FISHER moved for leave to bring in a Bill to establish County Courts in this Province.
Leave granted and the Bill read a
first time.
On motion of
Hon. Mr. FISHER this Bill was read a second time and ordered that 200 copies be printed for the use
of the Legislature.
Mr. McINERNEY moved the House into Committee on a Bill to establish an additional Polling Place
in the Parish of Carleton, in the County of Kent.
Mr. BABBIT took exception to the
Bill on the ground that it did not specify
where the dividing line of the Parish ran.
Mr. SMITH also said the Bill was insufficient in this respect. and further the
other member for the County (Mr. Caie)
was not in his seat.
Further progress was therefore reported, with leave to sit again.
Mr. YOUNG moved that the House
do on Wednesday next, the 29th instant,
go into the consideration of His Excellency's message communicating the Report of
the Auditor General.
Hon. Mr. FISHER moved for leave to bring in a Bill relating to the Fredericton Railway Company.
Leave granted and Bill read a first time.
The House then adjourned until Saturday morning, at 10 o'clock.
J.M.