THURSDAY, Feb. 2.
Mr. TALBOT said he was delighted with the excellent
speech which, had just been delivered by the Speaker.
He thought, however, when the delegates returned they
should have informed their fellow colonists of what they
had done in the Conference, and not permitted them to
remain in doubt upon so important a matter. Now, for
the first time, the Speaker vouchsafes to inform the
public through the House of the proceedings of our
delegates at that convention. He had three months to
consider what he had to tell us, and to-day has given
us the result of his three months' study. He sets out
by denying that the speech delivered by His Excellency,
on opening the Legislature, was the speech of the Governor himself. Now what I said
upon that subject was
this—I said that the views of the Governor, as expressed
in that speech, were diametrically opposed to the views
of the ministry, and consequently it was the duty of the
latter te resign their seats. It is a principle of Responsible Government that when
a difference of opinion arises
between the Governor and the Executive, when they
hold different views in reference to any measure of public policy, then it is the
duty of the latter at once to
resign their places. This difference of opinion is apparent bere. The Governor expresses,
his belief that the
people of the several districts should be taxed for the
support of their own poor. The Government say such
a system is impracticable, and they decline to entertain
it. Under such circumstances it is evident that so long
as the present Administration retain power, their Government must be a mere farce—a
mockery, a delusion,
and a snare. The Speaker spoke of those men who had
formerly bolstered themselves into position at the expense of the Government and the
people. But why does
the Speaker recall that? Did he not himself stand at
these men's backs, and by his voice do his utmost to
sustain them? He says a great deal of clap-trap has
recently appeared in the newspapers against confederation. What newspapers does he
refer to, may I ask?
The only published clap-trap I have seen has appeared
in these papers which favor his view of the question, and
they have contained little else than clan-trap since the
hon. Mr. Glen, published some letters in one of the
newspapers, which he did over his own signature. He
was not afraid to put his views fairly and boldly forward,
witn his name attached to them. I apprehend there
is no clap-trap about that. The Speaker tells us he
expects to live always in the country, that he has
children whom he hopes will also spend their days in it,
and he asks why, then, should he do anything to injure
it? Well, I do not believe he would intentionally do
so. Nevertheless, he might do so by an error of judgment. He might do that which no
doubt he would believe to be beneficial to the country, yet it might prove
exactly the reverse. So that I do not consider that any
argument whatever. Nay, I might be justified in regarding it as part and parcel of
the clap-trap to which he
referred just now. Again, he indignantly asks—would a
native be likely to sell his country? Why, of course
he would. Who else but a native could sell it? Surely
a foreigner would have no right to do it. What does
the Speaker mean, then, by so ridiculous a question?
I am surplised, however, to find that he sets so very
little value upon the fisheries of the country, and that he
sneers at the men who carry them on. He says they are
degrading us for their own selfish purpose, Well, if the
hon gentleman can afford to fall out with the merchants,
his principal supporters, I don't know that I have any
right to object to his doing so. Still, I cannot agree
with him that the merchants are degrading the country.
I don't see how we could very well do without them. I
observe however, that in one part of his speech he utters
a very glaring contradiction. He admits that it would
have been a great injury to transfer our fisheries to the
Americans, but then it would be a great blessing to
transfer them to the Canadians. I don't see the consistency of such an observation
as that. Both the Americans
and Canadians have the privilege of fishing in our waters,
and I can't imagine what more either of them can
want.
They can catch just as much fish now as they are able to
get. More they will not be able to do under Confederation. The hon gentleman repudiates
the idea that we
shall give away our liberties. But we certainly shall do
it if we agree to those resolutions. Don't we give away
our fisheries, our lands, our minerals, our revenues, and
our constitution, with the power to tax us
ad libitum,
superadded. Is this not selling our liberties? If it is
not, then I do not know what you can call it. I should
be glad to think Confederation as good a thing as the
Speaker represents it. If I could be convinced that it
would be beneficial to the country, and would have the
effect of lifting our people out of their present condition
of poverty, I would gladly give in my adhesion to it.
The Speaker has called our attention to the material progress which Canada has made,
and to the prosperity of
its people. But it the people of Canada were prosperous,
they had worked hard for it. They were industrious,
and had given their attention to the arts and sciences,
as well as to every thing else that could raise them as a
people. And now as to taxation: Hon gentlemen should
remember there was such a thing as taxing a people to
death. It is the last straw that breaks the camel's back.
I cannot and do not say our taxes will be raised to so
extreme a pitch as some persons imagine, but I think
there can be no question they will be higher than they
are now, and if the Canada tariff be retained, they will be
very much higher. It is a serious thing to place the
power of taxing us in the hands of others. But we go
further—we give them the privilege of taxing not only
our imports, but our exports, our lands, our houses
our money, our cattle, everything in short that we have
"The General Parliament shall have power to make
laws for the peace, welfare and good Government of the
Federated Provinces, (saving the Sovereignty of England) and especially Laws respecting
the following
subjects:—
The Public Debt and Property.
The Regulation of Trade and Commerce.
The imposition or regulation of Duties of Customs on
Imports and Exports, except on Exports of Timber
Logs, Masts, Spars, Deals and Sawn Lumber, and of
Coal and other Minerals.
The imposition or regulation of Excise Duties.
The raising of money by all or any other modes or
systems of Taxation.
Mr. SHEA complained of the irrelevant matter that
had been imported into the discussion. The suggestions as
to what might be done by the fishermen of the Colony,
in resorting to agriculture as an auxiliary resource, betrayed a very limited and
imperfect knowledge of their
circumstances. How many of them were absent during
a great part of the season? And in the town of St.
John's, where so many of them reside, where was the
land which they might cultivate? For these people the
two pursuits were incompatible, and either one or ths
other must be abandoned. The hon member who spoke
last referred to the Reciprocity Treaty, which he said
had proved a failure. He (Mr. Shea) feared the time
was not far distant when they would learn by its loss
how valuable this measure had been to the Colony.
When it was unter discussion last session, the benefits
of the Treaty had been attested by evidence from both
sides of the House, and the only difference that arose
was as to the best uneans of securing its removal. The
value of that Treaty in enhancing the worth of the oils
and pickled fish of this country, was established by the
clearest and most incontrovertible testimony, and he
only regretted that the present aspect of the question
foreboded the loss of these advantages. As for the
right of the Americans to fish on the coast, guaranteed
by the Reciprocity Treaty, it was a privilege that had
not been availed of; nor would it be in the nature of
things, while they possessed the more valuable right of
fishing on the Labrador coast, secured them by the
Treaty of 1818. Respecting the important question
immediately before the committee, he would refer to
the circumstances under which the question of a Union
of the Provinces presented itself to their consideration.
Sometime in September last a communication was receieved from the Canadian Government,
inviting this Colony to join in a Conference of Delegates from all the
British North American Provinces, to be held at Quebec
on the 10th October, to consider the subject of a Union
of the whole. The Government of this Colony very
wisely felt that in the consideration of such a question
all party views should be ignored, and in deciding to
accept the proposal, they did me the honour to invite
me to be the associate of the hon Speaker, as the Delagation from this country, the
same principle being adopted by all the other Provinces in the formation of their
Delegations. We had no power to bind the Colony to
any proposal that might be made, but simply to inquire
and report as to the decisions at which the Conference
might arrive. The Government, under all the circumces, would be wrong in giving any
more enlarged authorty; and for his (Mr. Shea's) part, he would not have
accepted the position if it involved any greater power
than was conferred upon the Delegates. The idea of a
confederation of the Provinces, though new in this Colony, was familiar enough to
the people of the other
Provinces. When Lord Durham came out from England to inquire into the so-called rebellion,
among the
measures suggested by him was a union of the whole of
these Colonies, for the purposes of strength, and moral
and material advancement. The subject, since that
time, has occasionally been under discussion in Canada
and Nova Scotia, and the conclusion invariably arrived
at was that the measure would tend to advance the general prosperity.—It has never
been dealt with as a party question, and men of all shades of politics amongst
the most enlightened of our Colonial statesmen, recorded
their deliberate opinions in its favor. But until now the
inquiry has never been gone into with a view to a definite
result, and it therefore assumes an aspect of greater importance, and naturally attracts
a larger share of public
attention than ever before was found to wait upon it. It
will be remembered that when the subject was first
named in the last summer, a general desire seemed to
pervade the public of this country that we should not be
excluded from any measure of Union the other colonies
might be disposed to form; and the Government were
criticised with severity for their supposed hostility to
the question, in which it was contended that great
benefit would be found for the people of this colony.
He (Mr. Shea) was suprised to find that the hon metaber for St. John's, on his right,
who in September last,
through his journal, was prominent amongst these critics,
should now come forward as an opponent of a course he
then advocated go strongly. (The hon gentleman hero
read from the Palriot some strong observations in condemnation of the government for
not having adopted
measures to have this country represented at the
Charlottetown Convention, and deprecating the view
that they represented the people in their indifference or
hostility to a union of the colonies.) He did not say it
was not competent to any man to change his opinions;
but when statements so adverse to each other are found
coming from the same tips, in the short space of time that
has elapsed since September last, the individual has
at least no right to the character of a reliable authoroty. But the non gentleman
says he was favorable to
a Legislative Union of the Martime Provinces, though
opposed to a federal union of the whole. He failed to.
draw any such distinction when he wrote in September,
but he spoke generally of a union, of the Provinces, and
quoted Mr. McGee, who it is well known is a Minister
of the Clown in Canada, and never advocated any ineasure of un on that did not comprehend
all the Provinces, as embraced in the resolutious of the Quebec Conference, But he
would take the hon gentleman on his
own ground, and see the position in which his argument
placed him. He objects to a federal union, as proposad
by the Conference, because it abstracts from the authority
of our present Legislature, though he avows himself
favorable to a Legislative union, which would annihilate
our local constitution. Can anything more illogical or
[?] be imagined? He objects strongly to the
loss of a part, but is quite willing that our Local Institutions should be entirely
swept away! This
is the position, the honoravle gentleman places
himself in by his attempt to escape from the
conspicuous inconsistency of his conduct. But a
Legislative union, which would extinguish the local
constitutions, was found to be impracticable, and the
Charlottetown Conference was a forregone failure,
and must have ended without a result, even though
2
THE NEWFOUNDLANDER.
it had not been interrupted by the presence of the
Canadian Ministers. The lower Provinces are all too
[?] importance for any to be willing to
concede to one of then the priority which would be
conferred on the head of such a combination, while
the proposition was embarrassed also by the loss of
local
prestige, and the great practical inconvenience
of leaving matters of a purely local character to be
decided by a general government, where the circumstane is could not be understood,
and where special
knowlelge was required for their management. Under
such constitution it is manifest that the local affairs
of the several outlying Provinces would be neglected,
and all these considerations doubtless had their
weight in leading the Charlottetown Conference to
abandon the design of a Legislative union of the
three Lower Provinces. On the arrival of the Canadian Delegates the larger plan proposed
by them
attracted the favorable attention of the Conference,
whose proceedings were then adjourned to Halifax,
and subsequently to Quebec, where the whole matter
was again carefully gone into, and after the most
mature consideration of eighteen days, the Report
now presented was agreed to. It proposes a constitution based as nearly as circumstances
would permit, on the principles of the British constitution, and
while of the Federal character, avoids the prominent causes of weakness and failure
which the working of the American system has disclosed. It contemplates a General
Government, and a Legislature
of two Houses, the Uppernominated for life by the
General Government composed of 76 members,
and the Lower House composed of 193 members,
based on the principle of population, to be elected
by the several Colonies forming parts of the Confederation. To this General Government
and
Legislature will be confided the larger powers now
possessed by the several local Governments, conferring on it the amount of authority
necessary for
the due conservation and protection of the interests
of the several communities whose guardianship it
would assume. There was not in this arrangement,
as had been represented for unworthy porposes and
to raise a cry amongst the unlettered and unwary,
any selling of the interests of one Colony to another,
but a proposal is made by which the several Colonies, on principles of honorable and
equitable partnership, agree to concede a certain portion of the
powers they severally possess, to a Central Authority
in which they are fairly represented, and where the
aggregate of these powers may be used with greatly
increased efficacy for common purposes of public advantage. The Local Government would
be retained,
with smaller powers, having under its control the
expenditure of eighty thousand pounds stg. per annum,
and the management of peculiarly local affairs. The
roads, public Institutions,and other kindred matters
would be in the hands of the Local Legislature; but
the operations of the General Government would be
entirely independent of the action of the Local Bodies. The modifications of the present
Local Governmental machinery are left to the several Bodies
themselves, to determine according to the peculiar circumstances of each Colony but
the necessity of reduccing them, in one shape of another, to meet the altered
condition of affairs, and lessen the expenses would not
be a matter of question. The Report embodying the
terms of this constitution was signed by his colleague
and himself, in conjunction with the other members of
the Conference. It had been said they had no authority to sign that document; but
he disputed the grounds
of the assertion. TheColony was not bound by their act,
and this was fully explained and understood at the conference. The Report was waste
paper without the signatures of the Delegates, but beyond that, said Mr. Shea,
my hon Colleague and myself subscribed our hand, in
testimony of our approval of the terms and principles it
embraces; and we are here ready to justify our act, and
to explain the reasons which brought our minds to this
conclusion. It had been urged by some hon member,
in thoughtless ignorance of the nature of the discussion, that the Conference should
not have been held
with closed doors. He (Mr. Shea) regretted that
secrecy was a necessary condition of the deliberations
of that Conference, for it would have been well had it
been possible that the whole public of British North
America, were present, to be witnesses of the great
ability displayed by the prominent statesmen of the
sister provinces, their grasp of mind, and the singleness
of purpose which animated their course, with the deep
sense of responsibility felt by all who took part in these
proceedings of high historic interest and grave importance.
The spectacle would have done good to the people whose
interests were at stake, and have frowned down the
narrow minded and ignorant views we now see exhibited in certain quarters, of that
work and the men who
were its promoters. It is said by some that Canada
seeks the alliance for her own purposes: No doubt
some constitutional change had become necessary in
Canada; and doubtless it was the exigency of their own
circumstances that induced the movement they had now
made, but how does this affect the question in our
regard? It is neither inapplicable to us or otherwise
merely from the fact of is being desired by Canada;
and we also, as well as they, will deal with it from .
selfish point of view, and carry out the principles which
regulate trade and all the ordinary transactions of men.
If a confederation of the provinces does not commend itself to the intelligent Judgment
of the people of these
colonies, as a measure of progress, it will not
avail
Canada much that she stands in need of its accomplishment. But have other colonies
no need? Are we in
that pairny state at the present moment, or are our prospects so bright and our general
condition so independent,
that we may not find it good to inquire whether the necessity of Canada may not be
our opportunity of escaping
from the deprivations of our isolated and powerless state?
It had been stated among the objections to this scheme,
that we should be at the mercy of Canada, with our
small representation of eight members in the General
Assembly. Canada is regarded as a large mamoth state,
intent only on devouring all its smailer associates. We
de not find in the history of combinations like this, that
the smaller states have causes of complaint from the exercise of undue influence on
the part of the larger. It has
never been found that the little state of Rhode Island
suffers aggression at the hands of the Americsn union.
If Canada had the power, it would not be her interest to
pursue any unjust or injarious policy towards the lesser
confederates. In our case she would desire to be our
supplier of the greater part of what we consume, and this
would give her a direct interest in our well-being and
advancement. But would the power lie with Canada to
tax or otherwise oppress us? Hon gentlemen seem to
forget that Canada is two provinces, not much in accord
in feeling or sentiment, or interest. These provinces
are seperated by causes of the most abiding nature—
differences of race, religion, language,
[?] anagorisms, which have now brought the Government of
the country to a deadlock, and which bar all prospect of
their becoming a homogeneous people. In the Upper
Province, the population is British and Protestant. In
the Lower Province, French and Catholic; and it is
remarkable how litle the races have mingled, though
living side by side for generations past. In the Lower
Province you see the French character as distinctly preserved as in any part of old
France, and they adhere to
their institutions with even poetic tenancy. Nothing
more unreasonable can be imagined than the combination of two Provinces so circumstanced,
for any purpose
of aggresssion on our rights, even if their sense of honor
or uprightness could not be relied on, which he (Mr.
Shea) would
be sorry to distrust. Between these
Provinces—Upper Canada with her 82 members, and
Lower Canada with 65—the 47 members from the
Lower Provinces would necessarily, in any inteligent
view of the case, exercise a power almost of commanding influence, and the common
interest of the Lower
Provinces would always join them together whenever
the occasion was of adequate importance. The saftey
of our position in this respect will be easily understood
by any one commonly observant of the working of
the British Parliament, and the influence of even
smaller relative combinations in affecting, and controlling the decisions of that
great body. There appeared to be much anxiety in this country as respects the
taxation under the Confederation. He (Mr. Shea)
was not then going into a particular discussion of that
question, which would more properly come on when
the resolutions were formally submitted, but he denied the statements that had been
made as to the
amount of the increase of our burthens, and would be
prepared to show, at least, that if there was any increase under the change, the most
full and intelligible
equivalents would be given for it. That is not taxation in the sense in which this
cry is raised, where
the Colony receives a value for the outlay. The taxation of Canada had been referred
to as excessive;
but when he saw what had been accomplished in that
country, its Railways, Canals and other extended means
of communication, adding to its wealth and population
and increasing the value of the labour of
the people, he felt with how much reason, we
should rejoice, if by means of increased taxation,
we could be made to realise similar results. The
mere cry of taxation, can be made to serve the
purpose of stirring up thoughtless public felling; but
no intelligent man will fail to see that taxation, well
applied, is necessary to enhance the value of labour,
by opening up the sources of a people's industry. But
they had been told that by Confederaion they would
give up their liberties, in relinquishing their present
rights of independent legislation, and various speeches
and newspaper articles had been quoted in support of
this view. Most of them had beard of Archbishop
Connolly, of Halifax, who had recently written on this
subject; and what are his opinion on this point? He
says—"Confederation, instead of depriving us of the
privilege of self-government, is the only practicable
and reliable guarantee for its continuance"—"I yield
"to no man in my heartfelt appreciation of the bless"ings we all enjoy in this country,
and I ask for no"thing more than to be able to calculate on their
"Continuance—
Sed hoc opus, hic labor est.—This is
"the difficulty, and I will say, with all candour, the
"only difficulty for me and all others who have every"thing to lose. No country situated
as Nova Scotia
"is, with a vast area and a sparse population, can
"reasonably hope to maintain its independence for
"any considerable period. Unless we are to be a single
"exception and an anomaly in the history of nations,
"some change must come, and come soon." This
was the opinion of a gentleman of profound learning,
and independently of what they knew of his great
worth, the letter bespeaks the philosophic statesman
and a mind stored with the treasures of historic lore,
which could not fail to command respectful attention.
—He tells us of the tendencies of the age and the
great forces that are at work in the near vicinity of
these Provinces, which warn us of the necessity of
preparation, and we in Newfoundland, isolated though
we are, cannot, if we would, separate ourselves from
our neighbours and their destiny. It had been objected that the Federal Government
had the power to tax
fixed property in this country. But such was not the
case. The power of direct taxation is reserved to the
several Local Governments, and it cannot be imposed
except by them. Exception was also taken to the
fact, that our fish and oil were not secured against
taxation by the General Government, while timber
and coal were reserved. It will be observed that the
Local Revenues are reserved for the use of each Province, and the provision made in
the cases specified is
merely made to preserve the duties on these articles
for their legitimate purposes. In the Timber Colonies
there was a direct import called stumpage, under
which duties were collected on the ground, but this
was found inconvenient, and a tax on this export was
accordingly substituted. If this export duty were not
protected fro, the operation of the General Government, and given to the local bodies,
the latter would
have been compelled to revert to the old plan of stumpage; and the same applies to
the coal of Nova Scotia,
from which the colony finds it more convenient to
obtain its revenue by an export tax. But the great
grain trade of Canada, its provisions and other exports,
and the fish and oil of Nova Scotia, are not protected
against taxation, any more than our produce, for the
reason that a tax on exports is a solecism in finance,
and exploded from all sound doctrines on that subject
and he (Mr. Shea,) for his own part, would as soon
think of asking the British Parliament to give a guarantee they would not reimpose
the Corn Laws, or
repeal the Enancipation Act. But if hon gentlemen
were sceptical, all doubts on this point might probably
be set at rest. It was also said that we gave up the
control of our fisheries to Canada, which was a most
unfair mode of putting the case. Whatever we gave
up, it was to the Government of which Nova Scotia,
New Brunswick, P. E. Island and ourselves were to
form parts, as well as Canada. These Colonies at
present have equal rights with our own in the fisheries, and have all a large direct
interest in their protection. Where then might the power be more wisely
placed than in the hands of a Government that represented the whole people whose property
these fisheries
are? But it was not entirely so placed, for a concurrent authority is reserved to
our own Local Government to protect the fisheries; and who can suppose
this local right can ever be injariously interfered with?
The British Government now exercise sovereign control, and we saw in 1857 how that
might be employed
to our great detriment. The fisheries of Maine and
Massachusets are under Federal control, being general property, as the fisheries of
these colonies are
general property also, and would be righty amenable
to the supervision of the Central Government. The
surrender of our minds and minerals to the General
Government was also urged as a cause of complaint by
those who sought every pretext to depreciate the
measure. The surrender, in this case, was met by a
very substanial consideration of one hundred and fifty
thousand dollars. The mines, however, were not given
away, but the right was conferred on the General Government of legislation for them.
To his (Mr. Shea's)
mind, there was a great advantage in this arrangement,
apart from the sum they were to receive. It had long
been a matter of question what our resources were, in
this respect, and the Local Government had not the
means to make the necessary requires. Last year a
feeble effort was made in that direction, but it is manifest that it would take many
years to unfold those
resources, if the investigation proceeded on so small a
scale. The General Government have the means to
prosecute the necessary researches in an active and
enlarged way, and for whom, but for our own people,
with these treasures be available, if they really exist?
It will be easy as at present to obtaian a grant of
land or a mining lease, and the parties on the spot
must ever have an advantage over all others. Our
mines can only be taken away by employing our people to work them; and he only hoped
they might soon
be taken away on these conditions. But, he would ask,
under what circumstances these objections are made—
objections, too, which a little examination so easily
dissipates. Hon gentlemen seem content with opposing this scheme, implying that in
the state of things
now staring us in the face, we should stand still. Look
abroad over the face of the country, and let us ask
ourselves if the present condition of the people can
safely continue? Large numbers of our industrious
population are, at the present moment, not half fed.
And this, under varying circumstances as to localities,
has been their lot for many years past, as the amount
given for poor relief abundantly testified. We
see the population decaying from this cause,
and while numbers of those who can resort
to emigration, to seek elsewhere the reward
which here they cannot get for their labor.
And yet, in presence of these facts, it is said we
should wait idly by, and live in hopes of better times.
We all hope, of course, for these better times, but
experience teaches us the true nature of that reliance.
Let us look back over the past twenty years. In that
time we have had as large a share of prosperous seasons as we can reasonably look
for in any corresponding future period. And yet what are its results, as
disclosed in the present condition of the country? We
believe we have resources that, if brought to light,
would provide that further employment for want of
which our people now suffer. But what are the existing agencies by which these means
of employment
can be effectively brought out? The Legislature has
tried its powers in many ways, but to little purpose.
We have had fishery reports and Agricultural Committees, and devices of one kind and
another, and the
result of all has been abortive. What, then, can our
Legislature do—this "independent" Legislature, the
powers of which hon. gentlemen seem so unwilling to
abridge? It was evident that its powers were unequal to the emergency that we have
had to deal with
for past years. No wonder it should be so, when we
look at the constitution and the inevitable proceedings
of this Assembly. We are here (continued Mr. Shea)
rival parties, one having possession of the Government whose chief aim was to keep
themselves in office,
and who made every public question subordinate to
this object. On the other hand is an opposition intent
on displacing the Government, and equally with their
opponents discarding all measures that came into conflict with the main design. Some
will tell you that
better things and sounder legislation may be looked
for when better men obtain seats in the Assembly.
But it is idle to suppose that any possible change of
personnel will lead to any marked difference in result
where the other conditions and circumstances remain
unaltered. We have here a signal illustration of the
value of our "independent" legielation; nor are we
very different in this respect from some of our neighbouring provinces. And it is,
therefore, no wonder
that the conviction should be forcing itself on the
minds of prominent public men in these colonies, that
for the higher purposes of legislation the present constitutions are not equal to
the task. I do not (said
Mr. Shea) mean that it should be concluded that a
union of the provinces is the necessary remedy for
existing evils; but a contemplation of our present
position should at last incline us to look with impartial minds on any proposal which
gave promise of beneficial results. He indulged in no Utopian views of the
results of confederation, but all history and experience
gave evidence of the general beneficial tendency of
such combinations. We saw the advantage of Confederation in our own case in 1857,
when on appeal to
the other Provinces they all made common disuse with
us, and induced the Home Government to withdraw
the French Convention. The effects are strikingly
shown in the case of the Canadas, which have more
than doubled in wealth and population since their
union. Does any rational man believe that the
United States could have become what they now are,
had they remained so many political fragments since
the time of their separation from the mother country?
He had heard the strange argument, that the present
war was the cousequence of the Union, but this he
thought could hardly have been seriously put. The
war arose, as had long been foreseen, out of the slavery question; but the world stood
amazed at the
marvelous resources of America, of which the war
had given evidence, showing what the union had done
for the development of the wealth of the country. If
the war is to be quoted as an argument against union,
we must go back and condemn the British constitution because of the Wars of the Roses
and of
the Commonwealth. Are we not justified then,
looking at the progress of the United States, in believing that a union of these Provinces
would lead
to at least somewhat similar results? They are not
more dissimilar in any circumstances, and far less so
in some others, than many of the United States.
What diversity can be more plain than that between
Maine and California? The one a fishing and lumbering country, with severe winters,
the other rich in
mines and all the fruits of the earth, rejoicing in the
enjoyment of perpetual summer. This very diversity
of circumstances is often an argument in favor of
unjon, aad not against it, for it gives a country within
itself those elements of interchange on which commerce
is built up, and which, in the present war in
America,
has rendered the country so largely independent of
external aid. Instead of seeing, therefore, in the
alieged difference between this and the other Provinces a reason against Confederation,
it seemed to him
to lead to the opposite conclusion. We have in these
North American Provinces, at the present time, a
larger population and greater wealth that was possessed
by the United States when they formed their utilon.
There is the agriculture and mines and timber of
Canada, the coal and lumber and agriculture of New
Brunswick, the agriculture and fisheries and mines of
Nova Scotia, the garden of Prince Edward Island
and the fisheries and mines of Newfoundland,
forming an amount of combined wealth such as
few countries can boast of. And we have
the British Government urging us, in all friendliness, to make this a common country,
and unite our
energies for its advancement, with the assurance that
while we need it, we can rely on their support and protection. He (Mr. Shea) was strong
in the conviction
that his Colony would be a great gainer by the proposed union; but he nevertheless
would deprecate any
undue haste in bringing the House to a conclusion upon it. The public required fuller
information,
and time to digest it; and he felt it would be wrong to
hassen a decision, until the opportunity for full inquiry
had been afforded, The question of the Militia had
been used by the smaller opponents of the measure.
and the fears of the ignorant had been imposed on by
the cry that they would be sent out of the country by
force, to defend the Canadian frontier. He (Mr.
Shea) thought a Militia force unsuited to this country, where the avocations of the
people compel them
to be absent from home during a great part of
the year, and their presence could not, therefore, be
relief on in case of emergency. But few were so
ignoraat as not to know that a Militia force could
not be sent from the Colony, being entirely for
purposes of home defence. Canada has her frontier to
defend, and her Miiitia is most efficient. But they
err who think the British troops will be withdrawn,
or that the cost of our defences is to be wholly cast
on ourselves. But supposing they were, what alternative have we but to submit? Soon,
however, is not
the intention of the Government, as far as he (Mr. Shea)
could gather it from well informed sources. Nor
would it comport with the relations that will exist between Great Britain and the
Confederacy. While we
are liable to be involved in Imperial war, our right to
protection is a necessary consequence; and it will not
be withheld. But some say—"let us remain as we
are." He (Mr. Shea) would show that we cannot
remain as we are if the other provinces confederate.
We shall probably have to contend with their commercial restrictions; and our isolation
will be more complete
than ever, and more injurious. Besides, how shall we
stand in the eyes of the British Government, who
this measure for our adoption? Depend on it, the French
Convention of 1857 is not dead. Their failures as the
French shore make them more then ever anxious to
extend their operations to Labrador. If we place
ourselves in a false position with the Imperial Government, the French may adroitly
secure the opportunity
with advantage. We knew how near we were before
to a ruinous compromise of our rights, but we shall
now have lost the stay of our neighbours, which then
upheld us. The Imperial Government cannot afford
that we should be a difficulty with France, and this
was stated to him (Mr. Shea) at the Colonial offices
But such an avowal was unnecessary when we consider how the commercial idea dominates
the whole
course of British policy at the present time. We saw
it in the case of Denmark, the other day, where indeference to this principle, a brave
ally, was allowed to be
trampled on though promises of support had been
held out. We saw it in the case of Poland and that of
the Southern States, though in all these instances the
sympathy of the Eaglish people was strongly on the
side of the weak. We have no commercial value for
England. France, under the Commercial Treaty, has
become so important in this respect, that the increased
trade with that country, for the past four years, was a
principal reason why the American war was so little
felt in English commercial affairs. Who does not see
the contingency to which we shall be exposed, if we
remain isolated, in oppositon to a course of policy for
these Colonies which England has decided on. We
should weigh well all the considerations that arise in
relation to this question, and viewing dispassionately
the arguments on both sides, endeavour to arrive, after
mature reflection, at the conclusion that seemed best
calculated to conserve the interests committed to our
care.
The Committee then rose, and the Chairman reported propress. To sit again to-morrow.
The house then adjourned until to-morrow, at three
o'clock.
This individual participated in:
