1
THE NEWFOUNDLANDER.
St. John's, Thursday, February 16, 1865.
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY.
FRIDAY, Feb. 3.
The House met at 3 o'clock.
On motion of
Mr. WYATT, pursuant to order of the
day, the House resolved itself into committee of the
whole, on the further consideration of the address to his
Excellency the Governor.
Mr. PARSONS.—The question embraced in the section
now under consideration, that if confederation. A day
is, however, set a part for its consideration, and I would
not now anticipate what I shall then bave to say on the
subject. I rise now merely to reply to an attack made
upon me last evening by one of the Delegates to the
Quebec convention, the hon member for Placentia and
St. Mary's, Mr. Shea. The hon gentleman charged me
in the face of the country, with inconsistency,because a late
issue of the
Patriot newspaper contained some remarks,
in favour of the union of the maritime provinces. And
because I reduplcate this confederation scheme concocted
in secret at Quebec, the hon gentleman assumes that my
course is inconsistent. I maintain that I am acting with
perfect consistency. There is a marked difference between
a Legislative union of the maritime provinces and this
project of Confederation. He (Mr. Parsons) would like
to be informed by the Premier and the Colonial Secretary by what authority they designated
the hon member
for Placentia and St. Mary's, Mr. Shea, the leader of the
opposition, which they did in their communications with
the other provinces respecting the appointment of delegates. The liberal party did
not recognise that hon
member as their leader, especially in such a delegation.
In all those embassies in which he had taken part, the
hon member had regarded his own interests more than
those of the parties who sent him. How could we forget
his self-denial in the matter of the Telegraph Company,
of which he became the agent How could we forget
his embassy in the matter of Free Trade, which had so
much disappointed the expectations of the people? Who
could forget his exertions in the matter of the Galway
Company, so beneficial to so little advantage to the public, considering how many
thousands of pounds it cost?
The liberal party would be cautious in entrusting their
interests in so vital to the welfare of the people to the
hon member. And the result of the conference showed
that the selection was not as it ought to be; for it was
evident we were sold to the Canadians. A Union on
fair terms might be advantageous; but such a one sided
measure as that could never have the sanction of the
people of Newfoundland; and he (Mr. Parsons) was
satisfied it would be rejected by the house. The hon
member had quoted from the
Patriot his (Mr Parsons')
options respecting the conduct of the government in not
taking action on tue dispatch of the Duke of Newcastle
transmitting the resolutions of the Nova Scotia House
of Assembly on the subject of a legislative union of the
maritime Provinces. Such a union might have something
in it calculated to prove beneficial to tuis colony. At all
events, it was worth considering. But we had now
before us the results arrived at by the Quebec conference,
after sitting so many days with closed doors, and he (Mr.
Parsons) said it ought to be rejected by the house, if they
were Due to the interests of their constituents. I do not
believe the people would be adverse to a Confederation
based upon principles which would benefit them equally
with Canada. But I am sure they will be opposed to
the confederation now sought to be effected. What have
we to uppe from Canada? Has she anything to bestow
upon us> Conteueration may be all well enough for the
neighbouring Provinces, but for us who are isolate from
them having interests entirely different from theirs, what
have we to expect. You talk of beneffitng our sons. Has
not Canada sons too, and will not they be the first to
occupy vacant places? Tak of our mines. Canada has
mines too, and will she not invest money in them in preference to ours, The fact is,
Canada is a troublesome
country. She is always in instine commotion. A great
many years have not transpired since she was in rebellion
against tue British Government. Only the other day her
Parliament House was burnt down, and now, day by day
between Orangemen and Femans, she is continually in
trouble. She is besides very considerably in debt, with
no hope of decreasing it. Her debentures cannot find
buyers, save at a discount, and finding it necessary to get
out of her financial alticulties she is endeavouring to ally
herself to the other colonies, besides she knows this is
the only way to prop up her falling credit. Already we
find her people unratted aud sent forward to protect her
frontier. Already we find them in trouble with the
United States, and likely to get into war with them.
Should such a war come, will we not have to share it, if
we are joined witn her? We do not want the protection
of Canada. She has more than she can do to protect herself.
We are safe from all aggression if we remain as we are.
We have the shields of two nations over us—England and
France. As for what the Speaker says about Canada
having influenced Britain to withdraw from the French
Convention. Canada was as much concerned in that as
we were; and as to the
[?] of another Convention to
give away our fisheries, we nave received the promise of
great Britain that nothing of the sort should be done. I
hope we have no paltry sunemers among us willing to sell
this country, having the fishermen's interests on their lips,
but their own interests in their hearts. The Speaker asks
would he, a native, be likely to sell Newfoundland?
Does he forget that a Sir John Smith sold Scotland, and
a Casneragn sold Ireland. So a native migut sell us.
But the man wuo would attempt such a thing would be
scouted and coutemned by the people of the whole country.
I would like to know what Mr. March would do with
such a man.
Mr. PABSONS.—We must not forget the convention
was held with closed doors, and we do not know what
secret arrangement were made in refereuce to taxation and other important matters.
As to Union being
strength, our Union with Canaua would be no Union,
and therefore it would have no strength of the
bundle of sticks, because we should be but one single
stick at the end of the bundle. The Speaker dwelt
largely upon the glorious future which he says is
before us under Confederation. I don't believe in
that. At all events, we can afford to wait before
joining it, that we see what the other Colonies will do,
and it would be far better if we first allow them to
enter, the Confederation and afterwards act upon their
experience. The door will be open for us to enter
it just as well by and bye as now. It is but now
we are beginning to appreciate the value of Responsible Government, and are we going
to give it up
just as we understand its value? Look at the lesson
set before us by the United States, and let us hesitate
belore binding ourselves to a similar Confederation of
States. The advantages set forth by the supporters of
Confederation are more than counterbalanced by one
year of war, such as that now going on in the United
States. We are asked to give up our revenues, a portion of whcih only we shall recieve
in return. To make
up the difference we must resort to direct taxation, and
I appeal to those who have experienced the blessings of
having the water tax gatherer at the doors, how they will
like the idea of other tax gatherers calling upon them
to pay a direct tax upon every necessary they use.
Under the Confederation the people will have to pay
double the amount of taxation they pay now. Canada
is thousands upon thousands of pounds in debt, and this,
is owing to the corruptness of her politicians. Her
representatives are elected by the municipalities, and
the members of the latter elect those who can pay the
highest bribes. Far better for us will it be to remain
as we are. All we need is good fisheries. It is all
fudge to say that Canada will supply us more cheaply
with manufactures. She can only partially supply herself by an immense protective
duty. Her object is plain
enough. She is endeavouring to build up her manufactures, and looks to her sister
Colonies for her markets,
but until she is in a position to compete successfully with
Britain, she cannot supply us more advantageously than
we are now supplied. Will Canada take our fish and
oil from us? No, because she can get enough elsewhere. I doubt very much whether Nova
Scotia and
New Brunswick will be disposed to join Canada. They
will hesitate before allying themselves with so restless
and discontented a people. The letter of Archbishop
Connolly has no application whatever to Newfoundiand.
It is intended only for Nova Scotia and New Brunswick,
and does not affect us in any way. Give us good fisheries, and we shall be perfectly
content as we are. We
have no Orange or Feman Societies to disturb us; or if
we have them, they do not dare to show themselves; nor
have we any other occasion for unhappiness. I trust
this will continue to be the case, and that by the kind
providence of God our country will yet rise from the
ruin we are now in.
Mr. RENOUF—If I consulted my own feelings I would
say nothing upon Confederation till the day upon which
the subject is to be discussed, but as the delegates have
made long speeches, and put forth their arguments. I
feel bound to reply to some of their points, I am grateful
to find these gentlemen have at length found their
tongues. We expected to have heard from them when
they first returned, but not one word have they favored
us with until yesterday. I would like to know from
them why it was we received an invitation to attend the
Conference only at the last hour. So late were Canadians in inviting us that they
were at last obliged to do
so by telegram. The Delegates met at Quebec, thirtytwo of them, and there with closed
doors and in secret
session, they attempted to revolutionize the Constitution
of the British North American Provinces. Our delegates
were not
authorized to sign those resolutions, But they
had done so, and the results that Mr. Cardwell accepts
their signatures as expressing the voice of this Colony,
and forward his despatch to the Governor, Mr. Cardwell
tells us we can affirm the resolutions now, and work out
the details afterwards, and Mr. Brown of Toronto is now
in England waiting the arrival of the other delegates
to aid in passing a bill through Parliament, so that if
we affirm those resolutious, our two delegates will go
home immediately upon the rising af the House, and
help to bind us permanently to Confederation. That
being the case, we must take care that we do not affirm
the resolutions until we have gone back to the people
and had a general election. Canada is troubled by two
great difficulties, one being military, the other constitutional, Her military difficulty
is that Eugland threatens to withdraw her troops, and leave Canada to protect
herself. This Canada is unable to do, and she wants the
other Colonies to help her, either with men or money.
Her constitutional difficulty is that Upper and Lower
Canada have an equal number of representatives, the
consequence of which is that they often come to a dead
lock and are really unable to conduct a government
through a single term. They want us to help them out
of that difficulty also. The Speaker said that the taxation
argument was mere claptrap. On the contrary, it is the
very pith and marrow of the whole matter. There can
be no doubt in the mind of any intelligent man that our
taxes will be increased, and if so such a fact could not be
regarded as claptrap. He talks about the long prices
paid by the fishermen for their supplies, but if Canadian
merchants came here to-morrow, would they supply our
fishermen at lower rates? Our supplying system is
precisely similar to the lumbering system of Canada, but
I speak knowingly when I say that the lumberers of
Canada are charged much longer prices for their goods
than our fishermen are. It is said again that Canada
manufactures sufficient to supply our wants, If so why
does she not do it? Are not our markets as open to
her now as they can be under Confederation? If our
trade could be carried on as well with Canada as with the
United States, no doubt it would be so. But now, I
would ask are we going to get a barrel of flour from
Canada to-day. Is not Canada shut up all the winter,
and how then can we be supplied by her? And during
the summer season, will our merchants allow their vessels returing from Brazil to
pass by New York, Boston
and Portland, to go to Canada? Surely they will not,
Confederation or no Confederation. Then is is said we
shall have a line of steamers to Canada. But what
guarantee have we for that, for I see nothing about it in
the resolutions? A Company would no inducement to
send their steamers here unless they were subsidized,
and who is to pay that subsidy? It is Canada? No
certainy not. We have had quite euough of steamship
subsides already. Now upon the question of tariff. We
are told that a uniform race of fifteen per cent will be
adopted. Yet even here Canada will be the gainer
while we shall lose. When Dr. Tupper, one of the
Nova Scotia delegates, returned to his cuistituents, what
did he tell them? He told them not to deceive themselves, for taxation would be increased.
Railroads were
to be built, which could never be of any benefit to Newfoundland. Other omprovements
were also to be
carried out, but these would not add to our comfort or prosperity. Taxation a claptrap,
indeed?
Just apply the Canadian tarrif to our imports,
and what will be the result? Why, that our taxes
will be increased £40,000. I have the figures
here, and I find that by the application of the Canadian
tariff to our imports for the year 1863, it would give a
total increase of taxation of £92,208. There would be
a decrease on some articles of £11,700, so that the
balance of increased taxation would be £40,508. This
satement is taken directly from the Customs Returns,
and must therefore be regarded as correct. What will
our fishermen say when they hear that under the Confederation they will have pay £3,600
more for their
molassess? On tea they will have to pay £2,000 more
and over £200 on the single item of blacking alone.
over £7,000 upon boots aud shoes. Over 1,000 on
their bread.—£1,200 on soap. On leather £2,400.
On sealing guns, power and shot they will have to pay
£500 more, and on manufactured goods £24,000. When
the question comes up on the 15th I will be in a position
to show that the General Government will have a denciency of $2000,000, and this sum
they will be compelled to make up by direcdt taxation. But it is said
that Canada will open up a field for our young men, and
perhaps for our hungry lawyers. But Canada is
flooded with lawyers, briefless ones, who are glad
to labor on the railroads for a living. It would be
no great harm if some of our lawyers were employed
in the same respectable way. Canada is as open
to our young men now as it possibly can be under Confederation. But even supposing
there were offices to
be had in Canada, is it likely that our young men would
get them in preference to Canadians? What a powerful voice our eight representatives
would have among the
196 members in Parliament. Oh, Sir, it cannot be
doubted that our young men will have a great chance,
backed by the influence of 8 members out of 196. My
opinion is we should not burry this matter. Mr. Shea
stated st the Conference that the Confederation could
not do without Newfoundland. So I say here. And
yet we are to be glad that Canada will make us a gift of
£37,500 for our minerals and waste lands. What an
idea? Canada, steeped in debt, make us a
gift. Do
we not give over to her our revenues, and lands, our
Constitution, our all, Canada gives us no gift. I will
prove to this House and to the country that we give
Canada £140,000 a year, and in return we get from her
£112,000. We are sold,—our revenues, our lands, our
fisheries our constitution, our all—for £112,000 a year
She gives us eighty cents per head on our population,
but, she will give us no more when our population, is
doubled, or when our wants are largely increased. The
seat of Government is to be at Ottawa, a town further
away from us than London, so that the inconvenience
we shall have to submit to on this account will not be
small. By the 20th section it will be seen that Lower
Canada can never have more than 65 members so that
in thirty years Upper Canada, by emigration and increase of population, will have
a larger representation
than Lower Canada and all the maratime provinces
combined. But we are told any change will be for the
better. When you convince us that it is for the better,
we'll go for Confederation. Canada is now heavily in debt.
At the Union they owed but £1,000, 00, now they owe
£16,000,000. Last year they could not sell their debentures at twenty-five per cent
discount, while our
debentures are at a premium. We have the authority
of Mr. Palmer, one of the delegates for saying that
there was great difference of opinion at the Conference.
The delegates could not get along with their work at
all, until a message was sent down to them that the
Lieut. Governors should be Colonial appointments.
After that every thing went on smoothly. Then it is
said there will be no occasion for an army and navy.
But president Lincoln has told the British Government
that he intends putting six steamships on the Lakes
to check the Canada raiders. If he does then Canada
must do the same. Canada is a most indefensible
country, She has 1400 miles of frontier, and needs troops
to protect her from the United States. She looks to
the other Colonies to find a portion of these troops for
her. Our delegates tell us that a million of dollars is
only set down for purposes of Canadian, defence. The
New Brunswick delegates tell their people that two and
a half millions will be required. Who are to be believed! It is said that we could
not have a militia in this
country, because our fishermen were generally absentBut we have a large resident population,
who would be
liable for militia duty. No one ever dreamt that a draft
would have been made in the United States, yet it had
been done, and may be done with us.—Let us keep out
of the Confederation, and we shall be clear of any such
contingency. The 67th section says that all engagements that may, before the Union
be entered into with
the Imperial Government for the defence of the country, shall be assumed by the General
Government." So
that if Canada assumes a debt of five, ten or twenty millions for defensive purposes,
Newfoundland will have to
pay her share. I do say, that, before these resolutions
can be affirmed, it is our bounded duty to go back to our
constituents, and receive their consent to this measure.
Mr. KENT.—Did not intend now to enter upon the
consideration of this subject. But he felt coerced to
make a few observations on some of the remarks of which
had fallen from the hon member for St. John's west,
Mr. Renouf. That hon, gentleman had imputed to him
(Mr. Kent) an improper and selfish motive for his expression of opinion on this subject.
He (Mr. Kent) thought
that he would have been the last public man on whom
such an importation would have been cast. If any man
had made sacrifices in the sustainment of his political
opinions he was the man. When he entered the Assembly he was a supporter of the liberal
party, although all
his interest was the other way, and when he was made
Treasurer he recorded on the Journals of one Assembly his
intention of not receiving a pension from the government;
and when he was Colonial Secretary and premier of the
late government he sacrificed his position on account of
a disagreement which he had with the then Governor, the
late Sir Alexander Bannerman. He (Mr. Kent) hoped
that the hon member for St. John's West, Mr. Renouf,
would as fearlessly and honesty asserts the rights of the
people as ne (Mr. Kent) had doue. With reference to
this proposed Confederation wers only called, upon at
present to affirm the principle. But we had actually
oeen told that we were transferring the government into
the hands of the Canadians. That was not the case. It
would not be in the hands of the Canadian, but in those
of the government. And was it to be supposed that we
were going to ally ourselves with an enemy. Was it not a
league with a parental government which would watch over
our chief interests. He also states that any great public
mark that may be undertaken would be entirely for the
benefit of Canada, and could not confer any advantage
upon us. If extensive Railroads were commenced in
Eagland were not the Irish navvies employed upon them;
suppose a rail were made into Canada, Nova Scotia, and
New Brunswick, what fear had we, s long as we were
at unity with Great Britain. The balance of power on
the continent of America, would be preserved by this
Confederation. What does the leader of the Government
say in this matter. He says there is to wish to press the
question. He merely puts forward the resolutions, and
then says after the question have been discussed we will go
to the Country on one matter. The hon member, Mr.
Parsons, had certainly used an extraordinary argument,
and that was that we might rely for protection on the
French. Were we to seek the protection of, and were
we likely to receive it from a country against our whole
encroachments on our shores and fisheries we were ever
complaining, and to resist which we had to seek the aid
of Britism men-of-war. He (Mr. Kent) had not intended
to offer any observations on this question, and he would
refrain from doing so now until the 15th, when the question was to be freely and amply
discussed. He could not
however, permit to pass unnoticed the improper and uncalled for importatons or a political
tyro whose seat in that
Assembly was yet hardly warm. He (Mr. Kent) was
influenced in this matter by a profound sense of duty,
and by nothing else.
Mr. A. SHEA.—It appears that we were having the
field day in anticipation. Now nothing was more unfair
and irregular than the way in which this debate had been
conducted. The delegates had deemed it their duty
2
THE NEWFOUNDLANDER.
before the matter came to be fully discussed, to place it.
before the public in a proper light so that no one might,
be taken at a disadvantage. Was it right that hon gentlemen should endeavor to prejudice
the public mind in
tne way in which they had tried to do. They come in
here with garbled statements—statements entirely incorrect and in that not a shadow
of foundation, for assertion,
and omit to mention the all fishery materials, such as
lines, twines, nets, &c., were admitted, duty free. They
tell as that we should have called a public meeting. But
there was no objection by them on their return, to go
before the public. He (Mr. Shea) was responsible to no
one but his constituency for his conduct; he was not appointed by the public, and
he did not see how any injury
could have resulted by reason of their not calling a public meeting. We had no desire
to force, the matter
thus; we wanted the fullest investigation and we rightly
deemed that the proper place for that investigation was
this House, where face to face, and before the public the
matter could be carafully and boldly enquired into.
The public had nothing to do with what the delegates
said at the Conference. They had to do with their
Acts and nothing more. He insisted that some hon
members had been there to witness the proceedings of
that Conference; it would have done them good, they
would have witnessed an exhibition of high tones, feeling and patriotism, for which
they would have been
uttered unprepared. What other cause could have been
adopted than the one pursued. These Resolutions would
have been only waste paper without the signatures of the
Delegates to authenticate them. Then we were to receive
no manufactures from Canada because Canada imported
largely from England herself. The arguanent was a
false and unfounded one, As well might you say that
we cant import from England because England imports
largely from France. He (Mr. Shea) knew of a manufactory at Toronto which actually
imported chairs to
England. Canada was great and rich in all the elements
of meterial prosperity. It was a bad thing, to see money so easily obtained here.
It was an evidence of the
unfortunate state of the country. We had great accumulations of idle money and a deal
of pauperism. When
he (Mr. Shea) was in Canada he had been ashamed to be
compelled to state that we spent £20,000 in poor relief.
We know pauperism to be incident to all places, but it
was not paid out of the public money as it was done
here. Had we not the extreme wealth at one end pauperism at the other, and was a state
things, which hon.
genlemen would desire to perpetuate. The hon gentleman continued at great length,
replying to each argument
put forward by the hon member Mr. Renouf.
On motion of
Mr. Wyatt, the Committee rose, and
the Chairman reported progress. To sit again on Monday.
The House then adjourned until Monday at three
o'clock.
This individual participated in:
